WTF is this chick talking about? Something about not disbelieving the effectiveness of an OTC cold remedy meaning you'll be gullible enough to follow a religion? That's uh...profound.
wow "wikipedia" didn't have a reference for her. Clearly she must be wrong if wikipedia has no reference for her. Wikipedia is the be and end all of knowledge. thank the gods that 'thenoel' is here to enlighten us.
what the heck is this??? i'm so confused on what this video is talking about!!!! its retarded! all i did was type in "stewie gullible" regarding family guy, and this psycho bitch came up. I'm so LOST!!! not to mention, lost is a good show!
That angrylittlegirl is now a 170 pound woman and nowhere near a cute as she used to be? (sigh). Maybe we should take away her bible and give her a Weight Watchers cookbook.
i think a lot of people miss the point of her video. a lot of people believe what the bible says and go to church, etc. because they were brought up to do it and their family and friends do it; they follow it and don't even question it. it's smart to question and that was her point.
There is no way I immediately subscribe to the notions of people, even those who are the most intelligent. I'm simply defending her. TheNoel, I apologize, as well as applaud your comment. That itself, was intelligent.
I found it ironic that someone could accuse another of being gullible while offering absolutely no evidence to corroborate their own beliefs.
Sure, Airborne is ineffective. But, why is it ineffective?
Sure, there's probably no God. But, what evidence (or lack of evidence) will you use to further your argument?
Holding the consensus view on an issue isn't proof of your intelligence. It means you're just a repository of others' ideas. True intelligence is demonstrated through your own reasoning.
@TheNoel She didn't state any of her own beliefs. She didn't say airborne was ineffective. She didn't say there was no God. She said don't take my word for it. And the last paragraph is exactly what she was getting at. This video response makes you look a little stupid.
Whoever made this video is trying to look funny when he/she really isn't. This person clearly needs to grow up and just wants what he can't have, so for some reason chooses to fight it off. Poor bastard had a bitch fest when she said religion and probably crapped his pants. I'll say it once and for all: Jess is clearly smarter than you are!
I'm an atheist now, but I don't accuse religious leaders of some grand conspiracy to deceive and extort their constituents - as she seems to.
Furthermore, I'm not repressing any sort of attraction to this girl; I'm into Asians, frankly. So, don't accuse me of trying to spite her. I found fault with her argument and made this video accordingly.
As for my intelligence, I won't claim to possess much more or less than she. Blindly subscribing to her notions says little about yours, however.
That comment tells a lot about yourself, you know. Apparently you view yourself superior to the "religious folk." Now it's hard for me to accept or take into consideration to what you have to tell me about religion and whatnot. People don't get along with others who view themselves as "superior" to anybody. You should work on that.
Absolutely. Also, Pelonetillo, you're making another statement calling roughly 4-5 billion people on this planet delusional. That's quite the insult you're putting on us humans (you and I and the rest of us) there. If I didn't believe the sky was blue, would it be justified that I call you and everyone else who sees a blue sky delusional? I think not. ;)
if most people with a proven track record -- reliable people -- didnt believe it was blue, then those of us who do believe it to be blue should reconsider the color. ...otherwise, we might as well join a church.
i dont care to convince anyone, what i mean to do is insult and have a good laugh at the expense of others. superiority is not marked by compassion, it comes in many forms.
what makes you so sure your superior to about a quarter, two thirds of the world's population that believe in a god or are religious. Doesn't our constitution say that EVERYONE is equal or are you not patriotic?jk But seriously the generalization is not apreshiated
to the first no I am not from another country I just suck at spelling but i totally bombed that word I forget why.....not even close....here i found it appreciated I think that's right
This entire video is fairly retarded. She does not have data. She is not trying to sell anything. She is questioning what people are saying and trying to get people to think. On the other hand, she isn't on wikipedia, so I guess we shouldn't listen to her.
What's wrong with religion!? Religion = WAR! DEATH! SUBMISSION! ABUSE! RAPE! TERRORISM! TOM CRUISE! TORTURE! DOOMSDAY WISHES! Built-in human ethics are way greater than any religious dogma.
I'm sure this entire video was just a reaction to the word "religion". If she'd said "COUCH POTATO SYNDROME" instead of religion, people would've let her be.
stupidest and most illetrate people in the world r athiest.Lemme give u an example....A DOG MAY NEVER UNDERSTAND WHAT R COMPUTERS ,IT DOESNT MEAN COMPUTERS DONT EXIST...its same for these athiest just because they dont have enough brain power to see everything around them they choose to belive god doesnt exist.And u know wat incredible part is they think others r stupid.
Haha, I wanted to thumb down danishqureshi88's comment, but it was written so poorly it looks better NOT thumbed down.
Illetrate? Perhaps there's a chance in heaven that an atheist would actually be able to spell it right, opposed to you? It's ILLITERATE. Close your bibl(ie)s, go read a real book. You can start with English lessons. Just giving some advice to help you here.
If there is a Noel.... - I suspect that both Noel and ALG are stage presences for a very witty Pythonish piece that will, despite its widespread viewership, largely end up on stony ground and mostly serve only to reinforce people's prejudices.
Having seen this, i feel a bit guilty for having laughed out loud at the one this one is (pretending to be) complaining about.
Hehe, this video got some LOLs out of me. I don't think it's supposed to be taken seriously.(this video not the one it's replying to.) It's just supposed to get a laught out of you.
way to get the point of the video guy. i mean, who'da thunk someone like yourself would be able to DO EXACTLY WHAT SHE ASKED YOU TO and question her sources when she didn't need sources to make the point. way to go.
also, wikipedia is, in many instances, more accurate then the Encyclopedia Britannica(compare Korea articles). however, some articles are only maintained by one guy, making it inherently biased.
I disagree. I find wikipedia to be an excellent source for information. And though it can be edited by anyone, most of the information submitted is generally accurate.
Indeed, wikipedia proves that not everything on the internet is immature. At first people thought wikipedia would be spammed full of useless stuff in every article, but strangely it has some relatively reliable information.
Most of information is backed up by references: links to other sites, books, articles... No it is reliable, but usually it doesn't give lot of details, and u should search for them for yourself in books and such.
Noel you are the biggest fucking retard on the planet. She isn't making any claims of truth so it's pointless to ask her to provide sources for what she's saying. She's using logic and reason to show that the bible and other religious books have nothing to back up their information. It's that simple. You're so fucking stupid. She's stating an opinion: Not facts. So you'd have to be an idiot to demand her to back up her thoughts with sources. You can't understand the simplest things.
Pretty defensive there draca666! One might think you were insecure about your beleifs.
How do you know she was talking about your religion? She didn't specify a religion.
Her unspoken inference is that there are no facts about religion to check, therefore she need prove nothing. One need not check facts that are not actually there.
LOL this is one of the funnyest responces on youtube
but really what the hell is this "airborn", its a term used to state that something is in the air (ie: airplane 1 is airborn) but your talking about it like its an item of sort
Her videos are pretty bad. But yours wasn't too great either. Most of the clips of her were taken out of context. And I would have to agree with her. You'd have to be pretty gullible to give into a religion.
Oh have you taken a fucking history/journalism class in college or something? Is that going to be your MAJOR now? You stupid condescending fucking bitch. Not for the gullible part, but for "Is this source reliable", etc.
She's not telling you NOT to beleive anything, just to make sure you can. She's not telling you to believe her. If anything, she expects you to question her in the ways she described, and for that, I commend you, but carelessly bashing someone just because they try to help broaden your perspective is unneccisary. Angrylittlegirl has one of the best minds on Youtube I've seen so far. This is the premise of a great philosopher, and I will not stand for you being mean to her for thinking.
This whack job is one who desperately needs to get a LIFE Geeze! Her name AngryLittleGirl is incerdibly appropriate. Quick; get her a Midol!!!! If she is attempting logic, crash & burn babeeeee...how sad...
man, that's not funny. You just don't understand the video. I also don't think everything is ok in that vid. but there's a lot of logic and clever structure in it. seriously. you must be so sturpid to spend time on showing other people you don't get things like that..
I don't know what's more sad - the fact that I was upset when she suggested I was gullible for religion bor the fact that someone made this to mock her. From now on I'm going to... crap sake as if I'll ever change. I need a girlfriend... correction, I need to try and make my relationships work... :(
amen! amen! There is nothing wrong with religion! In fact you have to be the oppostie of gullable to believe in it and that is FAITHFUL! This was right on man! Ans even funny!
Hahaha...she's funny as hell. She pretends to act sophisticated and proper with a nose in the air like Wikipedia is the "GOD" of information. Lmao, bored little girls, what do they really know anyways.
What is time? Is time really what that dictionary entry said, or a creation of the government to rule your mind! DUN DUN DUN! I dunno what that means.
Her remarks regarding religion were misconceived. Religion isn't evil or deceitful. It's usually no more than a lifestyle choice that helps people resolve their moral dilemmas. I am not religious, but I will not condemn those who are.
No, you CAN'T become a hypocrite like she is, since she's not, and you ARE a HYPOCRITE. At the end of the video, she said "Don't take my word for it." while you want us to believe you just like that? fuck off with your biblethumping.
And she had every right to do so, since they were not responding to her but to her alleged antireligiousness. She pleads to question everything, her included. They went on attacking her on things she didn't say or claim. You do the same. You lack the subtlety to understand even the tiniest portion of her statements. INTREPIDDEMON says it way better than I, and you haven't addressed him at all, instead you're RETREATing into "boOOOhooo, she bullied me!! and my little friends!"
you're so right. its also kinda dumb, he's totally missing the point. Some sad men can't stand it if pretty girls are younger and smarter than they are ...
no shes not, shes an amature retard. The facts she is talking about are done through complex surveys, we learned about those kind of things at stats. She obviously hasnt.
no its not a matter of opinion. Its whether you know what you are talking about, or you don't. Scientifically illiterate means that people don't know much about science. For example; if you add salt to water it will raise the boiling point, lots of people don't know that. A complex survey which includes test, polls, house calls, and other type of ways can determine that.
yh it is a matter of opinion...like some people dont care if some of her facts are wrong because she is human...i wonder if you met her for real and she told you these perfectly valid arguments you would be as rude as you are being now....
all the people that liked this response video are the fuckin idiots angrygirl want to change their minds. you didnt get the point of the video fucktards, and the creator of this video is also a retard dumbass
I just want to know what your own opinion is. In this thread, there' only some blames and questions that even has no answer you have. What do you want to say?
A reply to mjr, I understand where you are coming from. Although you must understand both sides of the argument. I do believe that perhaps the video was mean but the maker does have a point. As a natural reaction to an offensive comment you do want to fight back to protect one's "territory." Plus if you see her other videos, they are really offensive.
Petty, mean-spirited attack. She didn't publish a research paper in an academic journal; she just made a vlog expressing her opinion. The same criteria is not required. & all the same arguments can easily be redirected at you: who are you? Where are your sources? Do you even have data? etc. Then you re-edit her rhetorical questions to validate yourself as a condescending ass. Believe it or not, bullying teen girls doesn't make you seem smart but rather sad & afraid to face real opponents.
TheNoel isn't a good contribution. Angrylittlegirl was emphasizing organized religion can mislead people because you have to stop questioning at one point and go by faith in untestable ideas.
Thanks for your reply. I wasn't clear about why I thought it was a good contribution.
One of the things I liked about Angrylittlegirl's original video is that she put forth the idea that we should always scrutinize random propoganda. She mentioned that we should check out our sources before we buy things, (when she mentioned the AirBorne product.) That's very true, we really should.
And what I liked about TheNoel's response is that he points out that Angrylittlegirl, and anyone, when they put forth their own ideas (especially about difficult topics), will always be subject to the same sort of scrutiny they advocate for.
As we've seen from everyone's responses, Angrylittlegirl has been subject to that in a number of ways that attack her not just on a conceptual level but on a personal level. )People want to know what her background is, where her own analysis comes from. And I think it's interesting that that is the way that we, over youtube, try to debate difficult ideas. And that's why I thought it was a good contribution.
That is a great point ShannonGuy. TheCarruths emphasizes that we learn how limited reason is when we use it to question its own methods. This makes us realize we must go beyond logic in asking questions about our existence.
I didn't like TheNoel's response because he used questioning to belittle her rather than analyze the subject.
Hahaha, wow, your completely fallacious attack fell completely flat. I love the insinuation that she needs to prove that God *doesn't* exist, or that some drug *doesn't* work. :) Look up "burden of proof", Vince. I don't need to prove to you that invisible elves aren't dancing on my bed; if you assert that they are, you have to prove it.
And in the beginning... what was that all about? She needs more "data" to back up her existence?
I understand where you are coming from, but she used a weak argument such as "Airborne" not working despite being clinically tested. She did not show burden of proof.
The point isn't that religion is false because it can't be tested (that's the point of religion...having faith). The point is that you should question what is put before you, to which she ignorantly tied religion as if they had the same basis.
This isn't like comparing apples to oranges (they are at least fruit). This is like comparing apples to memory.
Well, it would be nice if religion did exist in its own realm, but unfortunately superstitious beliefs are extremely often applied to the real world. For example, many believe that abortion should be outlawed based on the assumption that clumps of cells have magical souls.
That's fine if you can't test religion, but it should not be regarded as true and *in any way* imposed on the real world given this fact.
In the case of abortion, I do not understand. You are either saying that the clumps of cells in a woman's womb do not have magical souls and, therefore, magically inherit magic upon touching air OR you are saying that no human has a magic soul and, therefore, all of them could, and in all but perfect circumstances should, be killed guiltlessly because there is no magic soul and no God to stop you.
You misunderstood. There are many reasons to want to outlaw abortion; some are based in superstition. As soon as we start imposing laws based upon superstitious beliefs, we cross the line between touchy-feely innocent beliefs, and beliefs which affect the real world and the rights of others. Because of this, you *should* question religious beliefs, and not simply take them on faith, because to do otherwise would be extremely dangerous.
And likewise I never implied that fetuses should be saved for their magical qualities. It sounds as ridiculous to me as it does to you. But just because a group of people want to save babies because of their soul doesn't mean our politicians base laws off of that superstition. I have a sneaky feeling that the issue lies in different definitions of life, not in hocus pocus.
According to Chris Horner's *Thinking through philosophy*
*[Karl] Popper also uses the idea of falsifiability to demarcate science from non-science. The claims advanced in other spheres such as religion (*God loves you*)... are usually unfalsifiable, where they are not actually falsified; nothing is allowed to count as evidence against such claims. This is what reveals them to be essentially unscientific.* (Page 109)
Angrylittlegirl's DHMO and gullible videos are consistent. They are about basing your beliefs on things you can test so you can tell when someone is trying to mislead you.
They aren't about the existence of what can't be tested.
You have to understand the role of falsifiability in science to know the difference.
According to Chris Horner's *Thinking through philosophy*
*[Karl] Popper also uses the idea of falsifiability to demarcate science from non-science. The claims advanced in other spheres such as religion (*God loves you*)... are usually unfalsifiable, where they are not actually falsified; nothing is allowed to count as evidence against such claims. This is what reveals them to be essentially unscientific.* (Page 109)
lolz and agree with ballsinger. if you guys think shes right and her argument isnt flawed MASSIVELY, then you should rewatch this video until that fact sinks into your thick heads -_-
Why believe that we need to check facts and be skeptical? Are you being serious? I don't care if a retarded midget in a gorilla suit tells me this; it's still true. Not because the midget said it, but because it's shown throughout history to be an extremely reliable method of truth-finding.
Only naive people try to wrap science and religion up under the same bow. It gives them a warm, fuzzy feeling to believe that both can exist together (because that way they get the best of both worlds) when in fact they do indeed blatantly contradict much of the time.
Angrylittlegirl's Gullible video says organized religion can manipulate the masses because we have to stop questioning at one point and have faith in untestable ideas.
TheNoel attacks angrylittlegirl instead because HE DOESN'T GET IT........
WTF is this chick talking about? Something about not disbelieving the effectiveness of an OTC cold remedy meaning you'll be gullible enough to follow a religion? That's uh...profound.
peterp21 2 months ago
The sound and video are out of sync lol. I haven't seen this video since 2007 haha!
DJShade707 5 months ago
Back to the future poster... rock on!
serenber 1 year ago
own3d !!!1111!!!11!!!! xD? ........ *cough*
starsnghts 1 year ago
a 5000 years old technique used to reach enlightenment is :
sit straight,close your eyes and concentrate on the two gaps.
the gap between breath going in and breath going out.
as well as
the gap between breath going out and breath going in.
also suitable for muslims .
please share the technique as much as possible .
use it as much as possible
sofianbelhedi 1 year ago
Yes it is in the dictionary.
TRAETHATRUTHhh 1 year ago
whats that song called
(where you say she doesn't exsist)
fgamboa25 1 year ago
wow "wikipedia" didn't have a reference for her. Clearly she must be wrong if wikipedia has no reference for her. Wikipedia is the be and end all of knowledge. thank the gods that 'thenoel' is here to enlighten us.
Humbug26 1 year ago
She's soooooooooo smart.
marvy1118 2 years ago
this videos audio is so off
it's just so annoying
but i like the video
BigTEntertainmnet 2 years ago
what the heck is this??? i'm so confused on what this video is talking about!!!! its retarded! all i did was type in "stewie gullible" regarding family guy, and this psycho bitch came up. I'm so LOST!!! not to mention, lost is a good show!
falldownboy91 2 years ago
She would have been more interesting if she showed her tits.
NinjaSperm 2 years ago 4
somebody get this BitchLittleGirl a cock to choke on. -that was a "play on words" do you know what that is?
have you ever heard the word opinionated?
do you know what the word "opinionated" means?
a series of questions from: SomePedophileAssholeThatDrivesAroundInAWhiteVanAndAsksStupidQuestions.
dweebers22 2 years ago
i keep saying after 2 years that this pussy is sooo hot.
jucamo007 2 years ago
heres a question: ever been with a black guy? how about 5?
nimibiantribesman 2 years ago
"OMG, PEOPLE TELL LIES?!?"
Best part of the video, I think.
legonintendo 2 years ago
She is very hot.
viharsarok 2 years ago
Classic lol
adderxxx 2 years ago
Did you know?
-----------------------Did you know?
Did you know?
That angrylittlegirl is now a 170 pound woman and nowhere near a cute as she used to be? (sigh). Maybe we should take away her bible and give her a Weight Watchers cookbook.
TeensAreNotChildren 2 years ago 2
I'm willing to believe that, it made me lol.
ItsFuckingAndy 2 years ago
SHE IS HOT!! and that is a fact
theXtreme50 2 years ago
Shes hot!!
theXtreme50 2 years ago
i think a lot of people miss the point of her video. a lot of people believe what the bible says and go to church, etc. because they were brought up to do it and their family and friends do it; they follow it and don't even question it. it's smart to question and that was her point.
musicfairy6 2 years ago
You PWNED that stuck-up bitch. Way to make her kick the bucket.
MadMunky20k 3 years ago 6
Haha, I agree.
Caffeinepills77 3 years ago
There is no way I immediately subscribe to the notions of people, even those who are the most intelligent. I'm simply defending her. TheNoel, I apologize, as well as applaud your comment. That itself, was intelligent.
Caffeinepills77 3 years ago
Aww shucks. Let's call it even. : ]
TheNoel 3 years ago
I found it ironic that someone could accuse another of being gullible while offering absolutely no evidence to corroborate their own beliefs.
Sure, Airborne is ineffective. But, why is it ineffective?
Sure, there's probably no God. But, what evidence (or lack of evidence) will you use to further your argument?
Holding the consensus view on an issue isn't proof of your intelligence. It means you're just a repository of others' ideas. True intelligence is demonstrated through your own reasoning.
TheNoel 3 years ago
@TheNoel She didn't state any of her own beliefs. She didn't say airborne was ineffective. She didn't say there was no God. She said don't take my word for it. And the last paragraph is exactly what she was getting at. This video response makes you look a little stupid.
tnus3 1 year ago
Whoever made this video is trying to look funny when he/she really isn't. This person clearly needs to grow up and just wants what he can't have, so for some reason chooses to fight it off. Poor bastard had a bitch fest when she said religion and probably crapped his pants. I'll say it once and for all: Jess is clearly smarter than you are!
Caffeinepills77 3 years ago
I'm an atheist now, but I don't accuse religious leaders of some grand conspiracy to deceive and extort their constituents - as she seems to.
Furthermore, I'm not repressing any sort of attraction to this girl; I'm into Asians, frankly. So, don't accuse me of trying to spite her. I found fault with her argument and made this video accordingly.
As for my intelligence, I won't claim to possess much more or less than she. Blindly subscribing to her notions says little about yours, however.
TheNoel 3 years ago
nice video and i have never seen airborn
dre4u6 3 years ago
aw, poor little religious person got offended and made a whole video for revenge. lol.
Pelonetillo 3 years ago
That comment tells a lot about yourself, you know. Apparently you view yourself superior to the "religious folk." Now it's hard for me to accept or take into consideration to what you have to tell me about religion and whatnot. People don't get along with others who view themselves as "superior" to anybody. You should work on that.
kingkev115 3 years ago
i am superior to religious folk. i dont suffer from delusions about gods and fairies -- its just not fair to them to compare me.
Pelonetillo 3 years ago
You may be right, but you won't convince anyone that way.
That was KingKev115's point, and I agree wholeheartedly.
A superior individual would spread their convictions through reasoned arguments - not condescend to others.
TheNoel 3 years ago
Absolutely. Also, Pelonetillo, you're making another statement calling roughly 4-5 billion people on this planet delusional. That's quite the insult you're putting on us humans (you and I and the rest of us) there. If I didn't believe the sky was blue, would it be justified that I call you and everyone else who sees a blue sky delusional? I think not. ;)
kingkev115 3 years ago
if most people with a proven track record -- reliable people -- didnt believe it was blue, then those of us who do believe it to be blue should reconsider the color. ...otherwise, we might as well join a church.
Pelonetillo 3 years ago
i dont care to convince anyone, what i mean to do is insult and have a good laugh at the expense of others. superiority is not marked by compassion, it comes in many forms.
Pelonetillo 3 years ago
what makes you so sure your superior to about a quarter, two thirds of the world's population that believe in a god or are religious. Doesn't our constitution say that EVERYONE is equal or are you not patriotic?jk But seriously the generalization is not apreshiated
thetimetojump 3 years ago
Are you from another country? or do you just not know how to spell appreciated?
The time to jump may be NOW
emerson24 2 years ago
to the first no I am not from another country I just suck at spelling but i totally bombed that word I forget why.....not even close....here i found it appreciated I think that's right
to the second um....ok......
sorry for the long comment
thetimetojump 2 years ago
great video
ru0107 3 years ago
Wow. That was the stupidest thing.....ever.
BecauseTheTruthHurts 3 years ago
This video must be a parody or a joke of some sort...right?
mnfchen 3 years ago
Woot! Wikipedia as a source? Really?
C'mon dude, this is pathetic. The maker of this video is gullible if they trust wikipedia.
albuspotter9 3 years ago
i ♥ it
bnbnnbbnbnnbnbnbnbnb 3 years ago
The video is ok, but really...wikipedia? come on...
Juniorain 3 years ago
Great video and I have no idea what the fuck airborne is. Is it an air freshener.
mythTURNStoLEGEND 3 years ago 3
haha funny
KruptedSoul 3 years ago
Interesting.... Even though the video mocks her.
Leonesaurus130 3 years ago
This entire video is fairly retarded. She does not have data. She is not trying to sell anything. She is questioning what people are saying and trying to get people to think. On the other hand, she isn't on wikipedia, so I guess we shouldn't listen to her.
crzyprplmnky 3 years ago
you used the wrong form of the word "There"
Hope this helps.
Lobbdalobster 3 years ago
What's wrong with religion!? Religion = WAR! DEATH! SUBMISSION! ABUSE! RAPE! TERRORISM! TOM CRUISE! TORTURE! DOOMSDAY WISHES! Built-in human ethics are way greater than any religious dogma.
I'm sure this entire video was just a reaction to the word "religion". If she'd said "COUCH POTATO SYNDROME" instead of religion, people would've let her be.
bjeah 3 years ago
She never told you to believe her. Infact, she made a point of questioning her.
EpicFailGirl 3 years ago
Are you, "TheXmas", implying that people are gullible for believing in Zeus? Why else poke fun at some of her last remarks otherwise.
She implied that people can believe in a certain religion because the are gullible.
brutus149 3 years ago
stupidest and most illetrate people in the world r athiest.Lemme give u an example....A DOG MAY NEVER UNDERSTAND WHAT R COMPUTERS ,IT DOESNT MEAN COMPUTERS DONT EXIST...its same for these athiest just because they dont have enough brain power to see everything around them they choose to belive god doesnt exist.And u know wat incredible part is they think others r stupid.
danishqureshi88 3 years ago
yes, you may say this.
but people may also believe that God can come down in the form of... meatloaf.
you may call them insane, yes.
but also, religion is the belief in a divine power. why can't this power be meatloaf? why must it be God?
think about that next time you feel like insulting other people's beliefs.
thanks, dickwad.
katiecullenx3 3 years ago
i absolutely agree.. a higher power is just that, A HIGHER POWER. that feeling in your gut! you know its there.
be it meatloaf, or spaghetti, or fucking saddam hussein...ITS A HIGHER POWER
is there any fact anywhere that says, ANYWHERE, that a higher power cannot in fact be meatloaf? or spaghetti? NO!!!! MY POINT EXACTLY
arlielaraine 3 years ago
Haha, I wanted to thumb down danishqureshi88's comment, but it was written so poorly it looks better NOT thumbed down.
Illetrate? Perhaps there's a chance in heaven that an atheist would actually be able to spell it right, opposed to you? It's ILLITERATE. Close your bibl(ie)s, go read a real book. You can start with English lessons. Just giving some advice to help you here.
bjeah 3 years ago
um bitch.. my neopet disagrees to back off!
God rocks!
1996bball 3 years ago 3
You really don't get it, Noel, do you?
If there is a Noel.... - I suspect that both Noel and ALG are stage presences for a very witty Pythonish piece that will, despite its widespread viewership, largely end up on stony ground and mostly serve only to reinforce people's prejudices.
Having seen this, i feel a bit guilty for having laughed out loud at the one this one is (pretending to be) complaining about.
djhbrown 3 years ago
Hehe, this video got some LOLs out of me. I don't think it's supposed to be taken seriously.(this video not the one it's replying to.) It's just supposed to get a laught out of you.
doom032 3 years ago
xD Rock on.
KitsuneFai 3 years ago
Wikipedia is an official unreliable source. Collegeas don't allow it.
pandasrmylife 3 years ago
way to get the point of the video guy. i mean, who'da thunk someone like yourself would be able to DO EXACTLY WHAT SHE ASKED YOU TO and question her sources when she didn't need sources to make the point. way to go.
also, wikipedia is, in many instances, more accurate then the Encyclopedia Britannica(compare Korea articles). however, some articles are only maintained by one guy, making it inherently biased.
rougegoat 3 years ago 2
If you had to go to Wikipedia to check for her, you are a freaking idiot rofl.
Wikipedia can be edited by ANYONE.
Wikipedia is the most unreliable site on the interenet.
Soneclipseredvblue 3 years ago
I disagree. I find wikipedia to be an excellent source for information. And though it can be edited by anyone, most of the information submitted is generally accurate.
Soulpyroz 3 years ago 5
Indeed, wikipedia proves that not everything on the internet is immature. At first people thought wikipedia would be spammed full of useless stuff in every article, but strangely it has some relatively reliable information.
doom032 3 years ago
Most of information is backed up by references: links to other sites, books, articles... No it is reliable, but usually it doesn't give lot of details, and u should search for them for yourself in books and such.
MediumKuriboh 3 years ago
this is a bad video.
sparklythings21 3 years ago
Noel you are the biggest fucking retard on the planet. She isn't making any claims of truth so it's pointless to ask her to provide sources for what she's saying. She's using logic and reason to show that the bible and other religious books have nothing to back up their information. It's that simple. You're so fucking stupid. She's stating an opinion: Not facts. So you'd have to be an idiot to demand her to back up her thoughts with sources. You can't understand the simplest things.
VitalSigns1 3 years ago
Dude this just good humor
duststorm888 3 years ago
No, these a cheap laughs.
Weltenweber 3 years ago
oh so you're saying that religion doesn't have sources?
are you saying that religion doesn't have any logic?
People don't believe in God just to believe.
We believe for a reason.
And for some angry little bitch not checking HER fact and attack our religion.
Fuck that shit.
These are the type of atheist that I hate.
The type of atheist that think they're so fucking smart and right about EVERYTHING.
I'm not against atheism,just the atheist that bash my religion.
Fucking pissy little bitch
Draca666 3 years ago
Pretty defensive there draca666! One might think you were insecure about your beleifs.
How do you know she was talking about your religion? She didn't specify a religion.
Her unspoken inference is that there are no facts about religion to check, therefore she need prove nothing. One need not check facts that are not actually there.
That puts the onus on you. Have fun with that.
massivereader 3 years ago 2
Ahahaha. :D This is great. Good job.
mailparannstaff 3 years ago
This is one of the worst video responses on YouTube... You tried to make her look bad in order to protect your ideas.
You know what they say ... great minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss people.
Cheers & keep up the good work
SkullboxDarkByte 3 years ago
agreed
NikitaLion 3 years ago
how pathetic...
the whole point is to ASK questiions, you don't HAVE to take her word for any of what she says... its the point.
You even had to put things out of context, like "What is time"... meaning what scale of measurement is used of a given graph...
Brainwavez 3 years ago
LOL this is one of the funnyest responces on youtube
but really what the hell is this "airborn", its a term used to state that something is in the air (ie: airplane 1 is airborn) but your talking about it like its an item of sort
SoldierCyfix 3 years ago
I think she meant the product Airborn. You take it when you're sick.
Sicklesale 3 years ago
Her videos are pretty bad. But yours wasn't too great either. Most of the clips of her were taken out of context. And I would have to agree with her. You'd have to be pretty gullible to give into a religion.
urantivirus 3 years ago 3
Sorry The Noel, the original of this isn't showing up since she was nominated and I mistook yours for hers. My bad!
agcurbaisti 3 years ago
Oh have you taken a fucking history/journalism class in college or something? Is that going to be your MAJOR now? You stupid condescending fucking bitch. Not for the gullible part, but for "Is this source reliable", etc.
agcurbaisti 3 years ago
Its a good point, watch the orig - its the WHOLE point infact.
Brainwavez 3 years ago
Read my comment that came immediately afterwards.
agcurbaisti 3 years ago
lol, fair enough.
Brainwavez 3 years ago
You bore me.
Belle19700 3 years ago
She's not telling you NOT to beleive anything, just to make sure you can. She's not telling you to believe her. If anything, she expects you to question her in the ways she described, and for that, I commend you, but carelessly bashing someone just because they try to help broaden your perspective is unneccisary. Angrylittlegirl has one of the best minds on Youtube I've seen so far. This is the premise of a great philosopher, and I will not stand for you being mean to her for thinking.
Offlian 3 years ago
you. kind sir, are a douche bag.
kthanksbye.
Fleescyy 3 years ago
THANK YOU!!!
Offlian 3 years ago
This whack job is one who desperately needs to get a LIFE Geeze! Her name AngryLittleGirl is incerdibly appropriate. Quick; get her a Midol!!!! If she is attempting logic, crash & burn babeeeee...how sad...
eyzonhim 3 years ago
Wikipedia's not a reliable source...
StarveAndRun85 3 years ago 4
man, that's not funny. You just don't understand the video. I also don't think everything is ok in that vid. but there's a lot of logic and clever structure in it. seriously. you must be so sturpid to spend time on showing other people you don't get things like that..
ACdiePerle 3 years ago
I don't know what's more sad - the fact that I was upset when she suggested I was gullible for religion bor the fact that someone made this to mock her. From now on I'm going to... crap sake as if I'll ever change. I need a girlfriend... correction, I need to try and make my relationships work... :(
OrunitaVivi 3 years ago
go 2 hell
smooth237 3 years ago
amen! amen! There is nothing wrong with religion! In fact you have to be the oppostie of gullable to believe in it and that is FAITHFUL! This was right on man! Ans even funny!
phantomeriklover 3 years ago
ive never heard about airbourne literally
sesarathor 4 years ago
honistly, i don't know what ariborn is XD
seasha28 4 years ago
Hahaha...she's funny as hell. She pretends to act sophisticated and proper with a nose in the air like Wikipedia is the "GOD" of information. Lmao, bored little girls, what do they really know anyways.
djniner 4 years ago 3
I think I just dropped into the mentally retarded category because I watched this.
Jackass9484 4 years ago
What is time? Is time really what that dictionary entry said, or a creation of the government to rule your mind! DUN DUN DUN! I dunno what that means.
syscothong 4 years ago
Okay you checked you did exactly what she told you to do. Is that suppose to make her look stupid?
syscothong 4 years ago
Sigh... Why is this my most frequently viewed video?
It funny how I've come to agree with many of the things she said. Increasingly, I find that I just had a problem with the way she said them.
If she been more articulate and less conceited, I may have respected her argument more.
TheNoel 4 years ago
Her remarks regarding religion were misconceived. Religion isn't evil or deceitful. It's usually no more than a lifestyle choice that helps people resolve their moral dilemmas. I am not religious, but I will not condemn those who are.
TheNoel 4 years ago
hahahthis vid rules, ur so funnyyyyyy
meluvcheese22 4 years ago
that AngryLittleBITCH NEED TO BE SHOT
eazy208 4 years ago
ummm Wikipedia is not a reliable source lol
VicKicksBricks 4 years ago
i think it was just a comical device... but yeah i agree. WIki sucks
M4gicMuffinm4n 4 years ago
No, you CAN'T become a hypocrite like she is, since she's not, and you ARE a HYPOCRITE. At the end of the video, she said "Don't take my word for it." while you want us to believe you just like that? fuck off with your biblethumping.
HA HA HA HA HA HA ..... OWNED!!
regger099 4 years ago
I'm obsessed with the fact that people hate her because she pleads for:
1. Scientific rigor (which is basically common sense, like don't compare apples with bricks)
2. Skepticism (is there bias in the source? Did the science teacher want to sell more chemistry lessons?)
Basically, she says that if ur stupid nuff to believe in ads then ur surely gonna swallow religion hook, line & sinker.
If ur faith is so strong, then never go to the doctor again, that'll solve that problem too, over time.
regger099 4 years ago
You go!
syscothong 4 years ago
And she had every right to do so, since they were not responding to her but to her alleged antireligiousness. She pleads to question everything, her included. They went on attacking her on things she didn't say or claim. You do the same. You lack the subtlety to understand even the tiniest portion of her statements. INTREPIDDEMON says it way better than I, and you haven't addressed him at all, instead you're RETREATing into "boOOOhooo, she bullied me!! and my little friends!"
regger099 4 years ago
Heh Noel, is this someone who goes to skyline or BCC? Lol
Utahraptor9 4 years ago
i'm sorry but this is actually YOU making an ass of YOURSELF for all eternity. But don't worry, you're too dumb to see that, so .... ;)
regger099 4 years ago
you're so right. its also kinda dumb, he's totally missing the point. Some sad men can't stand it if pretty girls are younger and smarter than they are ...
regger099 4 years ago
hey if you're too stupid to understand her, don't post.
Oh well, I guess it's hard being you, a fat ugly basterd who can't get dates ... ;)
regger099 4 years ago
I wanted to hit her sorry couldn't help it.
hannigan06 4 years ago
that was great loved it!
realdreamgirl 4 years ago
lots of poeple dislike angrylittlegirl but i think she's brill..
rosydonut 4 years ago
no shes not, shes an amature retard. The facts she is talking about are done through complex surveys, we learned about those kind of things at stats. She obviously hasnt.
YuraB 4 years ago
matter of opinion...
rosydonut 4 years ago
no its not a matter of opinion. Its whether you know what you are talking about, or you don't. Scientifically illiterate means that people don't know much about science. For example; if you add salt to water it will raise the boiling point, lots of people don't know that. A complex survey which includes test, polls, house calls, and other type of ways can determine that.
YuraB 4 years ago
ooooh i'm so glad you just had your first science and statistics class!!
All she's saying is question statements, given out as facts.
You're quite stupid aren't you, little boy?
regger099 4 years ago
no shes saying alot more than that and that is why there is like a hundred videos that make fun of her ass.
YuraB 4 years ago
yh it is a matter of opinion...like some people dont care if some of her facts are wrong because she is human...i wonder if you met her for real and she told you these perfectly valid arguments you would be as rude as you are being now....
i dont think you would!
rosydonut 4 years ago
what? she is saying people are wrong, and yet she is wrong and u say its ok if shes human?! what the fuck are u talking about.
YuraB 4 years ago
girl in the clip = AngryLittleGirl ?
DaBombastic7 4 years ago 3
I dont think so she looks like she´s done with zbrush and photoshop :D
L4s4gn3 4 years ago
she's fucking crazy but i would tottaly bang her......shes got a purty mouth
joberle 4 years ago 2
ur a dick
dylmo1 4 years ago
shes not good for anything else anyways.
YuraB 4 years ago
lol
srvfan04 4 years ago
all the people that liked this response video are the fuckin idiots angrygirl want to change their minds. you didnt get the point of the video fucktards, and the creator of this video is also a retard dumbass
julionather 4 years ago
you are officially my hero!!! lol jk but that was awesome!!
thelittlepeople07 4 years ago
hahah you rock.
audreysmakeup 4 years ago
OMG people tell lies?! - hahahaha!!
13morphine 4 years ago
one to many hits on the ole bong.... A mind is a terrible thing to waste and man is this one wasted...
tomtbs 4 years ago
OMG THAT'S AWESOME!!!
memyselfandcorpse2 4 years ago
Nice ;)
Arcolithe 4 years ago
I just want to know what your own opinion is. In this thread, there' only some blames and questions that even has no answer you have. What do you want to say?
ks8at1st 4 years ago
nice!!
texximan 4 years ago
I wanna have your babies. And a completely unrelated note this idea is basic statistics and is not an original idea.
Oogabugawa 4 years ago
A reply to mjr, I understand where you are coming from. Although you must understand both sides of the argument. I do believe that perhaps the video was mean but the maker does have a point. As a natural reaction to an offensive comment you do want to fight back to protect one's "territory." Plus if you see her other videos, they are really offensive.
Just saying it's a natural reaction.
SupahGloo 4 years ago
Why even argue?
Ednowacky 4 years ago
i see Back to the Future
masterrjedi 4 years ago
Petty, mean-spirited attack. She didn't publish a research paper in an academic journal; she just made a vlog expressing her opinion. The same criteria is not required. & all the same arguments can easily be redirected at you: who are you? Where are your sources? Do you even have data? etc. Then you re-edit her rhetorical questions to validate yourself as a condescending ass. Believe it or not, bullying teen girls doesn't make you seem smart but rather sad & afraid to face real opponents.
mjr256 4 years ago
nice edits! nice idea. good contribution to the discussion
ShannonGuy 4 years ago
TheNoel isn't a good contribution. Angrylittlegirl was emphasizing organized religion can mislead people because you have to stop questioning at one point and go by faith in untestable ideas.
TheNoel attacked her because he didn't get it.
globetrvllr2 4 years ago 2
Thanks for your reply. I wasn't clear about why I thought it was a good contribution.
One of the things I liked about Angrylittlegirl's original video is that she put forth the idea that we should always scrutinize random propoganda. She mentioned that we should check out our sources before we buy things, (when she mentioned the AirBorne product.) That's very true, we really should.
ShannonGuy 4 years ago
And what I liked about TheNoel's response is that he points out that Angrylittlegirl, and anyone, when they put forth their own ideas (especially about difficult topics), will always be subject to the same sort of scrutiny they advocate for.
ShannonGuy 4 years ago
As we've seen from everyone's responses, Angrylittlegirl has been subject to that in a number of ways that attack her not just on a conceptual level but on a personal level. )People want to know what her background is, where her own analysis comes from. And I think it's interesting that that is the way that we, over youtube, try to debate difficult ideas. And that's why I thought it was a good contribution.
ShannonGuy 4 years ago
That is a great point ShannonGuy. TheCarruths emphasizes that we learn how limited reason is when we use it to question its own methods. This makes us realize we must go beyond logic in asking questions about our existence.
I didn't like TheNoel's response because he used questioning to belittle her rather than analyze the subject.
globetrvllr2 4 years ago
That's where observation comes in. Truth is the hallmark of observation.
memoticon 4 years ago
Very funny!
trumpetman0815 4 years ago
Hahaha, wow, your completely fallacious attack fell completely flat. I love the insinuation that she needs to prove that God *doesn't* exist, or that some drug *doesn't* work. :) Look up "burden of proof", Vince. I don't need to prove to you that invisible elves aren't dancing on my bed; if you assert that they are, you have to prove it.
And in the beginning... what was that all about? She needs more "data" to back up her existence?
vargonian 4 years ago
I understand where you are coming from, but she used a weak argument such as "Airborne" not working despite being clinically tested. She did not show burden of proof.
kbuff634 4 years ago
The point isn't that religion is false because it can't be tested (that's the point of religion...having faith). The point is that you should question what is put before you, to which she ignorantly tied religion as if they had the same basis.
This isn't like comparing apples to oranges (they are at least fruit). This is like comparing apples to memory.
kbuff634 4 years ago
Well, it would be nice if religion did exist in its own realm, but unfortunately superstitious beliefs are extremely often applied to the real world. For example, many believe that abortion should be outlawed based on the assumption that clumps of cells have magical souls.
That's fine if you can't test religion, but it should not be regarded as true and *in any way* imposed on the real world given this fact.
vargonian 4 years ago
That would would true if everyone had your definition of real world or magical.
kbuff634 4 years ago
In the case of abortion, I do not understand. You are either saying that the clumps of cells in a woman's womb do not have magical souls and, therefore, magically inherit magic upon touching air OR you are saying that no human has a magic soul and, therefore, all of them could, and in all but perfect circumstances should, be killed guiltlessly because there is no magic soul and no God to stop you.
Sounds so...scientific.
kbuff634 4 years ago
You misunderstood. There are many reasons to want to outlaw abortion; some are based in superstition. As soon as we start imposing laws based upon superstitious beliefs, we cross the line between touchy-feely innocent beliefs, and beliefs which affect the real world and the rights of others. Because of this, you *should* question religious beliefs, and not simply take them on faith, because to do otherwise would be extremely dangerous.
I never implied that we should abort any fetuses.
vargonian 4 years ago
And likewise I never implied that fetuses should be saved for their magical qualities. It sounds as ridiculous to me as it does to you. But just because a group of people want to save babies because of their soul doesn't mean our politicians base laws off of that superstition. I have a sneaky feeling that the issue lies in different definitions of life, not in hocus pocus.
Can you name another example?
kbuff634 4 years ago
Does everyone believe in blue unicorns? They have never been proven false......
Give me a million dollars and I MIGHT find one.
globetrvllr2 4 years ago
In logic and in debate it is never required to prove a negative. The burden of proof falls on the proponent of a proposition.
max2right 4 years ago
Science deals in things you can test for falsehood. This isn't the same as proving it false. Learn Karl Popper's Theory of Falsification.
globetrvllr2 4 years ago
According to Chris Horner's *Thinking through philosophy*
*[Karl] Popper also uses the idea of falsifiability to demarcate science from non-science. The claims advanced in other spheres such as religion (*God loves you*)... are usually unfalsifiable, where they are not actually falsified; nothing is allowed to count as evidence against such claims. This is what reveals them to be essentially unscientific.* (Page 109)
globetrvllr2 4 years ago
Angrylittlegirl's DHMO and gullible videos are consistent. They are about basing your beliefs on things you can test so you can tell when someone is trying to mislead you.
They aren't about the existence of what can't be tested.
You have to understand the role of falsifiability in science to know the difference.
globetrvllr2 4 years ago
According to Chris Horner's *Thinking through philosophy*
*[Karl] Popper also uses the idea of falsifiability to demarcate science from non-science. The claims advanced in other spheres such as religion (*God loves you*)... are usually unfalsifiable, where they are not actually falsified; nothing is allowed to count as evidence against such claims. This is what reveals them to be essentially unscientific.* (Page 109)
globetrvllr2 4 years ago
lolz and agree with ballsinger. if you guys think shes right and her argument isnt flawed MASSIVELY, then you should rewatch this video until that fact sinks into your thick heads -_-
chhipzahoy 4 years ago
Everyone, I think Noel understood angrylittlegirl, but you all just don' want to accept it. Why believe angrylittlegirl more than anyone else???
Ballsinger 4 years ago
Why believe that we need to check facts and be skeptical? Are you being serious? I don't care if a retarded midget in a gorilla suit tells me this; it's still true. Not because the midget said it, but because it's shown throughout history to be an extremely reliable method of truth-finding.
vargonian 4 years ago
The bible and science are connected; religion and science go hand in hand. Only ignorant people try to get rid of religion.
Vacuouschan 4 years ago
The bible conflicts with evolution, is wrong about the shape of the earth, and says vegetation was created before the sun.
globetrvllr2 4 years ago
Only naive people try to wrap science and religion up under the same bow. It gives them a warm, fuzzy feeling to believe that both can exist together (because that way they get the best of both worlds) when in fact they do indeed blatantly contradict much of the time.
vargonian 4 years ago
In taking this video apart, you've kind of vindicated its original premise. I see what you did there.
majutsukai 4 years ago
Angrylittlegirl's Gullible video says organized religion can manipulate the masses because we have to stop questioning at one point and have faith in untestable ideas.
TheNoel attacks angrylittlegirl instead because HE DOESN'T GET IT........
globetrvllr2 4 years ago