The Atheism Tapes - Daniel Dennett - The Soul

[chrispikeyp]

some really good stuff here

[MrJonkelp]

some really good stuff here

[Eriance]

@Oliverk94

His reincarnation.

[DeenerBabiixxo]

@Oliverk94 He looks like Socrates to me. lol

[egyptian3rdeye]

This is part of the problem with lay-person conceptions of souls, spirits, and the afterlife: they are unembodied and immaterial. This provides good fodder for the debunkers and atheists. But souls, spirits, and the afterlife are not unembodied and immaterial. Spirits are as "solid" to one another as we humans are to one another. The greatest problem for both religion and science is how we understand the nature of "spirit." Both have gotten it wrong, but in some ways both have it right.

[TinyTurtie]

@egyptian3rdeye basically what your saying is completely contradictory.

[nanoday1]

lol Casper

[TheCyclingsaint]

couple of idiots!

[kapaleev]

If scientists can conceive off and formulate concepts that cannot be felt, why can others not do the same. What makes the scientists believe that there exists a , homogeneous, omnipresent, and fundamental particle that is the building block of everything that is there in this universe? Which scientist has felt that the universe is homogeneous that too without leaving earth or our solar system?

[CarlSagan6]

@kapaleev Because the concepts born from science are not just products of mere speculation. They are products of careful observation, evidence, and predictions made from other preexisting theories.

[CarlSagan6]

@kapaleev I myself am a physicist, and when we scientists hypothesize the existence of something like the Higgs boson or the homogeneity of the universe, it's not just some whim. We do so because those hypotheses are implied in some way or another from standing, well-tested particle physics or cosmological models. We assume as little as possible and are obliged to thoughtfully consider ALL evidence at hand.

[DeepCore214]

@CarlSagan6

Enter Doctor Duncan MacDougall circa 1910. He and several doctors weighed the human soul in a scientifically accurate forum, it was even published in journals. Man is very blind by culture and religion that tells you what they want. Without them you'd see the power and beautiful of the soul, also that it doesn't require you donating money or hate. Because in the end, the love you make is the love you receive.

[uiruu]

@DeepCore214 Wow. This guy actually thinks a soul is a real thing.

[lindazimmer]

If this guy was a bit smarter he would become religious, but not in the stupid way most people become. Chris Langan, highest IQ recorded, almost told it. We're few. Is it too early to reveal the truth?

One of us broke the ice. Question is, is the world ready for the real truth about God and Satan?

Download 'Revelations 10 Little Book' from Amazon. The author is one of us.

Telling the truth might be a mistake. Hope not. We took a gamble. Payoff is no nuclear war we see coming.

[MiKKA335]

@lindazimmer shut up.

[boshea8498]

@lindazimmer blah blah blah. smart man believes in god this is my argument for god get a grip, i know its probably not how you reason it but the fact you use it as justification just makes you look silly. you want to do the god thing fine. i dont even know if ideas such as truth hold some fundamental meaning. so i have no idea what the truth of a god entails. fucking satan give me a break. but if you can please do enlighten me. im not reading the book though. some words => god?

[chrisjeffsmusic]

see you fuckers, I told you santa was fucking real

[marsCubed]

IMO Religion stole these concepts from humanity.

Just as it attempts to do with science by using ID today. It becomes a mirror but with BS, to concepts exposing it's fraud.

Ie. the concept of the infinite & unity are not from religion, religion has people god wars. The concept of soul or spirit is corrupted by religious drivel.

People have a tangible sense of community & festivity; the spirit of a gathering, it's soul. Religions steals & trashes our language & abuses kids with utter junk.

[Airlightf]

Chimpanzees cannot understand man.

[Airlightf]

Dennett , your beard es more dangerous that the guy who is talking to you.

[Airlightf]

What an idiot! By saying that there is no continuety after life, is the same as hearing the words of a moron.

[Airlightf]

This video is a good demostration of atheists idi0cracies. Good job, athiests!!!

[Airlightf]

Dennett, your nose/beard is more dangerous than Darwin's fantacious theory.

[Huckxxx]

@Airlightf your religion is a gay-bashing, woman-hating, fear-mongering cult of human sacrifice that deserves idiots such as yourself as followers. i will point out that you still haven't answered any of my very simple questions, but i doubt you'll respond honestly.

[Huckxxx]

i have faith that there is no god. OH SNAP I THINK I JUST WON THE ARGUMENT ONCE AND FOR ALL.

[KaraBear567]

Lol - I always wondered about that Casper thing when I was a kid! I concluded that he had the ability to make himself material or immaterial at will - just like he could make himself invisible or sound like Arnold Schwarzenegger.

[Airlightf]

Atheists’ arguments against God are laughable and moronic: If I can give Christians a better life (than the kind of life Jesus—their king—gives them) or at least show them[convince them with facts my way is better than Jesus’] the best way to live life, then I have a right to open my mouth and speak up. But if I cannot do either, then the best thing for me to do is to shut my mouth and let Christians live their lives in Jesus’ Love, Way, and truth!!!

[xspilix]

@Airlightf Thus the reason i tend to steer clear of religious debates. It's the Atheists who are closed minded and ignorant that tend to pick the fights. Also [i doubt this is a proven fact] but from my experiences tend to be younger teenagers. I have nothing wrong with a debate, as long as you have valid points to back up an argument. Unfortunately you don't see many intelligent debates in the YouTube comments section. XD.

[Alexdurrant7]

@Airlightf cool story bro

[Airlightf]

@Alexdurrant7 Thank you :) Those moronic--atheists will always Fail in their attempt to bring up an rational argument against God.

[Airlightf]

Dennett -you look kind of sad.

[Airlightf]

“You will never see a spear making a spear. You will never see a horse shoe making a blacksmith. You will never see a pot making a potter.” –Dennett.

Well, the spear tells who made it. The horse shoe tells you who the maker is. Now, you will never see a pot laughing--mocking in the hands of its Creator without getting broken(into small pieces) or thrown outside. Don’t you see this pile of disobedient pots by my side?

Airlightf 1 day ago

[Huckxxx]

@Airlightf you cannot compare and contrast the nature of the contents of the universe with the nature of the universe itself. furthermore, the items you list all have identifiable uses, hence we associate them with having users. the universe on the other hand has no identifiable use. it is simplistic vanity that insists we humans must have a use, thus we must have a user (a god).

[Airlightf]

@Huckxxx GOD created the Universe and Its contents. THE LAWS stablished in the Universe ARE GOD's LAWS.

[Huckxxx]

@Airlightf 1. which god? 2. why do you believe that? 3. what if i also believe it, but simply don't care? 4. why does your response address none of my points?

[Airlightf]

@Huckxxx I do not care to answer your question.

[Huckxxx]

@Airlightf and thus you are disqualified from the debate! congratulations.

[Airlightf]

@Huckxxx And thus said the monkey-ape atheists. Congratulations! A monkey/ape has spoken!!!

[ThulinMartin]

@Airlightf ignorant.....

Do you even know what your God made us of? according to the bible?

Id rather be an evolved being (with a common ancestor with the apes) then a person without free will made of dirt....

[Airlightf]

@ThulinMartin So you think God cannot make anything out of the wind?

It's ok you can call yourselves apes/monkeys but don't insult others.

[ThulinMartin]

@Airlightf You dont know your bible??

It says he made man from dirt.....

How is it an insult to have common ancestors with apes?

[Airlightf]

@ThulinMartin "and God breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. "

[Airlightf]

@Airlightf If you want to sleep with an ape, go ahead. If you want to mate with a monkey, go ahead. If you want to have sex with men , or both men and women, go ahead.

[goooosey1]

@Huckxxx look man

[ThulinMartin]

@Airlightf and a loving God he is.... Making the rules so that if u fail.... u will suffer for eternity....

Now that a moral and good God....

[ThulinMartin]

@Airlightf If u just think longer then a second. You will realise that what u just wrote proves that God is immoral if he exists....

He knows forehand who is goin to choose so that they will go to hell.

Knowing who will go to hell and who wont. It is immoral to create them. Just so they can live for a short while and then go to hell....

Understand?

[Airlightf]

@ThulinMartin bUT do you know? You choose where you want to go.

[ThulinMartin]

@Airlightf Dan dennet is a so called determinist... but also a compatibilist...

Im not sure... I would like to think that i have a free will..... (hence not a determinist, and not a believer in God) but i have no good argument for why this is true....

[Airlightf]

@ThulinMartin I cannot beleive for you but i am embarrased for you :| Only an idiot/brainless can make a conclusion like yours" Knowing who will go to hell and who wont. It is immoral to create them. Just so they can live for a short while and then go to hell...." Did God tell you to become an atheist?" So you wan a god who doesn't know the future?

[ThulinMartin]

@Airlightf that God would be more moral yes... But NO i dont want a God that doesnt know the future... I dont want a God at all... I want there to be free will.... But this isnt about what i want. Want and Believe is 2 different things. I dont believe in God.

I cannot choose to believe... thats what makes him so immoral for sending people like me to hell. (that is if he does exist

PLZ try to understand.

[Airlightf]

@ThulinMartin God is Who He is. And nothing is going to change that. You will die anyway. It would be like you never existed anyway. So what mortals say don't count.

[ThulinMartin]

@Airlightf What?? U dont understand anything of what i wrote?

What you just wrote is totally irrelevant to the discussion....

Put your critical thinking brain back in and then read our whole discussion again.

[Airlightf]

@ThulinMartin A chimp cannot understand a human being.

[Airlightf]

@ThulinMartin The reason a chimp cannot understand man is because chimps brain are smaller.

[ThulinMartin]

@Airlightf And that my friend is the end of me trying to have a reasonable discussion with you.

[Airlightf]

@ThulinMartin I don't brag to know about things I didn't witness because a rational person will say "I do not know because I wasn't there at the time."

-- You know I don't believe in fantacy for adults or forced imaginatia to talk about things my eyes have never seen.

[goooosey1]

@Huckxxx You are going too burn in hell sitting on two hoarns. You beter hope Jesus forgives you. I used to be atheist but then a priest stuck his finger up my arse and I found GOD. And I remain forever thankful.

[ThulinMartin]

@goooosey1 lol---- typical priests...

[goooosey1]

@Huckxxx

.youtube.com/watch?v=2LjyleNzq­iA

[kansaimagic]

hope you guys like the 1 GOD MORE TUNE. It's on stunpals(dotcom) and on the youtube search.

[Airlightf]

it is hard for babies/kids to understand their parents as it is hard for atheists to understand God because they are not omnipotent, omniscience, omnibenevolent, or Eternal. It is GOD's Exaggeratedly power that confuse most human beings because our minds cannot possibly comprehend HIS Attributes completely.

[Vomitonthecross]

@Airlightf Which is more likely, that all of life's great mysteries are in the hands of a surreptitious creator silently watching his creation give birth and die for a purpose not allowed for us to know, or that being afraid of the dark, death and ultimate questions is part of the human condition, so cave-dwellers decided to perpetuate a belief to comfort them that has been perpetuated further by happy go lucky Christians like you? I think you know the answer as well as I do.

[Vomitonthecross]

@Airlightf That's your best argument? God's "exaggeratedly" power? first off it's exaggerated power, and second you may have just refuted your own belief. If God's power is exaggerated, then maybe God is a metaphor for happiness or a time and place that comforts you, or something gay like that."It is hard for atheists to understand God because they are not omnipotent." So you're saying Christians are those things? What gives you the right to say you understand big questions any more than I do?

[Airlightf]

@Vomitonthecross Now, why are you acting gay? Christians never say they understand God completely. But what we know about HIM is enough to humble ourselves before Him, that which atheists don't do, they are too in the right, I guess.

[Vomitonthecross]

@Airlightf And how is it that God loves you but if you can't find him or see his evidence he burns you in hell? Also, why did your God create our universe? Why couldn't it have been Krishna or Mythra or Allah or a Unicorn? I think the problem isn't that atheists don't understand God's power, but that you don't understand that you are a primate like the rest of us, and that we are all responsible for what goes on based on our choices, and not by prayers. They are the echoes of our wailing cries

[Airlightf]

@Vomitonthecross It is not hard to find God. No one says that God doesn't know that which is in your heart or mind or that he will burn you just for fun. The reason why God extended the Universe I do not know it. Believers act differently in different territories marked by GOD. Yes, I agree we are responsible because God didn't create robots. Prayer is a communication between man and God, between the soul and its Creator....Surely God hears our cries. By experience, Surely HE doesn't ignore it.

[Vomitonthecross]

@Airlightf Refute that. I think you lose.

[Vomitonthecross]

@Airlightf All living souls welcome whatever they are ready to cope with; all else they ignore, or pronounce to be monstrous and wrong, or deny to be possible.

-George Santayana

[Airlightf]

@Vomitonthecross That is One personal opinion which may be true in some but not in everybody making their claims.

[Airlightf]

I will not stay silent!!! I will declare to the UNIVERSE and the whole world that GOD Almighty created them! ~\0/~

[Vomitonthecross]

@Airlightf And since you've felt it necessary to spam the page with awful ignorance, I think I will push you off of it, to give people faith that the world isn't completely full of idiots. If God designed the universe perfectly to fit us, why is it that everything in space is out to kill us? Giant meteors, black holes, space debris, supernovas, dead lifeless planets, amazingly deadly changes in temperature and gravity and states of matter, only one planet that can seldom support life.

[ThulinMartin]

@Airlightf prove it...

[Airlightf]

now, you tell me how was man made and by who?

[Airlightf]

Second, evolution occurs naturally when the Laws of God act (or respond to them Naturally) upon them. Because any event that occurs in the Universe, is the result of the NATURAL LAWS governing the Universe, LAWS that were set by GOD. Something in our world, every event you see, is the result of God's law in action. You see how easily your statement is refuted by me?

[Vomitonthecross]

@Airlightf That comment on you "refuting" evolution, was not a refutation any more than the statement, "I still believe in Unicorns so that means that they put into place the laws of physics." Any good refutation is not a non-sequitur. Look it up if you don't know what it means. Here is a good quote, "if God is omniscient and omnipotent, what could he possibly be jealous of?"

[Airlightf]

@Vomitonthecross "I still believe in Unicorns so that means that they put into place the laws of physics." LOL. By replacing bicycle tires n a car doesn't change the car into a bicycle. HAHAHAH. Could you explain to mewhat do you understand by these two word?: omniscient and omnipotent, while I am drinking my coffee.

[Airlightf]

God is our everything!!!!!By faith atheists believe that the Universe emerged from an explosion (big bang) By blind faith atheists believe that they will find aliesns in outer space. By blind faith they believe that the Messiah (missing link) will one day to save them by shutting creationists's mouth. By blind faith they believe they came from a (imaginary gorrilla)non-existence Ape/monkey/chimp. By blind faith

[Vomitonthecross]

@Airlightf That is some of the most fatuous garbage I've ever heard. It takes no faith of the kind you're implying. Blind faith is faith without evidence aka Christianity. Faith that evolution and the big bang were and are true events is presented by the best evidence out there, which puts it head and shoulders above anything Christianity has to offer. That's why creationism will never be taught in our schools, because all it has is "God did it" and no actual science.

[Airlightf]

@Vomitonthecross Just don't spew on me, please.

[Airlightf]

@Vomitonthecross First, go ask at least 50/100 Christians how did the Redeemer saved them. You will see with your own eyes how the garbage coming out of your mouth will be comsumed before the fire.

[Vomitonthecross]

@Airlightf Also let's talk likelihood. Which is more likely, that by means of natural occurrences we got the position we're in now, or that a celestial entity impregnated a Palestinian virgin to redeem the world and will be coming back when he feels like it to take us to another dimension? Which is more likely, that there is no exception for miracles and that everything has a natural explanation or that the "truest" idea ever still takes the surrendering of our "God given" thinking facilities?

[Airlightf]

@Vomitonthecross Naturally occurrence(s) is that Will of GOD which brought me here. The world is redeemed by GOD and by nobody else.

[Airlightf]

@Vomitonthecross Let us talk about things that which our eyes have seen and not things which our eyes or the eyes of your parents/ancestors have not seen because you cannot neither prove or disprove that.

[Vomitonthecross]

@Airlightf Also apparently you have no understanding of the theory of evolution. (yes it's a theory, now dwell on that for another hundred years) Nowhere in the theory of evolution does it say we came from monkeys or apes, they share a common ancestor. And what's wrong with believing that we are all cut from the same cloth as plants and animals so that we share a responsibility in taking care of them instead of building mega-churches and killing the trees "God made" to print your Bibles on?

[Airlightf]

@Vomitonthecross "they share a common ancestor. " And does that prove anything in the sense that we are here without direct links? Evolutionists say they came from apes--Great Ape. I totally agree we should take good care of one another. But men are free to choose between right and wrong, good and evil. Bibles are like bread which come from the ground, people demand them.

[Yellowwatts]

google Doe's Account, mindblowing.

[ULQININYC]

bull shit, bull shit hahaha

[Twicebakedtaters]

Everybody also knows free will, meaning, morality,values, sentience, all philosophical conjectures are not consistent.

There are only 4 identifiable forces that drive every natural causal effect event. But everybody goes along with the gag.

[fede2]

dennett has a KICK-ASS BEARD

[MultiJacob17]

@fede2 and a kick-ass mind

[dLimboStick]

Is it just me, or did the bearded dude completely miss the point the old dude was making? The old dude was talking about continuity of consciousness after death and the bearded guy completely missed the mark and started talking about appearance and physical form after death.

[spleenblender]

I disagree. I think he's expounding on it by pointing out the fact that we have no experience whatsoever with the immaterial whatsoever and that any discussion of the immaterial necessitates unbounded imagination.

I am glad he made the parallel to thought experiments though since those are usually just analogies of the reality they are describing just as can be argued with the human visualization of the concept of of a soul.

[StarTrekLivz]

St Augustine, the 4th-5th Century bishop of Hippo in North Africa, wrote on how at the resurrection people would get idealized bodies -- specifically because his parishioners were afraid they would resurrect as they died: old, or sick, or injured, or maimed, etc.

I remember reading a guide to a Star Trek episode where people were out of phase; they walked through walls but didn't fall through the floor. When you posit the question, you realise how ridiculous the idea is.

[Twicebakedtaters]

"any discussion of the immaterial necessitates unbounded imagination."

Ah, you mean philosophy.

: )

[GnomesAmok]

No thats just you. That "old dude" is Steven Wolpert, a cellular biologist also know for his epistemological skepticism with regards to concepts like "continuity of consciousness after death" and the immaterial 'soul' (he has an atheistic worldview, though im sure his philosophical beliefs are much deeper than that)

Hewas making the point that Dennett extended about how people are actually unable to imagine such concepts without anchoring them in material terms within the minds eye.

[dkw12002]

Religion is someone's ideal. Take the soul. If a person survived death somehow, would they be resurrected as the same demented, overweight, old, person that died? If not, if they were some idealized form of the person, that would not be the same person. What we thing, feel, experience and how we view ourselves IS us. Change that and it is no longer us getting rewarded or punished. Mind/body are inseparable. The only eternity would be something like Elvis being eternal when you hear Hounddog.

[foolsbetrippin]

what dreams may come¿

[dmustard11]

@foolsbetrippin shit film

[foolsbetrippin]

i like it. i dont agree with premise as a stab at reality, but its a provocative movie.

don't be hatin

[dmustard11]

@foolsbetrippin It's a fantasy movie.

[foolsbetrippin]

yes it is a fantasy movie. i tam saying its a good one.

[mapscannotcontainme]

Casper? It's all so simple now. Casper the friendly ghost!

Holy shit. Why couldnt I see this before?

I'm just kidding. I don't agree with everything Dennett says and deistically (is that a word?) we don't share the same views, but he's a smart guy and I enjoy his books and admire him for his fight against fanaticism and extremism as well as his throwback Charles Darwin appearance. :)

Wouldn't have begged him as a Casper fan however.

[gavinmacmounsey]

Silly Christains, Tricks are for Kids

[ChaseKittens]

lololololololololololol

[metacarpi]

Because you can't conceptualise it, it doesn't mean you can't beleive in it. Faulty logic.

You should know better than that Denett.

[ChaseKittens]

he never said so. He even said that quantum physicists have the full right to have confidence in quantum mechanics even if they can't conceptualize it.

[metacarpi]

So why can't people have full confidence in the existance of an immaterial soul. Afterall I do exist, there is quite possibly something of me that doesn't exist in the material world, like my dreams, and desires, what are they?

I dont see the inconsistancy with respect to any good scientific theory, Dennett always assumes what he sets out to prove, which makes him a bad philosopher.

[ChaseKittens]

The difference is that there is no evidence or argument whatsoever for an immaterial soul when the mathematics behind quantum theory is rock solid.

[metacarpi]

But the currency of science is not proof, it is falsifying what could possibly be true.

I dont think science has done away with the hypothesis of a soul, nor is it even close to it.

We are afterall talking about two entirely different tiers of existance, one on a very minute scale, but we already know that existance of a consciousness comes from higher levels and effects the outcome of these minute systems (Quantum Measurement) so doesn't that show a non-material reality of this consciousness

[metacarpi]

A soul that is definable in higher levels only and not reducable to the parts of a mechanistic system.

[ChaseKittens]

Our "soul" is reducible.

[metacarpi]

No it isnt.

This wont go much further than this I'm afraid.

[ChaseKittens]

Won't go much further? If you want to ignore facts, maybe it won't.

However if you want to accept facts such as how we look at what a neuron is doing, how it makes up complex patterns to make the architecture of our brain, and how the number of neurons and connections between them easily produce enough computing to animate a human being, then yes, the soul is quite reducible.

[metacarpi]

I have yet to be convinced that this is little more than your opinion. The evidence doesn't even come close to demonstrating anything like this, else we would have real intelligence simulated on computer hardware. Read John Searle if you want a critique of strong AI.

I'm not going to contribute any more to this discussion because you are gleefully jumping to conclusions without any reason to.

An indication that worldview proceeds the science, not the other way round as Dennett would suggest.

[Pussychka]

We do know that neurons are important for your soul. If a soul existed (and I assume you also believe in God as creator of souls, at least the first one) then there would be no need for a physical world. We could exist in a world where there is no lack of resources necesary for survival, and hence need for 'sin'. Also, when you're 'knocked' on the head, your soul gets a bit... goofy. That sort of links the 'soul' to the body.

[ChaseKittens]

Ermm, no, it's not really my opinion. Even a vague view of modern neuroscience will show that neurons make up a vast net of one electro-chemical computer that is the brain. It's not my opinion, and that fact that you would think it's my opinion would put the conflict of world view on your own side.

[metacarpi]

A vague view of modern neuroscience with a enourmous a priori assumption will show the brain is just a vast net that makes one electro-chemical computer.

It's not a conflict, only extreemists need that to be so, it's supposed to be a rational discussion of the facts.

[ChaseKittens]

Nope, the simple observation of neurons communicating impulsive data is what quantifies them as electro-chemical computers, as they electro-chemically compute data.

Nothing to do with any priori assumption - just a demonstrable fundament of neuroscience.

[AteoConPimienta]

Searle already assume one thing, that we are not a chinese room. So basically he does what Turing didn dare, to define intelligence at least as a "no chinese room".

Turing test basics still stand, definitions of "intelligence" are highly arguible so a better path is to let an intelligent being try to transpersonte without the corporea, if he fails its probably not intelligent, if it can it probably is.

[camino1ca]

You would have to provide evidence a soul exist before you could argue that it is not reducible.

[Hufflewaffle]

I want to hear more of what Jonathon Miller thinks.

White beard and glasses does not a deep thinker make.

[hayeder]

Typing sentences with a cryptic word order does not sound you more intelligent make. pretentious sound It makes like you a twat.

[Hufflewaffle]

not big on irony I guess.

[skeletonmom]

He is the Santa Claus I can beleive in...LOL

[jack19790]

that was GOOD!

[Hufflewaffle]

yup. Same as you can believe in a rock. Doesn't actually do anything for you, but at least it doesn't make you nervous by expressing any complex ideas.

[dancinbear7476]

Dan Dennett looks like Santa Clause

[polymath7]

Actually, I think he looks like:

The bust of Socrates

An older version of a certain 1915 self-portrait by Matisse (the one in which he holds a palette and brush, and wears an olive colored suit).

I'd be curious to hear whether anyone who is familiar with the painting agrees.

[Hufflewaffle]

except he steals your gifts or tells you they don't exist. lol

[CaptainRen]

lmao

[jgwphilly1969]

I was wondering if anyone had the PBS special with Dan Dennett, Stephen Jay Gould, Freeman Dyson, Rupert Sheldrake, and some others discussing the Glorious Accident

[BrainRazer]

this video is too short. I like the philosopher but this video get no props. too short. that's it.

[Entropy56]

It is likewise funny to me when scientists make claims that they can't possibly know for sure. Like the age of the universe or the number of stars in the universe or the age of the human race. Everyone goes along with the gag.

[feinorgh]

I do not see your point. Scientists have estimates within a margin of error that are agreed on across the line. At least two of the claims you mention are knowable in principle (the age of the universe and the approximate age of the human race -- depending on what counts as human). The number of stars in the visible universe is also possible to estimate, but we don't know exactly how large the universe is, since we can't see "further" than how far the light has travelled since it began.

[hymnofashes]

Yeah!

And they have the nerve to ridicule you for postulating a cosmic Hebrew butcher who appears out of nowhere, and attempting to organize the modern world around his cryptic third-hand pronouncements.

Hilarious!

[Entropy56]

Okay, please tell me where I can find the *official* count of the number of stars in the universe.

[Entropy56]

No answer? My case is made.

[mathproof]

Wikipedia has it.

[ToListen]

Thank you for posting. Dan Dennett, thanks!