Here is the the background for this post. I posted a video called Debunking Evolution I opened up the comments section on the video and started some interesting conversations with a biology professor called GreedyCapybara. We argued back and forth about whales, Noa’s Flood, and other things. The conversations were getting long and YouTube only allows 500 letters in their comment section and the professor started to email me on YouTube. I stated that I had a website with a feedburner that displayed all the comments because I like the open forum atmosphere. So here we are with his first email that he sent me at YouTube
I have decided message you as the amount of comments on your video is getting silly, not to mention the fact that I have to scroll down a very large list of comments to get to the few you have approved and tried to respond to, I will divide up this message into the topics being discussed in the comments for ease of access, I would appreciate it if you did the same.
Just for the record I approved all the professors comments -Maximus
Origin of life:
-Getting organic chemicals is simple, Three of the five kingdoms Plants, Eugenia and Monoarea use this as either their only or main source of energy.
-These organisms use sunlight as an agent to turn CO2 and H2O into either glucose-a or in some rare cases glucose-b, both organic molecules.
-However organic molecules more often form by themselves in any polar solution (a liquid or gas where the primary molecules have a slight net charge at either end), this is how we get amino-acids, nucleotides and many other organic molecules that are found in water and some hydrocarbons (which themselves are organic).
Age of the Earth:
-there is little beyond a Gama-ray Burst (huge astronomical event) or actively firing “heavy” particles such as neutrons or protons into the nucleus of an atom that can change the rate of decay.
-even when firing “heavy” particles into such atoms the result would (if these were used for dating) always be a lower age rather than a higher one because the particle would knock neutrons into of the sample thus adding mass not subtracting it.
-All four species I named are in fact whales, both by the taxonomical definition that I presented and by your own dictionary definition that you presented.
-I actually did expect you to make up your own definition rather than use one from a dictionary that even a quick glance at the well known species that I named would confirm my prediction.
Evolution, is it a science?:
-Evolution is in fact a scientific theory and a fact, in my opinion it is ironic that due to Creationist critics evolution has progressed fast and is far more better understood then General Relativity (Gravity), be it that General Relativity is known to be false yet taught in schools anyway but I hope you see my point.
-Evidence for evolution included but not limited to: Embryology, Genetics, Microbiology, Biochemistry, The Fossil Record, Genetic Markers, Mutation and Variation, Radioactive Decay and Organic Chemistry.
-Yes, I like all scientists take a roll in the peer review process, we review, sight and offer corrections to experiments and articles, this speaks to sciences strength for example I was working for a treatment for Lung Cancer and conducted and experiment to optimise lung cell growth from stem cells, however a quick review of my experiment from a Polish chap in which he sighted my work revealed that I had left out a particular variable and by including it I could have more accurate results.
I will respond to the professors arguments in the comment sections below. Feel free to chime in.
To wrap it all up here is how I feel Please Watch the film below.