Oh no! Here we go again! Potholers pithy attempt at justification!

[rhinoburger]

@shizzleman8 If atheism is a religion, then bald is a hair color.

[QuantumChance]

@shizzleman8 WTF is your problem? How can you claim to be a person of god when you'll kill anyone that insults you? fucking psychopath, get help before you hurt yourself or someone you love, if you haven't already.

[ChristianIce]

Please read the Terms.

Article 8

[dancingnancy09]

beautifully said by potholer- the man speaks the truth!!!

[shizzleman8]

Personal matters are everything. My Dad and the U.S. Navy gave me the Cross on my page. No one in the history of the U.S. or the world has anything like it. I got an education that's worth millions of dollars.

You dont' get words like I'm giving you for free for any amount of money in the world. I can't be bought, but I'll die trying to help you!

[shizzleman8]

It's the law that made atheism = to religion. Torcaso v. Watkins 1961 (I think) Supreme Court and Kaufman v. McCaughtry 2005 7th Circuit court of appeals. Torcaso was upheld by Kaufman.

I've known there was a God since I was 5 years old. I looked at my bros and sis and at my parents and at myself and understood. You know friend, Jesus had a really great saying: "Let your yes be yes & your no, no. Anything MORE than this comes from evil. God CONSERVES all universes in existence.

[Answersinb00ks]

@shizzleman8 Torcaso v. Watkins in the decision makes no claim to set atheism as a religion. In fact it included the following "the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. Neither can force nor influence a person to go to or to remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion."

[shizzleman8]

I'm a JEW and I practiced the law for nearly 30 years. You'll never face anyone like me in court. My family has 91 years without a loss. It's like the New York Yacht Club and the America's Cup!

[shizzleman8]

Not only has Potholer54 never fought for the freedom of speech after he and his followers brutally assaulted my friend he begged them for money to fight YouTube.

I don't know about you but I'll die before I beg. The military has a code of ethics, it goes like this: DEATH BEFORE DISHONOR. That means I'll kill anyone who insults me. It's better for cowards to feel insulted than to insult. It's a community guideline not to say anything here you wouldn't to that person's face.

[Answersinb00ks]

@shizzleman8 "Not only has Potholer54 never fought for the freedom of speech after he and his followers brutally assaulted my friend he begged them for money to fight YouTube." Please give your source for this statement.

"I'll kill anyone who insults me." I believe that is a trait you share with many criminals, congratulations.

[Answersinb00ks]

Respond to this video... "It's a community guideline not to say anything here you wouldn't to that person's face." Very well I would gladly say this to your face. You are clearly unhinged if you truly mean what you write here. So far you have made no qualms about your desire to kill those who insult you. This is enough to question your sanity. Continue to make threats of this nature and I will bar you from commenting for a finite time.

[shizzleman8]

@Answersinb00ks If you could raise your head in public you wouldn't have a pathological need to feel like you're doing anything worthwhile in cyberspace. I've had greater emotional attachment to crap in the toilet than anything you're offering.

All my answers are in what I own and in my bank account. That's why I don't care if you block me, I pray that you do. I can prove everything I write. You can say you "mean" what you'd say if we met in real life, but that's not worth anything.

[shizzleman8]

I've been to war and fought for your and his rights a number of times. Freedom comes at a terrible price, one that cowards will never pay.

[MihaZ]

@shizzleman8 Your comeback was rather disappointing. I guess the next step is you coming up with the Hitler reference? As expected, discussions on youtube are a waste of my time. I have no interest to continue this conversation.

[shizzleman8]

@MihaZ If you weren't interested in putting me down one last time you wouldn't have commented one more time you worthless prick.

"I don't wish to have this conversation" < What an IDIOT would say!

[MihaZ]

@shizzleman8 Not only did you misquoted me, but you also resorted to insults. Weren't atheists the violent ones? Now, I only wanted to put it clear instead of letting you wait for a response. I only attempted to show some manners over the Internet, which you failed to do. Besides, calling me an idiot is a rather strange insult. What do you expect to achieve? Hurt my pixel feelings? So as I said, thank you for your time today, but I don't feel this discussion is going somewhere.

[shizzleman8]

@MihaZ You're quoting P.Hole, Amenakin, an anonymous judge and making so many incorrect assumptions I can't believe you went to college. Have you ever been shot at during a battle? Have you ever physically fought anyone over anything not even something sacred? You're just assuming that you're showing manners and I'm not.

I VERY patiently pointed out to you 6 or 7 times now that atheism is a religion that excludes all evidence for God. I advanced your legal education by YEARS! Ur welcome

[MihaZ]

@shizzleman8 In what way is atheism, a non-belief, a religion? What's the deity? The dogmas? The rituals? Once you will have answered that, you will be a position to say that you have ''point out that atheism is a religion''. I decided to reply because that's an interesting topic, as couldn't care less about your personnal life, which irrelevant in this discussion. Mostly because you can say whatever you want since you don't have to share your real name. That's fine, I'm only interested in ideas

[MihaZ]

@shizzleman8 I stopped to expect some sort of evidence in favor of god from you, but perhaps you can actually develop why you feel atheism is a religion, and it what way it is worse than christianity. If you could please give details concerning the penalty for apostasy, that would very nice of you. If I am to convert back to a religion, I might as well know what the atheists will do to me!

[MihaZ]

@shizzleman8 And I am still here, exchanging words with the Internet. I guess my attempt to take my leave in order to spend my time on a more meaningful activity failed because I find the topic particularly interesting. Oh well, I'll give you one more attempt to produce a relevant response to an even simpler question (proving God is challenging afterall, never been done so far haha) concerning atheism. If it's on the same level as what you previously wrote, I'll just leave you the last word.

[MihaZ]

Instead of acknowledging her ignorance peacefully, she engaged legal procedures to censor criticisms. Here we go again, clergly protecting dogmas for no other reasons than preserving the belief. As an intellectual, listening to the garbage she said about science, I felt insulted and I am glad Poth fought for his freedom of speech. You can believe in whatever you want, but don't force it upon people, especially if you can't back it with relevant data.

[shizzleman8]

It's not that you're rejecting God, that's what you're SAYING, but what you're doing is rejecting all evidence.

Try law school.

[MihaZ]

Poth was right, not that dumbass creationist. I would have said the same if it were a jewish man, or a christian child. Poth is fair to everybody: he makes fun of ignorant people equally.

[IndividualParties]

"criminality," lol, they put the video back up, it's protected under fairuse sily. Is this a troll account?

[Answersinb00ks]

@IndividualParties No this is not a troll account. This is in fact the answersinbooks backup channel. This video is a mirror of Dprjones' video highlighting this travesty in the sarcastic style for which he is known. The video is intended to be humorous in its assertions.

[philochko]

potholer54 kick ass!!! GO LOGIC!

[shizzleman8]

@philochko YEAH, Go P.Holer! Go kick that muslim make-up woman's ass!

[scuzzulus]

potholer ftw

[Picasso43967]

/yawn.

Don't want to be criticized? Don't put it out in public.

It's like robbing a bank and when you fail go like "don't punish me".

Actions have consequences. Live with it.

[superfisto]

potholer54 rules

[alchron]

*sigh* really? He got DMCA'd for that?

As Professor Farnsworth would say "I no longer want to live on this planet"

[badblueman]

@alchron Oh please. How can you make such a mistake! It's: "I don't want to live on this planet any more." Blasphemous heathen!

/watch?v=35TbGjt-weA

[XXWhambarXX]

@alchron Dude I hope you have writen permission from fox to use that qoute!

[Killedkennyagain]

@alchron I would agree with the wise Professor on that. But then again it seems that we are on the verge of a great realization which would be nice to watch unfold. I say that because the controversy of theism and atheism is getting more and more mainstream attention and the theists appear to be panicking and desperate.

[shizzleman8]

@Killedkennyagain The only one who wants mainstream attention is Richard Dawkins as long as Craig's not there. Today is the day of the debate, and Dawkins provided a new reason to not debate Craig. Richard Dawkins is your wise professor and he's scared shitless of Craig so much so that they had to give him an empty chair for MONTHS hoping beyond hope that he'd put up after Craig tore into his logical equations like a monkey on a cupcake. Do you ever watch any real debates? Craig =/= desperate

[Killedkennyagain]

@shizzleman8 Could you re-write that for me without all the logical fallacies? See: ad hoc, begging the question, ad hominem, half-truths, weasel words and non sequitur arguments to start (they are all found in your comment). Thank you.

[shizzleman8]

@Killedkennyagain Richard Dawkins didn't show up to debate William Craig. How do I know that without even checking? By logic. If Dawkins was a true genius (not just in evolutionary biology) he'd have gave all the same cowardly reasons for not showing up then prepared secretly to defeat Craig and SHOWED UP!

Your attempt to make an appeal by alluding to fallacious arguments sidesteps the BEEF of the entire issue. What are we talking about here? Dick > Craig? Dick = Coward. 70 yr. weakling.

[Killedkennyagain]

@shizzleman8 Again, scour your comment for the above logical fallacies, you will inevitably find more. If you continue on this line, I will no longer respond, your comments are not even relevant to my comment which you originally replied to. Craig is a half-wit at most. Dawkins has never claimed to be a genius (nor have I claimed him to be). Stop worshipping false idols (in the form of W. L. Craig) or your stone age God may get angry and smite thee.

[shizzleman8]

@Killedkennyagain He DIDN'T SHOW UP! You have nothing to live for as an atheist. You've lost ALL credibility.  Your Champion doesn't exist. Your original comment was that the THEISTS are PANICKING. YOU LOST. Telling a person they're making logical fallacies proves nothing. Dawkins is a coward, Hitchens was saved by an Evangelical Christian's medicine, and Harris is a twat who DOES bow down to Craig. Just try to learn one fallacy and all the exceptions. All your writing is speculative.

[Killedkennyagain]

@shizzleman8 Why do I have nothing to live for? Actually I said, "... appear to be panicking and desperate." There is a difference, note the non-definitive. Hitchens has not been "saved" and is still going to die of cancer. Harris is a twat, you are partly correct there. Caps does not make you correct, it only makes you appear illiterate. The presence of logical fallacies shows that your argument is not an argument at all. There are no exceptions to logical fallacies, this is not religious logic

[shizzleman8]

@Killedkennyagain "It seems this way", "It appears that way", this one is panicky that one's not. You're not saying anything definitively. It's a common practice on YouTube to use capital letters to express emphasis. The water from your well may be the illiterate. For instance I could write fuck you or I could say I was shouting, "FUCK YOU". See the difference, feel the difference. There's the hearsay rule and there are 30 EXCEPTIONS. An appeal to authority isn't automatically a fallacy.

[Killedkennyagain]

@shizzleman8 Common use does not equate to literate. You could scream, "FUCK YOU." But that would not be very Christian of you, would it? Actually, except for my initial comment (which you took as definitive when it was not), I have said plenty definitively. Hearsay is a variation of appeal to authority (not a separate fallacy) and again does not have the exceptions you claim. I'm bored with you. We are done here. Good day.

[shizzleman8]

@Killedkennyagain If you were bored or done you wouldn't have written another message genius. When I want to be rid of someone I don't normally write messages to them explaining myself.

TO YOU, what's the difference to someone who appears to be panicky and someone who is panicky. < Hearsay that.

[eleminatus]

@shizzleman8 number of none-believers is rapidly rising. That of course raises some uneasiness among religious people.

[shizzleman8]

@eleminatus That's just a belief you have. :)

Beliefs are some serious business. According to the wiki page Demographics of atheism the number of atheists drops off significantly after age 35. The law establishes states of mind, there's no other way to tell. Have you been watching the Dr. Murray/Michael Jackson's death trial? One guy testifies for FREE (Dr. Schafer) so the drug propofol doesn't get a bad name, another takes 150 large a month to kill M.J. Motives can be proven.

[eleminatus]

@shizzleman8 where did I say anything about atheism? I said none-believers! Would you mind showing that wiki of yours? Awfully curious. Since all the major polls show the decline of religious people in developed world.

[shizzleman8]

@eleminatus What a person believes doesn't impact the world as you're suggesting. I used to think the sky was blue because it was the sun reflecting off the ocean it turned out I was wrong, it's the Rayleigh effect. It's all academic. If it doesn't make you a nicer person it's not important. Non - believer = religious. Non - believer = / = irreligious. Irreligious = faith in God not religion. Development has nothing to do with religion, faith, and non religion, non faith. I gave it to U

[eleminatus]

@shizzleman8 what are you talking about? How is that relevant to my claim. All I said is that population of none-believers is increasing world wide.

[shizzleman8]

@eleminatus It's not "none-believers" it's just non-believers, and there's really no such thing. People have beliefs. The Air Force in 1947 reported to the associated press that UFOs crashed in Roswell New Mexico. Then they said it was a weather balloon. You can believe story A or B, but the fact that they provided two stories is not in dispute. Belief isn't required when abstraction and induction is applied, but the fact that people don't know how to prove anything is evident by beliefs.

[eleminatus]

@shizzleman8 yes there is. When I say i dont believe in god, I become a none-believer. Simple as that. And we know how to prove many things, thats why we have beliefs. Beliefs are grounded in known data and information. If you believe UFOs exist, that belief has to be grounded in evidence. Otherwise it becomes a mere faith. You can have faith in anything you want, but dont mix it in with belief.

[shizzleman8]

@eleminatus God has been proved. Look up the word in a dictionary. Not believing in God is what has no evidence. I can't prove what you believe, but I can prove you have beliefs/faith. You just have it in all the wrong unproven stuff. God is the objective moral foundation that law is based on. Without an objective moral foundation there is no proving anything. Known data/information is random to the user. If you want to know more like how to prove things you have to go to law school.

[eleminatus]

@shizzleman8 god proven? well how about you provide the evidence then. Should not be hard!

[shizzleman8]

@eleminatus Evidence. What does that mean to you? I'm glad I asked that question, to you it means none exists for what you don't accept. Study types of evidence, for every type of evidence God is proven. Testimony is a type of evidence, God is proven. Indirect evidence? Yep, God is proven. Physical evidence? yep, God is proven. Judicial notice, the highest form of evidence, Yep God is proven. The only one serious scientist who doesn't believe in God is in a wheel chair.

[eleminatus]

@shizzleman8 you should really stop with the demagogy! For someone who tries to lecture me about evidence, you fail to produce any! Instead of trying to establish that you studied law, lets try to establish what evidence there are . Can you do that? Can you provide testimonial, indirect or any kind of evidence in support of god's existence? Oh.. and please dont forget that something like standard of evidence also exists.

[MihaZ]

@shizzleman8 Nice wishful thinking.

[shizzleman8]

@MihaZ It's about beliefs. People who don't know the law, evidence and what constitutes a fact have beliefs.

I watched one of p.hole's recent videos and where he covered how life began in the earth over millions of years. That's CREATIONISM. What he's arguing is one religion, atheism, over another.

In the scheme of our lives who really gives a fuck about this crap anyway? I'm a big hairy ape who can type. The ONLY difference between me and any of you guys is I'm bigger and smarter. 8)

[MihaZ]

@shizzleman8 If you think abiogenesis is creationism,or that atheism is religion, you are definately mistaken.if you think science is another form of moral relativism, then you are ignorantTo be honest, I don't have that much time arguing ''smart people'' over youtube. When I replied to your comment, i merely wanted to highlight that you claimed the existence of a supreme deity to be proven,and yet didn't provide a single example for us.Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence.

[shizzleman8]

@MihaZ Atheism is the rejection of all types of evidence that prove God's existence. That rejection constitutes belief in the minds of the Supreme Court of the US. Atheism is protected under the U.S.'s first amendment to the constitution's FREE EXERCISE OF RELIGION clause. No different than Laveyan Satanism. Except atheists are FAR crueler and Satanic than any Satanists I've ever met.

If you want to know what I think, just ask. Atheism is the extroadinary claim. Peace/Happy Hollidays!

[MihaZ]

@shizzleman8 So, where is the evidence is favor of a supreme being that atheists so willingly ''reject''? It's a rather simple question, and it's the third time you fail to address it. I will not discuss anythign further unless you can provide what you claim to be self evident proof of the existence of god that I would have missed. I won't even discuss your statement about violence being an intricate value of atheism, as it makes absolutely no sense. About time you show your ''proofs''.

[shizzleman8]

@MihaZ You want me to present evidence to you that you reject up front? Hhmmm?

Let's say you started a church that rejected Ferraris. Showing you a picture of a Ferrari will do what for you? What if I showed you videos of races where Ferraris not only participated but even won? What if I provided to you the testimony of a driver of Ferrari or even took you on a tour of the plant?

None of that is "evidence" to a person who starts off rejecting all the evidence. You reject evidence. 8)

[MihaZ]

@shizzleman8 In fact, i'm a completing my master in civil law. Besides, you shouldn't assume so many things about a stranger. You say I ''reject up front'', which is false. Shown relevant evidence, I would change my mind. I actually grew up in the Christian faith, and moved away due to the lack of evidence we are talking about. Now, I wonder how you can provide something as compelling as an actual ferrari when it comes to religions.

[shizzleman8]

@MihaZ You're talking about religion and God, I'm just teaching you evidence. I retired 23 years ago, I'm seeking a big cup of coffee (a half gallon) and then it's off to LA Fitness where I hope to burn more than 1500 (fifteen hundred) calories so that I don't die of a heart attack at an early age due to obesity.

I don't believe in anything I can't prove. God is legislatively and judiciously noticed. There's no greater type of evidence. Amenakin is my friend. She was butt surfed.

[MihaZ]

@shizzleman8 Once again, you fail to address a very simple question. If I were a judge, I'd think you have no case and that your client should find something else. You didn't teach anything. Well, if you consider an irrelevant analogy as a form of education, I doubt you even went to university. Amenakin said dumb stuff about something she obviously didn't understand well. It is only natural to be corrected. It is to be expected when you share your opinion on a public channel.

[shizzleman8]

@MihaZ It's only simple when you know what constitutes evidence. The very definition of prejudice is what atheists do. I can't supply you with evidence when you're deciding that it's not evidence up front.

You're telling me you reject all evidence for the existence of God and then you asked me to provide you with evidence for God after I told you that's not going to work. 3rd time now. You got evidence for atheism? Make a case and have Congress and the Supreme Court banned from prayer.

[MihaZ]

@shizzleman8 The burden of evidence of on the side of people who claim. You claim for existence of a supreme being? Do your job or don't ask for special treatment. I ask for evidence, not bad analogies, which is all you have provided. I will look at anything you can provide with honesty. It's impossible to make a case for the nonbelief in something, you should know that. Asking to prove a negative is a fallacious argument. In what way is atheism a prejudice, and towards whom?

[MihaZ]

@shizzleman8 The problem I have right now is that you seem to mistake what you are learning, what we know of the human brain. You mentionned testimonies a few times now, and even though they are used in court, they are still the most irrelevant form of evidence since psychology has long since showed how inaccurate one's memory is. Atheists such as myself are asking for evidence, hard data that shows how the universe works, and in a way that cannot be explained through physics for example.

[MihaZ]

@shizzleman8 You should know, since you are at law school, that evidence has different level of credibility. Sure, something may tell you a version of the story, but it there are fingerprints, or that DNA has been found, the testimony will be discarded for obvious reasons if it is not consistent will empirical observations. That is how atheism was born: religious dogmas were not consistent with observations, and clergy killed countless scientists so belief could be preserved.

[MihaZ]

@shizzleman8 We both seek the truth, in our personnal lives just like in our professionnal ones. I find interesting that, in your ferrari example, you didn't say: here, I can show you the actual car so YOU can drive it. Now, that would have been fascinating.

[Leonis1989]

Oh you silly anti-muslim/anti-woman/anti-st­upid atheists and your antics!

Or whatever the stupid commenters on potholers video were actually saying.