Disclaimer: Please note that the content on this site is for informational and entertainment purposes only and should not be taken as anything else such as qualified professional advice. Anyone on this site seeking any advice should consult a qualified professional. This site's owner/creators cannot vouch for the veracity of the content on this site and are not liable for any risks or issues associated with using or acting upon the information on this site.
01 Dec 2019 20:48:30 Ed where do you stand on the statement. There is no evidence of the evolution of species?, as stated quite vigorously in this video.
I'm not a non believer but I don't indulged in blind faith other than in those that I love, so the religious parts of the video I take on board, but to say there is no proof of evolution is ridiculous. Besides many other studies, if we where made from fresh beginnings, why infect us with trillions of microorganisms of which keep us healthy? .
When I watch an informative production and then there is something that I logically find deluded, I struggle to find anything plausible in anything said before.
I really appreciate your time and effort in running these pages and I enjoy your insight. It's just that you posting this video has knocked my, I guess trust in you.
This is by no way an insult, and even if you have a different point of view/ beliefs. Its all cool, I just need to know how you sit with this if I may be so bold to ask?
{Ed033's Note - First of all if i watch something that i think is 40% accurate and 60% inaccurate, at the end of it, i don't then think 100% of it was inaccurate.
I think we can all recognise adaptation (which people might call micro evolution) is without question real, but macro evolution (fish turning into reptiles or reptiles turning into mammals a bit at a time or 1 species slowly turning into another). I haven't seen any evidence in the past or now of macro evolution.
If you watch the entirety of the below video, it would be good to read your response:
Sorry for the delay. I wanted to give this my undivided attention.
Just a bit of info on what I believe. Which is basically I really am unsure what to believe except that, there is more to things than meet the eye. So I try to stay as open-minded as possible with all things, but I guess that leaves me out in the cold when it comes to truly believing in something.
It was at the end of a long day and a few rums in when I watched the first video and I definitely didn't mean to suggest I dismiss everything if I don't believe part to be true.
My mind is racing right now so bear with me if I go off on a tangent. I have been very interested in conspiracies for 30 years and most of what I have learnt is all very believable, and I want to believe. I would love to be able to not have to second guess everything and for things to sit balanced in my mind. But there has never been that bit of proof or truth, that has made me feel 100% confident in thinking that, that's exactly how things are. However, watching this video has BLOWN MY MIND!
I am really surprised I haven't come across this information before, as I am always on the hunt for truth. But, as you and this video stated, there is no examples of macro evolution. Every living thing is perfectly designed. I have never brought Darwinism in to question, to be honest. It has always sat quite nicely as a truth. But I guess that's out the window, now.
I am going to sit here blank faced, deep in though for a while over this. Its been a long time since the fundamentals of my thinking have been rattled quite as much.
Just to clarify why I questioned what you believe. Your opinion is one of a small handful that I do hold highly. Very informed, un biased and trust-worthy. I guess I was confused or shocked, watching the video, and that brought that in to question too. Like I said, I have been rattled, so I can only apologise if I offended you in any way.
Really appreciate what you do. I do think of you as a very wise guide to the very big questions. Which is a massive compliment, mate. So, thank you.
{Ed033's Note - You didn't offend me in any way, we're both trying to find what the truth is, but it is extremely difficult as we have to contend with:
1. the official mainstream spin and lies
2. paid for controlled opposition, who put out a small bit of truth, but overall is dis-info
3. people who are not paid agents, but have bought into either of the previous two dis-info outlets.
07 Dec 2019 11:52:49 Np, I know. But if the statement was true it would pretty much prove evolution was wrong. Which was why I looked into it. But then its down to who you believe unless you do your own experiments.
The whole macro-evolution side of things I am in total agreement that the so called proof of it is just not there. Possibly not found yet, but that doesn't seem plausible. The main "evidence" of it seems to be based on a bird which evolved into 2 species that can no longer mate. But they still look identical. So, to me, that gives this argument very little weight. The other arguments all seem flawed to me too. 1. The whale-hippo link to a common ancestor when the hippo side has no intermediates. 2. The sequoia tree argument 3. The rabbit argument similar to the bird one. Apart from that, there isn't much else that I have found yet. There is one short video showing a living fish learning to walk. But you can't see the whole fish so external manipulation could be at play.
I'll continue to delve. Thanks for your time and work.
{Ed033's Note - It wouldn't surprise me that whoever first put out the blood clotting as evidence of macro evolution was controlled opposition who was hoping others would use it against 'pro evolutionists' so the 'no evolutionists' would be shot down.
07 Dec 2019 22:36:59 Ed, that has got me confused. isn't your statement a double negative?
What do you mean by "no evolutionist"? . people of faith?
I guess the whole double negative thing is your point. You never get to know the truth unless you're there/ involved/ apart of the elite/ agenda. Everyone else is overloaded with conflicting information therefor never finding or seeing the truth.
The missing intermediates in all species is such a massive hole in the theory of evolution, why has it been so uncovered?
{Ed033's Note - No, because you don't have to be a people of faith to think there is no such thing as macro evolution. I typed "no evolutionist" to mean any people who think there is no such thing as macro evolution.
But we're not overloaded with evidence of macro evolution. We have not seen any evidence of macro evolution.
