Why I Am a Creationist - Dr. Todd Wood, Biologist
Вставка
- Опубліковано 4 лют 2025
- Filmed at the 2017 IGH Conference, you can get this lecture and over 70 more at: isgenesishisto... Dr. Todd Wood has a BS in Biology from Liberty University in Virginia (1994) and a PhD in Biochemistry from the University of Virginia (Charlottesville, 1999).
Immediately following his PhD work at Virginia, Dr. Wood accepted a position as the Director of Bioinformatics at the Clemson University Genomics Institute (Clemson, South Carolina). After working for about two years at Clemson University, Dr. Wood accepted a faculty position at Bryan College (Dayton, Tennessee) in 2002.
He is now president of the Core Academy of Science.
Best and most honest answer I ever heard from a Creationist. The worse thing we can do when there are unanswerable questions is to try to answer them with quick fixe answers that create whole new problems.
The flood lasted a year, with surges as the seafloor spread with hot material, causing the crust to ride higher on the mantle. This created surges. It was probably six or seven months before the water flooded the highlands, which were actually lower before the high mountain ranges were formed. Animals and people moved higher until there was no place to go. It's catastrophic plate tectonics. The seafloor began to sink lower and the water ran off. Then the continents began to rebound. That's around the time the ice age started. I just love this stuff.
At least he's honest. I really appreciate that.
@Σά ββας honesty leads to all sorts of different conclusions depending on the person.
@Σά ββας oh yeah I guess you really got me there didn't think of that.
Thanks, Dr. Todd. As a geophysicist in oil & gas exploration, evolution was not critical to my profession. We never drilled a well based upon how old the rocks/sands were; we drilled because the explorationary evidence led us to a location(s) optimal to find economic deposits of hydrocarbons. Studying petroleum engineering and trade magazines it became obvious that there were never enough dinosaurs to die and create the petroleum we had produced or was still left. Furthermore, with the massive hydrocarbons found in the gas giants of Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune they could not be the remains of dinos but part of the Lord's original creation. Still waiting for astroscientists to explain that one. Keep informing us on your future discoveries.
Most fossil fuels are from plants. How does a geophysicist NOT know that?
@@pinklemon-m5v i mean his more an engineer than a scientist they are told just enough to do their job even tho they should have a paleontology course but maybe he is old and never had that kind of courses in university
For you Atheists who think he's saying he blindly chose faith over science, answer this: If I gave you an argument for the flat earth you could not answer, would you throw out the globe? Probably not. Why? Because the argument is not built on a single piece of information or one argument. There is a cumulative case that's bigger than that. He's saying that his confidence in the Biblical worldview is not so flimsy as to be taken down by one question he can't answer and it's not built on his own ability to know EVERYTHING. Pretending that this is the same thing as ignoring evidence or arguments for blind faith is horribly dishonest.
Just to be clear. scientific method says that any phenomenon that does not fit the model requires the model changed or thrown out. No exceptions.
If you believe a theory despite observing a phenomenon that contradicts it, even one, then you aren’t a scientist.
To clarify your own proposal, if i see one phenomenon that is inconsistent with a spherical earth and i cant change the spherical earth idea to fit it, then i will, just on that one phenomenon, discard the idea of the spherical earth. That’s science.
@@peteconrad2077 Thank you, kind sir
@@peteconrad2077 but if his model describes everything the best and there isn't a better model out there, do we still throw it out or tweak it?
@@seeker4trvth yes, we look for a better one.
@@seeker4trvth Yes. We still throw it out and return to saying we don't know the true shape of the earth. If we stick to the model that earth is round despite contradictory evidence then we are halting the process of finding the actual honest answer.
Here I was thinking I’d actually hear scientific arguments against evolution, but instead I get someone who chooses to simply ignore what he cannot explain and just uses blind faith.Moral of the story- if something goes against your faith and you cannot explain it away or refute it scientifically, just ignore it and go back to blindly following the Bible
Either ignore it or call it a hole in knowledge and insert your own personal god into that hole and keep repeating, "goddidit... goddidit...goddidit...
It was honestly embarrassing to watch. At least he's honest about it...
@Tim Polcyn Creationist cherry-pick a few facts and mangle them into a mess that they call logic.
@Tim Polcyn , citation needed
rduke
Sure pal. Name one animal that changed into another kind LOL. You have nothing chump.
Thank you for this perspective, Dr. Todd. Many people do not evaluate for themselves, do not engage critical thinking. When we encounter questions about the age of the earth or origin of life, we are too easily satisfied by the theory of evolution. Whether evolution or Creation by God, it is important to think it through for ourselves. God does not expect blind faith.
John Daedalus
Prove it. Name one animal that changed into another kind LOL. You have nothing.
"When we encounter questions about the age of the earth or origin of life, we are too easily satisfied by the theory of evolution."
This sentence displays your ignorance for all to see.
@@anthonyjames5474 "Name one animal that changed into another kind"
The theory of evolution does no predict, that one animal should turn into another kind.
Stop letting religious apologists tell you what evolution is. You wouldn't accept it, if the roles were reversed, so please be consistent.
Steelmage99 - Sure pal. Evolution is a fairy tale. Bring your ERVs, alleles, isochron dating, lol and get ripped to shreds. You have nothing.
@@anthonyjames5474 You have NO idea what the theory of evolution actually says. NONE.
Before any discussion can be had with a religious person on the subject of evolution, a few things has to be determined.
Does the religious person understand, accept and acknowledge that, in the context of the scientific theory of evolution, it is
the case that;
1. We observe that the genetic make up of groups of biological organisms change from generation to generation.
2. We label this observed change evolution.
3. The change observed applies to groups, not individuals.
4. Mutations, selective pressures and genetic drift is proposed to explain the observed changes.
5. We call that the "theory of evolution".
6. Speciation is not actually a requirement for evolution to take place - only change is. (1+2)
7. An explanation for the origin of life is not a requirement for the theory of evolution, any more that an explanation of planet
formation is a requirement for the theory of gravity.
If not, you are wasting your time.
This is no different from; "We observe that bodies of mass attract each other. We call this attraction gravity. The theory of
gravity proposes to explain our observations.".
It is no different from; "We observe biological organisms suffer from various infections. We call these infections diseases. The
germ theory of disease proposes to explain our observations".
Darn! I wanted to hear the argument. I've concluded the existence of proteins is one of the most excellent arguments *_against_* microbe-to-man evolution. No one seems to be able to defend the evolutionary origin of proteins.
Proteins are a chemical reaction between aminoacids and bend in different ways thanks to sulphuric bonds so their origin should be tied to volcanic reactions in the shallow prehistoric seas because they do have every ingridient to make an aminoacid including the basic carbon chains from combustion.
@@fromsiriusitcame Let me encourage you to learn some actual science about proteins and their constituent amino acids. You're reciting evolution lore, not science.
Massive facepalm!! His message in this video was basically to tell that he is still a Creationist because he ignored to consider evidence and listen to reason, or the slippery slope, as he called it. No wonder why creationists are being called ignorant and stupid.
Siddis33
anyone who goes against popular ideas is stupid. ya
"anyone who goes against popular ideas is stupid."
No, any scientist that ignores science is . . . doing something wrong.
@Anthony Maurice "Abiogenesis doesn't work!
Chemists can copy genetic information under strict protocols designed equipment manipulated controlled conditions and lots of intelligent input!"
Who was talking about abiogenesis? Did I mention it? Did Dr. Wood mention it? Why are you bringing it up?
Siddis33
You have no evidence for evolution whatsoever. None. Name one animal that changed into another kind. LOL. You have nothing
What is the protein evolution issue he mentions around 7:00 ? Any specific links.
I have no idea. It must not be around the San anymore, because in so far as I am able to hear from either side of the debate, molecular evolution. Proteins included, is not a winning fight for the evolution side.
I'm assuming whatever argument he heard back then has since been found out to be false in some regard.
Kind of like how everyone bought the "human chimp 99% similar " stuff as compelling and more research years later (ongoing now even) that statistic has been shown to be disingenuous from its start.
So im guessing it's something like that.
"I became a creationist when I found out people will give me free money to deny what is reality." Is what I heard from him.
lmfao
I didn't even hear that!!!! Wishy washy non argument.
For the record, creationism is in conflict with:
- astronomy: big bang
- biology: evolution
- Geology: age of the earth
- Chemistry: radioisotope dating
- Paleontology: dinosaurs, let alone trilobites.
- Fossil record: which clearly shows different species composition at different times.
- Anthropology - im not sure their thoughts on homo erectus, neanderthals, etc, but i know it isnt good.
- Epistemology: For disregarding the scientific consensus in all of the above.
This is scary. He literally says that despite all the evidence provided to him, he blindly follows his faith. This is both arrogant and irrational in equal measures.
Welcome to fundamentalist Christianity.
@@ndjarnag Not even fundamentalist. Most moderate theists base their beliefs on faith.
I’m a creationist because it is an absolute necessity to what we see in the universe.
The universe does have a beginning. The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics dictates it. If the universe were infinite then all usable energy would have been gone an infinite time ago. Also the flow of the universe is from order to chaos. The universe would be total chaos if no beginning. Mathematics proves this is not the case. Celestial movements and physics proves this is not the case. So there is still order within the universe.
So let’s go back to just before this beginning. There is 0 time-space, 0 energy, 0 matter. Play with the zeros all you want you still get zero. You need a catalyst outside of the universe to start things off.
The law of Cause and Effect says this catalyst must be everything and more than the effect it creates.
The catalyst must be:
Alive because there is life and have all the intangibles that makes life, like emotions.
Intentional to want to create
Able to create and powerful enough to create.
Able to work inside the universe but remain separate from the universe.
Communicating to express that creativity
The list goes on. Short version is that catalyst is God.
Variety of life forms is easy enough to explain. The catalyst (God) created the master classes of animals (called kinds in the Bible). These kinds had all the genetic information to express the variety of species as they reproduced. Think of it like a prism. The animal kind was like white light and reproduction as a prism. As the animal reproduces the genetic information is separated and expressed through the offspring. Those offspring that are genetically closest to each other can then reproduce and more speciation is produced.
This different from evolution in that evolution says genetic information is created in an ongoing process while this theory says genetic information is lost (more inline to what is actually observed in nature).
"because it is an absolute necessity to what we see in the universe. "
No, it isn't.
"The universe does have a beginning."
No, not in the way you think.
"The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics dictates it."
No, it does not.
"Also the flow of the universe is from order to chaos."
No, it isn't.
"The universe would be total chaos if no beginning."
No, it wouldn't.
"Mathematics proves this is not the case."
No, it does not.
"There is 0 time-space, 0 energy, 0 matter. Play with the zeros all you want you still get zero."
Not what Big Bang cosmology says.
"You need a catalyst outside of the universe to start things off."
No, you do not.
"The law of Cause and Effect..."
No such law exists.
"says this catalyst must be everything and more than the effect it creates. "
Clearly not true.
"The catalyst must be:
Alive because there is life and have all the intangibles that makes life, like emotions.
Intentional to want to create
Able to create and powerful enough to create.
Able to work inside the universe but remain separate from the universe.
Communicating to express that creativity
The list goes on. Short version is that catalyst is God. "
Just made up nonsense, in a desperate attempt to define your god into existence.
"This different from evolution in that evolution says genetic information is created in an ongoing process while this theory says genetic information is lost ( _more inline to what is actually observed in nature_ ).
"
No, it isn't.
You should stop listening to religious apologists. They are always dishonest.
Oh, dear. The Kalam fails on so many levels.
// The law of Cause and Effect says this catalyst must be everything and more than the effect it creates. //
There is no "law of Cause and Effect." Moreover, causality, as we understand it, is inherently dependent on time. Cause must precede effect; cause cannot precede effect in the absence of time; ergo, time itself cannot be said to be subject to causality as we understand it.
// Alive because there is life and have all the intangibles that makes life, like emotions. //
Bare assertion. A catalyst does not need to have the qualities of the effect it produces.
// Intentional to want to create //
Pathetic fallacy. A catalyst does not need to want to create.
// Able to create and powerful enough to create. //
...which tells us precisely nothing about the character of the catalyst.
// Able to work inside the universe but remain separate from the universe. //
Bare assertion. The cause could have taken place entirely outside of the context of space-time. There is no requirement that it remain active within the context of space-time
// Communicating to express that creativity //
Again, bare assertion. What does this even mean? Does a plant need to communicate in order to create seeds?
// The list goes on. Short version is that catalyst is God. //
Long and more accurate version is "This is a terrible argument entirely derived from faulty premises and fallacious reasoning."
"The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics dictates it."
Take course in Thermodynamic before you call upon the Three Laws.
The Second Law applies only to closed systems, systems that receive no energy from the outside. The Earth received vast amounts of energy from the Sun.
Take a physics class, energy cannot be destroyed. Time began at the Big Bang.
@@richardpaulhall, it's fascinating how many Creationists pompously declare that "The Second Law of Thermodynamics disproves evolution!"--and then can't actually articulate what the second law says beyond "Uhm, stuff breaks down and entropy and stuff!" They certainly can't tell you what the first or third laws are, and most of them aren't even aware that there's a zeroth law.
They don't have opinions; they repeat the opinions they've been told to hold.
Your first mistake is to assume that the Big Bang came form a bunch of zeros. It didn’t and no scientist thinks it did. The rest of your ideas fail because of this basic error.
I sincerely hope that these students see through this bs. He basically said, "I'm still a creationist, because I ultimately chose to ignore science, and focus on Jesus." He's telling kids to ignore reality. This guy sucks.
Actually it looks he did not ignore science it only brought him to a situation his creationist vieuws did not have the answers science had
and he is trying his best to do his creationist research as scientific as possible. At least he is not as pedantic and condescending as the run-of-the-mill apologists and creationists.
The parable of Peter is even quite apt, focusing on Jesus might brought his quite a distance walking on water, but in the end his baraminology theory just sinks under the waves of science.
Have mercy, O Lord, on those who reject 'the foolishness of God! "For seeing that in the wisdom of God the world, by wisdom, knew not God, it pleased God, by the foolishness of our preaching, to save them that believe." Do the evolutionists ever doubt? Do they know with absolute certainty that they possess the eternal truth of nature? "Why do the nations rage, and the peoples plot in vain?"
Hilarious
Why I'm not young-earth creationist: because the Bible doesn't teach young-earth creationism.
Ya no....
If there were evidence that refuted evolution, that does nothing to affirm Creatuonism.
Don’t we still have floods every year I’ve seen geese sit on their nest to the point of almost drowned just in yearly flood
He was referring the the flood in the bible, a global flood that wiped a massive amount of oxygen off the earth and the dinosaurs.
@@bradydeathstone2030 lol a fairytale plagurised from much earlier pagan religions
“The man who views the world at 50 the same as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life”
Let me sum this up the video. I am going to walk through life ignoring how life works.
You could also say: I am going to walk through life and put my faith on the word of God and I am not ashamed to admit it because there will always be those people who does not want to see the truth.
@@misse4503 Walking through life with your fingers in your ears and waking through life putting your faith in God (despite the evidence provided) are one and the same.
@@conordelaney76 Walking through life putting your faith in God does not mean you ignore everything else. It is more like believing in someone despite what others think. It is a choice, not ignorance that you are describing through the person who walks with fingers in his/her ears.
@@misse4503 It is believing in something despite the evidence and intelligence you have available to you. Faith allows even the most learned of individuals to ignore logic and reason. It is most certainly a choice.
@@conordelaney76 Bible gives logical answers and reason through Gods point of view. I do not see any wrong with believing in the Bible because it has been right in every single detail it has explained to the human kind.
It's like the Galileo affair again. So many religious fundamentalists so angry about science. But ask them to find a flaw in the idea and they have nothing. Even after all this time.
Except the "Galileo Affair" was the church (the primary scholastic entity of the day, for better or worse) telling Galileo "Hey, that's a neat idea you have there, but it doesn't fit with the evidence we've accumulated so far under Ptolemy's model. Come back when you have a better argument and stop using special pleading to fill the gaps. And yes, making fun of us in your texts isn't helping your case." On top of that, Galileo was also the inventor of the telescope. Newton wrote the book on optics much later. What reason did people _at the time_ have to believe that a telescope gave an accurate impression of the objects in the night sky? In modern times we know Galileo was right, but much like how Euler managed to get the right answer to many difficult sums through invalid reasoning, so too did Galileo reach a correct conclusion via "unscientific" means.
@@timh.6872 the church also killed Christ so they shouldn't be the standard for anything. Jesus Christ is the standard for our lives he is the truth, the way and the life.
@@arthur-a__r5u Evolution is not a religion or a belief. It is a thoroughly researched and well evidenced scientific fact. It is accepted as proven by 99 percent of the scientific community. The 1 percent who don't accept it are the ones, like Todd Wood who have sold out to Creationist organizations.
I can't believe the nerve of Todd Wood in claiming to be a biologist. He may have degrees in biology but he's not a biologist as he denies (or doesn't understand) the basis of modern Biology - Evolution.
@@gerrymcerlean8432 evolution is ultimately a dead-end based on what was once considered a simple cell. The understanding of the complexity of DNA and the human genome requires evolutionists to come to grips that life is not possible without a creator. There is no way it could have come about by itself because of irreducible complexity. Random mutations do not turn one species into another ...evolution is a fairy tale.
@@alantasman8273 lol
Dr. Wood, thank you for your testimony. It brought tears to my eyes! God bless you and keep you!
His testimony has him admitting that he rejects science and reason.
He could "see the miracles of God's movement", God doing this and that. Strangely, he would never be able to show any evidence of God's actions.
This is not the way a scientist thinks and acts.
@@richardpaulhall I strongly disagree with what you have written but I will not get into any arguments because I am afraid that we would just end up going back and forth to no avail. I will, however, warmly encourage you to watch this video with Charlie Duke (one of only twelve people that walked on the moon) where he shares his testimony of becoming a Christian. ua-cam.com/video/hkmAIOuVHDI/v-deo.html I hope it is a blessing for you.
George Atanasov like most creationists you fear argument because you know your ignorance and the falsehood of your belief will be demonstrated.
@@peteconrad2077 Incorrect. I don't fear arguments. Reread the reason why I didn't want to get into an argument with Richard. Come to think of it, it could've made a difference.
I am not ignorant. I am a Science student, whose favorite subject is Biology. I've extensively studied courses such as Ecology, Invertebrate Zoology, and Vertebrate Zoology, where one of the main themes is evolution. I've also studied Genetics, Biochemistry, and Cellular Biology, where textbooks often use evolution to explain things -- i.e. the endosymbiotic theory for example.
Lastly, my belief is firmly placed in Christ. The One Who lived a perfect, sinless life, was crucified and died on the cross to bear the sin of the whole world. He was buried and rose from the dead on the third day to be reunited with the Father.
Because of Christ's sacrifice, whoever believes in Him and what He has done, will be saved and have an everlasting life, enjoying a loving relationship with God forever.
Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life! Believe and receive His gift of salvation :)
@@Grozde1000 You, my friend, are delighted with your ignorance and brainwashed mind.
So, he managed to learn that if his findings were in contradiction with creationism, it's scientifically prudent to place one's fingers in one's ears and shout "LALALALALALALALA".
keith forrester
What finding would that be? Name one animal that changed into another kind LOL. You have nothing. Evolution is a total Fairytale
@@anthonyjames5474 considering "kinds" don't exist, that would be impossible.
Maybe instead of turning water into wine, the dead kid on a stick should have turned nails into spaghetti.
I feel horrible listening to this. This guy seems like he could have real potential as a scientist as he is intelligent and honest about his biases. Someday he is going to look back and realize he wasted everything he had. If there is a god, that isn't what he could possible want.
Ah, he is only intelligent if he comes up with same ideas that you have arrived at. Hmmmm…..?
Are you familiar with Dr. Todd Wood? Read any number of the essays he's written on the subject. This is a basic summary: He knows the Earth is not 6000 years old and he knows the diversity of life on Earth can only be explained by evolution by natural selection but he is going to pursue a career in something he knows is wrong because of his religious biases. That is not an exaggeration. Search "Todd Wood The truth about evolution"; the first thing that comes up is a link to his blog. Read what he says. It's tragic to watch a talented scientist do this to himself..
@Anthony Maurice The occurrence of abiogenesis is uncontroversial among scientists. Just because it hasn't been perfectly explained yet doesn't mean it didn't happen. Beware the god of the gaps fallacy.
My faith in the Lord Jesus Christ is firm. However, the concept of a young earth is not one I need to have to follow the Lord Jesus Christ. I do so based on the accounts of Jesus teachings, life, death and resurrection.
However, when I just look at the empirical evidence from God's creation it is one clearly of design.
The universe having a beginning leads a reasonable person to consider that the universe origins were from outside of space,time, matter, and physical energy.
The fine turning of just the cosmological constant where minor adjustments up or down leads to no universe able to create basic chemistry logically leads one to consider that a super intellect must have designed the physics.
The empirical evidence shows that a living cell does not happen naturally. From the homochirality of bio-macromolecules to only 1 viable protein fold in 10^77 possible. Life is amazingly evidenced to not be merely random.
I believe God created all things. However, I thought you'd have made an intellectual case as to why you still believe in creationism. You basically stated that you were baffled about protein evolution, couldn't wrap your head around it, but decided to continue in faith because of your church, etc. You basically give ammunition to evolutionists. I believe because when I contemplate even an acorn which turns into a tree in the right environment, I think of all the information packed into that acorn. How did the info get in there? Our Creator, the Creator of all things, put the information in it.
" Our Creator, the Creator of all things, put the information in "
Where is the evidence of that happening? How have you destroyed Evolutionary Biology?
Richard Hall 1. There is no such thing as a positive mutation.
2. Intelligence must come from a higher intellectual source.
3. Where is the evidence humans have evolved? Not ONE transitional species fossil exists, though we find thousands of dinosaur fossils which supposedly existed millions of years before humans.
Paul Thompson
1. There is. Lactose tolerance comes from one.
2. Why. Where’s your logical process to arrive at that?
3. They are numerous if you can be bothered to research. The Australopithecines are obviously much closer the the common ancestor with chimps than we are, the very definition of a transitional species.
@@peteconrad2077 tell me why we find thousands of dinosaur remains while we haven’t found even ONE intact transitional human species. Think about that.
@@stpaulphillip we’ve found dozens of human remains. What are you on about.
Why didn't you go to a real school
How embarrassing and pathetic for such nonsense to be preached to children in our present day in an education setting. This crap will just never cease.
Yeah maybe you should teach them to get a sex change or puberty blockers and that it's okay. Or that there life has no purpose or meaning.
Lying For Jesus is Still Lying.
I still struggle with this. This is cognitive dissonance. People keep religion out of fear and emotion not logic. Humans make decisions based on how they feel instead of what makes sense. No matter how much we uncover they find a way to distort it and then go "look! Theres a hole in the theory therefore god dun did it". It seems like a god deceptively put this evidence here to push us away. This subject is more of a psychological one than reason based.
So, what's happend after the death?
Jesus is Lord
I am not saying that I am special. I am nothing like that. But just believe me. Jesus..... What a waist of my 5 minutes in life.
And you waisted two more minutes with the comment. Just saying.😀 There are lots of of other videos that show a lot more evidence just so you know. I hope that you have a nice day.
So good!!
New International Version
And God said, "Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: the LIVESTOCK, the creatures that move along the ground, and the WILD ANIMALS, each according to its kind." And it was so. - Genesis 1:24
Livestock are farm animals while Wild Animals are Carnivorous animals. They have fangs and sharp claws for a reason. God gave all living creatures plants to eat to sustain life but not because all animals were vegetarians. WILD ANIMALS ARE NOT WILD EATING GRASS !!!!!!
Go back and retake High School Biology.
Animals in nature fall roughly into two categories; carnivores and herbivores. Meat Eaters and plant eaters to you. Gazelles a not domesticated, they east plants on the savannas. So do Musk Oxen, Elephants, Deer, Moose, etc.
To those of you insulting this individual giving his testimony from your armchairs. Watch Dr. Grady McMurtry's videos about the young age of the earth and then develop arguments against them if you believe that it is just a bunch of lies. If you can of course and there is no, well they already have it all figured out because if that is what you believe then you are equally or more so blind that your accusation of this man in the video.
"Watch Dr. Grady McMurtry's videos about the young age of the earth"
You should take courses in geology and physics. The Earth is old.
@@richardpaulhall lol
@@richardpaulhall I’ve taken a few courses in geology (not creation geology) and have read lots of geology books, written by both evolutionists and creationists. I believe that the creationists view is a much better interpretation of the geological evidence. Simply saying someone should take a class a is a good argument if someone has misrepresented what a class teaches, but,with the possible exception of a minority of small children, everyone is already aware of the viewpoints held by the different groups. The original uniformitarianism evidence for an old earth is seldom used these days and has been shown to be full of errors. Modern radiometric dating has been shown to be in accurate on rocks of known ages and is therefore untrustworthy for rocks of unknown ages. This was just a quick summary of a small portion of what is taught by evolutionists/creationists. I have studied a bit biology but am more familiar with geology. But there are plenty of resources for biology available from both sides as well. I would invite you to have a look. Happy reading👍
Holy crap. I kept waiting for him to prove why Creationism was the correct answer and got NOTHING, just 12 minutes of utter nonsense and gobbledygook. What an embarrassment this guy is.
3:34......Truth!.....Important Lesson to Learn...
Thank God; trust Him; the KJV Bible is Truth.
Bow to our Maker.
Jewish pride was exposed naked at the cross and His blood is still on the children who despised Him.
Do not suppose that us as today's disciples are holier than they. 'Our' church is led by satan just as was theirs.
This is a lesson in how to rationalize your way through your own blatant cognitive dissonance when faced with overwhelming scientific evidence that counters your faith beliefs..... Just surround yourself with like-mind "community" and BELEIVE!! Praise Jesus...
It sounds like you have blind faith that all of today's life evolved from a microbe that popped out of a non-living warm little pond, Jonny. Don't investigate how it's possible, just BELIEVE!
@@KenJackson_US Oh Faith...!
Faith applies to imaginary friends; not to all the models that are being INVESTIGATED on life and it's natural origin.
Believing in miracles...is "blind faith".
@@jonnyroy2008: _"Faith applies to imaginary friends ..."_
Why do you _refuse_ to investigate the truth? Molecular biology has revealed the truth that life is made up of molecular machines whose well crafted components defy natural selection. Investigate it, Jonny! Modern 21st century science leaves no room for 19th century mythology which can only be believed by faith.
@@KenJackson_US Is this the logic you feed to delusional faith-based minds??
Remember: Religion relies on Faith; whereas, Science relies on Doubt.
The model/process of science has led us to vast more vistas of "truth"...then any religion has; where truth is defined as the best model of reality.
@@jonnyroy2008: _"Religion relies on Faith;..."_
Religion? Why are you focused on religion? I'm not. Try to focus on science.
The Bible never mentions nucleotides, DNA, amino acids, proteins, polymerases, ribosomes, molecular machines or bodily system hierarchy and interdependence. Not even indirectly by inference. But _these_ are the things that shout out loud that life _could not have_ evolved from a microbe. And these things were discovered by *science,* NOT religion.
Science also tells us that all living organisms are accumulating damaging mutations at a rate fast enough that life can't be the hundreds of millions to billions of years old that we've been told. All life would surely be extinct in a few million years.
Focus on SCIENCE, Jonny. Explain how each of the many proteins needed to make ATP in mitochondria could have independently evolved and then been conserved (in violation of natural selection) until the others evolved.
So to summarise, believe in creationism regardless if it contradicts everything we know about nature. This guy is a disgrace to the term "Dr"
Try some critical thinking, versus swallowing the theory of evolution.
Oh dear...a biologist who does not realize that evolution is a fact...lol.
Dr. Todd Wood has already addressed this claim on his own organization's UA-cam channel:
ua-cam.com/video/IkjkOcIzp4E/v-deo.html
Choses to believe the bible instead of the lab. Says a lot about his credentials as a scientist.
I respect todd wood more than pretty much any creationist I've ever heard of, but this seems more like, "why I remained a christian" rather than, "why I remained a creationist."
It also boils down to why virtually everyone is a creationist, especially the young earth variety. It's not because of the evidence, or the lack there of. It's because the evidence contradicts (their interpretation of) their particular holy text.
Lol crazy idealist believing in a 6-10 thousand years old earth. Cognitive dissonance gone wild lol.
Dude claims he is a scientist, then admits without embarrassment that he believed Jesus was the absolute truth from the start, and saw any contrary evidence only as storms he should overcome. He has not dedicated himself to the pursuit of truth, but to the defense of the beliefs he already chose.
The idea of the big bang was put forward by a Belgian Jesuit Roman Catholic priest, he and Albert Einstein were corresponding.
If you know anything about the Jesuit order and Albert, this should make you question your scientific religious dogmas. I say this because scientisim is also a faith based belief, if one is being truly honest.
@@tomasomaonaigh7659 science isn't a religion or based on faith. You are arguing Semantics.
saddest creationist ever
Still, Evolution Is a complete Fairytale.
Logical Atheist - Show any proof whatsoever for your fairytale. You have nothing.
Free content for my channel lol
One word: abiogenesis. It never happened
How do you know?
This is a great video to show kids with downs syndrome that they can be biologists too!!!! Love it.
Amen.
Get Ken Ham to speak.
i came here from roblox your feed update.:}