Juanmike:
Which one be football video

How to create YouTube football videos for your YouTube channel

Sixfiguresmart:
Just the fact that as a child, I watched the discovery of Egyptian mummies on video recording and today, I am shown pictures is staggering. To know that James Cameron has video recording of the Mariana Trench and all these discoveries that happen in distances that a child can easily walk, have no video recording is mind-boggling.

How can I believe these pictures that I myself can create on a computer? Where is the place that it has not become a tourist attraction. From the Dinosaurs footprints to this. Tell us the location, we can go and verify these 133 million years footprints.

The reverse storyline of the African ghost that goes to a foreign land to father children is what we are seeing. Africans can neither tell you the place where the ghost who fathered the ghost babies was born nor the family that it happened to. It is all about "one man", and "one place".

you need to travel often. The Egyptian pyramids still standing, and artefacts are perfectly kept in places where they should be. Not everything is done with a PC. You're not smarter than billions of people walking the surface of the Earth.

Ykc2:
Benin Kingdom come and see una fellow Kingdom here plus oduduwa brothers

lol from a Igbo man

mysticwarrior:
mexico is a central American country.

north American

Youngwiz71:
LoL reminds me of the movie "apocalypto"

That movie bloody

Show us one of the rubber ball na

Chopcy29:


He’s referring it to a movie

Before you correct someone first make sure you are correct yourself

I was trying to throw more light on that movie Apocalypto; not trying to correct him because I have watched the movie too…

Those indigenous people in that movie are the Mayans…

HDMax:


How to create YouTube football videos for your YouTube channel

That is normal football?

Have you asked yourself what destroyed these civilizations? They were advanced interms of science and technology, yet they were wiped out.

Rome was once a thriving civilization, no army defeated them , yet they were wiped out too.

Sin is a reproach to a nation, a nation's laws drives its culture, when leaders start making the wrong laws, divine judgment is scaled up from a personal level to national level.

Emperormartin:
Right from antiquity, mankind has yielded for some entertainment. It’s no surprise that in late 19th century after the abolition of slave trade football was discovered and first played in Britain and now a global sports…

Before football and some modern day sports, there have been archaic and weird form of sports engaged by people as a form of entertainment. Most of these weird entertainment practices can be found on the scrolls of Ancient Rome.

Gladiators comes to mind but the mayans where brutal in all aspect hence their near extinction despite the fact it was a great kingdom per say.

Aurelius1:
The name off their God - Kukulkan. A blood thirty murraffucker.

Kukulkan doesn't seek human blood. It is mostly offers little animals like, butterfly,fish as sacrifice. The God is also known as feather serpent in Aztec civilization. You should read the book called "AZTEC". You will get a better understanding of the god kukulkan. What you saw in apocalyto was not really there history. Kukulkan doesn't seek human blood as sacrifice. The god was miscasted. Thou I will agree with you that mayan, Aztec and every other civilization that developed around that South and north america, do sacrifice human beings to their various gods except kukulkan.

Hawkler:

No. Apocalypto are the Aztecs tribe; there had many gods but worshipped Huitzilopochtli, the god of the sun and war, above all others. The Aztecs believed that they lived in the era of the fifth sun and that any day the world could end violently. In order to postpone their destruction and appease the gods, men performed human sacrifices

Apocalyptic are the mayan tribe not Aztec. Aztec tribe developed in Mexico, long after the first Mayans dissappeard without a trace. Mayans are totally different from aztec

Juanmike:
That is normal football?

Yes, those football highlights you watch on YouTube and how you can earn from it, just message me to join the class

LolLol...

Youngwiz71:
LoL reminds me of the movie "apocalypto"

That movie is too raw I don't how Mel Gipsom was able to produce such a movie.

theTranslator:
lol from a Igbo man

yes ooh shebi una talk say na oduduwa discovered the world thats why the first car in world was named after yoruba man Karl benz

JOemmy:


That movie is too raw I don't how Mel Gipsom was able to produce such a movie.

Mel Gibson is one badass producer. Check out the following movies:
Braveheart
The Patriot
Passions of the Christ
Apocalyto
They are all classics. I respect the guy

JOemmy:


That movie is too raw I don't how Mel Gipsom was able to produce such a movie.

It's a masterclass, everything was just top notch

Badhguy:

Apocalyptic are the mayan tribe not Aztec. Aztec tribe developed in Mexico, long after the first Mayans dissappeard without a trace. Mayans are totally different from aztec

el
What's is depicted in the movie is a phrase of the Mayans and there god of sun; Kinich Ahau.
The Maya came first, and settled in modern-day Mexico. Next, came the Olmecs, who also settled Mexico. They didn't build any major cities, but they were widespread and prosperous. They were followed by the Inca in modern-day Peru, and finally the Aztecs. There are from same lineage; way of life, culture, believes. Etc.

Ok

Hawkler:
el
What's is depicted in the movie is a phrase of the Mayans and there god of sun; Kinich Ahau.
The Maya came first, and settled in modern-day Mexico. Next, came the Olmecs, who also settled Mexico. They didn't build any major cities, but they were widespread and prosperous. They were followed by the Inca in modern-day Peru, and finally the Aztecs. There are from same lineage; way of life, culture, believes. Etc.

Mayans civilization really impacted or should I say influenced the latter civilization like the Aztec and the Incan empire. Mayans built lots of cities and their cities are still standing magnificently in modern day Ecuador,honduras,El Salvador and Guatemala.
Aztec and Incan empire flourished at the same time. Aztec was the first to fall before the Spanish discovered Inca empire. Honestly am still intrigued in the way Inca's ran their government without a mainstay currency. Unlike the Aztec that did their trading with Cocoa bean and gold dust. The Inca's didn't use any of that yet their empire were very much prosperous. You should goggle about the Inca's empire and see how their government worked.

iamyemiakins:
E don tey wey end time practices don dey, e just loud these days

E loud because of social media, but people like that 'Righteousness' guy and co think say these things start today. Little knowledge of history, them no get.

harmargedon:
you need to travel often. The Egyptian pyramids still standing, and artefacts are perfectly kept in places where they should be. Not everything is done with a PC. You're not smarter than billions of people walking the surface of the Earth.

Well, you are talking to someone with over 60 countries under the soles of his feet. I don't know where you want me to travem to now? Been to Egypt 2 times. What do you want to tell me about the pyramid that wasn't discovered. It has been standing for centuries before the archaeologists discovering plastic mummies and graphic footprints were born.

It is not rocket science to see the folly in all these nonsense, Sir. As I ain't smarter than millions, also refuse to be as stupid as the gullibles. I know science when I see one. I know stupidity when I see one too.

What artefacts are kept in places? The pyramids? Sir, kindly tell the that you didn't go believing all these scameologists. Do not be one of the deluded. There was no kife 133 million years ago. Funny how all their number ring in million with fresh prints that go back to 3000 years only.

You mean, the dinosaurs walked on snow? Or snow has preserved it for 133 million years? Other scientists claim that they were here 50,000 years ago. This one came up with 133 million years. And then, when did they EVOLVE? Which is the subject of the matter.

Is fossil and footprints the best diacoveries in the 21st century?

Sir, even in the 17th century people have been doing that without the advancements in technology and science. What should I applaud now?

That in the heart of the 21 century a diacovery this mammoth cannot be captured on camera for the public to see?
The last diacovery was the expedition by James cameron. Proof and evidence attest to it. No shade, no secrets.

So, life began in Africa, yes? And, relics of all pasts are discovered elsewhere. How plausibme is that?

Ask them to reconcile their facts and revert. Cos if I ever prssented a case like theirs in court, I'd be thrown out.

Goodbadbowy419:

Noise

What is noise? If I asked you how many planets there are in our solar system, for sure the fact that you would uttet from your mouth would not reconcile with what the kids are being taught in school today.

And, this is thenscience that discredits the Bible?

No one sees their switch gamr and no one condemns them for it.

Sixfiguresmart:
Well, you are talking to someone with over 60 countries under the soles of his feet. I don't know where you want me to travem to now? Been to Egypt 2 times. What do you want to tell me about the pyramid that wasn't discovered. It has been standing for centuries before the archaeologists discovering plastic mummies and graphic footprints were born.

It is not rocket science to see the folly in all these nonsense, Sir. As I ain't smarter than millions, also refuse to be as stupid as the gullibles. I know science when I see one. I know stupidity when I see one too.

What artefacts are kept in places? The pyramids? Sir, kindly tell the that you didn't go believing all these scameologists. Do not be one of the deluded. There was no kife 133 million years ago. Funny how all their number ring in million with fresh prints that go back to 3000 years only.

You mean, the dinosaurs walked on snow? Or snow has preserved it for 133 million years? Other scientists claim that they were here 50,000 years ago. This one came up with 133 million years. And then, when did they EVOLVE? Which is the subject of the matter.

Is fossil and footprints the best diacoveries in the 21st century?

Sir, even in the 17th century people have been doing that without the advancements in technology and science. What should I applaud now?

That in the heart of the 21 century a diacovery this mammoth cannot be captured on camera for the public to see?
The last diacovery was the expedition by James cameron. Proof and evidence attest to it. No shade, no secrets.

So, life began in Africa, yes? And, relics of all pasts are discovered elsewhere. How plausibme is that?

Ask them to reconcile their facts and revert. Cos if I ever prssented a case like theirs in court, I'd be thrown out.

how do I make this easy for you to understand. We all know scientists can be crazy most times, like for example when America said they've been to the moon.
Which was later discovered by the same Americans that no one has actually been to the moon, it's all staged.

But we wouldn't use these lies to justify the rest as false. The foot prints were discovered, many will go to verify if it's tire or not. Man has been walking the surface of the Earth even before science came to existence.

Sixfiguresmart:
Well, you are talking to someone with over 60 countries under the soles of his feet. I don't know where you want me to travem to now? Been to Egypt 2 times. What do you want to tell me about the pyramid that wasn't discovered. It has been standing for centuries before the archaeologists discovering plastic mummies and graphic footprints were born.

It is not rocket science to see the folly in all these nonsense, Sir. As I ain't smarter than millions, also refuse to be as stupid as the gullibles. I know science when I see one. I know stupidity when I see one too.

What artefacts are kept in places? The pyramids? Sir, kindly tell the that you didn't go believing all these scameologists. Do not be one of the deluded. There was no kife 133 million years ago. Funny how all their number ring in million with fresh prints that go back to 3000 years only.

You mean, the dinosaurs walked on snow? Or snow has preserved it for 133 million years? Other scientists claim that they were here 50,000 years ago. This one came up with 133 million years. And then, when did they EVOLVE? Which is the subject of the matter.

Is fossil and footprints the best diacoveries in the 21st century?

Sir, even in the 17th century people have been doing that without the advancements in technology and science. What should I applaud now?

That in the heart of the 21 century a diacovery this mammoth cannot be captured on camera for the public to see?
The last diacovery was the expedition by James cameron. Proof and evidence attest to it. No shade, no secrets.

So, life began in Africa, yes? And, relics of all pasts are discovered elsewhere. How plausibme is that?

Ask them to reconcile their facts and revert. Cos if I ever prssented a case like theirs in court, I'd be thrown out.

centuries to come, our existence will be argued just like we are deliberating on whether there was life older than what we believed. Earth didn't just exist 3000 years ago, but if we were good with carbon dating, we'd be able to separate the truth from lies.

Life didn't start in Africa, but Africans had the oldest documents science could lay their hands on. Life started equally in the world. Two places to get evidence are the places with unending ice and unending heat. You can point out where I speak of.

Earth is old, how old ? No one knows.

harmargedon:
centuries to come, our existence will be argued just like we are deliberating on whether there was life older than what we believed. Earth didn't just exist 3000 years ago, but if we were good with carbon dating, we'd be able to separate the truth from lies.

Life didn't start in Africa, but Africans had the oldest documents science could lay their hands on. Life started equally in the world. Two places to get evidence are the places with unending ice and unending heat. You can point out where I speak of.

Earth is old, how old ? No one knows.

You are conflicting issues here. Two places to get evidence are places with UNENDING ice, and life started in the WORLD. Where is this unending ice located, in the world or the astrodome? Are your referring to the arctic?

One thing that you and I agree here is that there was a beginning. What do we know before the beginning? Only the Bible provides such information. No other book in history can affirmatively tell you a single fact. What science is doing is not fact finding but carbon dating. The Bible did not provide a clue regarding how long the earth stayed before creation in it began. The answers has been very clear from the earlies. Nothing but water. Which is evidential as 71 percent of the earth is water. When life started in the world, the animal/human body does not decompose to ice, does it? Why do we have to search in unending ice when the body becomes dust eventually just as the bible says? Rather than searching in the ice for clues, the earth holds more evidence than ice can produce.

Your ice analogy comes from the ice age theory that scientist up till date have not been able to produce. Their pants are sweting right now as heat waves expose more of the lies that they have told over the years. They claimed that the ice ice altered climates and froze waters, thereby freezing the dinosaurs. Over the past 30 years, the oldest and thickest ice in the Arctic has declined by a stunning 95%. Not a single Dinosaur bone or fur strand was discovered after 95% decline. What did the almighty scientists do? They discarded this theory and distanced themselves from it. This is the theory that you are promulgating. Scientist have long seen the damage in such theory. Apply caution when you recommend such school of thought.

One question that you can ponder hard about is, if science cannot give us the age of the earth, where did the 4.5 billion years come from?
Earth didn't exist 3000 years ago, and humans did not exist prior to Adam which is arguably less than 7000 years.

You are relying on carbon dating which is extremely difficult to date for samples that are older than about 40,000 years. So, how were they able to go beyond 4.5 BILLION years? Scientists have long recognized that carbon dating is subject to error. So, how how has this invention performed so far? Still Science only provides an ESTIMATION. As a matter of fact, the calculation of the formation of the earth is based on an astronomical rock. Follow this: Science claims evolution, things EVOLVES, then uses rocks from meteorites and rocks gotten from Apollo Expeditions to the Moon to ascertain an estimated number not for the moon, but for the earth. Tell me about rocket science. I will post a link here so you can track this scientific fluctuating theories of science.
https://www.sciencelearn.org.nz/resources/1553-age-of-the-earth-timeline

Now, Apollo Expeditions to the Moon did not go with Uralmash-15000 to get rock from a deeper depth. As you can see in the videos, they picked rocks from the surface. Common sense knows that to get a near perfect age of something that EVOLVED, you have to drill deeper. But, stones on the surface of the moon is carbon dated and presented as the fact. Come on, men! We can do better.

So, watch out for more twists and new carbon dates as NASA prepares to launch a new ambitious drilling mission, set to launch for the Moon in 2022.

Is this the science that you trust? That taught you 9 planets and now teaching your kids 8 planets? Your grand kids could end up with 7 planets.

Sixfiguresmart:
You are conflicting issues here. Two places to get evidence are places with UNENDING ice, and life started in the WORLD. Where is this unending ice located, in the world or the astrodome? Are your referring to the arctic?

One thing that you and I agree here is that there was a beginning. What do we know before the beginning? Only the Bible provides such information. No other book in history can affirmatively tell you a single fact. What science is doing is not fact finding but carbon dating. The Bible did not provide a clue regarding how long the earth stayed before creation in it began. The answers has been very clear from the earlies. Nothing but water. Which is evidential as 71 percent of the earth is water. When life started in the world, the animal/human body does not decompose to ice, does it? Why do we have to search in unending ice when the body becomes dust eventually just as the bible says? Rather than searching in the ice for clues, the earth holds more evidence than ice can produce.

Your ice analogy comes from the ice age theory that scientist up till date have not been able to produce. Their pants are sweting right now as heat waves expose more of the lies that they have told over the years. They claimed that the ice ice altered climates and froze waters, thereby freezing the dinosaurs. Over the past 30 years, the oldest and thickest ice in the Arctic has declined by a stunning 95%. Not a single Dinosaur bone or fur strand was discovered after 95% decline. What did the almighty scientists do? They discarded this theory and distanced themselves from it. This is the theory that you are promulgating. Scientist have long seen the damage in such theory. Apply caution when you recommend such school of thought.

One question that you can ponder hard about is, if science cannot give us the age of the earth, where did the 4.5 billion years come from?
Earth didn't exist 3000 years ago, and humans did not exist prior to Adam which is arguably less than 7000 years.

You are relying on carbon dating which is extremely difficult to date for samples that are older than about 40,000 years. So, how were they able to go beyond 4.5 BILLION years? Scientists have long recognized that carbon dating is subject to error. So, how how has this invention performed so far? Still Science only provides an ESTIMATION. As a matter of fact, the calculation of the formation of the earth is based on an astronomical rock. Follow this: Science claims evolution, things EVOLVES, then uses rocks from meteorites and rocks gotten from Apollo Expeditions to the Moon to ascertain an estimated number not for the moon, but for the earth. Tell me about rocket science. I will post a link here so you can track this scientific fluctuating theories of science.
https://www.sciencelearn.org.nz/resources/1553-age-of-the-earth-timeline

Now, Apollo Expeditions to the Moon did not go with Uralmash-15000 to get rock from a deeper depth. As you can see in the videos, they picked rocks from the surface. Common sense knows that to get a near perfect age of something that EVOLVED, you have to drill deeper. But, stones on the surface of the moon is carbon dated and presented as the fact. Come on, men! We can do better.

So, watch out for more twists and new carbon dates as NASA prepares to launch a new ambitious drilling mission, set to launch for the Moon in 2022.

Is this the science that you trust? That taught you 9 planets and now teaching your kids 8 planets? Your grand kids could end up with 7 planets.

and with all your knowledge you believe in the Bible? Yeah, you're about to defend it. Don't stress yourself, I think you should focus your research knowledge on the existence of the Bible. What you don't know is greater than what you do. I don't have the energy to argue to convince anyone. But sooner than now you'll understand.

harmargedon:
how do I make this easy for you to understand.

I understood your entire logic. If you find it difficult to explain, then you are not solid on that point yet. I was pushing you to your limit cos I saw that your conclusion wasn't strong enough. I knew that If I pushed you harder, you would do a few research that will improve your knowledge on the subject.

harmargedon:
We all know scientists can be crazy most times, like for example when America said they've been to the moon.
Which was later discovered by the same Americans that no one has actually been to the moon, it's all staged.

That is not a fact. Americans have not refuted that. That is only hearsay. do not peddle hearsay plagiarize bloggers. Get your facts straight from reputable establishments. If you discredit it, that is your respected personal opinion. But do not make a blanket statement that will get you in trouble.

harmargedon:

But we wouldn't use these lies to justify the rest as false. The foot prints were discovered, many will go to verify if it's tire or not. Man has been walking the surface of the Earth even before science came to existence.

You are now the one peddling lies. Cos' the US has not called it a lie. You are now the lie seller. Where are you getting your facts?
I am not saying that I refute all the discoveries. I am just trying to make sense of the trend. It is suddenly becoming a cliché if in each year we make extraordinary discoveries like this repeatedly.

The foot prints of Dinosaurs are ridiculous to say the least. The dating makes them even easier to dispel.

Sixfiguresmart:
I understood your entire logic. If you find it difficult to explain, then you are not solid on that point yet. I was pushing you to your limit cos I saw that your conclusion wasn't strong enough. I knew that If I pushed you harder, you would do a few research that will improve your knowledge on the subject.
That is not a fact. Americans have not refuted that. That is only hearsay. do not peddle hearsay plagiarize bloggers. Get your facts straight from reputable establishments. If you discredit it, that is your respected personal opinion. But do not make a blanket statement that will get you in trouble.
You are now the one peddling lies. Cos' the US has not called it a lie. You are now the lie seller. Where are you getting your facts?
I am not saying that I refute all the discoveries. I am just trying to make sense of the trend. It is suddenly becoming a cliché if in each year we make extraordinary discoveries like this repeatedly.

The foot prints of Dinosaurs are ridiculous to say the least. The dating makes them even easier to dispel.

you're not pushing me to any limit, I'm just too busy to type or reply messages currently. I have every evidence that America has never been to the moon. I don't say what I'm not sure of. When I'm less busy I'll reply all your messages.

harmargedon:
and with all your knowledge you believe in the Bible?

Abundantly.

Without the Bible, I would have been just like you, wandering and soliciting every junk out there. Since I began reading this Bible, I became wiser and can easily filter trash from getting into my head.

From the Bible's account of creation, I can see clearly that no creature on earth has lived up to 10,000 years. That guide alone allows me to critically assess the information that I am served. The deeper I go, I see the fallacies. Without the Bible, I would have been a goon. A blind fool who accepts garbage and vomits.

Man no longer fools me. Look at the science timeline and see how deluded many people are. They have no clue that they are delusional but the stats are facts. You are also benefitting from the Bible right here. If not the guidance from the Bible, you could have been swallowed by those crooks in white skin. I have been able to sharpen you up because I was sharpened by the Bible. Give thanks and credit to Jehovah, the God of creation who gave you and I his word to guide us. You are in stark darkness without it.

with the Bible, what science is looking for, you already know. They spend billions of dollars, time and lives to verify what the Bible already say. Apollo expeditions confirm that there are no astronomical lives or aliens in space. The confirm the size of the light God created when he said, let there be light. The experienced the magnitude of creation , the size of his power etc. They were able to establish that even the earth has a beginning. That is what Genesis 1:1 says hahaha

They will go again to confirm more. They will spend their resources and time to authenticate the facts in the Bible.