you forget to mention that Argon-Argon dating can also be used to date the Earth, Iron-Iron dating isn't the only method that stretches out that far, all dating records aside from those created by man (i.e.the Bible, Torah, etc.) all point to a 4.62 billion year old Earth...good job making these kind of facts accessible and interesting to the masses, nice work
This is only a step by step process (Which has no scientific evidence that is is possible, let alone happen) does not in anyway can refute a single moment of creation. God does not need to grow a tree He can create it fully formed in less than a nano-second.
The continents do not move around the surface of the earth like a greasy egg on a frying pan. That is another myth, no evidence for that either.
Carbon 14 refutes all the other dating methods. Diamonds (Olderst) still contain carbon, 5730 HF
@Surfxeo You are scientifically illiterate. Satellite measurements of movements of the continents are extremely accurate these days. There is no empirical evidence supporting the existence of any god. Carbon 14 dating is useful only for relatively young objects, which is why many dating methods are used jointly to date older things such as rocks millions of years old. Diamonds are MADE of carbon, you idiot. The less you comment, the less obvious your ignorance of science is.
@ndrthrdr1 Continents don't move around and are all connected.
You mentioned there is no empirical evidence of God? There is evidence for God, there is overwhelming evidence for God. What empirical evidence is there for explaining science, mathematics, music?
Carbon still exists in the oldest 'so-called' material on earth. Diamonds are supposed to be billions of years old and they still contain carbon. Carbon 14 has a half-life of 5730 years meaning that diamonds are not as old as we are told
@Surfxeo said "Carbon 14 has a half-life of 5730 years meaning that diamonds are not as old as we are told"
Decay of carbon 14 isotopes doesn't mean that the carbon simply disappears. Otherwise, diamonds would gradually vanish. Ask that Harvard Geology number about that too, but you might consider saying you're asking for someone else to avoid looking too foolish.
@ndrthrdr1 The carbon would have to disappear completely for billions of years to be even half accurate. Another problem you have is what amount of carbon would a new diamond have to begin with to even begin to test its age. Carbon 14 will not just go away.
I have a whole list of dating methods that contradict each other completely discrediting each other. The problem is most are not even scientifically verifiable to test.
@ndrthrdr1 You are commiting an obvious category error when you say there is no evidence for the existence for God when we use materials to measure other materials, you cannot measure an immetial being with matter when that being is Spirit, energy, light, etc... Its a bit like a computer asking about its maker. It is beyond its reality.
But we all know God exists so why use bad arguments to suppress that knowledge?
In fact that same God made himself known to all mankind 2000 years ago in Israel.
@ndrthrdr1 Our eyes pick out the visible spectrum of electro-magnetisim, so light in this sense is limited. The light of God is beyond what we can comprendend with out eyes and is more limited by electromagnetism which is created by Him and is therefore not limiting his existence.
Physicists do not know what energy is but we can see some of the energy of God in how He created everything. Remember He created everything by His word (Logos) and this means information, the language of God.
@Surfxeo said "Our eyes pick out the visible spectrum of electro-magnetisim, so light in this sense is limited. The light of God is beyond what we can comprendend with out eyes and is more limited by electromagnetism which is created by Him and is therefore not limiting his existence."
We have instruments that can detect wavelengths far above and below that which human senses can detect.
If we can't detect any "God energy" in any way, why do you believe that it exists?
@Surfxeo (Continued) know that it exists at all? You say that we all know that a god exists, but we don't. I don't. An estimated 1 billion people say that they don't. When we ask believers "Why do you believe in a god?" we usually only receive repetition of WHAT they believe, rather than reasons WHY they believe.
Example: I don't believe that my pet dog, dead now for years, is a spirit, here and aware and thinking. Why? Because there is no evidence that this "dog ghost" exists at all.
@ndrthrdr1 We know of God because we look all around us and know that it didn't come into existance by itself. You need a mind to create something and everything in the universe is designed to a high level of complexity.
Its interesting you should mention a spirit for your God, in the Hebrew of Genesis animals have a spirit, not eternal like man but a spirit non the less. You can see this when you compair a dog to say a fish or a lobster. They display a level of communion closer to man.
@Surfxeo said "We know of God because we look all around us and know that it didn't come into existance by itself. You need a mind to create something and everything in the universe is designed to a high level of complexity."
Why would not knowing everything yet mean that a creator made everything? They used to explain disease with witchcraft, demons, curses, etc. Now we know about germs. No magic involved.
They used to think rainbows = signs from an invisible being. Now - refracted light.
Why do we have refracted light in the first place? Why a rainbow? You still need to have a mind to bring something as beautiful as that into existence. It is a sign of Gods benevolence to mankind.
Who used to explain diseases to witches? etc Never heard of it. Which is strange considering I read ancient history. You have a creator because we have creation and we are made in the image of God. Where do you think your mind comes from? What about your soul? Why do you think you have morals?
@Surfxeo said "Why do we have refracted light in the first place? Why a rainbow? You still need to have a mind to bring something as beautiful as that into existence. It is a sign of Gods benevolence to mankind."
Spray a garden hose in the air and you can make your own rainbow. It's simple refraction of light. Sunlight isn't just one wavelength, it's a range of wavelengths that refract differently. Presto - rainbow!
@Surfxeo said "Where do you think your mind comes from? What about your soul? Why do you think you have morals?"
1) Product of functioning of the brain.
2) No evidence that there is any such thing as a soul.
3) I don't steal because I know how it feels to be ripped off. I reason that the fewer of us steal, the better our society will be to live in. Same with violence, murder, sexual infidelity, honesty, etc. I treat others the way that they would like to be treated for the common good. :)
@Surfxeo said "In fact that same God made himself known to all mankind 2000 years ago in Israel."
Claims are made by members of every religion that I've ever heard about. The details vary between different denominations and religious faiths. However, claims are made that their beliefs are true. When asked to explain the evidence that proves that their claims are true, none give more than opinions as to the truth of the claims. Why is the Bible believable and other holy books not?
@ndrthrdr1 When we talk of evidence from the past we are talking about historical evidence and the evidence we have for Jesus Christ is overwhelming even against more famous people from antiquity. I don't know why you say there is no evidenence for this claim when the evidence is enormous.
For example, in the gospel it mentions the great darkness that covered the earth for 3 hours at the time of Christ is also mentioned by hostile source to Christianity.
@Surfxeo said " in the gospel it mentions the great darkness that covered the earth for 3 hours at the time of Christ is also mentioned by hostile source to Christianity."
What sources?. If you give a source that we can look up ourselves, and it turns out to be verifiable, that would be interesting. Ideally, where did you hear about this three-hour period? Do you mean an eclipse? They occur naturally.
Many stories appear of people claiming divine powers in those superstitious times.
@Surfxeo said "great darkness that covered the earth for 3 hours at the time of Christ is also mentioned by hostile source to Christianity. What about ancient prophecies for Christ?"
The Jesus story and others, some considerably older, bear striking similarities. If you e-mail the Atheist Experience show (Google it), they can provide websites that list many stories that are virtually the same story with a few details differing slightly. People knew about the prophesies already, and imitated.
@ndrthrdr1 I looked at all those stories and it is just a modern myth. Some of those sources are actually from hundreds of years after Christianity and the others are not even close. No professional scholar in those fields consider them at all reliable.
Stories of Horas painted onto Christ are bogus as is mithraism, Julius Caesar, December 25th, dying and rising Gods etc etc.
Jewish culture did not like the gods of other nation and went so far as to call them idols. So why would the adopt them?
@ndrthrdr1 I have given you the evidence of the Great Darkness including the earthquakes that accopanied it as confimation of the Biblical naritive. We have to proof of Christ being crucified as it was said in the gosples.
We have the proof of Christs resurrection after being crucied and appearing to his disciples and over 500 other people. These are historical 1st centruy proofs from Israel. Why go to popular modern myths and belief that against true historical verifiable evidence? Question it.
@Surfxeo Why would anyone adopt beliefs without proof. That's my point. There are lots of credulous people out there - people who mistakenly believe things that aren't correct. It's apparently human nature. Why would primitive and largely illiterate, uneducated people who passed stories by word of mouth be any more reliable than people today? There are all kinds of cults and crazy beliefs out there. The key is rational thought and skepticism of unverifiable claims.
@ndrthrdr1 I see your prejudice straight away and complete lack of knowledge of history. What illiterare uneducated people are you talking about???
Obviously not the people who had a set of laws, educated, written words and language, science, poetry, society, power, wealthy industry, precise measurement and literacy. We are not talking about the dark ages of Europe here!
@Surfxeo Most people needed scribes to write things down. In many parts of the world (Guatemala, for instance, where I lived for two years) there is still a high illiteracy rate. They had written language then, but not everyone could read and write. Notice that the Bible doesn't claim that Jesus wrote down even a single word. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John weren't written down by them or even while Jesus was said to be alive, according to biblical scholars. 10 Commandments not by Moses.
@ndrthrdr1 We are not talking about Guatemala, we are talking about the centre of civilization just a few hundred miles from the cradle of civilization where language originated, where there is a high degree of literacy of the population and where they recorded history, geneologies, theology. I feel like I am repeating myself.
Every Christian knows that Jesus never wrote the Gospels. Where did you get that idea? The entire NT was written by the Apostles.
@Surfxeo The reason you give no verifiable, specific sources as evidence that the Bible is accurate is because you don't know what they are, if in fact there are any. The Bible doesn't prove that the Bible is true, any more than other holy books prove that they are true.
I never said Jesus wrote the Gospels. I said that those were mostly illiterate people then. No public school system. Nobody at the time wrote that a guy was doing magic? Everyone who could have, would have just like today.
@ndrthrdr1 The Bible is self-authenticating. It not a single book but a collection of 66 books by over 40 authors over a period of over 2500 years. Every shred of archeological evidence from this continent backs up everything to date.
What evidence do you have that they were mostly iliterate? What do you mean noone wrote of Jesus supernatural work? Do you not read? Why do hostile Roman sources write of this very thing? You are more hot air than substance. Do you have anything to back up you up?
@Surfxeo The Bible says in Genesis 1:24-31 that all land animals (so that includes dinosaurs) and people were created on the same day. The geologic record clearly shows that the large dinosaurs died out at least 65 million years before humans showed up on the planet.
Google K-T boundary to see how we know that.
Also, the Bible says Earth was created first, then the stars.
Earth - 4 1/2 billion years old.
Yet we see light from stars 13.2 billion years old.
@ndrthrdr1 Why would you expect to find an 8 tonnes meat eating animal living beside man? Do you see modern man living with lions? Its laughable that you think that.
Where does it say that dinosaurs died off 65 million years ago? The earth has no date on it.
The fact we have soft tissue of T-rex today is real scientific evidence that the millions of years idea is a myth. That is your blind faith to naturalism that is saying that.
@Surfxeo The geologic record is quite clear. Geologists have no doubt about it. The K-T Boundary is found all over the planet. Call any reputable, accredited university's Geology department and ask them.
Soft tissue of T rex? what's your source? The Discovery Institute isn't a real scientific organization, and they don't make discoveries. Again, call any university. How about Harvard University Geology Department?
@ndrthrdr1 Source. How about Jack Horner for one. The Paleontologists who found them. What had the Discovery Institute got to do with it?
As for the K-T boundary. What I'll ask them is what are other fossils found on the same layer as the dinosaurs. What we find is an assortment of modern animals mixed in with them like spiders, insects, some fish, birds etc.
The geological record is all suppositional, when you look at it with, an open mind it's all based on a philosophical assumption.
@Surfxeo said "Why would you expect to find an 8 tonnes meat eating animal living beside man? Do you see modern man living with lions? Its laughable that you think that."
Google About 40 people a year are killed by lions in Tanzania.
That's on the lionattacksdotnet website.
Quit while you're behind. Save a few shreds of dignity for your next attempt at public defense of your faith.
@ndrthrdr1 When a lion kills a man the lion usually lives and the human body is taken away for burial. That rational thought clearly demonstrates that there would not be any human skeletons next a lion skeleton. Hense, why would you have t-rex remains found next to remains. It isn't even a logical statement let alone an idea.
Caesar almost certainly did exist, just as Jesus of Nazareth probably did. As to whether he was the son of god and everything that entails, there is no evidence to indicate that is the case. In fact the evidence is contradictory as there is good evidence to indicate that people cannot walk on water, turn water to wine, be resurrected etc.
Did you think Muhammad ever existed? And if you believe he did, does that mean the Quran is more likely to be true?
@sonicBlue00 We know Muhammad existed because we have historical evidence to support it. We know he was not a true prophet because the claims that the Quran make about Christianity such as Christ was not crucified, that the Gospel does not claim that he was God are easiliy testable. Not only do we know that what the Bible said at the time of Muhammad but we know what was in the Bible from the first centry.
I find it odd you say "Caesar almost certainly did exist, Jesus Probably did"
["We know he was not a true prophet because the claims that the Quran make about Christianity such as Christ was not crucified, that the Gospel does not claim that he was God are easiliy testable"]
Easily testable? You’ve got to be joking. You’re talking about hearsay, one group of people claiming one thing, another group claiming another.
@sonicBlue00 Ever hear of history? What about historical evidence? The only hearsay we have here is what you are saying based purily on personal bias.
Any rational mind can look at the historical evidence and discover the most obvious facts. 1) Christianity was founded in the 1st century. 2) Islam in the 7th century. 3) Over half a millenia of Christian history passed before the Quran rears its ugly head. 4) Muhammad had no geological, cultural, or historical link to 1st century Israel.
@sonicBlue00 Bibles? Plural? There was only one Christian Bible? Bibles do not say whatever they want. There is no historical evidence for your assumptions so what are you basing them on?
@sonicBlue00 There is more evidence for Jesus than for Julias Caesar so it should read Jesus certainly did exist and Caesar probably did" if you are consisent with the evidence.
The primary sources we have are the 4 Gospels and they are historically reliable. Two were written by Jesus own disciples.
Here is a simple question: If the create of the universe entered into his creation then to walk on water is nothing for this being to perform. It is evidence to support his claim
[“The primary sources we have are the 4 Gospels and they are historically reliable.”]
So tell me, what is the difference in historical reliability between the claim that Jesus walked on water and the claim that Muhummad flew off to heaven on a winged horse? Which claim is true and which is false, and how can you tell?
The Gospels are written in the time which they are set it and were written by four different unique sources. So were have multiple sources to gather information from which are consistent with the events described.
The Quran is one book said to have been written by one man Muhammad. The Quran does not mention a flying horse. Surah 17:1 says Muhammad was taken to a by night Mosque to Jerusalem. That Mosque did not exist at this time but after Muhammads death. Clear Contradiction.
[“Here is a simple question: If the create of the universe entered into his creation then to walk on water is nothing for this being to perform. It is evidence to support his claim”]
Wow, really? Circular logic is fun that way. I could just as easily claim there is no god because the fact that nobody walks on water is evidence to support the claim.
@sonicBlue00 How is that circular logic? If a person says they are God in the flesh and you see them exhibit power that normal man does not possess then you have to at least take them seriously. It is evidence supporting their claim.
A person who claimed what Jesus claimed and did no exhibit some unique characteristics then you would have to question that claim.
You use circular reasoning all the time: I do not believe in God therefore God does not exist.
["I can easily defend my faith as it is based on hard concrete evidence. What evidence do you have that God does not exit?"]
Simply, god's existence is unsubstantiated and unnecessary, therefore improbable. What is your "hard concrete evidence" for god? Obviously there is none, only subjective or unverifiable claims, so naturally I'm curious to see how good you are at mincing words.
@sonicBlue00 Gods existance is evident all around us, you have to suppress that knownledge to make believe that there is no God. The universe did not self assemble itself out of nothing. Nor can you supply evidence to support the idea that God does not exist.
You are starting from a framework of no God therefore nothing can support the claim because I do no believe it in the first place.
That's a purely subjective claim and therefore meaningless. The objective evidence all around us is that a perfect designer is incredibly unlikely. Just look at the world, most of it is uninhabitable to humans and there is chaos and incompetence everywhere you go. Even you could have designed the planet to be more accommodating to humans. (cont’d)
@sonicBlue00 It not objective but is the foundation of Physics. The universe is finely balanced on a razors edge which can go one way or another but does not. It is finely tuned for life to exist.
"perfect designer" Where do you get this idea from? God is the creator not the designer, all things came out of nothing by the power of God.
All of the earth is habitable so I'm not sure what you mean. If you are talking about the deserts then those did not exist 4 thousand years ago.
(cont’d) For example why not just make us vegetarians instead and put an abundance of plants around the place so that people don't starve to death all the time? Why meat eating? Flesh consuming flesh isn't indicative of perfect design at all, in fact it's a perverted concept altogether. (cont’d)
(cont’d) And why would a perfect designer design beings whose bodies constantly and needlessly fail from medical disorders? Children born with cancer? I mean come on, this is not intelligent design. What about natural disasters, where is the perfect design in that?
["you have to suppress that knownledge to make believe that there is no God."]
Actually it's the other way around; you must close your eyes and suppress the obvious truth all around us that the world looks nothing like the creation of a perfect being, simply for the fact that you could have easily done a better job yourself.
@sonicBlue00 In the being God creation all things perfect. Geneis 1 & 2. In chapter 3 is when the fall happens, death and sin enter the world and creation becomes corrupted. Then all the proceeding 39 books tells us how God is going to fix the world. Then you have Jesus and the redemption of the world which will lead up to its renewing of the original world.
Clearly you know nothing about the Bible or of a perfect Creator. All I've heard so far a bad strawman arguments copied from other people!
["Ever hear of history? What about historical evidence?"]
It's not "evidence" when it's just a random group of people thousands of years ago claiming that someone walked on water. Just imagine all the arguments I could mount against god if I could pick any ridiculous claim from any religion and claim it was "evidence".
["1) Christianity was founded in the 1st century. 2) Islam in the 7th century. 3) Over half a millenia of Christian history passed before the Quran rears its ugly head."]
Oh right, because christianity came first, that makes it more true. Awesome logic bro. btw there are many other religions that were established way before christianity, so I guess that establishes them as superior?
@sonicBlue00 Well it is when the Quran says it came from God but it doesn't get what Christians believe right or even what is in the Jewish Bible.
You forget Christianity did not come into existance 2000 years ago but is a fulfillment of a much older prophecy from the books in the Old Testament. In fact the Bible goes back all the way to the beginning of time which in essense makes it the oldest religion.
@sonicBlue00 Folllowed that link you sent and all i found were allogations of contradictions and no real substance. It did not mention any nor did it give references of contradiction.
[" Dawkins! You gave me a link from a biologist who knowns nothing about the physical sciences."]
Obviously you didn't even watch more than 30 seconds of the video, or even read the title of the video for that matter. Your ignorance really does make this conversation pointless as you are completely unwilling to learn. You are basically a robot with two functions: Function 1: deny science. Function 2: assert the bible as truth.
Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 58, Number 227. This is a historical claim and therefore counts as "evidence", right? Do you see how ridiculous you look claiming something so ridiculous written in an old book is true?
I told you how it's circular logic, I even gave you an example. If you're too retarded to understand, I can't help you any further. I smell troll. Or is it Poe's law?
So random death from medical disorders, lack of food resources, a mostly uninhabitable planet and universe, flesh consuming flesh, and constant natural disasters are all "finely tuned" are they?
["All of the earth is habitable so I'm not sure what you mean"]
Most of it is water you retard! Most of the universe is completely inhospitable to life!
[""Consuming flesh is not indicative of perfect design" Why???"]
Because it's a perverted concept to create life that survives by feeding off itself and other life forms having to constantly suffer and die to keep the other few alive, that any intelligence could easily improve by designing us to be herbivores.
[“Modern Physics tells us the universe is not eternal but is slowly growing old and dying. Modern physics does not tell us that something comes out of nothing. The very foundation of science is "From nothing, nothing comes".”]
Wrong, wrong and wrong. /watch?v=7ImvlS8PLIo
We live in a flat universe of total energy 0 which continues to expand forever, and could have come from nothing.
@sonicBlue00 Dawkins! You gave me a link from a biologist who knowns nothing about the physical sciences.
I want to get physics from physicists lol
You still need energy for an expanding universe. And as science states: From nothing nothing comes. Laws by themselves create nothing, you still need a person to push the cue to move snooker balls around the snooker table.
Also science cannot contradict the fundamental laws of physics, especially the 4 Law of Thermodynamics.
[“Evolution is an old pagan belief and is not something new and is not verified by modern science or history. There is zero evidence to support that belief.”]
Here is all the evidence for evolution you could possibly need: tinyurl [dot] com/4bl3d
If you want to continue shutting your eyes and ears then by all means do that.
["You have never witnessed evolution and neither has any person. How do you add genetic code into our cells?"]
You are wrong and here is the evidence proving that. tinyurl(dot)com/5j5chg
I feel you are wasting my time as I already gave you a link to this site earlier but obviously you haven't bothered looking at it. At this point it's clear you don't care about facts and just want to continue playing your childish fantasy because you don't like anything else.
[“Then all the proceeding 39 books tells us how God is going to fix the world.”]
But in the meantime I guess we have to just suffer and die because god still hasn’t gotten off his ass. Oh wait, he’s timeless, so how does he even wait?
@sonicBlue00 Since people have yet to be born as saved then the end of the world will not happen until the fulness of time has happened. We still have to have the prophecies in the Bible to be completed, especially those by Christ in the Gospels and in Revelation. Then the end will come.
@Whateveridontcaremeh Thanks mate. Like most people I am very sceptical of any claims, especially ones made about evolution. In the USA & the UK most people do not believe in evolution. They say you must believe in evolution and if you don't there is something wrong with you. Science requires observation before you make any theory, instead we have theory and no observation to back it up.
Check out this doc on the theory: watch?v=k5r5cRlctLM&feature=colike
["The universe did not self assemble out of nothing."]
Firstly, the same thing can be said for god, did he just assemble himself out of nothing too? Oh right, he always existed. Well then I can claim the natural world always existed. See how easy it is to mount an argument when you can just label things as eternal? Secondly, modern physics gives us good reason to believe something can come from nothing, in fact it may be a necessity due to relativity and uncertainty principle.
"he just assemble " We have never claimed He did so what is your argument apart from a strawman. It is naturalistic materialists who make this assumption. This belief you have is purely philosophical and can not bare much weight before it collapses.
Modern Physics tells us the universe is not eternal but is slowly growing old and dying. Modern physics does not tell us that something comes out of nothing. The very foundation of science is "From nothing, nothing comes".
["Nor can you supply evidence to support the idea that God does not exist."]
Burden of proof how does it work? But yes, there is plenty of evidence in the form of aforementioned inconsistencies between the natural world and intelligent design, absence of evidence, and the simple fact that god is unnecessary now that we have evolution and modern physics, which coupled with Russell’s Teapot, gives us a strong case that god does not exist.
@sonicBlue00 All the consistency is in the Christian perspective and non from the naturalists. The natural world contradicts what naturalistic materialists believe. Materialism is a Greek pagan belief and is not compatible with modern science. Evolution is an old pagan belief and is not something new and is not verified by modern science or history. There is zero evidence to support that belief.
A teapot is a man-made object and had been reputed long ago. A bad argument does not refute God.
No, I'm starting from a framework of LOGIC AND REASON. And before you say I'm presupposing logic, a) it doesn't require proof because it's self evidently true (2+2=4), and b) your god presupposes logic too. So I'm afraid that line of reasoning won't work either.
@sonicBlue00 How can you you resuppose logic when nothing you said was at all rational? There was no ryme nor reason to it what so ever. I'm afraid you haven't read what is actually in the Bible let alone discover what Christians actually believe. You assumption fail on all logical levels.
@ndrthrdr1 13.2 billion years? Don't get me started on Physics, I might just go beyond you head. Where did you get the idea that you can see light form 13.2 billion year ago?
NASA's Hubble Finds Most Distant Galaxy Candidate Ever Seen in Universe
Do you think that NASA and Harvard are lying, and parts of a gigantic conspiracy of Geologists and Cosmologists all over the world secretly conspiring to fool you? Call a few dozen other universities. Are they all in on it too?
Are virtually all scientists part of an intrnational conspiracy, or is your beloved Bronze Age book just plain wrong?
@ndrthrdr1 What does finding galaxies have to do with your idead of a conspiracy theory. A conspiracy to fool me with what? You're arguments aren't very rational on any level.
Here is some history. Atheists until the 1920's thought that the universe eternally existed, that was until cosmologies found out that the milky way was not the univse but a small part of it. Scientists discovered that the universe did have a beginning. The only book that every said that was the Bible. "In the Beginning".
@ndrthrdr1 And how do we know of the 10 Commandments today? Because Moses wrote them into a book.
Don't tell me you are now one of those people who try to make out that there are two different creation accounts in Genesis 1 & 2 and two different accounts of the law?
@ndrthrdr1 The Bible says that God inscribed the law onth 2 stone tablets, then we read Moses took those same tablets down and broke them. How do you know Moses got those 10 commandments? You read it from the book that Moses wrote!
@Surfxeo said "I have given you the evidence of the Great Darkness including the earthquakes that accopanied it as confimation of the Biblical naritive."
Actually, you have given no proof, but instead repeated claims. How can we know that they are true?
If you paste this and search
Mark his words, kids! - The Atheist Experience #704
and watch that video, you'll see what I mean about the difference between providing reason to believe and simply repeating claims or stating beliefs. Frustrating
@ndrthrdr1 The Atheist Experience are crazies with no self critical examination or even one shred of evidence. An asylum is more rational than their twisted logic.
You have never examined the evidence, have you?
What beliefs? Where did I get my information on of the great evidence? Let me spell it for you. Its called HISTORICAL EVIDENCE. Look it up. You might learn something instead of watching TV for the uneducated masses.
@Surfxeo The Atheist Experience is just a suggestion of a source of websites, books, etc. that you can use to look things up yourself. Why trust word of mouth? Better to check sources.
Just saying historical evidence isn't providing sources. What non-biblical sources convinced you? I'll read over the sources myself, but if you can't list specific sources, why should others take your word? Would you take the word of a stranger without verifying it yourself? Have you in fact done just that?
@Surfxeo As far as darkened skies, eclipses are natural events, and well-understood these days. Back then, so much was not understood that it's easy to imagine superstitious interpretations of natural events.
@ndrthrdr1 When evidence do you have that it was an eclipse??? You immediately jumped onto that presupposition without checking the evidence and a complete lack of modern cosmology. The event took place at a time of a full moon. It is impossible to have a lunar eclipse during a full moon. Nor does it last 3 hours! The most it lasts is 7 and a half minutes. Nor does a lunar eclipse explain why there was an earthquake accompanying the darkness.
@Surfxeo You said, "The continents do not move around ... no evidence"
Do you know what causes earthquakes? Have you ever heard of a fault line? Two techtonic plates scraping past each other. Movement that can be observed and measured for that matter.
@Mirewood Ok... I will have to cause the explanation and documentation will take more than is possible to put here. I will get it to you sometime this weekend. You and yours have a good weekend!
@Mirewood 1st of all I was addressing YBAdick (nice name LOL) if you had stuck with the subject of my reply to him and if you had some biblical knowledge you would have got it. The problem is I'm only allowed so many characters in youtube replies. So what part of what I said are you confused by and I will explain in detail the best I can.
John Pendleton is wearing a labcoat - does that make him a REAL scientist? Kent Hovind claimed he taught high school biology so he must be an expert biologist to, right? these people are idiots and they are proud of it.
When will humanity realise God of heaven controls everything. Judgement day is for every soul! Repent and seek Jesus! Call out to Jesus before the rapture and rule of beast come.
When will you religious fanatics realise, that every single one of you sound EXACTLY the same, with no regards to whatever religion you happen to have been childhood-indoctrinated, maybe even brainwashed, in to - yet not one single one of you have ever lifted the burden of proof.
Therefore, trust me, comments like yours get, at best, a shrug and a 'ah, another fanatic nutjob ..'
Even though current scientists were able find exact to age of the the earth, but there are lots of things they still don't know, how truly universe evolve or gravity force works how from nothing something comes out in the universe. I'm talking about the energy it self, or mass and energy are they equal the way Einstein claims, and he call in his speech unfamiliar conception for average mind. I'm ready to show even though energy creates the mass but they are not the same thing.
it is very sad to see most human kind afraid to come out of their shells, or could be they don't have the mental capacity to comprehend we couldn't have been here with out of millions of years of evolution!
This is amazing. Anyone who says we had to have a creator is kidding themselves. If "god" can just "exist" magically without a "creator" than so can we (:
I added this Video to my "Dynamic Videos That friends Made" content is exceptional, Music is Breathtaking, and love folks who deal with the truth and not fantasy
Give the credit where credit is due. The function of hydrogen working inside of life forms, as intended, according to a preexisting written word, has a Maker.
Don't confuse the apparent age of the universe with the known recorded age of life on earth. No other working things ever existed without having a maker. No other working thing is nearly as advanced as the nanotechnology utilized in life forms.
There is no question that life forms and the universe made of hydrogen have a Maker.
@Skindoggiedog It is not an assertion that hydrogen works in life forms and it is not an assertion that the universe consists primarily of hydrogen. The Maker of the function of hydrogen in life forms is the same Maker of the function of hydrogen in the rest of the universe. That is more observable evidence han there is for evolution which is none at all.
@JungleJargon It is an assertion to claim that hydrogen has a maker. considering that it's obvious, proven, factual, that hydrogen does not have a maker.
The universe is not made primarily of hydrogen. but of dark matter and energy. retard.
where's the evidence for the maker that made your maker?
i have no evidence for a maker. therefore no maker exists. simple logic.
Why can't you explain AB resistance or Plant speciation without using evolution theory?
@transtlantic It is not an assertion to say that function has a maker.
We have to go by the actual physical substance that we have that is the matter in our physical world. Othere invisible things to us are not things we can see. We have to go by the things we can see.
There is no evidence of any other Maker than the Maker of the function that hydrogen and most of the most common elements have in life forms.
You cannot use design that already existst as evidence of no design.
@JungleJargon It is an assertion to claim that hydrogen has a maker. considering that it's obvious, proven, factual, that hydrogen does not have a maker.
things we can see: a lot of things. but no god. therefore no god.
where's any evidence for the maker that made your maker? or evidence for your maker?
function of hydrogen is evidence that no maker exists. as proven.
Where's evidence for supernatural design in nature?
if you can't show me evidence for design. there's no design. as proven.
@Gage371 ALSO, keep in mind we are not actually sure how old the universe (observable) is, we use methods like radiography, and study particles of light, but we're only new at it, only just getting the hang of it. Also keep in mind that in the Koran (same god as from the bible) he mentions evolution "God created man from dust, and them from a germ, and then from a clot of blood, and then we clothed it in flesh..." etc etc. This is actually how we did start.
@Londron LOL. how dumb do you think humans are? of course we knew what a germ was around 610 A.D. We use to cure our meat to prevent them, wash our body's because we knew what "germs" were. Come on man... how little your argument.
but here is it if u think i am lying to you:
"We first created you from dust, then from a living germ, then from a clot of blood, and then from a half-formed lump of flesh, Al-Hajj Pilgrimage 22:5-22:5-6"
@Gage371 Imagine time as you know it as a movie playing strip by strip frame by frame. But with god time is like, he's taken the movie strip and laid it all out flat infront of him from one end of the table to another. He therefor has all the events of the movie, the past, and whats to come all infront of him, and also the ending! So essentially by His reckoning maybe he did do it instantly, but again your applying time to God.
@Gage371 indeed my friend you must look at things on a greater level. you question time yet you know not about time. you say, without metaphor, comparison, but indeed god does mention metaphor, comparison as to time especially. "one year as is to a thousand in gods reckoning" but indeed you analyse but one passage from one of gods books, but you take no heed to the rest, evidence of ignorance.
@Gage371 God doesn't created the universe in six days, but seven, because the seventh day is part of the creation, "the cessation". It means seven cosmic days or endless cycles of "seven" (lunar year); a seven day week, plus 4 equals to 28 days month. So it gives 13 months or 364 days, synchronized to solar year. And then you multiply by how many years you want, until eternity. Ah, what the scientistic not know is that the universe is infinite and it's in the Bible ...
Very Infomative.. Good..
Flusercom 1 month ago
Good!! Thanks
Spasatcom 1 month ago
you forget to mention that Argon-Argon dating can also be used to date the Earth, Iron-Iron dating isn't the only method that stretches out that far, all dating records aside from those created by man (i.e.the Bible, Torah, etc.) all point to a 4.62 billion year old Earth...good job making these kind of facts accessible and interesting to the masses, nice work
GreedyCapybara7 1 month ago
Excellent . . . I TRULY love this combo of facts and exteremly cool dance groove!!!
sidDkid87 2 months ago in playlist Favorite videos
awsome video =D
ComAntNeLib 2 months ago
awsome
MrGOTAMA420 4 months ago
we don´t know how big the UV is, because we just can see back until the big bang...unfortunately we will never experience what is behind this border.
moxigen 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
What if God created those materials to appear 2 billion years old but in reality they are only 6000 years old?
Just sayin'
Dimrain48 4 months ago
I really enjoyed this video, thank you.
tokyowaed 4 months ago
This is only a step by step process (Which has no scientific evidence that is is possible, let alone happen) does not in anyway can refute a single moment of creation. God does not need to grow a tree He can create it fully formed in less than a nano-second.
The continents do not move around the surface of the earth like a greasy egg on a frying pan. That is another myth, no evidence for that either.
Carbon 14 refutes all the other dating methods. Diamonds (Olderst) still contain carbon, 5730 HF
Surfxeo 5 months ago
@Surfxeo You are scientifically illiterate. Satellite measurements of movements of the continents are extremely accurate these days. There is no empirical evidence supporting the existence of any god. Carbon 14 dating is useful only for relatively young objects, which is why many dating methods are used jointly to date older things such as rocks millions of years old. Diamonds are MADE of carbon, you idiot. The less you comment, the less obvious your ignorance of science is.
ndrthrdr1 5 months ago
@ndrthrdr1 Continents don't move around and are all connected.
You mentioned there is no empirical evidence of God? There is evidence for God, there is overwhelming evidence for God. What empirical evidence is there for explaining science, mathematics, music?
Carbon still exists in the oldest 'so-called' material on earth. Diamonds are supposed to be billions of years old and they still contain carbon. Carbon 14 has a half-life of 5730 years meaning that diamonds are not as old as we are told
Surfxeo 5 months ago
@Surfxeo said "Carbon 14 has a half-life of 5730 years meaning that diamonds are not as old as we are told"
Decay of carbon 14 isotopes doesn't mean that the carbon simply disappears. Otherwise, diamonds would gradually vanish. Ask that Harvard Geology number about that too, but you might consider saying you're asking for someone else to avoid looking too foolish.
ndrthrdr1 5 months ago
@ndrthrdr1 The carbon would have to disappear completely for billions of years to be even half accurate. Another problem you have is what amount of carbon would a new diamond have to begin with to even begin to test its age. Carbon 14 will not just go away.
I have a whole list of dating methods that contradict each other completely discrediting each other. The problem is most are not even scientifically verifiable to test.
Surfxeo 5 months ago
@Surfxeo said, "I have a whole list of dating methods.."
Are they all as silly as your diamond example?
RasPesher 2 months ago
@ndrthrdr1 You are commiting an obvious category error when you say there is no evidence for the existence for God when we use materials to measure other materials, you cannot measure an immetial being with matter when that being is Spirit, energy, light, etc... Its a bit like a computer asking about its maker. It is beyond its reality.
But we all know God exists so why use bad arguments to suppress that knowledge?
In fact that same God made himself known to all mankind 2000 years ago in Israel.
Surfxeo 5 months ago
@Surfxeo said "you cannot measure an immetial being with matter when that being is Spirit, energy, light, etc."
If this being is light, we can measure the intensity, wavelength, etc.
If this being is some other type of verifiable energy, we can detect and measure that, too.
If this being is some other type of energy that can't be detected, why do you believe that it exists at all?
If this being is a spirit with no physical form that can be seen, weighed, heard and recorded, etc., how do you
..
ndrthrdr1 5 months ago
@ndrthrdr1 Our eyes pick out the visible spectrum of electro-magnetisim, so light in this sense is limited. The light of God is beyond what we can comprendend with out eyes and is more limited by electromagnetism which is created by Him and is therefore not limiting his existence.
Physicists do not know what energy is but we can see some of the energy of God in how He created everything. Remember He created everything by His word (Logos) and this means information, the language of God.
Surfxeo 5 months ago
@Surfxeo said "Our eyes pick out the visible spectrum of electro-magnetisim, so light in this sense is limited. The light of God is beyond what we can comprendend with out eyes and is more limited by electromagnetism which is created by Him and is therefore not limiting his existence."
We have instruments that can detect wavelengths far above and below that which human senses can detect.
If we can't detect any "God energy" in any way, why do you believe that it exists?
Same thing with spirits.
ndrthrdr1 5 months ago
@Surfxeo (Continued) know that it exists at all? You say that we all know that a god exists, but we don't. I don't. An estimated 1 billion people say that they don't. When we ask believers "Why do you believe in a god?" we usually only receive repetition of WHAT they believe, rather than reasons WHY they believe.
Example: I don't believe that my pet dog, dead now for years, is a spirit, here and aware and thinking. Why? Because there is no evidence that this "dog ghost" exists at all.
ndrthrdr1 5 months ago
@ndrthrdr1 We know of God because we look all around us and know that it didn't come into existance by itself. You need a mind to create something and everything in the universe is designed to a high level of complexity.
Its interesting you should mention a spirit for your God, in the Hebrew of Genesis animals have a spirit, not eternal like man but a spirit non the less. You can see this when you compair a dog to say a fish or a lobster. They display a level of communion closer to man.
Surfxeo 5 months ago
@Surfxeo said "We know of God because we look all around us and know that it didn't come into existance by itself. You need a mind to create something and everything in the universe is designed to a high level of complexity."
Why would not knowing everything yet mean that a creator made everything? They used to explain disease with witchcraft, demons, curses, etc. Now we know about germs. No magic involved.
They used to think rainbows = signs from an invisible being. Now - refracted light.
ndrthrdr1 5 months ago
Why do we have refracted light in the first place? Why a rainbow? You still need to have a mind to bring something as beautiful as that into existence. It is a sign of Gods benevolence to mankind.
Who used to explain diseases to witches? etc Never heard of it. Which is strange considering I read ancient history. You have a creator because we have creation and we are made in the image of God. Where do you think your mind comes from? What about your soul? Why do you think you have morals?
Surfxeo 5 months ago
@Surfxeo said "Why do we have refracted light in the first place? Why a rainbow? You still need to have a mind to bring something as beautiful as that into existence. It is a sign of Gods benevolence to mankind."
Spray a garden hose in the air and you can make your own rainbow. It's simple refraction of light. Sunlight isn't just one wavelength, it's a range of wavelengths that refract differently. Presto - rainbow!
ndrthrdr1 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Surfxeo said "Where do you think your mind comes from? What about your soul? Why do you think you have morals?"
1) Product of functioning of the brain.
2) No evidence that there is any such thing as a soul.
3) I don't steal because I know how it feels to be ripped off. I reason that the fewer of us steal, the better our society will be to live in. Same with violence, murder, sexual infidelity, honesty, etc. I treat others the way that they would like to be treated for the common good. :)
ndrthrdr1 5 months ago
@Surfxeo Other than on sesamme street, when did you see a fish communing with a dog?
RasPesher 2 months ago
Comment removed
ndrthrdr1 5 months ago
@Surfxeo said "In fact that same God made himself known to all mankind 2000 years ago in Israel."
Claims are made by members of every religion that I've ever heard about. The details vary between different denominations and religious faiths. However, claims are made that their beliefs are true. When asked to explain the evidence that proves that their claims are true, none give more than opinions as to the truth of the claims. Why is the Bible believable and other holy books not?
ndrthrdr1 5 months ago
@ndrthrdr1 When we talk of evidence from the past we are talking about historical evidence and the evidence we have for Jesus Christ is overwhelming even against more famous people from antiquity. I don't know why you say there is no evidenence for this claim when the evidence is enormous.
For example, in the gospel it mentions the great darkness that covered the earth for 3 hours at the time of Christ is also mentioned by hostile source to Christianity.
What about ancient prophecies for Christ?
Surfxeo 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Surfxeo said " in the gospel it mentions the great darkness that covered the earth for 3 hours at the time of Christ is also mentioned by hostile source to Christianity."
What sources?. If you give a source that we can look up ourselves, and it turns out to be verifiable, that would be interesting. Ideally, where did you hear about this three-hour period? Do you mean an eclipse? They occur naturally.
Many stories appear of people claiming divine powers in those superstitious times.
ndrthrdr1 5 months ago
@Surfxeo said "great darkness that covered the earth for 3 hours at the time of Christ is also mentioned by hostile source to Christianity. What about ancient prophecies for Christ?"
The Jesus story and others, some considerably older, bear striking similarities. If you e-mail the Atheist Experience show (Google it), they can provide websites that list many stories that are virtually the same story with a few details differing slightly. People knew about the prophesies already, and imitated.
ndrthrdr1 5 months ago
@ndrthrdr1 I looked at all those stories and it is just a modern myth. Some of those sources are actually from hundreds of years after Christianity and the others are not even close. No professional scholar in those fields consider them at all reliable.
Stories of Horas painted onto Christ are bogus as is mithraism, Julius Caesar, December 25th, dying and rising Gods etc etc.
Jewish culture did not like the gods of other nation and went so far as to call them idols. So why would the adopt them?
Surfxeo 5 months ago
@ndrthrdr1 I have given you the evidence of the Great Darkness including the earthquakes that accopanied it as confimation of the Biblical naritive. We have to proof of Christ being crucified as it was said in the gosples.
We have the proof of Christs resurrection after being crucied and appearing to his disciples and over 500 other people. These are historical 1st centruy proofs from Israel. Why go to popular modern myths and belief that against true historical verifiable evidence? Question it.
Surfxeo 5 months ago
@Surfxeo Why would anyone adopt beliefs without proof. That's my point. There are lots of credulous people out there - people who mistakenly believe things that aren't correct. It's apparently human nature. Why would primitive and largely illiterate, uneducated people who passed stories by word of mouth be any more reliable than people today? There are all kinds of cults and crazy beliefs out there. The key is rational thought and skepticism of unverifiable claims.
ndrthrdr1 5 months ago
@ndrthrdr1 I see your prejudice straight away and complete lack of knowledge of history. What illiterare uneducated people are you talking about???
Obviously not the people who had a set of laws, educated, written words and language, science, poetry, society, power, wealthy industry, precise measurement and literacy. We are not talking about the dark ages of Europe here!
Surfxeo 5 months ago
@Surfxeo Most people needed scribes to write things down. In many parts of the world (Guatemala, for instance, where I lived for two years) there is still a high illiteracy rate. They had written language then, but not everyone could read and write. Notice that the Bible doesn't claim that Jesus wrote down even a single word. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John weren't written down by them or even while Jesus was said to be alive, according to biblical scholars. 10 Commandments not by Moses.
ndrthrdr1 5 months ago
@ndrthrdr1 We are not talking about Guatemala, we are talking about the centre of civilization just a few hundred miles from the cradle of civilization where language originated, where there is a high degree of literacy of the population and where they recorded history, geneologies, theology. I feel like I am repeating myself.
Every Christian knows that Jesus never wrote the Gospels. Where did you get that idea? The entire NT was written by the Apostles.
You claim Moses didn't write the 10 C???
Surfxeo 5 months ago
@Surfxeo The reason you give no verifiable, specific sources as evidence that the Bible is accurate is because you don't know what they are, if in fact there are any. The Bible doesn't prove that the Bible is true, any more than other holy books prove that they are true.
I never said Jesus wrote the Gospels. I said that those were mostly illiterate people then. No public school system. Nobody at the time wrote that a guy was doing magic? Everyone who could have, would have just like today.
ndrthrdr1 5 months ago
@ndrthrdr1 The Bible is self-authenticating. It not a single book but a collection of 66 books by over 40 authors over a period of over 2500 years. Every shred of archeological evidence from this continent backs up everything to date.
What evidence do you have that they were mostly iliterate? What do you mean noone wrote of Jesus supernatural work? Do you not read? Why do hostile Roman sources write of this very thing? You are more hot air than substance. Do you have anything to back up you up?
Surfxeo 5 months ago
@Surfxeo The Bible says in Genesis 1:24-31 that all land animals (so that includes dinosaurs) and people were created on the same day. The geologic record clearly shows that the large dinosaurs died out at least 65 million years before humans showed up on the planet.
Google K-T boundary to see how we know that.
Also, the Bible says Earth was created first, then the stars.
Earth - 4 1/2 billion years old.
Yet we see light from stars 13.2 billion years old.
ndrthrdr1 5 months ago
@ndrthrdr1 Why would you expect to find an 8 tonnes meat eating animal living beside man? Do you see modern man living with lions? Its laughable that you think that.
Where does it say that dinosaurs died off 65 million years ago? The earth has no date on it.
The fact we have soft tissue of T-rex today is real scientific evidence that the millions of years idea is a myth. That is your blind faith to naturalism that is saying that.
K-T boundary is another myth.
Surfxeo 5 months ago
@Surfxeo The geologic record is quite clear. Geologists have no doubt about it. The K-T Boundary is found all over the planet. Call any reputable, accredited university's Geology department and ask them.
Soft tissue of T rex? what's your source? The Discovery Institute isn't a real scientific organization, and they don't make discoveries. Again, call any university. How about Harvard University Geology Department?
1 617-494-7242
ndrthrdr1 5 months ago
@ndrthrdr1 Source. How about Jack Horner for one. The Paleontologists who found them. What had the Discovery Institute got to do with it?
As for the K-T boundary. What I'll ask them is what are other fossils found on the same layer as the dinosaurs. What we find is an assortment of modern animals mixed in with them like spiders, insects, some fish, birds etc.
The geological record is all suppositional, when you look at it with, an open mind it's all based on a philosophical assumption.
Surfxeo 5 months ago
@Surfxeo said "Why would you expect to find an 8 tonnes meat eating animal living beside man? Do you see modern man living with lions? Its laughable that you think that."
Google About 40 people a year are killed by lions in Tanzania.
That's on the lionattacksdotnet website.
Quit while you're behind. Save a few shreds of dignity for your next attempt at public defense of your faith.
ndrthrdr1 5 months ago
@ndrthrdr1 When a lion kills a man the lion usually lives and the human body is taken away for burial. That rational thought clearly demonstrates that there would not be any human skeletons next a lion skeleton. Hense, why would you have t-rex remains found next to remains. It isn't even a logical statement let alone an idea.
Surfxeo 5 months ago
@ndrthrdr1 I can easily defend my faith as it is based on hard concrete evidence.
What evidence do you have that God does not exit?
Surfxeo 5 months ago
@Surfxeo The fact that after 2000 years you've provided absolutely no evidence at all...ever.
jimmywrangles 5 months ago
@jimmywrangles What do you consider evidence?
Here is a simple question for you to answer.
Did Julius Caesar Gaius Caesar ever exist? And if you believe he did. What is the evidence which you base your answer on?
Surfxeo 5 months ago
@Surfxeo
Caesar almost certainly did exist, just as Jesus of Nazareth probably did. As to whether he was the son of god and everything that entails, there is no evidence to indicate that is the case. In fact the evidence is contradictory as there is good evidence to indicate that people cannot walk on water, turn water to wine, be resurrected etc.
Did you think Muhammad ever existed? And if you believe he did, does that mean the Quran is more likely to be true?
sonicBlue00 4 months ago
@sonicBlue00 We know Muhammad existed because we have historical evidence to support it. We know he was not a true prophet because the claims that the Quran make about Christianity such as Christ was not crucified, that the Gospel does not claim that he was God are easiliy testable. Not only do we know that what the Bible said at the time of Muhammad but we know what was in the Bible from the first centry.
I find it odd you say "Caesar almost certainly did exist, Jesus Probably did"
Surfxeo 4 months ago
@Surfxeo
["We know he was not a true prophet because the claims that the Quran make about Christianity such as Christ was not crucified, that the Gospel does not claim that he was God are easiliy testable"]
Easily testable? You’ve got to be joking. You’re talking about hearsay, one group of people claiming one thing, another group claiming another.
sonicBlue00 4 months ago
@sonicBlue00 Ever hear of history? What about historical evidence? The only hearsay we have here is what you are saying based purily on personal bias.
Any rational mind can look at the historical evidence and discover the most obvious facts. 1) Christianity was founded in the 1st century. 2) Islam in the 7th century. 3) Over half a millenia of Christian history passed before the Quran rears its ugly head. 4) Muhammad had no geological, cultural, or historical link to 1st century Israel.
Surfxeo 4 months ago
@Surfxeo
[“Not only do we know that what the Bible said at the time of Muhammad but we know what was in the Bible from the first centry.”]
Bibles can say whatever they want, that doesn’t make their claims automatically true.
sonicBlue00 4 months ago
@sonicBlue00 Bibles? Plural? There was only one Christian Bible? Bibles do not say whatever they want. There is no historical evidence for your assumptions so what are you basing them on?
Surfxeo 4 months ago
@sonicBlue00 There is more evidence for Jesus than for Julias Caesar so it should read Jesus certainly did exist and Caesar probably did" if you are consisent with the evidence.
The primary sources we have are the 4 Gospels and they are historically reliable. Two were written by Jesus own disciples.
Here is a simple question: If the create of the universe entered into his creation then to walk on water is nothing for this being to perform. It is evidence to support his claim
Surfxeo 4 months ago
@Surfxeo
[“The primary sources we have are the 4 Gospels and they are historically reliable.”]
So tell me, what is the difference in historical reliability between the claim that Jesus walked on water and the claim that Muhummad flew off to heaven on a winged horse? Which claim is true and which is false, and how can you tell?
sonicBlue00 4 months ago
@sonicBlue00
The Gospels are written in the time which they are set it and were written by four different unique sources. So were have multiple sources to gather information from which are consistent with the events described.
The Quran is one book said to have been written by one man Muhammad. The Quran does not mention a flying horse. Surah 17:1 says Muhammad was taken to a by night Mosque to Jerusalem. That Mosque did not exist at this time but after Muhammads death. Clear Contradiction.
Surfxeo 4 months ago
@Surfxeo
[“Here is a simple question: If the create of the universe entered into his creation then to walk on water is nothing for this being to perform. It is evidence to support his claim”]
Wow, really? Circular logic is fun that way. I could just as easily claim there is no god because the fact that nobody walks on water is evidence to support the claim.
sonicBlue00 4 months ago
@sonicBlue00 How is that circular logic? If a person says they are God in the flesh and you see them exhibit power that normal man does not possess then you have to at least take them seriously. It is evidence supporting their claim.
A person who claimed what Jesus claimed and did no exhibit some unique characteristics then you would have to question that claim.
You use circular reasoning all the time: I do not believe in God therefore God does not exist.
Surfxeo 4 months ago
@Surfxeo
["I can easily defend my faith as it is based on hard concrete evidence. What evidence do you have that God does not exit?"]
Simply, god's existence is unsubstantiated and unnecessary, therefore improbable. What is your "hard concrete evidence" for god? Obviously there is none, only subjective or unverifiable claims, so naturally I'm curious to see how good you are at mincing words.
sonicBlue00 4 months ago
@sonicBlue00 Gods existance is evident all around us, you have to suppress that knownledge to make believe that there is no God. The universe did not self assemble itself out of nothing. Nor can you supply evidence to support the idea that God does not exist.
You are starting from a framework of no God therefore nothing can support the claim because I do no believe it in the first place.
Surfxeo 4 months ago
@Surfxeo
["Gods existance is evident all around us"]
That's a purely subjective claim and therefore meaningless. The objective evidence all around us is that a perfect designer is incredibly unlikely. Just look at the world, most of it is uninhabitable to humans and there is chaos and incompetence everywhere you go. Even you could have designed the planet to be more accommodating to humans. (cont’d)
sonicBlue00 4 months ago
@sonicBlue00 It not objective but is the foundation of Physics. The universe is finely balanced on a razors edge which can go one way or another but does not. It is finely tuned for life to exist.
"perfect designer" Where do you get this idea from? God is the creator not the designer, all things came out of nothing by the power of God.
All of the earth is habitable so I'm not sure what you mean. If you are talking about the deserts then those did not exist 4 thousand years ago.
Surfxeo 4 months ago
@Surfxeo
["Gods existance is evident all around us"]
(cont’d) For example why not just make us vegetarians instead and put an abundance of plants around the place so that people don't starve to death all the time? Why meat eating? Flesh consuming flesh isn't indicative of perfect design at all, in fact it's a perverted concept altogether. (cont’d)
sonicBlue00 4 months ago
@sonicBlue00 Have you never read Genesis? Man in the beginning did not eat meat.
"Consuming flesh is not indicative of perfect design" Why???
Surfxeo 4 months ago
@Surfxeo
["Gods existance is evident all around us"]
(cont’d) And why would a perfect designer design beings whose bodies constantly and needlessly fail from medical disorders? Children born with cancer? I mean come on, this is not intelligent design. What about natural disasters, where is the perfect design in that?
sonicBlue00 4 months ago
@sonicBlue00 Have you never read Genesis?
Medical disorders. Cancer. What has that got to do with intelligent design? What has design got to do with disasters? Absolutely nothing.
The Bible tells us why there is death and suffering so your arumgents are poorly thought out.
Why did Christ die on the cross again???
Surfxeo 4 months ago
@Surfxeo
["you have to suppress that knownledge to make believe that there is no God."]
Actually it's the other way around; you must close your eyes and suppress the obvious truth all around us that the world looks nothing like the creation of a perfect being, simply for the fact that you could have easily done a better job yourself.
sonicBlue00 4 months ago
@sonicBlue00 In the being God creation all things perfect. Geneis 1 & 2. In chapter 3 is when the fall happens, death and sin enter the world and creation becomes corrupted. Then all the proceeding 39 books tells us how God is going to fix the world. Then you have Jesus and the redemption of the world which will lead up to its renewing of the original world.
Clearly you know nothing about the Bible or of a perfect Creator. All I've heard so far a bad strawman arguments copied from other people!
Surfxeo 4 months ago
@Surfxeo
["Ever hear of history? What about historical evidence?"]
It's not "evidence" when it's just a random group of people thousands of years ago claiming that someone walked on water. Just imagine all the arguments I could mount against god if I could pick any ridiculous claim from any religion and claim it was "evidence".
sonicBlue00 4 months ago
@sonicBlue00 Walking on water is less than a miracle than life itself is.
Surfxeo 3 months ago
@Surfxeo
Given the size, age and diversity of the universe, it would be a miracle if a single cell type structure *didn't* form at some point.
sonicBlue00 3 months ago
@Surfxeo
["1) Christianity was founded in the 1st century. 2) Islam in the 7th century. 3) Over half a millenia of Christian history passed before the Quran rears its ugly head."]
Oh right, because christianity came first, that makes it more true. Awesome logic bro. btw there are many other religions that were established way before christianity, so I guess that establishes them as superior?
sonicBlue00 4 months ago
@sonicBlue00 Well it is when the Quran says it came from God but it doesn't get what Christians believe right or even what is in the Jewish Bible.
You forget Christianity did not come into existance 2000 years ago but is a fulfillment of a much older prophecy from the books in the Old Testament. In fact the Bible goes back all the way to the beginning of time which in essense makes it the oldest religion.
Surfxeo 3 months ago
@Surfxeo
["In fact the Bible goes back all the way to the beginning of time which in essense makes it the oldest religion."]
You are just wrong I'm afraid, there are many religions established before christianity. See wikipedia article "timeline_of_religion".
sonicBlue00 3 months ago
@Surfxeo
["There is no historical evidence for your assumptions so what are you basing them on?"]
Logic and reason. It's pretty simple really.
["That Mosque did not exist at this time but after Muhammads death. Clear Contradiction."]
Oh, you want to talk contradictions in the bible do you? tinyurl[dot]com/yaxgyyg
sonicBlue00 4 months ago
@sonicBlue00 All the so called contradictions I have ever heard where all refuted or where not even what was actually written in the Bible.
Maybe I'll write a letter refuting each point!
Surfxeo 3 months ago
@sonicBlue00 Folllowed that link you sent and all i found were allogations of contradictions and no real substance. It did not mention any nor did it give references of contradiction.
Surfxeo 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Surfxeo
[" Dawkins! You gave me a link from a biologist who knowns nothing about the physical sciences."]
Obviously you didn't even watch more than 30 seconds of the video, or even read the title of the video for that matter. Your ignorance really does make this conversation pointless as you are completely unwilling to learn. You are basically a robot with two functions: Function 1: deny science. Function 2: assert the bible as truth.
sonicBlue00 3 months ago
@Surfxeo
["Folllowed that link you sent and all i found were allogations of contradictions and no real substance"]
Feel free to look them up yourself: tinyurl(dot)com/5wpyxtd
sonicBlue00 3 months ago
@Surfxeo
["The Quran does not mention a flying horse."]
Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 58, Number 227. This is a historical claim and therefore counts as "evidence", right? Do you see how ridiculous you look claiming something so ridiculous written in an old book is true?
sonicBlue00 4 months ago
@Surfxeo
["How is that circular logic?"]
I told you how it's circular logic, I even gave you an example. If you're too retarded to understand, I can't help you any further. I smell troll. Or is it Poe's law?
sonicBlue00 4 months ago
@Surfxeo
["You use circular reasoning all the time: I do not believe in God therefore God does not exist."]
No, I don't believe in god for the reasons I gave you earlier:
a) absence of evidence showing that god actually exists (no, your old books don't count)
b) aforementioned inconsistencies between the natural world and intelligent design
c) evolution and modern physics renders god unnecessary
d) russell's teapot
sonicBlue00 4 months ago
@Surfxeo
["It is finely tuned for life to exist."]
So random death from medical disorders, lack of food resources, a mostly uninhabitable planet and universe, flesh consuming flesh, and constant natural disasters are all "finely tuned" are they?
["All of the earth is habitable so I'm not sure what you mean"]
Most of it is water you retard! Most of the universe is completely inhospitable to life!
sonicBlue00 4 months ago
@Surfxeo
[""Consuming flesh is not indicative of perfect design" Why???"]
Because it's a perverted concept to create life that survives by feeding off itself and other life forms having to constantly suffer and die to keep the other few alive, that any intelligence could easily improve by designing us to be herbivores.
sonicBlue00 4 months ago
@Surfxeo
[“Modern Physics tells us the universe is not eternal but is slowly growing old and dying. Modern physics does not tell us that something comes out of nothing. The very foundation of science is "From nothing, nothing comes".”]
Wrong, wrong and wrong. /watch?v=7ImvlS8PLIo
We live in a flat universe of total energy 0 which continues to expand forever, and could have come from nothing.
sonicBlue00 4 months ago
@sonicBlue00 Dawkins! You gave me a link from a biologist who knowns nothing about the physical sciences.
I want to get physics from physicists lol
You still need energy for an expanding universe. And as science states: From nothing nothing comes. Laws by themselves create nothing, you still need a person to push the cue to move snooker balls around the snooker table.
Also science cannot contradict the fundamental laws of physics, especially the 4 Law of Thermodynamics.
Surfxeo 3 months ago
@Surfxeo
[“Evolution is an old pagan belief and is not something new and is not verified by modern science or history. There is zero evidence to support that belief.”]
Here is all the evidence for evolution you could possibly need: tinyurl [dot] com/4bl3d
If you want to continue shutting your eyes and ears then by all means do that.
sonicBlue00 4 months ago
@sonicBlue00 You have never witnessed evolution and neither has any person. How do you add genetic code into our cells?
I do not even consider evolution to be a scientific theory in the classical sense of the word. You need extreme faith to believe in it.
Surfxeo 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Surfxeo
["You have never witnessed evolution and neither has any person. How do you add genetic code into our cells?"]
You are wrong and here is the evidence proving that. tinyurl(dot)com/5j5chg
I feel you are wasting my time as I already gave you a link to this site earlier but obviously you haven't bothered looking at it. At this point it's clear you don't care about facts and just want to continue playing your childish fantasy because you don't like anything else.
sonicBlue00 3 months ago
@Surfxeo
[“Then all the proceeding 39 books tells us how God is going to fix the world.”]
But in the meantime I guess we have to just suffer and die because god still hasn’t gotten off his ass. Oh wait, he’s timeless, so how does he even wait?
sonicBlue00 4 months ago
@sonicBlue00 Since people have yet to be born as saved then the end of the world will not happen until the fulness of time has happened. We still have to have the prophecies in the Bible to be completed, especially those by Christ in the Gospels and in Revelation. Then the end will come.
Surfxeo 3 months ago
@Surfxeo I like how you are being all original.... nothing you've said, is something i had heard before....
Whateveridontcaremeh 3 months ago
@Whateveridontcaremeh Thanks mate. Like most people I am very sceptical of any claims, especially ones made about evolution. In the USA & the UK most people do not believe in evolution. They say you must believe in evolution and if you don't there is something wrong with you. Science requires observation before you make any theory, instead we have theory and no observation to back it up.
Check out this doc on the theory: watch?v=k5r5cRlctLM&feature=colike
Surfxeo 3 months ago
@Surfxeo
["The universe did not self assemble out of nothing."]
Firstly, the same thing can be said for god, did he just assemble himself out of nothing too? Oh right, he always existed. Well then I can claim the natural world always existed. See how easy it is to mount an argument when you can just label things as eternal? Secondly, modern physics gives us good reason to believe something can come from nothing, in fact it may be a necessity due to relativity and uncertainty principle.
sonicBlue00 4 months ago
@sonicBlue00
"he just assemble " We have never claimed He did so what is your argument apart from a strawman. It is naturalistic materialists who make this assumption. This belief you have is purely philosophical and can not bare much weight before it collapses.
Modern Physics tells us the universe is not eternal but is slowly growing old and dying. Modern physics does not tell us that something comes out of nothing. The very foundation of science is "From nothing, nothing comes".
Surfxeo 4 months ago
@Surfxeo
["Nor can you supply evidence to support the idea that God does not exist."]
Burden of proof how does it work? But yes, there is plenty of evidence in the form of aforementioned inconsistencies between the natural world and intelligent design, absence of evidence, and the simple fact that god is unnecessary now that we have evolution and modern physics, which coupled with Russell’s Teapot, gives us a strong case that god does not exist.
sonicBlue00 4 months ago
@sonicBlue00 All the consistency is in the Christian perspective and non from the naturalists. The natural world contradicts what naturalistic materialists believe. Materialism is a Greek pagan belief and is not compatible with modern science. Evolution is an old pagan belief and is not something new and is not verified by modern science or history. There is zero evidence to support that belief.
A teapot is a man-made object and had been reputed long ago. A bad argument does not refute God.
Surfxeo 4 months ago
@Surfxeo
["You are starting from a framework of no God"]
No, I'm starting from a framework of LOGIC AND REASON. And before you say I'm presupposing logic, a) it doesn't require proof because it's self evidently true (2+2=4), and b) your god presupposes logic too. So I'm afraid that line of reasoning won't work either.
sonicBlue00 4 months ago
@sonicBlue00 How can you you resuppose logic when nothing you said was at all rational? There was no ryme nor reason to it what so ever. I'm afraid you haven't read what is actually in the Bible let alone discover what Christians actually believe. You assumption fail on all logical levels.
Surfxeo 4 months ago
@ndrthrdr1 13.2 billion years? Don't get me started on Physics, I might just go beyond you head. Where did you get the idea that you can see light form 13.2 billion year ago?
Surfxeo 5 months ago
@Surfxeo Google:
NASA's Hubble Finds Most Distant Galaxy Candidate Ever Seen in Universe
Do you think that NASA and Harvard are lying, and parts of a gigantic conspiracy of Geologists and Cosmologists all over the world secretly conspiring to fool you? Call a few dozen other universities. Are they all in on it too?
Are virtually all scientists part of an intrnational conspiracy, or is your beloved Bronze Age book just plain wrong?
Which is more likely?
Google Confirmation Bias.
ndrthrdr1 5 months ago
@ndrthrdr1 What does finding galaxies have to do with your idead of a conspiracy theory. A conspiracy to fool me with what? You're arguments aren't very rational on any level.
Here is some history. Atheists until the 1920's thought that the universe eternally existed, that was until cosmologies found out that the milky way was not the univse but a small part of it. Scientists discovered that the universe did have a beginning. The only book that every said that was the Bible. "In the Beginning".
Surfxeo 5 months ago
@Surfxeo You claim Moses didn't write the 10 C???
According to Exodus, God inscribed them on stone tablets, although it depends on which version you read.
ndrthrdr1 5 months ago
@ndrthrdr1 And how do we know of the 10 Commandments today? Because Moses wrote them into a book.
Don't tell me you are now one of those people who try to make out that there are two different creation accounts in Genesis 1 & 2 and two different accounts of the law?
Don't you know how to read in context?
Surfxeo 5 months ago
@Surfxeo The Bible says that God inscribed them on stone tablets.
ndrthrdr1 5 months ago
@ndrthrdr1 The Bible says that God inscribed the law onth 2 stone tablets, then we read Moses took those same tablets down and broke them. How do you know Moses got those 10 commandments? You read it from the book that Moses wrote!
Surfxeo 5 months ago
@Surfxeo The Bible told people to burn witches. We know there's no such thing.
ndrthrdr1 5 months ago
@ndrthrdr1 Where in the Bible does it tell people to burn bitches? LOL
The witches that practice witchcraft will be upset to hear they do not exist.
Surfxeo 5 months ago
@Surfxeo Exodus 22:18-19 "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live"
Atheists know more about the Bible than believers. That's why we are atheists.
ndrthrdr1 5 months ago
@ndrthrdr1 Atheists know nothing about the Bible. They can't even read it in context but only take it out of context to try and distort the truth.
Again. Where does it say in the Bible what witches are to be burned?
Surfxeo 5 months ago
@Surfxeo That's a pretty sweeping statement typical of the religious mind.
You've classed every athiest as ignorant but it's your kind who cannot show any evidence at that god exists.
So now it's my turn.
All theists are stupid and unable to comprehend that god doesn't exist or understand the proof Darwin and DNA research has provided us.
jimmywrangles 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Surfxeo That's a pretty sweeping statement typical of the religious mind.
You've classed every athiest as ignorant but it's your kind who cannot show any evidence at that god exists.
So now it's my turn.
All theists are stupid and unable to comprehend that god doesn't exist or understand the proof Darwin and DNA research has provided us.
jimmywrangles 5 months ago
@Surfxeo Do you think that the few nuts who actually believe in witchcraft ARE witches?
ndrthrdr1 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ndrthrdr1 Why don't you ask them?
Surfxeo 5 months ago
@Surfxeo said "I have given you the evidence of the Great Darkness including the earthquakes that accopanied it as confimation of the Biblical naritive."
Actually, you have given no proof, but instead repeated claims. How can we know that they are true?
If you paste this and search
Mark his words, kids! - The Atheist Experience #704
and watch that video, you'll see what I mean about the difference between providing reason to believe and simply repeating claims or stating beliefs. Frustrating
ndrthrdr1 5 months ago
@ndrthrdr1 The Atheist Experience are crazies with no self critical examination or even one shred of evidence. An asylum is more rational than their twisted logic.
You have never examined the evidence, have you?
What beliefs? Where did I get my information on of the great evidence? Let me spell it for you. Its called HISTORICAL EVIDENCE. Look it up. You might learn something instead of watching TV for the uneducated masses.
Surfxeo 5 months ago
@Surfxeo The Atheist Experience is just a suggestion of a source of websites, books, etc. that you can use to look things up yourself. Why trust word of mouth? Better to check sources.
Just saying historical evidence isn't providing sources. What non-biblical sources convinced you? I'll read over the sources myself, but if you can't list specific sources, why should others take your word? Would you take the word of a stranger without verifying it yourself? Have you in fact done just that?
ndrthrdr1 5 months ago
@Surfxeo As far as darkened skies, eclipses are natural events, and well-understood these days. Back then, so much was not understood that it's easy to imagine superstitious interpretations of natural events.
ndrthrdr1 5 months ago
@ndrthrdr1 When evidence do you have that it was an eclipse??? You immediately jumped onto that presupposition without checking the evidence and a complete lack of modern cosmology. The event took place at a time of a full moon. It is impossible to have a lunar eclipse during a full moon. Nor does it last 3 hours! The most it lasts is 7 and a half minutes. Nor does a lunar eclipse explain why there was an earthquake accompanying the darkness.
Check your information.
Surfxeo 5 months ago
@Surfxeo said "But we all know God exists"
Your argument fails before it starts, The premise is false. I've never knowingly met a god in my life!
RasPesher 2 months ago
@Surfxeo You said, "Diamonds (Olderst) still contain carbon"
Do you understand the difference between Carbon-12 and Carbon-14?
C12 is a stable isotope.
RasPesher 2 months ago
@Surfxeo You said, "The continents do not move around ... no evidence"
Do you know what causes earthquakes? Have you ever heard of a fault line? Two techtonic plates scraping past each other. Movement that can be observed and measured for that matter.
RasPesher 2 months ago
@Mirewood Ok... I will have to cause the explanation and documentation will take more than is possible to put here. I will get it to you sometime this weekend. You and yours have a good weekend!
wolfgange63 5 months ago
Comment removed
wolfgange63 5 months ago
@Mirewood 1st of all I was addressing YBAdick (nice name LOL) if you had stuck with the subject of my reply to him and if you had some biblical knowledge you would have got it. The problem is I'm only allowed so many characters in youtube replies. So what part of what I said are you confused by and I will explain in detail the best I can.
wolfgange63 5 months ago
@Mirewood No...you didn't think about what I said at all. All you thought about when you read it was.."Let's see what I can come back with!"
wolfgange63 5 months ago
evolution believer huh... so what came first the chicken or the egg?
QuitLounge 6 months ago
@QuitLounge Chicken.
rontayan 6 months ago
0:22 "Earth has been here 6 thousand years" - this is a true statement, Earth has been here for 6 000 years as well as for 4 540 000 000 years.
InnerFood 6 months ago
"0.0014% Not bad eh?"
Actually its not "good" either :) What took you so long to arrive?!
masseffectws 7 months ago
Wow, God did all those billions of years worth of work in only 6 days, just 6000 years ago? My Lord truly is capable of all things!
PS: The Earth looks old due to water damage from the worldwide flood
PPS: Some how this flood must have affected meteorites too
PPPS: I am poe'ing :)
TheRationalizer 7 months ago
I would like to know the age of Earth with minute accuracy in fact...
xlapj001 7 months ago
Excellent - Kind of makes a mockery of their 6000 year myth !! lol - idiot bible bashing brainwashed sheep lmao .
shibby790 7 months ago
John Pendleton is wearing a labcoat - does that make him a REAL scientist? Kent Hovind claimed he taught high school biology so he must be an expert biologist to, right? these people are idiots and they are proud of it.
Reaper081087 7 months ago
When will humanity realise God of heaven controls everything. Judgement day is for every soul! Repent and seek Jesus! Call out to Jesus before the rapture and rule of beast come.
bass109 7 months ago
@bass109
When will you religious fanatics realise, that every single one of you sound EXACTLY the same, with no regards to whatever religion you happen to have been childhood-indoctrinated, maybe even brainwashed, in to - yet not one single one of you have ever lifted the burden of proof.
Therefore, trust me, comments like yours get, at best, a shrug and a 'ah, another fanatic nutjob ..'
tdjdk 7 months ago 5
Even though current scientists were able find exact to age of the the earth, but there are lots of things they still don't know, how truly universe evolve or gravity force works how from nothing something comes out in the universe. I'm talking about the energy it self, or mass and energy are they equal the way Einstein claims, and he call in his speech unfamiliar conception for average mind. I'm ready to show even though energy creates the mass but they are not the same thing.
Levon9404 8 months ago
it is very sad to see most human kind afraid to come out of their shells, or could be they don't have the mental capacity to comprehend we couldn't have been here with out of millions of years of evolution!
Levon9404 8 months ago
5:50 'i've hitten ... analyse rationalize lol
lautaa33 8 months ago
This is amazing. Anyone who says we had to have a creator is kidding themselves. If "god" can just "exist" magically without a "creator" than so can we (:
JessicaJoyFarkie 8 months ago 10
I added this Video to my "Dynamic Videos That friends Made" content is exceptional, Music is Breathtaking, and love folks who deal with the truth and not fantasy
StrikingConcept 8 months ago
Give the credit where credit is due. The function of hydrogen working inside of life forms, as intended, according to a preexisting written word, has a Maker.
Don't confuse the apparent age of the universe with the known recorded age of life on earth. No other working things ever existed without having a maker. No other working thing is nearly as advanced as the nanotechnology utilized in life forms.
There is no question that life forms and the universe made of hydrogen have a Maker.
JungleJargon 8 months ago
@JungleJargon Then there's no question that this maker also had a maker, since the maker must be more 'advanced' than any life form it created.
Slanguaj 8 months ago
@JungleJargon "There is no question that life forms and the universe made of hydrogen have a Maker."
You need to learn the difference between evidence and assertion.
Skindoggiedog 8 months ago
@Skindoggiedog It is not an assertion that hydrogen works in life forms and it is not an assertion that the universe consists primarily of hydrogen. The Maker of the function of hydrogen in life forms is the same Maker of the function of hydrogen in the rest of the universe. That is more observable evidence han there is for evolution which is none at all.
JungleJargon 8 months ago
@JungleJargon It is an assertion to claim that hydrogen has a maker. considering that it's obvious, proven, factual, that hydrogen does not have a maker.
The universe is not made primarily of hydrogen. but of dark matter and energy. retard.
where's the evidence for the maker that made your maker?
i have no evidence for a maker. therefore no maker exists. simple logic.
Why can't you explain AB resistance or Plant speciation without using evolution theory?
transtlantic 8 months ago
@transtlantic It is not an assertion to say that function has a maker.
We have to go by the actual physical substance that we have that is the matter in our physical world. Othere invisible things to us are not things we can see. We have to go by the things we can see.
There is no evidence of any other Maker than the Maker of the function that hydrogen and most of the most common elements have in life forms.
You cannot use design that already existst as evidence of no design.
JungleJargon 8 months ago
@JungleJargon It is an assertion to claim that hydrogen has a maker. considering that it's obvious, proven, factual, that hydrogen does not have a maker.
things we can see: a lot of things. but no god. therefore no god.
where's any evidence for the maker that made your maker? or evidence for your maker?
function of hydrogen is evidence that no maker exists. as proven.
Where's evidence for supernatural design in nature?
if you can't show me evidence for design. there's no design. as proven.
transtlantic 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@JungleJargon "The Maker of the function of hydrogen in life forms is the same Maker of the function of hydrogen in the rest of the universe."
You need to learn the difference between evidence and assertion.
Skindoggiedog 8 months ago
awesome vid..Groovy music too.!!
karmakomodia 9 months ago
@Gage371 ALSO, keep in mind we are not actually sure how old the universe (observable) is, we use methods like radiography, and study particles of light, but we're only new at it, only just getting the hang of it. Also keep in mind that in the Koran (same god as from the bible) he mentions evolution "God created man from dust, and them from a germ, and then from a clot of blood, and then we clothed it in flesh..." etc etc. This is actually how we did start.
shootomatic 9 months ago
@shootomatic
Something tells me people back then didn't know what a germ was so either you're lying or you've read a biased translation, pick one.
Londron 9 months ago
@Londron LOL. how dumb do you think humans are? of course we knew what a germ was around 610 A.D. We use to cure our meat to prevent them, wash our body's because we knew what "germs" were. Come on man... how little your argument.
but here is it if u think i am lying to you:
"We first created you from dust, then from a living germ, then from a clot of blood, and then from a half-formed lump of flesh, Al-Hajj Pilgrimage 22:5-22:5-6"
shootomatic 9 months ago
@Londron Also, god said that he sent FLOWING water down to earth to bring forth life...do you understand the significance of this???
shootomatic 9 months ago
@shootomatic
I was asking about the germs so no idea what that last was all about...
Londron 9 months ago
@Gage371 Imagine time as you know it as a movie playing strip by strip frame by frame. But with god time is like, he's taken the movie strip and laid it all out flat infront of him from one end of the table to another. He therefor has all the events of the movie, the past, and whats to come all infront of him, and also the ending! So essentially by His reckoning maybe he did do it instantly, but again your applying time to God.
shootomatic 9 months ago
@Gage371 indeed my friend you must look at things on a greater level. you question time yet you know not about time. you say, without metaphor, comparison, but indeed god does mention metaphor, comparison as to time especially. "one year as is to a thousand in gods reckoning" but indeed you analyse but one passage from one of gods books, but you take no heed to the rest, evidence of ignorance.
shootomatic 9 months ago
@Gage371 God doesn't created the universe in six days, but seven, because the seventh day is part of the creation, "the cessation". It means seven cosmic days or endless cycles of "seven" (lunar year); a seven day week, plus 4 equals to 28 days month. So it gives 13 months or 364 days, synchronized to solar year. And then you multiply by how many years you want, until eternity. Ah, what the scientistic not know is that the universe is infinite and it's in the Bible ...
Manuipe 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
h t t p : / / science.slashdot. or g/story/10/09/25/0254219/Scientists-Confirm-Nuclear-De\
cay-Rate-Constancy
Manuipe 9 months ago