Пікірлер

• 
  @AdamKlownzinger12 сағат бұрын

  I’m just wondering when the topic of “ever” comes in

• 
  @WeebSlayer27Күн бұрын

  Redditors assembled for this comment section 😂

• 
  @VoxAstra-qk4jzКүн бұрын

  Where was he even going with that? As if knowing specific names for arguments automatically makes them wrong.

• 
  @LeftWithRightКүн бұрын

  A creationist can call themselves a scientist that doesnt make it true. I am an attack helicopter.

• 
  @test-2012 күн бұрын

  right now the united states has a roman catholic and jewish government and they promote gay and trans pride which is also an american ideology so its all just a joke

• 
  @baraalayan14223 күн бұрын

  I didn't get it, what are they debating

• 
  @AMC22832 күн бұрын

  Nothing. There’s no debate. The real scientist is telling him that

• 
  @bevr91283 күн бұрын

  God is real. I could beat the scientist in a debate.✝️

• 
  @AMC22833 күн бұрын

  You wouldn’t have to debate him, you’d have to show proof that some god is real. Obviously you can’t.

• 
  @bevr91283 күн бұрын

  @@AMC2283 Jesus proved it

• 
  @AMC22833 күн бұрын

  @@bevr9128 how?

• 
  @bevr91283 күн бұрын

  @@AMC2283 When he died and rose from the dead he proved all his teachings true including his claims to be God

• 
  @AMC22833 күн бұрын

  @@bevr9128 how?

• 
  @redflag42554 күн бұрын

  Which Christian slipriture?

• 
  @ender83524 күн бұрын

  Each of them look about how you'd expect them to

• 
  @russellseitz4 күн бұрын

  A palpable touch ! The principle division in any scientific debate is between the side whose dialect is intelligible to laymen and philosophers alike, and the one even God has trouble undersatnding

• 
  @kingcronecker4 күн бұрын

  This debate lasted longer than it took God to create The Grand Canyon.

• 
  @AMC22834 күн бұрын

  Your beliefs have no basis in science, that’s the point

• 
  @billycranston54814 күн бұрын

  He didn’t look that short maybe they were speaking about his intelligence

• 
  @AMC22834 күн бұрын

  Short intelligence?

• 
  @lonzo614 күн бұрын

  There are scientISTS, and there are creationISTS. The only similarity between these two words is the IST. Other than that, the words are not and should not be used interchangeably , AND FOR GOOD REASON. Religion makes people ignorant.

• 
  @rickbaker80964 күн бұрын

  The canyon was dug out by the Army Corps of Engineers back in the 1930s as a WPA project. They did a nice job 👍

• 
  @eliasgriffin35185 күн бұрын

  Creationists are not scientists because they start with a conclusion then select evidence instead of using evidence to come to a conclusion

• 
  @naps_8785 күн бұрын

  i forgot what fallacy this is is it the uhh... texas sharpshooter?

• 
  @AMC22834 күн бұрын

  @@naps_878ummmmm-the scientific method is perfectly clear Jack, how do you honestly see anything wrong with this comment?

• 
  @drmantistoboggan28704 күн бұрын

  ​@@AMC2283hes referring to the creationists 😂

• 
  @GentlemanBystander6 күн бұрын

  All the midwit aphorisms in the comments...Jesus...

• 
  @BloodAlwaysFindsItsLevel6 күн бұрын

  $10,000 for any evidence for any scientists that don't believe in creation. Take your time.

• 
  @FlyingSpaghettiJesus6 күн бұрын

  There’s a whole of list of them. It’s called the list of Steve’s . Look it up. Also my father who is retired Marine biologist didn’t believe in Cretardisim. Where’s my money

• 
  @AMC22836 күн бұрын

  how does one get smug about something they refer to as a belief?

• 
  @epicchocolate18665 күн бұрын

  What? You want evidence that something doesn’t exist?

• 
  @Ricketator7 күн бұрын

  Some here thinks there is an existential need to humiliate who believe in creatorism. Well, the evolution theory says lifeforms gradually to an advantageous form. Meanwhile there are some animals which's structure functionality only works in its current form and would not be survivable in a centuries of generations of evolving there with the purpose they will be able to function a few eras later. By the time they reach it they would go extinct. Examples were some gasburn spider, and winged lizard. Winged lizard who are halway to grow wings cant fly nor can it move to avoid predators. Gas spider a little bit malfunction not working things in exact accuracy it explodes. And didnt read a theory scieentificly explaining these to explain the scientific darwinism. But still it is the scientific explanation. Quiet unscientific. And that is what is called scientific dogmas, and why it was compared to religion. At this point when it is not explained but you have to belive it cuz "science" it is alikeness to religion mascarading as science. And what verifies it that it is science. (It does not qualifies science itself. It is people who cheat the logic and sell ideas with the word science) But science itself states that stuff must be proven. And there is no public statement that addresses this counterargument for the scientific theory talked about as fact. The theory goes around as common sense as if this valid argument wasnt brought up, therefore no answer, therefore it is "uncontested". Or maybe the argument does not count scientific and that is enough not elaborate on keeping the theory as it is. But, if you know about a writing that gives explanation i am not aware of share it with me I want to know it too. No, I am not stating lifeforms do not evolve. Not what I said, dont send the moth color changing experiment with smug sense of condenscending superiority cuz in your head you want some religious creatorist... (like some commenters showed themselves as) The darwinism statement doesnt answer, do not accommodate said examples. The answer must be something different. ( unless you say it was a modification design done by people at ancient civilization. God would be bypassed. Ancient technology was found though, not commonly published therefore not scientific I guess.) The invalidity of darwin theory as is itself does not proves god. And a darwin theory does not proves godlessness itself. What I wanted to say this whole time. Don't be so mean. You do not even have the facts to belittle others. Thats it I guess

• 
  @AMC22837 күн бұрын

  This video is about geology

• 
  @Ricketator7 күн бұрын

  @@AMC2283 read video title again. If disagree with the text, remind everyone else too it is about geology

• 
  @AMC22837 күн бұрын

  @@Ricketator how about you watch video again

• 
  @Ricketator7 күн бұрын

  @@AMC2283 if i see you commenting here to everyone it is about geology who did not mention the subject then I will watch the video again

• 
  @AMC22836 күн бұрын

  @@Ricketator the point is the only reason to lump it together is you can’t tell the difference and just view it as thing against your religion

• 
  @lassiterdominguez28798 күн бұрын

  Ahh right ok answers the obtuse moron. Perplexed as to why.😂😂😂but stays silent in his faith😂😂😂

• 
  @hismajesty627210 күн бұрын

  I was raised Evangelical and my congregation was super strict on young earth creationism. I was hesitant to embrace the idea of Darwinist evolution because of the blatant hostility towards all things religious by online darwinists. What gave me the wiggle room to change my mind was a professor who was charitable and well meaning toward religion who taught ancient history from the protohumans to the Roman Empire. I am still a devout Christian and I have since fully accepted Darwinistic evolution into my worldview.

• 
  @fredharvey272010 күн бұрын

  Not all creationists are young earthers. This isn't relevant at all.

• 
  @sammysalgado147511 күн бұрын

  Science is a religion,wayy to many unknowns and made up stuff They LIE same as big pharma and the current American Food industry

• 
  @AMC228311 күн бұрын

  So you worship the god of computerized telecommunications in order to view this and post that?

• 
  @degew93676 күн бұрын

  Prove it

• 
  @sammysalgado14756 күн бұрын

  @AMC2283 nope,these fast typed gotcha questions don't help either

• 
  @sammysalgado14756 күн бұрын

  @degew9367 look around,1 in 3 ppl are obese

• 
  @degew93676 күн бұрын

  @@sammysalgado1475 you have yet to prove anything

• 
  @glycomcdonald12 күн бұрын

  When exploring the evidence of the Grand Canyon's origins. The interpretation this video provides has many problems when you actually go out and really study it for your self and research other conclusions. It becomes clear that it did not form from a little water flowing up stream over billions of years but rather from a lot of water over a short time like from a global scale flood. Far better explains the fossils we find and the fossilization process in general, the petrified trees we find connecting these layers that proves the layers aren't different ages and the sediment we find in each layer. The truth tends to really bother some people especially when it confronts their comfortable selfish sinful lifestyles.

• 
  @AMC228312 күн бұрын

  Nope, your self righteousness is evidence of nothing

• 
  @sammysalgado147511 күн бұрын

  What??! So random and stupid​@@AMC2283

• 
  @lindenstromberg685912 күн бұрын

  What is God? And does God have more power than David Blaine?

• 
  @Huskylogic212 күн бұрын

  What is god? Is it a name of a food? If it was, maybe I just ate one yesternight. Ended up with some diarrhea for 7 month straight. Do not recommend. 0/10.

• 
  @lindenstromberg685912 күн бұрын

  @@Huskylogic2 Ah! I’ve heard of the food known as God before. From what I understand, God is made from a type of wafer.

• 
  @Huskylogic212 күн бұрын

  @@lindenstromberg6859 Exactly! And as always, wafer has always been pretty vanilla.. Too overrated though considering more than a half of people on this planet find pleasure devouring it & even have been idolizing it for millennium!

• 
  @naps_8785 күн бұрын

  who's david blaine might i ask

• 
  @mustang820612 күн бұрын

  Atheist* vs Creationist

• 
  @carlosmanuelherreracastillo13 күн бұрын

  I was expecting the shortest scientist to be a microbiologist.

• 
  @ElficGuy15 күн бұрын

  This absolutely sums it up. "Here is some evidence" -"oh I don't count this as evidence" -... Welp

• 
  @AMC228315 күн бұрын

  It’s not evidence, it’s a religious belief

• 
  @ElficGuy15 күн бұрын

  @@AMC2283 case and point; you don't even know what I'm talking about.

• 
  @StrangeScaryNewEngland13 күн бұрын

  @@ElficGuy I think they were just confused or misread what you posted. No need to be harsh on them. It is the internet, and often impossible to interpret how someone is meaning something.

• 
  @jackdotblue15 күн бұрын

  The funny part about this is there is no god, never has been. Now, are there beings out there far more advanced than we, that could have something to do with our existence? Absolutely. But at the same time; it's just aliens having fun with science. We're in a simulation created by alien scientists. Imagine being an alien scientist. I mean, here on earth most scientists are much more intelligent than the average person. Now imagine an 'alien' scientist...Holy Moly! The stupid people on their planet are still smarter than any Einstein on ours. Seems to me that if you were a highly advanced civilization that creating what you were millions of years previous, would be a fun science project. And here we are! Still living with animals amongst us, able to kill us. Still living with the problems of disease and obesity and bothersome insects. Still lying to one another and thinking buying stuff will benefit our lives. It's incredible living among humans for me...and highly annoying, at the same time.

• 
  @user-uo9cy2ep2h17 күн бұрын

  Tell me im a fucking idiot, without telling me Im an idiot. Your God, whatever he/she/it is, is a derivative of a humans imagination.

• 
  @DrBreyn21 күн бұрын

  Wait till he finds out many tall historical scientific researchers were or became believers in a creator after finding evidence for themselves

• 
  @FlyingSpaghettiJesus20 күн бұрын

  there have been several studies on the beliefs of scientists regarding the existence of God. One of the most well-known studies is the survey conducted by the Pew Research Center in 2009, which found that scientists are less likely to believe in God than the general public. According to this study: - 33% of scientists said they believe in God. - 18% believed in a universal spirit or higher power. - 41% did not believe in either. - 7% did not know or refused to answer. Another significant study was conducted by Edward J. Larson and Larry Witham in 1998 and published in Nature. This survey found that among members of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), belief in a personal god and immortality was low: - About 7% believed in a personal God. - Around 72.2% expressed disbelief or doubt. These studies indicate that a significant proportion of scientists, particularly those in elite institutions, tend to be more skeptical about the existence of a deity compared to the general population.

• 
  @AMC228320 күн бұрын

  Well which is it-you’re a believer or there’s evidence?

• 
  @DrBreyn20 күн бұрын

  @@AMC2283 One can start to believe something after they have experienced evidence for themselves. It's not an excluding word meaning

• 
  @AMC228320 күн бұрын

  @@DrBreyn you have absolutely no rational criticism of the age of earth huh?

• 
  @DrBreyn20 күн бұрын

  ​@@AMC2283Huh? We were not talking about the age of the earth. Where did that come from?

• 
  @davidporter67122 күн бұрын

  Real meeting of the mind here…

• 
  @gusfring688723 күн бұрын

  You can't change the mind of someone who doesn't use logic with logic, you might as well speak a different language

• 
  @michaelbaker749923 күн бұрын

  And you shouldn't count them as scientists, because they are not

• 
  @tharodsta23 күн бұрын

  According to science everything has to be proven in a laboratory. You can't prove evolution in a laboratory therefore evolution is not scientific...😊 Science is based on observations...have you seen an animal species change into another species with your naked eye...no... therefore it's based purely on theory with no proven scientific evidence...

• 
  @AMC228323 күн бұрын

  strike 1, observation isn't some biologist watching, it's physical evidence strike 2, organisms don't change species, changes are hereditary, so congratulations on criticizing exactly nothing the theory of evolution predicts strike 3, this video is about geology, you changed the subject because you can't tell the difference, it's all just Things against your religious superstitions strike 4, you're not concerned with evidence, your religious superstitions have none

• 
  @ka-boom208321 күн бұрын

  "According to science everything has to be proven in a laboratory." Lmfao that's not true, In labs we see similar genomes between a ancestor and predecessor, between a vampyropod fossil and a octopus. At that very moment, evolution is no longer theory but proven with scientific evidence.

• 
  @PK-qi9jr21 күн бұрын

  ​@@ka-boom2083 Quick correction: it is still a scientific theory. The evidence we have found for it means it's no longer a hypothesis

• 
  @Typexviiib15 күн бұрын

  @@PK-qi9jrcorrect, theory is the highest state of confidence for descriptor models, in much the same way that laws are the highest state of confidence for predictor models.

• 
  @degew93676 күн бұрын

  Actually we have observed evolution in a laboratory

• 
  @HellInternAKACandyMD24 күн бұрын

  How did the fictional tale of proving someones' royal blood line get in these discussions? (And notice how it's never been a method we used?) Also, when they ask, "Where's the pea then?" What would represent the pea? A physical difference you can touch? An open space like an air bubble? Or possibly the canyon itself? Or literally deeper in the wall? I remember feeling a lot of pressure on my brain during one of my seizures in my 30s. Along with that pressure, the brain chemistry at work convinced me I was having a great realization, on the brand new "info" I had just "learned", which was actually another section of my brain spouting gibberish, like an ancient greek virgin oracle back in the day. It was along the lines of "the mother becomes the daughter becomes a mother once more and soon that will be all". Swelling went down, as did the heady feeling of "learning what I thought was a new definitive absolute truth". When my senses returned, I "internally groaned" at myself in disgust because I was essentially a babbling idiot. Maybe a lot of these "Biblical Flood" people, felt a similar pressure on their brains, with some bad timing of info learning, and never rexamined their full thoughts.

• 
  @user-ie7jg4dj6q25 күн бұрын

  Just because something took billions of years to form doesn't mean evolution here's the thing. When we look at creation it sporadically just appears fully formed

• 
  @AMC228324 күн бұрын

  Yeaaaah-canyons don’t evolve being as they’re not organisms. What is it-all just one thing that’s against your religion to you?

• 
  @VisshanVis24 күн бұрын

  Creationism and intelligent design are both pseudo-sciences, that's why not a single legitimate credible university teaches it.

• 
  13 күн бұрын

  No it does not sporadically just appears fully formed. Only creationists make that claim.

• 
  @user-ie7jg4dj6q13 күн бұрын

  What you mean is there telling the truth about it where is evolutionists try to say there's transition but cannot produce any evidence or any kind of transitional fossils. They were caught altering Lucy 400 of the same species of Lucy found more complete skeletal remains yet they chose to use fragments Karma because they can't lie to you any other way. Now go look up layered sediment and you will see for yourself life's sporadically appeared on the scene

• 
  @AdventureUncharted25 күн бұрын

  Mount Saint Helen’s explosion took hours to deposit many layers, those layers did not take millions of years. They were deposited during the Great Flood

• 
  @AMC228325 күн бұрын

  Your superstitions are evidence of nothing

• 
  @AdventureUncharted25 күн бұрын

  @@AMC2283 those are observed, I know you think observation is not necessary, such as the case of pond scum coming alive and monkeys turning into people

• 
  @AMC228324 күн бұрын

  @@AdventureUncharted1, observing isn’t some biologist watching for millennia, it’s physical evidence. 2, wonderful erroneous description of evolution on a video about geology. 3, you really want to get into what hasn’t been observed there chief?

• 
  @AdventureUncharted24 күн бұрын

  @@AMC2283 hmm looks like the channel owner is afraid of my comments and deleted it. I don’t remember my exact reply. Although it is “simplified” it is literally what you believe. You believe ponds full of crap eventually sometimes come alive, I mean it’s a huge joke. The obvious only possible truth is that a super intelligence created life You also believe that “sometimes” (very rarely but still you believe this) that monkeys turn into people, again it sounds ridiculous only because the sciency language has been stripped away. It’s just plain stupid to believe this garbage and I say that as an ex-evolutionist

• 
  @AMC228324 күн бұрын

  @@AdventureUncharted save it, you don’t have to embarrass yourself with your incredibly wrong ideas about evolution on a geology video. no after life otherwise and you can’t face reality, that’s your real only objection to any of it isn’t it?

• 
  @bob1351325 күн бұрын

  The world was created in 6 days. Those days are not equivalent to a single spin of Earth- it wasn't even created yet!

• 
  @bob1351325 күн бұрын

  Venus Length of day- 243 Earth days Saturn Length of day- 10 Hours Pluto Length of day- 6 Earth days 1 day does not implicitly equal 1 day on earth.

• 
  @AMC228325 күн бұрын

  Great. What’s godlike about your god taking eons to do something? Oooh right, there were no eons, the universe wasn’t created yet.

• 
  13 күн бұрын

  Sorry that just isn't true. Not even a little bit.

• 
  @johnedwards439426 күн бұрын

  Me: No scientist believes the geologic column is reliable for dating fossils. Guy with hat: I know plenty that do believe it's reliable. Me: I don’t consider them scientists. Anyone who engages in the circular reasoning that the geologic column entails, is not doing science. Moreover, by arbitrarily dismissing certain scientific authorities without stating "why," is begging the question in the debate, as your authorities do when they engage in circular reasoning about the geologic column.

• 
  @Typexviiib15 күн бұрын

  Scientists dont pick and choose data points based solely on if they fit into a specific literal reading of a book written thousands of years ago. Scientists form hypotheses based on physical evidence, and there is no physical evidence that can independently point you towards believing a god created this planet a few thousand years ago. You simply cannot look at the grand canyon without first believing genesis is literal truth, and come to the conclusion that its only a few thousand years old based on all of the available evidence. Frankly common sense says otherwise because theres not any physical evidence for a catastrophic flood thats required to even humor the idea. Twisting data to fit a young earth creationist worldview you only came to because of a misunderstanding of an ancient jewish text is not science. Anyone that holds that opinion, by definition, cannot be a scientist because their process for evaluating evidence is not scientific. Thats not circular reasoning, it points out a contradiction in terms. If i claim to be a christian, but show that i dont actually believe in god, its ok to point out im not a Christian because my position is fundamentally opposed to what it means to be a christian. Atheists cannot be christians. Likewise, young earth creationists, cannot be scientists. I say this as a man who spent 15 years of my adult life being misled by creationists who pretended to be scientists and was fully committed to yec.

• 
  @Arminius42026 күн бұрын

  None of our bodies, limbs anything is perfectly symmetrical compared to a engineered device that we created.

• 
  @matthew815327 күн бұрын

  “They don’t agree with me so they’re not legitimate.”

• 
  @AMC228327 күн бұрын

  Well they don’t agree with him because they never followed the scientific method for one second, so that’s really the problem.

• 
  @sanseijedi26 күн бұрын

  Which is the anthem of so many folks. Willful ignorance.

• 
  @Typexviiib15 күн бұрын

  Theyre not scientists if they dont follow the scientific method, it’s pretty simple. There is no scientifically sound argument for the grand canyon not being millions of years old. The discrete fossil layers and radiometric dating definitively prove this cant be true.

• 
  @matthew81536 күн бұрын

  @@AMC2283 Christians invented the scientific method to prove the word of God. It was a priest who came up with the Big Bang.

• 
  @honestaspie640527 күн бұрын

  I'm no creationist, but this gives the impression they're both arguing in bad faith.

• 
  @ohhellno875919 күн бұрын

  I agree haha

• 
  @user-tw3rh9po4t28 күн бұрын

  This shouldn’t be a debate, not because creationism is wrong (it isn’t wrong), but because it is mostly separate from and not contradictory to science.

• 
  @AMC228328 күн бұрын

  Laughing boy has no business contradicting the scientist

• 
  @Xarai28 күн бұрын

  uhhh it is wrong, its been debunked years ago.

• 
  @user-tw3rh9po4t28 күн бұрын

  @@XaraiNo.

• 
  @user-tw3rh9po4t26 күн бұрын

  @benji-m1wNo, ya’ll don’t.

• 
  @user-tw3rh9po4t26 күн бұрын

  @benji-m1wK bye idiot

• 
  @RichardCranium.Ай бұрын

  The scary thing about young earth creationtards is that even in the time of Jesus many Christians supported old earth creationism. Young earthism is close to the craziness of the flat earth with how stupid it is.

• 
  @hismajesty6272Ай бұрын

  I believe God created the earth several billion years ago and created mankind through the evolutionary process.

• 
  @AMC2283Ай бұрын

  If you like but what religion teaches this? What’s god like about taking exactly as long as nature?

• 
  @honestaspie640527 күн бұрын

  You can ignore AMC.

• 
  @AMC228327 күн бұрын

  @@honestaspie6405look how desperate you are to ignore logic, telling other people to.

• 
  @honestaspie640527 күн бұрын

  @@AMC2283 Weak bait.

• 
  @AMC228327 күн бұрын

  @@honestaspie6405 yeah, you have no rational objection to the age of earth, guy who gives his own comments thumbs up.

• 
  @mountainmover777Ай бұрын

  The problem is that the "scientists" this guy is talking about all agree with his religion rather than Christianity.. He's putting faith in mans observations about things he couldn't possibly know 100% as factual. That's no different than any other religion. These people worship their own understanding. This is the crux of the problem with "scientists" today. That they refuse to decipher between what really is 100% known science and what is still just theory. Regardless of how many are lining up to say they agree and believe it to be true, it's still NOT proven, and therefore isn't actually factual. The same can be said for Einstein and his theories of relativity.. So many people claim to understand it, but no one can explain it. As if "time" is anything other than a mere measurement... Just wow!

• 
  @AMC2283Ай бұрын

  Nope, that’s your excuse to not have to learn facts and leave your fantasy world of gods. you can construe it as converting.

• 
  @mountainmover777Ай бұрын

  @@AMC2283 My "excuse" as you put it, is the fact that most people are not as smart as they think they are, yourself included!

• 
  @AMC2283Ай бұрын

  @@mountainmover777 yeah, I’ve noticed that the religious liken science that’s inconvenient for them to religion like there’s something inherently misleading about religion. You need earth to have been created just for you to believe in an afterlife, that’s the only objection here isn’t it?

• 
  @honestaspie640527 күн бұрын

  ​@@mountainmover777You can ignore AMC.

• 
  @mountainmover77726 күн бұрын

  @@AMC2283 I can't help it if you don't see it.. it's even obvious to people who aren't religious too. What people who believe in scientific theories have is faith, not facts. How is an unproven theory, any different than theology?

• 
  @firstamendment2887Ай бұрын

  The hubris of man is "intelligence."

• 
  @Huskylogic2Ай бұрын

  Okay? Much better than being born with a low quality & low usage brain who's still stuck in the neverending rabbit hole yet keep seeking attention on both real life & the internet. Coping much while hoping for your sky daddy to comfort your life of ignorance? You wishy-washy people are disgusting. Pitiful one.

• 
  @sundareshvenugopal6575Ай бұрын

  That's a snub. "OOh, I've read them. I don't count them as scientists.".

• 
  @FlyingSpaghettiJesusАй бұрын

  Cretardisim isnt a field of science and it’s not supported by any science what so ever, therefore it’s not science.

• 
  @tifacolaАй бұрын

  How did the Colorado river go uphill 4k feet from Page, AZ to carve out that canyon?

• 
  @AMC2283Ай бұрын

  nothing flowed uphill, geological uplift changed the elevation

• 
  @tifacola28 күн бұрын

  @@AMC2283 creationists and contemporary geologist agree that the uplift occurred before the Grand Canyon was formed.

• 
  @AMC228328 күн бұрын

  @@tifacola so what are you saying, your god likes giant holes in the ground?

• 
  @honestaspie640527 күн бұрын

  ​@@tifacolaYou can ignore AMC.

• 
  @BK-hq7tnАй бұрын

  Uniformitarinism in geology refers to strict gradualism, which many modern geologist don't hold to anymore and now accept many catosphism events. The scientist here is wrong to claim that all scientists are uniformiterianism. That doesnt mean creation is right, but the "scientist" is wrong.

• 
  @AMC2283Ай бұрын

  it means the laws of science haven't changed

• 
  @honestaspie640527 күн бұрын

  ​​You can ignore AMC.