I believe because I've experienced the supernatural crossing of dimensions, but I don't try to define it so much. You can not take it from me though because it was for me to know. Your time will come.
@kobrajesusreturns I was abducted by the Invisible Green Tomato and you can't prove that I wasn't so therefore it is true. You may not believe me but it is for me to know and your time will come.
Saying you know of a complex intelligence that didn't come from a biological brain is like saying you know of a wooden chair that didn't come from a tree.
So. God supports slavery. Does he? Well, he's a loving God, who loves when jews are happy, so happy jews need slaves. Thing is. God allows for experimentation without making us doubt. Want to know what happens when you sacrifice animals to a rock? Sure, try it, says God, just see what happens. Want to sacrifice babies to a demonic entity? Sure, go ahead, see what happens.. And what happens is.. the NWO, and a corrupt church. That's what baby killing leads to. And Thank God, we figured that out.
Christians are not idiots, stupid, or any other foul name that comes into your mind! Just as atheism leads to many illogical conclusions(IMO). So does belief in a higher power than us( n ur opinion). The truth has not been proven by either side and probably never will ! I think theistically and you think atheistically. Both sides seem predetermined. I guess we can't help ourselves!!!
@TheDano1947 The bible is against the practice of magic. Many great scientist were Christians and still are. True science is based in the bible, for example it states in John 1:1 in the beginning was the WORD or sound. Scientist are understanding through quantum physics that everything in the universe is made out of sound for in the beginning was the word. Everything that you see is made out of the invisible it states that in Hebrews scientists have recently only discovered that.
@newcity777 "Many great scientist were Christians and still are."
I'm calling bullshit on you. With a wild claim like that, you better provide some proof. Sure, plenty of religious scientists still exist. Roughly 30%. Of those, many do in fact separate religion from science. Intentional ignorance if you will. Now, you said "great" which suggests popularity of some type whether through celebrity or work. So name them.
@newcity777 I am presuming that with your statement "Scientist are understanding through quantum physics that everything in the universe is made out of sound" you are actually refering to the "string theory"? First of it hasen't fully been aknowledge by the scientific community as there doesn't exist enough emperical evidence for it yet. Secondly, if it indeed turns of to be true, it still has absolutely nothing to do with sound - it is just vibriting strings of energy, nothing more.
Yet, he made sure we would. "Nonono, it's all your own choice ..." - Well, god chose this system, knowing very well ppl would end up in hell. He put down the rules for when you enter hell. God already knows if we end up in hell even before he creates us. The only conclusion is that god creates SOME humans, specificaly for hell, and others specificaly for heaven. Why would ANYBODY put trust in to this kind of evil? I guess it takes idiots like you to worship. Good thing it's a myth
I went to bible school and I have studied the bible for years and the New Testament does not say anything close to your argument. If this is not your field of study why are you assuming or making theories on something you have not taken time to evaluate. If your really trying to find the truth search the scriptures with an open heart. It clearly states in the New Testament that a person has a choice to accept Jesus or not. Jesus did not come for the righteous but sinners to be saved
Heres a curious observation: All athists are aware of the consiquences of being wrong. But are all deists aware of what happens if their wrong? They threw a life away under the pretense that its better after they die. and more so to extreamists, that they activly went and ruined the lifes of others.
Because Pascals Wager doesn't account for the possibility of every other religion known to the world. Cutting it up into chances would leave everyone with only a extremely small chance of getting something, if anything, right. Id rather use my .5% Chance not counting on questionable promises.
This guy was really struggling to make much sense. Logical reasoning was just replaced with groundless assertions plus weak assumptions, masqueraded as logical arguments with some buzz words thrown in that the guy didn't even understand. For someone to be absolutely sure of something & not be able to explain why is a very sad thing.
@xDanMEH Science works, think of medicine, powered flight, electronics, the internet etc, if i ever see any evidence for christianity working i will accept it too. Contact me, when you are scared of the muslim hell or your separation from samsara and i will start worrying about your empty threats of your patently man-made religion.
@xDanMEH There are only two ways you can make a statement like "You need more faith to believe in science than Christianity," either you do don't know what faith and belief mean or you don't know what science is.
I think the caller wants to know if mathematics has a human or a divine origin. That is, were they invented or discovered? If invented, they can modified......, if discovered, they must absolute (eternal).
Similarly, does "man" have a human or a divine origin?... If "human", he can change or evolve.....if "divine", he is absolute, or eternal.
@dhampir1000 Here is your list of "STUPID CHRISTIAN SCIENTIST, "SIR Isaac Newton, stated "The most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.",Nicholas Copernicus,Galileo Galilei, Rene Descartes, Robert Boyle, and Albert Einstein was not a Christian but, did believe in GOD he stated,"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." The *stupid", founders of science.
@newcity777 Firstly, Einstein was an atheist. He always spoke of God metaphorically, as if the Universe had a mind of it's own. Secondly, despite being one of the greatest scientists, Isaac Newton was an absolute nutter... He was the sort of bloke who put needles to the back of his eye sockets and stared at the sun long enough to force him to stay in a dark room for two days. All just ''to see what would happen'' if he did.
@newcity777 Einstein did not believe in a personal God. If you would quit relying on religious sources for your information, you would know this. Your sources commit an act called "Quote Mining." How about you tell us what Einstein said before and after that line you quoted? Something tells me you can't.
What happened to us? Back in the day we could push the mother in law into a volcano to please a god. Now a days muslims get 72 virgins with the same amount of mother in laws. So the guy gets a bad deal an in heaven so do the 72 virgins. Everybody loses. DAMN!
The logical absolutes do not exist out side our minds. They are demonstrable outside our minds. That is how Aristotle discovered them, by observing the natural world.
Typical... you only look at it from your perspective. What numbers did we discover? Base 10, inches, meters, Kelvin? The objective reality we apply the numbers to is real. The numbers themselves are ours, like any other language... and there is more than one language. No no no.... there is not one "real" language either.
Why don't we use colors as a system of measurement? Numbers are just easier - so yes, we did "imagine up" numbers.
@clintonskakun yep, mathematics are what we use to measure equations and how we know how much drugs to give a person so they dont just die....without that created system of measurement by humans....everyone would just be Eyeballing it >.> like stupid animals
This is by far the most damning clip of the show illustrating that many people making things up, concocting definition that they can't even verify or substantiate, yet use it as a club to mindlessly hammer the opposition's point.
All of the hosts take time to listen to the callers argument or comments.. Must have been fuckin' annoying to hear stupid religious/creationists talk bullcrap.. When there is something which science has not yet figured out.. You can't just simply say.. ''Ohh God must have done it'' You are making an extrodinary claim.. Which you need a ton of evidence to support..
@Jacob6958 slight over generalization of theist (words all, never are not often accurate descriptions) However you are right he is poor theist and is rambling.
@Jacob6958 using the word all or never would be like ... saying all chinese are good at math.. Well we know logically that is not an accurate qualuifier or Italians are all in the Mafia. That is inaccurate assertion
Nature is god. Nature has its laws, which either we obey or we get destroyed.
The existence of god is a concept created by human beings. And religions have hijacked it for their own purposes. Praying to god does not make a difference, however obeying nature laws makes you a happy human being.
The first cause argument is just an endless continuum. To say first cause doesnt get you anywhere. Because you can ask what was before that? Then that's when they say well it just always existed but the orginal statement was to explain that something can't come from nothing but to prove it you are saying that what created first cause came from nothing.
Topics: WINNING ARGUMENTS FOR CREATIONISM-EVOLUTIONISM DEBATE (See Subchapter 10.2.2, Chapter 10, of Part Two.), The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balancedway.yolasite.com
balancedway1.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
U CAN NOT MEASURE NUMBERS SINCE NUMBERS ARE INFINITE - ALSO NUMBERS ARE NOT ALWAYS CORRECT - LOOK AT PIE- HUMANS JUST ROUND UP PIE AS WE CAN NOT FIGURE A COMPLETE AND ACCURATE NUMBER - ONLY THE UNIVERSE KNOWS THE CORRECT NUMBER, OR CLOSEST TO IT SINCE THE UNIVERSE IS CREATED MOSTLY OF CIRCLES / SPHERES WHICH ALSO NEED TO INCLUDES DIAMETER- RADIUS PIE AND MUCH MORE MATHEMATICS
@nejtilsvampe He got 8 minutes to explain his ideas, but he can't say the difference between what's real and what's not. It was enough to say there's no "good stuff" in his mind. Just another religion brainwashed mind.
@lewisner probably, but he was going to say something along the lines of the cosmological argument, which alot of theists still use, and they should've taken the time to debunk that for the theist viewers imo.
@nejtilsvampe There would be a point to debunking the cosmological argument if it was clearly articulated by who somebody who understood it but this guy didn't.
@lewisner I don't know about that, someone who understands it would clearly not make that argument since it's so easily debunked right? - I just think they treated him kind of rude, and I think they missed an opportunity to educate alot of people in the process.
@TheHomelessCripple The problem is that, for religionists, God is the answer to everything. This is why, for them questions about evolution, the big bang, general relativity, numbers or logic are all interchangeable. The answer is always the same, every time; God and God exists. It would be funny if it wasn't so stupid.
This is sad. It is an example of someone who was mentally abused by religion. This poorly spoken, uneducated person has very little hope of ever learning much because religious poisoning has rendered him incapable of saying 'I don't know'. Even worse, he seems to know it all, if by all we mean god in a metaphorical sense. The circularity of religious arguments is inescapable, which is why illogical people swallow the religious pill more readily. This person is a victim of religion. I'm sorry.
This guy can't even communicate. "can you define the word exist?" and he says"can I define god?".
He doesn't realize how close he is coming to saying that god is just in his head. plus, he thinks it is a good argument to say "it just has to be,,,uhhh....you know logic, right?". Wow,
This guy is prolly still riled up after watching a creationist video full of long words he doesn't understand and tries to use them to convince people of his faith and beleaves so they can feel the same way. And they sounds so right and logical in the videos, because all the real logic, you get time to process, all the bullcrap goes by at an amazing pase so you can't think about it, cuz your not supposed to.
Anyway, don't hate this type of person I descibed. They mean good, but didn't get it yet
Every time I think, "This is the dumbest caller ever!" another one comes along, like this guy, to get even dumber. Few things are more annoying than listening to fools trying to use logic...almost sad, if this guy wasn't so painfully stupid.
the ending was hilarious, especially when matt made the comment about winning a nobel prize, and traci laughed too. i would love to see an episode where traci gets mad and curses during a call.
What is mind? In other words, if our brain is condensed matter to produce this phenomenon of "consciousness," then condensed matter when you climb the fractal scale of the universe would imply a cosmic consciousness. That's why the neurons in a brain cell structurally resemble clusters of galaxies surrounded by stars. Just do a Google image search for "brain cell/universe." So, the universe itself is a kind of mind, an entelechy, a cosmic consciousness and we're all thoughts in the mind of God.
@thegalwegian They're not the same respect to how we experience our everyday consciousness, but if you were to put yourself in a state of a "higher consciousness," then you would resonate with a cosmic consciousness that is ubiquitous all around us, and perhaps permeates our own consciousness.
@thegalwegian Citations of these things do exist, they're just not going to be distilled by orthodox science. Just read Dr. Dennis McKenna or Dr. Rick Strassman's work. These things would instead by hidden by science rather than revealed. Scientists are paid off government workers. DMT will never be publicly announced, it will be repressed. That's why psychedelics are illegal and things like alcohol and tabacco are legal.
@Hanahleia: Alcohol and tabaco are legal because their effects aren't as extreme as drugs when taken in limited quantities, and the damages caused by them are less immediately obvious, which has allowed a powerful industry to build up behind it and lobby for it's existence.
Also, there are many different scientists in many different countries, supported by governments and private organisations with many different agendas. If there are no peer-reviewed articles, it's because it's unproven.
@8NCLI8 Well, that's a conservative position. If you look at it a bit more sinisterly, alcohol and tabacco are a sort of installment for depopulation. You can kill yourself with extreme amounts of alcohol, you can't OD from a psychedelic substance. Tobacco is responsible for more deaths than heroin, cocaine, and methamphetamine combined! Alcohol is only second to tobacco. DMT occurs in the human brain naturally! That's the ultimate catch-22. You think your government isn't hiding anything?
@Hanahleia: Tabacco is responsible for more deaths because it is used by more people. Simple as that. Also, you can definitely OD from psychedelic substances. I'd suggest you watch the video Marijuana: Negative Health Effects by C0nc0rdance, who is actually a professional, and has done proper research.
@Hanahleia: Also, just because sometyhing occurs in the brain naturally, it doesn't mean that increasing the amount is not dangerous. Most things are not dangerous when consumed in limited amounts. Even water is dangerous if you drink too much of it.
Lastly, I don't really think my government is hiding anything like this from me, no. Here, we trust our government, and as opposed to the US, you don't need huge funds to get elected.
@8NCLI8 It's true that any substance is potentially toxic, but if you understand a concept like LD-50 (lethal dose), the LD-50 for LSD has never been discovered. What most people find is that mortality isn't really what you have to fear for with psychedelics, it's sanity.
It doesn't sound like you've any experience with these substances, here's a suggestion if you're but open-minded enough to listen:
@8NCLI8 C0nc0rdance?! Are you kidding me?! The guy is totally bias, he's never even had the experience of smoking marijuana. Besides, cannabis doesn't have to be smoked, it can be ingested or vaporized. Why don't you take it from someone who has first-hand experience? To me, that would be the logical way to go about this. Here's another suggestion for you:
@Hanahleia: He is a medical professionals who has spent a long time gathering peer-reviewed articles and studies on the subject. If anything, smoking marijuana would mean that you have a bias.
Do you have anything to back up your claims that the video is inaccurate and biased, or are you dismissing it because it doesn't fit your personal beliefs?
@8NCLI8 Smoking cannabis doesn't necessarily imply a bias, but rather acknowledge the fact of first-hand experience, which I think is necessary when studying any drug. Why listen to someone who's never had any experience with this substances what-so-ever? The first question he asks is, "Is cannabis addictive?" Well, instead of reading hundreds of articles, why not just smoke it, at least once? I have, and obviously it's not addictive nor a drug of dependence. Besides, + effects outweigh the -.
@Hanahleia , "Well, instead of reading hundreds of articles, why not just smoke it, at least once? I have, and obviously it's not addictive nor a drug of dependence." Right, and I have had alcohol without becoming addicted so obviously it's not addictive(shakes head).Personal experience is useless when it comes to measuring effects on populations.There are lot's of addictive substances but not all substances are equally addictive.
@thegalwegian The addiction is psychological, it's not really attributed to the substance itself. I mean, in the same sense, you can become addicted to a person, a place, chocolate, a whole myriad of things not necessarily related to things like alcohol or tobacco. There's a lot of despair within societies, and alcohol alleviates stress, suppresses, numbs, and most people who use alcohol use it as a temporary "escape." However, I'm talking about cannabis. I wouldn't compare cannabis to alcohol.
@Hanahleia "The addiction is psychological, it's not really attributed to the substance itself."
And why on earth would you think that psychological addiction is less severe?Sure alcohol withdrawal has more physiological symptoms, creates aggression in some whilst intoxicated but have you ever seen a wake'nbaker that hasn't had a spliff in a few hours?I have... So now that I've indulged your comparison of apples and oranges and related personally, would you like me to point you to a study?
@Hanahleia "There's a lot of despair within societies, and alcohol alleviates stress, suppresses, numbs, and most people who use alcohol use it as a temporary "escape."" The exact same thing is true for cannabis.
@Hanahleia: If you smoked it, and like it, you obviously have a stake in the matter, and thus a bias. C0nc0rdance has no stake in this.
You try to establish that personal experience > scientific experiments and trials, when in the real world, the opposite is the case. A personal experience is just that, personal. You can`t use it to make generak statements about the effect of the substance, only how you experienced it.
@8NCLI8 "Anyone who wants to know the human psyche will learn next to nothing from experimental psychology. He would be better advised to abandon exact science, put away his scholar's gown, bid farewell to his study, and wander with human heart throughout the world. Through the experience of passion in every form in his own body, he would reap richer stores of knowledge than text-books a foot thick could give him." -C.G.Jung
C0nc0rdance mentions a bias at 7:22. Language always gives you away.
If we were to take you seriously, doctors should smoke tobacco and get lung cancer before saying it should be banned, instead of conducting clinical trials.
@8NCLI8 I'm talking about first-hand experience of cannabis to ascertain whether it's addictive or not, and it's not. How do I know this? I didn't need to read thousands of articles, I simply tried it for myself. Now, of course, you don't have to smoke tobacco to realize this is a great cause for lung cancer. So, you've used a false analogy, a common fallacy. Now, I'd like to quote Jung on another post here…
@Hanahleia: Just like you can ascertain, without smoking it, that tobacco is addictive and dangerous, you can ascertain, without smoking it, that cannabis is dangerous and addictive. What is the difference? Why will you admit the one, but not the other? Because you have a bias.
About Jung, whom I generally disagree with, I agree that one shouldn't just read books when it comes to the human psyche, but cannabis is measurable and testable, as opposed to our psyche(though there is progress)
@8NCLI8 I can safely bet that you don't use cannabis. Cannabis doesn't cause physical withdrawal symptoms in the same way that an opiate or alcohol potentially can. There's is no physical addiction, the so-called addiction is psychological. That's my point. In the same way that someone addicts to person, a place, or chocolate is the same way someone might frequent their use of marijuana. It's not nearly as dangerous when vaporized or eaten. A suggestion:
@8NCLI8 I rely on the scientific method in combination with experience, and that is what really needs to be done in order to really understand these psychoactive substances. Science can't really know the full spectrum of effects or consequences of THC from an outside observational standpoint. So, if you rely on scientific method alone, then you're right, this talk is done. Without experience, you become a pedantic drudge to the scientific method.
@Hanahleia: Science has a pretty damn good understanding of the full effect of these drugs. There is no need to try them to know whether they are addictive and dangerous, just like tobacco and alcohol. The nice feelings they provide are irrelevant.
@Hanahleia ,"You're 17? Christ! No wonder I can't rely on ratiocination here."
Why now you're commiting a fallacy again, ad-hom in regards to age. First of all, this is the internet, you have no idea of anyones actual age.Second, it speaks miles about your ability to defend your claims when you stoop to putting someone down due to age instead of sticking to the argument itself.There's plenty of smart and well read 17 year olds around.
@Hanahleia: Strawman much? I was 17 when I created my account, genius. I just haven't bothered to update it. Not that age should matter in a discussion.
@8NCLI8 It shouldn't, and I'm not much of a ageist, but what other explanation is there to excuse your denseness? You don't use cannabis because it's illegal despite all the Cannabinoid receptors in your body which seem to imply a symbiotic relationship between plants and consciousness. You use DMT because you can't help it, despite it being a schedule I illegal substance. It's the ultimate catch-22, isn't it?
@Hanahleia , There is no conclusive evidence that DMT is present in human brains so stop talking out of your arse. Besides the info from 8NCLI8, you do realise that psychedelic drugs can and does have other less desirable side effects than seeing nice patterns etc? Lastly, hallucinating that god exists in one way or another does not mean one does.
@thegalwegian DMT is produced in the pineal gland throughout your life, and it is stored in the spinal-cerebral fluid. This has been scientifically proved, that psychedelic tryptamines, including N,N-DMT, 5-MeO-DMT, and other similar compounds, are all found in the cerebral fluid that surrounds the brain and spinal cord, and that the pineal gland, which synthesizes melatonin, is perfectly capable of synthesizing DMT, a cousin of serotonin.
@Hanahleia , Support your statements about pineal gland and dmt with citations from peer-reviewed scientific journals. Don't even think about saying "there isn't any but..." as you did in other comment because you'll be wasting your time and only encourage scorn and derision.
@thegalwegian It's been proven, you're the one I think is in denial of this fact. Even if I found a citation in peer-review, you'd still have skepticism, I bet. However, I'm not going through the trouble. Psychedelics, including DMT, are illegal to research, so that might explain why, and if it's not addressed by peer-review. And if it's not, I don't think I'd trust peer-review as a relaible source of information. Why don't you research it yourself? I'm sure you'd find incontrovertible evidence.
@Hanahleia , Wow, pathetic answer again.Your continued denial and refusal to cough up evidence says it all.I suppose you don't have evidence for this third assertion (dmt research illegal, where btw?)? Since I asked for peer-reviewed evidence your claim that I wouldn't accept such evidence is just more cream on the conspiracy nut cake that is your brain.Since there you don't have any evidence of dmt-pineal gland, why do you believe it?
@Hanahleia ,(cont)Basing his reasoning on the unreferenced and unsupported statement that all the enzymatic material needed to produce DMT is found in the pineal gland (see evidence in mammals), and moreover in substantially greater concentrations than in any other part of the body, Strassman (,[11] p. 69) has speculated that DMT is made in the pineal gland. Currently there is no published reliable scientific evidence supporting this hypothesis and as such, it is merely a hypothesis."
@thegalwegian I read the section titled "speculation," and now realize you've misinterpreted this. It's not speculation or hypothesis that it's endogenously produced in the brain, that's already accepted. What is hypothesis is whether DMT is involved in certain psychological and neurological states such as the dream state, REM states, the near-death state and so forth. You need to heed your own critical remarks, "your continued denial... " That would describe YOU better in this case, not I.
@Hanahleia Fucking christ on a stick, can't you read: ",Strassman (,[11] p. 69) has speculated that DMT is made in the pineal gland. Currently there is no published reliable scientific evidence supporting this hypothesis and as such, it is merely a hypothesis." Do you see the word "speculated" ? Now come one than, I have shown evidence, you're the one making a positive claim, cough up your evidence.
@thegalwegian Yes, I've read that. What I'm saying is that you're misinterpreting it to mean that DMT is not endogenous to the human body. It's accepted that DMT is produced in all mammals, and higher concentrations in primates, and the highest concentration in human beings. What Strassman speculates is that it's elaborated in the pineal gland, that's what is the hypothesis.
@Hanahleia , Your claim was that dmt is produced in the pineal gland, I said it's not.You refused to show evidence for said assertion, I showed evidence that it's just speculation because no evidence of it exists.At no one time have I claimed that it's not present at all in the human body, I did claim that it doesn't occur in the brain (it does in negligible amounts), when I meant to say it's not produced in the brain (it's not). I haven't misinterpreted anything.Care to retract?
@thegalwegian It reads negligible amounts in rats. Melatonin is a hormone secreted from the pineal gland and involved with circadian rhythms. So, DMT, which is related to melatonin, is obviously being produced somewhere in the body. Strassman speculated that the pineal gland is a good candidate for the source of DMT secretions. If you've ever smoked DMT, it casts you into a world of 100% hallucination within the span of about 45 seconds. Strassman discontinued studies due to illegality issues.
@Hanahleia , But were not talking about melatonin. However, in my latest comment I stated as fact that dmt is not produced by the brain in the hopes that you would jump at that since it is established that it is, not just exactly where.Upon which I would say "yes, you're right, I am wrong, see how easy it is to admit when you're wrong?" in the hopes that you would take a hint as far as your own habit of expressing opinions + hypothesis without evidence as fact.Sigh.
@Hanahleia , " If you've ever smoked DMT, it casts you into a world of 100% hallucination within the span of about 45 seconds." I have heard about it but never used it, as with any psychedelic it should be evaluated from all angles whilst realising that hallucinations are not reliable.
@TheFunkytheist heres another one for ya. : )
OpenAirAtheist 5 days ago
If Edward Current ever called your show he'd have you two on your knees acknowledging DeLord Almighty!
Dougster 2 weeks ago
"And if we were in mexico, we would have dos jarros." HAHAHAHA
ColdRainMaker 2 weeks ago
@Thebluesrockmusic But you're lying, and I never lie.
kobrajesusreturns 3 weeks ago
She looks just like John Turturro by the way.
kobrajesusreturns 3 weeks ago
I believe because I've experienced the supernatural crossing of dimensions, but I don't try to define it so much. You can not take it from me though because it was for me to know. Your time will come.
kobrajesusreturns 3 weeks ago
@kobrajesusreturns I was abducted by the Invisible Green Tomato and you can't prove that I wasn't so therefore it is true. You may not believe me but it is for me to know and your time will come.
Thebluesrockmusic 3 weeks ago
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAjhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh*!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
NO ONE HAS EVER SAID THERE WAS NOTHING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
baldurus1 3 weeks ago in playlist More videos from TheAtheistExperience
Don't be too hard on this caller. At least he figured out how to work his phone.
lewisner 1 month ago
every time I think there cannot be a bigger idiot caller on this show, I watch another video and it happens- and here he is!
dancingnancy09 1 month ago 4
Saying you know of a complex intelligence that didn't come from a biological brain is like saying you know of a wooden chair that didn't come from a tree.
theBartone9119 1 month ago
Rofl the title made me think of eyes without a face. Damn I hate that song.
brongarago 1 month ago
rest in peace Christopher Hitchens.
....... But hitch doesn't know he"s dead anyway. Soooooooo
TheAplombMan 1 month ago
So. God supports slavery. Does he? Well, he's a loving God, who loves when jews are happy, so happy jews need slaves. Thing is. God allows for experimentation without making us doubt. Want to know what happens when you sacrifice animals to a rock? Sure, try it, says God, just see what happens. Want to sacrifice babies to a demonic entity? Sure, go ahead, see what happens.. And what happens is.. the NWO, and a corrupt church. That's what baby killing leads to. And Thank God, we figured that out.
Zandonus 1 month ago
man that guy hurts my head
ubernagash 1 month ago
I feel dumber for having watched this video.
tommylehman 1 month ago
boy am i glad i listened to the 2+2 guy because i always thought it was 22 lol
philosophicalreason 1 month ago
Christians are not idiots, stupid, or any other foul name that comes into your mind! Just as atheism leads to many illogical conclusions(IMO). So does belief in a higher power than us( n ur opinion). The truth has not been proven by either side and probably never will ! I think theistically and you think atheistically. Both sides seem predetermined. I guess we can't help ourselves!!!
zubezack 1 month ago
@zubezack Well they aren't idiots, only their arguements are idiotic :D
DeathLordFhyeg 1 month ago
lol this one was funny
freeekin jesusists
mikesomething 1 month ago
ken cant be real
Demo5 1 month ago
I love these guys, they use magic to explain the universe, the only problem is they apparently don't live in the 21st century
TheDano1947 1 month ago
@TheDano1947 The bible is against the practice of magic. Many great scientist were Christians and still are. True science is based in the bible, for example it states in John 1:1 in the beginning was the WORD or sound. Scientist are understanding through quantum physics that everything in the universe is made out of sound for in the beginning was the word. Everything that you see is made out of the invisible it states that in Hebrews scientists have recently only discovered that.
newcity777 1 month ago
@newcity777 "Many great scientist were Christians and still are."
I'm calling bullshit on you. With a wild claim like that, you better provide some proof. Sure, plenty of religious scientists still exist. Roughly 30%. Of those, many do in fact separate religion from science. Intentional ignorance if you will. Now, you said "great" which suggests popularity of some type whether through celebrity or work. So name them.
iz2sicc 1 month ago in playlist Religion/Atheism
@newcity777 I am presuming that with your statement "Scientist are understanding through quantum physics that everything in the universe is made out of sound" you are actually refering to the "string theory"? First of it hasen't fully been aknowledge by the scientific community as there doesn't exist enough emperical evidence for it yet. Secondly, if it indeed turns of to be true, it still has absolutely nothing to do with sound - it is just vibriting strings of energy, nothing more.
GetEasyMoneyCash 1 month ago
I pray for your lost souls. Seriously, please trust in Jesus. He wishes nobody to burn in hell. :) I am praying for you
Fire23eater 1 month ago
@Fire23eater
Yet, he made sure we would. "Nonono, it's all your own choice ..." - Well, god chose this system, knowing very well ppl would end up in hell. He put down the rules for when you enter hell. God already knows if we end up in hell even before he creates us. The only conclusion is that god creates SOME humans, specificaly for hell, and others specificaly for heaven. Why would ANYBODY put trust in to this kind of evil? I guess it takes idiots like you to worship. Good thing it's a myth
tdjdk 1 month ago
I went to bible school and I have studied the bible for years and the New Testament does not say anything close to your argument. If this is not your field of study why are you assuming or making theories on something you have not taken time to evaluate. If your really trying to find the truth search the scriptures with an open heart. It clearly states in the New Testament that a person has a choice to accept Jesus or not. Jesus did not come for the righteous but sinners to be saved
newcity777 1 month ago
@Manguneshane haha whaaat?
ericisaflamer 2 months ago
OMG can anyone see darwin in the background ? !
quantum8kid 2 months ago
@xDanMEH
God created Hell. God created the rules that send people to Hell.
God (for his own bizarre reasoning) has chosen not to provide me any evidence for his existence
God, therefore wants me in hell.
What a sick fuck!
Uberlaser 2 months ago
Before I was thinking of the flying unicorns, following the logic of this caller, because of thought of them, THEY EXIST!!!
GnosticHumanist 2 months ago
Heres a curious observation: All athists are aware of the consiquences of being wrong. But are all deists aware of what happens if their wrong? They threw a life away under the pretense that its better after they die. and more so to extreamists, that they activly went and ruined the lifes of others.
Manguneshane 2 months ago
@Manguneshane Noted , you obviously aren't a follower of Blaise Pascal.
TheDano1947 1 month ago
@TheDano1947
Because Pascals Wager doesn't account for the possibility of every other religion known to the world. Cutting it up into chances would leave everyone with only a extremely small chance of getting something, if anything, right. Id rather use my .5% Chance not counting on questionable promises.
Manguneshane 1 month ago
@xDanMEH I promise that nothing happens to me or you or anyone else. I plooooooomise.
martinboson 2 months ago
@xDanMEH Loving the baseless assertions & there are a lot here... Now prove them
uncleboring 2 months ago
This guy was really struggling to make much sense. Logical reasoning was just replaced with groundless assertions plus weak assumptions, masqueraded as logical arguments with some buzz words thrown in that the guy didn't even understand. For someone to be absolutely sure of something & not be able to explain why is a very sad thing.
uncleboring 2 months ago
logical caller was not logical
LOGIC42369 2 months ago
@xDanMEH Science works, think of medicine, powered flight, electronics, the internet etc, if i ever see any evidence for christianity working i will accept it too. Contact me, when you are scared of the muslim hell or your separation from samsara and i will start worrying about your empty threats of your patently man-made religion.
1empathy 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xDanMEH There are only two ways you can make a statement like "You need more faith to believe in science than Christianity," either you do don't know what faith and belief mean or you don't know what science is.
cujagu 2 months ago
I think the caller wants to know if mathematics has a human or a divine origin. That is, were they invented or discovered? If invented, they can modified......, if discovered, they must absolute (eternal).
Similarly, does "man" have a human or a divine origin?... If "human", he can change or evolve.....if "divine", he is absolute, or eternal.
Finally, can "man" be both: Human and Divine?
ruffomaldito 3 months ago
christians r stupid,it s like talking to a stone
dhampir1000 3 months ago
@dhampir1000 Here is your list of "STUPID CHRISTIAN SCIENTIST, "SIR Isaac Newton, stated "The most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.",Nicholas Copernicus,Galileo Galilei, Rene Descartes, Robert Boyle, and Albert Einstein was not a Christian but, did believe in GOD he stated,"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." The *stupid", founders of science.
newcity777 1 month ago
@newcity777 Firstly, Einstein was an atheist. He always spoke of God metaphorically, as if the Universe had a mind of it's own. Secondly, despite being one of the greatest scientists, Isaac Newton was an absolute nutter... He was the sort of bloke who put needles to the back of his eye sockets and stared at the sun long enough to force him to stay in a dark room for two days. All just ''to see what would happen'' if he did.
Rdburnzy 1 month ago
@newcity777 Einstein did not believe in a personal God. If you would quit relying on religious sources for your information, you would know this. Your sources commit an act called "Quote Mining." How about you tell us what Einstein said before and after that line you quoted? Something tells me you can't.
iz2sicc 1 month ago in playlist Religion/Atheism
What happened to us? Back in the day we could push the mother in law into a volcano to please a god. Now a days muslims get 72 virgins with the same amount of mother in laws. So the guy gets a bad deal an in heaven so do the 72 virgins. Everybody loses. DAMN!
kansaimagic 3 months ago
@Callirgos1 have you read frege?
tullfrogable 3 months ago
The logical absolutes do not exist out side our minds. They are demonstrable outside our minds. That is how Aristotle discovered them, by observing the natural world.
Kailoa36 3 months ago
ken been on crack or ? lol
flexbrat 3 months ago
Wow, this is really funny because the atheists are so philosophically illiterate. Numbers are discovered not imagined up by humans, read Frege!
tullfrogable 3 months ago
@tullfrogable
Typical... you only look at it from your perspective. What numbers did we discover? Base 10, inches, meters, Kelvin? The objective reality we apply the numbers to is real. The numbers themselves are ours, like any other language... and there is more than one language. No no no.... there is not one "real" language either.
Why don't we use colors as a system of measurement? Numbers are just easier - so yes, we did "imagine up" numbers.
Read anything in a different language.
Callirgos1 3 months ago
I sometimes wonder how people can fool themselves intoo thinking god exists and then I remember "o yeah, alot of people are really stupid."
olelumpy 3 months ago
Can you measure numbers? WTF. Don't they understand that numbers are an idea created by humans? How fucking stupid can you get lol.
clintonskakun 3 months ago
@clintonskakun yep, mathematics are what we use to measure equations and how we know how much drugs to give a person so they dont just die....without that created system of measurement by humans....everyone would just be Eyeballing it >.> like stupid animals
MadMAn12gauge 3 months ago
The caller and his God are a perfect match.
Caller's God: A mind without a body.
Caller: A body without a mind.
itsjustameme 3 months ago 26
@itsjustameme no this is actually the orthodox Christian position, and I have done many videos on this subject. And it just wont die!
OpenAirAtheist 5 days ago
@OpenAirAtheist
No. It was me having a crack at humor.
itsjustameme 4 days ago
This is by far the most damning clip of the show illustrating that many people making things up, concocting definition that they can't even verify or substantiate, yet use it as a club to mindlessly hammer the opposition's point.
ninuxy 3 months ago
All of the hosts take time to listen to the callers argument or comments.. Must have been fuckin' annoying to hear stupid religious/creationists talk bullcrap.. When there is something which science has not yet figured out.. You can't just simply say.. ''Ohh God must have done it'' You are making an extrodinary claim.. Which you need a ton of evidence to support..
MarcusEFN 4 months ago
There's only one reason she would have that many dice.
Blatently plays 40k. :p
Vehementi 4 months ago
The Hosts have an admirable amount of patience, I would have tried to strangle this guy through the phone.
Frappuccino1988 4 months ago
Man, that guy was powerfully stupid.
jwhite0398 4 months ago
6:06
Matt: "What do you mean by first cause?"
Ken: "Well, it's very simple, um, blahblitty blum tata.
elroyrigsby 4 months ago
Tracie's explanation of reality was great in this episode!
Adebayo714 4 months ago
Poor theist. He is rambling like all do just to try to prove his God.
Jacob6958 4 months ago
@Jacob6958 slight over generalization of theist (words all, never are not often accurate descriptions) However you are right he is poor theist and is rambling.
casablanca4381 4 months ago
@Jacob6958 using the word all or never would be like ... saying all chinese are good at math.. Well we know logically that is not an accurate qualuifier or Italians are all in the Mafia. That is inaccurate assertion
casablanca4381 4 months ago
@Jacob6958 Let alone saying the above would be insulting to those groups
casablanca4381 4 months ago
Nature is god. Nature has its laws, which either we obey or we get destroyed.
The existence of god is a concept created by human beings. And religions have hijacked it for their own purposes. Praying to god does not make a difference, however obeying nature laws makes you a happy human being.
topthickproducer 5 months ago
The first cause argument is just an endless continuum. To say first cause doesnt get you anywhere. Because you can ask what was before that? Then that's when they say well it just always existed but the orginal statement was to explain that something can't come from nothing but to prove it you are saying that what created first cause came from nothing.
kiddhitta 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NEW BOOK (Donated) For Debates And Governance
Topics: WINNING ARGUMENTS FOR CREATIONISM-EVOLUTIONISM DEBATE (See Subchapter 10.2.2, Chapter 10, of Part Two.), The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balancedway.yolasite.com
balancedway1.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
announcements-balancedway.yolasite.com
TheServiceWeb 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
A CONSCIOUS MIND WITHOUT A BRAIN = A JELLY FISH
krepzer 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
U CAN NOT MEASURE NUMBERS SINCE NUMBERS ARE INFINITE - ALSO NUMBERS ARE NOT ALWAYS CORRECT - LOOK AT PIE- HUMANS JUST ROUND UP PIE AS WE CAN NOT FIGURE A COMPLETE AND ACCURATE NUMBER - ONLY THE UNIVERSE KNOWS THE CORRECT NUMBER, OR CLOSEST TO IT SINCE THE UNIVERSE IS CREATED MOSTLY OF CIRCLES / SPHERES WHICH ALSO NEED TO INCLUDES DIAMETER- RADIUS PIE AND MUCH MORE MATHEMATICS
krepzer 5 months ago
Comment removed
krepzer 5 months ago
Comment removed
krepzer 5 months ago
Comment removed
krepzer 5 months ago
Comment removed
krepzer 5 months ago
Comment removed
krepzer 5 months ago
Comment removed
krepzer 5 months ago
This guy has convinced me there is such thing as a brainless mind.
Chinomareno 5 months ago
@Chinomareno More like a mindless brain.
INTPTT 5 months ago
ok, why did youtube recommend this to me after i watched "led zeppelin - the oceans"? am i missing the connection?
ScooterAndOtis 5 months ago
this is the wrost thing ever. i don't know but i can't say nothing causee fucking im only one person
assbagandro 5 months ago
boo this sucks somethings we can expample
assbagandro 5 months ago
This guy babbled for 8 minutes and didnt say jack shit
bpotts0401 5 months ago
Meth is a hell of a drug.
willd3rbeast 5 months ago
"Why is 2+2=4?"
That's like asking why your right foot is to the right of your left foot.
We define the number 2, we define the addition operator, the result is the same as the number defined to be 4.
Do away with the words, if it helps:
** + ** = ****
JMUDoc 5 months ago 6
lol is that the flying spaghetti monster?
MrWAZZAPDUDE 6 months ago
That's some classic stupidity right there : )
Redshift21 6 months ago
Religion makes uneducated people think they know more than actually educated people.
RottenRroses 6 months ago 2
Wow, that guy.............that guy....... :)
Hemmersfield1 6 months ago
can you say Cognitive Dissonance?
easeconnect 6 months ago
they cut him off before he got to the good stuff, I don't think they treated him verry well here.
nejtilsvampe 6 months ago
@nejtilsvampe He got 8 minutes to explain his ideas, but he can't say the difference between what's real and what's not. It was enough to say there's no "good stuff" in his mind. Just another religion brainwashed mind.
FreeSilio 6 months ago 2
@nejtilsvampe I think they saved him looking any more stupid than he already did. It was mercy.
lewisner 6 months ago
@lewisner probably, but he was going to say something along the lines of the cosmological argument, which alot of theists still use, and they should've taken the time to debunk that for the theist viewers imo.
nejtilsvampe 6 months ago
@nejtilsvampe There would be a point to debunking the cosmological argument if it was clearly articulated by who somebody who understood it but this guy didn't.
lewisner 6 months ago
@lewisner I don't know about that, someone who understands it would clearly not make that argument since it's so easily debunked right? - I just think they treated him kind of rude, and I think they missed an opportunity to educate alot of people in the process.
nejtilsvampe 6 months ago
@nejtilsvampe I have seen this guy call in all the time.
nextgenvids 6 months ago
Tracie Harris OCD at 1:30
Curse274 6 months ago
Wow, this caller is an idiot. Last time I checked General Relativity says nothing about the Big Bang, or the origins of the universe
TheHomelessCripple 7 months ago
@TheHomelessCripple The problem is that, for religionists, God is the answer to everything. This is why, for them questions about evolution, the big bang, general relativity, numbers or logic are all interchangeable. The answer is always the same, every time; God and God exists. It would be funny if it wasn't so stupid.
ritchloui 6 months ago 28
@ritchloui Indeed. Only religion offers absolute certainty about anything.
fred10538 5 months ago
@ritchloui
lol.... "Magic".
Callirgos1 3 months ago
This is sad. It is an example of someone who was mentally abused by religion. This poorly spoken, uneducated person has very little hope of ever learning much because religious poisoning has rendered him incapable of saying 'I don't know'. Even worse, he seems to know it all, if by all we mean god in a metaphorical sense. The circularity of religious arguments is inescapable, which is why illogical people swallow the religious pill more readily. This person is a victim of religion. I'm sorry.
paul07568 7 months ago
This guy can't even communicate. "can you define the word exist?" and he says"can I define god?".
He doesn't realize how close he is coming to saying that god is just in his head. plus, he thinks it is a good argument to say "it just has to be,,,uhhh....you know logic, right?". Wow,
NameSpikeDog 7 months ago
0:57 "Can you measure numbers...."
Yes, it's called COUNTING!!!
nightvidcole 7 months ago 47
@nightvidcole Whenever they ask about numbers or counting I always hear Jean-Luc Picard's voice in my head, "There are four lights."
LadyNightthorn 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@downyourtube Your videos are the biggest fail I have ever watched you have no scientific evidence to back up anything you claim now go away
equinox5005 7 months ago
This guy is prolly still riled up after watching a creationist video full of long words he doesn't understand and tries to use them to convince people of his faith and beleaves so they can feel the same way. And they sounds so right and logical in the videos, because all the real logic, you get time to process, all the bullcrap goes by at an amazing pase so you can't think about it, cuz your not supposed to.
Anyway, don't hate this type of person I descibed. They mean good, but didn't get it yet
Defhrone 7 months ago
@Defhrone "A creationist video full of long words" That's a good one.
brongarago 7 months ago
@brongarago Oxymoron
Ostrasize 7 months ago
The Jar is Ajar? LOL
twistedH3L1X 7 months ago 2
Tracie you absolute hotness, I love your mind Women! Smart and gorgeous, I have find a women like her!
CWJohnson1990 7 months ago
@CWJohnson1990 ya, and she can spell check all your Youtube posts
TheHomelessCripple 7 months ago
this dude be straight trippin.
idreamtofflight 7 months ago 2
all these tapes are going to be classic one day......give up...dont use the word logic or reality if u believe in the non-existent
greenlover42020 7 months ago
@greenlover42020 Yeah, a classic laughingstock one day, maybe.
Hanahleia 7 months ago
Every time I think, "This is the dumbest caller ever!" another one comes along, like this guy, to get even dumber. Few things are more annoying than listening to fools trying to use logic...almost sad, if this guy wasn't so painfully stupid.
paxpaul 7 months ago
wwwdotExposingChristianitydotcom
GahdeMalprigi1488x 7 months ago
Lol the caller didn't even understand half the words he was using. Then he tried to dabble in physics ha ha ha ha
haycockjeff 7 months ago
the ending was hilarious, especially when matt made the comment about winning a nobel prize, and traci laughed too. i would love to see an episode where traci gets mad and curses during a call.
mattakudesu 7 months ago
He was a retard and a sheep, obviously he was try to convince them with arguments he was convinced before by other people.
Dreiz 7 months ago
dude seems stoned
powabiatch 7 months ago
That is one confused person.
eran5005 7 months ago
that caller was brighter than most christians i've met and he had absolutely no point to make
AMpufnstuf 7 months ago
What is mind? In other words, if our brain is condensed matter to produce this phenomenon of "consciousness," then condensed matter when you climb the fractal scale of the universe would imply a cosmic consciousness. That's why the neurons in a brain cell structurally resemble clusters of galaxies surrounded by stars. Just do a Google image search for "brain cell/universe." So, the universe itself is a kind of mind, an entelechy, a cosmic consciousness and we're all thoughts in the mind of God.
Hanahleia 7 months ago
@Hanahleia ,Facepalm. So because two different things look alike they are virtually the same?Really?
thegalwegian 7 months ago
@thegalwegian They're not the same respect to how we experience our everyday consciousness, but if you were to put yourself in a state of a "higher consciousness," then you would resonate with a cosmic consciousness that is ubiquitous all around us, and perhaps permeates our own consciousness.
Hanahleia 7 months ago
@Hanahleia , Evidence for this process, citations from peer-reviewed scientific journal will be accepted.
thegalwegian 7 months ago
@thegalwegian Citations of these things do exist, they're just not going to be distilled by orthodox science. Just read Dr. Dennis McKenna or Dr. Rick Strassman's work. These things would instead by hidden by science rather than revealed. Scientists are paid off government workers. DMT will never be publicly announced, it will be repressed. That's why psychedelics are illegal and things like alcohol and tabacco are legal.
Hanahleia 7 months ago
@Hanahleia: Alcohol and tabaco are legal because their effects aren't as extreme as drugs when taken in limited quantities, and the damages caused by them are less immediately obvious, which has allowed a powerful industry to build up behind it and lobby for it's existence.
Also, there are many different scientists in many different countries, supported by governments and private organisations with many different agendas. If there are no peer-reviewed articles, it's because it's unproven.
8NCLI8 7 months ago
@8NCLI8 Well, that's a conservative position. If you look at it a bit more sinisterly, alcohol and tabacco are a sort of installment for depopulation. You can kill yourself with extreme amounts of alcohol, you can't OD from a psychedelic substance. Tobacco is responsible for more deaths than heroin, cocaine, and methamphetamine combined! Alcohol is only second to tobacco. DMT occurs in the human brain naturally! That's the ultimate catch-22. You think your government isn't hiding anything?
Hanahleia 7 months ago
@Hanahleia: Tabacco is responsible for more deaths because it is used by more people. Simple as that. Also, you can definitely OD from psychedelic substances. I'd suggest you watch the video Marijuana: Negative Health Effects by C0nc0rdance, who is actually a professional, and has done proper research.
8NCLI8 7 months ago
@Hanahleia: Also, just because sometyhing occurs in the brain naturally, it doesn't mean that increasing the amount is not dangerous. Most things are not dangerous when consumed in limited amounts. Even water is dangerous if you drink too much of it.
Lastly, I don't really think my government is hiding anything like this from me, no. Here, we trust our government, and as opposed to the US, you don't need huge funds to get elected.
8NCLI8 7 months ago
@8NCLI8 It's true that any substance is potentially toxic, but if you understand a concept like LD-50 (lethal dose), the LD-50 for LSD has never been discovered. What most people find is that mortality isn't really what you have to fear for with psychedelics, it's sanity.
It doesn't sound like you've any experience with these substances, here's a suggestion if you're but open-minded enough to listen:
/watch?v=Nrj1X6TzEXo&playnext=1&list=PL4D35BC49277B6F49
Hanahleia 7 months ago
@8NCLI8 C0nc0rdance?! Are you kidding me?! The guy is totally bias, he's never even had the experience of smoking marijuana. Besides, cannabis doesn't have to be smoked, it can be ingested or vaporized. Why don't you take it from someone who has first-hand experience? To me, that would be the logical way to go about this. Here's another suggestion for you:
/watch?v=4J0hzqCo3GA
Hanahleia 7 months ago
@Hanahleia: He is a medical professionals who has spent a long time gathering peer-reviewed articles and studies on the subject. If anything, smoking marijuana would mean that you have a bias.
Do you have anything to back up your claims that the video is inaccurate and biased, or are you dismissing it because it doesn't fit your personal beliefs?
8NCLI8 7 months ago
@8NCLI8 Smoking cannabis doesn't necessarily imply a bias, but rather acknowledge the fact of first-hand experience, which I think is necessary when studying any drug. Why listen to someone who's never had any experience with this substances what-so-ever? The first question he asks is, "Is cannabis addictive?" Well, instead of reading hundreds of articles, why not just smoke it, at least once? I have, and obviously it's not addictive nor a drug of dependence. Besides, + effects outweigh the -.
Hanahleia 7 months ago
@Hanahleia , "Well, instead of reading hundreds of articles, why not just smoke it, at least once? I have, and obviously it's not addictive nor a drug of dependence." Right, and I have had alcohol without becoming addicted so obviously it's not addictive(shakes head).Personal experience is useless when it comes to measuring effects on populations.There are lot's of addictive substances but not all substances are equally addictive.
thegalwegian 7 months ago
@thegalwegian The addiction is psychological, it's not really attributed to the substance itself. I mean, in the same sense, you can become addicted to a person, a place, chocolate, a whole myriad of things not necessarily related to things like alcohol or tobacco. There's a lot of despair within societies, and alcohol alleviates stress, suppresses, numbs, and most people who use alcohol use it as a temporary "escape." However, I'm talking about cannabis. I wouldn't compare cannabis to alcohol.
Hanahleia 7 months ago
@Hanahleia "The addiction is psychological, it's not really attributed to the substance itself."
And why on earth would you think that psychological addiction is less severe?Sure alcohol withdrawal has more physiological symptoms, creates aggression in some whilst intoxicated but have you ever seen a wake'nbaker that hasn't had a spliff in a few hours?I have... So now that I've indulged your comparison of apples and oranges and related personally, would you like me to point you to a study?
thegalwegian 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Hanahleia "There's a lot of despair within societies, and alcohol alleviates stress, suppresses, numbs, and most people who use alcohol use it as a temporary "escape."" The exact same thing is true for cannabis.
thegalwegian 7 months ago
@Hanahleia: If you smoked it, and like it, you obviously have a stake in the matter, and thus a bias. C0nc0rdance has no stake in this.
You try to establish that personal experience > scientific experiments and trials, when in the real world, the opposite is the case. A personal experience is just that, personal. You can`t use it to make generak statements about the effect of the substance, only how you experienced it.
8NCLI8 7 months ago
@8NCLI8 "Anyone who wants to know the human psyche will learn next to nothing from experimental psychology. He would be better advised to abandon exact science, put away his scholar's gown, bid farewell to his study, and wander with human heart throughout the world. Through the experience of passion in every form in his own body, he would reap richer stores of knowledge than text-books a foot thick could give him." -C.G.Jung
C0nc0rdance mentions a bias at 7:22. Language always gives you away.
Hanahleia 7 months ago
If we were to take you seriously, doctors should smoke tobacco and get lung cancer before saying it should be banned, instead of conducting clinical trials.
8NCLI8 7 months ago
@8NCLI8 I'm talking about first-hand experience of cannabis to ascertain whether it's addictive or not, and it's not. How do I know this? I didn't need to read thousands of articles, I simply tried it for myself. Now, of course, you don't have to smoke tobacco to realize this is a great cause for lung cancer. So, you've used a false analogy, a common fallacy. Now, I'd like to quote Jung on another post here…
Hanahleia 7 months ago
@Hanahleia: Just like you can ascertain, without smoking it, that tobacco is addictive and dangerous, you can ascertain, without smoking it, that cannabis is dangerous and addictive. What is the difference? Why will you admit the one, but not the other? Because you have a bias.
About Jung, whom I generally disagree with, I agree that one shouldn't just read books when it comes to the human psyche, but cannabis is measurable and testable, as opposed to our psyche(though there is progress)
8NCLI8 7 months ago
@8NCLI8 I can safely bet that you don't use cannabis. Cannabis doesn't cause physical withdrawal symptoms in the same way that an opiate or alcohol potentially can. There's is no physical addiction, the so-called addiction is psychological. That's my point. In the same way that someone addicts to person, a place, or chocolate is the same way someone might frequent their use of marijuana. It's not nearly as dangerous when vaporized or eaten. A suggestion:
/watch?v=DBQCWVAmEik
Hanahleia 7 months ago
@Hanahleia: No, I do not smoke cannabis. It is illegal.
Your personal experience is that it is not addictive, while studies show that it is for many people.
Scientific method > Personal experience. If you can't even grasp that basic fact, we have nothing more to talk about.
8NCLI8 7 months ago
@8NCLI8 And what study is that?
HoLOLcaust 7 months ago
@HoLOLcaust: Watch C0nc0rdance's video.
8NCLI8 7 months ago
@8NCLI8 I rely on the scientific method in combination with experience, and that is what really needs to be done in order to really understand these psychoactive substances. Science can't really know the full spectrum of effects or consequences of THC from an outside observational standpoint. So, if you rely on scientific method alone, then you're right, this talk is done. Without experience, you become a pedantic drudge to the scientific method.
Hanahleia 7 months ago
@Hanahleia: Science has a pretty damn good understanding of the full effect of these drugs. There is no need to try them to know whether they are addictive and dangerous, just like tobacco and alcohol. The nice feelings they provide are irrelevant.
Yes, this conversation is over.
8NCLI8 7 months ago
@8NCLI8 You're 17? Christ! No wonder I can't rely on ratiocination here.
Hanahleia 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Hanahleia ,"You're 17? Christ! No wonder I can't rely on ratiocination here."
Why now you're commiting a fallacy again, ad-hom in regards to age. First of all, this is the internet, you have no idea of anyones actual age.Second, it speaks miles about your ability to defend your claims when you stoop to putting someone down due to age instead of sticking to the argument itself.There's plenty of smart and well read 17 year olds around.
thegalwegian 7 months ago
@Hanahleia: Strawman much? I was 17 when I created my account, genius. I just haven't bothered to update it. Not that age should matter in a discussion.
8NCLI8 7 months ago
@8NCLI8 It shouldn't, and I'm not much of a ageist, but what other explanation is there to excuse your denseness? You don't use cannabis because it's illegal despite all the Cannabinoid receptors in your body which seem to imply a symbiotic relationship between plants and consciousness. You use DMT because you can't help it, despite it being a schedule I illegal substance. It's the ultimate catch-22, isn't it?
Hanahleia 7 months ago
@Hanahleia , There is no conclusive evidence that DMT is present in human brains so stop talking out of your arse. Besides the info from 8NCLI8, you do realise that psychedelic drugs can and does have other less desirable side effects than seeing nice patterns etc? Lastly, hallucinating that god exists in one way or another does not mean one does.
thegalwegian 7 months ago
@thegalwegian DMT is produced in the pineal gland throughout your life, and it is stored in the spinal-cerebral fluid. This has been scientifically proved, that psychedelic tryptamines, including N,N-DMT, 5-MeO-DMT, and other similar compounds, are all found in the cerebral fluid that surrounds the brain and spinal cord, and that the pineal gland, which synthesizes melatonin, is perfectly capable of synthesizing DMT, a cousin of serotonin.
Hanahleia 7 months ago
@Hanahleia , Support your statements about pineal gland and dmt with citations from peer-reviewed scientific journals. Don't even think about saying "there isn't any but..." as you did in other comment because you'll be wasting your time and only encourage scorn and derision.
thegalwegian 7 months ago
@thegalwegian It's been proven, you're the one I think is in denial of this fact. Even if I found a citation in peer-review, you'd still have skepticism, I bet. However, I'm not going through the trouble. Psychedelics, including DMT, are illegal to research, so that might explain why, and if it's not addressed by peer-review. And if it's not, I don't think I'd trust peer-review as a relaible source of information. Why don't you research it yourself? I'm sure you'd find incontrovertible evidence.
Hanahleia 7 months ago
@Hanahleia , Wow, pathetic answer again.Your continued denial and refusal to cough up evidence says it all.I suppose you don't have evidence for this third assertion (dmt research illegal, where btw?)? Since I asked for peer-reviewed evidence your claim that I wouldn't accept such evidence is just more cream on the conspiracy nut cake that is your brain.Since there you don't have any evidence of dmt-pineal gland, why do you believe it?
thegalwegian 7 months ago
@Hanahleia ,(cont)Basing his reasoning on the unreferenced and unsupported statement that all the enzymatic material needed to produce DMT is found in the pineal gland (see evidence in mammals), and moreover in substantially greater concentrations than in any other part of the body, Strassman (,[11] p. 69) has speculated that DMT is made in the pineal gland. Currently there is no published reliable scientific evidence supporting this hypothesis and as such, it is merely a hypothesis."
thegalwegian 7 months ago
@thegalwegian I read the section titled "speculation," and now realize you've misinterpreted this. It's not speculation or hypothesis that it's endogenously produced in the brain, that's already accepted. What is hypothesis is whether DMT is involved in certain psychological and neurological states such as the dream state, REM states, the near-death state and so forth. You need to heed your own critical remarks, "your continued denial... " That would describe YOU better in this case, not I.
Hanahleia 7 months ago
@Hanahleia Fucking christ on a stick, can't you read: ",Strassman (,[11] p. 69) has speculated that DMT is made in the pineal gland. Currently there is no published reliable scientific evidence supporting this hypothesis and as such, it is merely a hypothesis." Do you see the word "speculated" ? Now come one than, I have shown evidence, you're the one making a positive claim, cough up your evidence.
thegalwegian 7 months ago
@thegalwegian Yes, I've read that. What I'm saying is that you're misinterpreting it to mean that DMT is not endogenous to the human body. It's accepted that DMT is produced in all mammals, and higher concentrations in primates, and the highest concentration in human beings. What Strassman speculates is that it's elaborated in the pineal gland, that's what is the hypothesis.
Hanahleia 7 months ago
@Hanahleia , Your claim was that dmt is produced in the pineal gland, I said it's not.You refused to show evidence for said assertion, I showed evidence that it's just speculation because no evidence of it exists.At no one time have I claimed that it's not present at all in the human body, I did claim that it doesn't occur in the brain (it does in negligible amounts), when I meant to say it's not produced in the brain (it's not). I haven't misinterpreted anything.Care to retract?
thegalwegian 7 months ago
Comment removed
Hanahleia 7 months ago
@thegalwegian It reads negligible amounts in rats. Melatonin is a hormone secreted from the pineal gland and involved with circadian rhythms. So, DMT, which is related to melatonin, is obviously being produced somewhere in the body. Strassman speculated that the pineal gland is a good candidate for the source of DMT secretions. If you've ever smoked DMT, it casts you into a world of 100% hallucination within the span of about 45 seconds. Strassman discontinued studies due to illegality issues.
Hanahleia 7 months ago
@Hanahleia , But were not talking about melatonin. However, in my latest comment I stated as fact that dmt is not produced by the brain in the hopes that you would jump at that since it is established that it is, not just exactly where.Upon which I would say "yes, you're right, I am wrong, see how easy it is to admit when you're wrong?" in the hopes that you would take a hint as far as your own habit of expressing opinions + hypothesis without evidence as fact.Sigh.
thegalwegian 7 months ago
@Hanahleia , " If you've ever smoked DMT, it casts you into a world of 100% hallucination within the span of about 45 seconds." I have heard about it but never used it, as with any psychedelic it should be evaluated from all angles whilst realising that hallucinations are not reliable.
thegalwegian 7 months ago