Is this worth refuting?

[toolmanjantzi]

Why non-biblical, unbelieving, atheistic, and agenda purpose science is continually refuted by those who believe in God, Creation, and the infallibility of scripture.


Check out this video on YouTube:

http://youtu.be/1zz8_MxcnzY

 

[rikerjoe]

Why non-biblical, unbelieving, atheistic, and agenda purpose science is continually refuted by those who believe in God, Creation, and the infallibility of scripture.


Check out this video on YouTube:

Nephilim: TRUE STORY of Satan, Fallen Angels, Giants, Aliens, Hybrids, Elongated Skulls & Nephilim - YouTube

Not continually refuted. They haven't actually refuted anything. (except maybe in the sense of denying it...)

 

[lasthero]

I'm not watching a two-hour video. Could you do a summary, please?

 

[toolmanjantzi]

I'm not watching a two-hour video. Could you do a summary, please?

No watch it.

 

[Neogaia777]

I believe that Science, while it hasn't yet, but sometime in the future will actually "prove" God, at least the existence of a "something" anyways "out-there/in-here", and not just nothing, but it's not there yet.

 

[toolmanjantzi]

I believe that Science, while it hasn't yet, but sometime in the future will actually "prove" God, at least the existence of a "something" anyways "out-there/in-here", and not just nothing, but it's not there yet.

I think some science does prove the existence of God; when you look at DNA, and hear some yahoo say it all started from a bang, I often wonder how ignorant man is when it comes to being right.

 

[lasthero]

when you look at DNA, and hear some yahoo say it all started from a bang

Nobody ever said DNA came from a bang.

 

[toolmanjantzi]

Nobody ever said DNA came from a bang.

That's awesome a believer in creation.

 

[Nithavela]

No, this video is not worth refuting, thanks for asking.

 

[OllieFranz]

I believe that Science, while it hasn't yet, but sometime in the future will actually "prove" God, at least the existence of a "something" anyways "out-there/in-here", and not just nothing, but it's not there yet.

You don't think much of your god if you expect that science will one day prove it. The very way science is designed, if science can examine it, it is not divine, it is natural. If it is merely natural, it cannot be God.

Now my God, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the Creator of Heaven and Earth, and sustainer of the Universe is both Transcendant and Imminent. He is not confined to the "natural" or physical world, as science is.

 

[biggles53]

Why non-biblical, unbelieving, atheistic, and agenda purpose science is continually refuted by those who believe in God, Creation, and the infallibility of scripture.


Check out this video on YouTube:

Nephilim: TRUE STORY of Satan, Fallen Angels, Giants, Aliens, Hybrids, Elongated Skulls & Nephilim - YouTube

Really...?

 

[Shemjaza]

Why non-biblical, unbelieving, atheistic, and agenda purpose science is continually refuted by those who believe in God, Creation, and the infallibility of scripture.


Check out this video on YouTube:

Nephilim: TRUE STORY of Satan, Fallen Angels, Giants, Aliens, Hybrids, Elongated Skulls & Nephilim - YouTube

It' entertaining and energetic, but the evidence is very poor.

He ignores all the various transitional hominid fossils found and skips from afarensis to sapiens and neanderthal.

The stuff about genetics always winding down and losing information is just incorrect.

And finally he asserts the silly factoids about "kinds" and their uncross-able barriers without clear definition or evidence.

I appologise that I haven't watched the whole film (I may later), but given that so much is just wrong so far, I'm skeptical that I'll learn anything more.

 

[toolmanjantzi]

It' entertaining and energetic, but the evidence is very poor. He ignores all the various transitional hominid fossils found and skips from afarensis to sapiens and neanderthal. The stuff about genetics always winding down and losing information is just incorrect. And finally he asserts the silly factoids about "kinds" and their uncross-able barriers without clear definition or evidence. I appologise that I haven't watched the whole film (I may later), but given that so much is just wrong so far, I'm skeptical that I'll learn anything more.

Yet the evidence he supplies is more then you just supplied. Your transitional fossils that you are referring to are for example a Bony Fish. I forget did it become a bird, a plane, no wait it became a fish.

 

[EternalDragon]

You don't think much of your god if you expect that science will one day prove it. The very way science is designed, if science can examine it, it is not divine, it is natural. If it is merely natural, it cannot be God.

Now my God, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the Creator of Heaven and Earth, and sustainer of the Universe is both Transcendant and Imminent. He is not confined to the "natural" or physical world, as science is.

Yet, if you are sincere about your faith, then yes, your God is confined to the "natural" as HE became a human like us and lived with us. He became a natural human being and still is.

Unless you are Jewish and do not adhere to the NT. Yet I do see from your profile that you have "Christian" there so I am assuming you are a follower of Christ, which would make your statement above a bit inconsistent.

 

[lasthero]

Yet the evidence he supplies is more then you just supplied. Your transitional fossils that you are referring to are for example a Bony Fish. I forget did it become a bird, a plane, no wait it became a fish.

Is 'fish' a kind?

 

[lasthero]

I can't even take three minutes of this - the guy's voice is annoying, he jumps around from point to point in a barely coherent fashion, and I hate the 'Look at that! Now, look at that!' style of his documentary.

And what's with the silly hand signs?

Could you please just summarize whatever points you feel are worth talking about?

 

[HitchSlap]

Why non-biblical, unbelieving, atheistic, and agenda purpose science is continually refuted by those who believe in God, Creation, and the infallibility of scripture.


Check out this video on YouTube:

Nephilim: TRUE STORY of Satan, Fallen Angels, Giants, Aliens, Hybrids, Elongated Skulls & Nephilim - YouTube

In twenty words or less, please define "refuted."

Thank you.

 

[toolmanjantzi]

Is 'fish' a kind?

That is the reference used when talking about different species. But it might not carry the scientific signa.

 

[toolmanjantzi]

I can't even take three minutes of this - the guy's voice is annoying, he jumps around from point to point in a barely coherent fashion, and I hate the 'Look at that! Now, look at that!' style of his documentary. And what's with the silly hand signs? Could you please just summarize whatever points you feel are worth talking about?

You made note of the word "Kind". Care to show observation of any species evolving from another kind. Observable please.

 

[toolmanjantzi]

In twenty words or less, please define "refuted." Thank you.

refute
r?'fju:t/
verb
1.
prove (a statement or theory) to be wrong or false; disprove.
"these claims have not been convincingly refuted"
synonyms: disprove, prove wrong/false, show/prove to be wrong/false, rebut, confute, give the lie to, demolish, explode, debunk, drive a coach and horses through, discredit, invalidate; More
antonyms: confirm
prove that (someone) is wrong.
"his voice challenging his audience to rise and refute him"
deny or contradict (a statement or accusation).
"a spokesman totally refuted the allegation of bias"
synonyms: deny, reject, repudiate, rebut, declare to be untrue; More
antonyms: accept