This DANGEROUS Lie From Atheists Is Fooling More and More People

[@dreadassembly4087]

Years ago while I was fishing, I found a milled 2x6x8 sticking up out of the mud in a river. The part stuck in the mud was completely petrified. Were there lumber mills millions of years ago? Or does the time it takes to petrify would depend on the mineral content of the water and mud?

[@nathancook2852]

Ok, so we know things can petrify quickly. What is your point? You also can't prove that you even found this item.

[@dreadassembly4087]

@@nathancook2852 No I can't. But if I have government , media and academia behind me, I can interpret the evidence in the time period I choose. And I highly doubt you've seen evidence for allot of claims, but must believe in good faith.

[@nathancook2852]

@@dreadassembly4087 I have seen no scientific evidence for a young earth, none that refutes evolution, and none that refutes an old universe. And yes, I have examined evidence that does support all of those claims. I don't take things on "faith". That is how people end up in cults.

[@dreadassembly4087]

@@nathancook2852 Believe what you wish. But to call Christianity a cult? 2000 year old cult that created Western civilization. Tell me any major city that's as safe as Amish country? Is it Christianity that caused this crime, drug and homeless epidemic? All Atheism did was remove God and filled the vacuum with government. Atheists have no choice but to put their faith in "That god". Kind of setting the bar low for your salvation, taking other's down with you on your race to the bottom. I remember who was quick to lock down.

[@jockyoung4491]

@@dreadassembly4087 Why don't you look at the evidence and think for yourself? You have never even tried. And if you say "what evidence", it will just prove my point.

[@avafury4584]

Helping us trust the Bible are the claims of the writers themselves. The Old Testament authors declared that they spoke the very words of God (Exodus 20:1-4; Deuteronomy 8:3; Isaiah 1:2; Jeremiah 1:1-13). Certain men were designated by God as prophets, kings, or leaders and were recognized as such by the people they served. The prophets qualified most of their pronouncements with the words, “So says the Lord” (e.g., Jeremiah 45:2; Zechariah 7:13). This declaration was often met with rebellion and persecution (Matthew 23:37; 1 Kings 19:10; Acts 7:52). There was no earthly reason for a prophet to declare unpleasant truths to people who were likely to stone him. Yet, the prophets continued to proclaim their message because they were completely convinced that the Lord held them responsible to represent Him faithfully. The words of the prophets were then recorded for future generations and accepted as the words of God, even by Jesus Himself (Matthew 4:10; Luke 4:8). The New Testament authors identify various reasons for writing. Luke, for example, was a respected physician and historian who traveled with Paul on his missionary journeys. He explains the purpose for his book in the first chapter: “Just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word have delivered them to us, it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught” (Luke 1:2-4). Luke personally researched the claims about Jesus in order to verify the veracity of the gospel narrative and wrote the twin books of Luke and Acts.~got questions

[@richardgregory3684]

You're serously arguing that the bible is proof of the bible? lol.

[@avafury4584]

@richardgregory3684 there are many things OUTSIDE OF the Bible that prove the Bible to be true, as well. Don't be so coy.

[@toppaypositionacademy4658]

​@avafury4584 false. Like the damaged logic of all religious Apes.

[@richardgregory3684]

@@avafury4584 _there are many things OUTSIDE OF the Bible that prove the Bible to be true, as well_ Such as? Of ocurse the bible does contain some real things - most fiction does. The existanc eof Whitby and Transylvania do not prove Bram Stoker's Dracula to be true however. The bible is mostly fiction...not even original fiction. Many of the stories were simply stolen and rewritten.

[@avafury4584]

@@toppaypositionacademy4658 suit yourself. If you don't want to spend eternity in a really good place as opposed to a really bad place that's on you. Can't say nobody warned you.

[@idallas4964]

Scratch my last comment, just did a search of the channel and found the videos on what I was asking about. Thanks again for your hard work and great videos! God Bless!

[@avafury4584]

When choosing where to place our trust, we must consider the reliability of each option. The Bible makes some startling claims about itself. Some people think they can pick and choose which parts of the Bible they consider true, but the Book itself never gives us that option. It states that it is the inspired Word of God (2 Timothy 3:16), that it is true (Psalm 119:160; John 17:17), and that it is the guidebook for our lives (Psalm 119:105; Luke 4:4). To trust that this is not true means that everything else the Bible claims is suspect; therefore, claiming the promises while ignoring the commands is irrational. To declare that the Bible is untrustworthy means we must find another reasonable explanation for its miraculous nature, as evidenced in its predictive prophecy. Calculations vary, but approximately 25 percent of the Bible is predictive. This means that, when written, over one fourth of the Bible-more than one in four verses-was predictive. There are over 1,800 prophecies in the Bible. The amount of prophecy in the Bible is staggering; no other book in the world has such a focus on making predictions. On top of it all is the amazing accuracy of the Bible's detailed prophecies. At least one half of all biblical predictions have already been fulfilled precisely as God had declared.~got questions

[@johnelliott5859]

and yet Christians ignore huge parts of the Mosaic law despite Christ saying that no part of the law would be discounted until everything was accomplished.

[@Bomtombadi1]

Give us one and let’s talk about it. Rules: you don’t get to mention a prophecy earlier in the bible which “comes true” later in the bible.

[@avafury4584]

@Bomtombadi1 The rebirth of the nation of Israel. There you go.

[@shaundaugherty1028]

However trustworthy the Scriptures are, nowhere in Scripture does it ever assert "Thou shalt go by the Scriptures only." And if you will allow the NT to speak for itself, it follows the LXX text of the OT much more often than not. All I am saying is that the LXX gives a far better rendition of the ancient Hebrew than the Masoretic Text. Even the Dead Sea Scrolls give evidence to support the superiority of the LXX text of the OT.

[@ankyspon1701]

I'm a believer, but must point out the Bible does NOT ever state the Earth is only 6000 or so years old. Humans have attempted to count back using the ages of biblical figures. But the problem comes right 'in the beginning' as the Bible does not state a date of creation, not does it give a duration for the creation of the heavens and earth in the first verse. The Bible has also been translated a number of times, corrupting the texts of Genesis. Many ancient Hebrew scholars state that the Bible should read, In the beginning 'when God was making' the heavens and the earth. This gives a totally different perspective. Lastly, God made the entire universe, it should therefore be obvious that God put life on those millions of other planets, meaning aliens are real!

[@CreationvsEvolution]

Thank you AIG. Appreciate all your hard work. The naysayers and people who lack faith only go to prove God's word true. Christ asked the question, when he returns will he find faith on the Earth? Faith is it an all time low because people would rather trust the word of man than the word of God. We stand on God's word! Nothing else. God bless

[@jockyoung4491]

People think for themselves and come to different conclusions. And that's OK.

[@nathancook2852]

Faith is at an all time low because you all deny demonstrably real science. No one wants to associate with people who do that...

[@venomousgas3300]

@@jockyoung4491 Unfortunately that's not how mainstream science works. It's performed by biased atheists who work to disprove the existence of God rather than to find evidence for His existence. Said scientists manipulate the data to fit their own biased narrative. Unbiased science substantiates the existence of God, from Archaeology, to Biology, to Mathematics and Physics. The difficult part is sifting through the manipulated science.

[@venomousgas3300]

@@jockyoung4491 Unfortunately that's not how mainstream science works. It's performed by biased atheists that manipulate it in order to fit their own narrative. They are more concerned with disproving His existence rather than finding evidence of His existence. Unbiased science substantiates His existence, from archaeology, to biology, to geology, to mathematics and physics. Those who perform the unbiased research are heavily 'sin, soared'. I was 'sense oared' twice just trying to post this reply, that should be suggestive to you of the overall bias we face.

[@venomousgas3300]

​@@jockyoung4491 Well, unfortunately that's not how mainstream science works. It's perpetrated by biased Aye thee, ists looking to disprove His existence rather than finding evidence of His existence. They manipulate "their findings" to fit their bias narratives. In fact, unbiased data substantiates His existence; Archaeology, Biology, Physics, and Mathematics. Those who perform unbiased research are thereby either ignored, swept under the rug, or completely 'Seine soared,' because their findings do not fit the biased narratives. I was bloqqt twice trying to reply to this. That should be indicative of the sort of bias we face.

[@HS-zk5nn]

evolution is from Sa tan

[@sciencerules2825]

_evolution is from Sa_ San Antonio? Why would evolution be from there? 😄

[@earthisasphere]

According to creationists, liars follow the devil. How closely are you on his heels?

[@Fred-mp1vf]

Consider the size of Noah's ark, then consider the diversity of the animal kingdom today. It's clear that animals have evolved over time. But we know that life did NOT create itself, nor did the universe. The very thought is absurd.

[@davidgardner863]

@@Fred-mp1vf That isn’t evidence against evolution.

[@alanpfeiffer9686]

Not evolution on the ark were kinds now we have the species from those kinds speciation and. If they were a wolf kind now are dogs wolves etc ​ and still are dogs and wolves .@Fred-mp1vf

[@IAMhassentyou-e7l]

Paul says of the Old Testament: “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work” (2 Tim. 3:16-17). Christians believe the Bible is the divinely inspired word of God because Jesus validates it. Jesus confirms that God has chosen the written, recorded word as his primary means of communicating his thoughts and his will to mankind. Christ clearly puts his stamp of approval on the Old Testament. This is also confirmed in what Christ has done in us through his Holy Spirit. The Bible claims to be infallible in 2 Peter 1:19: “We also have the prophetic message as something completely reliable” (NIV). Peter continues with a description of how Scripture came to be: “No prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation of things.

[@aubreyleonae4108]

He merely farted; you misunderstood.

[@newcreationinchrist1423]

Amen 🙏🙏🙏

[@antbrown9066]

For those that reject a teaching from a book, that book has no credible relevance - they simply don’t believe. The argument you present is called circular reasoning. “the bible is true because the people inside the bible claim it is true” That will not convince any one who can follow logic, reason and scientific enquiry. It will most likely confirm their position.

[@earthisasphere]

@@antbrown9066 That is the reasoning YEC's use. I was raised a YEC and I can tell you right now, the very first thing you are taught is the song "Jesus Loves Me". What is the lyric in that line? "Yes, Jesus loves me, the Bible tells me so." They start you from birth with circular reasoning.

[@MusicalRaichu]

2 Tim says scripture is useful for teaching you how to be a good person, not how to be a geologist. Jesus often quoted the bible, sure, but he also critiqued its shortcomings. "You have heard it said ... but I say to you ..." Mat 5. If it's a choice between disobeying the Bible and hurting someone, you opt for disobeying the Bible Mat 12. 2 Peter does NOT say that. NIV is inaccurate and frequently biased, changes the meanings of words and even adds words that aren't there. It's saying that their experience of Christ confirms what the prophets said in the past. It's about hope in a corrupt world, nothing to do with geology.

[@them.4701]

How did bones homeostasis organs like the brain heart skin, and nerves all at the same time, most of these evolutionary people say that it just randomly happened, but before these organs and body functions existed how did we even survive for “natural selection to take place? That takes more faith and even the question of how life can come from nothing, to create everything so incredibly complex and purposeful, it’s scientifically impossible for a car to just randomly form from nothing same with life

[@jockyoung4491]

No scientist has ever claimed that it just randomly happened. Don't be silly.

[@kathleennorton2228]

Where are all the trillions upon trillions of bloopers? It would take many, many misfires before each viable minute change would happen. There are very few good mutations to all the neutral (junk building up) and destructive mutations.

[@muppetonmeds]

I just Googled the opposite of random and this is what I got. made, done, happening, or chosen without method or conscious decision. Take care

[@Vernon-Chitlen]

​@@jockyoung4491By what process did the 98 elements become arranged into a cell capable of evolving?

[@jockyoung4491]

@@kathleennorton2228 Which is why only a tiny percentage of offspring survive. The most serious misfires never even fully develop, and the less serious ones produce all of the variation we see in every species. Every individual is unique, and that variation can have a profound effect on how well each survives and reproduces. That is how natural selection works.

[@russelllowry1061]

People are without excuse, if they just use their brains. Romans 1:20.

[@nathancook2852]

True. The evidence for an old earth and evolution is overwhelming. Most Christians worldwide even realize this.

[@HS-zk5nn]

@@nathancook2852 that verse has nothing to do with with age of earth and evolution. Most athiests even people if not all except you even realize this

[@nathancook2852]

@@HS-zk5nn Have you gotten that Ph.D. from your Ivy League School yet? In "Evolution" nonetheless? Are you still peddling that lie?

[@HS-zk5nn]

@@nathancook2852 yet? nope, I got it a while ago. I see you are still peddling that lie that I dont

[@newcreationinchrist1423]

​@@nathancook2852 what we believe isn't based on a popularity contest. Noah was the only one in his generation that followed God. Surely we have more than just one Noah around today. 🙏✝️🕊️

[@kathleennorton2228]

We knew about the great flood in the first place. Therefore, we should not have resorted to millions of years.

[@jockyoung4491]

An old book says 6000 years. Facts from the real world say millions of years.

[@sciencerules2825]

Interestingly enough modern geology was started in the late 1700's by creationists who set out to find physical evidence of the Flood. They then discovered all the physical evidence showed an old Earth and no Flood. 🙂

[@kathleennorton2228]

@@sciencerules2825 It doesn't today, and it didn't then. For a while, many were deluded by "science", falsely there called.

[@sciencerules2825]

@@kathleennorton2228 OK then, please provide your evidence all the sediment across the whole planet was deposited by a single one-year event only 4400 years ago. I'll wait. 🙂

[@earthisasphere]

Noahs flood is geologically impossible. 1) The sodium carbonate needed for even a small single layer of limestone requires centuries or more of build up of shelled creatures and coral. When explaining the Grand Canyon, in your model, that isn't possible. In the actual model we know that the southwest U.S. was once a shallow seabed, so the sodium bicarbonate could build up over time. 2) The limestone in the G. C. also requires calm, shallow waters to form, like.... a shallow seabed. Not the most violent storm the earth would have ever seen. The hydraulic sorting claim YEC's like to peddle doesn't work either, because the water is still to deep and to volatile. 3) There are multiple places where layers of salt are separated by layers of rock. Sea's would have to evaporate, have a layer (or layers) of rock form, and then the area would have to become a sea bed again. A flood can't explain this. 4) Unconformities don't have the time needed to happen on a 6,000 year old earth. 5) The following were rulers of their respected kingdoms during the flood timelime Egypt- Pepi, Akkad - Sargon, Elam - Helu, and the Indus Valley Civ had been around for 1,000 years and continued for another 1,000 years 5) fossils and stratification layers of rock match predictions of evolution 6) Sand dunes don't have time to form 7) certain layers of rock would require forest fires to exists underwater 8) the amount of energy released during such an event would destroy the earth, also known as the heat problem 9) Ocean basins have less than a km of sedimentary rock on top, while the continental shelves are over 12 km thick with sedimentary rock, a flood of that magnitude and length would have eroded away much more of the continental shelves 10) We have studied the growth rate of coral form a very long time now, and it doesn't grow fast enough to match your timeline - forget a flood, 6,000 years isn't even enough time. Look into the Enewetak atoll if you want more info 11) evaporites and shales take too long to form 12) the change in salinity levels would kill both freshwater and saltwater fish, and on and on and on.

[@Citingpick]

I love you you've helped me through tough times❤❤

[@saintmalaclypse3217]

You talking to Cliff or God? Either one makes a weird post, but...?

[@Petro-wp8xt]

15:01 yes One day shall be likened to a thousand years and a thousand years likened to a day. There is no shadow of a change in the Lord God Almighty, He has created everything through His Word and nothing can exist without Him willing to, sin has brought division between ourselves and the Father due to sin, our free will is gift, we choose whom we shall serve. Jesus is the One who was and is and is to come and nobody comes yo the Father except through Jesus.

[@alanpfeiffer9686]

2Pete 3 is not related to creation but to the coming judgment ,tho God is outside of time He had no problem of speaking into existence creation ,look at the miracles of Christ for He is the creator.

[@vikingskuld]

Yeah salvation is God's choice, he even goes on to say that he predestined some to be adopted into his family before he created the foundations of the world. You can sin all you want but salvation is his gift to give to those he chose.

[@aubreyleonae4108]

Get booty wrecked for a day bucko

[@ThundermansThunder]

@@vikingskuld God is the God of decency and order, He is not the author of confusion (1 Corinthians 14:). The saved are predestined according to their faith in Christ, as the propitiation for sin, as Romans 8 clearly explains. The call to salvation, according to Romans 23:13 is to "whosoever will call upon the name of the Lord," not "whosoever God arbitrarily chooses." God also said in 2 Peter 3:9 that God is longsuffering and not willing that any should perish, which further supports Romans 23. You must willing deny a LOT of scriptures, such as John 3:16, Romans 10:9-10, 1 John 5:13 - which says "so that you may KNOW that you are saved," to believe in arbitrarily predestined salvation! The scriptures that reference predestination are not saying that God arbitrarily chooses who will be saved and who will not, they are referencing the predestination of Jesus as the propitiation of sin for humanity, and the the predestined to be saved are all who, by free will election, call out in submission to Christ as Lord God incarnate, to be reborn in His blood, Who imbues us with His own righteous Holy Spirit, by which, they are saved. God, clearly, predestined salvation to all who call upon the name of the Lord to be spiritually reborn in His righteousness, as it is the only way to receive God's gift of eternal salvation. There is nothing arbitrary about it.

[@vikingskuld]

@ThundermansThunder no I don't do what u do and get confused or ignore scripture. Romans 9 clearly states God chooses people for election ACORDING TO IS WILL NOT YOURS. Jesus Christ spoke in Parables so as not to have to save some that God didn't want to save. That's in the bibleas well. It also clearly states God chose those to be adopted into his family and saved before he created the foundation of the world. So do do you explain that and your free will. Again Roman's 9 God chose to love one and HATE the other in the womb for his purpose of election so it stands not of works but of God that calls. So no you don't get to have a gift unless God chooses to give it to you. He created the world its his sovereign right to choose who he saves. Also that verse about God not willing to loose any is only about his chosen or you have so many contradictions in the Bible you couldn't trust it.

[@christtheonlyhope4578]

I don't fall for lies from atheists anymore. Lol Way beyond that.

[@Gek711]

That just means you've been well trained by the people who don't want you to think for yourself.

[@christtheonlyhope4578]

@Gek711 speaking of not thinking for yourself, what original ideas have you ever come up with that reflect what you believe to be true? Sounds to me like you have your own belief system that has been influenced by other people (hence- not thinking for yourself)

[@nathancook2852]

Ah, so the brainwashing is complete.

[@Gek711]

@@christtheonlyhope4578 thinking for yourself doesn't necessarily mean having original beliefs as much as it means being willing to change what you think when you've reached the wrong conclusion. You for example practice thought terminating clichés and dismissals in order to prevent yourself from thinking about any idea that is threatening to the belief system you've been trained to hold. I don't have to behave like that, since I'm capable of thinking for myself I'm able to abandon any belief I hold if it turns out not to be true.

[@jockyoung4491]

@@christtheonlyhope4578 Believing the Bible must be literally true is hardly "thinking for yourself"

[@JohnLawrence-wf1rj]

Brilliant. Praise Jesus!

[@earthisasphere]

Clavin mischaracterized science all through the video. You think geologists actually date rocks just by looking at them? You think a flood and a volcanic eruption are comparable in terms of the features they may or may not create on Earth?

[@halodude4481]

EARLY ima love this one

[@garrygraham]

I really enjoy your content, Calvin. Good stuff! Blessings from 🇦🇺

[@lilyfromafar969]

Praise the Lord for he is good

[@johnelliott5859]

except for the genocide and child sacrifice.

[@newcreationinchrist1423]

Amen 🙌🙌🙌

[@lilyfromafar969]

Thank you for this information. Our children must know the truth . Jesus is the way the truth and the life .

[@jockyoung4491]

That may be so, but what does it have to do with science?

[@nathancook2852]

Yes, children must know the truth, and the truth is, there is zero evidence for a young earth.

[@jockyoung4491]

We should be teaching our children to think for themselves.

[@newcreationinchrist1423]

​@@jockyoung4491 Sorry friend, but you don't get the privilege of telling other people how they should raise their children. That's pretty rude, to be honest.

[@jockyoung4491]

@@newcreationinchrist1423 I said OUR children and I have every right to my opinion. If you don't think people should teach their children to think for themselves, you would have the right to that opinion as well. And the comment I was responding to was much "ruder" than mine, so why didn't you criticize that?

[@MichealLiam]

I was homeless, got into drugs, went into prisons, then i got to know Jesus, He changed my life.. Now i make 22k weekly. have a home, a wife, a lovely daughter... A child of God. HALLELUJAH

[@MichealLiam]

All thanks to Maria Luisa Clare

[@MichealLiam]

After I raised up to 325k trading with her I bought a new House and a car here in the states 🇺🇸🇺🇸 also paid for my daughter's surgery (Joey). Glory to God.shalom.

[@James1xr]

*How can someone get connection to that Woman y'all speaking bout !!!?*

[@MichealLiam]

There is her line!!! under this comment!!!👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻🔁 Just put the digits together.

[@MichealLiam]

+1🇺🇸

[@chrish5791]

Thank you for your faithfulness to scripture and your love of God’s creation, Calvin. I’ve been watching you for years and have a somewhat similar background as you. Praise God for His great mercy that has redeemed sinners like us. I thank Him for creation ministries, such as those you’ve been associated with, satisfying my scientific curiosity about His creation and this creations youth. May God bless you and your family and the ministries you speak for.

[@jockyoung4491]

Don't pretend you have any scientific curiosity. Insisting on the literal truth of an ancient book is neither scientific nor intellectually curious.

[@melvinnoble8043]

@@jockyoung4491 Funny statement from someone who believes the lie of evolution! Here's a quote you may or may not be familiar with from a fellow believer in evolutianity, Associate Professor of Anthropology, UCLA, Gale Kennedy said "The problem with those that don't believe in evolution is that they don't have the imagination". Evolution is a fairy tale for those afraid of the light. You claim that "science" is on your side when in fact true science points to a creator GOD. You must have an amazing life to be spending your Friday night, one of the few that you will have in your lifetime, coming to a Christian You Tube channel and arguing over something that you say doesn't exist. 🤣🤣🤣

[@earthisasphere]

@@melvinnoble8043 We are very familiar that a common practice among YEC's is quote mining. You do know that is a form of lying, right? I thought Lying was a sin?

[@alanpfeiffer9686]

Where science follows some of the lines of thinking that the bible hints of then there are many dicoveries.​@@jockyoung4491

[@melvinnoble8043]

@@earthisasphere i quoted her exactly! Check out Evolution vs. GOD (start at 36:20 - 36:27 and see/hear her say it for yourself. Of course you won't do that because it would prove 2 things, 1. that I am NOT lying and 2. That she really did say what I said she said) and see for yourself. You know, usually the one making the accusation is guilty of said subject so what are you lying about? Oh yeah, about the quote not being accurate! Of course you won't check out the video because it's against your religion! You people are very much like the extremist muslims in that you would prefer the end of someone that doesn't agree with your religion! I've already said that I don't care what you believe as it's your life but why do you insist on coming to these videos and trying to recruit for your religion of evolutianity? I wouldn't want anything untoward to happen to you and I assume that you would wish no harm to me. How about you quit trying to evangelize for your religion and I'll quit trying to convince you that you're believing a lie? A question for you before I end my part in this convo, can a man become a woman or vice versa ? Please answer this last question.

[@avafury4584]

Amen AIG ❤✝️

[@fioschannel]

Thank you, Calvin, I'm still blessed by your videos 🙏

[@aubreyleonae4108]

Hard to believe that Calvin is a virgin. Could he be lying?

[@fioschannel]

​@@aubreyleonae4108And what? The importance is the message he gives us. His life is private, we don't have to know anything else that what he does form AiG Canada.

[@earthisasphere]

@@fioschannel The important thing would be that he tell you truth. He does not. That is easy to see to anyone who has even a high school level of science knowledge...

[@fioschannel]

@@earthisasphere Sorry, but according to what I've heard, he tells the truth because he is working at AiG Canada, he can't tell something different that every AiG organisms around the world. To remind you, AiG is a Apologetics and Creationist organism. About his private life, it is totally not our business.

[@earthisasphere]

@@fioschannel So you think that because of where he works he is incapable of lying? That tells me all I need to know. But he lies in this very video. In. this video insinuates that scientist determine the absolute age of rocks by just looking at them. And that is an absolute bold faced lie. He claims science can't explain polystrate fossils, and it very clearly and easily does, and he lies about the definition of evolution. It's sad. it is even more sad that you all believe him.

[@RobertA-oi6hw]

Love this stuff! Thanks guys. God's word will endure forever.

[@nathancook2852]

Only in the minds of the indoctrinated. Calvin says "we found rocks that look old but that are young", and YEC's be like 'All of science is wrong!!!!"

[@RobertA-oi6hw]

​@@nathancook2852 yeah, it be wrong. That be true! 😂

[@RobertA-oi6hw]

​@@nathancook2852 fortunately we have more evidence than just your flawed carbon dating. Love this stuff, man. You atheists sure seem riled up!

[@BmoreGrrrrl]

@@RobertA-oi6hw Please show me your evidence for determining the age of the Earth as 6000 years, plus or minus. Don't just claim all of existing science is wrong, provide evidence of what you say is right.

[@nathancook2852]

@@RobertA-oi6hw I know many YEC's, I live in the deep south of the US. Not once have I been shown scientific evidence for a young earth. I would love to see what you have. My guess, you won't respond with any evidence at all. But please, prove me wrong.

[@TJforChrist-v2s]

I don't see what's so hard about believing the Bible over humans. If we believe there is a God who created all things like the Bible says, then nothing would be impossible for Him. It would be a supernatural thing to create all things in 6 days and God specializes in doing supernatural things. Thanks AIG

[@BmoreGrrrrl]

If you or anyone wants to believe everything was supernaturally created in the last 6000 years, go for it. Just please don't try to say those beliefs are supported or corroborated in any way by actual scientific findings because they aren't. In fact it's just the opposite.

[@jockyoung4491]

Yes. IF. You choose to believe it. Others don't. And that's OK

[@nathancook2852]

Believe in whatever god you want, but the channel is a science denying channel. Just don't use your belief in a god to deny science.

[@newcreationinchrist1423]

Amen 🙏🙏🙏 easy for us as Christians to see this. For unbelievers, not so easy.

[@earthisasphere]

What is hard about believe the bible is that you have to ignore all the evidence. No evidence supports a literal biblical interpretation, and all the evidence we have shows a literal biblical interpretation could not have happened.

[@refuse2bdcvd324]

Thanks, AIG Canada! 2 Peter 3:5 tells us the earth is old, but we should not let atheists convince us that it is OLDER than what is documented in scripture.

[@nathancook2852]

The age isn't even documented in scripture...

[@refuse2bdcvd324]

@@nathancook2852 the geneaologies indicate the age.

[@nathancook2852]

@@refuse2bdcvd324 Of course they do. And we are certain those are correct are we? Hell, people now days can't even go back 4 generations and get it correct. LOL And on top of that, all of geology is wrong as well. Oh, the hubris of YEC's...

[@refuse2bdcvd324]

@@nathancook2852 you labeled me a YEC. I am not. As my initial comment states, the Bible tells us the earth is old, just not as old as darwinistic materialists say. You said, people now days can't even go back 4 generations and get it correct. Perhaps you have never heard of ancestry websites that trace people's lineages back for well beyond 4 generations. Or do you deny their accuracy as well? That said, the people aren't the only ones who kept track of the generations. God himself did so. Denial of the genaeologies equates to documented history denial. Please accept documented history; receive Christ.

[@Alisonwarr87]

@@nathancook2852 it’s correct …. The Bible is the word of God and it is perfect

[@thegallantsaint2034]

I’ve heard of a ww2 bunker that still had sandbags lining it. In just 80 years, the sand in the sandbags hardened to become sandstone, and no pressure was put on it - even the top layer of sandbags had turned into stone.

[@Bomtombadi1]

where is your source for this?

[@earthisasphere]

@@Bomtombadi1 Didn't you know? KZbin is censoring him and won't let him post it! 🤣

[@rizdekd3912]

Are we sure they weren't bags of cement that hardened? If you leave a bag of sakrete (cement) in the weather, it will harden as hard as rock in a few months.

[@RMgolf]

Why does our moon have craters? There are only a few ways for you to get out of this question… either the moon was here before earth then somehow earth captured the moon later on. The impacts were during the human era and were observed by people, which isn’t the truth because surely that would be documented watching that spectacle. The moon doesn’t have craters… The truth is during one of the heavy bombardment eras billions of years ago the earth and the moon were getting pelted constantly during the solar systems settlement period. The earth got rid of its scars because of its very active surface and atmosphere over long periods of time. The moon doesn’t have an active surface or atmosphere so you see the evidence of a catastrophic time long ago. Also earth and the moon shared material from the blasts with each other which we’ve even been able to bring back to earth and study ancient earth rock.

[@jwag7747]

Thank you. This really helped me. I never knew why nor worried about why science & the Bible varied so much. I always thought it doesn't matter if the earth is 6,000 yrs old or millions, bc either way God created it. I was wrong tho, bc truth matters! It's shameful that we don't have true science that follows facts instead of manipulated results designed to fit a theory or narrative. I've recently started reading the Bible beginning with Genesis. Is reading the Bible in order from front to back the best way? I just assumed that's the way it's meant to be read, but I've also heard that others recommend a different order. I'm just curious if anyone here has any recommendations. Thanks

[@juliealoem]

Hey ! If you're just beginning to read the Bible, maybe you might want to watch the videos made by BibleProject, especially those that summarize the content and global meaning of each book, starting from Genesis. It really helps clarifying things and not get too overwhelmed at once. Videos are around 6-10 minutes so it's really easy to watch. Of course, you can also just read and study on your own without external influences which is also great for many reasons, but I think it might get discouraging sometimes and hard to understand when you begin. For the reading order, I personally think reading the Bible chronologically is great, starting from Genesis because imo Genesis contains the entirety of the Bible's core message and is a very beautiful and interesting book, foreshadowing Jesus from beginning to end. But many would tell you you should read the New Testament first. And then the Old Testament. About the issue about the age of the earth, I used to think it didn't matter as well. But the truth is that if you want to believe the God of the Bible, the millions of years of death and suffering and struggle before humans even appeared and sinned is a real problem that simply doesn't fit with His character. I wish you peace and happiness on your path with God ; ).

[@earthisasphere]

The truth does matter. You should study actual science and not get your science from apologists. More christians understand the earth is old and evolution explains the diversity of life we see today than those who claim the earth is young. Evolution is scientific ideas that is the most well tested, most scrutinized, and most supported by evidence, and these is nothing that even begins to falsify it. Believe in whatever god you wish, but learn actual science too.

[@jwag7747]

@earthisasphere thanks for your input. BTW I believe that evolution occurs bc we can observe it, but I don't believe that humans evolved from monkeys, etc

[@mmaimmortals]

Just an opinion, but the Bible is laid out pretty much in chronological order from Genesis through the New Testament. So reading it from Genesis forward makes good sense. It's obviously not the only approach, but it does help you develop the history step by step in the order in which it actually happened.

[@tomesplin4130]

Hint: the Bible was never intended to be read as a scientific or historical record. There is no conflict between science and Christianity whatsoever.

[@tomperone9338]

That's hilarious! AIG are some of the most baldfaced liars on the planet!

[@maylingng4107]

They are the worst. Lead by Ken Ham who has no science education. But that did not stop him to extort more than $50 million (net worth) from the ignorant and gullible.

[@KenJackson_US]

Please do tell! What was a lie?

[@maylingng4107]

@@KenJackson_US Everything the uneducated Kelvin was babbling!

[@tomperone9338]

@KenJackson_US I've yet to find a single thing they don't lie about. The Bible is not, and never will be, a science text. Anyone treating it as such is either a fool or a con artist.

[@snaggletooth14]

You, my friend, are completely deceived. Open your eyes before it’s too late for you.

[@reyniercampher3815]

I love your ministry, brother. God bless you. I'm here for the ride.

[@petronioantunes5317]

This generation will not pass away until the coming of the Lord. Then jaws will drop at all truth. God bless your efforts.

[@Bomtombadi1]

Oh look! Another “genuine Christian” with the pettiness of a 6 year old!

[@jockyoung4491]

Every generation has been saying that for 2000 years.

[@petronioantunes5317]

But previous generations did not have the knowledge we have now, as prophesied by Daniel that in the end times knowledge will increase. But the wicked do not understand and will be surprised.

[@earthisasphere]

@@petronioantunes5317 LOL. The had the same book you do.

[@Bomtombadi1]

@ you think “knowledge increasing is profoundly prophetic? It’s profoundly pathetic. I bet you’d be impressed if the bible said people will eat food in the last days.

[@HS-zk5nn]

its Nov 22, 2024 and still no proof of LUCA - the athiests ponds daddy

[@sciencerules2825]

Hey H S! Still spreading the lie you have a PhD in Evolution from an Ivy? 🤣🤣😂😂😅😅

[@jockyoung4491]

Not that you would care or even understand, but LUCA was obviously not the first life.

[@HS-zk5nn]

@@sciencerules2825 Hey annie oaktree ! why did yt remove you sam burns? 🤣🤣😂😂😅😅

[@HS-zk5nn]

@@jockyoung4491 exactly the point jocky. God created kinds. thanks!

[@earthisasphere]

And you still don't have the Ph.D. in "Evolution" from an Ivy League university like you claim.

[@thire7432]

I rather believe that trees would have had rings, not necessarily from growth, but because I think it would be the optimal structure. Different layers of trees have different functions in the world today: some cells move water up the trunk, while others move sap down the trunk. So while trees would not have grown layers over time-subject to the conditions thereof-they are also not likely to be uniform throughout the cross section. But, as with all thoughts of the world at creation, it is subject to (in addition to Divine Intervention) any changes occurring with the Fall, the Curse, the Flood, or even the Judgment on Babel: so it need not conform to the conditions of the present day.

[@AndrewJarvis-hn7cc]

I live in the Sourh of England, and the South Downs ( chalk hills) form our beautiful landscape. In one cutting nearby , you can see that the actual soil thickness is a just matter of inches. If soil formed at even 1mm per year, it would need to be MILES thick if it was 100 million years old.

[@jockyoung4491]

Assuming it formed at a constant rate and never eroded. Both assumptions are obviously false.

[@sciencerules2825]

Please read about the *geologic rock cycle* which continually recycles soil through erosion and plate tectonic subduction.

[@AndrewJarvis-hn7cc]

So you are suggesting about one MICRON of soil per year ?

[@jockyoung4491]

@@AndrewJarvis-hn7cc Have you ever heard of erosion?

[@jockyoung4491]

Soil on chalk deposits is almost always thin because it is very poor growing conditions and organic matter accumulates very slowly.

[@jeffreyabercrombie]

Great presentation as usual, keep. It up

[@Petro-wp8xt]

The Word is true, evey bit. That Lord God Almighty is the Creator of everything 1John 1: 1... The world is in it's current state due to sin. Death and illness came to creation because of sin. Thank you Jesus for giving Your life after unimaginable sacrifice and suffering to give us the opportunity to reconcile with the Father ❤❤.

[@henno3889]

Correction: according to your own bible, he gave his life but took it back two days later. That's not a sacrifice, that's just a bad weekend.

[@DiscipleofJesusChrist-t2p]

Evolutionists vs. Math: *Most factual math + human population history according to "the story of evolution"* If humans (i.e., the genus homo ) have been on the Earth for roughly two to three million years. Using statistics, one can arrive at an estimate for how many people would be predicted to be on the Earth at different points in history. For example, accounting for factors such as *war, plagues, disease, natural disasters, and famine* and assuming humans have been on the planet for only one million, rather than two to three million, years, we find that there should be 10^2,000 people on the planet today. There are, however, not even 10^10 people on the Earth. In fact, if three-feet-tall humans with narrow shoulders were squeezed into the Universe like sardines, only 10^82 people could fit into the entire Universe. It would take 10^1,918 (minus one) other Universes like ours to house that many humans. *Extremely generous math to try to favor the history of humanity according to "the story of evolution"* Atheist scientists had originally said that humans broke off from ape-like creatures 2.5 million years ago. And that modern man evolved from that humanoid about 250,000 to 300,000 years ago. Well, even if we assume that humans have ony been on the planet for 10,000 years, when the alleged agricultural revolution started and being extremely conversative. Only doubling the world's population every 150 years (currently the population doubles about 40 years), *after 150 years there will be 4 people, after another 150 years there will be 8 people, after another 150 years there will be 16 people, and so on* This rate is actually very conservative. (we have records of a Russian woman in the 1700's who gave birth to over 60 children). I am taking into account *disease, plagues, famines, natural disasters, wars, and reverse birth to death ratio at various intervals.* Way before the discovery of penicillin in 1928. We have records of women from the 1400's giving birth to 10 children on average, let's say only 5 would make it to old age for the factors mentioned above, so 2 children per couple every 150 years for 10,000 years it is extremely generous. Calculating these numbers, there would have been averaging close to 100 doublings in 10,000 years. The world’s population would be whopping figure of the # 1 followed by 30 zeros. Check it out: 1,000000000000000000000000000000. You can still wipe out humanity a couple of times more and the numbers still don't add up. *Think about this in 1912 when the Titanic sank and 1,500 people died. The world's population was only a little over 1 billion people. Fast-forward 100 years and we are 8 billion. And we have had world war I and world War II in between (70 million people died). In 1945-46 around 140,000 people died as a result of the bombing of Hiroshima, Plus the worst influenza plague the world has ever seen, which happened 1918 (50 million people die)* Still In the last 100 years alone we can see a population growth of 8 times its numbers. *Now, let's look at this other also very conservative math:* If we start about 4,500 years ago (time of Noah's flood, only 8 people survived). After about 30 doublings, which is about 4,500 years, the world's population would have reached about 8 billion people (4,500 years ÷ 150 years in between births = 30 doublings // 8 exponentially doubled 30 times = 8,589,934,592 people). Give or take a few millions due to the negative factors mentioned above. Yes, some Christians and many other religions believe in some sort of evolution. But this is only because they have been influenced by this indoctrination since they were children. *Math doesn't lie. We can see how man invented the a theory of his origin to try to do away with God’s moral laws. We have lied about our origin, our history. And the studies of archeology, biology, anthropology, and so on. We even rather believe in panspermia (aliens from other galaxies). We are very ready to accept anything but God. BTW, religion is also man's made. For God there's only two religions good and evil* There's gonna be people regardless of their educational level that because of their cognitive biases can look at these facts and will still want to continue their merry-way without having any accountability for their actions. *Data taken into account:* *We have the oldest world's population census data from China's Han Dynasty in 2 CE, which recorded a population of 57.7 million people.* *World population record:* "8000 BC This is an assumed date based on human evolution; which is a total fictional fabrication: The claimed world's population was around 5 million at the beginning of agriculture." *The following world's population record is from factual census:* 1 AD: The world's population was around 200 million, but some estimates suggest it was closer to 300 million or 600 million. 1800: The world's population reached 1 billion. 1930: The world's population reached 2 billion. 1960: The world's population reached 3 billion. 1974: The world's population reached 4 billion. 1987: The world's population reached 5 billion. 1999: The world's population reached 6 billion people 2011: The world's population reached 7 billion people 2022: The world's population reached 8 billion people 2023: The world's population was 8,045,311,447. *In 1912 when the Titanic sank, where 1,500 people died. The world's population was only a little over 1 billion people. Fast-forward 100 years and we are 8 billion. And we have had world war I and world War II in between (70 million people died). In 1945-46 around 140,000 people died as a result of the bombing of Hiroshima, Plus the worst influenza plague the world has ever seen, which happened 1918 (50 million people die)* Still In the last 100 years alone we can see a population growth of 8 times its numbers. *COVID 2019 to 2024 about 7,010,681 people died. But there's still over 8 billion people on the planet.* *Each year in the USA alone there are approximately 4 million births and 2.4 million deaths.* The world's fertility rate has only been declining over the past 70 years, from around 5 children per woman in 1950 to 2.2 children per woman in 2021 (with the exception of a recorded case of a Russian woman in the 1700's who had 69 children) is due to a number of factors, including: • Reduced childhood mortality: Mothers no longer need to compensate for lost children • Increased women's autonomy: Women have more control over their lives • Improved contraception access and efficacy: Contraception is more widely available and effective.

[@jockyoung4491]

If you can't say something in your own words, nobody is going to care what you regurgitate

[@sciencerules2825]

Huge steaming pile of creationist nonsense which doesn't take into account actual historic birth and death rates and the fact the population doubling time has *NOT* been constant. GIGO from the first stupid "calculation". 😄

[@DiscipleofJesusChrist-t2p]

@jockyoung4491 Oh, we both know why you love the story that you came from a rock 4 billion years ago. The fairytale of man's origin without God is nothing more than a cup out. You simply suppress the truth of God, so you don't have to face your conscience, which is constantly reminding you of your sinful nature and your dirty lifestyle. You are basically a weak coward, because you can't stand your ground and say no to the things you know you are doing wrong. You easily give in to every sinful fleshy desire you have. You hate having moral accountability.

[@sciencerules2825]

@@DiscipleofJesusChrist-t2p Why do you C&P this "it's too improbable" stupidity you don't understand and can't defend?

[@DiscipleofJesusChrist-t2p]

​@@sciencerules2825 Regardless, you are so caught up in your cult of atheism that you path is already fixed. Rejecting God and believe that you can take His place is the ultimate form of narcissism.

[@Nora-ky5bt]

Beautiful presentation 🙏🏻

[@earthisasphere]

Which isn't supported by history or science...

[@newcreationinchrist1423]

Amen AIG 🙏🙏🙏✝️🕊️ no reason to doubt God's word! Praying for you 💪💪💪 be strong in the Lord and in the power of his might (Ephesians 6)

[@graemeross6970]

How do you know it's God's word?

[@earthisasphere]

Mother Earth revealed to me that nature is the one true god and the mother earth bible proves it. It actually prophesied that you would make this comment.

[@newcreationinchrist1423]

​@@graemeross6970 after everything Christians have taught you still don't know?

[@newcreationinchrist1423]

​@@earthisasphere not a good thing to mock God, my friend. 😉🙏✝️🕊️

[@earthisasphere]

@@newcreationinchrist1423 Well, when you post stupid things you get stupid responses... but you can't prove me wrong. You don't know what has been revealed to me and by which god.

[@christophesutter1844]

Alléluia 🔥💜🔥

[@LostFoundRestored]

Love these very well done videos! The thing about the pre-fall condition is that no one and nothing aged until after the fall. The Bible doesn't give us any idea of how long Adam and Eve were in the garden before they sinned. It may have been a thousand years, more or less. We simply don't know. But there would still be no way to measure that period of time for the very reason that thermo-dynamics did not apply and nothing decayed. No seasons, but apparently day and night in a perfect paradise where no danger or disease existed. Can't imagine it!

[@Bomtombadi1]

So god suspends thermodynamics and all laws of physics pre-fall? One would think there is evidence of these scientific principles being violated. What a weird thing to be saying

[@LostFoundRestored]

@Bomtombadi1 i never said all laws were suspended! Thermodynamics is one law of physics. It just stands to reason, I think, that for a world to be perfect it cannot include death, disease, or decay. But, hey, it's just a thought. Like yours....

[@BiologosDebunked-h2v]

Trusting in God leads to the truth that is found in his word. The lies of this world are designed by the enemy to lead people away from salvation. Don't forget that he is technically the "god of this world." The devil is very clever and only through the help of the Holy Spirit can one overcome it.

[@nathancook2852]

Yep, the devil planted all that evidence in the ground that points to evolution and an old earth. He also made the universe look old as well. Damn devil... when you best argument against science is "the devil is clever', you don't have a good argument.

[@BiologosDebunked-h2v]

@nathancook2852 your comment and shows exactly how deceptive the devil is. He has you so fooled. I feel so sorry for you.

[@nathancook2852]

@@BiologosDebunked-h2v LOL. Why? I am able to think for myself. I don't have to follow the YEC talking points. I can look at scientific findings with wonder and amazement and when scientist explain how it happens I don't have to claim "GAWD DID IT!" I can look at history honestly and not have to filter it through YEC viewpoints... you have no reason at all to feel sorry for me. I certainly don't feel sorry for those who are willfully ignorant. I do feel sorry for the children you all indoctrinate and set up for failure though...

[@BiologosDebunked-h2v]

@nathancook2852 no you don't resort to "God did it." You resort to "God didn't do it." You look at history through the lens of people who have taught you. Nothing more. There is nothing honest about what you've been taught. It's all part of the lies of this world. You've been deceived. Nothing more.

[@BiologosDebunked-h2v]

Set up for failure? I wouldn't call making it to heaven, failure. Lol

[@eyeguy51]

The best statement I have read yet: “science has questions that may never be answered, whereas religion has answers that may never be questioned“.

[@honeybeehaley799]

I don’t know about that considered I ask God so many questions and he answers them

[@eyeguy51]

@ Science doesn’t mind, and in fact encourages being questioned. All religions, no matter how outrageous their claims may be, resent those claims being questioned. As far as a god speaking to you and providing advice, I can only imagine that its the work of your subconscious deliberations becoming manifest. Unless you do actually hear voices.

[@earthisasphere]

@@honeybeehaley799 Many people say this. The problem is, there is no proof it is answered by a god. Believe in a god if you wish, but the type of "evidence" you are trying to claim isn't actual evidence for a god.

[@iriemon1796]

That's because science seeks truth by continuously testing things based on objectively verifiable evidence, whilst religion is dogmatic and uninterested in truth if it contradicts the bible. That is why folks like answers in Genesis can say ridiculous things like the earth is only 100 years old and there were dinosaurs floating on a boat for a year 4000 years ago.

[@stegokitty]

@@eyeguy51 //All religions, no matter how outrageous their claims may be, resent those claims being questioned. // Not Christianity. The entire point is to question and to seek out the answers. But I perceive that you think it's legitimate to seek answers in a way contrary to wisdom and any reasonable knowledge. One does not discover how the ant moves and lives by studying lobsters; one does not learn how to play the violin by banging on pots and pans. So yea, it appears to me, based upon your loaded comment at the start of this thread that you're not really interested in discovering the truth at all, but rather at mocking and making a fool of yourself.

[@JamesW225]

So what is the first day of creation

[@maylingng4107]

No such thing as a creation.

[@JamesW225]

It is all around us.

[@maylingng4107]

@@JamesW225 You refer to prejudice and superstition being all around you? You are right.

[@JamesW225]

You are full of conclusiin

[@maylingng4107]

@@JamesW225 Learn how to spell and by all means get an education!

[@EmehIfeanyi-nz5lf]

I love you Calvin , you are really clearing things up

[@earthisasphere]

Do you think geologists just look at the age of rocks to tell how old they are? Really? The island of Surtsey he mentioned is a prime example of the evolution of species that he claims can't even happen. LOL.

[@ClawsAndJaws7]

@@earthisasphere How so is an example?

[@EmehIfeanyi-nz5lf]

@@earthisasphere He has a point , just looked at the evidences. To what I have seen so far, evolution theory is just a believe or idea , and everything gonna fit inside it or rejected.

[@mirandahotspring4019]

How? By lying to you?

[@mirandahotspring4019]

@@EmehIfeanyi-nz5lf Learn what a scientific theory actually is!

[@zerosteel0123]

Thanks AIG! appreciate you

[@ShadowAceAZ]

I absolutely love your way of teaching and how you speak. Yet, I’d be remiss if I didn’t say how much I want that leather jacket. 😊 People have lost so much, not the least is dressing professionally. If everyone started to dress stylish again, I think their mental attitude would also change. Just as making your bed in the morning is a great way to accomplish something first thing in the day. You see your accomplishment and want to do more. Hope that makes sense.

[@CreationvsEvolution]

Why should we trust the Bible? The Bible contains 66 books written by over 40 different authors in 3 different languages over the course of 1,500 years, and together they paint a picture of one story that revolves around God creating men and women, us sinning against God, and God making a way for the restoration of all things by His grace through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. In other words, they all paint a consistent and clear picture of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. That’s 40 authors over the course of 1,500 years. If I took 40 people right now and asked them to write down their views on God, what’s wrong in the world, and how it can be made right, there’s no way I could get them to agree. And that’s at the same time in history with the same language!

[@tomesplin4130]

@@CreationvsEvolution That’s a tad fallacious. The authors weren’t selected at random, but were carefully selected from works that were part of a people group with a religion and strong ethic self-identity. Of course they would correlate. It’s not proof of divine inspiration. Hebrew was not a written language prior to 10th century BCE so there’s a significant amount of verbal tradition contained in the accounts of early origins.

[@nathancook2852]

"My papi told me"... And you know what, stories that get passed down for even a few generations have been shown to be completely inaccurate. It's like playing a game of telephone...

[@DennisIsadore]

@@CreationvsEvolution tis true

[@newcreationinchrist1423]

Great post! God bless you 🙏🙏🙏

[@aubreyleonae4108]

Bravo chucklehead, you are brilliant!

[@thecrew777]

I love watching these. Thank you, A.I.G..

[@Torby4096]

A guy was terribly offended that I would limit God to just 6 days, like He said🤔

[@angelalewis3645]

It sounds like he thinks God must take much longer. Why would he limit God’s ability?

[@Dorothy-zx]

Amen and amen Larry Burkett's book on "Giving and Tithing" drew me closer to God and helped my spirituality. 2020 was a year I literally lived it. I cashed in my life savings and gave it all away. My total giving amounted to 40,000 dollars. Everyone thought I was delusional. Today I receive 85,000 dollars every two months. I have a property in Calabasas CA and travel alot. God has promoted me more than once and opened doors for me to live beyond my dreams. God kept to his promises to and for me.❤

[@Praying_for_Grace]

There’s wonder working power in following Kingdom principles on giving and tithing. Hallelujah!

[@Dorothy-zx]

It is the digital market. That's been the secret to this wealth transfer. A lot of folks in the US and abroad are getting so much from it, God has been good to my household Thank you Jesus

[@Dorothy-zx]

Big thanks to Mrs Elara Marie Wells.

[@Dorothy-zx]

Her top notch guidance and expertise on digital market changed the game for me.

[@Dorothy-zx]

There is her line!!!! under this comment!!!! combine the DIGITS 🔁

[@canthomaru]

I've thought about this, but for years, I haven't had any of the information needed to address the age issue, thanks.

[@earthisasphere]

Calvin didn't give you any info to address the age issues. He just gave a big "Nuh Uh" toward science, which is all he ever does... Don't get science from apologetics channels.

[@zerosteel0123]

​@@earthisasphere don't think you can tell us what we should or shouldn't listen to as Christians. We don't take advice on things like this from atheists

[@Animalmanager]

If you want a legitimate explanation for the origins of a young earth as it appears now, including origins of earth’s radioactivity and its geological features look up Walter Brown’s hydroplate theory. Brian Nickels has an amazing KZbin channel that clearly and in a detailed organized matter, lays out the entire theory. far more comprehensive and coherent than any young earth creationist theory out there that punts to miracles and mystery.

[@Johnny_Eh-theist]

​@@zerosteel0123you should. You would be far less ignorant of reality if you did listen to us a bit more. Still have your faith in God. But stop denying reality and it'll do you a literal world of good.

[@zerosteel0123]

@Johnny_Eh-theist not a chance. God is the only reality in this life and his word stands above all

[@mctomans]

The volcano shot rocks out of the ocean and the middle of the Earth. The rocks weren't born when you saw the island form. The rocks were around for many years before then. Also, when volcano's erupt, people know that is different than when continents break apart or other geological events happen.

[@janniedzwiecki3419]

,,A lie once told remains a lie, but a lie told a thousand times becomes the truth" Joseph Gebbels Still actual in our daily, evolutionistic world...

[@jockyoung4491]

What is an "evolutionist" and name one lie you think such a person has told.

[@earthisasphere]

Yes, the lies of religion have been around for thousands of years...

[@janniedzwiecki3419]

We heard so many times about milions or billions of years, isnt it the same strategy?

[@sciencerules2825]

@@janniedzwiecki3419 We have a huge amount of physical evidence for millions and billions of years. Why shouldn't we teach that evidence in schools? Just because you personally don't like it?

[@jockyoung4491]

@@janniedzwiecki3419 Billions of years is not a strategy. It's a scientific fact.

[@lennyruiz6586]

Blessings. Here from Honduras

[@rickmarosi-yz9wt-s5b]

I notice that when Christ beckoned the disciples to come to his fire with fish & bread upon, it was a mature fire of coals.

[@MinnesotaBeekeeper]

Sea shells in mountain top rocks? Bottom line is we weren't there.

[@sciencerules2825]

Sea shells deposited on ocean beds, fossilized, then were raised to the tops of mountains which formed due to plate tectonic collisions.

[@lagoon7389]

​@@sciencerules2825Or there was a global flood. Same result. Bottom line is we weren't there.

[@mavrosyvannah]

​@lagoon7389 no chance of that. Too many layers, different material, ancient dates.

[@sciencerules2825]

@@lagoon7389 Sorry but a literal global Noah's Flood was scientifically disproven over two centuries ago, by Christian geologists at that.

[@lagoon7389]

@@sciencerules2825 and "Scientists" and "Christians" have never been wrong before. Of Course! No it hasn't been disproven. nice try though

[@maylingng4107]

*Historicity of Jesus* There is no evidence that the biblical Jesus ever existed. The virgin birth, crucifixion and resurrections are the foundational dogma of the Christian religions; no evidence exists for any of that. That a man (rabbi, minister, priest or a hobo of his day with similar name lived, is possible, but that would not serve Christianity. What about the thousands of writings and claims from many religious historians? They are serving their faith and are not interested in facts of history. Is it possible that not a single eyewitness to Jesus mention a single word about Jesus? No it is not possible, if he really existed and performed those miracles. What about the contemporaries, writers and historians in the early first century? There were more than a dozen of those around Jerusalem and the Middle East. Nobody mentioned witnessing the birth, trial and crucifixion of Jesus or the graves opening and the dead walking around the city. If you are tempted by the 4 Gospels, then you should know that these were written by anonymous Greeks living in Greece having never met Jesus, just hearing the folk tales. The 4 did not have names, and we do not know who they were or what they saw or did not see. The Greek bishop, Irenaeus invented the four names and inserted them into the gospels in 170 C.E. Did you ever ask why the other dozen or so gospels were excluded from the bible? The answer is, they were excluded because they contradicted the four gospels that were included. Very convenient. It should also be noted, that the bible was and I still being revised. Several versions are in use today. For those perpetuating the Jesus propaganda I would like to ask; (1) Do you believe that the prophet Muhammad split the moon in half and rode a winged horse (buraq)? Well, there are thousands of written confirmations/writings and 1.6 billion Muslims claim it so. (2) Do you believe that Joseph Smith received god’s message on golden tablets from the angel Moroni? There are millions of Mormons who write about this and believe it. Plus, how about other tales by other religions about their private miracles? What is the difference between those tales and the Christian tale? Finally, the Jesus story closely matches stories of other gods before Jesus. Is that a coincidence; I think not. For example: Horus born of a virgin, had twelve disciples, walked on water, delivered a 'sermon on the mount', performed miracles, (turning water into wine) was executed beside two thieves, rose from the dead and ascended into heaven. It turns out, that the Jesus story is a cheap knock-off of previous legends.

[@alantasman8273]

Apparently you know nothing about history. Nice try at gaslighting....Jesus said those that deny me before man, I will deny before the Father. You are treading on danger ground.

[@maylingng4107]

@@alantasman8273 I know much more about history than you do! List a single eyewitness to Jesus (outside the lies in the bible) who mentioned Jesus in his writing. I take a single eyewitness writer or historian. Now, do you have any, or just prefer to lie some more?

[@alantasman8273]

@@maylingng4107 Flavious Josephus, Roman Senator Tacitus, Pliny the Younger and others outside the Bible have written about Jesus being a historical figure. This does not include the many apostles who wrote about Jesus, his miracles, death and resurrection. Those apostles died horrible deaths while refusing to recant what they had witnessed about Jesus. Ultimately Rome itself became a Christian culture less than four hundred years after Christs death.

[@alantasman8273]

@@maylingng4107 Apparently you are not familiar with the writings of Flavious Josepus, Roman Senator Tacitus, Pliny the Younger and others on the historicity of Jesus. Jesus was seminal figure in world history. Even our calendar is divided pre Jesus and after his birth. I am surprised you don't know of the Word..the one who spoke everything into existence.

[@maylingng4107]

@@alantasman8273 Apparently you know nothing about history or just prefer to lie a lot. I asked for a secular writer who was an EYEWITNESS to Jesus? Which of those you mention was an eyewitness? PS: The calendar is CE and BCE (nothing to do with Jesus). Much of the world uses different calendars.

[@borg386]

FINALLY! I hear someone explaining in a well thought out way what I have believe aand been saying forever. That God created the earth, humans, all living creatures,and even the entire Universe within a literal 6 days. But he created it "already old". There has to be something for all the unbelievers to believe in, and seemingly have science to back ot up. Evolution of the earth and the universe took billions of years. But in reality,it only took 6 days. See how smart God is?

[@IAMhassentyou-e7l]

It is always best to trust God's word. The Bible is the word of God. The Bible is called the Word of God, meaning it can be considered a direct line of communication from the Lord, divinely inspired by the authors of the respective books. Jesus Christ Himself is also called the Word of God. This concept is based on the belief that Jesus embodies God's message to humanity.

[@jollyandwaylo]

But why do you think the Bible is the word of god? It looks like the word of people who lived during the time of the writing.

[@earthisasphere]

@@jollyandwaylo The Bible tells them so. That's literally all they have. The Bible is true because it tells them it is...

[@IAMhassentyou-e7l]

​@@jollyandwaylo "it looks like....." Why should anyone take your subjective opinion on it? Gods opinion is not subjective.

[@IAMhassentyou-e7l]

Evolution should never be mixed with scripture. One of the important questions we should ask ourselves is how is Satan god of this world (2 Corinthians 4:4)? The phrase god of this world (or god of this age) indicates that Satan is the major influence on the ideals, opinions, goals, and views of the majority of people. His influence encompasses the world’s philosophies, education, and commerce. When people live as if there is no God, they by default follow the god of this world. The unholy thoughts, destructive ideas, wild speculations, and false religions of this world have sprung from Satan’s lies and deceptions.

[@IAMhassentyou-e7l]

Satan is also called the “prince of the power of the air” in Ephesians 2:2. He is the “ruler of this world” in John 12:31. These titles and many more signify Satan’s capabilities. He wields a certain amount of authority and power in this world. He is not a king, but a prince, a ruler of some sort. In some way he rules over the world and the people in it: “The whole world is under the control of the evil one” (1 John 5:19).

[@erikt1713]

Most people would assume that it took millions of years to carve out the Grand Canyon. This is exactly right, and that's what it is. Anyway, just look at a large stalagmite from a cave. The oldest are estimated to be two million years old. However, you can almost go into any cave in Croatia to find one that is demonstrably 50 thousand years old. This already disproves the Bible. These things are not created in a violent event. The Grand Canyon wasn't, either, but it may be less obvious for an observer intent on ignoring evidence.

[@JosephBoxmeyer-u3d]

But, were those Mt. Saint Helens deposits as hard as rock when they were rapidly worn? Are those deposits rock now?

[@throckmortensnivel2850]

Calvin Smith: "...we typically detect age being attached to something because of our assumptions..." Like, for instance, assuming the chronology in the bible is accurate. If that chronology is incorrect, or is a complete fantasy, then none of your assumptions about the age of the earth are true.

[@alantasman8273]

The Chronology of the Bible was given to Moses by God. It is a first person account of how everything came into being by one who was there in the beginning. It is not assumption or speculation like man made fables, instead, it reveals why the world is in the current state we find it. It has been found to be historically accurate and represents a real account of God and his relationship with man...particularly man's rebellion and the sacrifice of Jesus to bring man back into fellowship with the Father.

[@throckmortensnivel2850]

@@alantasman8273 Obviously Calvin Smith doesn't believe what you believe. If he did, he wouldn't be trying to justify it with "science". As far as Jesus's sacrifice, what sacrifice was that? .

[@josephreigens3090]

AMEN!!!

[@msd5808]

Did Adam or Eve desire children before the exit from Eden? I don't mean just sexual desire, but desire for progeny. They were happy being childless?

[@maylingng4107]

There never was an Adam or an Eve.

[@Pedro-dk1ej]

Noah's flood is not historical! You're just making that thing up!

[@cloisteredoyster]

yes it is "impossible history" as I call it

[@littleacorn2244]

@@cloisteredoyster Everyone else calls it mythology.

[@cloisteredoyster]

@@littleacorn2244 well not everyone else....all Darwins parrots maybe 😆✅

[@littleacorn2244]

@@cloisteredoyster Everyone with an IQ higher than room temperature Celsius. That leaves out creationist dimbulbs like you. 😄

[@cloisteredoyster]

@@littleacorn2244 if you have a high IQ I'll happily be left out of that club 😆✅

[@jollyandwaylo]

This is so ridiculous. People thought that the Bible was true and only through study and evidence, eventually realized that the earth is old. The preconceived idea was the earth was young. Go look up the history of geology for instance. The young earth idea has been completely overwhelmed by science as we learn about our planet and the universe. The evidence is all for an old earth. The list of names in the Bible is not a good reason to throw out all the information we have learned in the last 200 years.

[@thrutheblinders]

It's been approximately 6,000yrs since the fall. But, we can not account for how much time Adam and Eve spent in the garden. We, because of sin and the lack of longevity of life, can't imagine an existence of 5000-10000 years.

[@stillraven9415]

Excellently done!

[@PrehistoricFarmsYT]

Ty AIGC!❤😊

[@0n3Abov3All]

I Though adam and eve 'start aging' after the curse....in this case the time between creation and the 'serpent' should be unknown...but I'm not sure...need to re-check

[@maylingng4107]

There never was an Adam or an Eve.

[@0n3Abov3All]

@maylingng4107 😂 this wasn't my point...better read 2 times before talk

[@maylingng4107]

@@0n3Abov3All Of course it was. You brought up the fake Adam and Eve,

[@noneyabidness9644]

Interestingly, if we applied what we've learned about aging to pre-flood humans, they'd look in their 20s, when they were centuries old.

[@Bomtombadi1]

Interesting! You’d think this would be studied more, right?

[@noneyabidness9644]

@@Bomtombadi1 why would it? Are we supposed to have living specimens pre flood?

[@earthisasphere]

@@noneyabidness9644 There is no "pre flood". Even your YEC brethren of the RATE team agree so much energy would have been released by such a flood the earth would have been destroyed more than 10 time over.

[@noneyabidness9644]

@earthisasphere except there is. Even in secular religious belief, there is no less than five continent and greater floods.

[@noneyabidness9644]

@earthisasphere although you are welcome to state your religious faith. You aren't welcome to your own facts. Who did this calculation and what were their assumptions, if you know.

[@WatchmansHerald]

Thank you for touching on Bible prophecy to point people to truth! God bless

[@nathancook2852]

What about those unfulfilled prophecies in Ezekial 29 and Jeremiah 46 and 49? Egypt was never destroyed so badly that nothing could set foot their for 40 years. And Nebuchadnezzar is long dead at this point. He can't fulfill it at this point....

[@aubreyleonae4108]

God told me that He has washed His hands of us and has cut us loose to face our consequences.

[@Bomtombadi1]

There are no bible prophecies.

[@canadiankewldude]

*_(For the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness and righteousness and truth;)_* *_Proving what is acceptable unto the Lord._* *_And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them._* *_Eph 5:9-11_* *_- KJB_*

[@BmoreGrrrrl]

Question - are there any honest informed creationists here worth conversing with? If so please introduce yourself. My limited experience only shows the usual cesspool of creationist ignorance.

[@newcreationinchrist1423]

So you are looking for someone that you can sway away from YEC? Is that the gist of your comment? Or are you genuinely seeking God?

[@sciencerules2825]

There have been a few over the years but you can count them on the fingers of one hand. It's been mostly a clown show with Bozos like Joe Friday.

[@jockyoung4491]

@@newcreationinchrist1423 Our purpose here is a good question. Wanting to persuade others that we are right is kind of a universal human thing. But it is important to differentiate science and faith. I don't argue about faith. It is pointless and I don't care what other people believe. But science can be discussed objectively, and I really enjoy doing that. I also feel the need to defend science and scientists from warrantless attacks from creationists.

[@nunyabizniss6934]

I'll converse with you. I'm both honest and informed. Where shall we start?

[@earthisasphere]

@@nunyabizniss6934 I think OP say from your other posts that you are neither informed nor honest.

[@earthisasphere]

Clavin is in the comments?! Ken Ham must be breathing down his neck. Are views down Calvin? That is the only time you poke your head out. I love the typical "Prove it" and "Nope" comments from you. Such depth, such knowledge, such amazing evidence to support your claims. At least you are consistent. You don't provide evidence in your videos either.

[@Bomtombadi1]

Calvin needs to boost engagement from time to time. He’s known to enter the comments, drop a few arrogant quips to stir the nest a d then run away.

[@NathanAmiel-f6b]

Whats the background music in the beginning?

[@MountKeen]

It's not loud enough to drown out Calvin's falsehoods

[@antbrown9066]

“isn’t as old as the bible clearly teaches”. It actually is not clear at all. There is no clear teaching about the age.

[@martybuck]

Except the boring genealogies

[@PrehistoricFarmsYT]

@@martybucktrue, reading those are a bit exhausting but if I wasn’t important, i wold not have been written there

[@antbrown9066]

@@martybuck the genealogies are not the “bible clearly teaching the age of the earth” . The genealogies are a record of genealogy. Not of the age of the earth. Finding the age of the earth from genealogy requires interpretation and inference.

[@justcrap3703]

@@martybuck What's interesting is the bible warned Christians against using genealogies. It's worthless, useless, in vain and because most likely you'll end up drawing to a wrong conclusion while you preach to others that's what the bible said. And yet, these "Christians" still use genealogies to measure the age of something, which God directly prohibited. Titus 3:9 "But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless."

[@lagoon7389]

The genealogies provide a proper timeframe for Adam and Eve to today. One would think that creation wasn't too far behind that but who knows?

[@mavrosyvannah]

Where's the danger?

[@mmaimmortals]

If you tell people they are related to monkeys and cucumber plants, they will believe it and start making up their own rules about how to conduct society.

[@rhett_rydinhood]

@@mmaimmortals Again: Where's the danger?

[@SoMuchFacepalm]

@@mmaimmortals They do that already. The fact that we don't already agree on morality is proof of that.

[@jockyoung4491]

@@mmaimmortals Science can't say anything about how to conduct society. Accepting the science of evolution does not make people decide to be mean to each other.

[@trustenbaker8766]

"neither would they believe, though one rose from the dead"

[@hansdemos6510]

Mr. Smith says that erosion and sedimentation are evidence for his faith-based view. They are not. The erosion we observe happening disproves his faith-based opinion. The erosion we see has happened in the past confirms our observations of the present. The Grand Canyon cannot possibly have been formed rapidly, as evidenced by its meandering course. Some sediments that we know form certain rock layers cannot have formed rapidly either, like chalk or clay formations. This too disproves Mr. Smith's faith-based claims.

[@avafury4584]

You need salvation. I'm praying for you

[@hansdemos6510]

@@avafury4584 You said: _" You need salvation. I'm praying for you"_ Thank you for that, but I am not convinced anyone needs salvation, and the disingenuous things Mr. Smith is telling us in these videos confirm my views each and every time. Look at Horseshoe Bend in the Grand Canyon; are you really telling me that was formed by tons of water rushing through? Impossible. Mr. Smith is selling you snake oil. I have no problem with people being religious, as you obviously are, as long as they don't harm others, but Mr. Smith is pretending he is scientific when he obviously isn't and he is advocating for public policies that are harmful to our children. If you are concerned about anyone's salvation, please pray for Mr. Smith. If his God is as just as Mr. Smith believes he is, Mr. Smith and all of AiG will be in for a nasty surprise come Judgment Day.

[@anaquaduck5252]

Uniformitarianism is dogma. The G/Canyon cuts through high plateaus, is not diverted by faults and doesn't follow topographical slopes. In other words, goes against secular geological logic. It is not as straight forward as you would like it to be. Atheistic/Secular interpretation assumes Nature alone by faith, not by evidence or observation.

[@nathancook2852]

@@anaquaduck5252 Oh my, so you just learned the YEC talking points and haven't actually studied the formation of the Grand Canyon. I would suggest you actually study its formation before acting like an expert...

[@anaquaduck5252]

@@nathancook2852 Talking points...very funny. So, uniformitarianism is unchallenged and has no contradictions. How about that.

[@ShallowsPaul]

The ice ages debunk this garbage.

[@earthisasphere]

They don't accept actual science or history. I read one guy on here who commented that he was arguing against all of what historians know about the past in favor of the history of the Bible.

[@BmoreGrrrrl]

Pretty much all of science debunks YEC claims.

[@ShallowsPaul]

​@@BmoreGrrrrl Even the bible debunks YEC - they claim their 'god' wrote the first parts of genesis, which means their 'god' didn't even know that the Sun was the provider of daylight.

[@edbrackeen5979]

I appreciate the terrific evidential studies you do.

[@maylingng4107]

Evidence? There is not a single one in this video.

[@hansdemos6510]

Around 7:55, Mr. Smith reveals that he is not making a rational argument, but a religious one. He says: _"I believe that because the Word of God says that's what happened in the past."_ Therefore, no evidence will be able to budge Mr. Smith's belief, nor will any evidence be needed to support it. His belief is faith-based, not evidence-based. That means that his pretenses at being in any way scientific are irrelevant, as he can never properly follow the modern scientific method anyway because that would require him to question his assumptions, which he is incapable of doing.

[@mick776gold]

He is using evidence and logic all the way through. And you are using the same argument that evolutionists often use against creation science. But I see the closed-mindedness evolutionary so-called scientists. They already believe whatever the scholars before them have said, and they cannot question that whole paradigm. Evolution researchers do exactly what you're accusing creation scientists of doing. In fact you're doing it. Instead of refuting any of his arguments, you just refute creation science entirely with an argument that applies to you just as much as it applies to anyone else.

[@anaquaduck5252]

Calvin has admitted that he previously believed in evolution. It was just that the 'evidence' didn't stack up when confronted with the deeper questioning of deep time & long ages. So, he is certainly capable of questioning things (how about you?) No one can properly follow the scientific method/observation when it comes to the past. By the way, Scripture has a historical context. Modern science has its own hoaxes, con jobs & propped up theories. Nature did it all is not 'scientific', it was never observed. Life from non-life is not so rational, observation wise, life begets life all over the globe. To assume that God or Scripture is irrelevant when it comes to life and death and everything in-between is a great error.

[@nathancook2852]

@@anaquaduck5252 "Calvin has admitted that he previously believed in evolution. It was just that the 'evidence' didn't stack up when confronted with the deeper questioning of deep time & long ages." - Calvin is a paid actor. That is all part of his character. He cannot even properly define evolution. He can't even properly define scientific theory. He has clearly not studied evolution in depth. Please enlighten us on these "hoaxes, con jobs & propped up theories". I can point to YEC hoaxes such as carving footprints in and near dino tracks to try to claim humans and dino's lived at the same time, I can point you to "dragon skull" hoaxes. Evolution has been observed. To claim otherwise is to either not understand what evolution is, or to outright lie. Evolution isn't dependent on how life started. To claim it is is also either a lie or a mischaracterization of evolution. I don't care what god or gods one believes in, but denying science is dangerous and hinders progress.

[@hansdemos6510]

​@@mick776gold You said: _" He is using evidence and logic all the way through."_ He is cherry-picking evidence, not telling you the whole story, and his logic may be sound in some places, but is fatally flawed in other. You said: _"And you are using the same argument that evolutionists often use against creation science."_ An oldie but a goodie, apparently. You said: _"But I see the closed-mindedness evolutionary so-called scientists."_ Why are you dismissive of people who have dedicated their professional lives to science? You said: _"They already believe whatever the scholars before them have said, and they cannot question that whole paradigm."_ Nonsense! If you have the evidence and the insight to call into question the status quo, you are celebrated in the sciences! Or at least you should be! Of course people are people and some are less charitable than others, but in the end, the evidence will always prevail, even if the old guard needs to retire before the new guard can take over. The best recent example of this is what happened to Dr. Mary Schweitzer; when she first discovered soft tissue remnants in dinosaur fossils, everyone was skeptical, and rightfully so. But she put in the academic legwork, did the research in accordance with the modern scientific method, published in the peer reviewed professional outlets, and now she has her own research department at a reputable university, and gets dinosaurs named after her! You said: _"Evolution researchers do exactly what you're accusing creation scientists of doing."_ Nope. You have fallen for the propaganda people like Mr. Smith are spreading. You should diversify your information sources and look beyong what you have been told by AiG and ICR etc. You said: _"Instead of refuting any of his arguments, you just refute creation science entirely with an argument that applies to you just as much as it applies to anyone else."_ Please look at some of my other comments for more specific refutations of some arguments (if you can call them that) Mr. Smith uses. Meanwhile, I am making a specific criticism here in this comment that you don't address; Mr. Smith admits that his views are religious, and that means that he is incapable of properly following the modern scientific method, because that would require him to question his religious dogmas. And yet, Mr. Smith pretends that he is doing science. Do you have any opinions on that contradiction?

[@hansdemos6510]

​@@anaquaduck5252 You said: _" Calvin has admitted that he previously believed in evolution."_ So what? In fact, "believing in evolution" is not something somebody who has "studied evolution in-depth" would say. The essence of the modern scientific theory of evolution is that you don't need to *_"believe"_* in it at all. Because it is a *_scientific_* theory, you can just evaluate the evidence and then make a rational decision to accept or reject the explanation, or to reserve judgment. No "belief" or "faith" is required or desired. You said: _"It was just that the 'evidence' didn't stack up when confronted with the deeper questioning of deep time & long ages."_ As it is impossible for us to tell what evidence he looked at, we can't make any judgment call about whether it "stacked up" or not. What we do know however is that in general in the sciences, you can't just say stuff without sufficient evidence to back it up. We know that is true for, for example, metallurgy, where you can't just say that your new type of steel is stronger than regular steel, and you can't do that in nuclear physics, where you can't just say that you have found a new elementary particle without the experiments and the results to back your claim up. The same is true for the science of biology. The modern scientific theory of evolution would not have become a scientific theory without sufficient objectively convincing evidence to back it up. That is simply not how the practice of science works. So whatever it was that Mr. Smith looked at, we *_know_* that it wasn't the evidence for the theory of evolution that is available in science. Because we *_know_* that "stacks up". You said: _"So, he is certainly capable of questioning things (how about you?)"_ We are all capable of questioning things. That is not the issue. The issue here is how we question things. Mr. Smith tells us explicitly that he is not questioning a scientific theory on scientific grounds, but because of what his religious beliefs tell him. I think that disqualifies his criticism in the scientific arena. He may have a theological point, but by his own admission, his argument does not have any scientific relevance. You said: _"No one can properly follow the scientific method/observation when it comes to the past."_ That is completely and utterly false. In fact, we can *_only_* make observations of things that happened in the past. The speed of light is finite, so even you looking at the thermometer will only give you a temperature reading that was a nano-second in the past. You have fallen for an apologist fable. There is no fundamental difference between "observational science" and "historical science". There is only a difference of gradation. The longer an event is in the past, the fewer of its effects we will still be able to observe. That is all. You said: _"By the way, Scripture has a historical context."_ It certainly has! Something many present day believers tend to conveniently forget. You said: _"Modern science has its own hoaxes, con jobs & propped up theories."_ And modern science has done a fine job exposing them. No human endeavor is perfect, but at least the modern scientific and scholarly method has some built-in mechanisms for self-correction. Mechanisms that are completely absent in any religion, by the way. You said: _"Nature did it all is not 'scientific', it was never observed."_ As "nature" is the only thing we have ever observed, that seems a fairly silly statement. You said: _"Life from non-life is not so rational, observation wise, life begets life all over the globe."_ Sure, once it got going, it kept going, but that is not the issue. The issue is how it got going in the first place. That is what origin of life research is about. And from that perspective, any hypothesis that is falsifiable and rooted in what we can observe and test and verify about our material reality is more rational than any hypothesis that is unfalsifiable and assumes something supernatural that we cannot test, verify, or observe. You said: _"To assume that God or Scripture is irrelevant when it comes to life and death and everything in-between is a great error."_ No such assumption needs to be made. All you need to do is to show the evidence that your favorite God and your favorite scriptures are relevant. You come with the evidence, you formulate a proper scientific hypothesis and you will be off to the races! If you can't provide such evidence, you are in the same boat as Mr. Smith; you are outside of the scientific world pretending to do science.

[@cynicallyskeptic4295]

Your right, you can't assume. Do you have any of these original trees with no rings? Have you ever seen a deluge that caused a meandering stream? No, you don't have a tree with no rings, every deluge causes a straight cut. They grand canyon has a horseshoe curve which only happens by slow and gentle flow.

[@earthisasphere]

It has multiple horseshoes... but admitting the obvious doesn't get Calvin donations.

[@sciencerules2825]

My favorite example is the Goosenecks State Park in Utah. The San Juan River cuts a series of incised meander switchbacks which travel 10 river miles in 1 linear mile. Aerial views of the canyon are quite remarkable. I've never seen a single creationist touch this evidence against Noah's Flood.

[@nunyabizniss6934]

The Grand Canyon was formed when Grand Lake and Hopi Lake breached their banks and poured out. It was probably carved in a day or two at the most. Dr. Walt Brown discovered these lakes, and has explained how this also accounts for the petrified forest in Arizona.

[@sciencerules2825]

@@nunyabizniss6934 That is a ridiculous claim easily disproven by the geologic evidence. How did this supposed lake breach manage to produce the Horseshoe Bend incised switchback meanders in the GC? Fast flowing water cuts straight channels, not meanders.

[@earthisasphere]

@@nunyabizniss6934 LOL, Walt Brown is a mechanical engineer! 🤣"But trust me bro, he knows more than every geologist alive about how the Grand Canyon was formed!" 🤣🤣

[@glennmurphy4820]

Before the flood it was very different here than it is now, even right after the flood, since then things have changed somewhat the way they think it has always done excluding the actual catastrophe (The Flood). The speed of light, it is suggested was millions of times faster than it is today, which would leave the earmarks of millions of years of passage when it was not. Barry Sutterfield Australian physicist SoL studies.

[@earthisasphere2]

Noahs flood is geologically impossible. 1) The sodium carbonate needed for even a small single layer of limestone requires centuries or more of build up of shelled creatures and coral. When explaining the Grand Canyon, in your model, that isn't possible. In the actual model we know that the southwest U.S. was once a shallow seabed, so the sodium bicarbonate could build up over time. 2) The limestone in the G. C. also requires calm, shallow waters to form, like.... a shallow seabed. Not the most violent storm the earth would have ever seen. The hydraulic sorting claim YEC's like to peddle doesn't work either, because the water is still to deep and to volatile. 3) There are multiple places where layers of salt are separated by layers of rock. Sea's would have to evaporate, have a layer (or layers) of rock form, and then the area would have to become a sea bed again. A flood can't explain this. 4) Unconformities don't have the time needed to happen on a 6,000 year old earth. 5) The following were rulers of their respected kingdoms during the flood timelime Egypt- Pepi, Akkad - Sargon, Elam - Helu, and the Indus Valley Civ had been around for 1,000 years and continued for another 1,000 years 5) fossils and stratification layers of rock match predictions of evolution 6) Sand dunes don't have time to form 7) certain layers of rock would require forest fires to exists underwater 8) the amount of energy released during such an event would destroy the earth, also known as the heat problem 9) Ocean basins have less than a km of sedimentary rock on top, while the continental shelves are over 12 km thick with sedimentary rock, a flood of that magnitude and length would have eroded away much more of the continental shelves 10) We have studied the growth rate of coral form a very long time now, and it doesn't grow fast enough to match your timeline - forget a flood, 6,000 years isn't even enough time. Look into the Enewetak atoll if you want more info 11) evaporites and shales take too long to form 12) the change in salinity levels would kill both freshwater and saltwater fish, and on and on and on.

[@glennmurphy4820]

@@earthisasphere2 Catastrophe is the word you need to understand.

[@Bomtombadi1]

@@glennmurphy4820please help us understand the word then.

[@earthisasphere]

@@glennmurphy4820 Reality is the word you need to understand.

[@burnttoast2790]

@@glennmurphy4820 *The speed of light, it is suggested was millions of times faster than it is today, which would leave the earmarks of millions of years of passage when it was not. Barry Sutterfield Australian physicist SoL studies.* Altering the speed of light? Congratulations! You've just sterilized the planet; by altering the speed of light, you've necessarily ramped up the speed at which nuclear fission occurs such that the Earth's radioisotopes render it uninhabitable.

[@MichaelPeterson-ml6re]

This isn't just willfully ignorant, it's pridefully stupid.

[@sciencerules2825]

It's really just dishonest grift.

[@thomasedwards5431]

Name calling is a method of psychologically and emotionally convincing others in ignorance. Blind faith in your assertion.

[@earthisasphere]

@@thomasedwards5431 Blind faith is what religion is built on. Hell, it is a central theme in Christianity...

[@Bomtombadi1]

@@thomasedwards5431Calvin wasn’t called any names. His argument was. And on that note, calling someone stupid when they don’t listen to the criticisms of their position is completely warranted.

[@robinj.9329]

As for me? The "Age" of the Earth 🌎 means nothing! And I never argue about it with anyone. If Jesus felt it as a fact IMPORTANT to our salvation? Of course he would have told us all about it. So OBVIOUSLY it's just not important!!!!!

[@TheSaintFrenzy]

He gave us a recorded of history. From that record we can calculate an age of the beginning to now. Somewhere between 6,000 and no further out than 10,000 years ago.

[@rwatson2609]

Hebrews 4:4 Paul the apostle believed the seven day creation story.

[@lavieenrose5954]

@@TheSaintFrenzy It’s been proven that we homosapiens lived alongside Neanderthals 100,000 years ago… thus making a 6000 year old Earth impossible….. this also means death and suffering were in the world way before Adam….how do you reconcile these facts with your beliefs… God bless you ❤

[@tomesplin4130]

Totally agree. Belief in an old earth and evolution is shared by the vast majority of Christians around the world.

[@avafury4584]

Anything that proves God's word is important. Evolution is used to keep people from salvation. THAT IS IMPORTANT

[@hansdemos6510]

At the end of the video, Mr. Smith shows the really harmful side of his anti-scientific ramblings. His goal is to undermine proper science education so children will be more gullible and will be more likely to believe his faith-based religion than evidence-based science. This is something that must be vigorously opposed, not only by the unreligious, but by other religious people as well. Mr. Smith is a believer in a relatively benign religion that is embedded in Western culture, but if he gets his way, the floodgates are open and any religion with enough political clout could demand to have its dogmas taught in science classes, or could get science they object to redacted out of school text books. That is unacceptable, and should be nipped in the bud. Even Mr. Smith should not want that.

[@fellfields2143]

Ah, just like atheists did with their naturalistic religion. It's okay for them, but not other groups. Seriously though, I want truth taught and critical thinking taught (preferably both sides and the arguments for both sides taught as fairly as possible). Evolutionary scientists and their theories about the origins of life are riddled with issues. Issues that the account of creation, and scientists that hold to the history in the Bible have better answers to.

[@therick363]

@@fellfields2143naturalism isn’t a religion. Please don’t misrepresent things. You say you want truth taught? I’m guessing in the school system you mean? Yes?

[@fellfields2143]

@therick363 in what way is naturalism not a religion?

[@therick363]

@ you’re the one saying it is one-how is it? Anytime I’ve seen someone call it a religion they never support it. Hoping you’ll be the first

[@hansdemos6510]

​@@fellfields2143 You said: _" Ah, just like atheists did with their naturalistic religion."_ Not a religion, sorry. No faith is required or desired, nothing supernatural is claimed, all assumptions are always up for scrutiny. Sorry to demonstrate you are wrong, but there you go. Also, in most Western nations, science education was introduced by Christians, so no cigar there either. You said: _"It's okay for them, but not other groups."_ "Scientists" are not a "group" and by and large neither are "atheists". And although there are proportionally more atheists among scientists than among the general population, the majority of scientists in the Western world are still religious in some way or other. You said: _"Seriously though, I want truth taught and critical thinking taught..."_ Well then, the modern scientific and scholarly method has you covered! You said: _" ... (preferably both sides and the arguments for both sides taught as fairly as possible)."_ Sorry, but what do you mean by "both sides"? If there are serious contenders for some scientific insight, of course these are taught at the appropriate level. I am sure high school kids can handle basic explanations of multiverse theories and string theory. If you refer to your particular religion's opinion about scientific matters, then I think you have not quite thought your view through. If schools are required to teach your religion's view, then why should they not be required to teach some other religion's views as well? You could end up with lessons on Muslim meteorology, Hindu cosmology, Buddhist biology, Satanist gravity etc. etc. I can't imagine that's what you want, is it? You said: _"Evolutionary scientists and their theories about the origins of life are riddled with issues."_ The issues that the modern scientific theory of evolution has and the issues of the scientific hypothesis of abiogenesis are specifically and exclusively *_scientific_* issues. Nobody thinks or claims that our current scientific knowledge is perfect, in fact, that is one of the premises of the modern scientific method, and the reason why it is always trying to improve. But the improvements must necessarily come from science itself, and cannot come from religion or politics or whatever other field you would like to introduce. You said: _"Issues that the account of creation, and scientists that hold to the history in the Bible have better answers to."_ No, they don't. They may have answers that align more with your personal religious opinions, but their answers certainly do not measure up against the scientific consensus. And we *_know_* that this is the case, because otherwise they would have been adopted, if not by science, then certainly by industry, because a more truthful description of reality will inevitably yield better results when applied to products, or finding resources, or manufacturing methods etc. Moreover, what Biblical creationists offer is not really an "explanation" at all. Saying your God did it does not explain anything, especially if you also believe we cannot understand your God anyway. It is a mystification rather than an explanation.

[@donteatthecats0001]

Did this video have any point besides repeating the usual list of long debunked creationist lies?

[@earthisasphere]

Yes, to solicit donations from ignorant viewers and to keep them buying AIG merch, visiting the "replica' ark that took steel beams to support it and took water damage to boot, and to spread science denial in general.

[@noneyabidness9644]

So, facts are lies now?

[@earthisasphere]

@@noneyabidness9644 Nothing Calvin said even remotely supports a young earth. And the vast majority of the things he said were either outright lies or mischaracterizations. And they still don't support a young earth. LOL

[@noneyabidness9644]

@earthisasphere absolutely incorrect. He stated fact and valid logic with multiple known examples that are quite definitive.

[@earthisasphere]

@@noneyabidness9644 LOL, no he didn't. Name one "fact" he gave that supports a young earth.

[@MyHellaKitty]

What was the soil made of when God created Eden? What would that soil feel and look like? What would have it been made of?

[@cloisteredoyster]

good point.....God would have said let there be soil and there was soil.......the word soil creating soil and the maths and physics and chemistry required for soil

[@MountKeen]

A reminder that Calvin was nominated for this year's Golden Crocoduck Award. The Golden Crocoduck is awarded every year for the biggest breach of the 9th Commandment in pursuit of the Creationist cause. He didn't win but even to be shortlisted was quite a dubious honor for you Calvin.....well deserved

[@MountKeen]

@@joefriday2275 Congratulations!! You win today's _ *"Golden Non-Sequiter Award"* _ for the most irrelevant (and inaccurate) response.

[@earthisasphere]

@@MountKeen Joefriday has a running streak of winning that award. His streak extends from whenever he learned to string a sentence together until today.

[@MountKeen]

@@earthisasphere Yes Joefriday is certainly a streak of something. Oh how I chuckled when he claimed that radiocarbon dating was not a form of radiometric dating! 😆 I chuckled even more when he persisted in his claim, then after being shown that it was demonstrably a form of radiometric data, deleted his posts containing the claim!! 🤣🤣 I'm sure that if there was a village somewhere, populated entirely by the village idiots from the surrounding villages, Joefriday would be that village's village idiot.

[@nunyabizniss6934]

A reminder that your comment fulfills the prophecy of 2 Peter 3, providing additional evidence the Bible is accurate and making you look like a fool. 😎

[@earthisasphere]

@@nunyabizniss6934 A reminder that the Bible has many false prophecies, showing that it is in no way inspired, infallible, or trustworthy. Hell history alone shows that many of the major events of the Bible wouldn't have happened they way it claims they did. The Romans did not require people to return to their ancestral home for any census (most people wouldn't even know where that was, and hardly any of them could afford it if they did know), nor is there any record of Jesus trial in Pontus Pilates court records, nor did the Romans have a custom of letting a prisoner/criminal go free on Passover. Hell, the pyramids of Egypt were built right through the flood timeline and we know the rulers of Egypt, Akkad, and Elam (Pepi, Sargon, and Helu respectively) during the same flood time period.

[@covingtonrealnewsnetwork5662]

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 how can anyone take this seriously, i can only hope no one truly believes any of this silliness, we're supposed to be intelligent

[@logicalatheist1065]

Unfortunately people do... Mostly Americans... Lol 🤣

[@covingtonrealnewsnetwork5662]

@logicalatheist1065 🤔 let me guess, you're in the UK somewhere, not allot of christ'insanes there huh, but I hear the muslimps are controlling your ability to speak freely, at least openly, no right to bear arms, no right to assemble, no right to protest, what are yall allowed to do, and are you a true atheist or just another post-theist posing as an atheist? genuinely asking ✌

[@earthisasphere]

@@covingtonrealnewsnetwork5662 Europeans can do all of those things except "bear arms" and they don't even need to do that. They have way less violent crime than the US and way less mass shootings as well. The statistics are staggering. When you take guns away from people, they no longer feel empowered to commit crime. What a concept...

[@earthisasphere]

@@covingtonrealnewsnetwork5662 For reference, the homicide rate is almost 3 time as high in the US compared to Europe, rape is almost 7 times higher in the US, and robbery is about 4 times higher in the US....

[@covingtonrealnewsnetwork5662]

@@earthisasphere 🤔 not sure what that has to do with your incoherent America remark or my reply, but OK, freedom is scary, I've never had done to me nor have i done anything you just rambled on about, am I missing the point, I am American after all, what's your original offense, my comment or reply, are you just trolling, are you well mate, do you need another dingo on the barbe 🤣🤣🤣

[@johnsmit5999]

That is the one thing that the ID community overlooks when affirming an old earth:worldwide Flood. And if the worldwide Flood did not happen, then the creator who intelligently designed all is not the Biblical One.

[@BmoreGrrrrl]

A global worldwide Noah's Flood most certainly did not happen.

[@johnsmit5999]

@@BmoreGrrrrl There are 100s of similar stories of a worldwide Flood from different cultures around the world.

[@BmoreGrrrrl]

@@johnsmit5999 Many human cultures (not all) have flood stories because many human cultures (not all) developed next to water sources subject to periodic flooding. These flood stories all differ significantly in their details. Sorry but a literal Noah's Flood has been scientifically disproven many times over.

[@danbeaulieu2130]

Calvin. Stop lying.

[@therick363]

You calling people liars…..when you’ve literally demonstrated you’re a lair. Man the hypocrisy. When you cherry pick things you show you’re the lair. Try having an honest adult conversation next time.

[@timothyterrell1629]

No geologist says that because something looks old, then it must be old. Using the Grand Canyon and then comparing it to the canyon in Washington is a false equivalent. The canyon in Washington was cut out of soft volcanic deposits. The Colorado River and its tributaries cut their channels through layer after layer of rock while the Colorado Plateau was uplifted. Two very different processes.

[@xx_Agent_Carolina]

*Using

[@earthisasphere]

Noahs flood is geologically impossible. 1) The sodium carbonate needed for even a small single layer of limestone requires centuries or more of build up of shelled creatures and coral. When explaining the Grand Canyon, in your model, that isn't possible. In the actual model we know that the southwest U.S. was once a shallow seabed, so the sodium bicarbonate could build up over time. 2) The limestone in the G. C. also requires calm, shallow waters to form, like.... a shallow seabed. Not the most violent storm the earth would have ever seen. The hydraulic sorting claim YEC's like to peddle doesn't work either, because the water is still to deep and to volatile. 3) There are multiple places where layers of salt are separated by layers of rock. Sea's would have to evaporate, have a layer (or layers) of rock form, and then the area would have to become a sea bed again. A flood can't explain this. 4) Unconformities don't have the time needed to happen on a 6,000 year old earth. 5) The following were rulers of their respected kingdoms during the flood timelime Egypt- Pepi, Akkad - Sargon, Elam - Helu, and the Indus Valley Civ had been around for 1,000 years and continued for another 1,000 years 5) fossils and stratification layers of rock match predictions of evolution 6) Sand dunes don't have time to form 7) certain layers of rock would require forest fires to exists underwater 8) the amount of energy released during such an event would destroy the earth, also known as the heat problem 9) Ocean basins have less than a km of sedimentary rock on top, while the continental shelves are over 12 km thick with sedimentary rock, a flood of that magnitude and length would have eroded away much more of the continental shelves 10) We have studied the growth rate of coral form a very long time now, and it doesn't grow fast enough to match your timeline - forget a flood, 6,000 years isn't even enough time. Look into the Enewetak atoll if you want more info 11) evaporites and shales take too long to form 12) the change in salinity levels would kill both freshwater and saltwater fish, and on and on and on.

[@earthisasphere]

@@joefriday2275 Joe, I found you a bed buddy. You and Teardownthiswall can't do anything but lie and troll. You two would get along nicely.

[@Abidingingrace-p6z]

😂😂

[@earthisasphere]

@@Abidingingrace-p6z I get it, you don't understand science at all. And it is easy to laugh at YEC's. Especially Calvin. But I am starting to think you might need some real help...

[@Fred-mp1vf]

Many of today's so-called "scientific facts" are based too much on assumptions and conjecture. They completely ignore the fact that it is scientifically impossible for life to have emerged from nothing, or for the universe to have created and organized itself.

[@mmaimmortals]

@@earthisasphere "1) The sodium carbonate needed for even a small single layer of limestone requires centuries or more of build up of shelled creatures and coral." -- Really? Which scientist has conducted a centuries long experiment to validate this claim?

[@samburns3329]

A literal Noah's Flood / Ark was scientifically disproven over two centuries ago. For example: 1. The world is full of geologic features (angular unconformities, the vertically incised meanders in Goosenecks State Park, the Columbia Basalt Group) impossible to form in a one year one time Flood. 2. We have lots of archaeological evidence of cities and cultures (Jericho is 11,000 years old, The Jiahu culture in China is 9500 years old) which lived right through the Flood without noticing. 3. Modern genetics shows no extant species underwent a severe genetic bottleneck only 4400 years ago. If the Ark story were true ALL extant species would show such a bottleneck. 4. Besides well established radiometric dating we also have lots of non-radiometric proxies (tree rings, lake varves, ice cores) showing the Earth is way older than 6000 years.

[@Stephan-ix8me]

Agreed.

[@Abidingingrace-p6z]

😂😂

[@Fred-mp1vf]

Manipulators and deceivers can claim to "scientifically prove" anything they want to these days with conjecture and false assumptions.

[@mmaimmortals]

Sam, we STILL don't believe the fake version of the Biblical account that is in your head either. Ignoring the factual and logical errors in your 4 points, you don't even have the details of the Biblical account correct, so you are refuting a history that no one believes in.

[@Abidingingrace-p6z]

@@mmaimmortals the fake version of the biblical account? What are you talking about? Bible believing Christians accept the Bible's account of history. Who is "we?"

[@mrazyone]

14:52 this isn't accurate