Casey Luskin Liar, Hypocrite, Imbecilic Assclown

benthemiester Says:

Sep 11, 2011 - @KyuubiNaruto1337XD By 1865 when he proposed his theory to scholars in Brun Morovia & to anyone that would hear him, the Origin of the Species and Darwins work was already the popular view among these men. You didn't event know that random mutations were a part of the neo Darwinian synthesis or that there was a neo Darwinian synthesis. You questioned the term Darwinist. I am not going to give you a crash course on history. You should know the subject your debating before you try to debate it.

KyuubiNaruto1337XD Says:

Sep 11, 2011 - @benthemiester doesn't mean darwinist ignored mendel, the small scientific community did at that time, Religion still dominated until 1960's when the sputnik project went into effect, only then did the government invest in books to help educate the kids, this is where evolution took rise again in America.Also I didn't say or imply that random mutations were apart of evolution, you simply introduced a new term of Neo-darwinism, instead of the regular term Evolution

KyuubiNaruto1337XD Says:

Sep 11, 2011 - @benthemiester Also, you simply say just because science doesn't explain where these random mutations come from, doesn't mean an intelligent designer did it.you are causing an inference that leads to "if I don't know, therefore ID

benthemiester Says:

Sep 12, 2011 - @KyuubiNaruto1337XD I was speaking of what happened in the meeting of the Historical society in Brun Morovia where scholars & scientist representing different fields in earth science from all over Europe came together. If your speaking of the US, I don't know who told you that the government didn't invested in educational school books until the sixties, but where ever you got this information it is false, and again I wasn't speaking of the history of Darwinism in US schools. Your point is moot.

benthemiester Says:

Sep 12, 2011 - @KyuubiNaruto1337XD One of the reasons that I was put off by the theory is because as a kid I was lied too and taught that Piltdown man was an ancestor of humans and I repeated this to other people and ended up looking like a fool. It was still in my textbook even though it had been debunked 20 years before. I was especially upset when I found that Darwin, Huxley and even later James Watson and others considered Blacks to be closer related to apes and genetically inferior to nordic whites.

KyuubiNaruto1337XD Says:

Sep 12, 2011 - @benthemiester Its ok to think that, Indoctrination is a bitch, and during darwins time, slavery was prevalent in southern US.If you just look at it chronologically, the blacks are still prevalent in africa and are basically the oldest forms of Humans, humans migrated north and around into america.Blacks tend to be more susceptible to Tuberculosis, where whites aren't, and Latin American people tend to be prone to small poxeach group of people has pros and cons

benthemiester Says:

Sep 12, 2011 - @KyuubiNaruto1337XD And whites are prone to Cystic fibrosis, Alzheimers & skin cancer. So what? If Blacks are the oldest form of humans then according to simple logic that means they had more time to evolve than their white counter parts who came much later according to the theory.In reality know one knows what color skin the first humans had or how long it took skin color to change. These are all assumptions & if you think you are genetically superior, then again this is one of my pet peeves.

KyuubiNaruto1337XD Says:

Sep 12, 2011 - @benthemiester not necessarily, the environment of africa hasn't changed much, so evolving to one disease that doesn't affect many of its entire population isn't likely.sort of like Small pox, it has been around for hundreds of thousands of years, and not one person is immune from it unless you get the vaccine to prevent it.

benthemiester Says:

Sep 12, 2011 - @KyuubiNaruto1337XD Tuberculosis was first discovered near Heidelberg in the Neolithic bone remains, as well as the great Tuberculosis epidemic of Europe, and like many other diseases like Small Pox, Measles the Plague etc. again which all started in Europe and spread to the Americas.

benthemiester Says:

Sep 12, 2011 - @KyuubiNaruto1337XD What do you mean the environment hasn't changed much in Africa? Do you think there aren't big cities in Africa. Or that all African live in huts and chuck spears?Who do you think built the great cities of Ethiopia and Egypt. Or are you saying that the climate changed everywhere but Africa? According to your own theory man was supposed to have evolved in Africa. WTF?

KyuubiNaruto1337XD Says:

Sep 12, 2011 - @benthemiester missed what I said by it didn't change, the weather hasn't changed, just because people live in cities or bungaloes doesn't mean it changes like that, the cities and buildings are less than 200 years old, how much evolution do you think takes place in a city that is less than that, not even thinking about the lack of it without the cities, the climate hasn't changed, the jungles are still the same. They've adapted efficiently to it, by having darker skin for higher melonin

benthemiester Says:

Sep 12, 2011 - @KyuubiNaruto1337XD cont..... You say because the jungles are still there. So what? We have mountains in Europe and North America that are still here. If you think that the ancient cities of Ethiopia, Egypt, Nigeria, Mali, Kenya, Somalia, Morocco and Libya are less that 200 years old then some one really screwed with your head. Is this what evolution has taught you? I find this very sad.

benthemiester Says:

Sep 12, 2011 - @KyuubiNaruto1337XD I made the point that if Blacks were the oldest humans alive as you say, then they had more time to evolve. Your the one that said the environment hasn't changed so they didn't evolve, even though your own theory says that humans evolved in Africa. Again I don't even think you know what your talking about or what your point is........

benthemiester Says:

Sep 12, 2011 - @KyuubiNaruto1337XD "the climate hasn't changed, the jungles are still the same"Google "climate or environmental change in Africa" and you will find many examples of this happening even throughout Africa's existence.

KyuubiNaruto1337XD Says:

Sep 13, 2011 - @benthemiester you missed the point, the jungles are similar to the jungles back then, I know desertification occured to create the sahara, but people migrated and africa was still similar to what it is today, also, how much evolution do you think can take place in only 3million years when other evolutionary changes occur in as little as 5 to as much as 60 million, years with some species like Diatoms which evolve small bits in less than 20,000

benthemiester Says:

Sep 13, 2011 - @KyuubiNaruto1337XD cont... If by your own reasoning Blacks evolved first, and whites came after, then whites they had a lessor time to evolve as a race. Blacks, Indians and Mesopotamians were building pyramids and mapping the stars when Northern Europeans were still hunters and gathers & running around worshipping trees. Who do you think the Romans and Greeks were speaking of when they used the word "savage barbarians" This is not an insult but a historical fact.

benthemiester Says:

Sep 13, 2011 - @KyuubiNaruto1337XD "you missed the point, the jungles are similar to the jungles back then"I have no idea what your point is. Again if you think Blacks are less evolved then something is wrong with your reasoning. Mountains are still similar to mountains. The ocean is still similar to the ocean. So what? Again I don't even know what your arguing anymore.

KyuubiNaruto1337XD Says:

Sep 14, 2011 - @benthemiester well if they're the same then there isn't much evolving now is there?

benthemiester Says:

Sep 14, 2011 - @KyuubiNaruto1337XD "well if they're the same then there isn't much evolving now is there?"Bingo and KyuubiMaruto finally gets it. Please forgive my sarcasm and grouchyness. I'm old.

brewerbrian420 Says:

Sep 16, 2011 - @Ultracity6060 The really sad thing about it is, they probably didn't see the video. Just the title.

TMTours Says:

Oct 13, 2011 - Is it just me or does he put other people in mind of Mr.Bean?

TheHowardZinn Says:

Nov 14, 2011 - @benthemiester yea 360,000 years isnt really long enough to produce anything but different colored skin and different bone structure thats about it. Not alot of argument.

thybigballs Says:

Dec 6, 2011 - Nothing like having someone that isn't even in a field of science (and actually just a lawyer) argue science on television. But then again this was the Christian supporting Faux News. Way to be good god fearing folk with truth on your side!

oaksmithiii Says:

Dec 25, 2011 - Why do you keep using "WE". Who are you? Why do you call people names.