Evolution vs Creationism debate 3 UK professors debunk evolution for you using irreducible complexity arguments. Professor Andy McIntosh, Professor Stuart Burgess and Professor Stephen Taylor reject the common scientific view of evolution which leads many Brits into atheism from childhood. Interviewed by uk street preacher Joe Kirby.
Off The Kirb Ministries: https://bit.ly/2RKVKng
#offthekirb #evolution #atheismisunstoppable
Big thank you to Jack Mordh for making our awesome new intro clip!! Thank you 😀
Video Source
I want to disprove the law of gravity!
First, let me talk to a police officer, a chef and a stripper! Yep, that will be sufficient to disprove that pesky gravity!
Smdh…..
Nice vid dude 👍
You don't think it's a bit dishonest to ask 3 professors of not evolutionary biology, what their opinions on evolution are? I'm sure they're undeniably smart in their own lanes, but the arguments they're presenting are laughably simple.
"Look at this feather."
Evolution could make that.
"Irreducible complexity."
Is not a term used in evolution. A thing could evolve for a certain use, then through mutation, grow into the use we see today.
"Our hands weren't designed to throw a punch, they were designed to play the piano."
Actually they can do both and to assign an intended use is to presuppose there was an intent. You've smuggled in your designer through word games. Also, it is much easier for humans to throw a punch than to play the piano… well.
"Life is much more complex than anything we've created."
I guess cameras don't exist that can see into both the infrared and ultraviolet. Regardless, the argument we can't make things as complex as life, therefor intelligent design is true, is a terrible argument on its face. Just because we can't do it (yet), is not a measure of weather or not that thing could have come about by natural causes. Go back several years and you'll see we didn't have the means of flight. Your argument would have us look at ducks and say, flight is impossible for us. Humans can't recreate flight as God can, therefor intelligent design is true.
"You need to be alive for the evolutionary process to work."
Well… yes? Otherwise natural selection would get all kinds of wonky.
"It's got all the hallmarks of intelligent design."
What are those hallmarks?
"No one has ever seen a computer program, be produced by a random process."
Are you unfamiliar with AI? Basically intelligence that can write it's own code and trash bad code based on the environment it's put in. It tries random things over a long period of time and eventually you can teach it to play a game with remarkable proficiency. Of course we had to make the original code and put it in an environment, but that's why I'd also say that computer programs aren't DNA and that's why analogies aren't proof.
Look, I'm once again, sure these guys are smart in their own field, but seriously, if these questions they're bringing up could be answered by an artists with an associate's degree, they seriously need to do better.
LOL
"3 UK professors debunk evolution for you using irreducible complexity arguments."
One of whom appears either to think that pianos were around before us and that we were designed to fit them, or is incapable of comprehending that we wouldn't invent a device for human use that a human couldn't use.