"Evolution vs. God" Released (8/7/2013)

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 08, 2013 8:46 PM GMT


    “Evolution vs. God will rock the creation and evolution world!” Ken Ham, Answers in Genesis

    “Excellent. Superbly done.” Phil Johnson, PyroManiacs

    “WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!! BLEW ME AWAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!” Randy Jones, Pres. Word of Truth

    “Fascinating and eye-opening. Every student and every parent should watch it!” Randy Alcorn

    “Fascinating. Highly revealing. You will be amazed at what the experts themselves have to say!” Jason Lisle

    “Ray Comfort's ability to insightfully shred the vain reasoning's of men is a gift, and this film is a tour de force exposure of the emptiness of humanism.” James White (apologist)

    “Absolutely excellent.” Paul Taylor, Creation Today

    “Wow!!! I got goose bumps watching. Dawkins will have a cow.” Ron Fathauer, GospelCry

    “Wow! Engaging.” Frank Turek, CrossExamined.org

    “Another winner!” Eric Rader, Creation & Earth History Museum

    “Sensational!” Jim Fletcher, Beliefnet.com

    “Revealing, thought-provoking, and challenging.” Norm Geisler

    “Absolutely devastating! If it were a boxing match, the ref would have stopped your interviews with all of those people, including the professors.” Pastor Bruce Garner, CrossPoint

    “Outstanding!” Francine Rivers

    “Enlightening as well as entertaining—because it forces evolutionists to exercise a mental muscle that they apparently haven't used in a while.” Eric Hovind, President Creation Today

    “Not since 'Expelled' has anything been done that is as important as this.” Carl D. Kerby, President, Reasons for Hope

    “Wow! Very encouraging to see a tactical and practical method to expose the lies which permeate our culture.” Jayson Payne, Museum Curator, Creation & Earth History Museum

    “Confronts the absurdity of atheism with the same power with which '180' confronts the atrocity of abortion.”
    Paul Washer

    “Kaboom! Pow! Lights out! Party's over!” Todd Friel, host, Wretched TV

    “You've have outdone yourself with this video! Loved it!” Tim Wildmon, President AFA

    “Ray Comfort has not only proved that belief in evolution requires faith, he has also demonstrated that it's a faith woefully devoid of evidence.” Joseph Farah, Chief Executive Officer, WND

    “Most excellent…SIMPLE arguments to dismantle the atheist worldview.” Greg Elsasser, “Roman and Jorge”

    “Ray Comfort has done it again. In this video he uncovers the illogic of the atheists' thinking as he shows people two things, how evolution falls short as a true scientific theory and how their belief in it is actually faith.” Matt Slick, Carm.org.

    “An excellent fast-paced exposé.” David J Galloway MD FRCS FRCS(Ed) FACS



  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 08, 2013 11:13 PM GMT
    The title itself is ignorant.
    I'll watch for laughs.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 10, 2013 8:14 PM GMT
    Aristoshark: What a surprise. Every encomium is from a certified crazy person.

    jockfever: Karl's Law: The validity of a belief system is inversely proportional to the ease with which its followers call their opponents crazy.

    Charles-Darwin.jpg?596


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 10, 2013 8:19 PM GMT
    JohnSpotter: The title itself is ignorant. I'll watch for laughs.

    evolution-joke.gif?596
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 10, 2013 8:25 PM GMT
    Everyone should watch the trailer, it's really funny. Kind of like a Saturday Night Live skit. It's hysterical that the guy thinks he's disproving science by filming a bunch of scientists and putting the bobbles into a movie.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 10, 2013 8:28 PM GMT
    185913-texas-governor-rick-perry-gives-a
    72e30c07-4788-4030-bdee-996349668b06-460
    r-MIKE-HUCKABEE-TODD-AKIN-large570.jpg?4

    628x471.jpg
    AreYouKiddingMeBlackSS.png
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 10, 2013 8:37 PM GMT
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-zimmerman/evolution-vs-god-not-a-ch_b_3530509.html

    First, Ray seems to have a very warped sense of how science operates, acting as if there are doctrinal texts that control both scientific information and interpretation. I'll let Ray explain this point himself. "Many times over the years I've been accused by atheists of not understanding evolution. I've read every page of the world's most boring book, 'The Origin of Species.'"

    What Ray misunderstands is that it makes no sense to attempt to treat any science text, even one as important as Darwin's seminal work, in the same manner as Biblical literalists treat the Bible. No scientific text, in the mind of any scientist, can have the last word on any scientific topic. Even more to the point, scientific knowledge is cumulative and our understanding of every topic, including evolution, increases with each new published work. Hundreds of thousands of studies on various aspects of evolution have been published since the fall of 1859 when On the Origin of Species first appeared. The fact that Ray has read every page of Darwin's book is fine, but it certainly does not make him an expert on modern evolution....

    Ray's second problem is even more important. From the title of his new film to virtually everything he ever says about evolution, he asserts that a choice has to be made between God and evolution. But the simple fact is that no such choice has to be made.

    The Clergy Letter Project, which I founded and direct, demonstrates this simple point elegantly. Indeed, more than 13,600 clergy from all across the United States have come together to assert that not only are they in favor evolution being taught in our schools but that such a position in no way challenges their religious beliefs....

    Which brings me to my final point. Ray can best be described by a word I just learned today from Anu Garg who writes A Word a Day: mumpsimus. Garg defines mumpsimus as a noun meaning "a view stubbornly held in spite of clear evidence that it's wrong; and a person who holds such a view."

    So there you have it. Ray Comfort is completely wrong about the relationship between religion and science and he is a mumpsimus about the topic.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 10, 2013 8:40 PM GMT
    From one of the scientists interviewed:

    http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2013/07/02/lie-harder-little-man/

    Ray Comfort is pushing his new creationist movie with a lie. He’s setting it up that Richard Dawkins talks about the evidence for evolution, but that he went to real scientists and asked them, and Ray is going to spring a surprise on him — Comfort implies that the scientists disagreed.

    I was one of those scientists. NO, I did not disagree with Dawkins about evolution or the evidence for evolution; NO, nothing I said provided any support to creationist claims; NO, there is not a lack of evidence for evolution.

    What actually happened is that I briefly discussed the evidence for evolution — genetics and molecular biology of fish, transitional fossils, known phylogenies relating extant groups, and experimental work done on bacterial evolution in the lab, and Ray Comfort simply denied it all — the bacteria were still bacteria, the fish were still fish. I suspect the other scientists did likewise: we provided the evidence, Ray Comfort simply closed his eyes and denied it all.

    Richard Dawkins will not be at all surprised that Ray Comfort is a dishonest fool.
  • AMoonHawk

    Posts: 11406

    Jul 10, 2013 8:52 PM GMT
    And then there is this ... a mammal that lays eggs

    lifesciences-platypus.jpg

    I guess God has a pretty good sense of humor icon_biggrin.gif

    .... or is that extraterrestrial gene splicing
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 10, 2013 8:56 PM GMT
    jockfever saidJohnSpotter: The title itself is ignorant. I'll watch for laughs.

    evolution-joke.gif?596

    I don't get it. What you you mean to say?
    99.9% of the theists I know also believe in Evolution.
    The title doesn't make sense to me.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 10, 2013 9:01 PM GMT
    AMoonHawk saidAnd then there is this ... a mammal that lays eggs

    lifesciences-platypus.jpg

    I guess God has a pretty good sense of humor icon_biggrin.gif

    .... or is that extraterrestrial gene splicing

    Did you know the platypus is one of the world's most deadly animals?
    There goes my childhood dream of playing with one.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 10, 2013 9:02 PM GMT
    JohnSpotter said
    I don't get it. What you you mean to say?
    99.9% of the theists I know also believe in Evolution.
    The title doesn't make sense to me.


    If you haven't run across him before, you will soon learn that literally NOTHING that jockfever says makes sense. He'd be funny if he weren't so earnest, and rude.
  • AMoonHawk

    Posts: 11406

    Jul 10, 2013 9:03 PM GMT
    And then sometimes, evolution seems to take a step back
    PreviewFile.jpg.ashx?q=90&v=1&w=640&h=36

    And lets not forget air breathing fish
    invasive-snakehead-fish.jpg
    http://www.businessinsider.com/invasive-snakehead-fish-in-central-park-2013-4
  • AMoonHawk

    Posts: 11406

    Jul 10, 2013 9:04 PM GMT
    JohnSpotter said
    AMoonHawk saidAnd then there is this ... a mammal that lays eggs

    lifesciences-platypus.jpg

    I guess God has a pretty good sense of humor icon_biggrin.gif

    .... or is that extraterrestrial gene splicing

    Did you know the platypus is one of the world's most deadly animals?
    There goes my childhood dream of playing with one.

    deadliest animals??? How so, do tell.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 10, 2013 9:05 PM GMT
    JohnSpotter said
    AMoonHawk saidAnd then there is this ... a mammal that lays eggs

    lifesciences-platypus.jpg

    I guess God has a pretty good sense of humor icon_biggrin.gif

    .... or is that extraterrestrial gene splicing

    Did you know the platypus is one of the world's most deadly animals?
    There goes my childhood dream of playing with one.


    Only the males, the females are not venomous (although I didn't think the male venom was deadly...)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 10, 2013 9:06 PM GMT
    AMoonHawk saidAnd then there is this ... a mammal that lays eggs

    lifesciences-platypus.jpg

    I guess God has a pretty good sense of humor icon_biggrin.gif

    .... or is that extraterrestrial gene splicing

    When the platypus was first discovered some people actually thought it was a hoax, meant to discredit Darwin's work.
  • Vaughn

    Posts: 1880

    Jul 10, 2013 9:07 PM GMT
    This is a joke, right?



    I mean, will be there a point where they hold YHWH to the same standard they hold evolution?

    Do they address other gods beside just 'God'? Claims making between religions is not more credible in one religion than any other religion.
  • HottJoe

    Posts: 21366

    Jul 10, 2013 9:08 PM GMT
    showme said
    JohnSpotter said
    I don't get it. What you you mean to say?
    99.9% of the theists I know also believe in Evolution.
    The title doesn't make sense to me.


    If you haven't run across him before, you will soon learn that literally NOTHING that jockfever says makes sense. He'd be funny if he weren't so earnest, and rude.

    That's not entirely true. I believe him when he says he has a gym socks fetish.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 10, 2013 9:09 PM GMT
    I have a question I've been meaning to ask about evolution and since we have qualified people here (unlike the other lunatic thread) I'd like to ask it. I'm not trying to disprove evolution but I find it a curiousity.
    Why are there mostly only easily classified animals in existence?
    What aren't all the transitional phases still out and about? I don't see any reason for them to die out so consistently.
  • Vaughn

    Posts: 1880

    Jul 10, 2013 9:09 PM GMT
    jockfever saidAristoshark: What a surprise. Every encomium is from a certified crazy person.

    jockfever: Karl's Law: The validity of a belief system is inversely proportional to the ease with which its followers call their opponents crazy.

    Charles-Darwin.jpg?596




    I'll take this of evidence of your counter-argument as a symptom of dramatic personality disorder rather than well reasoned claims making.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 10, 2013 9:15 PM GMT
    "Only the males, the females are not venomous (although I didn't think the male venom was deadly)..."

    Well I learned it on TV so who knows.
    They said one of the other least suspected deadly animals was the swan.

    (edit)

    I just looked it up. TV lied! Who could have known?
  • Vaughn

    Posts: 1880

    Jul 10, 2013 9:15 PM GMT
    JohnSpotter saidI have a question I've been meaning to ask about evolution and since we have qualified people here (unlike the other lunatic thread) I'd like to ask it. I'm not trying to disprove evolution but I find it a curiousity.
    Why are there mostly only easily classified animals in existence?
    What aren't all the transitional phases still out and about? I don't see any reason for them to die out so consistently.


    A. Can you rephrase the first question.

    B. Because they are replaced by the next phase. Trees branch out because animals are isolated. Gene flow needs shared DNA between populations only once every 100 years to maintain the species, depending on the life cycle. We can actually see transitional phases in birds that have the same physiology but different beaks or in the hominid fossil record. If you line up fossils from Homo Habilis to anatomically modern man by date; those fossils will actually appear to morph.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 10, 2013 9:20 PM GMT
    JohnSpotter saidI have a question I've been meaning to ask about evolution and since we have qualified people here (unlike the other lunatic thread) I'd like to ask it. I'm not trying to disprove evolution but I find it a curiousity.
    Why are there mostly only easily classified animals in existence?
    What aren't all the transitional phases still out and about? I don't see any reason for them to die out so consistently.


    The more we learn the more we realize that our "easy" system of classification is actually very inadequate when trying to describe variation. The definition of "species" is becoming hazy now that we can map DNA. We've been moving away from Linnaean classification systems to cladistics as they can more accurately describe relationships between groups.

    There isn't a lack of transitional species, they are actually recorded all over (see Archaeopteryx as a "link" between dinosaurs and birds). There just isn't a COMPLETE transitional record as not all time periods and locations are accounted for in the fossil record. Fossilization occurs only under certain circumstances, most organisms just rot and dissolve away. There are also theories regarding evolutionary "leaps" where transitional periods were disadvantageous to survival but the before and end states were viable.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 10, 2013 9:20 PM GMT
    JohnSpotter saidI have a question I've been meaning to ask about evolution and since we have qualified people here (unlike the other lunatic thread) I'd like to ask it. I'm not trying to disprove evolution but I find it a curiousity.
    Why are there mostly only easily classified animals in existence?
    What aren't all the transitional phases still out and about? I don't see any reason for them to die out so consistently.

    This probably isn't the most technically correct way to phrase things but, hey, I'm a physicist and not a biologist. Basically, everything is a transitional species. We just don't know what they're transitioning into yet.
  • Vaughn

    Posts: 1880

    Jul 10, 2013 9:22 PM GMT
    AstroGeek said
    JohnSpotter saidI have a question I've been meaning to ask about evolution and since we have qualified people here (unlike the other lunatic thread) I'd like to ask it. I'm not trying to disprove evolution but I find it a curiousity.
    Why are there mostly only easily classified animals in existence?
    What aren't all the transitional phases still out and about? I don't see any reason for them to die out so consistently.

    This probably isn't the most technically correct way to phrase things but, hey, I'm a physicist and not a biologist. Basically, everything is a transitional species. We just don't know what their transitioning into yet.


    Mutation is random.