The first few minutes of that video was pure gold.

Could someone put a link to the video? Can't see embedded vids with my mobile.

I would disagree there that there isn't a difference between macro and micro evolution except for timescale.

Just based on the fact that some organisms have more chromosomes then others and we've yet to find a situation where the addition or subtraction of chromosomes have been helpful. (To my knowledge.)

How chromosome levels change is the big question still posed to evolution.

The most prevalent explination is that some mutations like downs syndrom lets people live on... and some others may end up being nuetral rather then harmful.  Though unless said mutation proved to be helpful, it's hard to explain why addition or subtraction of chromosones would ever take root in species.

No case of chromosone addition or subtraction has ever been helpful though since it's been uneven.

It's just the definition of Macro and Micro evolution could use some tweaking.  To where "new species" doesn't matter so much as "different chromosome count."

And the last 2 minutes were rubbish.

And then it stopped talking about bad science and went on the attack against any religion with an afterlife.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPsfBXxLmbs&feature=player_embedded

I couldn't get through a 30 seconds of that.  The second guys voice was just really annoying.  I'm convinced the difference between internet guys that make it "big" and don't is simply they don't have a grating nasaly voice.

You've read between the lines slimebeast, I'm a little bit proud of you. I thougth the last two or three minutes of that video were complete rubbish too.

And his opinion is according to the Bible. We Christians try to have our opinion according to the Bible. Your (implicit) opinion that Paulicianism mustn't be judged as incorrect ISN'T according to the Bible. Paulicianism is a supposedly Christian branch, so it must be judged according to the Bible.

Paulicianism isn't supported by the Bible and Paul of Samosata wasn't prior to the New Testament. The New Testament, at different spots and books, says that Jesus is God and was with God since the foundation of the World. Hence, he wasn't adopted by God. That is a clear statement, and a different approach at this point is a heresy, according to the Bible.

It's like saying:

- B is the biological son of A.

- B proclaims that. So do their friends and a lot more people, throughout decades.

- Two centuries later, C says that believes in B, but that B wasn't the biological son of A, hence C says that B was lying.

- Some people complain about C's incongruity.

- You say "Hey! You can't say that C's opinion is wrong".

You're an intelligent user, but I don't understand why you're following this line of thinking.