How Genetic Science CONFIRMS the Bible | Dr. Nathaniel Jeanson | Traced: Episode 15
2022 ж. 29 Жел.
288 570 Рет қаралды
In this episode of Traced, Bryan Osborne and Dr. Nathaniel Jeanson reveal how genetic science CONFIRMS the Bible, which tends to drive atheists a bit crazy since it directly opposes the theory of evolution. Subscribe to us for more biblical content every week.
See the full playlist of Traced episodes here: • Traced: DNA's Big Surp...
Check out Dr. Jeanson's book, Traced: answersingenesis.org/store/pr....
I was studying a bizarre fish called cheanocephalus aceratus--a species of icefish. Specifically I was studying it's genetic sequences and the relationship of these encoded genes and it's extremely peculiar attributes that allow it to live in antarctic waters. As I was comparing deleted sequences of genetic material that near relatives had and added genetic sequences that are peculiar to it. I was sitting at a huge table on the second floor of a science library at thr university ajd suddenly I started to grasp the statistical probability of so many changes by random mutation and selection in an old earth time line and realized the probability was so remote it was impossible. In that moment I knew beyond a doubt that I was examining the literal handwriting of a creator, written in nucleotides, the plans for a fish that could live with a body temperature of -4C°. And yet when I share this with 999/1000 people, even Christians, they just aren't impressed. Atheists are hostile, agnostics are bored and Christians are dismissive or annoyed.
Sadly more and more "Christians" are falling away to a secular ideology that's being adopted into religious institutions. Coupled with pastors and teachers who no longer teach the truth, but only find what people are interested in hearing that's trendy or politically correct, the church as a whole is falling into apostasy and eventually there will be no truth taught. Only personal interpretations and false doctrines of the pagans Jesus and not The Righteous and Holy Creater.
That's awesome! Glory to GOD!
I'm not annoyed or dismissive. That is truly amazing 🙏
Wow. I think you ought to contact and talk with the man in this video.
That's great! The creation declares the majesty of the Creator. I'm glad you found something to point your mind where your heart needs it to be. We worship our God in spirit and in truth, and when you can see truth with your mind, your spirit will necessarily lean into it.
It's sad that I can show this video to my friends, co-workers and family and they will either not watch it or still not believe it even if they watched it. This is my favorite series on Answers in Genesis, and probably my favorite resource for evidence, outside of the Bible, that Gods word is true. So we should obey it! Shalom!
Pearls before swine, sadly. If one is secure in answers that paint humanity as the ultimate authority, or hates the very idea of A God, then they’re incentivized to reject any evidence to the contrary. I know I was. But keep trying by example. You might change someone’s mind like mine was changed. But remember it’s between them and God, because we can’t (shouldn’t) do the thinking for other people.
"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled" - Mark Twain Let's show them the Truth (the gospel + scientific evidence) and let the Holy Spirit do the rest, it's what were called to do.
It's like explaining the ocean to a blind man and even if you drove him to the ocean he still can't see it.
@@WisdomThumbs I know this is true that ultimately it's up to God to bring people to the truth. And, even though this is true, I put an effort, however little effort it is, to help guide people in the right direction. For the most part I respect their free will and I don't beat anybody over the head with the Bible. I almost feel guilty about that, like I should be doing more. Lately, I am just open with my faith. I openly talk about my faith with others regardless of what they think or say. I'm called a Bible thumper, I'm called other names, I've been accused by my son's mom of being in a cult and "forcing" my son to be apart of the "cult". As an act of worship I've started learning Hebrew and I've also been teaching my son what I learn, and I'm open about it. I use what I've learned when I talk to my parents and repeat what I said translated into English. Over the "holiday" weekend I was asked what my plans were and I responded with "the same thing I always do, study my Bible and now I'm learning Hebrew". Someone asked why I decided to learn Hebrew, of all languages, and I responded "as an act of worship to God. It was the language of His ancestrally chosen people." This year I plan on celebrating the real Holy days, the Lords feasts. I've even invited my parents, who are theists but don't believe specifically in the true God. Lately I've stopped trying to "convert" anybody and instead I just live my walk alone with the Lord and occasionally pray for everyone's salvation. I'm leaving it up to Him, even though I feel like I should be helping.
You can show it to us, but all of it only reinforces the theories that back evolution to the point of near certainty.
I never liked the theory of evolution concerning long time line. However, I was having an issue with the ideal of creation. I know, Jesus would rather you be hot or cold and not luke warm. Because of this series, I no longer have issue with creation. Thank you.
There's no archeological evidence of Jesus ever even existing.
Truth shall set you free…
amen
The truth is something that can be demonstrated, and doesn't require faith.
Just the first page of the book of Genesis is impossible to believe for those who have unbiasly studied the bible and enough ancient history. For example: On the first page alone u have the ancient belief held by the Sumerians, Babylonians, AND Hebrews that the universe was a primordial sea of blue water prior to the gods creating the Earth BEFORE the SUN. Then, the gods created a glasslike SkyDome FIRMAMENT to separate the waters in space from the waters on the Earth. They came up with this firmament belief, because the Sumerians reasoned that there must be a huge glasslike dome above us stopping the blue water from falling. Why did they think there was blue water in space? Because they (and their god) had no clue about oxygen, so only a blue primordial sea made the best answer for them as to why the sky was blue. First page of Genesis clearly says the plants were created BEFORE the SUN 🌞 also, because they (and their god) had no clue the plants needed the SUN. It also tells about the ancient ignorant belief that the sun and moon were only created to be lights in the sky to separate day and night. They also thought these mere lights rotated around the earth. I could go on and on about other things like how they thought stars were only little lights used for lighting the earth at night and hung on the firmament like Christmas tree ornaments, which is why they didn't think the rest of the universe would take significantly much more time to create than the earth, but that's on page 2😉 If Genesis isn't credible, the whole Bible isn't credible, jesus isn't credible, etc etc. People who value believing true things will make sure what they believe is 100% credible. (Just do an image search for "ancient Hebrew cosmology beliefs" to get yourself started in verifying my claims)
@@drewdrake9130 thats true, that is why science brings forth glasses, better crops, housing, medicine, social structures,etc.. and religion does not, only a story that lacks evidence, and originated in times were ppl were oblivious of the nature of all things.. earthquake,plague,war,bad harvest ? = god angry !, sons born instead of daughters, good harvest, victory in battle ? = good blessed you ! Offcourse the lack of science in those days, made them wonder how things happend, things they couldn't understand(yet) so in order make sense of things, they attributed those things to celestial beings ( gods,demons,etc. ) Today we KNOW better !
@@drewdrake9130 50%+ of science cannot be reproduced, it's called "The crisis in reproduction". Literally cannot be demonstrated. Most studies aren't even tested, there's no money or clout in it. To put your faith in science is indeed an act of faith in human beings, who if you put your faith in fish-to-man evolution are assuming to be randomly adapted with no intellegence and subjective morals. So you would be putting your faith in chimps to be smarter than you.
i really like your work doctor, i apologise that i wont buy your books at this time, but i would like to thank you kindly for putting your discoveries up for free on youtube. God bless you all
I doubt the doctor is personally reading your comment
@@valor101arise i don't mind, it's not wasted effort :)
the human body is a marvel of engineering. For You formed my inward parts; You covered me in my mother's womb. I will praise You, for I am fearfully *and* wonderfully made; marvelous are Your works, and *that* my soul knows very well. My frame was not hidden from You, when I was made in secret, *and* skillfully wrought in the lowest parts of the earth. Your eyes saw my substance, being yet unformed. And in Your book they were all written, the days fashioned for me, when as *yet there were* none of them. Psalms 139:13-16.
You must be younger than 50.
@@kevinkelly2162 agreed , doesn’t quite read the same in that version
Just the first page of the book of Genesis is impossible to believe for those who have unbiasly studied the bible and enough ancient history. For example: On the first page alone u have the ancient belief held by the Sumerians, Babylonians, AND Hebrews that the universe was a primordial sea of blue water prior to the gods creating the Earth BEFORE the SUN. Then, the gods created a glasslike SkyDome FIRMAMENT to separate the waters in space from the waters on the Earth. They came up with this firmament belief, because the Sumerians reasoned that there must be a huge glasslike dome above us stopping the blue water from falling. Why did they think there was blue water in space? Because they (and their god) had no clue about oxygen, so only a blue primordial sea made the best answer for them as to why the sky was blue. First page of Genesis clearly says the plants were created BEFORE the SUN 🌞 also, because they (and their god) had no clue the plants needed the SUN. It also tells about the ancient ignorant belief that the sun and moon were only created to be lights in the sky to separate day and night. They also thought these mere lights rotated around the earth. I could go on and on about other things like how they thought stars were only little lights used for lighting the earth at night and hung on the firmament like Christmas tree ornaments, which is why they didn't think the rest of the universe would take significantly much more time to create than the earth, but that's on page 2😉 If Genesis isn't credible, the whole Bible isn't credible, jesus isn't credible, etc etc. People who value believing true things will make sure what they believe is 100% credible. (Just do an image search for "ancient Hebrew cosmology beliefs" to get yourself started in verifying my claims)
@@audieabel1261 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, *Let there be light* and there was light. {Genesis 1:1-3}
One of my favorite psalms
Thank you for this timely update on Genetic Science. I purchased Traced right after your initial introduction and have just started re-reading it. On a related note, during the mid-1960s I attended a Christian college. One day during our general assembly, a paleontologist from Dallas, Tx spoke to us about young earth creationism. As a result of that lecture, I purchased The Genesis Flood by John C Whitcomb Th.D. (Author), Henry M Morris (Author). It is a tremendous resource for anyone interested in in this subject.
That is interesting. Someone recently loaned me a book co-authored by John D. Morris (I believe) called "The Ark on Ararat". I wonder if they are related. It was a good book as well.
Any citation of the Genesis fable author?
@@222ableVelo So you are a fan of fiction. Do you read Harry Potter?
@@222ableVelo At what elevation is this mythical Ark located? I can't find anything Scientific on the subject
@@globalcoupledances Interesting because a search turns up the fact that it's pseudoscience. Are you for or against the mythical flood?
Keep the videos coming. I listen to every new one I see as well as the older ones I find
all people now came from one woman it was Eve
And where is the paper on this he published for peer review?
Earth is where the Biblical story begins. Salvation is what the story is about, and Jesus, the Word of God, is the story's hero.
Just the first page of the book of Genesis is impossible to believe for those who have unbiasly studied the bible and enough ancient history. For example: On the first page alone u have the ancient belief held by the Sumerians, Babylonians, AND Hebrews that the universe was a primordial sea of blue water prior to the gods creating the Earth BEFORE the SUN. Then, the gods created a glasslike SkyDome FIRMAMENT to separate the waters in space from the waters on the Earth. They came up with this firmament belief, because the Sumerians reasoned that there must be a huge glasslike dome above us stopping the blue water from falling. Why did they think there was blue water in space? Because they (and their god) had no clue about oxygen, so only a blue primordial sea made the best answer for them as to why the sky was blue. First page of Genesis clearly says the plants were created BEFORE the SUN 🌞 also, because they (and their god) had no clue the plants needed the SUN. It also tells about the ancient ignorant belief that the sun and moon were only created to be lights in the sky to separate day and night. They also thought these mere lights rotated around the earth. I could go on and on about other things like how they thought stars were only little lights used for lighting the earth at night and hung on the firmament like Christmas tree ornaments, which is why they didn't think the rest of the universe would take significantly much more time to create than the earth, but that's on page 2😉 If Genesis isn't credible, the whole Bible isn't credible, jesus isn't credible, etc etc. People who value believing true things will make sure what they believe is 100% credible. (Just do an image search for "ancient Hebrew cosmology beliefs" to get yourself started in verifying my claims)
Isn't it amazing that the main stream scientists want to rely on experimental results until they can't rely on the outcomes? It was always troubling that the scientific community wanted to apply the 2nd law of thermodynamics, entropy, selectively. A scientific law is just that, it isn't applicable in only some cases, no, it is applicable across disciplines and in all cases, or it wouldn't be a scientific law.
Beware of people who claim "I am science."
@@Freedomfred939 *The Science. He is The Science. Priase be the mask.
True!
But the scientific community doesn’t apply scientific laws selectively. Would love for a single example of that happening.
The first law of thermodynamics says that energy cannot be created, or destroyed. Therefore, obviously your God didn't create it, and lacks the ability to destroy it.
So excited to watch this ... Thank you for sharing this ! The biggest lie I was ever told was if you care for or go into science you don't believe in God which was in my youth in elementary school . My faith in God remained however I didn't veer towards much maybe as a result. I do have a great interest in genetics though . I just actually enjoy learning about it more so now at my current age . So this I am very sure will be a fabulous bit of information.
Only ignorant people will say when you study science you will not believe in God. It is in studying science that you discover God .
You are on the right path. “The day science begins to study non-physical phenomena, it will make more progress in one decade than in all the previous centuries of its existence.” ― Nikola Tesla The greatest scientists of history believed in God. Natural sciences started their decline only after Charles Darwin got his theory accepted 1859 (mainly for political reasons). The most remarkable scientists behind the birth of modern science such as Galileo Galilei, Robert Boyle, Michael Faraday, James Maxwell, Isaac Newton, Blaise Pascal and Louis Pasteur all believed in the genuine planning which can be observed in nature. ………………. ”Though these bodies may indeed continue in their orbits by the mere laws of gravity, yet they could by no means have at first derived the regular position of the orbits themselves from those laws. Thus, this most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the council and dominion of an intelligent and powerful being.” - General Scholium to the Principia (Isaac Newton)
Thanks so much for your hard work and diligence!!!
In grade school at a perochrial school, we were assigned verses to read after lunch. The unlucky ones got the begat verses. So hard. Those impossible names are making so much sense for me now.
PLEASE PRAY FOR MY SONS JEREMIAH AND AARON TO COME TO BELIEVE IN JESUS CHRIST AND GET SAVED IN JESUS CHRISTS NAME I PRAY AMEN
Great series and Traced was interesting read. So nice seeing so much work and research being done to dispel the evolutionary viewpoint. I just wish more people and especially scientists were open to it, but unfortunately there will always be those who are “willfully ignorant. “
'Willfully ignorant' would be one way to describe those people who have not researched this 'Traced' book properly. It is pseudoscience. Yes, I can provide plenty of citations to support this claim. Either that, or you could DIY.
Submit your findings for peer review and collect your Nobel Prize! What is stopping you?
I know why you guys are so fixated on the Nobel Prize. It's because you know the Nobel committee is a bunch of leftists that passionately _hate_ any truth that doesn't fit their narrative.
😂😂😂 He knows it is impossible.. Thats why
Brother, this is THE MOST interesting information I have ever experienced‼️ I'm praying for you and yours and I'm thanking God for the thirst for knowledge that He has given 🙌🕊🎉
Just the first page of the book of Genesis is impossible to believe for those who have unbiasly studied the bible and enough ancient history. For example: On the first page alone u have the ancient belief held by the Sumerians, Babylonians, AND Hebrews that the universe was a primordial sea of blue water prior to the gods creating the Earth BEFORE the SUN. Then, the gods created a glasslike SkyDome FIRMAMENT to separate the waters in space from the waters on the Earth. They came up with this firmament belief, because the Sumerians reasoned that there must be a huge glasslike dome above us stopping the blue water from falling. Why did they think there was blue water in space? Because they (and their god) had no clue about oxygen, so only a blue primordial sea made the best answer for them as to why the sky was blue. First page of Genesis clearly says the plants were created BEFORE the SUN 🌞 also, because they (and their god) had no clue the plants needed the SUN. It also tells about the ancient ignorant belief that the sun and moon were only created to be lights in the sky to separate day and night. They also thought these mere lights rotated around the earth. I could go on and on about other things like how they thought stars were only little lights used for lighting the earth at night and hung on the firmament like Christmas tree ornaments, which is why they didn't think the rest of the universe would take significantly much more time to create than the earth, but that's on page 2😉 If Genesis isn't credible, the whole Bible isn't credible, jesus isn't credible, etc etc. People who value believing true things will make sure what they believe is 100% credible. (Just do an image search for "ancient Hebrew cosmology beliefs" to get yourself started in verifying my claims)
@@audieabel1261 should actually look into creationism because they have explanations for the questions that you have. Instead you just assume that the Bible isn't true and that shows where your heart is.
@Dustin Fairchild who are u talking to Dustin? If it's me, I can assure u that you're wrong. Nobody WANTS to discover their family is wrong about their beliefs. It makes things much more complicated and dramatic when u have to admit to yourself that the beliefs taught to u as a child are wrong. ExMuslims and exMormons are treated extremely bad by their families. I lost some relatives, but I'm lucky because my family isn't extremely orthodox. If u know something is 1000% false, u can't believe it. It's that simple.
@@inthelightofhisglory9614 audie able seems to be a bot. No actual interaction, just the same post copy and pasted in a dozen threads.
@@maxpeck1962 that's quite possible
That he created just one of each of us just like there is just one of him is AMAZING. God is AWESOME! 🤯💖👍🆒️🙌
And we each have our own individual finger print like name tags. Even identical twins with 100% of the same dna have different finger prints!
At 53, I've become "Weary" of (though still do it every day) of the only prayer I pray. "GOD, I believe, help me through my disbelief ". These past few years have seen me through a lockdown, a pan"doomic", and FINALLY allows me to try DEEPER PRAYER through YOUR "FULLER" EVIDENCE. While I am still uncertain, I guess THIS VIDEO may well be defined as an "Answer" to my previous prayer. Wonder what answers my NEXT prayer will provide. Keep in mind, I am an INDIVIDUAL having a PERSONAL "EXPERIENCE". TOOK ME 4 DECADES to realise that's whT being "me" was about.... Opening up, and Accepting were KEY
This is the age where scientists discover the craftsmanship of the creator our science was just not good enough before
They are not discovering they are accepting...no longer able to control the results of experiments the darwinian groupies can not and will not release themselves from the circular firing squad they so wantonly put humanity in front used as cover from their own hypocritical hot lead... darwinian cancer😮
Greeting from Germany 🇩🇪 and thank you for your great work!
I tell people about Jesus and his Finished work on the Cross and if they don't want to hear what I have to say I move on. Be strong brother's & sister's, Jesus is coming back for ALL believers very soon.
Very soon.... As said for nearly two thousand years now
Excellent video! As an uninitiated person to the basics of DNA mutation rates, videos 11-15 gave the answers to basic questions I had when deciding whether to purchase his Traced book. Earlier videos were good, but now I can replay those and better understand, and visualize, how the data Dr. Jeanson presented is predictable using a Young Earth view. The decade history of research and his papers in this video were very interesting. The future of DNA sequencing with higher coverage (video 11) will be fascinating. We need Dr Jeanson et al. to keep abreast of that data to make sure it is not filtered, misleadingly, to agree with evolutionist's view (video 11).
Thank God for people like Dr. Jeanson. I look forward to seeing him publish an article in a peer-reviewed journal to shake up the status quo and make people realize how science proves the Bible.
I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you.... He's not gonna be able to get this peer reviewed. Creationist have NEVER succeeded in getting any of their claims peer reviewed.
@@Jewonastick Then it's high time they did. When their evidence shakes the very foundation of evolutionism, then it should be preached as widely as possible.
Just the first page of the book of Genesis is impossible to believe for those who have unbiasly studied the bible and enough ancient history. For example: On the first page alone u have the ancient belief held by the Sumerians, Babylonians, AND Hebrews that the universe was a primordial sea of blue water prior to the gods creating the Earth BEFORE the SUN. Then, the gods created a glasslike SkyDome FIRMAMENT to separate the waters in space from the waters on the Earth. They came up with this firmament belief, because the Sumerians reasoned that there must be a huge glasslike dome above us stopping the blue water from falling. Why did they think there was blue water in space? Because they (and their god) had no clue about oxygen, so only a blue primordial sea made the best answer for them as to why the sky was blue. First page of Genesis clearly says the plants were created BEFORE the SUN 🌞 also, because they (and their god) had no clue the plants needed the SUN. It also tells about the ancient ignorant belief that the sun and moon were only created to be lights in the sky to separate day and night. They also thought these mere lights rotated around the earth. I could go on and on about other things like how they thought stars were only little lights used for lighting the earth at night and hung on the firmament like Christmas tree ornaments, which is why they didn't think the rest of the universe would take significantly much more time to create than the earth, but that's on page 2😉 If Genesis isn't credible, the whole Bible isn't credible, jesus isn't credible, etc etc. People who value believing true things will make sure what they believe is 100% credible. (Just do an image search for "ancient Hebrew cosmology beliefs" to get yourself started in verifying my claims)...
@@audieabel1261 Maybe you should bring this up with Dr. Jeanson. As far as I'm concerned, this video should dispel any doubt that the word of God teaches us everything we need to know about "science".
@@paulthompson9668 Have you read any critiques of others in this scientific field, concerning this evidence you feel shakes the very foundations of evolution?
Thank you for sharing all your knowledge! I believe what you say! May God bless you and your family!
So you believe me when I say that turtles are actually part of the German politics? I would hope not. I don't just believe stuff because I read it, or someone else says it's true with no evidence but they're say so. That's crazy and that's how a lot of disappointments start.
@@IbanezShreds67 Why are you saying random things about turtles and acting like it makes a point. He's done the research and showed the evidence. He's got enough evidence to fill a book 😆
@@babybird4255 Yeah okay 👍, 😆😆😆😆😆😂😂🤣 you can tell how much I care right? Lol 🤣🤣
@@IbanezShreds67 emojis don't compensate for not knowing anything. They also don't cover up that you are fuming right now. I can read you like a book 📖 📖 📖
@@babybird4255 Yeah 👍 okay . You can read me like a book, what and who am I and what do I like in life? Or go to bed and mind your business, and worry about something that's worth it, I personally don't care guy. I'm just on KZhead looking and posting. Don't really care, but if you wanna believe different, than so be it.
"WE WILL SHOW YOU A FACT.. BUT YOU WILL NEVER KNOW ME THAT NO ONE SHOULD LIE" THE WORLD SAID AND+AMEN
Any updates on when we might see the responses to specific critiques?
Incredible information. Thank you answers in genesis!
Thank you for all this work & for keeping the faith.
I will pass this video on, not sure of reactions. I myself need to listen it more than once. Lots of information. Halleluyah, please stay with the Lord no matter what happens, as it's getting harder. May The Lord keeps you continually safe and on the top of your discoveries 🙏😇
I think these topics are good but for the majority of people maybe a much more condensed version should be available.
we used to call that....The Readers Digest version....
Here is the condensed version: every human alive in 2024 is related to all others within 15 generations,or 500 years, or less We are 1 family
Modern Quantum Physics has shown that reality is based on probability: A statistical impossibility is defined as “a probability that is so low as to not be worthy of mentioning. Sometimes it is quoted as 1/10^50 although the cutoff is inherently arbitrary. Although not truly impossible the probability is low enough so as to not bear mention in a Rational, Reasonable argument." The probability of finding one particular atom out of all of the atoms in the universe has been estimated to be 1/10^80. The probability of just one (1) functional 150 amino acid protein chain forming by chance is 1/10^164. It has been calculated that the probability of DNA forming by chance is 1/10^119,000. The probability of random chance protein-protein linkages in a cell is 1/10^79,000,000,000. Based on just these three cellular components, it would be far more Rational and Reasonable to conclude that the cell was not formed by un-directed random natural processes. Note: Abiogenesis Hypothesis posits that un-directed random natural processes, i.e. random chance formation, of molecules led to living organisms. Natural selection has no effect on individual atoms and molecules on the micro scale in a prebiotic environment. (*For reference, peptides/proteins can vary in size from 3 amino acid chains to 34,000 amino acid chains. Some scientists consider 300-400 amino acid protein chains to be the average size. There are 42,000,000 protein molecules in just one (1) simple cell, each protein requiring precise assembly. There are approx. 30,000,000,000,000 cells in the human body.) Of all the physical laws and constants, just the Cosmological Constant alone is tuned to a level of 1/10^120; not to mention the fine-tuning of the Mass-Energy distribution of early universe which is 1/10^10^123. Therefore, in the fine-tuning argument, it would be more Rational and Reasonable to conclude that the multi-verse is not the correct answer. On the other hand, it has been scientifically proven numerous times that Consciousness does indeed collapse the wave function to cause information waves of probability/potentiality to become particle/matter with 1/1 probability. A rational and reasonable person could therefore conclude that the answer is consciousness. A "Miracle" is considered to be an event with a probability of occurrence of 1/10^6. Abiogenesis, RNA World Hypothesis, and Multiverse would all far, far, far exceed any "Miracle". Yet, these extremely irrational and unreasonable hypotheses are what some of the world’s top scientists ‘must’ believe in because of a prior commitment to a strictly arbitrary, subjective, biased, narrow, limiting, materialistic ideology / worldview. Every idea, number, concept, thought, theory, mathematical equation, abstraction, qualia, etc. existing within and expressed by anyone is "Immaterial" or "Non-material". The very idea or concept of "Materialism" is an immaterial entity and by it's own definition does not exist. Modern science seems to be stuck in archaic, subjective, biased, incomplete ideologies that have inadequately attempted to define the "nature of reality" or the "reality of nature" for millennia. A Paradigm Shift in ‘Science’ is needed for humanity to advance. A major part of this Science Paradigm Shift would be the formal acknowledgment by the scientific community of the existence of "Immaterial" or "Non-material" entities as verified and confirmed by observation of the universe and discoveries in Quantum Physics.)
41:23 Very good, Moses! Loved your longish essay! Fine tuning is also necessary in engineering; imitating God gives good results! When you engineer something, you choose adequate materials, the finer, the better, but what the market needs impinges. A rocket engine requires the best. A motorcycle engine for average use needs less exotic materials. Then there’s the design which necessarily preceded it and finally the careful assembly of the system. In summary, - adequate design, adequate materials, and careful assembly are necessary for adequate performance. Toyota engines would be an example in the automotive world.
John 3: 6,7 “That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.” “Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.”
Can you please define the word - spirit - in a way that would differentiate it from the imaginary? This way I can understand that what you're talking about is something more than imagination.
Just the first page of the book of Genesis is impossible to believe for those who have unbiasly studied the bible and enough ancient history. For example: On the first page alone u have the ancient belief held by the Sumerians, Babylonians, AND Hebrews that the universe was a primordial sea of blue water prior to the gods creating the Earth BEFORE the SUN. Then, the gods created a glasslike SkyDome FIRMAMENT to separate the waters in space from the waters on the Earth. They came up with this firmament belief, because the Sumerians reasoned that there must be a huge glasslike dome above us stopping the blue water from falling. Why did they think there was blue water in space? Because they (and their god) had no clue about oxygen, so only a blue primordial sea made the best answer for them as to why the sky was blue. First page of Genesis clearly says the plants were created BEFORE the SUN 🌞 also, because they (and their god) had no clue the plants needed the SUN. It also tells about the ancient ignorant belief that the sun and moon were only created to be lights in the sky to separate day and night. They also thought these mere lights rotated around the earth. I could go on and on about other things like how they thought stars were only little lights used for lighting the earth at night and hung on the firmament like Christmas tree ornaments, which is why they didn't think the rest of the universe would take significantly much more time to create than the earth, but that's on page 2😉 If Genesis isn't credible, the whole Bible isn't credible, jesus isn't credible, etc etc. People who value believing true things will make sure what they believe is 100% credible. (Just do an image search for "ancient Hebrew cosmology beliefs" to get yourself started in verifying my claims)
@audie abel didn't nasa find water in space? A Qasar spews water as it's inhaling gas and dust. There's actual water vapor in the milky way but most of it is frozen in ice. So why would it be something silly that would be apart of the origins of creation?
@@carlyrios8297 please do as mentioned in my comment and learn more about the cosmology beliefs of ancient Hebrews by searching "ancient Hebrew cosmology beliefs". Then, click on image search and u will understand better. Reread my comments if needed. They believed the sky was blue because of a cosmic sea. Not water vapor or water on other planets. No planets, no space. A cosmic sea. Learn more, then get back to me. Thanks for your effort and attention tho. 🙂
@audie abel I know the bible and interpretations can be different. From what I've learned and studied it isn't what most people say in a limited perspective. In the Hebrew perspective the waters above the heavens make sense and actually explains the earthly flood and the creation of the rainbow. A sort of water dome. In the beginning it absolutely makes sense why it would be different from the earth we know today. Most people don't take everything the bible says into account by taking it out of context and only want to understand it within their own framework. Because simply you don't believe these events happened. Which is fine, but why be so arrogant about your own beleifs? You weren't there, you didn't see it? You have to have just as much faith it didn't happen as much as I have faith it did.
Makes ps 1 blindingly clear.Thank you brother ! Glad I sucked at science at school ! (U.K.).
Wow! Super awesome! I'm not in no means a scientist nor a specialist, but this makes sooooo much sense and Dr. Jeanson's teaching is really easy to understand, straight forward and clear... Thank you AIG!
Yes you are,every one is a scientists in you have senses and a sound mind. You are an expert about yourself.
It’s impossible for me to ever disbelieve because of the monumental evidence contradicting evolution that answers in Genesis has shown me
There is no evidence contradicting evolution. It is in fact one of the best-supported theories in science.
@@dinohall2595 still disproven after almost 200 years, if theists have answers and evidence it could change the world, but they don't
@@dinohall2595 there is absolutely no evidence for evolution, none, zero, it's a religion that worships randomness and time, a cult, that is taught as truth, what a bad joke.
@@dinohall2595 lol no.
@@joshuathomas512 people NEVER deny the obvious. That’s why everyone on earth believed the truth about covid from the very beginning and nobody is still deluded today
البروفيسور جينسون من افضل العلماء التاريخ والحضارات والحمض النووي البشري في العالم وفي أمريكا بالمرصاد على كل كذاب أشر في العالم كلامه صحيح حضاريا وتاريخيا وعلميا وجغرافيا
Would you say the pairs of chromosomes in Adam are based on some logical/theological/spiritual model?
I have a question for Dr. Jeanson. I haven't watched the whole video yet, but around 22:00 he is talking about mitochondrial mutations vs. autosomal mutations. It seems that autosomal mutation rates could pose some issues for a young earth model (maybe he addresses this later in the video but I haven't finished watching yet); this is where my question/proposition comes in... Question: Would it be reasonable to hypothesize that autosomal DNA, being inherited from both parents, could be subject to an exponential mutation rate function? Couldn't it be reasonable hypothesized and investigated that as mutations accumulate in autosomal DNA, the rate of mutation increases in some proportional correlation to the total number of accumulated mutations? - For example, the function of total number of autosomal mutations over time (time recorded in # of generations) - and subsequently the rate of change in mutations over time (# of generations) could look something like this: f(x)= (c)X^2 + C (Total Accumulated Mutations over Time(# of Generations)) f'(x)= 2(c)X (Rate of Change of Mutations over Time(# of Generations)) - Where X = Time in # of Generations; f(x) = # of Autosomal Mutations; f'(x) = Rate of Change in (# of Mutations/Generation); C = Initial number of Mutations of the common ancestor; and (c) = the Coefficient of Mutation with respect to Time(# of generations) This could produce/be correlated with another function --> Mutation Rate/Total # of Accumulated Mutations (Mutation Rate as a function of Total # of Mutations) Anyway, this is just food for thought for Dr. Jeanson or anyone else that might be interested in this type of analysis. Mostly I am just curious myself, as I am fairly uneducated in Biology. Love the video's! This is AMAZING research!
Can’t follow the math but higher rates of mutation wouldn’t help evolution because the mutations have to be beneficial. In reality the mutation rate at see puts a cap on the human race’s viability at about 300 generations before error catastrophe. Higher mutation rates would only make long timescales that much less plausible
He does address this later in the video; keep watching. :) This is also addressed in depth in his book Replacing Darwin. Basically, it makes more sense that god created differences in Adam's 2 sets of chromosomes, so that he could father a diversity of children rather than simply cloning. So while mitochondrial (and Y-chromosome) DNA differences are only the result of mutation, most of the autosomal differences were created, with some additional differences from mutation. Even the distribution of "copies" of each gene (called alleles) matches this model. The vast majority of gene locations are found in 2 varieties (alleles) among humans distributed across the globe; in cases where there are 3 or more alleles, the frequency of the 3rd or 4th allele is very small in comparison. Just what you would expect if the 2 dominant alleles were created that way, and the other variants arose from random mutations in the last few thousand years.
@@cosmictreason2242 Oh yeah, I wasn't arguing for plausibility of evolution in my math at all. I overwhelmingly believe in a young earth timescale; due to the vast amount of evidence in multiple fields of science that point to that conclusion WITHOUT narrative rescuing devices. I was just trying to think of a plausible mathematical function that could account for why autosomal DNA mutations are higher than what we would expect for a young earth timescale. Autosomal DNA is a much larger sequence of DNA, and it gets copied twice per generation (once per parent), and there would likely need to be a correlation function between the two sets of DNA (since each set can mutate independently and mutations would not likely happen in the same area of each DNA strand). This means at the very least, the mutation rate for autosomal DNA would be twice as fast as that for a piece of DNA that is only inherited from a single parent (1 copy). Taking into account that there are probably some unknown (unknown to me anyway) interactions between the two inherited segments of DNA that have independently accumulated mutations, I would assume this probably increases effective mutation rate further than just the minimum factor of 2.
@@maxpeck1962 Oh okay, yeah that would make sense from a biblical perspective. I'm about to finish the video now, so I guess I will see how he addresses this. I was just wondering/proposing a function for a natural process that could account for the increased number of mutations that are found in autosomal DNA over mitochondrial DNA or Y-chromosome DNA. I'm not too well versed in biology, but I love math and science, and Dr. Jeanson does and AMAZING job at approaching scientific data in an objective manner and trusting it will prove the bible.
@@maxpeck1962 I finished the video, that makes much more sense now. It would only make sense that the first two people each had 2 unique sets of autosomal DNA (4 unique sets total) and therefore could produce an extremely diverse range of offspring. Then their children would also be extremely genetically diverse and could also further produce healthy children with each other. No exponential equations needed at that point! That would also explain why God didn't forbid marriages with closer family members until around 2,500 years later. That's when the DNA sequences of family trees would have started to become more similar and cause genetic disorders between close relatives.
Thank you for showing to me the working of a true scientific mind.
Awesome, Dr. Jeanson!
Have these rates of mutational changes been adjusted for the various DNA repair pathways? Also, what about offsetting the calculations by discounting the majority of non germ cells from that mutation count, as these mutated cells will have zero influence on descendant genetics? Thank you in advance.
Mutations here and mutations there ... A mutation at best is a two-edged sword. At best, that is. Usually they are only destructive. In their concocted mutation theory, evolutionists try to hide the problem of genome not being able to generate (macro)evolution. In their scientifically unproven theory, mutations allegedly bring new information to the genome thus creating new body plans i.e. evolution. This theory is against everything that science knows of mutations. Scientists know this well: ”Because the biggest part of mutations - if they have any effect - are harmful, their overall effect must be harmful.” [Crow, J., The high spontaneous mutation rate: Is it a health risk? Proc Natl Acad Sci 94:8380-8386, 1997.] Of the same opinion are also Keightley and Lynch: ”Major part of mutations are harmful.” [Keightley, P. & Lynch, M., Toward a realistic model of mutations affecting fitness. Evolution 57:683-685, 2003.] Gerrish and Lenski estimate that the proportion of useful mutations vs. harmful mutations is 1:1000 000. [Gerrish P.J., & Lenski, R., The fate of competing beneficial mutations in an asexual population. Gentetica 102(103):127-144, 1998.] Ohta, Kimura, Elena and others have estimated, that the proportion of useful mutations is so low that it can’t be statistically measured! [Ohta, T., Molecular evolution and polymorphism. Natl Inst Genet Mishima Japan 76:148-167, 1977.] [Kimura, M., Model of effective neutral mutaitons in which selective constraint is incorporated. PNAS 76:3440-3444, 1979.] [Elena, S.F. et al, Distribution of fitness effects caused by random insertion mutations in E. Coli. Gentetica 102/103:349-358, 1998.] Science doesn't know any evolutionary beneficial mutations that could transform the body plan of any given organism i.e. generate evolution and new life forms. All known mutations have been non-structural like sickle-cell mutation, lactose tolerance, wingless flies, antibiotic resistant bacteria, metabolic changes, colour changes etc. These are subjectively beneficial only in right conditions: Sickle-cell mutation wards off malaria but if both parents have it, the child dies. Wingless fly survives only on windy island. Antibiotic resistant bacteria doesn't survive outside of hospital environment etc. When we add the fact that DNA has the mechanism that deletes ALL mutations it finds, we understand the impossibility of mutations generating new life forms i.e. generating (macro)evolution.
Even if one could disprove the entirety of scientific knowledge from the past millenia, he still wouldn't be any closer to substantiating his outlandish "god/creator" claim. And I expect nothing less as proof as you demand from science: a clear hypothesis, evidence substantiating it, and an explanation of HOW it all works.
We must have a love for the truth. Keep up the good work.
God warns about adding or taking away from His Word. And adding even one more hour to six days of creation leads to a form of evolution and DECEPTION.
I get where skin color come from but Variations in the form of the human face how did that work after the Tower of Babel?. Was it the inbreeding process that brought certain genes to the forefront.. that made the Asian peoples eyes different or the black hair curly etc? Thx you
I am NOT an atheist, but I am a scientist. I'm afraid to say, unfortunately, the inability of the speaker to explain his hypothesis in an elegant and logical way making the theory probably not even being considered by the main stream to give a serious reply.
Men lived for 900 years? You believe that?
I Love this! I will continue to watch and see!
“Watch and see” the un-cherry-picked data that debunks his “narrative”.
As a follower of Yeshua, and a science nerd I appreciate others testing the status quote thought of Science.? How do you test a YEC model? How to explain: half life of elements, ocean floor spreading, speed of light in relation to galaxies, soil formation, KT boundary, plate tectonics, marine fossils such as trilobites all over the world’s land masses, to name a few with a YEC model? Is it fair to say all these disciplines need a testable hypothesis to account to its present state? Shalom
What you are assuming, is for YEC and Evolution sequencing that each starts from the exact same genetic starting point with an Adam and Eve. Then you apply the evolution and creation simulations. Of course you get these results.
"Knowing" is proof enough that a Supreme Being is out there,... He is beyond our understanding. Even the greatest mind that ever existed was at one time smaller than a grain of sand. The cells know how to create a whole person from a tiny two-celled organism created at conception - how do they know where to go in order to create eyes, a liver, arms, a heart, a womb, ears, a brain? How do they know?
If no one could answer your question, do you think that would count as evidence that your particular god was the cause?
@@drewdrake9130 There can only be one answer: Someone tells these cells where to go - they certainly don't have a mind of their own. Denying that is like saying that computer programs write themselves. Besides, the heavens are more than sufficient proof that God is out there somewhere. The odds of an accidental positioning of our solar system and stars and galaxies (and what-have-you) as we see them are simply impossible. It's like saying that the wine bottle sitting on my dining table got there by itself - even if it were actually alive, it could never get there by itself - it has no legs, or arms, or wings.
@@violinhunter2 I don't understand, was your answer to my question - No -? I was asking a very reasonable question, concerning what you had asked, and whether you thought another's ignorance counted as evidence for your conclusion.
@@therick363 What gaps? There are no gaps. There can never be gaps. A thing is either a horse or a toad. When has anyone seen a fish turn into a donkey?
@@violinhunter2 How exactly do you tell the difference between your God causing something to happen, and something happening naturally in a fashion you just don't understand? You would need a method for telling the difference between these two things, before you could rationally put forward that something was caused by your God.
God bless you AIG 🙂🙏✝️
So through DNA if we can trace to the beginning. Would that make it possible to calculate into the future how many mutations over time may make a species nonviable and disappear.
this is extremely interesting.....hopefully someone will provide an answer...
I'm a Christian first and a scientist second. I bend modern research to fit my beliefs. Anything that does not fit is discarded. Like all of cosmology.
Satire
Take me to your leader 👽
Wonder-busting truth, I love it!
It's been a month since I asked any theist to demonstrate the existence of their supposed gods(s) and everyone of them has failed. Why is that, why do all theists fail in their burden of proof?
Same reason atheists aren’t able to disprove if they carry the burden of proof.
"why do all theists fail in their burden of proof?" Because they have nothing but logical fallacies at their disposal.
Please number the videos in the title/description. Start here with #15
would definitely help me out.
Could you please put the link to the prior episode in description?
Lol, you remind me so much of myself. How good it feels not to feel so alone at my work. I'm a philosopher.
I'd like you to think seriously about whether women had always been with a one like one another. I write on onoskelis, & of hints in the bible, ones written and one's been omitted. I wonder that with our all only pairing like one another, the scorpions in revelations 9 would be what women when not seeing 3-5 are revealed as .. as either 'wifey' or 'nesty. You know, we recently discovered Darwin was wrong about males and so far I have not found a man willing to face or raise the implications. many of the ~ 69% if women killed being killed by their partners, are killed upon trying to leave their abusive men. For this I don't think I will wait for a man to do the math for the two of us. I write a written more self explanatory version made of intertwining fragments of truth. A makeshift rod. *Shudders*.
.. when women had seen more than a one man, could the mitochondrial DNA have diluted the male DNA till we then began all pairing like one another? Treatment of the Jews & onoskelis looks to me like seeing 3-5 had been wiped out . Why do the ten commandments look like . 'Don't borrow, or take from, or run from, or talk about when he's behind closed doors or cheat on a man. Love your marriage, a holy relationship/god". PS. Don't think you know your mother like another does." (Wonders to self a tick ..Might God had been the functional tribe?)
God sure made things in a way that makes us really work hard to see His hand in our cells !! ❤️🙏❤️🙏
Just the first page of the book of Genesis is impossible to believe for those who have unbiasly studied the bible and enough ancient history. For example: On the first page alone u have the ancient belief held by the Sumerians, Babylonians, AND Hebrews that the universe was a primordial sea of blue water prior to the gods creating the Earth BEFORE the SUN. Then, the gods created a glasslike SkyDome FIRMAMENT to separate the waters in space from the waters on the Earth. They came up with this firmament belief, because the Sumerians reasoned that there must be a huge glasslike dome above us stopping the blue water from falling. Why did they think there was blue water in space? Because they (and their god) had no clue about oxygen, so only a blue primordial sea made the best answer for them as to why the sky was blue. First page of Genesis clearly says the plants were created BEFORE the SUN 🌞 also, because they (and their god) had no clue the plants needed the SUN. It also tells about the ancient ignorant belief that the sun and moon were only created to be lights in the sky to separate day and night. They also thought these mere lights rotated around the earth. I could go on and on about other things like how they thought stars were only little lights used for lighting the earth at night and hung on the firmament like Christmas tree ornaments, which is why they didn't think the rest of the universe would take significantly much more time to create than the earth, but that's on page 2😉 If Genesis isn't credible, the whole Bible isn't credible, jesus isn't credible, etc etc. People who value believing true things will make sure what they believe is 100% credible. (Just do an image search for "ancient Hebrew cosmology beliefs" to get yourself started in verifying my claims)..
Psalms 139:16 KJV
@@kathleenking47 Psalm 137:9 Happy is the one who takes your babies and smashes their brains out onto the rocks.😬
@@audieabel1261 I see you are copy and pasting the exact same comment. Why?
@@shadowfax9177 I am a fisher of men. I sometimes copy and paste my own comments to save time. I do my best to try to find those who may be humble and mature enough to challenge their beliefs and grow as a result. I also try to improve my methods of getting past cognitive bias and cognitive dissonance. I give my time to those with the most potential and ignore anyone who shows too much immaturity. Thank you for asking questions instead of making false assumptions shadowfax 👍
Absurdity on parade.
Has there been a written up response to this? And them a rebuttal
Is there some peer reviewed papers that I can look into?
No - this channel cannot provide evidence for claims, without your voluntary willful suspension of disbelief.
When I took an anatomy & physiology course in college I saw the handiwork, one might say the fingerprints, of God, even in my intro to general biology in could see in a single cell, animal or plant, GOD DID THIS!!!
I agree.
Just the first page of the book of Genesis is impossible to believe for those who have unbiasly studied the bible and enough ancient history. For example: On the first page alone u have the ancient belief held by the Sumerians, Babylonians, AND Hebrews that the universe was a primordial sea of blue water prior to the gods creating the Earth BEFORE the SUN. Then, the gods created a glasslike SkyDome FIRMAMENT to separate the waters in space from the waters on the Earth. They came up with this firmament belief, because the Sumerians reasoned that there must be a huge glasslike dome above us stopping the blue water from falling. Why did they think there was blue water in space? Because they (and their god) had no clue about oxygen, so only a blue primordial sea made the best answer for them as to why the sky was blue. First page of Genesis clearly says the plants were created BEFORE the SUN 🌞 also, because they (and their god) had no clue the plants needed the SUN. It also tells about the ancient ignorant belief that the sun and moon were only created to be lights in the sky to separate day and night. They also thought these mere lights rotated around the earth. I could go on and on about other things like how they thought stars were only little lights used for lighting the earth at night and hung on the firmament like Christmas tree ornaments, which is why they didn't think the rest of the universe would take significantly much more time to create than the earth, but that's on page 2😉 If Genesis isn't credible, the whole Bible isn't credible, jesus isn't credible, etc etc. People who value believing true things will make sure what they believe is 100% credible. (Just do an image search for "ancient Hebrew cosmology beliefs" to get yourself started in verifying my claims)
@@audieabel1261 I never argue from the Bible about any of this. The Bible account is an allegory. It has nothing to do with my science beliefs, but nice straw man!
@@audieabel1261 Now why don’t you explain the primary structure of a single protein and the importance of the sequence of amino acids to its secondary and tertiary structures and its function. What are the odds of a single 150 amino acid protein forming in the proper sequence spontaneously? I’m just talking about the sequence problem, not the chemistry. There are 20 amino acids to choose from, and you want a 150 amino acid protein. (The sequence matters to its function. A single point mutation of many proteins result in serious diseases. So the sequence has to be determined by the DNA code. Pretend that there’s no code). What are the odds of a sequence forming correctly? It’s one in 20 raised to the power of 150. Comprende mi amigo? That’s a zero chance. Zero, like you.
@@audieabel1261 I just read the genesis account again. It said that God first created light, then later he created the sun and the moon. But they already spoke of day vs night by the time they mentioned the sun and moon: “God made two great lights-the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning-the fourth day.” Obviously they knew about the sun creating night versus daylight, so this ordering of events could be a simple reiteration of the creation of the sun in the first sentence of genesis with the reiteration in verse 17 and the additional creation of the moon. It didn’t read like a new thing created when they mentioned the sun again. The whole account is an allegory anyway. It proves or disproves nothing! The firmament they called “the sky”. Read it again! There is a sky. I don’t get the impression that they had a concept of a glass dome lol. The part about plants needing the sun is stupid because the first thing created, genius, was LIGHT! The Bible is not the basis for the argument about abiogenesis, but even if it were, the account of creation in the Bible is not bad! It’s actually kind of good. Light preceded everything. That makes a lot of sense.
I am an atheist. I am definitely not being driven crazy by this silliness.
Mind blown! I watched ALL your videos during pastc2 yesterday. I am a lay person so I have to frequently rewind and try to understand. But the adam eve info blows me away. They were diff,... Adam's mitochondrial DNA not passed... wow! Explains so much
Is not a surprise that Adam' s mitochondrial DNA did not pass. Because God said that, "Eve is the mother of all living humans." If only read the Bible, & believe God, everything makes sense.
If you have to use deception to make your point, how truthful is it?
8:09 The evo community has a pantheon of gods at this point
32:40 such a beautiful point. If genetic differences were entirely from random mutation, there would be very few functional genes compared to a HUGE array of nonfunctional genes.
do you know what recessive and dominant genes are?
@@zqrza Recessive and dominant genes are known e.g. for their functions in adaptive variation. Adaptive variation is connected to speciation. Speciation is connected to natural selection. Natural selection generates speciation. Speciation however can't generate evolution. In fact it generates devolution. Natural selection COULD produce evolution if it COULD deliver to the survivors such qualitatively new genes that are not already found in the population. Natural selection however delivers nothing, it just exterminates individuals who have less suitable genes for the environment where they live. The winners must go on with the genes they have. In the long run they can copulate only with other winners (the less fit are dead or become too rare) which means that on population level everybody's genome gets specialized i.e. impoverished. The "weak genes" become recessive and finally disappear with their hosts. This is adaptation, not evolution. It is good for a while, but the specialized genomes make a more one-sided gene pool than the gene pool of the original population. When the living conditions change again, the highly specialized population suffers and goes extinct. We can observe that natural selection creates adaptation through gene loss, through devolution not evolution. That's why millions of species have already gone extinct and this process continues incessantly. All ”evolutionary” processes are in fact devolution processes, as each new subspecies has less genetic variety than its stem species (like in dealing a deck of cards). This fact makes impossible for any subspecies to create the path that would lead to new taxonomic genera or new taxonomic families i.e. to evolution.
Awesome presentation.
Anyone who has read Traced and/or Replacing Darwin? Can you say if the kindle versions are "ok" with respect to viewing the charts and graphs? Thanks.
I started reading Traced in ebook format before they added the hyperlinks between text and figures. It was annoying but still readable. Should be much easier with the hyperlinks added. I would still recommend the book over the ebook (call me old fashioned, but I like to keep a finger in the figure section), and I would recommend the 2020 video series to complement the book. It's easier to follow the content when it's in presentation format with laser pointers animating the figures while he talks.
Very strong theory, let the evidence come in, I'll be following this closely 😀👍
Just the first page of the book of Genesis is impossible to believe for those who have unbiasly studied the bible and enough ancient history. For example: On the first page alone u have the ancient belief held by the Sumerians, Babylonians, AND Hebrews that the universe was a primordial sea of blue water prior to the gods creating the Earth BEFORE the SUN. Then, the gods created a glasslike SkyDome FIRMAMENT to separate the waters in space from the waters on the Earth. They came up with this firmament belief, because the Sumerians reasoned that there must be a huge glasslike dome above us stopping the blue water from falling. Why did they think there was blue water in space? Because they (and their god) had no clue about oxygen, so only a blue primordial sea made the best answer for them as to why the sky was blue. First page of Genesis clearly says the plants were created BEFORE the SUN 🌞 also, because they (and their god) had no clue the plants needed the SUN. It also tells about the ancient ignorant belief that the sun and moon were only created to be lights in the sky to separate day and night. They also thought these mere lights rotated around the earth. I could go on and on about other things like how they thought stars were only little lights used for lighting the earth at night and hung on the firmament like Christmas tree ornaments, which is why they didn't think the rest of the universe would take significantly much more time to create than the earth, but that's on page 2😉 If Genesis isn't credible, the whole Bible isn't credible, jesus isn't credible, etc etc. People who value believing true things will make sure what they believe is 100% credible. (Just do an image search for "ancient Hebrew cosmology beliefs" to get yourself started in verifying my claims)
@@audieabel1261 you should start listening more to creationists and get the answers from them instead of just outright assuming that the Bible isn't true
@@audieabel1261 You demonstrate a very strong atheist bias in your reading of scripture. You will find, in the first sentence of that first page, that it says "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth". You are completely disregarding the fact that God is enacting this process. Essentially what is happening here is that you are assuming a naturalistic explanation, then conclude that your naturalistic explanation is incompatible with the truth, and therefore you discard the truth, and since the truth is now gone, you consider that your naturalistic explanation is the only remaining option.
@@SimpleAmadeus yes, I must be the one who is exhibiting a strong bias and having problems with assuming and disregarding. Have a good life. 👋
@@audieabel1261 This fallacy you're committing now is called "tu quoque". It is extra fallacious because you have not provided any evidence that I drew my conclusion based on bias.
I need to buy this book
I have done so and love it so far!
I bought the book as well. I havn't read it yet. But I am itching to read it! Looks like it has a lot of useful charts and graphs as well!
Before you buy it, it would be wise of you to research the reviews on it from other individuals in this specific scientific field.
Just the first page of the book of Genesis is impossible to believe for those who have unbiasly studied the bible and enough ancient history. For example: On the first page alone u have the ancient belief held by the Sumerians, Babylonians, AND Hebrews that the universe was a primordial sea of blue water prior to the gods creating the Earth BEFORE the SUN. Then, the gods created a glasslike SkyDome FIRMAMENT to separate the waters in space from the waters on the Earth. They came up with this firmament belief, because the Sumerians reasoned that there must be a huge glasslike dome above us stopping the blue water from falling. Why did they think there was blue water in space? Because they (and their god) had no clue about oxygen, so only a blue primordial sea made the best answer for them as to why the sky was blue. First page of Genesis clearly says the plants were created BEFORE the SUN 🌞 also, because they (and their god) had no clue the plants needed the SUN. It also tells about the ancient ignorant belief that the sun and moon were only created to be lights in the sky to separate day and night. They also thought these mere lights rotated around the earth. I could go on and on about other things like how they thought stars were only little lights used for lighting the earth at night and hung on the firmament like Christmas tree ornaments, which is why they didn't think the rest of the universe would take significantly much more time to create than the earth, but that's on page 2😉 If Genesis isn't credible, the whole Bible isn't credible, jesus isn't credible, etc etc. People who value believing true things will make sure what they believe is 100% credible. (Just do an image search for "ancient Hebrew cosmology beliefs" to get yourself started in verifying my claims)..
@@globalcoupledances Herman Mays did a debate with Jeanson. It was a complete waste of time as he made it quite clear he had not even read his book which was allegedly the topic of the debate. In hindsight Mays had published an article "In Defense of Ridicule" in which he advocated for ridiculing creationists rather than debate them on scientific issues. He seems to be living up to that shameful advice.
Diddo to Squeaks comments. I am an elementary teacher 8n a private Christian school in Alabama and I have spent hours reading and watching Answers in Genesis on DNA related to human history and the Bible has made 5his the best Christmas ever and I’ve bought a copy of Traced.
Your a teacher molding the minds of our young and you teach them the nonsense that is religion? I think our children are the most important life forms on the planet and people like you make my blood boil! You want to believe in your religious nonsense then good for you. But leave our children alone!
I hope you teach the children how to think, not what to think.
I get some of what your saying and its very interesting and important. But I am not that smart so much of it is difficult for me. I am confused by the DNA Tree chart where the African's are that long stretch on the diagram - I thought we were all African to begin with but your chart seems to show they are like many others - a mutated branch?
😉👍Very well done and informatively explained and executed indeed 👌.
None of his ideas are confirm in reality, on contrary reality demonstrate his assumptions are wrong.
Just the first page of the book of Genesis is impossible to believe for those who have unbiasly studied the bible and enough ancient history. For example: On the first page alone u have the ancient belief held by the Sumerians, Babylonians, AND Hebrews that the universe was a primordial sea of blue water prior to the gods creating the Earth BEFORE the SUN. Then, the gods created a glasslike SkyDome FIRMAMENT to separate the waters in space from the waters on the Earth. They came up with this firmament belief, because the Sumerians reasoned that there must be a huge glasslike dome above us stopping the blue water from falling. Why did they think there was blue water in space? Because they (and their god) had no clue about oxygen, so only a blue primordial sea made the best answer for them as to why the sky was blue. First page of Genesis clearly says the plants were created BEFORE the SUN 🌞 also, because they (and their god) had no clue the plants needed the SUN. It also tells about the ancient ignorant belief that the sun and moon were only created to be lights in the sky to separate day and night. They also thought these mere lights rotated around the earth. I could go on and on about other things like how they thought stars were only little lights used for lighting the earth at night and hung on the firmament like Christmas tree ornaments, which is why they didn't think the rest of the universe would take significantly much more time to create than the earth, but that's on page 2😉 If Genesis isn't credible, the whole Bible isn't credible, jesus isn't credible, etc etc. People who value believing true things will make sure what they believe is 100% credible. (Just do an image search for "ancient Hebrew cosmology beliefs" to get yourself started in verifying my claims)
@@miscamisca6775 according to atheists, anyway
@@audieabel1261 you should read more into creationism and what they have to say on those things instead of simply dismissing it and completely disregarding the bible.
@@inthelightofhisglory9614 "according to atheists, anyway" No, according to reality. Both the population on tristan da Cuna and Canary islands are directly empirical evidence which demonstrate that his assumptions are wrong about mutation rate and accumulation. His whole foundation of what he says is not in line with reality, he just made stuff up without even check with reality for any evidence.
Genesis 3:15: "And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel." GENES IS
The Anthropic Principle It has recently been realised that if some of the fundamental physical constants of the universe were only slightly different then the existence of life in this universe would have been impossible (see Martin Rees's Just Six Numbers). There are many of these fortuitous coincidences which have led some to believe that the universe has been fine-tuned. Many explanations for this have been proposed: Is there some necessity for life to exist - sentient intelligent life which could observe and ponder the universe - or else the universe could not come into being? Can the conditions for life be set less rigidly? Is there a multiplicity of universes with the constants set differently in each universe? But perhaps the most famous (infamous?) interpretation of the Anthropic Principle is that we are we living in a "designer universe" (considered by Steven Weinberg here). Other critics would also say that carbon-based life is not the only possible type of life: maybe an entirely different form of silicon-based life would exist, for example, if the physical constants were set differently. However, from the list of coincidences (and the particular example of the precise setting of the cosmological constant, considered here), it would appear that the majority of values which the constant could take would result in no life ever being possible, the universe either spreading too far too quickly, or else collapsing back on itself. According to the proposer of string theory Leonard Susskind: "The notorious cosmological constant is not quite zero, as it was thought to be. *_"This is a cataclysm and the only way that we know how to make any sense of it is through the reviled and despised Anthropic Principle."_* Notice his contempt in the adjectives he uses "Reviled and Despised" that is not a scientific quote that is an agenda!!! Supposedly science is just that science where the evidence is what speaks, not the philosophical views of the scientists themselves., nope they absolutely do hve an agenda they want to force on the rest of us.
Acts 4:12 Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to mankind by which we must be saved.”
I'm not a scientist, but I am an academic in a completely unrelated field. I can't comment (obviously) on the research presented as is due to significant gaps in knowledge, but it's important to highlight that the publications you have shown here are from the ARJ, which by their own admission: "Cutting-edge creation research. Answers Research Journal (ARJ) is a professional, peer-reviewed technical journal for the publication of interdisciplinary scientific and other relevant research from the perspective of the recent Creation and the global Flood within a biblical framework." Science isn't perfect. It's guided by humans. However, have you tried publishing these findings in secular journals? If so, what has your experience been? If not, why? I've not watched all of the video yet but I hope that not mentioning this fact is not deliberate or ill-intentioned.
Good eye and no, none of this work has been published anywhere outside of AiG.
@@CreationMyths It's very interesting how the channel rejects mainstream science / research as insufficient, yet they're extremely happy to host an academic who earned his PhD in a secular institution and who holds a (mostly) secular or non-religious academic title (Dr.). So they're happy with the social authority of academia to promote his reputation, but not the actual scientific output created and shared in those same institutions? Talk about hypocrisy. That this research has not been published outside of AiG is of little surprise! If he has tried, however, I think it would be interesting (if not more academically rebust and honest) to share his peer review comments, instead of simply saying that his work is 'in print' and therefore 'has done science'.
@@andrewf.bradley1106 What you call "secular" journals simply hold to the dominant religious worldview of naturalism; they're just as biased, the difference is ARJ is open and honest about their bias. Many creation scientists have published in evolutionist journals but only if they avoid any overtly creation-supporting conclusions. Any such overt creationist paper is rejected on philosophical grounds, regardless of the quality of the science being documented. That is why journals like ARJ were founded, because of the hostile academic environment that has been created by the current majority evolutionist dogma.
I have heard from creationists that evo based journals will not print their creation based work.
@@maxpeck1962 science is not a religion
Fantastic content! Truth is more amazing and wonderful than error! Thankyou Dr Jeanson!
I would be interested in hearing theories as to why a “recent origin of man” requires (or doesn’t) a young earth.
Is it a young earth archeologically (human activity wise), but older than 6000 years rock formation wise?
LXX states in the beginning god made the heavens an the earth but the earth was unseen and unprepared, this is before "light" and so before the first day. Could exist before time, even.
@MagpieOAO LXX states in Numbers 31 that God incited Moses to attack the Midianites but only the men were killed . God was furious and directed that all were to be killed except for the virgins who were handed out to the Victors . Can anyone explain God's ferocity ?
I've been watching this with a lot of interest. Much of it I don't really get. But, I love the thought that you are using measurements to come to your conclusions, not a bunch of evolution psuedo magic as we are normally presented with. I'm from a physics background. In the past few decades we have learned that there was, in fact, a massive flood that reshaped our planet about 10-12 thousand years ago. Some people are making interesting cases that humans had a civilization before that time. That fits with the Bible too. Pre flood and post flood. The time frame is off but we also know that ancient genealogists were prone to skip generations when delineating descendants so that is easy to explain.
Yes, the timeframes are one of the biggest issues. Mainstream science continues to run around the edges of the Biblical accounts, just with completely different time frames (incorrect time frames in my opinion). I look at someone like Randall Carlson, who in all of his descriptions of history talks about massive amounts of water carving gigantic valleys through terrain in North America. He is perfectly, and quite eloquently, describing a massive flood. But the funny part is that he is basically corroborating what the Bible says, but he doesn't even realize it. 😄
The huge ages secular scientists give things are wrong and we should believe the Bible's time frame over man's time frame.
Like you say you are a physicist. Not all skills are transferable. So what is your evidence for this pre flood flood?
@@kevinkelly2162 they are supporting the Biblical flood occurring, not a flood before the flood although their ages are wrong, not 10-12 thousand years ago but around 4500 years ago.
@@aeronblitz9347 Oh. That is good because there isn't enough water for a biblical type flood.
This is so awesome. I hope you can get this theory into law then fact & start teaching this in the schools and universities, before they bury it, like they did with Bebe's theory of reverse complexity. God bless this ministry 🙏❤
A theory is the highest level of explanation in science. Scientific theories incorporate facts and often laws as well. Scientific theories do not become facts or laws. FYI the book, 'Traced' is pseudoscience. You seem like an honest person, so I'm sure you'd be interested in researching this subject on your own and learning why it's pseudoscience.
@@travisbicklepopsicle It's facts, dude. Accept it, or get lost. Better yet, re-educate yourself. XD
@@JosephCoenMason I hope you're joking :-) I don't have a dog in this race, I couldn't care less if the book is pseudoscience or not, makes no difference to me. I think it would be really interesting if somebody could trace their DNA back to Noah or his sons or whoever, but that's just not how reality works. When the information in 'Traced' is published in a relevant science journal, such as 'Nature', then it's time to take the work seriously. Until then, it's just a book written by a religious apologist who adheres to a particular statement of faith. The work needs to be peer-reviewed. Unfortunately, the book has already been discredited by other scientists working in genetics, and if you would take some time to research, you would know this. It isn't a matter of opinion; the book is pseudoscience. The author needs to go through the proper scientific channels; merely writing a book simply doesn't cut it in the real world. 'Accept it or get lost' Terrible, terrible attitude concerning this subject, and certainly not something anybody who knows anything about science would ever say.
Great video! Thank you all at Answers!
obviously deleterious mutations will constrain random drift substantially. Imagine a computer code, there are ways that it could be changed, and still work. But those ways are relatively few compared to all of the mutations which would completely destroy its utility. You're work provides a starting point for the informational dynamics to show how few mutations are allowable. Keep in mind 1/3 of all pregnancies spontaneously abort. So what is the exponential effect… The drift rate is dramatically curtailed by natural selection.
I would think with today's technology, those ancient transcripts should have finger prints and DNA on them.
You mean manuscripts? The problem with ancient DNA is that the DNA molecule is extremely fragile, breaking down within a year or so even when stored in ideal lab conditions. Whether it's Neanderthal DNA, dinosaur fossil DNA, or bovine DNA from manuscripts, it's simply too optimistic to expect that DNA to have survived intact for thousands of years.
@@maxpeck1962 Depends on the conditions. There seems to be enough fragments of DNA within a 30,000 year old Mammoth corpse to accuractely rebuild and resequence. Also, Oetzi's corpse contained plenty enough preserved DNA to identify which species of flower were undigested in his stomach.
@@bartsanders1553 Yes, there is still some useful investigative info to be found in such ancient DNA. But when trying to sequence an entire chromosome and fit it into a family tree constructed from living DNA samples, it ends up with very poor statistics every time. Ancient DNA might be preserved enough to make gross generalizations, but it's terrible when it comes to fine details.
@@maxpeck1962 It would comparable to reassembling the complete works of shakespeare from 100,000 shredded copied. Extremely difficult, but technically feasible, given enough time.
@@bartsanders1553 Assuming you still had every piece of shredded paper, yes it would be technically feasible. However, I do not think that is a valid assumption.
I have Traced and have read almost half. It's a great book!
Just the first page of the book of Genesis is impossible to believe for those who have unbiasly studied the bible and enough ancient history. For example: On the first page alone u have the ancient belief held by the Sumerians, Babylonians, AND Hebrews that the universe was a primordial sea of blue water prior to the gods creating the Earth BEFORE the SUN. Then, the gods created a glasslike SkyDome FIRMAMENT to separate the waters in space from the waters on the Earth. They came up with this firmament belief, because the Sumerians reasoned that there must be a huge glasslike dome above us stopping the blue water from falling. Why did they think there was blue water in space? Because they (and their god) had no clue about oxygen, so only a blue primordial sea made the best answer for them as to why the sky was blue. First page of Genesis clearly says the plants were created BEFORE the SUN 🌞 also, because they (and their god) had no clue the plants needed the SUN. It also tells about the ancient ignorant belief that the sun and moon were only created to be lights in the sky to separate day and night. They also thought these mere lights rotated around the earth. I could go on and on about other things like how they thought stars were only little lights used for lighting the earth at night and hung on the firmament like Christmas tree ornaments, which is why they didn't think the rest of the universe would take significantly much more time to create than the earth, but that's on page 2😉 If Genesis isn't credible, the whole Bible isn't credible, jesus isn't credible, etc etc. People who value believing true things will make sure what they believe is 100% credible. (Just do an image search for "ancient Hebrew cosmology beliefs" to get yourself started in verifying my claims)...
@@audieabel1261What exactly are you trying to get at, and why on this video about DNA?
@@audieabel1261And there is no one who studies the Bible without bias.
@@johndoiron9615 this video is attacking atheists. I am telling u why atheists can't believe. Just the first page of the book of Genesis is impossible to believe for those who have unbiasly studied the bible and enough ancient history. For example: On the first page alone u have the ancient belief held by the Sumerians, Babylonians, AND Hebrews that the universe was a primordial sea of blue water prior to the gods creating the Earth BEFORE the SUN. Then, the gods created a glasslike SkyDome FIRMAMENT to separate the waters in space from the waters on the Earth. They came up with this firmament belief, because the Sumerians reasoned that there must be a huge glasslike dome above us stopping the blue water from falling. Why did they think there was blue water in space? Because they (and their god) had no clue about oxygen, so only a blue primordial sea made the best answer for them as to why the sky was blue. First page of Genesis clearly says the plants were created BEFORE the SUN 🌞 also, because they (and their god) had no clue the plants needed the SUN. It also tells about the ancient ignorant belief that the sun and moon were only created to be lights in the sky to separate day and night. They also thought these mere lights rotated around the earth. I could go on and on about other things like how they thought stars were only little lights used for lighting the earth at night and hung on the firmament like Christmas tree ornaments, which is why they didn't think the rest of the universe would take significantly much more time to create than the earth, but that's on page 2😉 If Genesis isn't credible, the whole Bible isn't credible, jesus isn't credible, etc etc. People who value believing true things will make sure what they believe is 100% credible. (Just do an image search for "ancient Hebrew cosmology beliefs" to get yourself started in verifying my claims)
@@audieabel1261Thanks, I guess. I'll let you know when I asked, okay?
I have far more questions than answers from Genesis. In Genesis 35 4, why does God tell Jacob and his family to worship him on account of God helping Jacob? You would have thought that God was secure enough in His omnipotence not to demand ostentatious praise and sacrifice from His creation?
As a complete Atheist first of all, this video Does Not drive me crazy❗️Secondly, this is one mans Opinion, no matter how absurd.
If our tax funds can be given to nilhistic studies If Thantos glove could actually wipe out 50% with a snap then this project and model deserves to be funded no matter what excuses gov would make. At some point you tubes algorithm will not be able to keep your work from being explored by everyone. The longer it stands the more it will spread. The times are changing .
Right smh, it’s a conspiracy. His work is bunk. That’s why. You can “trace” through the data from the same scientific journals to reveal how he cherry-picks his conclusion.
@@brunorhagalcus6132 are you suggesting their aren't evolutionary filters and paradoxs that mainstream doesn't pick and choose super positions from? Lol He explains in detail such and event .. It's mountains of evidence that doesn't fit evolutionary models in all fields of science . From physic,cosmology , biology to cosmology they ignore and excuse data all the time.
@@brunorhagalcus6132 Richard Dawkins says that the universe and biology is conspiring to trick us with illusions he even wrote a book on it. That's your evolutionary accepted views. So why are you so upset over that ?
@@dadsonworldwide3238 He immediately reveals his methodology is cherry-picking data. His mitochondrial dna claim is completely bunk heeding the breadth of data he cherry-picked from. You generalize “inconsistency” to build a false compromise…a necessary facet of the scam.
@@brunorhagalcus6132 you way off. Their is no cherry-picking data here. We have a population growth curb. We no recorded population sizes when they've exploded. In evolutionary time scale they have to filter out and argue away mountains of evidence like why for 70k years populations remained so low for so long. Not to mention digging up DNA that isn't yours or my ancestors in any direct way.
Those that acknowledge God can see his work in his handycraft. Those that do not acknowledge God can only see the handycraft and have no reasonable explaination of it's existence.
Earth is stationary not a spinning water ball
I love this
Explanations are dime a dozen The individuals that can demonstrate their explanations are accurate depictions of reality, are the ones people listen to.
@@drewdrake9130 exactly. Nobody can show earth curve. Globe dead
@@squirrel4421 What?? Where did that come from?
For believers to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord. For the Unbelievers the Judgment. Pass it on to people who don't believe. It's TRUE.
Would be interested to know what he thinks about the Sasquach GENOME PROJECT with a female Mitochondria DNA and an unknown Y
*DNA evidence is our friend!*
Just the first page of the book of Genesis is impossible to believe for those who have unbiasly studied the bible and enough ancient history. For example: On the first page alone u have the ancient belief held by the Sumerians, Babylonians, AND Hebrews that the universe was a primordial sea of blue water prior to the gods creating the Earth BEFORE the SUN. Then, the gods created a glasslike SkyDome FIRMAMENT to separate the waters in space from the waters on the Earth. They came up with this firmament belief, because the Sumerians reasoned that there must be a huge glasslike dome above us stopping the blue water from falling. Why did they think there was blue water in space? Because they (and their god) had no clue about oxygen, so only a blue primordial sea made the best answer for them as to why the sky was blue. First page of Genesis clearly says the plants were created BEFORE the SUN 🌞 also, because they (and their god) had no clue the plants needed the SUN. It also tells about the ancient ignorant belief that the sun and moon were only created to be lights in the sky to separate day and night. They also thought these mere lights rotated around the earth. I could go on and on about other things like how they thought stars were only little lights used for lighting the earth at night and hung on the firmament like Christmas tree ornaments, which is why they didn't think the rest of the universe would take significantly much more time to create than the earth, but that's on page 2😉 If Genesis isn't credible, the whole Bible isn't credible, jesus isn't credible, etc etc. People who value believing true things will make sure what they believe is 100% credible. (Just do an image search for "ancient Hebrew cosmology beliefs" to get yourself started in verifying my claims)...
@@audieabel1261 You can complain all you want. The ancient civilizations are all real. The ancient civilizations are all descended from Noah who had sixteen grandsons that became the sixteen ancient the civilizations each with their own paternal haplogroup lineage. Gomer Europeans R, Madai Medes Q, Javan Greek sea people T, Tiras Thracians L, Tubal Italy K, Meshek Siberians N, Magog Asian O, Aram Aramean F, Asshur Assyrians G, Elam Elamites H, Arphaxad Arabs Hebrews I&J, Lud Lydians F2, Phut early Phoenicians E1, Mitzrayim Egyptians E3, Canaan Canaanites E2, Cush Cushites A B & C. …D could have been the Sinite tribe from Canaan. C is the descendants of Nimrod. Neanderthals are Japhethites and Denisovans are a mix of Japhethites and Hamites, not Semitic. It shows up on DNA maps and charts. Every grandson of Noah and their descendants have their own paternal Y chromosome haplogroup lineage! I can name all sixteen of them like I just did and give you each of their haplogroups! Probably it’s your interpretation of the events of Creation that are wrong since there was light on the very first day when the cycle of night and day began. No physical thing can ever make or direct itself. Billions of bits of written genetic programming can’t write itself. No amount of programming can write itself. There’s no such thing as magical morphing monkeys. Naturalism is unscientific. Energy can’t make or direct itself. You can’t have anything without a Creator. Try charging your phone with an equal or lesser amount of charge. The smallest amount of energy came from the greatest power which is God.
You have an eccentric pronunciation of *NARRATIVE*
I've known this for 30 some years. Adam had black children, red children, white children Asian children, every race on earth was within Adam and within Eve. Every human has a different finger print, a different face...every kind of difference between even twins, it was all in Adam and Eve. Perhaps some races of humans were a cross between, perhaps, Asians and Indians, or African and Caucasian. But generally, all this was within Adam and Eve. Just as All dogs came from one or 2 original dogs. Horses gave rise to all kinds of horses. It was all God given variants.
Interested in these ideas being looked at by Dr Stephen Myers