Comments by "Phil Aypee (Philip Potter)" (@philaypeephilippotter6532) on "Vox" channel.

@MatthewBox77 Kind is not a biological term in taxonomy. In consequence there is no such thing as a kind.
7
@isabellaearnhardt6380 Evolution gives no opinion on how space and atoms appeared as it's a biological theory. Try physics instead.
6
Alas you are wrong in every detail. If any scientists had disproved evolution it would be major news all over this planet - and it's not. The rest of your post is an argument from incredulity - you don't know so it must have been god. Do you know why your computer/phone works? If you don't it must be god.
6
No such thing as a kind.
5
Wrong. Evolution is proven while biological types don't exist.
5
@audaudin6592 We are still apes.
4
They're frightened, partly by the fire-and-brimstone preachers, partly by not wanting to seem out-of-step and partly because their idea of god makes them feel seem special.
4
Similarities actually point to evolution. A creator would make things exactly the same.
4
@Ryanarrecis Actually there are many tons of evidence for evolution and it was scientifically proven decades ago. More recent proof has been the discovery that transitional fossils are actually extraordinarily common showing that there's an unbroken chain of development culminating in today's species. Even speciation may have been observed recently. Why do you think evolution needs any deity to start it?
4
@MatthewBox77 What has the bible to do with the science of biology? I've heard creationists of all stripes say that all felines are one kind but they're patently separate species. Ergo your definition of kind=species is not general amongst creationists. Also look up the Latin word species.
4
@KentuckyFriedChildren It's living things that evolve, not astrophysical bodies.
3
What has either atheism or god got to do with evolution?
3
@Ryanarrecis Indeed. But this opinion explains observed facts better than any rival opinion - even yours.
3
@Ryanarrecis Surely you cannot mean biogenesis? Biogenesis is something that doesn't even imply any deity. It is the idea that only living organisms can produce other living organisms. It is not a scientific theory and even the hypothesis has little support. Life (and evolution) was started by abiogenesis, that's actually the meaning of that word. Before about 1665 biological cells hadn't been observed. They were obviously imaginary. As yet ambiogenesis has not been observed - possibly. It's obviously just as imaginary as a biological cell - possibly. Scientists, actually evolutionary biologists, are fairly sure that practical methods of abiogenesis will soon be found.
3
@MatthewBox77 You really ought to learn about typographical errors - typos. Transposing letters like that is not uncommon.
3
@wossaaaat Equally importantly there is no evidence at all for any hypothesis other than evolution. This is one of the reasons that evolution was elevated to scientific theory status long ago.
3
@robertt8862 What do you think that means?
2
@KentuckyFriedChildren Sorry, it was meant for the OP.
2
Requiem I'll take a bow - the next time I urinate❢
2
@Ryanarrecis What scientific facts do you think I'm denying?
2
@Ryanarrecis Can you tell me what scientific facts you think I'm denying?
2
@johnthumble5154 Did you hear about the dyslexic devil worshipper? He sold his soul to Santa❢ 😇😉😈
2
@johnthumble5154 Well, nobody expects The Spanish Inquisition. - Monty Python.
2
@johnthumble5154 Great! We all need a good laugh. But I think the beauteous Box doesn't know how to - creationists don't know what a sense of humour is. As the late great atheist Dave Allen often said May your god go with you. I wonder what he meant?
1