Christian philosophy is based upon the primacy of the human mind with god being the mind. God the super human mind/idea precedes the material world and is seperate from the world. Christians need a creation so that they fit into the world whereas an atheist knows that they fit into the world because they are the world.
That's why I'm no longer a Christian! Once you actually start thinking for yourself & see all the flaws in this so called God, right from his creation of mankind through to his so called holy book, the Bible, you can't but help to abandon Christianity and begin to re-evaluate everything you ever thought was true!
I wish more Christians would do this instead of insisting that their's is a God of perfection & all that's good. Well if he is, I'd hate to know of a God that screws up worse than this one!
how can you sit here and tell me that cherry garcia doesn't exist, it is way too perfect of a dessert (the spelling of the tasty classification for post meal snack is still up for teaching i will never figure out if there is one "s" or two.) When i look at the sky and the mountains ....i know....cherry garcia is out there.
You know I just wrote out a loooong response to this that consisted of a common argument that atheists use to try to prove that no religion can possibly be the right religion (three blind men and the elephant except I was the elephant for time). I found out though that at the end of the day this really does have to take faith. I really dont like to use that in an argument because many people use it for a "cop out", but this really is a time for it I believe.
The little bit after 7:24 about the Bible is brilliant! It's been said before, but it was said in a very eloquent way here, and Christians honestly do not consider this enough.
yes..but nobody is preaching about those things are they...have you ever tried to do what the bible said doing...if the bible is so false why has everybody on earth has sin
Although I am agnostic to any specific GOD or true creator...there must be one because i can concieve of such....the idea of creator is perfection and the most high which contradicts non existence...that true creator or GOD could be anything but with out doubt does exist...this earth isnt build like this perfect by random acts of events
Luv ya Bro - seriously. You raise excellent points & chap the arses of many people of whom deserve arse-chapping. I'm a Christian. If I wasn't, I'd probably be an Athiest because religious people usually piss me off with irrational dogma (other christians too often). However, if you read the Bible, -it tells the tale of the original creation that suffered a serious tort due to several factors. In Computer terms, we're in the middle of a "hack" done by God in order to RESTORE that creation. G'day
First video of yours that I've watched. Very impressive. Some nice insights into the "god's flawed act of creation" argument. But don't expect Dave, whoever that is, to comprehend those insights. They're too down to earth for the theist mind.
And I am telling your stop being lazy and look the answers for yourself through REAL science sources! Libraries are made for that! You can even go talk to scholars in universities about cosmology.
All the answers to your questions about science and the evidence it found to explain our universe are available even from the net! Leave them creationists websites alone and educate yourself with real science.
And whatever you meant by your loaded question, I am not a scientist. I can understand science to a certain extant but for a competent answer, ask it to a cosmologist.
You are yet again trying to diver me from the real issue. Theists claim that a god created everything without any evidence. The burden of proof is on them. Not on the party that doesn't believe them.
Are you even sure what an ad hoc argument means? An ad hoc (literally, "to this" in Latin) argument is one created to respond to one particular objection.
Now you used the notoriety of the person you were citing to show that his argumentation had some value, eventho he doesn't have any evidence to back his words.
What is so scary in actually doing the works to prove your claim is true? Instead of speculating, go out and find them evidences!
What are you talking about? Is that a hint of ad hominem I feel in your weird comment? Weak atheism has nothing to do with the validity of an argument.
Now if my arguments weren't compelling, just point out where I was mistaken, like I did for you so many times!
Every time I brought up a counter argument, you just switched to another topic without even acknowledging that any point was made.
Again, theists claim that a god exist, bring the proof.
Stop tap dancing! I mean I know you don't know the answer to my question. In fact NO ONE DOES! To know anything about a god, we need to know for sure it exists. So far we don't know that.
It's time for theists to stop being lazy and pretend to know answers without doing any serious research. They need to investigate their claims before saying they are true.
Your answer is as lame as a guy who'd claim he can fly but won't do it now because he supposedly shown his powers to some people back in the days and that should be evidence of his ability to fly.
You either can or you can't. God can either do incredible miracles or not. Your line of reasoning is speculative at best. Not evidence. Now if you excuse me, I will watch my hockey game (I'm canadian).
You keep bringing this answer and I always reply that this is only your opinion, your interpretation of what a being that is beyond comprehension motives would be. As far as I am concerned, you aren't in charge of god PR.
Again, why can't god do the same actions that he did in the past today, given that it is within his power and that it would in no way infringe our free will (it didn't for the primitive civilizations or the angels).
You are starting to ramble here. I said that the universe may as well have been caused by something but this something have yet to be proved to be a sentient being.
Argument from authority? Wow, you almost used up all the common theist logical fallacies here!
An argument from authority is one in which a proposition is claimed to be true because an esteemed person says it is true. It is a fallacy in that it relies on the person's fame or reputation, rather than on logical arguments or empirical evidence.
I agree that something must be the cause! What I ask is what evidence do you have this thing is a sentient being?
I agree that something has to be the cause for the universe. It this first cause a sentient being? No evidence to support this has been found yet, so it is false to assume a god was the first cause right off the bat!
Faith? Faith is belief without evidence. So far all the scientific disciplines provided us with a tremendous amount of evidence that support theories which have become laws.
Does it take faith not to believe in unicorns? Or leprechauns?
This is yet again a false trichotomy (?). Saying that a god created the universe isn't logical! In fact it doesn't answer a thing! It is a gods of the gaps argument right here.
You also conveniently forgot to include the option that the universe could've been formed from a non sentient source of energy that always existed.
To that I will ask you what created god? If you say he always was, then it is just as fine to say the universe didn't need a creator.
Atheists don't question a god! They don't believe in one! Can't you understand this simple fact?
We can't relate to god in any more way that we can relate to unicorns. We don't believe, rebel, question or whatever in regards of any imaginary being!
Ahhh, we are getting to the core of your beliefs, the bible! How do you know that anything in it is true?
Man is special? It's normal for us to attribute value to things that surround us, especially our own kind. It doesn't mean that such value is justified!
Before going any further and attribute anything to a god, prove that he exists! As long as this hasn't been done, whatever you say about a god is pure SPECULATION!
You are still holding on to that absolute red herring! The universe isn't evidence for god. If it were, we wouldn't be arguing now! There wouldn't atheists! Or any other religion without a god!
Self depreciation is a normal step in any religion! Step one, make someone feel inadequate and bad. Step two, offer your god or beliefs as a means to escape such bad state of mind. Step three the conversion is successful or not if the person accepts your proposition on faith or not.
Sinful nature? Unable to understand? We need to repent because we are bad people without a god? Sounds familiar? If that isn't self depreciation then what is?
Do you even realize what you are saying anymore? So if I understand, god doesn't exist either in space or time (which are the basis or our universe), but exists nonetheless?
How can something exist and not exist at the same time?
You start with the false assumption that this being exists! before you can go one stating things about anything, prove it exists!
What the god is made of is irrelevant! If the very existence of a thing hasn't been demonstrated, why bother with what its made of? What kind of dumb argument is that?
We can trust our minds because we can have our perceptions independently verified by another party. This is the basis of science, which is based on logic and results.
What's with the self depreciation syndrome all theists have?
This isn't a world view! It is what any reasonable person does when presented any proposition. Before believing, one has to be convinced.
And to convince someone, you need to provide reasons, evidence proof, something! Of course someone can believe without any of these, it is called faith. Or in other words gullibility.
Here's another way to put my question, why would a god, which clearly has the means to demonstrate his existence in a way that is comprehensible to his creation, decide not to do so once the said creation developed means to distribute and record information?
All your arguments in favor of this ''invisible'' being could and have been used by many people to justify the existence of their own imaginary being. Why would it have any weight with the claim that a god exists?
This is again your interpretation! For the sake of argument, let's say that what you say is true. Why did god give evidence of his existence anyways to these primitive civilization? Why isn't he doing the same today?
I will ask again, why would an all powerful being give a primitive civilization practical evidence of his existence on a regular basis as stated in the bible but stop doing it for us today?
I never equate atheism with truth! It is the lack of belief in a god or gods! But atheists tend to use logic, reason and evidence to look for the truth.
We can trust our minds because it is they only thing we have to assess REALITY! How do you think we can decide if a person is sane or not? By using our many perceptive senses!
Again you are claiming that there must be some intelligence behind the universe. Prove it.
All the evidence we have so far points to no god whatsoever.
You are again diverting the discussion! I am using the examples of evidence stated in the bible. Why doesn't god do the same things now to prove himself to us today? Why did he stop doing all these incredible miracles?
Evidence should be available and testable to all to be valid! Personal experience don't count as valid evidence.
You haven't answered a thing! You simply claimed things about god, which according to you is beyond comprehension! How do you even know these things you say about god, how can you comprehend them?
Why did this old civilization get evidence, and why don't we get the same?
Whether or not I am adamant in the pursuit of truth and the debunking of bad ideas as nothing to do with this. Be honest for once!
This bastardization of every scientific theory that you try to pass at what is science is a STRAW MAN!
Even if ALL the scientific theories in the world were proved wrong tomorrow morning, it would in no way give any more validity to a god existing or not!
Stop avoiding the real issues with all these diversions! and answer my question! Why did god give these primitive people evidence and why doesn't he do the same for us?
And please, stop with the condescending ''try again'' rebuttal (?) you give in attempt to discredit my arguments.
You have yet to answer any of my valid questions and keep tap dancing around them. You have yet to make any reasonable point for that matter.
I'll leave you at that so you can collect your thoughts and make some research! Educate yourself! Knowledge is very precious and the key to ones' freedom. Remember, truth doesnt fear critical thinking.
And let me correct you about the burden on proof, it is on you. I assume you are a Christian when I say this: even the bible says you must be ready to justify your faith at any time! Go read 1 Peter 3:15.
This is a blatant LIE! I studied the bible probably more than the average Christian and tangible miracles are visible since the OLD testament!
Sea split in two, Go's booming voice coming from the skies, his hand touching the earth to cause volcanoes to erupt, god stopping the sun in the sky for Joshua, god causing the walls of Jericho to fall down, etc.
We can comprehend the universe because we can OBSERVE it! We can comprehend ANYTHING because we can observe it. This is community college 101 science level knowledge!
Will you answer my questions!!!! Stop tap dancing! Why don't we have the same evidence as primitive humans and how can you claim to know or understand something that you say is beyond comprehension?
And if you are going to say its because they reject the so-called evidence you claim that exist, how do you even know them or even understand them, remember, god is beyond comprehension and would require absolute knowledge to comprehend in your opinion!
Do you know this old robot saying? It does not compute!
Its normal! When we don't know an answer to a question, we say: I don't know! That is until further investigation and evidence is produced! Then we can say we know!
Why is it different for religion? they claim to know and understand something that you claim is beyond comprehension!
What???? Comprehension isn't the issue! You are again tap dancing!
The issue is believing in something without evidence or good reason! If no evidence of something existing have been found, on on earth can you consider it to be true without being delusional?
And answer my question!!!! Why are we dumber than primitive people thus unable to understand the evidence they had in their time?
This is a dumb argument! Stop using it! Ambiguity? Are you serious? Why would god want to appear as a fallacy or even a lie?
And you still didn't answer my question: you said many many time that we need to have infinite minds to have absolute knowledge to understand god (you seem to be ale to do so without this).
Why were primitive people able to UNDERSTAND god and not us?
Its great that you can find some humor about all this.
Let me set things straight. I have no issues with people believing whatever they want for what ever reasons they want. I have issues when people act upon their beliefs when they are either false, delusional, unsupported by evidence or whatever. This includes religions, conspiration theories, alien abduction, astrology, ghosts sightings and so much more!
Don't think I only challenge religion. I challenge all bad ideas.
Hidden nature! How convenient! Let me ask you this. If god is beyond comprehension, how do you know or even comprehend all the things you assume about him, her or whatever it is?
Stop, stop, STOP! You are shooting yourself again in the foot!
Let me rephrase my question. In the bible, primitive and ancient people WERE able to understand god because they had EVIDENCE!
Fast foward today. You say that we can't comprehend god because we'd need absolute knowledge. Does it mean that ancient primitive humans had such knowledge and superior minds that we lost with time?
I will ask again, why did god provide people in the bible with practical and concrete evidence of his existence and the ability to understand these signs as such and deprives us today the same benefit?
This doesn't answer anything! Why aren't we getting the same evidence as the people in the old time? Why were they able to understand and know that god exists and we don't?
In a way yes! They all suffer of delusion on several levels. And again your statistics are flawed, where did you take them? Do you count the closet atheists as well? Or the fake religious as so many theists point out once one of them screw up (Ted Haggard, Jimmy Swaggart, etc.)
I simply redirected the debate on the real issue. You were simply using semantics to distract me.
Absolute knowledge is also a distraction. Why were the people in the old time provided with evidence of his existence and why aren't we benefiting the same treatment?
The world once believed that the world was flat. You are using an ad populum argument here.
Argumentum ad populum ("argument from popular appeal", "appeal to the majority") is a logical fallacy whereby a proposition is claimed to be true because it is believed by large numbers of people.
Beliefs don't make things true, evidence, proof and reason does.
Exactly! Absolute evidence doesn't exist! We are finally agreeing on something here.
But its quite unsettling that you'd believe that an omnipotent being wouldn't be capable of making us able to understand him.
On another note, god (I refer to the common conception of a Christian god in America) didn't seem to have any difficulties to provide practical evidence of his existence to people in the bible. Why is that? were they more enlightened than us who live today?
What does that mean??? I am talking about practical beliefs, not some ultimate absolute beliefs. Forget absolutes! Red herring, remember?
Let me explain, a red herring is an argument, given in reply, that does not address the original issue. Critically, a red herring is a deliberate attempt to change the subject or divert the argument.
If something exists, it is normal to expect evidence supporting it. Now we can say that we haven't found evidence for a god yet, that we are still looking or that we don't know.
But saying this entity exists without anything supporting this belief is gullibility or faith. Which is OK if this faith doesn't inform ones actions.
We can't just go around believing any proposition to be true without evidence. This is insane and one of the reason some people get locked up in asylums.
We can bicker all day about semantics and the meanings of words but the existence of a god or gods still needs to be demonstrated by evidence, proof and reason in ways that are relevant to us.
Remember that absolute knowledge is a red herring.
I understand what you are trying to do here by arguing about semantics. The fact remains that a god existing still hasn't been supported by practical evidence.
The default stance when given an unproven proposition is disbelief. Until evidence as been presented as to somethings' existence, one disbelieves it. Simple as that.
I asked this many times and didn't get an answer, why would religion, claiming many things without evidence should be exempted of any scrutiny.
Again with the distortion. When did I say that logic was the mechanism behind the universe?
Logic consists of sets of rules we came up with to understand the universe. Period. Same as the scientific method which is greatly derived from logic.
Logic is no more subjective than science is. logic investigates and classifies the structure of statements and arguments, both through the study of formal systems of inference and through the study of arguments in natural language. The field of logic ranges from core topics such as the study of validity, fallacies and paradoxes, to specialized analysis of reasoning using probability and to arguments involving causality. Logic is also commonly used today in argumentation theory.
Yes, they are not the result of randomness. I don't understand why the ''alternative'' is so important to you, you seem to still want to apply your false dichotomy, which is a logical fallacy like I tried to point out to you.
If I had to name what is behind the phenomenons I enumerated I would use natural selection.
Subjectivity refers to a subject's perspective, particularly feelings, beliefs, and desires. It is often used casually to refer to unjustified personal opinions, in contrast to knowledge and justified belief.
Conversely, logic isn't a set of beliefs, they are sets of laws, rules to help us understand phenomenons.
Laws of logic are just an anthropomorphic expression we use to describe phenomenons in relatable language. Logic isnt prescriptive like laws in the way we commonly use the term. Logic is descriptive, a tool, a language to describe how all that exist consistently and reliably behave.
Have you ever heard of the big bang theory, of evolution, abiogenesis or natural selection? Randomness has nothing to do with these.
Stop being lazy, use your brain and educate yourself! Go out read books! Talk to scholars in universities! Search for science vulgarization websites, do something!
They will give you a better account of the science behind the universe.
Again, what is design for you, and why is it so obvious in the case of the universe?
For your benefit, I will repost my answer to this:
You are again committing a logical fallacy with this false dichotomy.
''It doesn't boils down to either randomness or intelligent design. This is as asinine as saying that creationism and evolution are the only two answers and that invalidating one justifies the other.''
I did say that the universe wasn't the result of randomness, but that's the problem with your logic. you are assuming that the only answers are randomness or ID.
You are again committing a logical fallacy with this false dichotomy.
It doesn't boils down to either randomness or intelligent design. This is as asinine as saying that creationism and evolution are the only two answers and that invalidating one justifies the other.
No. Complexity doesn't automatically derive from intelligence. Again, define what you mean by design and provide evidence of what you consider obvious.
Are you this oblivious on purpose? The fact that humans design thing in no way supports an intelligent all powerful creator. This is a non-sequitur.
I agree with you that the universe wasn't the result of randomness. The problem is that this isn't the position of the scientific community.
All the scientific theories supporting a natural universe can be found in books, universities, the Internet, etc. Just be intellectually honest educate yourself.
Saying that something is obvious doesn't support anything. If it was that obvious, we wouldn't be talking about it now. So present your evidence as to what you are saying is obvious.
You are again using a blatant straw man to try and discredit my position. I never implied or said that design doesn't exist! I am saying that the universe wasn't design because there is no evidence to support that claim.
We know that humans design things because there is evidence of it! Blueprints, factories, etc...
Wait what? Your your position was (correct me if I am wrong): a cell is more complex than a city therefore it was created by an intelligent being.
The fact that everything is made of atoms supports a whole lot more what I was saying earlier: everything starts simple and evolves to become complex.
You still haven't defined what you mean by design.
First, I never said or implied that anything constituting our universe was designed, you did. Second, complex things come from much simpler ones as explained by the theory of evolution.
Again, define what you mean design and why you believe an intelligence is behind the universe.
The appearance of design is subjective. What features denote design? Complexity? Order? Beauty? Suitability to a purpose? Any of these can be lacking in objects we know to be designed. We recognize designed objects by comparison with previously known designed objects and by contrasting them with naturally occurring objects.
What one believes has no bearing on the truth. I don't understand your question. Can you rephrase it please?
What science, practical knowledge and evidence and hundred of thousand of human observation indicate is that things start very simple and become very complex by the process of evolution aided by natural selection.
You continue to not making much sense. Atheism is the lack of belief in a god. I go even further and say that there is no god, given that there are not practical evidence or reason to believe so.
Atheists aren't the ones who must prove the non-existence of a deity, the ones claiming it have the burden of proof! This is like saying non-believers in bigfoot are the ones supposed to bring proof this creature doesn't exist!
So far, no one was able to prove the existence of any gods.
The question of whether God exists is considered very important to many people, and has been for millennia. Thousands of people have assiduously searched for evidence that a god exists. Nonetheless, there is still no good evidence for a god. Many atheists thus feel justified in not believing that any gods exist, and in fact some feel justified in concluding that no gods exist.
When presented with some proposition P, we should initially keep an open mind. But if a diligent search fails to produce evidence that P is true, then we can rationally conclude that P is false.
The thing is that we can't know ANYTHING for sure. Absolute knowledge is a red herring. A sane position is to actually care about believing as many true things as possible as supported by evidence and reason.
If we start believing anything without good reasons, evidence or on faith (whether it is religion, astrology, conspiracy theories, etc.), we open the door to many unhealthy beliefs. One's beliefs inform one's actions, ergo bad or unjustified beliefs result in reprehensible actions.
I don't want to rain on your parade 1big10incher but what is an infinite being? Why would this state be a prerequisite to understand god? Why do you place such a limitation on a being deemed omnipotent?
On another note, why did god found it reasonable to give humans back in biblical times concrete evidence of his existence but stop doing so for later modern human generations (us pretty much)?
Where the humans in the bronze age infinite beings and therefore able to comprehend god?
''an infinite god HAS NO CHOICE but to create a being that is unable to fully comprehend god.the only way god could have done otherwise would be to create an infinite being (obviously impossible) or to not create at all.''
Wait what? 1big10incher, this comment of yours doesn't make a lick of sense!
hey i think if the true creator exist then i think he jus left it up to us to live if it jus started out with GOd that has to be boring....... then the creation of angels who do anything u want gets boring as well....then hey lets create and rebelious angel at heart...so things can spice up a little u know...........hey its jus a theory.......
"How can god understand REMAKE" is actually my way of dealing with theists who claim that god is "beyond comprehension" : if we can't comprehend god, how can he comprehend us?
After watching several videos and your friendly rivals, it seems they cannot rebuttal in a clear precise manner. They say one thing and turn around saying something completely opposite. "perfect plan" turns out to be a disasterous outcome, with lingering confused "christians" in my mind. It's funny how they continually struggle to make their points clear. If the world could hear you speak my friend, I believe we would be closer to achieving world peace, being on the same page, without religion.
Christian philosophy is based upon the primacy of the human mind with god being the mind. God the super human mind/idea precedes the material world and is seperate from the world. Christians need a creation so that they fit into the world whereas an atheist knows that they fit into the world because they are the world.
humansaretheworld 11 months ago
What a dick
clamp111 1 year ago
@clamp111 Thank you Captain Obvious. He put that in his description. Did you just figure that out or are you just proud that you can read.
freedom2think 2 months ago
That's why I'm no longer a Christian! Once you actually start thinking for yourself & see all the flaws in this so called God, right from his creation of mankind through to his so called holy book, the Bible, you can't but help to abandon Christianity and begin to re-evaluate everything you ever thought was true!
summersun2828 1 year ago
I wish more Christians would do this instead of insisting that their's is a God of perfection & all that's good. Well if he is, I'd hate to know of a God that screws up worse than this one!
summersun2828 1 year ago
He sounds like Arnold Shwarzenegger at the start.
Jtherva 1 year ago
how can you sit here and tell me that cherry garcia doesn't exist, it is way too perfect of a dessert (the spelling of the tasty classification for post meal snack is still up for teaching i will never figure out if there is one "s" or two.) When i look at the sky and the mountains ....i know....cherry garcia is out there.
jonathon119 1 year ago 6
@failedassassin I was thinking Josh Hartnett, lol.
These3dbags 1 year ago
You know I just wrote out a loooong response to this that consisted of a common argument that atheists use to try to prove that no religion can possibly be the right religion (three blind men and the elephant except I was the elephant for time). I found out though that at the end of the day this really does have to take faith. I really dont like to use that in an argument because many people use it for a "cop out", but this really is a time for it I believe.
Justificationized 1 year ago
@Justificationized Send me the link to your comment or please copy and paste it in a pm to me.
freedom2think 2 months ago
The little bit after 7:24 about the Bible is brilliant! It's been said before, but it was said in a very eloquent way here, and Christians honestly do not consider this enough.
qqquigley 2 years ago
I think Daves reply was also an epiphany
(I think that's what you ment)
of intelectual lazyness.
Sadly that doesn't work if you want to debate somebody :)
Great clip,
keep 'em comming.
Xigano1 2 years ago
AAARRRGGGHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!
My favourite, NO WAYYYYY!!!!
And guess what Cherry Garcia fan's?
NO MORE Cherry Garcia, I'm afraid, a few weeks ago I saw some in ASDA, (not seen any for a couple years), and they have FUCKIN CHANGED IT.
It's some frozen yoghurt shite now, changed it completely.
It WAS one of my Four fav flavours of ice cream. I hope I'm wrong, and it's just a mirage, or aberation.
Frozen Yoghurt???
Frozen bollocks!!!
And YOU expect ME to believe in a benevolent god after this?
martiangrundy 2 years ago
I question anybody who is sure....whether they know there is a god or know that there isnt.....neither knows they both just believe
kwesi216 2 years ago
The beginning is hillarious.
andysss456 2 years ago 13
why would you follow the commandments of the person who created the earth..thats what the devil look at him
kwesi216 2 years ago
yes..but nobody is preaching about those things are they...have you ever tried to do what the bible said doing...if the bible is so false why has everybody on earth has sin
kwesi216 2 years ago
Agreed! And I notice there's no video response from one who was so ready to get into debate...
OnThe246 2 years ago 2
exist
1. to have actual being; be
2. to have life or animation; live.
veenified 2 years ago
Although I am agnostic to any specific GOD or true creator...there must be one because i can concieve of such....the idea of creator is perfection and the most high which contradicts non existence...that true creator or GOD could be anything but with out doubt does exist...this earth isnt build like this perfect by random acts of events
kwesi216 2 years ago
How can imagining something cause it to exist?
veenified 2 years ago
it exist in your mind and spaghetti already exist so u didnt do what i ask......
kwesi216 2 years ago
i know something that doesn't exist...
s,jhdfuksadbhg
you're a fucking moron
veenified 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
that does exist....idiot...you created it...my point is our thoughts creates things into existence..
kwesi216 2 years ago
Mr...TB....Think of something that doesnt exist..( dont say god either..lol).....that u know with out a doubt doesnt exist
kwesi216 2 years ago
Flying Spaghetti Monster
veenified 2 years ago
well now it exist and spaghetti already exist so u didnt do it.....
kwesi216 2 years ago
Luv ya Bro - seriously. You raise excellent points & chap the arses of many people of whom deserve arse-chapping. I'm a Christian. If I wasn't, I'd probably be an Athiest because religious people usually piss me off with irrational dogma (other christians too often). However, if you read the Bible, -it tells the tale of the original creation that suffered a serious tort due to several factors. In Computer terms, we're in the middle of a "hack" done by God in order to RESTORE that creation. G'day
g0ysorg 3 years ago
First video of yours that I've watched. Very impressive. Some nice insights into the "god's flawed act of creation" argument. But don't expect Dave, whoever that is, to comprehend those insights. They're too down to earth for the theist mind.
Blackmark52 3 years ago
BTW Dave is fucking PWN3D
NismoTyler 3 years ago 2
I love you so much man that I give you your 5 stars BEFORE I watch your videos. You rock so fucking hard.
NismoTyler 3 years ago
And I am telling your stop being lazy and look the answers for yourself through REAL science sources! Libraries are made for that! You can even go talk to scholars in universities about cosmology.
wynd2007 3 years ago
Anyways, I am done clogging this video's message section. You got anything else to add, send me a mail.
wynd2007 3 years ago
Yes! What are these constants? Do you mean the laws of nature as demonstrated by the many fields of science?
If anything all the theories show that no sentient being is behind any of them.
Again, show evidence that there is such a being!
wynd2007 3 years ago
All the answers to your questions about science and the evidence it found to explain our universe are available even from the net! Leave them creationists websites alone and educate yourself with real science.
wynd2007 3 years ago
And whatever you meant by your loaded question, I am not a scientist. I can understand science to a certain extant but for a competent answer, ask it to a cosmologist.
wynd2007 3 years ago
Please post the passage where I said you made it up.
wynd2007 3 years ago
And even if I did say you made it up, that is still and argument of authority! Where is the evidence that supports what your guy says?
If there are not, it remains speculation.
wynd2007 3 years ago
You are yet again trying to diver me from the real issue. Theists claim that a god created everything without any evidence. The burden of proof is on them. Not on the party that doesn't believe them.
wynd2007 3 years ago
Look at the last five pages in the video's comment thread. That's me bringing counter arguments to all the ones you brought. Did you even read them?
wynd2007 3 years ago
First before you ask something you need to establish what you mean by the term you use. Define Universal constraints.
wynd2007 3 years ago
When I say that you speculate, I in no way mean that it is wrong. But assuming these speculations are true without any reason? Now that is wrong.
wynd2007 3 years ago
Are you even sure what an ad hoc argument means? An ad hoc (literally, "to this" in Latin) argument is one created to respond to one particular objection.
Now you used the notoriety of the person you were citing to show that his argumentation had some value, eventho he doesn't have any evidence to back his words.
What is so scary in actually doing the works to prove your claim is true? Instead of speculating, go out and find them evidences!
wynd2007 3 years ago
What are you talking about? Is that a hint of ad hominem I feel in your weird comment? Weak atheism has nothing to do with the validity of an argument.
Now if my arguments weren't compelling, just point out where I was mistaken, like I did for you so many times!
Every time I brought up a counter argument, you just switched to another topic without even acknowledging that any point was made.
Again, theists claim that a god exist, bring the proof.
wynd2007 3 years ago
Good! You seem to be able to spot your logical fallacies on your own! If only you will stop using them altogether.
wynd2007 3 years ago
Stop tap dancing! I mean I know you don't know the answer to my question. In fact NO ONE DOES! To know anything about a god, we need to know for sure it exists. So far we don't know that.
wynd2007 3 years ago
It's time for theists to stop being lazy and pretend to know answers without doing any serious research. They need to investigate their claims before saying they are true.
wynd2007 3 years ago
Arguments whether they come from an esteemed authority holds no weight without evidence or proof!
wynd2007 3 years ago
Your answer is as lame as a guy who'd claim he can fly but won't do it now because he supposedly shown his powers to some people back in the days and that should be evidence of his ability to fly.
You either can or you can't. God can either do incredible miracles or not. Your line of reasoning is speculative at best. Not evidence. Now if you excuse me, I will watch my hockey game (I'm canadian).
wynd2007 3 years ago
You keep bringing this answer and I always reply that this is only your opinion, your interpretation of what a being that is beyond comprehension motives would be. As far as I am concerned, you aren't in charge of god PR.
Again, why can't god do the same actions that he did in the past today, given that it is within his power and that it would in no way infringe our free will (it didn't for the primitive civilizations or the angels).
wynd2007 3 years ago
You are starting to ramble here. I said that the universe may as well have been caused by something but this something have yet to be proved to be a sentient being.
What is so difficult in that?
wynd2007 3 years ago
No matter which way you want to turn this, theists still have to provide empirical evidence of what they claim is true.
This is what we do in every aspect of our live. I see no reason why religion should be above scrutiny. You say something exists? Prove it.
wynd2007 3 years ago
I will bring back my question you keep dodging, why would a god provide tangible evidence of his existence in the past, and stop doing it today?
Is it because he doesn't feel like it, doesn't care, or simply just doesn't exist?
wynd2007 3 years ago
Argument from authority? Wow, you almost used up all the common theist logical fallacies here!
An argument from authority is one in which a proposition is claimed to be true because an esteemed person says it is true. It is a fallacy in that it relies on the person's fame or reputation, rather than on logical arguments or empirical evidence.
I agree that something must be the cause! What I ask is what evidence do you have this thing is a sentient being?
wynd2007 3 years ago
I agree that something has to be the cause for the universe. It this first cause a sentient being? No evidence to support this has been found yet, so it is false to assume a god was the first cause right off the bat!
wynd2007 3 years ago
This is yet again your personal opinion. It is in no way evidence for a god.
If you were presenting these arguments in the scientific arena, you wouldn't last very long.
Again, how can you claim anything about a god that you say is beyond comprehension?
wynd2007 3 years ago
Whether we can imagine things or not has no bearing on things being true.
wynd2007 3 years ago
What? Even if what you said here was true, in what way is it evidence of a god existing? Why is it so hard for you to understand this basic principle.
To believe something is true, good reason and evidence must be provided. Otherwise it is faith and it is gullibility.
Now provide the evidence that god exists! I don't mean now. Go out and make your research to find the evidence. It won't just come to you like that.
wynd2007 3 years ago
It is the burden of the one making the claim to prove it. Simple as that.
wynd2007 3 years ago
For the last time, atheism is the position of a person regarding the belief in a god.
It is not our burden to prove that your claim is false, it is your burden to prove it is true.
wynd2007 3 years ago
The way that our universe evolved to become what it is today doesn't have a thing with a god being the first cause.
Present evidence that a god exists. If you can't the logical stance is to disbelieve until evidence is provided. What's so hard in that?
wynd2007 3 years ago
This is not evidence, this is YOUR opinion. Present evidence of the existence of a god, please.
wynd2007 3 years ago
Faith? Faith is belief without evidence. So far all the scientific disciplines provided us with a tremendous amount of evidence that support theories which have become laws.
Does it take faith not to believe in unicorns? Or leprechauns?
Stop avoiding the questions, provide evidence!
wynd2007 3 years ago
What caused the universe doesn't have to be a who right off the bat! Didn't you read any of my messages? Start by asking what.
If the evidence points to a who, then we can assume a sentient being is the cause.
wynd2007 3 years ago
What are you talking about here? In what way the cause of the universe (if infinite) would have to be a sentient being?
Again, provide evidence that supports this.
wynd2007 3 years ago
This is yet again a false trichotomy (?). Saying that a god created the universe isn't logical! In fact it doesn't answer a thing! It is a gods of the gaps argument right here.
You also conveniently forgot to include the option that the universe could've been formed from a non sentient source of energy that always existed.
To that I will ask you what created god? If you say he always was, then it is just as fine to say the universe didn't need a creator.
wynd2007 3 years ago
If you say that god didn't need a creator (if he did there would be the infinite regression problem to solve) you are using special pleading.
Special pleading is a claim that standards of evidence should be modified or reversed for a particular claim or type of claim.
wynd2007 3 years ago
And we go back to the real issue! You claim that a god exists, present the evidence that supports your belief.
If there are none, then your belief is based on faith witch is your right, but in no way evidence that a god exists.
So stop tap dancing, and present these evidences!
wynd2007 3 years ago
And you still haven't answered my questions! Why did god give these ancient civilizations evidence of his existence and won't do it for us today?
Also, how can you claim to know ANYTHING about a god if his very existence is supposed to be beyond comprehension?
wynd2007 3 years ago
Special in regards to what? Every species on this planet can consider itself special. It has no bearing on it being true.
Not putting humanity on a pedestal isn't self depreciation. We think we are special because it benefits us and makes us feel good!
wynd2007 3 years ago
Atheists don't question a god! They don't believe in one! Can't you understand this simple fact?
We can't relate to god in any more way that we can relate to unicorns. We don't believe, rebel, question or whatever in regards of any imaginary being!
wynd2007 3 years ago
Until a god has been proved to exists, any claims regarding its nature, behavior or whatever is purely opinion and speculation.
Just the same as arguing about Spiderman's powers and if he could beat superman remains speculation!
wynd2007 3 years ago
Ahhh, we are getting to the core of your beliefs, the bible! How do you know that anything in it is true?
Man is special? It's normal for us to attribute value to things that surround us, especially our own kind. It doesn't mean that such value is justified!
wynd2007 3 years ago
Before going any further and attribute anything to a god, prove that he exists! As long as this hasn't been done, whatever you say about a god is pure SPECULATION!
wynd2007 3 years ago
You are still holding on to that absolute red herring! The universe isn't evidence for god. If it were, we wouldn't be arguing now! There wouldn't atheists! Or any other religion without a god!
wynd2007 3 years ago
Again you are making baseless claims! Provide tangible evidence of what you are saying!
I agree that the universe needs a cause. Now prove that god is that cause.
wynd2007 3 years ago
Self depreciation is a normal step in any religion! Step one, make someone feel inadequate and bad. Step two, offer your god or beliefs as a means to escape such bad state of mind. Step three the conversion is successful or not if the person accepts your proposition on faith or not.
wynd2007 3 years ago
Sinful nature? Unable to understand? We need to repent because we are bad people without a god? Sounds familiar? If that isn't self depreciation then what is?
wynd2007 3 years ago
Do you even realize what you are saying anymore? So if I understand, god doesn't exist either in space or time (which are the basis or our universe), but exists nonetheless?
How can something exist and not exist at the same time?
wynd2007 3 years ago
You start with the false assumption that this being exists! before you can go one stating things about anything, prove it exists!
What the god is made of is irrelevant! If the very existence of a thing hasn't been demonstrated, why bother with what its made of? What kind of dumb argument is that?
wynd2007 3 years ago
We can trust our minds because we can have our perceptions independently verified by another party. This is the basis of science, which is based on logic and results.
What's with the self depreciation syndrome all theists have?
wynd2007 3 years ago
This isn't a world view! It is what any reasonable person does when presented any proposition. Before believing, one has to be convinced.
And to convince someone, you need to provide reasons, evidence proof, something! Of course someone can believe without any of these, it is called faith. Or in other words gullibility.
wynd2007 3 years ago
Here's another way to put my question, why would a god, which clearly has the means to demonstrate his existence in a way that is comprehensible to his creation, decide not to do so once the said creation developed means to distribute and record information?
wynd2007 3 years ago
All your arguments in favor of this ''invisible'' being could and have been used by many people to justify the existence of their own imaginary being. Why would it have any weight with the claim that a god exists?
wynd2007 3 years ago
This is again your interpretation! For the sake of argument, let's say that what you say is true. Why did god give evidence of his existence anyways to these primitive civilization? Why isn't he doing the same today?
The effect of the knowledge isn't the issue!
wynd2007 3 years ago
So? These people had tangible evidence! And some decided to rebel and not believe in god! Knowing that god exists won't destroy our free will!
Some will believe, some won't some won't give a damn. So again, why aren't we getting the same evidence?
wynd2007 3 years ago
This isn't an answer! This is just your interpretation, your opinion. Provide evidence that support your opinion.
wynd2007 3 years ago
This is a dumb answer. There is a difference in punctual miracles occurrences and none whatsoever!
Knowledge is in no way a barrier to free will!!!! Even the angels who were with god and knew he existed rebelled! It didn't impede their free will!
So again why aren't we seeing the same miracles of the past today?
wynd2007 3 years ago
I will ask again, why would an all powerful being give a primitive civilization practical evidence of his existence on a regular basis as stated in the bible but stop doing it for us today?
wynd2007 3 years ago
I never equate atheism with truth! It is the lack of belief in a god or gods! But atheists tend to use logic, reason and evidence to look for the truth.
We can trust our minds because it is they only thing we have to assess REALITY! How do you think we can decide if a person is sane or not? By using our many perceptive senses!
Again you are claiming that there must be some intelligence behind the universe. Prove it.
All the evidence we have so far points to no god whatsoever.
wynd2007 3 years ago
You are again diverting the discussion! I am using the examples of evidence stated in the bible. Why doesn't god do the same things now to prove himself to us today? Why did he stop doing all these incredible miracles?
Evidence should be available and testable to all to be valid! Personal experience don't count as valid evidence.
wynd2007 3 years ago
You haven't answered a thing! You simply claimed things about god, which according to you is beyond comprehension! How do you even know these things you say about god, how can you comprehend them?
Why did this old civilization get evidence, and why don't we get the same?
Whether or not I am adamant in the pursuit of truth and the debunking of bad ideas as nothing to do with this. Be honest for once!
wynd2007 3 years ago
This bastardization of every scientific theory that you try to pass at what is science is a STRAW MAN!
Even if ALL the scientific theories in the world were proved wrong tomorrow morning, it would in no way give any more validity to a god existing or not!
Stop avoiding the real issues with all these diversions! and answer my question! Why did god give these primitive people evidence and why doesn't he do the same for us?
wynd2007 3 years ago
Again with a percentage you pull out of nowhere! There are acts of god in EVERY book of the bible!
Again, if that was true that god only acted when Jesus and Moses were around what is your point?
These are still tangible evidence of god directly interfering in human live in practical and understandable ways!
My question still remains unanswered, why were did ancient primitive people get these evidence and why don't we have them today?
wynd2007 3 years ago
And please, stop with the condescending ''try again'' rebuttal (?) you give in attempt to discredit my arguments.
You have yet to answer any of my valid questions and keep tap dancing around them. You have yet to make any reasonable point for that matter.
I'll leave you at that so you can collect your thoughts and make some research! Educate yourself! Knowledge is very precious and the key to ones' freedom. Remember, truth doesnt fear critical thinking.
wynd2007 3 years ago
It's one thing to try and defend your beliefs, it's another when you do it at the expanse of logic and reality.
wynd2007 3 years ago
And let me correct you about the burden on proof, it is on you. I assume you are a Christian when I say this: even the bible says you must be ready to justify your faith at any time! Go read 1 Peter 3:15.
wynd2007 3 years ago
There is nothing to understand in an infinite universe! Infinity isn't a thing! It is a concept!
We understand infinity so much that we use it in many fields in our lives such as mathematics and philosophy!
And the scientific community doesn't believe that the universe is infinite. The EVIDENCE points to an infinitely expanding universe.
Will you answer my questions? Lol!
wynd2007 3 years ago
This is a blatant LIE! I studied the bible probably more than the average Christian and tangible miracles are visible since the OLD testament!
Sea split in two, Go's booming voice coming from the skies, his hand touching the earth to cause volcanoes to erupt, god stopping the sun in the sky for Joshua, god causing the walls of Jericho to fall down, etc.
What do you call these?
wynd2007 3 years ago
We can comprehend the universe because we can OBSERVE it! We can comprehend ANYTHING because we can observe it. This is community college 101 science level knowledge!
Will you answer my questions!!!! Stop tap dancing! Why don't we have the same evidence as primitive humans and how can you claim to know or understand something that you say is beyond comprehension?
wynd2007 3 years ago
God does appear as a lie and a fallacy! How do you explain atheists or religions that aren't center on a god like Raelians?
wynd2007 3 years ago
And if you are going to say its because they reject the so-called evidence you claim that exist, how do you even know them or even understand them, remember, god is beyond comprehension and would require absolute knowledge to comprehend in your opinion!
Do you know this old robot saying? It does not compute!
wynd2007 3 years ago
And how can you claim to know anything about a god if it is beyond comprehension? This is highly illogical or speculation at best!
wynd2007 3 years ago
No, no, NO! Forget ABSOLUTES! They are only diversions.
Why don't we have the same evidence as the old time people??? Will you answer the question? Lol!
wynd2007 3 years ago
Its normal! When we don't know an answer to a question, we say: I don't know! That is until further investigation and evidence is produced! Then we can say we know!
Why is it different for religion? they claim to know and understand something that you claim is beyond comprehension!
wynd2007 3 years ago
What???? Comprehension isn't the issue! You are again tap dancing!
The issue is believing in something without evidence or good reason! If no evidence of something existing have been found, on on earth can you consider it to be true without being delusional?
And answer my question!!!! Why are we dumber than primitive people thus unable to understand the evidence they had in their time?
wynd2007 3 years ago
This is a dumb argument! Stop using it! Ambiguity? Are you serious? Why would god want to appear as a fallacy or even a lie?
And you still didn't answer my question: you said many many time that we need to have infinite minds to have absolute knowledge to understand god (you seem to be ale to do so without this).
Why were primitive people able to UNDERSTAND god and not us?
wynd2007 3 years ago
Its great that you can find some humor about all this.
Let me set things straight. I have no issues with people believing whatever they want for what ever reasons they want. I have issues when people act upon their beliefs when they are either false, delusional, unsupported by evidence or whatever. This includes religions, conspiration theories, alien abduction, astrology, ghosts sightings and so much more!
Don't think I only challenge religion. I challenge all bad ideas.
wynd2007 3 years ago
Hidden nature! How convenient! Let me ask you this. If god is beyond comprehension, how do you know or even comprehend all the things you assume about him, her or whatever it is?
This argument is dumb.
wynd2007 3 years ago
Stop, stop, STOP! You are shooting yourself again in the foot!
Let me rephrase my question. In the bible, primitive and ancient people WERE able to understand god because they had EVIDENCE!
Fast foward today. You say that we can't comprehend god because we'd need absolute knowledge. Does it mean that ancient primitive humans had such knowledge and superior minds that we lost with time?
wynd2007 3 years ago
See? You are tap dancing again! I asked a very valid question and you go to morality!
What does it have to do with a god existing or not?
Criminals do what they do no matter the consequence! Knowledge is and never will be an impediment to free will!
So god shouldn't be scared of tainting our free will by revealing himself! He didn't happen to think this was an issue in the bible now did he?
wynd2007 3 years ago
I will ask again, why did god provide people in the bible with practical and concrete evidence of his existence and the ability to understand these signs as such and deprives us today the same benefit?
wynd2007 3 years ago
This doesn't answer anything! Why aren't we getting the same evidence as the people in the old time? Why were they able to understand and know that god exists and we don't?
Did we get too dumb?
wynd2007 3 years ago
In a way yes! They all suffer of delusion on several levels. And again your statistics are flawed, where did you take them? Do you count the closet atheists as well? Or the fake religious as so many theists point out once one of them screw up (Ted Haggard, Jimmy Swaggart, etc.)
wynd2007 3 years ago
I simply redirected the debate on the real issue. You were simply using semantics to distract me.
Absolute knowledge is also a distraction. Why were the people in the old time provided with evidence of his existence and why aren't we benefiting the same treatment?
wynd2007 3 years ago
Theism might as well be a mental disorder. It is a delusion.
wynd2007 3 years ago
The world once believed that the world was flat. You are using an ad populum argument here.
Argumentum ad populum ("argument from popular appeal", "appeal to the majority") is a logical fallacy whereby a proposition is claimed to be true because it is believed by large numbers of people.
Beliefs don't make things true, evidence, proof and reason does.
wynd2007 3 years ago
Exactly! Absolute evidence doesn't exist! We are finally agreeing on something here.
But its quite unsettling that you'd believe that an omnipotent being wouldn't be capable of making us able to understand him.
On another note, god (I refer to the common conception of a Christian god in America) didn't seem to have any difficulties to provide practical evidence of his existence to people in the bible. Why is that? were they more enlightened than us who live today?
wynd2007 3 years ago
What does that mean??? I am talking about practical beliefs, not some ultimate absolute beliefs. Forget absolutes! Red herring, remember?
Let me explain, a red herring is an argument, given in reply, that does not address the original issue. Critically, a red herring is a deliberate attempt to change the subject or divert the argument.
wynd2007 3 years ago
If something exists, it is normal to expect evidence supporting it. Now we can say that we haven't found evidence for a god yet, that we are still looking or that we don't know.
But saying this entity exists without anything supporting this belief is gullibility or faith. Which is OK if this faith doesn't inform ones actions.
We can't just go around believing any proposition to be true without evidence. This is insane and one of the reason some people get locked up in asylums.
wynd2007 3 years ago
We can bicker all day about semantics and the meanings of words but the existence of a god or gods still needs to be demonstrated by evidence, proof and reason in ways that are relevant to us.
Remember that absolute knowledge is a red herring.
wynd2007 3 years ago
I understand what you are trying to do here by arguing about semantics. The fact remains that a god existing still hasn't been supported by practical evidence.
The default stance when given an unproven proposition is disbelief. Until evidence as been presented as to somethings' existence, one disbelieves it. Simple as that.
I asked this many times and didn't get an answer, why would religion, claiming many things without evidence should be exempted of any scrutiny.
wynd2007 3 years ago
Why is logic being objective a prerequisite to distinguish reality from fiction?
wynd2007 3 years ago
The fact that I happen to not believe in a god has nothing to do with the fact that I just can't stand logical fallacies.
wynd2007 3 years ago
Don't you think we have the ability to distinguish what is real and true from what is imaginary and false?
wynd2007 3 years ago
I don't get why you seem so happy here, and how you came to the conclusion that logic is subjective, but what is your point?
wynd2007 3 years ago
Convince myself of what? We are debating here. It's normal that one brings in arguments to support his propositions.
If anything, I am trying to point out the fallacies in your logic or at least incite you to educate yourself.
wynd2007 3 years ago
Again with the distortion. When did I say that logic was the mechanism behind the universe?
Logic consists of sets of rules we came up with to understand the universe. Period. Same as the scientific method which is greatly derived from logic.
wynd2007 3 years ago
You are again distorting my answers. The universe started simple and became more complex with time to the point we reached today.
Forget the idea of a plan, predestination or design. The universe is the way it is because the conditions for it to be were there.
wynd2007 3 years ago
Logic is no more subjective than science is. logic investigates and classifies the structure of statements and arguments, both through the study of formal systems of inference and through the study of arguments in natural language. The field of logic ranges from core topics such as the study of validity, fallacies and paradoxes, to specialized analysis of reasoning using probability and to arguments involving causality. Logic is also commonly used today in argumentation theory.
wynd2007 3 years ago
Everything! It has to do that given a certain set of conditions, a phenomenon will occur.
Remember, that I used this term to illustrate an ''alternative'' as you call it.
wynd2007 3 years ago
WOW! This reply is gold! You don't mind if I save it for my personal records? It shows all that is wrong with your argumentation.
I would recommend you to see Scott's God Logic video as he explains better than I could why your argument isn't very viable.
wynd2007 3 years ago
Yes, they are not the result of randomness. I don't understand why the ''alternative'' is so important to you, you seem to still want to apply your false dichotomy, which is a logical fallacy like I tried to point out to you.
If I had to name what is behind the phenomenons I enumerated I would use natural selection.
wynd2007 3 years ago
Subjectivity refers to a subject's perspective, particularly feelings, beliefs, and desires. It is often used casually to refer to unjustified personal opinions, in contrast to knowledge and justified belief.
Conversely, logic isn't a set of beliefs, they are sets of laws, rules to help us understand phenomenons.
Again, what is your point?
wynd2007 3 years ago
I just gave you three examples. Here they are again: the big bang theory, evolution and abiogenesis.
What is your point?
wynd2007 3 years ago
Laws of logic are just an anthropomorphic expression we use to describe phenomenons in relatable language. Logic isnt prescriptive like laws in the way we commonly use the term. Logic is descriptive, a tool, a language to describe how all that exist consistently and reliably behave.
wynd2007 3 years ago
Have you ever heard of the big bang theory, of evolution, abiogenesis or natural selection? Randomness has nothing to do with these.
Stop being lazy, use your brain and educate yourself! Go out read books! Talk to scholars in universities! Search for science vulgarization websites, do something!
They will give you a better account of the science behind the universe.
Again, what is design for you, and why is it so obvious in the case of the universe?
wynd2007 3 years ago
For your benefit, I will repost my answer to this:
You are again committing a logical fallacy with this false dichotomy.
''It doesn't boils down to either randomness or intelligent design. This is as asinine as saying that creationism and evolution are the only two answers and that invalidating one justifies the other.''
I did say that the universe wasn't the result of randomness, but that's the problem with your logic. you are assuming that the only answers are randomness or ID.
wynd2007 3 years ago
You are again committing a logical fallacy with this false dichotomy.
It doesn't boils down to either randomness or intelligent design. This is as asinine as saying that creationism and evolution are the only two answers and that invalidating one justifies the other.
wynd2007 3 years ago
No. Complexity doesn't automatically derive from intelligence. Again, define what you mean by design and provide evidence of what you consider obvious.
wynd2007 3 years ago
Are you this oblivious on purpose? The fact that humans design thing in no way supports an intelligent all powerful creator. This is a non-sequitur.
I agree with you that the universe wasn't the result of randomness. The problem is that this isn't the position of the scientific community.
All the scientific theories supporting a natural universe can be found in books, universities, the Internet, etc. Just be intellectually honest educate yourself.
wynd2007 3 years ago
Saying that something is obvious doesn't support anything. If it was that obvious, we wouldn't be talking about it now. So present your evidence as to what you are saying is obvious.
wynd2007 3 years ago
Who ever said that the universe id the result of randomness?
Evolution and natural selection are not random processes. Educate yourself and stop using these straw men!
wynd2007 3 years ago
You are again using a blatant straw man to try and discredit my position. I never implied or said that design doesn't exist! I am saying that the universe wasn't design because there is no evidence to support that claim.
We know that humans design things because there is evidence of it! Blueprints, factories, etc...
wynd2007 3 years ago
Wait what? Your your position was (correct me if I am wrong): a cell is more complex than a city therefore it was created by an intelligent being.
The fact that everything is made of atoms supports a whole lot more what I was saying earlier: everything starts simple and evolves to become complex.
You still haven't defined what design is.
wynd2007 3 years ago
A single cell? More complex than a city? Do you realize that a city is made of atoms which form cells which form matter that forms a city.
Your argument is weird, please clarify your stance.
wynd2007 3 years ago
You still haven't defined what you mean by design.
First, I never said or implied that anything constituting our universe was designed, you did. Second, complex things come from much simpler ones as explained by the theory of evolution.
Again, define what you mean design and why you believe an intelligence is behind the universe.
wynd2007 3 years ago
No. The cause to effect relation you made is flawed. Can you provide evidence of what you are claiming?
As I said earlier, design is a subjective concept. Define what you mean by design first, and then we can talk.
wynd2007 3 years ago
The appearance of design is subjective. What features denote design? Complexity? Order? Beauty? Suitability to a purpose? Any of these can be lacking in objects we know to be designed. We recognize designed objects by comparison with previously known designed objects and by contrasting them with naturally occurring objects.
wynd2007 3 years ago
What one believes has no bearing on the truth. I don't understand your question. Can you rephrase it please?
What science, practical knowledge and evidence and hundred of thousand of human observation indicate is that things start very simple and become very complex by the process of evolution aided by natural selection.
wynd2007 3 years ago
You continue to not making much sense. Atheism is the lack of belief in a god. I go even further and say that there is no god, given that there are not practical evidence or reason to believe so.
Atheists aren't the ones who must prove the non-existence of a deity, the ones claiming it have the burden of proof! This is like saying non-believers in bigfoot are the ones supposed to bring proof this creature doesn't exist!
So far, no one was able to prove the existence of any gods.
wynd2007 3 years ago
The question of whether God exists is considered very important to many people, and has been for millennia. Thousands of people have assiduously searched for evidence that a god exists. Nonetheless, there is still no good evidence for a god. Many atheists thus feel justified in not believing that any gods exist, and in fact some feel justified in concluding that no gods exist.
wynd2007 3 years ago
When presented with some proposition P, we should initially keep an open mind. But if a diligent search fails to produce evidence that P is true, then we can rationally conclude that P is false.
wynd2007 3 years ago
The thing is that we can't know ANYTHING for sure. Absolute knowledge is a red herring. A sane position is to actually care about believing as many true things as possible as supported by evidence and reason.
If we start believing anything without good reasons, evidence or on faith (whether it is religion, astrology, conspiracy theories, etc.), we open the door to many unhealthy beliefs. One's beliefs inform one's actions, ergo bad or unjustified beliefs result in reprehensible actions.
wynd2007 3 years ago
I don't want to rain on your parade 1big10incher but what is an infinite being? Why would this state be a prerequisite to understand god? Why do you place such a limitation on a being deemed omnipotent?
On another note, why did god found it reasonable to give humans back in biblical times concrete evidence of his existence but stop doing so for later modern human generations (us pretty much)?
Where the humans in the bronze age infinite beings and therefore able to comprehend god?
wynd2007 3 years ago
''an infinite god HAS NO CHOICE but to create a being that is unable to fully comprehend god.the only way god could have done otherwise would be to create an infinite being (obviously impossible) or to not create at all.''
Wait what? 1big10incher, this comment of yours doesn't make a lick of sense!
wynd2007 3 years ago
That was so good it brought tears to my eyes...
scott5856 3 years ago
the last three minutes were fnatstic.
TheFemaleDurden 3 years ago
Amen...lol
eworc12 3 years ago
I have too many differences with RRS. I don't agree with the way they communicate their message.
TheoreticalBullshit 3 years ago
This is a pretty good medium. There's plenty of nutjobs on Youtube to smite as there are in the real world.
Here, he's able to prevent those nutjobs diseminating their crackery in in the real world ;).
poorkinghaggard 3 years ago
hey i think if the true creator exist then i think he jus left it up to us to live if it jus started out with GOd that has to be boring....... then the creation of angels who do anything u want gets boring as well....then hey lets create and rebelious angel at heart...so things can spice up a little u know...........hey its jus a theory.......
kwesi216 3 years ago
"How can god understand REMAKE" is actually my way of dealing with theists who claim that god is "beyond comprehension" : if we can't comprehend god, how can he comprehend us?
DrObswolovitch 3 years ago
one of your best videos
DrDarwinian 4 years ago
After watching several videos and your friendly rivals, it seems they cannot rebuttal in a clear precise manner. They say one thing and turn around saying something completely opposite. "perfect plan" turns out to be a disasterous outcome, with lingering confused "christians" in my mind. It's funny how they continually struggle to make their points clear. If the world could hear you speak my friend, I believe we would be closer to achieving world peace, being on the same page, without religion.
Gambit719 4 years ago 2
Beginning part was hilarious.
Gambit719 4 years ago 3
Wow this video was harsh. Correct, but still harsh.
DeeEmarr 4 years ago
Because he's a sadist?
DickJohnson3434 4 years ago