This is a response to Eye2EyeIIIV’s video,
‘Evolutionists are anti-Science.’ There seems to be an emerging theme to the
creationist videos I’ve been seeing lately and that is that they seldom seem to actually
have a point to make, which makes it somewhat difficult to rebut specifically.
In this particular example, you spend two minutes making sweeping statements against
science in general and evolutionary theory specifically without ever pausing to provide
any evidence to support your outrageous assertions. In this response I’ll try my best to point
out and correct your more outrageous lies and also to demonstrate why you really should
think twice before posting any more of this kind of dishonest and malodorous material.
“You know, after a long time of encountering what evolutionists say, what they do is actually
really anti-science. They’re perverting everything that ever… that has ever been
founded in science by the Bible-believing creationists Isaac Newton, Johannes Keppler,
Albert Einstein and so on. Um, although Albert Einstein, he’s a big mystery – but he
kind of believed in God.” Oops. Almost left yourself open to a real
intellectual raping of biblical proportions, there, didn’t you? As it is, you still left
enough material hanging out of your rectal cavity to justify my having to shove it back
up where it came from. It’s no mystery and a matter of record that
Einstein was at most a pantheist who was open to the possibility that the word “god”
might be applied to the Universe itself. He rejected outright the concept of a personal
anthropomorphic god, including the one you continue to insist is real despite the lack
of any evidence to support its existence and a world of evidence that points to it, and
all others, as being just the figments of primitive imaginations.
Your attempt to co-opt Einstein is a pathetic as your inability to live in a world that’s
not populated by fairy tales from your childhood. In addition, you seem to be harboring the
delusion that Newton, Kepler and others, were made of the same mental stuff as the pale
and sickly gelatinous mass that occupies the space between your ears.
But luckily, these great men were able to look past the safety blanket of the religion
that you’ve wrapped yourself in, and let the evidence lead them where it would. For
them, “God did it” wasn’t enough, and while some of them might have been inspired
by their beliefs, they were certainly not satisfied by simply blindly accepting the
patently ludicrous stories in your holy book that are purported to describe reality.
Had they been of your mindset, they would have been happy to accept these simplistic
fables and explanations and humanity would have been left to fester in superstition and
ignorance. Fortunately for us, when the evidence said otherwise people like them had the character
and fortitude to put aside the childish myths and fables, accept reality for what it was
and not what they wanted it to be and modify their beliefs accordingly, if not abandon
them entirely. The simple fact of the matter is that these
weren’t great scientists because of their religion, but despite it and your attempt
to use them to bolster the crumbling edifice of your belief system smacks of nothing short
of desperation. “But they’re trying to say things like
‘gravity is a theory, not a law’, they’re trying to say ‘time is… is an illusion,’.
No, gravity is a law – established. Here take a look at this… that’s gravity.”
Do you really think that your uninformed opinion means more that actually picking up a book
and reading up on subject before opening your mouth? Words have very specific meanings in
science and just because some dullard chooses to assign his own definitions to them doesn’t
mean that they’ve actually changed. All this demonstrates is your arrogant inability
to listen to, or understand, what’s being said.
What you just demonstrated was the fact that objects tend to fall to the earth because
of a force we label with the word “gravity.” Perhaps in times past you’d have been satisfied
in believing that this was due to angels pulling the pen to the ground with invisible threads
and left it at that. Fortunately for us, Isaac Newton had the brilliant
insight that this very same force reached up into the heavens and maintained the moon
and planets in their orbits. Using his hypothesis that every object in the universe attracts
every other, he demonstrated mathematically that this force obeyed the law that stated
that it was invariably proportional to the product of the objects’ masses and the inverse
of the square of the distance between them. Following experimental and observational verification
of his ideas, his hypothesis was promoted to the status of theory.
Over two hundred years later Einstein improved on Newton’s work by demonstrating that objects
attract each other by warping the fabric of space and time using his theory general of
relatively. So despite what you say, gravity is a fact
and a law and a theory, and your assertion to the contrary does nothing other than demonstrate
your complete and utter ignorance of science and your willingness to show it to the world.
“We never see goo-to-you evolution happening, ever. All we see are variations within the
kinds. It’s changes within species happen. But, Darwin didn’t write a book about how…
how species changed – he talked about the origin of species.”
So now you have the gall to categorically state what’s in a book that you’ve obviously
never read? You realize that there were a few pages between the covers of that particular
book, don’t you? Or do you really think that the title was a complete and accurate
summary of the contents. If you had actually made the effort of reading
the work that you are so happy to dismiss out of hand, you would have discovered that
Darwin gives a highly details account of how species evolve based on the data that were
available to him at the time and makes numerous predictions that were later verified by observation
or experiment. And in fact, if that seems like a little too
much effort, you didn’t even have to read the book, just the rest of the title. Have
you any idea how completely and utterly stupid, ignorant and disingenuous statements like
this make you look? I‘d also like to point out that despite
what you said, we’ve seen a lot more than just changes within species happening since
we’ve directly observed and documented numerous examples of extant speciation events. Presumably
that’s why you used the word “kind”, even though you were so sloppy in your phrasing
in this clip that you essentially equated the two terms.
Despite the fact that neither you, nor any other creationist I’ve seen on YouTube,
has ever had the balls or the decency to stand by their argument and give a clear definition
of the word, I’ll assume that you’re trying to say that evolution cannot be true because
we have never directly observed one species evolve into a morphologically very different
“kind” of animal. This is at best a downright dishonest argument
and at worst a downright retarded one. According to evolutionary theory morphological evolution
of this extent occurs in timescales of hundreds of thousands to tens of millions of years
so your demand to see it happening in real time is tantamount to you saying that you
don’t believe you have a wanky hairstyle because you’ve never seen it growing before
your eyes. Your ignorance of the science behind evolution
is no more clearly demonstrated by the fact that you’re unable to understand that it
would be completely destroyed should we ever observe the evidence you claim would be required
to accept it. “Darwinian evolution has been disproven
over, and over and over in the realm of real science, OK? And I don’t like how… er…
evolutionists pervert all these… um… scientific things and try to say; ‘oh no, no, no, no.
it’s a theory. Oh, no time is an illusion’. Time is what is happening right now. It’s
happening, like, one, two, three, four. It’s an illusion. How much more crazy can they…
can they get?” What the fuck does the nature of time have
to do with the veracity of evolutionary theory? If I didn’t know better, then I’d have
to assume that your main goal in this video is to provide conclusive evidence that you
are the world’s largest pile of dim-witted pig-ignorance.
If your argument is that “evolution is must be untrue because look at all the crazy ideas
those kooky scientists keep coming up with,” then I suggest that in the future you restrict
your discussion to an audience with mental age closer to yours.
So I’m going to ignore that part of your rant and ask you whether you are capable of
backing up your statement that evolution had been disproven numerous times with any actual
evidence, or are you expecting everyone to blindly accept that particular piece of lunacy
in the same way you blindly accept that lions used to be vegetarians. If you can’t provide
such evidence, then kindly issue a retraction and keep your ignorant yap shut in the future.
Also, if Darwinian evolution has indeed been disproved by “real” science, then why
is it that Biology Departments at Universities everywhere are full of presumably “surreal”
scientists who either accept or are actively working on evolution? Either they’re all
wasting their time or you’ve evolved the ability to speak from an orifice other than
your mouth. Finally, whether you like or dislike how evolutionists
pervert “scientific things” is neither here nor there. If you believe a statement
to be inaccurate then please feel free to explain where its flaws are and provide evidence
to support your stance. I for one am always open to a rational argument, but I have absolutely
no fucking interest as to your personal tastes or whether you’re upset when reality intrudes
into your self-delusion. “They’re really perverting science of
what is happening. They’re confusing people. They… they…er… change and twist and
distort a lot of things in science just to make their theory seem, like, truthful or
intellectual. I’m sorry guys, but it’s not working. It’s not working at all you
just lie put forth all these simplistic assertions and unscientific assumptions out there, and
liberal misconception and misinterpretations.” Has it ever occurred to you that science seems
to be confusing, twisted and distorted because you’re actually too stupid or mentally crippled
by your religion to understand it? Your inability to comprehend the material is not reasonable
grounds for dismissing it, and points not to its inaccuracy but to your diminished cranial
capacity. When you finally manage to graduate 5th grade
and get into junior high, you may realize that it seems to be only the smart kids that
do well in science and math. There is and actually reason for that.
I’m also curious about what you think “liberal” misconceptions and misrepresentations have
to do with science, and where you presumably think “conservative” facts and proofs
fit into the picture. If you truly think that political leaning have any place in the scientific
enterprise, then you must be even dumber than the bucket of pig-shit I initially took you
for. Finally, if you really believe that evolutionary
theory is based on nothing more than simplistic assertions and unscientific assumptions, then
has it ever occurred to you that perhaps you’ve somehow missed something? And if it hasn’t,
then perhaps you can tell us why you feel justified in dismissing them out of hand.
Can’t you be more specific? If you can’t, then I think we can safely conclude that you
know better and are just lying through your hypocritical teeth because you have no real
arguments to make that can defend a position that really is intellectually indefensible.
Unjustifiable denial and willful ignorance are all you’ve got.
“Gravity is a law. Evolutionism is not. Time is not an illusion, it’s what’s going
on. Time is happening right now, ever since… you know, like… over six thousand years
ago when… since the creation account, things have been… have been happening along with
the biblical concept ‘til now.” There’s nothing I can say to that really,
is there? I thought I’d just leave it in because I can’t do a better job of showcasing
your profound idiocy than you just did. “Evolution is unproved and unprovable. It’s
not tenst… testable, demonstrable repeatable science, OK? It s been proven wrong many times
and it’s been shown that there is intentional or unintentional lies used to support it.
Truth is valid. Evolutionism is not valid.” If evolution is not testable, demonstrable
and repeatable science, then why are there dozens of peer reviewed scientific journals
dedicated to publishing the papers of tens of thousands professional evolutionary biologists
from all around the world? Is it really more likely that this whole enterprise is based
on a misconception or a lie propagated by some of the smartest minds on the planet,
or that you’re just an ignorant fucktard who can’t bring himself to let go of his
childish delusions? If you want to at least try to refute the
latter, would you please supply us of these instances where evolution has been disproved,
or of the lies you claim have been used to support it. Once again, no organism that has
managed to achieve multi-cellularity should be expected to accept as fact the unsupported
assertions of a self-pwning cretin. Stump up or shut up.
Finally, evolution is as unproved as unprovable as any other theory is science.
We’ve never seen electrons being fired across a cathode ray tube, but we have used our knowledge
of them to build computers and microscopes that actually work.
We’ve never seen the fabric of spacetime being stretched by mass or velocity, but we
were able to use our knowledge of it to predict gravitational lensing and to know by how much
to slow down the clocks on our GPS satellites. We’ve never seen two molecules reacting
with each other, but were able to use our knowledge of it to synthesize fertilizer to
feed the world and pharmaceuticals to cure our diseases.
Similarly, we’ve never seen a fish evolve into an amphibian, but we’ve been able to
use our knowledge of it to correctly predict where the fossils of these intermediates could
be found and that every single organism discovered since Darwin would fall neatly into the phylogenetic
nested hierarchy of life. Evolutionary theory has been developed using
the same scientific method and by individuals with the same dedication to discovering the
truth as all of the rest of modern science. The only reason you choose to deny it and
the age of the earth, and none of the others, is because they disagree with the fantastic
fables written by primitive men in a primitive age that you have set your stock in, and not
because there is a rational argument against them.
I think you might find it less tortuous to give up on this lunacy, as have the majority
of Christians, and find peace with your god in the knowledge that some parts of your book
might not be literal. If you can’t do that, than at least accept that your choice is not
rational and learn to live with it. But if you continue to insist on propping
up your beliefs by attacking science with ignorance, then be prepared for lifetime of