I enjoy Betrand Russell's viewpoint on the question of the existence of God. Richard Dawkins had a good idea when he put some of Betrand Russell's thoughts in the book, God Delusion. Thank you for up loading this video. Thumbs up.
@ndrthrdr1 It's not that simple. There's only support for the Christian God, the one and only One. Think of NDE's, astral projection, the beginning of the universe, laminin, the center of the whirlppol galaxy, proof of events in the Bible, and miracles. There's probably more than what I mentioned, but those should be enough.
@nar3sas NDEs are when the brain is malfunctioning from too little oxygen.
Astral projection is superstitious nonsense due to self-delusion.
The beginning of the Universe is still up for debate. It hasn't been demonstrated yet - the science is still young.
Laminin is not in perfect cross shapes, as some creationists claim.
Genesis has provably false information. Google K-T Boundary, see that large dinosaurs were not created on the same day as humans (or even during the same 65 million years).
@ndrthrdr1 I'm sure that NDE's are all forced astral projection in which it is hard for your soul to get back into your body. Astral projection is real in which it is hard for your soul to get out of your body instead. I'm sure God created the universe. The universe couldn't have appeared out of nothing. I know that laminin is not the perfect cross shape, but there must be a reason for that. I know dinosaurs were created before us. 7 days is symbolic for millions of years. The Bible is symbolic.
@nar3sas You're sure how? You have a feeling that it's true, so it must be true because your mind is perfect and incapable of making mistakes? If not that, then based on what evidence is astral projection true?
The universe couldn't have appeared out of nothing? Who says that it did? The Big Bang theory describes a rapid expansion of existing matter, not a magical appearance of previously non-existing nothingness.. What makes you think that matter hasn't always existed?
@ndrthrdr1 I'm sure because it is true. People have done it, and it can be proven. People wouldn't say it was real if they couldn't prove it. My mind is not perfect. Only God's mind is. Where did that existing matter that you speak of come from? I'm sure there was nothing and that God made the Big Bang, the beginning of the universe, happen. It's not magical. It's the highest form of energy, divine energy. Some Being created (designed) the universe just like a watchmaker making a watch.
@nar3sas & days = millions of years? The Earth is billions of years old. In Genesis it says that a god does some things, then there was evening, then there was morning, and that was the first day. Same with the next five days. (7th day rested, so six creation days). Do stuff, then night, then morning IS one day. If you rewrite any book of fiction you can make it mean whatever you want it to mean.
I can interpret directions on a microwave dinner to mean that I won the lottery, but I didn't.
@ndrthrdr1 I meant that each day could have been hundreds of millions of years, which then amounts up to the billions of years you're talking about. The Bible is NOT a book of fiction. It is quite symbolic. Not everything is to be taken literally. The description of the creation of the universe in Genesis IS symbolic. Interpreting directions on a microwave to mean that you won the lottery cannot be compared to interpretation of the Bible. The instructions on a microwave have only one meaning.
@nar3sas Why do you think that it's symbolic? It doesn't say that it's symbolic. As we learn more about our universe, our planet's history, and the history of life on our planet, more and more things seem to be "symbolic" in the Bible.
In Genesis, stars created the day after the Earth. In Job, the other way around. Not both true..
Earth age - 4.5 billion years. We see light from stars 13.2 billion light years away. Those stars older than Earth. Bible says stars created after Earth.
@ndrthrdr1 It is symbolic, whether you want to believe that or not. It doesn't have to say that it's symbolic. We can use our brains. About more and more things becoming symbolic in the Bible, that's true. That comes with our continual progress in gaining knowledge. There are also events in the Bible that have been shown to be true through our continual progress. Give me the verses in Genesis and Job so I can read them.
@ndrthrdr1 Also, all of the statements other than the ones about morality do not have to be true. It's not like the writers of the Bible knew everything. Of course, God COULD have told them everything, but we would have found out about things sooner if that was the case. That is why only the moral teachings contained in the Bible are to be considered carefully.
@nar3sas Moral teachings like kill gays, non-virgins on their wedding nights, non-believers, rebellious teens, witches, and anyone caught gathering firewood on the Sabbath? Of course, we can interpret that to mean DON'T kill them, but how would that make sense?
If we are meant to believe what a book says or be punished forever, why would the one book of instructions be so vague that there are hundreds of different denominations with different interpretations. God's bad at giving dictation?
@ndrthrdr1 What you mentioned are NOT the moral teachings. Those were laws set up by corrupt people as a result of our free will and not being controlled. It is quite realistic. God did not order those things to happen. The moral teachings are mainly the ones taught by Jesus as well as certain ones in the Old Testament. I don't think you have to believe in the Bible to not be punished forever. Hundreds of different denominations? You're referring to the traditional side of religion.
@ndrthrdr1 I as a Christian believe that tradition is definitely not necessary. I don't go to Church, and I dont pray. I'm the kind that is more focused on doing good actions and not doing bad ones rather than focusing on believing. I'm not sure that a belief in God is necessary, so I believe that you accept Him through your actions. I don't think God is bad at giving dictation. Like I said before, there is symbolism and the realistic corruption of the people during OT times due to free will.
There is absolutely an orbiting tea pot. It was put there by Douglas Adams when he was writing the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy series. He thought Ford might get thirsty during his stellar travels.
Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, Romans 1:22
Men is a fool, I dont listen to men. God is all-knowing cause he made us. And I believe my creator and not fools :) In 20 years we sinned 21900 times(3 a day maybe more).
People repent you are evil, your thoughts are evil. Jesus lives and has won death, go to him and accept Him! Dont go to hell! REPENT!
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important differences between heterosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption and homosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption. Even non-religious people know this.
Homosexual activists, with support from the media, have succeeded at framing themselves as noble victims; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
@tyhan222 no i am not its a good thing thr is no god,and thr is no proof for d existence of this ghastly entity,the hypothesis of a god is a failed concept and does us a lot of harm
@thescorpionking2020 So what created the Earth....the Big Bang? There is not proof of the big bang happening. What even caused the big bang to happen?
@migitman84. not sure about the big bang -- ask a cosmologist. but how the earth was created is much easier to answer. i suppose i could answer, but i'm too lazy -- go look it up yourself.
@CopernicusXII lol, so you are happy to believe that a man with a beard magically clapped his hands and created the world in 6 days, yet you ae not accepting of evolution?
« The blowhole on a whale is behind the brain cavity »
Which is an adaptation due to the changing lifestyle of the whales' ancestors. The fossil record shows how the nasal aperture moved upwards and backwards through time, providing a neat transitional sequence.
@CopernicusXII I agree you in the point, that evolution (and some other scientific theories) has adopted dangerous cultlike characteristics. However I completely disagree in everything else, you wrote. The problem with your post is your statement "There is no evidence of evolution". This statement is plain lie often told by enemies of free thought. The question is not if there are prooves, it's are there enough prooves. And there are more prooves for evolution, than for any other theory.
Dawkins belives universe from nothing is a science?. It is not science, but faith .... belief in nothing from nothing only proves the ignorance and stupidity. sry for english. look at movies in my channel (in faviorite category) that proves God and are real; "blood of Jesus", "atheist, profesor in hell" and other if you want. Then you will find the true God, Jesus Christ.
How many millions of dollars have you made out of your drivel?
Yes, I can (and do (by the freedom of speech allowed by law - such is the power of the law) call your writings drivel with just as much credence as you can call mine, and anyone elses.
One god further?
your SELF!
We observe the productions of the self everyday and have done since Man stood up and invented HIStory If man's an animal, he will, by defeinition, always be an animal!
@CopernicusXII Like your name ... you should get a update 2011... things change... like pasta turns in to shit when you eat it, its called biochemic reaction....
@CopernicusXII On the contrary, as an anti-theist, I find creationists very precious. There is no greater source of self-evident fail like your use of apostrophe - it's a catastrophe.
@thruthem wow, really gonna debate grammar nigga? come to the streets of youngstown and tell that to someone over here. bet they'd bash your brains out and eat it with a side of baby, you fucking cunt.
@CopernicusXII Wiki the long dis-proven idea of 'irreducible complexity'. You appear to be it's principal proponent. Read up on the bacterial flagellum and the response of the scientific community. It is nothing more than an argument from ignorance - 'I don't know how so god gone done it'.
Theism is a virus and we are predisposed to infection. Thanks, evolution!
-You see, I just anthropomorphized a natural process-Better get that looked at. @.@
@thruthem There is evidence against FSM. Thus far there has not been scientific evidence that proves you can give life to an inanimate object(s), much more, a food product.
@07Aristotle Scientific evidence can not disprove FSM. Nor prove his existence for he is invisible.
But, if you seek hard enough & look within...you will feel his love and the gentleness of his invisible appendage that tethers you tho the Earth even now! RAmen
@07Aristotle nope...it basically saying something total unbelievable and outlandish so when a christian person says "thats dumb" or "fake" atheist can say "thats exactly how we feel about religion"
@MrCh3wyBacca So I don't have to think that my pasta will get up and make itself invisible and create worlds? Whew!.......It is not a serious argument.
Topics: WINNING ARGUMENTS NOW ADDED For The Creationism-Evolutionism Debate (See Subchapter 10.2.2.), 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: balanceddiet1.yolasite.com
See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
Nowhere did he actually explain why God is a logical failure, he just compares him to teapots and unicorns. Because religion can be bad says nothing about the existence of God or a creator being things. There has to be something more to this existence, I mean think about it.
@AuntyMabele Logical fail? Logic can't be used to prove or disprove a premise e.g. God Exists. It's used to test if a conclusion logically follows from a premise not if the premise is true of false.
Premise A) All men are mortal
Premise B) Socrates is a man
Deduction = Socrates is mortal.
The conclusion is logically sound but the statement is only 'true' on the suppostion that it's premises are true.
There wasn't any use of logic in this video, & yet it's called God, a logical failure....
@thruthem ,on the supposition that A&B are true then your deduction would follow. The point Dawkins seemed to be making was the likelihood of a deity is improbable to a high degree. But a logical fail or impossibility is something quite different.
For example when Pat Condell says that the Trinity is impossible, I don't think he has properly considered what the word impossible means. However as the definition he gave of the trinity was incorrect, the strawman he created probably was impossible
@thruthem to show God is a logical fail, you need to make a deductive argument where, if the premises are true, then the conclusion follows deductively. However your first premise A) "All Gods are man-made", means that you're assuming the very think you're setting out to prove. God's non existence needs to come out of your deduction, not your in premises.
@Anglican08 You fail bro. You are correct in pointing out that guy's mistake but when you create your own argument for the existence of God you will get no further yourself. Have you even listened to the video?
@Anglican08 If The PREMISES Are TRUE And You're Trying To DEDUCTIVELY PROVE That They're TRUE, What's The Problem? You're Assuming Your PREMISE Is TRUE And You're Trying To PROVE That It's TRUE. That's What DEDUCTIVE REASONING Is.
Don't TRY To Come On Here With With DEEP Logic That Adds Up To Nonsense. OKAY. Here, Here's My DEEP Logic. Evolution Created A Psychological Need For GOD, Hence Man Created The Concept Of GOD Therefore GOD Really Doesn't Exist.
Topics: 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: balanceddiet1.yolasite.com etc.
See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc.yolasite.com
or
figure4etc3.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com announcements-balancedway.yolasite.com
Dawkins FAIL. If this was about an orbiting tea pot, then why didn't Dawkins write a book on the tea pot delusion??? instead, he along with hundreds of atheists, writes about a God that they don't even believe exists!!!!
@thespybreaker Are you completely fucking retarded, or just trolling? NO ONE believes in the Teapot. But people DO believe in God. If people were trying to get the Teapot beliefe to influence education and politics, atheists would argue against them. It's not stupid to debate something you don't believe in if people who DO believe in it are imposing it on others. Just like it's not stupid to debate why Sharia law is wrong to someone who believes it's right and imposes it on others.
@blackkakari resorting to cheap insults is a sign of not having a valid argument. No one believes in a teapot in space because there is PLENTY OF EVIDENCE against it. That is why Mr Dawkins will not write a book on the teapot. People believe in intelligent design because THERE IS PLENTY OF EVIDENCE for it. That is why people like Dawkins have to write books and lectures to disprove it. So it is people like you who force their beliefs on education,politics by resorting to insults
@thespybreaker My insult was valid, and your latest comment only reaffirms that. You can't prove the Teapot doesn't exist if you can't look closely enough to see if it's there. And all the "evidence" for intelligent design has been completely refuted. Christ tards force schools to teach creationism as science. THEIR idea of creationism. Which is no more valid than any other religion's idea of creationism. Dawkins is trying to have schools teach actual science rather than biased dogma.
@blackkakari if you weren't so thick, it would be easier for you to understand that there is a difference between "you can't prove the teapot doesn't exist" vs EVIDENCE that teapot doesn't exist. This is the fundamental flaw with evolutionists who are ZOMBIES that do not even consider evidence. Who ever brought up creation science??? There is PLENTY of evidence for intelligent design which haven't been even addressed by the likes of dawkins. So stop yapping the same old trash.
@thruthem for beginners, the probability of the existence of cosmological constants is 10 ^ -40 in the least and where the change in even one constant, the nuclear force, by even .2% would cause the universe to collapse. There is no explanation for the cosmological constants in such a random chain of events. The universe would not be self staining if there is a minor alteration to any of these factors. Other constants are electromagnetic force to gravity, force that binds nucleons etc
@thespybreaker Unlike you, having examined all of the available evidence, Stephen Hawkin and the Academy of Sciences have become convinced that there are no gods. How do you explain this?
@thruthem Appealing to an authority figure as your source of evidence is logically flawed. And Stephen Hawkings' opinion about there absolutely being no supreme intelligence is no more valid than the Buddhist monks' mediating within their sacred temples. He should stick to what he KNOWS, and stop pretending he's mentally capable of determining the [non]existence of God(s) and the origins of the universe. However most atheist are logical positivist who deny any concept outside their comfort zone.
@thespybreaker You're the only one who's thick, here. Again, how can you PROVE the Teapot doesn't exist?! We can't look closely enough at the sun to see weather or not it's there. What the fuck is so hard to understand about that?! There ISN'T any evidence it doesn't exist because we don't have any means of checking! Think you can wrap your tiny mind around that? Probably not. So just STFU, get off the internet and go back to being mesmerised by shiny things. I'm done trying to reason with you.
@blackkakari . Okay, you just proved that you are an IDIOT. No one can prove that something DOES NOT EXIST but YOU CAN SHOW EVIDENCE AGAINST IT (Please READ that SLOWLY 10 times so it gets into your stupid little peanut brain). Here is the evidence that there is no tea pot orbiting the sun:1 NASA or no Earth mission has ever sent a mission to space to deploy a tea pot. 2. There are no photo or video evidences of tea pots in space etc. DO YOU GET IT??? NOW GO BACK TO HIGH SCHOOL
@thespybreaker My whole point went completely over your head. That's why, as I said before, I'M DONE TRYING TO REASON WITH YOU! You misconceive everything I say and fill in what you don't understand with whatever you can imagine that makes me sound stupid. What I'm saying is clearly beyond your realm of comprehension. And I'm not saying that to boast, as Jack and Jill is probably beyond your realm of comprehension.
@blackkakari - hey, go back to school. I gave you EVIDENCES (YES, first time you heard such a thing) against WHY THERE IS NO TEA POT IN SPACE and the best you could do is come with 500 words of cheapshots AND NOT EVEN ONE (1, one) counter argument. HAAHAHA. PROVED MY POINT. THANKS. Now I have more educated people to deal with while you have to go back and read high school text books.
@thespybreaker I didn't deliver a counter arguement because you would have just misconceived it as well. Your idea of "evidence" is a joke. If I had the patience to talk down to your level I'd probably have to write a novels worth just to MAYBE make you understand. But I figured I'd have an easier time teaching my cat thermo-dynamics.
So if winning an arguement means being too dense to understand what the other person is saying, then you go declare yourself the winner & pat yourself on the back.
@blackkakari I've read some of your comments and it's quite clear that you're not only close-minded but you sound like the typical militant atheist who thinks they can scream "fairy tales" at the top of their lungs to win their argument. As an agnostic I think rationally and keep an open mind; and I've come to the conclusion that people who totally refute intelligent design are as ignorant as those that blindly accept a [poly]theistic belief system.
@Raelsatu I was only trying to make one point clear which he couldn't seem to grasp, which is why I didn't go into detail about anything else. I didn't just yell "fairy tales!", I legitimately questioned and considered the merits of his arguement, questions he couldn't understand, only to find his points moronic. Had he made different arguements, I would've questioned and considered them as well. I don't think that there's no god, only that assuming there's a god is stupid.
@blackkakari Fair enough. However, I'm slightly inclined towards his argument more than the former. Dawkins attempts to make a comparison between the reasoning to believe God may exist and the belief that a teapot may orbit the sun. At this point, neither can be proved or disproved; so therefore believing in the teapot "cult" is just as irrational as believing in a higher intelligence. However, the analogy doesn't connect. The concept of "God" and spirit, in any form, takes on a life of its own.
@Raelsatu I'm not quite sure what you mean in your last sentence. I thought the only relevant point was the comparison between the two showing that both lack evidence. I'm sure I'm missing something glaringly obvious, as I tend to overthink things. Would you care to elaborate?
@blackkakari Make the comparison, that if you can believe God exist, then why not believe unicorns exist? Some argue that this logic holds, and to believe in either one is equally absurd and/or based off faith reasoning. However, they are not equal. It's the CONCEPT of God that differs from all the other mythologies and folk legends; and it's a concept that not only permeates ALL cultures, but the individual mind. You can't simply disprove an idea that's pervaded consciousness since time began.
@blackkakari With that said, the belief in God(s) and the afterlife is not a disease, as some atheist would (ignorantly) say. International research studies have been done to show that the human mind is predisposed to believing in both. Why is that? Perhaps there is a perfect example apart from the notion that human beings are spiritual in nature, perhaps not. Ontologicaly, I could go on for quite a bit to argue that materialistic atheism is close-minded and less rational than what it appears.
@Raelsatu Make no mistake, I do not claim that everything we currently know is the absolute truth. All I mean to say is that our current knowledge is all we have, and we must always question & research every view, especially our own. We need to discover everything we can with what we have and always expand upon it, and never deny or confirm anything's existence.
@blackkakari I agree with that, I think knowledge is the most important, essential key; and all its facets should be studied without making preconceived notions of what is or isn't truth. This definitely isn't that easy for most because people are typically, anthropologically black-&-white. This stasis consist of people either being for intelligent design but their doctrine is religious in nature. Then you have people who believe only in materialism, and a big-bang without any creator of sorts.
@STEPHENWRAYSFORD33 that'd be nice but as I know there aren't any I figured any references will do so I can then educate the idiot as I tear his references to shreds and him a new arsehole in the process.
Topics: Terrorism, War, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Secrets about yourself that you may still don’t know, Debated issues, About the END OF THE WORLD, and many others.
Websites: balanceddiet1.yolasite.com , etc.
(See Figure 4, Figure 521, Figure 6, Figure 7, Figure 8, Figure 9, Figure 10, Figure 1021, and Figure 1022 at figure4etc3.yolasite.com , etc .)
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com , etc.
Dawkins' comments in this clip, are unworthy of a man of science. He should be addressing the real scientific questions. No mention in 'The God Delusion' of the anti-gravity force, the Cosmological Constant, accurate to 1:10 to the 120th power. As an agnostic, outside of the two Beliefs, i think we must consider all relevant science.
Christians brag about the US being a Christian nation but their God, who was noticeably absent for 9/11, Katrina, and the recent killer tornadoes isn't very dependable. I'll take the MONEY. They can have this God, his Son, and the Ghost. Let them try using them at Wal-Mart.
(cont'd) And if you were able to bend spoons within your dream, would it be because of your sudden awareness, or because you are following the dream's script (i.e Fate, Destiny)?
In fact you would come to realize the Dream itself has a will of its own. This as close an analogy as one can make to what we call "God". However, most people, both when dreaming and living their waking life, avoid this conflict as much as possible, as it's incapatible with an egocentric existence.
(cont'd) Now you may say that once you have awareness in your dream, you'll be able to prove that it is in fact a dream. That's actually not the case. Achieving awareness in a dream is no different than if you were to come to a similiar epiphany that this reality is in fact also a dream--you would still be restrained by the limitations of that dream. In other words, you wouldn't suddenly become Neo in the Matrix and be able to bend spoons with your mind.
Russell's interpretation of God would be laughable if it were not so common place, amongst both modern athiets and believers alike.
God exists in the same way you exist when you are dreaming. You are within the dream, yet how is that possible when you are also asleep in bed? If while within this dream you had the epiphany that you were in fact asleep in bed, and you attempted to explain this to other creations in your dream, they would take you as God, for that in fact is what you are.
Here in the Netherlands people who believe are ridiculed if they are religious.. What you believe in God and Jesus? Ha never heard of a dinosaur fossil or the faults in the Bible and caveman skeletons?
@UnusualKnight Or you're a joke. You can't disprove God's existence, yet you say what you say as if it's a fact. Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence. There's more weight in proving He exists than disproving He exists, so it's more likely that He exists. There's no complete proof that He exists, but it stands that there is nothing at all to disprove His existence.
@nar3sas. There have been 1000's of gods throughout history, if you want to worship one then go ahead. I'll try not to laugh. But please keep your mythology away from impressionable school kids, out of political debates, and don't let it hinder scientific progress.
@baobubs If that's what you think, but I'm sure there is only support for the God I believe in, who IS the one and only God. It doesn't matter whether you laugh or not, and it is not mythology. I don't know what would be wrong with telling school kids about God. You act as if that would be bad since He's not real in your opinion. Also, there's nothing wrong with God being involved in political debates, and the concept of God is not hindering scientific progress.
@nar3sas. Sorry, but your god (whichever one you believe in) IS mythology - no different from Roman or Greek mythology. I'm all for teaching mythology to kids - but to teach them that it's real is just totally wrong. And we trust our politicians to have a firm grasp on reality, so they can govern wisely. Would you trust a president who thinks the world was created 6000 years ago? How about a president who believes in narnia? As I said, believe whatever you want - but keep it in church.
@baobubs God is NOT mythology. It's very different from Roman or Greek mythoology, which have no support. You THINK it's not real, so you can't say that teaching it to kids as being real is wrong. Politicians can be Christian and have a firm grasp on reality so they can govern wisely as you said. Also, I as a Christian do not believe that the world was created 6000 years ago as you said. We all know Narnia is simply something imagined. For the last thing you said, I don't go to church.
@nar3sas. Which god are you talking about? You have 1000's to choose from. Kids are in school to learn factual stuff - like reading, writing, maths, and science. Teaching them to have blind faith in some higher power is just cruel and misleading.
@baobubs I'm talking about the one and only Christian God, who has no equals. Yes, I know kids are in school to learn factual information, but they're also taught subjective information. I was taught religion in school, and I didn't simply stick to it as I was taught. I have an open-mind, but I've made my decision on what to believe in. It's not cruel or misleading to teach kids about God when you back that up with NDE's, astral projection, the beginning of the universe, laminin, and more.
@UnusualKnight Or you're a joke. You can't disprove God's existence, yet you say what you say as if it's a fact. Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence. There's more weight in proving He exists than disproving He exists, so it's more likely that He exists. There's no complete proof that He exists, but it stands that there is nothing at all to disprove His existence.
You God deniers are sosooo arrogant worse than any bible thumper from way back...atheism is a rabid religious faith of slobbering drooling fanatics who think others are neanderthals who should be exiled, or worse, from the planet
The argument assumes that there indeed is not a teapot......this teapot might exist, we dont know. A future humanity with time machines etc....might just for laughs insert such a teapot in space.
We dont even know if we are really here on earth living our so called lives, yet you ckaim there is no God? hmmm. Such arrogance.
@wotan237 unfortunately time travel is impossible. We DO know what are facts and what are stupid fairytales. We have created revolutionary technologies and have scientifically advanced through these logical conclusions and facts, while religion prevented any kind of advancement whatsoever (pointing out to the dark ages) and idiots like you tortured, burned and beheaded geniuses, scientists and other people who claimed things like the earth isn't flat. Flat earth isn't different from God
@wotan237 Did you not watch the video at all?? You missed the entire part of the argument. That we can't know anything with absolute certainty is the premise behind the argument. However, that is not the point. Just as we are reasonably certain that we really are living our lives on Earth, atheists are reasonably certain that no God exists.
You know what else is a logical fail? Richard Dawkins logic. If he could prove that God doesn't exist and that its a logical fail then why try to prove it in the first place?
I mean if there wasn't a God then why try and prove there wasn't? It would just be that obvious wouldn't it? Apparently not though if people disagree. Which means logically something must be up. Just saying.
Why did Newton try to prove the old Greeks like Aristotele wrong? After all Aristoteles and other Ancient scientists had a view on the laws of physics which made perfect sense to ancient minds. Newton himself was ridiculed at first and few wanted to listen to his new ideas. When he proved he was right, more and more supported him and he became a leading figure in physics
Also, you seem to forget most people do NOT think logically but are driven by instincts, emotions and traditions
@Onizuma13 I love seeing so many pseudo-intellectuals trying to attack real intellectuals. You just fail so badly you can't even build a logically appropriate argument.
@ernis1100 Real intellectual huh? If that were true then why the hell do you even care what a so called "pseudo-intellectual" like me thinks anyway? Not to mention I wrote that like 2 weeks ago and I could have easily have changed my mind, died, or just stopped giving a fuck about this retarded subject in a whole. Maybe you should act like a "real" intellectual and actually think ahead before you speak.
@Onizuma13 Because our society is influenced by this bullshit. Idiot or a genius - you're a part of the society. By real intellectuals I meant people like Dawkings, however even assuming that I meant myself, I'm not naive enough to impersonate the stereotype of a wise person or an intellectual, I can and will have whatever personality I favor regardless of my intellect and I'm free to express my opinion whenever and wherever I want.
And I just happen to feel like replying right here, right now.
@Onizuma13 Just because you use the word "logic" a few times doesn't mean your argument makes rational sense. Sometimes, the intuitive is wrong. Look up behavioral psychology and the superstitious tendencies that exist in all animals when they associate one thing to another. We try to make something there that isn't in order to process our environment. God is a false product of this. Also, just because people agree on an idea doesn't make it right.
@joe1234567890i You realize just by saying what you just said there kinda fucks up with your own claims. I could say the same for the ideas you just put on the table. It works both ways.
"We try to make something there that isn't in order to process our environment. God is a false product of this." is nothing more than an idea you've told yourself in order to believe something doesn't exist but in truth it doesn't prove a damn thing either. Nothing ever will and why does it matter honestly?
@Onizuma13 Also if you like putting yourself in the same league with animals thats cool but personally I know i didn't evolve from no fucking monkey. We may be very similar to animals but thats like saying water and blood are the same just because they're both a liquid. I really wish I could think of a better example but yeah who really cares honestly? Does it really matter to you what other people believe in? I'd start looking at yourself before you criticize others for having an opinion.
@Onizuma13 Just to let you know, you responded to yourself. Oh, and I agree, you didn't evolve from a monkey just as I didn't evolve from a monkey either. That's because individuals don't evolve: populations evolve. If you don't understand that concept, you need to either seriously refresh yourself in biology class or learn it for the first time. Oh, and how about you look at your comments, look at my comments, and ask yourself who is criticizing who?
@Onizuma13 I fail to see how what I said "fucks up" my own claims. You may repeat what I said word for word, but that isn't a refutation of my statement. Try a little harder next time before you claim that my statements refute themselves. Also, that quote is an explanation of the previous sentence in case you did not pick that up. Again, talk to me when you've actually looked up something about psychology and come back with a better answer. RESEARCH what other people say. Don't just take my word
WORSHIP THE TEAPOT, the only way to truth. Otherwise you will be bounced into the darkness of the evil Coffepot and you will be boiled in black mocca for all times!
Isn't it just so simple; you can believe in what we collectively know to be true, follow a path of critical thinking and accept the acceptable OR believe in something that has no factual basis, borne of myth, swallowed by time, turned over, shuffled and spoken and passed down as a mindless mantra
The eye of faith can see anything it wants to see excepting only 'things as they really are'. Why celebrate a moribund 'luxury' of adamantine blockheadedness instead of conducting a vigorous & fearless pursuit of the Real - given our especially hard-won human freedoms and faculties to do so with? Isn't faith in one Early Bronze Age Middle Eastern deity about as dangerous as any other in the 21st Century??
Comment removed
freedomofthought100 1 month ago
Richard Dawkins has the best sense of humour. I think he should be god :P
MrAsh183 1 month ago
Haha, I just go one God further.
LaGrangeband 1 month ago
i could disprove the tooth fairy - it is actually parents
doombybbr 2 months ago
@doombybbr Hah! The Tooth Fairy sometimes uses parents for its own devious purposes. >=)
Gnomefro 2 months ago
i was touched by my uncles noodly appendage as a child.
josh218 2 months ago
"If there is a God, he is a malign thug."
- Mark Twain
AtheismGate 2 months ago
can't wait to buy it
cliveFewingz 2 months ago
I enjoy Betrand Russell's viewpoint on the question of the existence of God. Richard Dawkins had a good idea when he put some of Betrand Russell's thoughts in the book, God Delusion. Thank you for up loading this video. Thumbs up.
longname25 3 months ago
There are many gods. Take your pick, just like when you're at a buffet.
ndrthrdr1 3 months ago
@ndrthrdr1 It's not that simple. There's only support for the Christian God, the one and only One. Think of NDE's, astral projection, the beginning of the universe, laminin, the center of the whirlppol galaxy, proof of events in the Bible, and miracles. There's probably more than what I mentioned, but those should be enough.
nar3sas 3 months ago
@nar3sas NDEs are when the brain is malfunctioning from too little oxygen.
Astral projection is superstitious nonsense due to self-delusion.
The beginning of the Universe is still up for debate. It hasn't been demonstrated yet - the science is still young.
Laminin is not in perfect cross shapes, as some creationists claim.
Genesis has provably false information. Google K-T Boundary, see that large dinosaurs were not created on the same day as humans (or even during the same 65 million years).
ndrthrdr1 3 months ago
@ndrthrdr1 I'm sure that NDE's are all forced astral projection in which it is hard for your soul to get back into your body. Astral projection is real in which it is hard for your soul to get out of your body instead. I'm sure God created the universe. The universe couldn't have appeared out of nothing. I know that laminin is not the perfect cross shape, but there must be a reason for that. I know dinosaurs were created before us. 7 days is symbolic for millions of years. The Bible is symbolic.
nar3sas 3 months ago
@nar3sas You're sure how? You have a feeling that it's true, so it must be true because your mind is perfect and incapable of making mistakes? If not that, then based on what evidence is astral projection true?
The universe couldn't have appeared out of nothing? Who says that it did? The Big Bang theory describes a rapid expansion of existing matter, not a magical appearance of previously non-existing nothingness.. What makes you think that matter hasn't always existed?
ndrthrdr1 3 months ago
@ndrthrdr1 I'm sure because it is true. People have done it, and it can be proven. People wouldn't say it was real if they couldn't prove it. My mind is not perfect. Only God's mind is. Where did that existing matter that you speak of come from? I'm sure there was nothing and that God made the Big Bang, the beginning of the universe, happen. It's not magical. It's the highest form of energy, divine energy. Some Being created (designed) the universe just like a watchmaker making a watch.
nar3sas 3 months ago
@nar3sas & days = millions of years? The Earth is billions of years old. In Genesis it says that a god does some things, then there was evening, then there was morning, and that was the first day. Same with the next five days. (7th day rested, so six creation days). Do stuff, then night, then morning IS one day. If you rewrite any book of fiction you can make it mean whatever you want it to mean.
I can interpret directions on a microwave dinner to mean that I won the lottery, but I didn't.
ndrthrdr1 3 months ago
@ndrthrdr1 I meant that each day could have been hundreds of millions of years, which then amounts up to the billions of years you're talking about. The Bible is NOT a book of fiction. It is quite symbolic. Not everything is to be taken literally. The description of the creation of the universe in Genesis IS symbolic. Interpreting directions on a microwave to mean that you won the lottery cannot be compared to interpretation of the Bible. The instructions on a microwave have only one meaning.
nar3sas 3 months ago
@nar3sas Why do you think that it's symbolic? It doesn't say that it's symbolic. As we learn more about our universe, our planet's history, and the history of life on our planet, more and more things seem to be "symbolic" in the Bible.
In Genesis, stars created the day after the Earth. In Job, the other way around. Not both true..
Earth age - 4.5 billion years. We see light from stars 13.2 billion light years away. Those stars older than Earth. Bible says stars created after Earth.
ndrthrdr1 3 months ago
@ndrthrdr1 It is symbolic, whether you want to believe that or not. It doesn't have to say that it's symbolic. We can use our brains. About more and more things becoming symbolic in the Bible, that's true. That comes with our continual progress in gaining knowledge. There are also events in the Bible that have been shown to be true through our continual progress. Give me the verses in Genesis and Job so I can read them.
nar3sas 3 months ago
@ndrthrdr1 Also, all of the statements other than the ones about morality do not have to be true. It's not like the writers of the Bible knew everything. Of course, God COULD have told them everything, but we would have found out about things sooner if that was the case. That is why only the moral teachings contained in the Bible are to be considered carefully.
nar3sas 3 months ago
@nar3sas Moral teachings like kill gays, non-virgins on their wedding nights, non-believers, rebellious teens, witches, and anyone caught gathering firewood on the Sabbath? Of course, we can interpret that to mean DON'T kill them, but how would that make sense?
If we are meant to believe what a book says or be punished forever, why would the one book of instructions be so vague that there are hundreds of different denominations with different interpretations. God's bad at giving dictation?
ndrthrdr1 3 months ago
@ndrthrdr1 What you mentioned are NOT the moral teachings. Those were laws set up by corrupt people as a result of our free will and not being controlled. It is quite realistic. God did not order those things to happen. The moral teachings are mainly the ones taught by Jesus as well as certain ones in the Old Testament. I don't think you have to believe in the Bible to not be punished forever. Hundreds of different denominations? You're referring to the traditional side of religion.
nar3sas 3 months ago
@ndrthrdr1 I as a Christian believe that tradition is definitely not necessary. I don't go to Church, and I dont pray. I'm the kind that is more focused on doing good actions and not doing bad ones rather than focusing on believing. I'm not sure that a belief in God is necessary, so I believe that you accept Him through your actions. I don't think God is bad at giving dictation. Like I said before, there is symbolism and the realistic corruption of the people during OT times due to free will.
nar3sas 3 months ago
There is absolutely an orbiting tea pot. It was put there by Douglas Adams when he was writing the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy series. He thought Ford might get thirsty during his stellar travels.
ChipArgyle 3 months ago
This was one of my favourite parts of the book.
typenamehere19 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, Romans 1:22
Men is a fool, I dont listen to men. God is all-knowing cause he made us. And I believe my creator and not fools :) In 20 years we sinned 21900 times(3 a day maybe more).
People repent you are evil, your thoughts are evil. Jesus lives and has won death, go to him and accept Him! Dont go to hell! REPENT!
coolboysoldier1 3 months ago
So. Eh. I was raised a Catholic. Started thinking for myself. Became Agnostic. Now a Borderline Atheist with Mental Catholic Insurgents
marineooo5 3 months ago
@CopernicusXII
Can't see you but have to believe you are there - Only reading your words thanks to this wonderful internet. Bible?
Gods Internet!
SImple!
But there again I'm idiot!
Thanks, topperheartramada, for the persecution. :-x
katherine3486 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important differences between heterosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption and homosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption. Even non-religious people know this.
Homosexual activists, with support from the media, have succeeded at framing themselves as noble victims; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
lightandbeautiful 4 months ago
dick dawkins= fail
unless ur a believer in his faith.
yes to believe in nothing creating nothing takes more FAITH than any christian will ever need!
bluegrassreb1 4 months ago
@bluegrassreb1 Faith you say? Seems that somebody has not done his/her homework.
Leivonmies 4 months ago
@CopernicusXII reviewed, perhaps. then thrown into the rubbish bin right after the review.
topperheartramada 4 months ago
god=fail
thescorpionking2020 4 months ago
@thescorpionking2020 So you are admitting the existence of some god? If so, explain your stance of "god=fail"
tyhan222 4 months ago
@tyhan222 no i am not its a good thing thr is no god,and thr is no proof for d existence of this ghastly entity,the hypothesis of a god is a failed concept and does us a lot of harm
thescorpionking2020 4 months ago
@thescorpionking2020 So what created the Earth....the Big Bang? There is not proof of the big bang happening. What even caused the big bang to happen?
migitman84 4 months ago
@migitman84 actually there is proof of the big bang. Backkground radiation for example
TheWorm2000 3 months ago
@migitman84. not sure about the big bang -- ask a cosmologist. but how the earth was created is much easier to answer. i suppose i could answer, but i'm too lazy -- go look it up yourself.
baobubs 3 months ago
@thescorpionking2020 So why mention the name "God?" If you obviously don't believe in him, why would you mention him failing?
tyhan222 4 months ago
I have to admit, the creationists can sure make me laugh. Their beliefs are so ridiculous that they are hilarious to listen to.
nancy6ify 4 months ago
@CopernicusXII lol, so you are happy to believe that a man with a beard magically clapped his hands and created the world in 6 days, yet you ae not accepting of evolution?
ec123456789able 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
« Dogs didn't evolve from wolves »
You're a Poe, aren't you? You're not really a creationist; you're making idiotic statements in order to ridicule creationists.
XGralgrathor 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
« The blowhole on a whale is behind the brain cavity »
Which is an adaptation due to the changing lifestyle of the whales' ancestors. The fossil record shows how the nasal aperture moved upwards and backwards through time, providing a neat transitional sequence.
XGralgrathor 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
« i've debunked every piece of evidence evolution has to offer »
No, not really. You've simply repeated common creationist misrepresentations and arguments from incredulity like irreducible complexity.
XGralgrathor 4 months ago
@CopernicusXII I agree you in the point, that evolution (and some other scientific theories) has adopted dangerous cultlike characteristics. However I completely disagree in everything else, you wrote. The problem with your post is your statement "There is no evidence of evolution". This statement is plain lie often told by enemies of free thought. The question is not if there are prooves, it's are there enough prooves. And there are more prooves for evolution, than for any other theory.
RoberttheWise 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Dawkins belives universe from nothing is a science?. It is not science, but faith .... belief in nothing from nothing only proves the ignorance and stupidity. sry for english. look at movies in my channel (in faviorite category) that proves God and are real; "blood of Jesus", "atheist, profesor in hell" and other if you want. Then you will find the true God, Jesus Christ.
mobiledev 4 months ago
How much are you worth Richard?
How many millions of dollars have you made out of your drivel?
Yes, I can (and do (by the freedom of speech allowed by law - such is the power of the law) call your writings drivel with just as much credence as you can call mine, and anyone elses.
One god further?
your SELF!
We observe the productions of the self everyday and have done since Man stood up and invented HIStory If man's an animal, he will, by defeinition, always be an animal!
Logic?
katherine3486 4 months ago
@katherine3486 Remind me again how are the Megachurches and Cathedrals are worth?
Freedom of Speech, it's a nice thing isn't it? Now that we live in a secular world we can finally enjoy it.
TomFynn 4 months ago
@katherine3486 katherine, tyes you can do that, but the difference is that he is a renowned scientist and you are an anonymous idiot on youtube.
topperheartramada 4 months ago
@CopernicusXII Like your name ... you should get a update 2011... things change... like pasta turns in to shit when you eat it, its called biochemic reaction....
ChaosSebastian 5 months ago
@CopernicusXII On the contrary, as an anti-theist, I find creationists very precious. There is no greater source of self-evident fail like your use of apostrophe - it's a catastrophe.
FSM Loves You, don't be a fool!
thruthem 5 months ago 15
@thruthem wow, really gonna debate grammar nigga? come to the streets of youngstown and tell that to someone over here. bet they'd bash your brains out and eat it with a side of baby, you fucking cunt.
roxtar55 4 months ago
@CopernicusXII Wiki the long dis-proven idea of 'irreducible complexity'. You appear to be it's principal proponent. Read up on the bacterial flagellum and the response of the scientific community. It is nothing more than an argument from ignorance - 'I don't know how so god gone done it'.
Theism is a virus and we are predisposed to infection. Thanks, evolution!
-You see, I just anthropomorphized a natural process-Better get that looked at. @.@
thruthem 5 months ago 10
@thruthem apparently you need your anthropomorphized inverted penis looked at.
roxtar55 4 months ago
@roxtar55 Thank you for thinking of it. It deserves more admirers!
thruthem 4 months ago
@thruthem not admirers, conspirators ;) cheers mate
roxtar55 4 months ago
@thruthem There is evidence against FSM. Thus far there has not been scientific evidence that proves you can give life to an inanimate object(s), much more, a food product.
07Aristotle 3 months ago
@07Aristotle Scientific evidence can not disprove FSM. Nor prove his existence for he is invisible.
But, if you seek hard enough & look within...you will feel his love and the gentleness of his invisible appendage that tethers you tho the Earth even now! RAmen
thruthem 3 months ago
@thruthem How can a food product live, much less, be invisible? Be pragmatic first.
07Aristotle 3 months ago
@07Aristotle really? wat evidence? lol
MrCh3wyBacca 3 months ago
@MrCh3wyBacca You're not serious right? Food product? My pasta, living?
07Aristotle 3 months ago
@07Aristotle the holy point of FSM is that its UNBELIEVABLE, its poking fun at religion
MrCh3wyBacca 2 months ago
@MrCh3wyBacca Oh, so its not meant to be taken as a serious argument, okay, cool.
07Aristotle 2 months ago
@07Aristotle nope...it basically saying something total unbelievable and outlandish so when a christian person says "thats dumb" or "fake" atheist can say "thats exactly how we feel about religion"
MrCh3wyBacca 2 months ago
@MrCh3wyBacca So I don't have to think that my pasta will get up and make itself invisible and create worlds? Whew!.......It is not a serious argument.
07Aristotle 2 months ago
@07Aristotle lol religion isn't either
MrCh3wyBacca 2 months ago
@MrCh3wyBacca Religion is not an argument, it is a belief system.
07Aristotle 2 months ago
@07Aristotle whole***
MrCh3wyBacca 2 months ago
@CopernicusXII LOL
thruthem 5 months ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
NEW BOOK (DONATED) FOR DEBATES AND GOVERNANCE
Topics: WINNING ARGUMENTS NOW ADDED For The Creationism-Evolutionism Debate (See Subchapter 10.2.2.), 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: balanceddiet1.yolasite.com
See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
etc.
TheServiceWeb 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
John 3:16
16 “For God loved the world so much that he gave his one and only Son,
so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life.
PastorExtremeSermon 5 months ago
Nowhere did he actually explain why God is a logical failure, he just compares him to teapots and unicorns. Because religion can be bad says nothing about the existence of God or a creator being things. There has to be something more to this existence, I mean think about it.
AuntyMabele 5 months ago
@AuntyMabele Logical fail? Logic can't be used to prove or disprove a premise e.g. God Exists. It's used to test if a conclusion logically follows from a premise not if the premise is true of false.
Premise A) All men are mortal
Premise B) Socrates is a man
Deduction = Socrates is mortal.
The conclusion is logically sound but the statement is only 'true' on the suppostion that it's premises are true.
There wasn't any use of logic in this video, & yet it's called God, a logical failure....
STEPHENWRAYSFORD33 5 months ago
@STEPHENWRAYSFORD33
Premise A) All gods are man-made
Premise B) You were indoctrinated with a god
Deduction =Your god is man-made
thruthem 5 months ago
@thruthem ,on the supposition that A&B are true then your deduction would follow. The point Dawkins seemed to be making was the likelihood of a deity is improbable to a high degree. But a logical fail or impossibility is something quite different.
For example when Pat Condell says that the Trinity is impossible, I don't think he has properly considered what the word impossible means. However as the definition he gave of the trinity was incorrect, the strawman he created probably was impossible
STEPHENWRAYSFORD33 5 months ago
@thruthem to show God is a logical fail, you need to make a deductive argument where, if the premises are true, then the conclusion follows deductively. However your first premise A) "All Gods are man-made", means that you're assuming the very think you're setting out to prove. God's non existence needs to come out of your deduction, not your in premises.
Anglican08 1 month ago
@Anglican08 You fail bro. You are correct in pointing out that guy's mistake but when you create your own argument for the existence of God you will get no further yourself. Have you even listened to the video?
AlphaKiloOscarZulu 1 month ago
@Anglican08 If The PREMISES Are TRUE And You're Trying To DEDUCTIVELY PROVE That They're TRUE, What's The Problem? You're Assuming Your PREMISE Is TRUE And You're Trying To PROVE That It's TRUE. That's What DEDUCTIVE REASONING Is.
Don't TRY To Come On Here With With DEEP Logic That Adds Up To Nonsense. OKAY. Here, Here's My DEEP Logic. Evolution Created A Psychological Need For GOD, Hence Man Created The Concept Of GOD Therefore GOD Really Doesn't Exist.
PeeGeeBeeDee 3 weeks ago
3:47 Tentacle rape? Fuck that, God rape!
Netugi 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NEW BOOK FOR DEBATES AND GOVERNANCE
Topics: 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: balanceddiet1.yolasite.com etc.
See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc.yolasite.com
or
figure4etc3.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com announcements-balancedway.yolasite.com
TheServiceWeb 5 months ago
Dawkins FAIL. If this was about an orbiting tea pot, then why didn't Dawkins write a book on the tea pot delusion??? instead, he along with hundreds of atheists, writes about a God that they don't even believe exists!!!!
thespybreaker 6 months ago
@thespybreaker Are you completely fucking retarded, or just trolling? NO ONE believes in the Teapot. But people DO believe in God. If people were trying to get the Teapot beliefe to influence education and politics, atheists would argue against them. It's not stupid to debate something you don't believe in if people who DO believe in it are imposing it on others. Just like it's not stupid to debate why Sharia law is wrong to someone who believes it's right and imposes it on others.
blackkakari 5 months ago
@blackkakari resorting to cheap insults is a sign of not having a valid argument. No one believes in a teapot in space because there is PLENTY OF EVIDENCE against it. That is why Mr Dawkins will not write a book on the teapot. People believe in intelligent design because THERE IS PLENTY OF EVIDENCE for it. That is why people like Dawkins have to write books and lectures to disprove it. So it is people like you who force their beliefs on education,politics by resorting to insults
thespybreaker 5 months ago
@thespybreaker My insult was valid, and your latest comment only reaffirms that. You can't prove the Teapot doesn't exist if you can't look closely enough to see if it's there. And all the "evidence" for intelligent design has been completely refuted. Christ tards force schools to teach creationism as science. THEIR idea of creationism. Which is no more valid than any other religion's idea of creationism. Dawkins is trying to have schools teach actual science rather than biased dogma.
blackkakari 5 months ago
@blackkakari if you weren't so thick, it would be easier for you to understand that there is a difference between "you can't prove the teapot doesn't exist" vs EVIDENCE that teapot doesn't exist. This is the fundamental flaw with evolutionists who are ZOMBIES that do not even consider evidence. Who ever brought up creation science??? There is PLENTY of evidence for intelligent design which haven't been even addressed by the likes of dawkins. So stop yapping the same old trash.
thespybreaker 5 months ago
@thespybreaker Hey, let's be civil, people. Anger is a sign of a weak argument.
What "PLENTY of evidence for intelligent design" are you referring to?
thruthem 5 months ago
@thruthem for beginners, the probability of the existence of cosmological constants is 10 ^ -40 in the least and where the change in even one constant, the nuclear force, by even .2% would cause the universe to collapse. There is no explanation for the cosmological constants in such a random chain of events. The universe would not be self staining if there is a minor alteration to any of these factors. Other constants are electromagnetic force to gravity, force that binds nucleons etc
thespybreaker 5 months ago
@thespybreaker Unlike you, having examined all of the available evidence, Stephen Hawkin and the Academy of Sciences have become convinced that there are no gods. How do you explain this?
thruthem 5 months ago
@thruthem Appealing to an authority figure as your source of evidence is logically flawed. And Stephen Hawkings' opinion about there absolutely being no supreme intelligence is no more valid than the Buddhist monks' mediating within their sacred temples. He should stick to what he KNOWS, and stop pretending he's mentally capable of determining the [non]existence of God(s) and the origins of the universe. However most atheist are logical positivist who deny any concept outside their comfort zone.
Raelsatu 5 months ago
@thespybreaker You're the only one who's thick, here. Again, how can you PROVE the Teapot doesn't exist?! We can't look closely enough at the sun to see weather or not it's there. What the fuck is so hard to understand about that?! There ISN'T any evidence it doesn't exist because we don't have any means of checking! Think you can wrap your tiny mind around that? Probably not. So just STFU, get off the internet and go back to being mesmerised by shiny things. I'm done trying to reason with you.
blackkakari 5 months ago
@blackkakari . Okay, you just proved that you are an IDIOT. No one can prove that something DOES NOT EXIST but YOU CAN SHOW EVIDENCE AGAINST IT (Please READ that SLOWLY 10 times so it gets into your stupid little peanut brain). Here is the evidence that there is no tea pot orbiting the sun:1 NASA or no Earth mission has ever sent a mission to space to deploy a tea pot. 2. There are no photo or video evidences of tea pots in space etc. DO YOU GET IT??? NOW GO BACK TO HIGH SCHOOL
thespybreaker 5 months ago
@thespybreaker My whole point went completely over your head. That's why, as I said before, I'M DONE TRYING TO REASON WITH YOU! You misconceive everything I say and fill in what you don't understand with whatever you can imagine that makes me sound stupid. What I'm saying is clearly beyond your realm of comprehension. And I'm not saying that to boast, as Jack and Jill is probably beyond your realm of comprehension.
blackkakari 5 months ago
@blackkakari - hey, go back to school. I gave you EVIDENCES (YES, first time you heard such a thing) against WHY THERE IS NO TEA POT IN SPACE and the best you could do is come with 500 words of cheapshots AND NOT EVEN ONE (1, one) counter argument. HAAHAHA. PROVED MY POINT. THANKS. Now I have more educated people to deal with while you have to go back and read high school text books.
thespybreaker 5 months ago
@thespybreaker I didn't deliver a counter arguement because you would have just misconceived it as well. Your idea of "evidence" is a joke. If I had the patience to talk down to your level I'd probably have to write a novels worth just to MAYBE make you understand. But I figured I'd have an easier time teaching my cat thermo-dynamics.
So if winning an arguement means being too dense to understand what the other person is saying, then you go declare yourself the winner & pat yourself on the back.
blackkakari 5 months ago
@blackkakari I've read some of your comments and it's quite clear that you're not only close-minded but you sound like the typical militant atheist who thinks they can scream "fairy tales" at the top of their lungs to win their argument. As an agnostic I think rationally and keep an open mind; and I've come to the conclusion that people who totally refute intelligent design are as ignorant as those that blindly accept a [poly]theistic belief system.
Raelsatu 5 months ago
@Raelsatu I was only trying to make one point clear which he couldn't seem to grasp, which is why I didn't go into detail about anything else. I didn't just yell "fairy tales!", I legitimately questioned and considered the merits of his arguement, questions he couldn't understand, only to find his points moronic. Had he made different arguements, I would've questioned and considered them as well. I don't think that there's no god, only that assuming there's a god is stupid.
blackkakari 5 months ago
@blackkakari Fair enough. However, I'm slightly inclined towards his argument more than the former. Dawkins attempts to make a comparison between the reasoning to believe God may exist and the belief that a teapot may orbit the sun. At this point, neither can be proved or disproved; so therefore believing in the teapot "cult" is just as irrational as believing in a higher intelligence. However, the analogy doesn't connect. The concept of "God" and spirit, in any form, takes on a life of its own.
Raelsatu 5 months ago
@Raelsatu I'm not quite sure what you mean in your last sentence. I thought the only relevant point was the comparison between the two showing that both lack evidence. I'm sure I'm missing something glaringly obvious, as I tend to overthink things. Would you care to elaborate?
blackkakari 5 months ago
@blackkakari Make the comparison, that if you can believe God exist, then why not believe unicorns exist? Some argue that this logic holds, and to believe in either one is equally absurd and/or based off faith reasoning. However, they are not equal. It's the CONCEPT of God that differs from all the other mythologies and folk legends; and it's a concept that not only permeates ALL cultures, but the individual mind. You can't simply disprove an idea that's pervaded consciousness since time began.
Raelsatu 5 months ago
@blackkakari With that said, the belief in God(s) and the afterlife is not a disease, as some atheist would (ignorantly) say. International research studies have been done to show that the human mind is predisposed to believing in both. Why is that? Perhaps there is a perfect example apart from the notion that human beings are spiritual in nature, perhaps not. Ontologicaly, I could go on for quite a bit to argue that materialistic atheism is close-minded and less rational than what it appears.
Raelsatu 5 months ago
@Raelsatu Make no mistake, I do not claim that everything we currently know is the absolute truth. All I mean to say is that our current knowledge is all we have, and we must always question & research every view, especially our own. We need to discover everything we can with what we have and always expand upon it, and never deny or confirm anything's existence.
blackkakari 5 months ago
@blackkakari I agree with that, I think knowledge is the most important, essential key; and all its facets should be studied without making preconceived notions of what is or isn't truth. This definitely isn't that easy for most because people are typically, anthropologically black-&-white. This stasis consist of people either being for intelligent design but their doctrine is religious in nature. Then you have people who believe only in materialism, and a big-bang without any creator of sorts.
Raelsatu 5 months ago
@thespybreaker plenty of evidence for intelligent design? time to start providing some references.
uknowispeaksense 5 months ago
@uknowispeaksense some peer-reviewed references..
STEPHENWRAYSFORD33 5 months ago
@STEPHENWRAYSFORD33 that'd be nice but as I know there aren't any I figured any references will do so I can then educate the idiot as I tear his references to shreds and him a new arsehole in the process.
uknowispeaksense 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NEW BOOK TO READ FOR YOUR ENJOYMENT
Topics: Terrorism, War, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Secrets about yourself that you may still don’t know, Debated issues, About the END OF THE WORLD, and many others.
Websites: balanceddiet1.yolasite.com , etc.
(See Figure 4, Figure 521, Figure 6, Figure 7, Figure 8, Figure 9, Figure 10, Figure 1021, and Figure 1022 at figure4etc3.yolasite.com , etc .)
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com , etc.
TheServiceWeb 6 months ago
This is such a straw man it makes me want to hurl.
imthemac420 6 months ago
Dawkins' comments in this clip, are unworthy of a man of science. He should be addressing the real scientific questions. No mention in 'The God Delusion' of the anti-gravity force, the Cosmological Constant, accurate to 1:10 to the 120th power. As an agnostic, outside of the two Beliefs, i think we must consider all relevant science.
brianjsmith1895 6 months ago 2
if u dare go to rekkiten on youtube peace
TheAngelofliberty 6 months ago
yay raptor jesus. google "jesus didnt tap"
GamerAndStuff 6 months ago
Hail raptor Jesus!
Yallniggasbetrollin 6 months ago
Christians brag about the US being a Christian nation but their God, who was noticeably absent for 9/11, Katrina, and the recent killer tornadoes isn't very dependable. I'll take the MONEY. They can have this God, his Son, and the Ghost. Let them try using them at Wal-Mart.
BobbyWarrenMiller 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
god = logic see it on theoreticalphysics.webs.com
paginipro 7 months ago
If Sara Palen was a scientist...This is the most intellectually foolish nonsense I have ever herd.
soldatna 7 months ago
@soldatna
Sarah Palin a SCIENTIST?
She's barely got the mental tools to complete kindergarten.
TheSkunkCat 6 months ago
Jesus is the son of god and god is the son of a bitch. After his resurection he to became a son of a bitch. Praise be to god for he is a bastard.
scotttebben 7 months ago
(cont'd) And if you were able to bend spoons within your dream, would it be because of your sudden awareness, or because you are following the dream's script (i.e Fate, Destiny)?
In fact you would come to realize the Dream itself has a will of its own. This as close an analogy as one can make to what we call "God". However, most people, both when dreaming and living their waking life, avoid this conflict as much as possible, as it's incapatible with an egocentric existence.
eleutheromaniac 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@eleutheromaniac
what exactly is your point?
mellamosean 7 months ago
(cont'd) Now you may say that once you have awareness in your dream, you'll be able to prove that it is in fact a dream. That's actually not the case. Achieving awareness in a dream is no different than if you were to come to a similiar epiphany that this reality is in fact also a dream--you would still be restrained by the limitations of that dream. In other words, you wouldn't suddenly become Neo in the Matrix and be able to bend spoons with your mind.
eleutheromaniac 7 months ago
Russell's interpretation of God would be laughable if it were not so common place, amongst both modern athiets and believers alike.
God exists in the same way you exist when you are dreaming. You are within the dream, yet how is that possible when you are also asleep in bed? If while within this dream you had the epiphany that you were in fact asleep in bed, and you attempted to explain this to other creations in your dream, they would take you as God, for that in fact is what you are.
eleutheromaniac 7 months ago
god is logic = theoreticalphysics.webs.com
paginipro 7 months ago
FUCK RELIGION! If it wasn't for religion or martyrs those world trade center towers would still be standing!
FallofDarkness55 7 months ago
Sweden is doing the right thing ;D :
children make up their own minds and are taught a good deal of scientifical evidence.
MCAMVP 7 months ago
@MCAMVP With the exception of Russia, and the Irish too.Europeans are a bunch of pussy's.
TOLTECAAZTECA 7 months ago
Here in the Netherlands people who believe are ridiculed if they are religious.. What you believe in God and Jesus? Ha never heard of a dinosaur fossil or the faults in the Bible and caveman skeletons?
Ben1987X 8 months ago
@Ben1987X I guess that's cool for the atheists, but you should be just as appalled at the ridicule of religious people.
DoctorGreyMD 8 months ago
god = bad joke
UnusualKnight 8 months ago 18
Comment removed
realbojay 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@UnusualKnight
"god = bad joke"
its not a joke if people go and enslave people and murder and torture and extort them after hearing it
only we atheists laugh when we hear it..
realbojay 5 months ago
@UnusualKnight Or you're a joke. You can't disprove God's existence, yet you say what you say as if it's a fact. Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence. There's more weight in proving He exists than disproving He exists, so it's more likely that He exists. There's no complete proof that He exists, but it stands that there is nothing at all to disprove His existence.
nar3sas 4 months ago
@nar3sas. There have been 1000's of gods throughout history, if you want to worship one then go ahead. I'll try not to laugh. But please keep your mythology away from impressionable school kids, out of political debates, and don't let it hinder scientific progress.
baobubs 3 months ago
@baobubs If that's what you think, but I'm sure there is only support for the God I believe in, who IS the one and only God. It doesn't matter whether you laugh or not, and it is not mythology. I don't know what would be wrong with telling school kids about God. You act as if that would be bad since He's not real in your opinion. Also, there's nothing wrong with God being involved in political debates, and the concept of God is not hindering scientific progress.
nar3sas 3 months ago
@nar3sas. Sorry, but your god (whichever one you believe in) IS mythology - no different from Roman or Greek mythology. I'm all for teaching mythology to kids - but to teach them that it's real is just totally wrong. And we trust our politicians to have a firm grasp on reality, so they can govern wisely. Would you trust a president who thinks the world was created 6000 years ago? How about a president who believes in narnia? As I said, believe whatever you want - but keep it in church.
baobubs 3 months ago
@baobubs God is NOT mythology. It's very different from Roman or Greek mythoology, which have no support. You THINK it's not real, so you can't say that teaching it to kids as being real is wrong. Politicians can be Christian and have a firm grasp on reality so they can govern wisely as you said. Also, I as a Christian do not believe that the world was created 6000 years ago as you said. We all know Narnia is simply something imagined. For the last thing you said, I don't go to church.
nar3sas 3 months ago
@nar3sas. Which god are you talking about? You have 1000's to choose from. Kids are in school to learn factual stuff - like reading, writing, maths, and science. Teaching them to have blind faith in some higher power is just cruel and misleading.
baobubs 3 months ago
@baobubs I'm talking about the one and only Christian God, who has no equals. Yes, I know kids are in school to learn factual information, but they're also taught subjective information. I was taught religion in school, and I didn't simply stick to it as I was taught. I have an open-mind, but I've made my decision on what to believe in. It's not cruel or misleading to teach kids about God when you back that up with NDE's, astral projection, the beginning of the universe, laminin, and more.
nar3sas 3 months ago
@UnusualKnight Or you're a joke. You can't disprove God's existence, yet you say what you say as if it's a fact. Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence. There's more weight in proving He exists than disproving He exists, so it's more likely that He exists. There's no complete proof that He exists, but it stands that there is nothing at all to disprove His existence.
nar3sas 4 months ago
You God deniers are sosooo arrogant worse than any bible thumper from way back...atheism is a rabid religious faith of slobbering drooling fanatics who think others are neanderthals who should be exiled, or worse, from the planet
wotan237 8 months ago
@wotan237 Obvious troll is obvious
Ringwaul 8 months ago
The argument assumes that there indeed is not a teapot......this teapot might exist, we dont know. A future humanity with time machines etc....might just for laughs insert such a teapot in space.
We dont even know if we are really here on earth living our so called lives, yet you ckaim there is no God? hmmm. Such arrogance.
wotan237 8 months ago
@wotan237 unfortunately time travel is impossible. We DO know what are facts and what are stupid fairytales. We have created revolutionary technologies and have scientifically advanced through these logical conclusions and facts, while religion prevented any kind of advancement whatsoever (pointing out to the dark ages) and idiots like you tortured, burned and beheaded geniuses, scientists and other people who claimed things like the earth isn't flat. Flat earth isn't different from God
ernis1100 8 months ago
@wotan237 Did you not watch the video at all?? You missed the entire part of the argument. That we can't know anything with absolute certainty is the premise behind the argument. However, that is not the point. Just as we are reasonably certain that we really are living our lives on Earth, atheists are reasonably certain that no God exists.
joe1234567890i 8 months ago
He's good - but he's no Hitchens.
And when will we all remember the important part Monty Python life of Bryan played in all of this..... and then Douglas Adams of course.....
elgar104 8 months ago
3:07 reminded me of star wars.
Sikoa2617 8 months ago
lol at the teapot simbol, I want a neckless or ring.
Trinivalts 8 months ago
You know what else is a logical fail? Richard Dawkins logic. If he could prove that God doesn't exist and that its a logical fail then why try to prove it in the first place?
I mean if there wasn't a God then why try and prove there wasn't? It would just be that obvious wouldn't it? Apparently not though if people disagree. Which means logically something must be up. Just saying.
Onizuma13 8 months ago
@Onizuma13
Why did Newton try to prove the old Greeks like Aristotele wrong? After all Aristoteles and other Ancient scientists had a view on the laws of physics which made perfect sense to ancient minds. Newton himself was ridiculed at first and few wanted to listen to his new ideas. When he proved he was right, more and more supported him and he became a leading figure in physics
Also, you seem to forget most people do NOT think logically but are driven by instincts, emotions and traditions
McLarenMercedes 8 months ago
@Onizuma13 I love seeing so many pseudo-intellectuals trying to attack real intellectuals. You just fail so badly you can't even build a logically appropriate argument.
ernis1100 8 months ago
@ernis1100 Real intellectual huh? If that were true then why the hell do you even care what a so called "pseudo-intellectual" like me thinks anyway? Not to mention I wrote that like 2 weeks ago and I could have easily have changed my mind, died, or just stopped giving a fuck about this retarded subject in a whole. Maybe you should act like a "real" intellectual and actually think ahead before you speak.
Onizuma13 8 months ago
@Onizuma13 Because our society is influenced by this bullshit. Idiot or a genius - you're a part of the society. By real intellectuals I meant people like Dawkings, however even assuming that I meant myself, I'm not naive enough to impersonate the stereotype of a wise person or an intellectual, I can and will have whatever personality I favor regardless of my intellect and I'm free to express my opinion whenever and wherever I want.
And I just happen to feel like replying right here, right now.
ernis1100 8 months ago
@ernis1100 Do you smoke pot? Because they should really make that stuff legal. =)
Onizuma13 8 months ago
@Onizuma13 Just because you use the word "logic" a few times doesn't mean your argument makes rational sense. Sometimes, the intuitive is wrong. Look up behavioral psychology and the superstitious tendencies that exist in all animals when they associate one thing to another. We try to make something there that isn't in order to process our environment. God is a false product of this. Also, just because people agree on an idea doesn't make it right.
joe1234567890i 8 months ago
@joe1234567890i You realize just by saying what you just said there kinda fucks up with your own claims. I could say the same for the ideas you just put on the table. It works both ways.
"We try to make something there that isn't in order to process our environment. God is a false product of this." is nothing more than an idea you've told yourself in order to believe something doesn't exist but in truth it doesn't prove a damn thing either. Nothing ever will and why does it matter honestly?
Onizuma13 8 months ago
@Onizuma13 Also if you like putting yourself in the same league with animals thats cool but personally I know i didn't evolve from no fucking monkey. We may be very similar to animals but thats like saying water and blood are the same just because they're both a liquid. I really wish I could think of a better example but yeah who really cares honestly? Does it really matter to you what other people believe in? I'd start looking at yourself before you criticize others for having an opinion.
Onizuma13 8 months ago
@Onizuma13 Just to let you know, you responded to yourself. Oh, and I agree, you didn't evolve from a monkey just as I didn't evolve from a monkey either. That's because individuals don't evolve: populations evolve. If you don't understand that concept, you need to either seriously refresh yourself in biology class or learn it for the first time. Oh, and how about you look at your comments, look at my comments, and ask yourself who is criticizing who?
joe1234567890i 8 months ago
@Onizuma13 Yes you did evolve from the primate family! Of course you wouldn't understand that because your religion has brainwashed you!
FallofDarkness55 7 months ago
@Onizuma13 I fail to see how what I said "fucks up" my own claims. You may repeat what I said word for word, but that isn't a refutation of my statement. Try a little harder next time before you claim that my statements refute themselves. Also, that quote is an explanation of the previous sentence in case you did not pick that up. Again, talk to me when you've actually looked up something about psychology and come back with a better answer. RESEARCH what other people say. Don't just take my word
joe1234567890i 8 months ago
all hail, the flying spaghetti monster
AgeOfInfidels 8 months ago
@AgeOfInfidels Imma eat the flying spaghetti monster, PASTA WITH ALFREDO SAUCE FTW
migeezel 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hale spaghetti full of grace the sauce is in with you,
Blessed art thou amongst noodles,
and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Stomach.
Holy Spaghetti, Mother of Pasta,
pray for us Fat boy,
now and at the hour of our death.
Ramen.............
pogsx69x 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hale spaghetti full of grace the sauce is in with you,
Blessed art thou amongst noodles,
and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Stomach.
Holy Spaghetti, Mother of Pasta,
pray for us Fat boy,
now and at the hour of our death.
Ramen..............
pogsx69x 9 months ago
WORSHIP THE TEAPOT, the only way to truth. Otherwise you will be bounced into the darkness of the evil Coffepot and you will be boiled in black mocca for all times!
ironheadfm 9 months ago
That sounds like a fucking awesome camp. I would have lved to have gone there as a kid...
luckycharms8282 9 months ago
Dawkins? Ele existe?
revcarlospuck 9 months ago
is
therealist220 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
jesus/GOD is real( im posting this on all videos that say that god/jesus isnt reaL
therealist220 9 months ago
Isn't it just so simple; you can believe in what we collectively know to be true, follow a path of critical thinking and accept the acceptable OR believe in something that has no factual basis, borne of myth, swallowed by time, turned over, shuffled and spoken and passed down as a mindless mantra
725672567256 9 months ago
The eye of faith can see anything it wants to see excepting only 'things as they really are'. Why celebrate a moribund 'luxury' of adamantine blockheadedness instead of conducting a vigorous & fearless pursuit of the Real - given our especially hard-won human freedoms and faculties to do so with? Isn't faith in one Early Bronze Age Middle Eastern deity about as dangerous as any other in the 21st Century??
bluygs 9 months ago
LOL
notice how he talks about the FSM in the same manner as he talks about the christian god.
what a CHAP!!!!
ps:...
ALL HAIL HIS NOODLY APPEDAGE!!
Mikeybetts 9 months ago