Mr Cow. Your Video claimed a "Christian" was a plagiarist. My Question is, if "I have MY OWN morals," and IF I don't see anything wrong with being a Plagiarist, who are you to tell me I'm wrong.
Let me restate the heart of my question, Why is plagiarism wrong?
That's it, Mr Cowboy, Why is plagiarism wrong?
If you live up to your standards, fine, but DO YOU have a right to force your, "OWN morals," on someone else?
@MrCalhounr1 Well, I tend to lean toward consequentialism. I could explain why plagiarism should be considered wrong under that moral theory, but I don't really have the space here. And why should you accept consequentialism? Because I think it makes the most sense (depending on the version of consequentialism) out of all the moral theories.
Why do I have the right to force this on you? Well *I* don't, but the society you're participating sort of does...
I don't see a problem. If there is no god, no absolute right or wrong; how would an act like plagiarism be wrong. You're trying to place a standard of Christian behavior on someone. You have no right to tell someone to live up to standards when you reject the foundation of those standards.
@MrCalhounr1 The bible isn't the only foundation for morals. It's called being a rational human being. The number of christians that do heinous things is equal to or greater than the number of atheists. You're a fucking idiot dude it's people like you that christianity was made for because if you didn't have an invisible man threatening to burn you you would be out raping people and killing their mothers. I'm glad we have fantasy to keep you idiots in line. As for me I have MY OWN morals.
I like how brock equates atheism with deconstructionism, like what does that stupid story have to do with atheism anyway? Atheists are free to see the order and structure of the universe, we just don't presume to know it came from a god.
I don't care whether this guy uses other peoples stuff or not. The only thing that matters is that it is a bunch of crap!! I'll plagiarize all day. Once the words are out there they are fair game as far as I'm concerned. He's just guilty of picking the wrong ones.
@mma171 Exactly dude. People stopped caring about plaigerism after the invention of cut and paste (well, maybe less so when your making an actual video and quoting it, but still), the guy uses a bunch of meaningless sound bytes and buzz words which have neither substance nor combined meaning.
'Performing real world actions which achieve real world reactions simply detract from the time you can spend praying to a make belief space man! Duh, winning!'
@TheJamesrocket That's shit's not gonna fly in academia. Try that on at university (especially at the higher levels) and you'll get your arse kicked out, and rightly so!
I've observed about one christian repeater for every ten atheist repeaters on youtube. Even the format of your video which is "exposing a christian's plagarism," is old, and tired, and not your own idea. Oh the irony.
It was Aurde Lorde who said, "There are no new ideas." Everything now is taking old ideas and making them your own. That is creativity. I may speak the same idea as someone else, but I speak it in my own words. AA does not do that. He copies words from other, very particular phrases that sound eloquent to him, and adjusts them slightly.
I don't think Antybu is here to entertain, either. He's exposing this guy. I don't care if his video format is "creative".
@ArcasDevlin I'll say again, I've observed about one christian doing exactly what AA does for every ten atheists that do the exact same thing. Thats because like so many other religion obsessed atheists, antyfu is also obsessed with this guy. How many videos has he made about him? How many hours has he spent carefully listening and researching what he says? It really isn't about giving the proper person credit rather than discrediting the original quote by whatever means possible.
And yet, it brought attention to the fact that this individual is a plagiarist, so it accomplished what it apparently set out to do quite nicely. It gave the real writers credit, and probably directed many people to their work.
AA was selling shirts, shirts with plagiarized images. I haven't seen anything for sale from Antybu. Have you?
You can say you've "observed" this from Atheists 10x as often. Care to point me toward some proof? Because I, personally, haven't.
@ArcasDevlin I don't follow AA so I don't know about the shirts. I don't like AA's style, its judgemental and fear driven. I've watched a couple of antybu's videos. I've agreed with him before but never walk away enlightened. For the record, I'm not atheist. I also don't obsess about atheists or theists I disagree with. Craig is probably the only apolgetics guy I can listen to though I don't believe in apologetics. I'm a firm believer in dusting the boots off and have nothing to apologize for.
@ArcasDevlin You don't have proof? What you don't have is a large team of people scrutinizing your own camp you clearly consider yourself party to. I would play this game If I thought it was important or could be bothered with it at all. Lets just say in simple that if I hear another youtube narcissist throw out catch phrases like "begs the question," I think I'll puke in my suite. One has success with something and everyone lines up to get on it. Its really quite plain to see. Again, take care
I, personally, have not seen atheists do this any more than theists. The only difference I have noticed is that theist don't have anything to support their claims.
I enjoy watching his videos. He enjoys making them. Somehow, I don't see an issue there.
I do see an issue with what Christianity has done to the world. Good job for the atheists standing up to it. Wanting to teach my kids creationism? If they stop interfering with others' lives, I wouldn't mind leaving them be.
@ArcasDevlin What Christianity has done to the world? Know what I see? I see what people have done to the world for better and worse. You're straying off the subject into a typical anti religious rant btw. Not to mention, I just got done telling you that I firmly believe in letting people believe what they want.
You have as much right to not have your children influenced with other world views as much as you're willing to return the favor. I don't know, you don't seem that willing.
As for the time wasted researching, all he had to do was type some curious phrases into a search provider. He was then reading not about AA but about various theological topics, which is entertaining. Whenever someone makes an exceptional claim, I do the same. Usually, I end up learning something... and if that guy was lying, I would make it known, because we have enough "Believe the first thing you hear" idiots.
@ArcasDevlin Making these videos takes alot of time. The kind of time that someone would have to find it really really important. As far as checking to see if someones claim is their own original, that makes sense. If you can uncover that it was someone elses claim originally it dismisses the claim all together right? Thats usually the agenda in doing so.
@ArcasDevlin "I used to think that brock lawley was a wordsmith of sorts,"
If you're actually honest with yourself do you really think that statement is true? Of course its not. This guy hates AA with a passion, probably has since the first video he's seen of his. That statement's purpose was to add drama to this video, to entertain. AA and antyfu have an agenda and entertainment is the only way to sell that agenda here. Take care.
Great expose', good research; very well done. It is truly sad to see that AA did not give proper credit to the originators of the quotes, and ironic considering his complaint against evolutionists... however, that doesn't change the truth of the quotes. If you steal an apple from an apple tree, and try to sell it standing in front of an orange tree, it's still an apple. It is also truly sad that you could read all that G.K. Chesterton in your research and not be enlightened by it. :(
Why am I not surprised when a censorious Christian plagiarizes someone? If you expect anything less from an apologist, you're not listening to the true message that apologists are expected to internalize. They are trying to assimilate everything into a "Christian" worldview. In other words, that's what they are as an institution. It is an act that comprises their entire identity. The mysticism is a cover; always, there are no exceptions, except in the untutored apologist.
Man, this video gives me nostalgia for old-school YouTube, with the 5 star ratings . . .
Awesome takedown. As I said, I'm late to all this, but my next video might amuse you . . . it quotes Antony Flew on his beliefs and how they actually oppose those of Brock even though he tries to appropriate Flew's conversion to deism for his own ends.
This would be a better video if you actually addressed the content of the videos instead of plagarism. Yes, he should have cited his sources. Email him. Most Christian authors don't care about people quoting them, nor mentioning their name, but I think we should sometimes. Christian authors like Lane Craig,Ken ham, Ravi, Greg Koukl, Matt Slick, arent going to go after you, they write specifically for other Christians to defend their faith.
Now we see also why his ramblings sound incoherent at times and just plain fake. He's acting a script he created by plagiarizing other writers' works. Sweet. I like to refer to him as the Intelligence Antidote.
Now, imagine Brock as a church father or Christian 1900 years back. He could take the book of Mark (gospel) and rewrite it and pass HIS version on and only those who got his would think he was a great author and his was the best and authoritative. No one would have been able to know any differently. And interestingly, that's exactly what happened back then. The gospel of Matthew is that work. Luke then did it using Mark and Matthew and Josephus' writings. Thank god for databases.
Someone just showed me this vid. I had no idea. I left this comment on his most recent vid:
i just unsubbed from you. I find it disgusting that you take, verbatim, someone elses words and pass them off as your own. Most of us that do videos will put our OWN words and our OWN thoughts out there and we struggle to make a coherent video. We outline, we script, we edit. We look dumb (if we're lucky) and we take the criticism. YOU rip others off and add a little drama. I'm sure you'll ignore this
lol, you do know....this is how conservative brain functions at lease in the US. Its all about repeating everything they read and heard with little intellectual examination....just listen to Glen Beck. He always whine how people are wrong to call him ignorant idiot because he READS a lot more than avrg person. What he fails to comprehend is reading does not learning or thinking through your believe.
@KwenHuda2010 Actually reading, and being informed on an issue is basically the opposite of ignorance. Way to fail at understanding what he said. Now being an revolutionary or visionary, while just repeating words (of wisdom), he is not.
This is the cat and the mouse intellectual mind games,while the atheist antidote uses lines from a book and repeat them in front of a video camara, is no difference when ThunderfEEt do it,or Factsvsreligion,or any users,even news channels do that, but the true name of the game according to this video is 'I can and you can't cause i own freedom,and i did not grant you the privilege to speak'. It is a shame that most of this videos do not offer an intellectual argument on the subject.
@breedofthe45 "...while the atheist antidote uses lines from a book and repeat them in front of a video camara, is no difference when ThunderfEEt do it,or Factsvsreligion"
And you have proof of that, right? Let's face it, the only people stupid enough to plagiarize like Brock and expect not to be caught are religious freaks like you.
@mirekk1977 ..Funny, in some peoples minds they belive that the way to be right is to insult others, no response to the subject, just insults, intellectual bankruptcy that is nothing but pet names, label a human bieng into 'freaks' or 'bigots' or 'delusional' a whole psychiatric evaluation with no PHD in psychiatry or in any field that deals with human psychology, they try their best to convince you that something is wrong with you, but no answer to the subject whatsoever.
@mirekk1977 ..........*****Funny, in some peoples minds they belive that the way to be right is to insult others, no response to the subject,"****
*****Note*****
No Insults or Religious reference in my comment, but i still got insulted by you:
***And you have proof of that, right? Let's face it, the only people stupid enough to plagiarize like Brock and expect not to be caught are religious freaks like you**
But you still want an answer like you deserve respect after your stupid rant?
@mirekk1977 In some Ironic twist and obvious way of radical fundamentalists by indoctrination they invite people not to think, but to indoctrinate their followers with the same intolerance.Just like any radical fundamentalist religious views,The new atheists do the same as there is only one way, and that is their way.And one either speaks like them, looks like them, acts like them and thinks like them or one is relegated to a lower moral plane.This is a useless conversation.
@mirekk1977 ..like a neutered dog you still don't get it do you?
You actually belive i was born yesterday?
Don't matter if i give you an ocean of eveidence it will still be irrelevant.
Why would it be irrelevant you ask?
Because you are not going to accept it or discuss it.All you gonna do is throw out empty insulting cliches just to delight your followers with a school-boyish putdowns.It is irrelevant what i say.Either way the response is gonna be the same,some sort of a pet name callin.
@mirekk1977********* Why would it be irrelevant you ask?*********************
Because you are not going to accept it or discuss it.All you gonna do is throw out empty insulting cliches just to delight your followers with a school-boyish putdowns.It is irrelevant what i say.Either way the response is gonna be the same,some sort of a pet name callin.
@breedofthe45 "while the atheist antidote uses lines from a book and repeat them in front of a video camara, is no difference when ThunderfEEt do it,or Factsvsreligion,or any users"
See, only dumb theist (like Brock) would use other people work as a script and expect not to be caught.
You basically did the same by accusing TF and FvsR of similar plagiarism with no facts to back it up, and expected that nobody will call you out on that.
@mirekk1977 *****See, only dumb theist (like Brock) would use other people work as a script and expect not to be caught*****
I think you are repeating what i just put in my comments,not once but everytime you respond to my comments...And like you said "You basically did the same by accusing TF and FvsR of similar plagiarism with no facts to back it up, and expected that nobody will call you out on that"
@breedofthe45 "Just like any radical fundamentalist religious views,The new atheists do the same as there is only one way, and that is their way.And one either speaks like them, looks like them, acts like them and thinks like them or one is relegated to a lower moral plane."
This is ridiculous. There are no common bonding elements between atheists as there are with religious people, such as dogma, doctrine, and ritual. Reason and logic are enough, Are you aware of your own projection?
@NormDePlume69 The greatest danger that besets us does not come from believers or atheists; it comes from those who, under the guise of religion, science or reason, imagine that we can free ourselves from the limitations of human nature. Those who insist we are morally advancing as a species are deluding themselves. That is what we have become. We’ve moved from a print-based culture to an image-based culture, one responds emotionally, not intellectually. That is precisely what’s happening.
@NormDePlume69 The new atheists are intellectually bankrupt. They have nothing to offer in terms of serious moral, theological or even scientific debate. They are very much a product of the television age, school-boyish putdowns and insults that only a tourette's syndrome patient can deliver.They celebrate their own ignorance. The kinds of things they write about religion are religiously illiterate. I am very disturbed by the racist cant that they have unleashed toward the christian world only.
"Intellectually bankrupt", "nothing to offer in terms of serious moral, theological or even scientific debate", "ignorance", "religiously illiterate". You certainly like to generalise don't you. I strongly suggest you take a look at this: watch?v=b2Vxuaga_pA "Atheists Excel in Religious Knowledge".
"Racist cant that they have unleashed toward the christian world only"? 1. Atheism is a rejection of the belief in god/gods, nothing whatsoever to do with race. 2.Did I miss something? I wasn't aware that christianity was a race. 3. We object to all religions, not just christianity. Please get your facts right before posting such comments.
1.Atheism is the rejection of the belief in god/s, nothing to do with science.
2.Yep ,you indeed miss something, Homosexualism is not a race also, but you people act like it is, therefore, Racism is prejudice and DISCRIMINATION based on race, DISCRIMINATION is the treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit.
@breedofthe45 "Nothing to do with science" who said anything about science?
WTF "Homosexualism is not a race also, but you people act like it is". We are the people who recognise that homosexuals are human beings, with the same rights as everyone else. We are the people who are not discriminating, we actually defend other peoples human rights. You & your religion are the ones who are guilty of discrimination!
@freetheworldof WTF "Homosexualism is not a race also, but you people act like it is". We are the people who recognise that homosexuals are human beings, with the same rights as everyone else. We are the people who are not discriminating, we actually defend other peoples human rights."
DESCRIMINATION is the subject, therefore, don't matter who is the person or individual who is protected, the rights for a human bieng is for all, not for the ones you cherry pick, that includes religious rights.
@freetheworldof I love it when christians have no idea about what values they as a group stand for and what views their group holds. And it is fun to educate them how these views have changed throughout history.
I like your responses here on this video, keep up the good work :)
@N3CR1S Thanks for the compliment. I must say, I am constantly astounded that I still have an intact keyboard at the end of each day. I get a little heavy handed with the keys at times, when 'debating' with some of these people.
@breedofthe45 We do not discriminate against 'religious' people. We are simply debating the topic of religion, that is not discrimination. Yes, we will voice our opinion strongly when it comes to the harm that religion causes, it would be immoral for anyone not to object.
I notice that you did not respond to my comment regarding "Atheists Excel in Religious Knowledge".
@freetheworldof ..Your claim was that Christianity is not a race, therefore is not descrimination against them. I used the term of Homosexuality as an example to show you that racism towards a group of individuals is racist since the word racists means prejudice and DESCRIMINATION, therefore get your facts right before you do more comments.
@breedofthe45 It is you who has the facts wrong. The accepted definition of race is: "race describes genetically divergent populations of humans that can be marked by common phenotypic and genotypic traits". This does not & cannot include homosexuals or people of religion.
@freetheworldof ,,ohh gosh, i used the term racist in a DISCRIMINATION(i used an [e] instead of an [i] in my other comments, i can't remember why and i apologize for that) way, i think the comment was well writen, either way, i used the word to show my dislike of the propaganda used to discriminate against christians, but christophobia is getting a little bit absurd, we need to be fair, these videos are like a secular form of Fox News ..fair and balance my ass..
@breedofthe45 I can certainly agree with you on that. I am all for debating, providing it is done in a courteous manner. Some of these videos are over the top (to say the least). I can be very passionate when it comes to the harm that religion is causing, but hope that I can remain courteous whilst debating.
@freetheworldof It is nothing wrong with a debate, i seen videos where Richard Dawkins or Christopher Hitchens are invited to Christian Centers to have a debate, and they treat him with respect, at the end of the debate everybody shake hands and go home. There is cartoons of Jesus in South Park and Family Guy, i never heard of death threats done by a bunch of christians to banned the cartoon, my point is, christians are bitchin about a lot of things, but who among us does not?..lets be fair.
@breedofthe45 In addition, a person can be discriminated against for many reasons other than race. Someone could say (I don't), that they discriminate against catholics all over the world. You could in no way say this is racist, since this would mean that you would be racist against a significent number of people throughout the world. This of course is absurd.
@freetheworldof Charles Bradlaugh, in 1876, proposed that atheism does not assert "there is no God," and by doing so he diluted the traditional definition of atheism. Since 1979, many atheists have followed Bradlaugh's thinking further and stated that atheism is merely a lack of belief in any god. The motive for such a shift in meaning appears to be to an attempt to shift the burden of proof regarding the existence of God to the theism side.
@breedofthe45 Your quote from Charles Bradlaugh (The Freethinker's Text-Book) has no relevance regarding the burden of proof. The burden of proof has always & will always rest with the person making the claim. For example: creationists are always shouting "where is the evidence for evolution, show us the evidence, prove it!". If I told you I could perform the very same miracles described in the bible, you would not say to me "I will show that you can't", you would say "prove it!."
@freetheworldof Call it whatever you want, i used Charles Bradlaugh since most of you atheists used the word 'Atheist' as a badge, like a police man, like the word gives you the right to do whatever you want,say whatever you want and not to be question, like atheism is perfection in every way, immune to tell lies, You people can redifine the word 'atheist' all day long, but that kind of attitude is the same as those extreme christians, you offer the same disease in a secular form.
@breedofthe45 No one is redefining the word atheism.
Atheism cannot be perfection, since it is not a claim - it is simply as I said, the rejection of belief in a god/gods. Yes SOME athiests are exactly as you said (& I do not count myself among those). However, EVERY religious person I have ever met & seen are exactly the way you described some atheists.
JAjaja...DECONSTRUCTIVISM as atheism. That is interesting.
Deconstructivism has existed since the 1980`s, and it has never, to my knowledge, made any religious statement. It does have a philosophical root and backround, but not atheism in its core. The absurdity of stablishment, maybe religion included, is in my opinion, what motivates this architectural movement.
Okay, so you have doubts about Christianity, but you said you cannot be a Christian if you don't believe, having doubts implies that you don't fully believe it.
Congratulations, you just handed him his ass!! Something was always not quite right with Antidote guy, and you've exposed him! You should've ended with "you take it to the bank!" He, he....
Wow. Whether the guy plagiarizes or not, what he says just doesn't make a whole lot of sense. The dogma is astounding. I'm so glad I never got tangled up in religion. It never ceases to amaze me the sheer volume of stories and faulty justifications have been amassed in an attempt to legitimize creationist claims. It's so much easier to just see things as they are. No need to make shit up.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I can only sit back and marvel at atheists, such as yourself, who go to great lengths in bashing the messenger rather than the message. I can make a similar video of "plagiarized ideas,articles and quotes" word for word from the 1000 atheists we have here on YouTube and I'm certain it will be votbotted and atheists will feist and whine.
I'm not endorsing what TAA did. I'm just saying atheists also do the same and I'm going to make a video and post it back here as response. Fair enough?
@charliesplinter Yes, I'd love for you to do a video. I hope you've watched all 5 parts of this series, so that you can find an atheist who has plagiarized to the extend that Brock has.
@TruthSurge "and 4 months later...." ... I take it he never actually made the video he said he would? One would think that it would make for a better argument for someone to say "and X said Y about this, while Z said B about that", annotate and document, backing up your argument with something more than just your own thoughts and words ... plagiarism takes that and suggests that just your own words are good enough, you don't need to include other people's ideas.
@Alitari I saw no response vid here so one has to assume he never made it. For why would he make it and not post here?
Yeah, sometimes you use an idea or theme, rewrite in your OWN words and don't give credit. That happens a lot on YT. People read an article and then do a vid talking about it. Not a big deal really. It isn't a science paper. BUT, what Brock did is simply sleazy and despicable. It was basically lying to make his viewers think he was such a wordsmith. hahaha
@Alitari I just uploaded a vid using Brock as one person in it if you are interested. it's at /watch?v=SADKwEzY7pA your vid here inspired me to put him in!
that guy only wants to sound intelligent, by relying on the works of others. He certainly doesn't have an "antidote" to anything, but he does have the cause of many delusions.... faith.
@charliesplinter Imagine my suprise to see after checking your profile that as expected you did no such thing even though you have had 4 months since you said you would make this video..bless. Actually following through for your religion was just a bit too much work I take it?
@charliesplinter Perhaps you should reread your own comment? ''im not endorsing what TAA did. I'm just saying atheists also do the same and I'm going to make a video and post it back here as response. '' Then read your first comment (too long to copy paste)then reread my original response, then feel like an idiot :).
@charliesplinter Pretty much the response I was expecting from someone who mysteriously has not made a response he vowed to do 4 months ago when attempting to defend his religion (or attack atheists, your call), im sure Jesus wont see it as a sign that you only make a stand and follow through for your religion when it does not take any actual work or effort on your part :).
You know, I'm looking at my comments and they're very much lacking of the words "Jesus" and "God" you're trying to turn this into a theological debate which I am *not*, I repeat *not*, willing to indulge myself in. So I pass.
"he vowed to do 4 months ago "
LOL @ vowed. Yes it's been 4 months. I know. I didn't mention a specific date nor a time now did I?
@charliesplinter A comment does not have to contain the words jesus or god to be religious in nature, obvious distaste towards atheists is shown in your comments and thats a pretty standard symptom of Christianity, or have I misjudged you? This is further hammered in as you claim atheists go to great lengths to bash the messenger of such videos rather than the message (seeing as the message in this case is highly Christian), its also a somewhat ridiculous point given the armies of videos out
@charliesplinter there adressing these exact points made by Christians, you can hardly say that the message is not adressed. Furthermore I think in cases such as Brock it certainly is important to look at the character of the person making the points, seeing as Brock endlessly likes to hammer in his view that he due to his Christian beliefs is morally far superior to nasty atheists it is very relevant to note that he is a liar and a theif. If you have not done so already I advise watching the
@charliesplinter final part of this series where brock is exposed for attempting to sell and profit off work which is not his, that is STEALING and im fairly sure is something considered immoral even by his religion..it is thus VERY relevant as the person in these cases is very much a key part of the message.
You then end by implying that even though it has been 4 months you had not forgotten about your original statement and do intend on following it up. (if you disagree just reread what you
@charliesplinter typed there, ill remind you 'Yes it's been 4 months. I know. I didn't mention a specific date nor a time now did I?' That is some pretty heavy implication there, and im afraid i dont believe for a second that it is the truth. It seems considerably more likely that you never really intended on doing so and merely threw out that sentence as a form of idle posturing..am I wrong? Think hard before you answer, Jesus does not like lying..dont make him sad :p.
" It seems considerably more likely that you never really intended on doing so"
Wow what a waste of my time you have been. You should have saved yourself all the trouble.
And for the final time, making or not making this video isn't "following through for my religion" or "helping Brock" whatever you're trying to turn this little rant of yours to be.
@charliesplinter ..reread my comments, im not sure if you are intentionally misunderstanding my points or not but it seems very likely. Either adress them honestly or move along, that shtick gets old and predictable fast.
I don't get what your problem is. I said I would make the video and it's been 4 months. Look at this entire series and see the months between each part. Part 3 was made in August 09, Part 4 December 09. So swallow up your pride and be patient.
Don't bother replying cause I won't bother reading.
@charliesplinter I made my problem perfectly clear in previous comments you went out of your way to avoid adressing, im not going to repeat it again. What you are trying to do here is pretty obvious and I dont think anyone is fooling for it.
'''I'm actually done replying to you.'''
What a suprise you were not being truthfull when you said that last time either. (shakes head) Although im sure you wont admit it here I hope you learned something about not posting mindless comments in future :).
@charliesplinter I'm still waiting...is it done yet? You claimed you weren't condoning it, but it sure sounded like an "everyone's doing it" defense...without the proof, of course.
BTW..the message was bad also. There are plenty of videos about the "content". But this one was about the thievery. There's a logical fallacy in your assumption that since this is about the specific words, atheists don't hear the message.
Usually, we blast the message. The problem is when the messenger is such a stuck up ass like Brock, it's hard not to want to digitally smack in the nuts.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
HAHHAHA, typcial athiest resorting to ad hominen attacks on people who disprove and challenge the athiest religion. I hope your proud of yourself antybu86. You couldn't refute the content, so you come up with this plagiarist crap.
@TypicalRepublican The content has already been refuted, and in many cases, it's been refuted *decades* ago. But I understand that you're not impressed by this video - by this point, I'm sure you're immune to hypocritical Christians.
@antybu86 It's not an ad hominem. If it was said that because he steals large portions of his text, none of his points have any merit, then that would be an ad hominem. But this video simply was pointing out some evidence. It could be argued that your post is more of a true ad hominem than this video. At least equally as much of one. It's certainly a fallacy to assume that because this post doesn't deal with the content, none do.
@TypicalRepublican "HAHHAHA, typcial athiest resorting to ad hominen attacks" look up "ad hominem." i know it's popular to use that term nowadays, but you obviously have no idea what it means. hint: it doesn't mean criticising someone for being a plagiarism.
what is a difrence betvene atheist materialist and religius. give evidence to an atheist and he belives you, bring evidence to the religius and he hates you for it.
@ZackTheProtestant From wiki "The argumentum ad hominem is not always fallacious, for in some instances questions of personal conduct, character, motives, etc., are legitimate and relevant to the issue.[3]"
What does Brock have to say for himself? Not much, since his channel has been deleted. But don't worry, he's got a second channel where he can play the victim. Poor Brock, got his channel deleted just for stealing other's work. Boo fucking hoo.
i don't know too much about this brock lawley chap (he seems a bit unbearable based on the few videos i looked at) but I must dig out a bit of GK Chesterton again, the man had some pretty righteous things to say about spirituality....
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I agree that AA should of give credit where it is due. It is apparent that AA reads a lot. The biggest problem for AA is that it allows his neigh-sayers to redirect the discussion away from the point. They run yelling and pointing their fingers... "PLAGIARIST!!" allowing them to burn the straw man instead of arguing the point he brings.
The fact that he does not give credit to his sources undermines any point he may be trying to make. He has presented other people's thoughts and ideas as his own creations, essentially perpetrating a lie.
The fact that he has done this REPEATEDLY and been called on it is very telling. This is not the sort of person one would want supporting their cause, be it religion or anything else. Sadly, he is not the only one doing so in the name of his faith.
Did he claim to have invented these ideas or is he just repeating what he has read? If we must give reference for every statement we would have nothing but references. looks like atheists using mudslinging and attacking the messenger and not the message.
1) Yes, Brock did take credit for other people's work. As you can see in this video he made statements like "I recently realized that [insert plagiarized work here]." And when people compl
GOT 'EM!
koreanknight 4 weeks ago
Mr. Cow, Why is plagiarism wrong? How dare you push your belief system on someone else.
MrCalhounr1 4 months ago
lol he removed every video you talked about hahahahaha!! people have probably said this a million times already but I've only just seen it now
phurt89 5 months ago 3
Mr Cow. Your Video claimed a "Christian" was a plagiarist. My Question is, if "I have MY OWN morals," and IF I don't see anything wrong with being a Plagiarist, who are you to tell me I'm wrong.
Let me restate the heart of my question, Why is plagiarism wrong?
That's it, Mr Cowboy, Why is plagiarism wrong?
If you live up to your standards, fine, but DO YOU have a right to force your, "OWN morals," on someone else?
MrCalhounr1 6 months ago
@MrCalhounr1 Well, I tend to lean toward consequentialism. I could explain why plagiarism should be considered wrong under that moral theory, but I don't really have the space here. And why should you accept consequentialism? Because I think it makes the most sense (depending on the version of consequentialism) out of all the moral theories.
Why do I have the right to force this on you? Well *I* don't, but the society you're participating sort of does...
antybu86 6 months ago 7
@MrCalhounr1 I think plagiarism is wrong because I wouldn't want to someone to pass off my work as their own.
CHamlin86 3 months ago
Comment removed
dkayc5missy 6 months ago
I don't see a problem. If there is no god, no absolute right or wrong; how would an act like plagiarism be wrong. You're trying to place a standard of Christian behavior on someone. You have no right to tell someone to live up to standards when you reject the foundation of those standards.
MrCalhounr1 6 months ago
@MrCalhounr1 The bible isn't the only foundation for morals. It's called being a rational human being. The number of christians that do heinous things is equal to or greater than the number of atheists. You're a fucking idiot dude it's people like you that christianity was made for because if you didn't have an invisible man threatening to burn you you would be out raping people and killing their mothers. I'm glad we have fantasy to keep you idiots in line. As for me I have MY OWN morals.
Jonnythecowboy666 6 months ago 2
@MrCalhounr1 sorry, but a 2000 y/o religion does not have ownership on morality.
atheistcommonsense 4 months ago 2
this kind of intellectual ownership fighting is tiresome and meaningless
TheMindsmack 7 months ago
materialists and madmen never have doubts.
That is the greatest thing i have ever heard a religious person say .
Most religious people have no doubt that god exsists so that makes them madmen.
HE owned himself and didnt even know it.
australianews 7 months ago in playlist Intellectual Dishonesty on YT
There are no limits to making shit up.
panterguy 7 months ago 2
I like how brock equates atheism with deconstructionism, like what does that stupid story have to do with atheism anyway? Atheists are free to see the order and structure of the universe, we just don't presume to know it came from a god.
Staunts 8 months ago
a materialist has a mind that is locked up? sorry but to that i say....bwahahahahahaha
osityan 10 months ago
A theist who is dishonest in proving that the highly improbable is true? Say it ain't so.
jd52wtf 10 months ago 2
He deleted the video, lol
grendelee 10 months ago
this is really interesting. Obviously, this guy is trying to sound smarter than he really is.
bdhcarbon 11 months ago 16
@bdhcarbon If he really wanted to sound smart, he'd switch sides.
GoblinXXX 10 months ago
I don't care whether this guy uses other peoples stuff or not. The only thing that matters is that it is a bunch of crap!! I'll plagiarize all day. Once the words are out there they are fair game as far as I'm concerned. He's just guilty of picking the wrong ones.
mma171 11 months ago
@mma171 Exactly dude. People stopped caring about plaigerism after the invention of cut and paste (well, maybe less so when your making an actual video and quoting it, but still), the guy uses a bunch of meaningless sound bytes and buzz words which have neither substance nor combined meaning.
'Performing real world actions which achieve real world reactions simply detract from the time you can spend praying to a make belief space man! Duh, winning!'
TheJamesrocket 9 months ago
@TheJamesrocket That's shit's not gonna fly in academia. Try that on at university (especially at the higher levels) and you'll get your arse kicked out, and rightly so!
FantasmaBAnco 8 months ago
@FantasmaBAnco Who said anything about applying this to scholastics?
As I said, on the internet, cutting and pasting is so quick and easy, trying to demonise it would be impossible. Everybody does it.
TheJamesrocket 8 months ago
lol his name is Brock Loli AKA CHRISTIAN PEDOPHILE
Psycatalyst 11 months ago
I see why he plagiarizes. When he veers from his script, this occurs:
...white scaffolding that was all mixed up (Could someone explain to me what this means?)
...second double take (Redundant.. or inaccurate. The first double take would be the double take, so would second double take be a third take?)
...Christian theist (also redundant)
Overall, the original eloquence of the works from which he copied is lost when he edits it.
ArcasDevlin 11 months ago
I've observed about one christian repeater for every ten atheist repeaters on youtube. Even the format of your video which is "exposing a christian's plagarism," is old, and tired, and not your own idea. Oh the irony.
Vlaxitov 11 months ago
@Vlaxitov
It was Aurde Lorde who said, "There are no new ideas." Everything now is taking old ideas and making them your own. That is creativity. I may speak the same idea as someone else, but I speak it in my own words. AA does not do that. He copies words from other, very particular phrases that sound eloquent to him, and adjusts them slightly.
I don't think Antybu is here to entertain, either. He's exposing this guy. I don't care if his video format is "creative".
Watch the whole series.
ArcasDevlin 11 months ago
@ArcasDevlin I'll say again, I've observed about one christian doing exactly what AA does for every ten atheists that do the exact same thing. Thats because like so many other religion obsessed atheists, antyfu is also obsessed with this guy. How many videos has he made about him? How many hours has he spent carefully listening and researching what he says? It really isn't about giving the proper person credit rather than discrediting the original quote by whatever means possible.
Vlaxitov 11 months ago
@Vlaxitov
And yet, it brought attention to the fact that this individual is a plagiarist, so it accomplished what it apparently set out to do quite nicely. It gave the real writers credit, and probably directed many people to their work.
AA was selling shirts, shirts with plagiarized images. I haven't seen anything for sale from Antybu. Have you?
You can say you've "observed" this from Atheists 10x as often. Care to point me toward some proof? Because I, personally, haven't.
ArcasDevlin 11 months ago
@ArcasDevlin I don't follow AA so I don't know about the shirts. I don't like AA's style, its judgemental and fear driven. I've watched a couple of antybu's videos. I've agreed with him before but never walk away enlightened. For the record, I'm not atheist. I also don't obsess about atheists or theists I disagree with. Craig is probably the only apolgetics guy I can listen to though I don't believe in apologetics. I'm a firm believer in dusting the boots off and have nothing to apologize for.
Vlaxitov 11 months ago
@ArcasDevlin You don't have proof? What you don't have is a large team of people scrutinizing your own camp you clearly consider yourself party to. I would play this game If I thought it was important or could be bothered with it at all. Lets just say in simple that if I hear another youtube narcissist throw out catch phrases like "begs the question," I think I'll puke in my suite. One has success with something and everyone lines up to get on it. Its really quite plain to see. Again, take care
Vlaxitov 11 months ago
@Vlaxitov
I, personally, have not seen atheists do this any more than theists. The only difference I have noticed is that theist don't have anything to support their claims.
I enjoy watching his videos. He enjoys making them. Somehow, I don't see an issue there.
I do see an issue with what Christianity has done to the world. Good job for the atheists standing up to it. Wanting to teach my kids creationism? If they stop interfering with others' lives, I wouldn't mind leaving them be.
ArcasDevlin 11 months ago
@ArcasDevlin What Christianity has done to the world? Know what I see? I see what people have done to the world for better and worse. You're straying off the subject into a typical anti religious rant btw. Not to mention, I just got done telling you that I firmly believe in letting people believe what they want.
You have as much right to not have your children influenced with other world views as much as you're willing to return the favor. I don't know, you don't seem that willing.
Vlaxitov 11 months ago
@Vlaxitov
As for the time wasted researching, all he had to do was type some curious phrases into a search provider. He was then reading not about AA but about various theological topics, which is entertaining. Whenever someone makes an exceptional claim, I do the same. Usually, I end up learning something... and if that guy was lying, I would make it known, because we have enough "Believe the first thing you hear" idiots.
ArcasDevlin 11 months ago
@ArcasDevlin Making these videos takes alot of time. The kind of time that someone would have to find it really really important. As far as checking to see if someones claim is their own original, that makes sense. If you can uncover that it was someone elses claim originally it dismisses the claim all together right? Thats usually the agenda in doing so.
Vlaxitov 11 months ago
@ArcasDevlin "I used to think that brock lawley was a wordsmith of sorts,"
If you're actually honest with yourself do you really think that statement is true? Of course its not. This guy hates AA with a passion, probably has since the first video he's seen of his. That statement's purpose was to add drama to this video, to entertain. AA and antyfu have an agenda and entertainment is the only way to sell that agenda here. Take care.
Vlaxitov 11 months ago
Great expose', good research; very well done. It is truly sad to see that AA did not give proper credit to the originators of the quotes, and ironic considering his complaint against evolutionists... however, that doesn't change the truth of the quotes. If you steal an apple from an apple tree, and try to sell it standing in front of an orange tree, it's still an apple. It is also truly sad that you could read all that G.K. Chesterton in your research and not be enlightened by it. :(
DiJohnny18 1 year ago
LOL, wow I watched this video with my jaw on the floor. What a complete charlatan this guy is.
MrTruthAddict 1 year ago
I see the coward took down the videos...
Pathetic really.
Zentz29 1 year ago
As a Christian, this is disappointing to see.
robotwookie 1 year ago
Why am I not surprised when a censorious Christian plagiarizes someone? If you expect anything less from an apologist, you're not listening to the true message that apologists are expected to internalize. They are trying to assimilate everything into a "Christian" worldview. In other words, that's what they are as an institution. It is an act that comprises their entire identity. The mysticism is a cover; always, there are no exceptions, except in the untutored apologist.
kern0099 1 year ago
Man, this video gives me nostalgia for old-school YouTube, with the 5 star ratings . . .
Awesome takedown. As I said, I'm late to all this, but my next video might amuse you . . . it quotes Antony Flew on his beliefs and how they actually oppose those of Brock even though he tries to appropriate Flew's conversion to deism for his own ends.
I'll let you know :)
Th1sWasATriumph 1 year ago
GREAT ONE BRO, LOVE IT. You just proved brocks parroting skills. NO thinking just repeating. Im glad you exposed him. great job, bro. thanks man.
jrev37 1 year ago
This would be a better video if you actually addressed the content of the videos instead of plagarism. Yes, he should have cited his sources. Email him. Most Christian authors don't care about people quoting them, nor mentioning their name, but I think we should sometimes. Christian authors like Lane Craig,Ken ham, Ravi, Greg Koukl, Matt Slick, arent going to go after you, they write specifically for other Christians to defend their faith.
Creationcreed 1 year ago
Now we see also why his ramblings sound incoherent at times and just plain fake. He's acting a script he created by plagiarizing other writers' works. Sweet. I like to refer to him as the Intelligence Antidote.
TruthSurge 1 year ago
Now, imagine Brock as a church father or Christian 1900 years back. He could take the book of Mark (gospel) and rewrite it and pass HIS version on and only those who got his would think he was a great author and his was the best and authoritative. No one would have been able to know any differently. And interestingly, that's exactly what happened back then. The gospel of Matthew is that work. Luke then did it using Mark and Matthew and Josephus' writings. Thank god for databases.
TruthSurge 1 year ago
"They never have any doubts".
Euh...those people are the DEFINITION of doubt.
Londron 1 year ago
Someone just showed me this vid. I had no idea. I left this comment on his most recent vid:
i just unsubbed from you. I find it disgusting that you take, verbatim, someone elses words and pass them off as your own. Most of us that do videos will put our OWN words and our OWN thoughts out there and we struggle to make a coherent video. We outline, we script, we edit. We look dumb (if we're lucky) and we take the criticism. YOU rip others off and add a little drama. I'm sure you'll ignore this
lambchopxoxo 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@lambchopxoxo (cont) but you just gave people something else to hold against christianity. Good job jerk.
lambchopxoxo 1 year ago
I seem to recall something about not stealing being in that so called god-given, objective morality.
stevehayes13 1 year ago
Could he be any more intellectually dishonest? He keeps throwing around unrelated terms, and misrepresenting all of them.
dookiecheez 1 year ago
lol, you do know....this is how conservative brain functions at lease in the US. Its all about repeating everything they read and heard with little intellectual examination....just listen to Glen Beck. He always whine how people are wrong to call him ignorant idiot because he READS a lot more than avrg person. What he fails to comprehend is reading does not learning or thinking through your believe.
KwenHuda2010 1 year ago
@KwenHuda2010 Actually reading, and being informed on an issue is basically the opposite of ignorance. Way to fail at understanding what he said. Now being an revolutionary or visionary, while just repeating words (of wisdom), he is not.
Psychodegu 1 year ago
he sounds abit like george bush
mastaODI56 1 year ago
This is the cat and the mouse intellectual mind games,while the atheist antidote uses lines from a book and repeat them in front of a video camara, is no difference when ThunderfEEt do it,or Factsvsreligion,or any users,even news channels do that, but the true name of the game according to this video is 'I can and you can't cause i own freedom,and i did not grant you the privilege to speak'. It is a shame that most of this videos do not offer an intellectual argument on the subject.
breedofthe45 1 year ago
@breedofthe45 "...while the atheist antidote uses lines from a book and repeat them in front of a video camara, is no difference when ThunderfEEt do it,or Factsvsreligion"
And you have proof of that, right? Let's face it, the only people stupid enough to plagiarize like Brock and expect not to be caught are religious freaks like you.
mirekk1977 1 year ago
@mirekk1977 ..Funny, in some peoples minds they belive that the way to be right is to insult others, no response to the subject, just insults, intellectual bankruptcy that is nothing but pet names, label a human bieng into 'freaks' or 'bigots' or 'delusional' a whole psychiatric evaluation with no PHD in psychiatry or in any field that deals with human psychology, they try their best to convince you that something is wrong with you, but no answer to the subject whatsoever.
breedofthe45 1 year ago
@breedofthe45 "Funny, in some peoples minds they belive that the way to be right is to insult others, no response to the subject,"
Where is your proof that TF or FvsR plagiarized other people's material like Brock did?
mirekk1977 1 year ago
@mirekk1977 ..........*****Funny, in some peoples minds they belive that the way to be right is to insult others, no response to the subject,"****
*****Note*****
No Insults or Religious reference in my comment, but i still got insulted by you:
***And you have proof of that, right? Let's face it, the only people stupid enough to plagiarize like Brock and expect not to be caught are religious freaks like you**
But you still want an answer like you deserve respect after your stupid rant?
breedofthe45 1 year ago
@breedofthe45 So I guess you pulled it out of your ass that TF and FvsR plagiarize and now pretend that you are offended.
C'mon give me proof.
mirekk1977 1 year ago
@mirekk1977 In some Ironic twist and obvious way of radical fundamentalists by indoctrination they invite people not to think, but to indoctrinate their followers with the same intolerance.Just like any radical fundamentalist religious views,The new atheists do the same as there is only one way, and that is their way.And one either speaks like them, looks like them, acts like them and thinks like them or one is relegated to a lower moral plane.This is a useless conversation.
breedofthe45 1 year ago
@breedofthe45 You accused those two users of plagiarism similar to Brock's.
Please provide proof.
mirekk1977 1 year ago
@mirekk1977 ..like a neutered dog you still don't get it do you?
You actually belive i was born yesterday?
Don't matter if i give you an ocean of eveidence it will still be irrelevant.
Why would it be irrelevant you ask?
Because you are not going to accept it or discuss it.All you gonna do is throw out empty insulting cliches just to delight your followers with a school-boyish putdowns.It is irrelevant what i say.Either way the response is gonna be the same,some sort of a pet name callin.
breedofthe45 1 year ago
@breedofthe45 "Don't matter if i give you an ocean of eveidence it will still be irrelevant."
Give me 1 (one) example when TF of FvsR plagiarized books or articles like Brock did.
Give me ONE example please.
mirekk1977 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mirekk1977********* Why would it be irrelevant you ask?*********************
Because you are not going to accept it or discuss it.All you gonna do is throw out empty insulting cliches just to delight your followers with a school-boyish putdowns.It is irrelevant what i say.Either way the response is gonna be the same,some sort of a pet name callin.
I think i was very clear in my last comment.
breedofthe45 1 year ago
@breedofthe45 "while the atheist antidote uses lines from a book and repeat them in front of a video camara, is no difference when ThunderfEEt do it,or Factsvsreligion,or any users"
See, only dumb theist (like Brock) would use other people work as a script and expect not to be caught.
You basically did the same by accusing TF and FvsR of similar plagiarism with no facts to back it up, and expected that nobody will call you out on that.
If those are not the examples of being dumb...
mirekk1977 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mirekk1977 *****See, only dumb theist (like Brock) would use other people work as a script and expect not to be caught*****
I think you are repeating what i just put in my comments,not once but everytime you respond to my comments...And like you said "You basically did the same by accusing TF and FvsR of similar plagiarism with no facts to back it up, and expected that nobody will call you out on that"
I guess is no plagiarism when you do it right?
breedofthe45 1 year ago
@breedofthe45 "I think you are repeating what i just put in my comments,not once but everytime you respond to my comments"
Are you retarded or something... I was quoting you, so you know to what I'm responding.
See the "..." signs? How is that plagiarism?
mirekk1977 1 year ago
@mirekk1977 ..keep cursing me out?... good luck talking to a wall.
breedofthe45 1 year ago
@breedofthe45 "I guess is no plagiarism when you do it right?"
Once again, provide evidence that TF or FvsR use other people work as a script (very thing that Brock did)
mirekk1977 1 year ago
@breedofthe45 "Just like any radical fundamentalist religious views,The new atheists do the same as there is only one way, and that is their way.And one either speaks like them, looks like them, acts like them and thinks like them or one is relegated to a lower moral plane."
This is ridiculous. There are no common bonding elements between atheists as there are with religious people, such as dogma, doctrine, and ritual. Reason and logic are enough, Are you aware of your own projection?
NormDePlume69 1 year ago
@NormDePlume69 The greatest danger that besets us does not come from believers or atheists; it comes from those who, under the guise of religion, science or reason, imagine that we can free ourselves from the limitations of human nature. Those who insist we are morally advancing as a species are deluding themselves. That is what we have become. We’ve moved from a print-based culture to an image-based culture, one responds emotionally, not intellectually. That is precisely what’s happening.
breedofthe45 1 year ago
@NormDePlume69 The new atheists are intellectually bankrupt. They have nothing to offer in terms of serious moral, theological or even scientific debate. They are very much a product of the television age, school-boyish putdowns and insults that only a tourette's syndrome patient can deliver.They celebrate their own ignorance. The kinds of things they write about religion are religiously illiterate. I am very disturbed by the racist cant that they have unleashed toward the christian world only.
breedofthe45 1 year ago
@breedofthe45
"Intellectually bankrupt", "nothing to offer in terms of serious moral, theological or even scientific debate", "ignorance", "religiously illiterate". You certainly like to generalise don't you. I strongly suggest you take a look at this: watch?v=b2Vxuaga_pA "Atheists Excel in Religious Knowledge".
freetheworldof 1 year ago
@breedofthe45
"Racist cant that they have unleashed toward the christian world only"? 1. Atheism is a rejection of the belief in god/gods, nothing whatsoever to do with race. 2.Did I miss something? I wasn't aware that christianity was a race. 3. We object to all religions, not just christianity. Please get your facts right before posting such comments.
freetheworldof 1 year ago
@freetheworldof
1.Atheism is the rejection of the belief in god/s, nothing to do with science.
2.Yep ,you indeed miss something, Homosexualism is not a race also, but you people act like it is, therefore, Racism is prejudice and DISCRIMINATION based on race, DISCRIMINATION is the treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit.
breedofthe45 1 year ago
@breedofthe45 "Nothing to do with science" who said anything about science?
WTF "Homosexualism is not a race also, but you people act like it is". We are the people who recognise that homosexuals are human beings, with the same rights as everyone else. We are the people who are not discriminating, we actually defend other peoples human rights. You & your religion are the ones who are guilty of discrimination!
freetheworldof 1 year ago
@freetheworldof WTF "Homosexualism is not a race also, but you people act like it is". We are the people who recognise that homosexuals are human beings, with the same rights as everyone else. We are the people who are not discriminating, we actually defend other peoples human rights."
DESCRIMINATION is the subject, therefore, don't matter who is the person or individual who is protected, the rights for a human bieng is for all, not for the ones you cherry pick, that includes religious rights.
breedofthe45 1 year ago
@breedofthe45 Try reading my comment in its entirety (there are two parts).
freetheworldof 1 year ago
@freetheworldof I love it when christians have no idea about what values they as a group stand for and what views their group holds. And it is fun to educate them how these views have changed throughout history.
I like your responses here on this video, keep up the good work :)
N3CR1S 1 year ago
@N3CR1S Thanks for the compliment. I must say, I am constantly astounded that I still have an intact keyboard at the end of each day. I get a little heavy handed with the keys at times, when 'debating' with some of these people.
freetheworldof 1 year ago
@breedofthe45 We do not discriminate against 'religious' people. We are simply debating the topic of religion, that is not discrimination. Yes, we will voice our opinion strongly when it comes to the harm that religion causes, it would be immoral for anyone not to object.
I notice that you did not respond to my comment regarding "Atheists Excel in Religious Knowledge".
freetheworldof 1 year ago
@freetheworldof ..Your claim was that Christianity is not a race, therefore is not descrimination against them. I used the term of Homosexuality as an example to show you that racism towards a group of individuals is racist since the word racists means prejudice and DESCRIMINATION, therefore get your facts right before you do more comments.
breedofthe45 1 year ago
@breedofthe45 It is you who has the facts wrong. The accepted definition of race is: "race describes genetically divergent populations of humans that can be marked by common phenotypic and genotypic traits". This does not & cannot include homosexuals or people of religion.
freetheworldof 1 year ago
@freetheworldof ,,ohh gosh, i used the term racist in a DISCRIMINATION(i used an [e] instead of an [i] in my other comments, i can't remember why and i apologize for that) way, i think the comment was well writen, either way, i used the word to show my dislike of the propaganda used to discriminate against christians, but christophobia is getting a little bit absurd, we need to be fair, these videos are like a secular form of Fox News ..fair and balance my ass..
needs to be said.
breedofthe45 1 year ago
@breedofthe45 I can certainly agree with you on that. I am all for debating, providing it is done in a courteous manner. Some of these videos are over the top (to say the least). I can be very passionate when it comes to the harm that religion is causing, but hope that I can remain courteous whilst debating.
freetheworldof 1 year ago
@freetheworldof It is nothing wrong with a debate, i seen videos where Richard Dawkins or Christopher Hitchens are invited to Christian Centers to have a debate, and they treat him with respect, at the end of the debate everybody shake hands and go home. There is cartoons of Jesus in South Park and Family Guy, i never heard of death threats done by a bunch of christians to banned the cartoon, my point is, christians are bitchin about a lot of things, but who among us does not?..lets be fair.
breedofthe45 1 year ago
@breedofthe45 In addition, a person can be discriminated against for many reasons other than race. Someone could say (I don't), that they discriminate against catholics all over the world. You could in no way say this is racist, since this would mean that you would be racist against a significent number of people throughout the world. This of course is absurd.
freetheworldof 1 year ago
@freetheworldof Charles Bradlaugh, in 1876, proposed that atheism does not assert "there is no God," and by doing so he diluted the traditional definition of atheism. Since 1979, many atheists have followed Bradlaugh's thinking further and stated that atheism is merely a lack of belief in any god. The motive for such a shift in meaning appears to be to an attempt to shift the burden of proof regarding the existence of God to the theism side.
breedofthe45 1 year ago
@breedofthe45 Your quote from Charles Bradlaugh (The Freethinker's Text-Book) has no relevance regarding the burden of proof. The burden of proof has always & will always rest with the person making the claim. For example: creationists are always shouting "where is the evidence for evolution, show us the evidence, prove it!". If I told you I could perform the very same miracles described in the bible, you would not say to me "I will show that you can't", you would say "prove it!."
freetheworldof 1 year ago
@freetheworldof Call it whatever you want, i used Charles Bradlaugh since most of you atheists used the word 'Atheist' as a badge, like a police man, like the word gives you the right to do whatever you want,say whatever you want and not to be question, like atheism is perfection in every way, immune to tell lies, You people can redifine the word 'atheist' all day long, but that kind of attitude is the same as those extreme christians, you offer the same disease in a secular form.
breedofthe45 1 year ago
@breedofthe45 No one is redefining the word atheism.
Atheism cannot be perfection, since it is not a claim - it is simply as I said, the rejection of belief in a god/gods. Yes SOME athiests are exactly as you said (& I do not count myself among those). However, EVERY religious person I have ever met & seen are exactly the way you described some atheists.
freetheworldof 1 year ago
Is there anyone who's surprised that people like TAA, do this on a regular basis.
He's a typical christian hypocrite.
Blacksmith1964 1 year ago
JAjaja...DECONSTRUCTIVISM as atheism. That is interesting.
Deconstructivism has existed since the 1980`s, and it has never, to my knowledge, made any religious statement. It does have a philosophical root and backround, but not atheism in its core. The absurdity of stablishment, maybe religion included, is in my opinion, what motivates this architectural movement.
Just saying.
janover73 1 year ago
Thanks for all your work putting this video together.
agentssith 1 year ago
Okay, so you have doubts about Christianity, but you said you cannot be a Christian if you don't believe, having doubts implies that you don't fully believe it.
Jonstern1983 1 year ago
Congratulations, you just handed him his ass!! Something was always not quite right with Antidote guy, and you've exposed him! You should've ended with "you take it to the bank!" He, he....
ekorre33 1 year ago
Wow. Whether the guy plagiarizes or not, what he says just doesn't make a whole lot of sense. The dogma is astounding. I'm so glad I never got tangled up in religion. It never ceases to amaze me the sheer volume of stories and faulty justifications have been amassed in an attempt to legitimize creationist claims. It's so much easier to just see things as they are. No need to make shit up.
JamesMorlan 1 year ago
I got sick of hearing AA's voice. It must have been excruciating having to watch all those vids
jbradshaw1 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I can only sit back and marvel at atheists, such as yourself, who go to great lengths in bashing the messenger rather than the message. I can make a similar video of "plagiarized ideas,articles and quotes" word for word from the 1000 atheists we have here on YouTube and I'm certain it will be votbotted and atheists will feist and whine.
charliesplinter 1 year ago
@charliesplinter I can only sit back and marvel at people like yourself who allow their "brothers in Christ" to lie and steal without remorse.
antybu86 1 year ago 37
@antybu86
I'm not endorsing what TAA did. I'm just saying atheists also do the same and I'm going to make a video and post it back here as response. Fair enough?
charliesplinter 1 year ago
@charliesplinter Yes, I'd love for you to do a video. I hope you've watched all 5 parts of this series, so that you can find an atheist who has plagiarized to the extend that Brock has.
antybu86 1 year ago 18
@antybu86 and 4 months later.... the sound of silence.......
TruthSurge 1 year ago
@TruthSurge "and 4 months later...." ... I take it he never actually made the video he said he would? One would think that it would make for a better argument for someone to say "and X said Y about this, while Z said B about that", annotate and document, backing up your argument with something more than just your own thoughts and words ... plagiarism takes that and suggests that just your own words are good enough, you don't need to include other people's ideas.
Alitari 1 year ago
@Alitari I saw no response vid here so one has to assume he never made it. For why would he make it and not post here?
Yeah, sometimes you use an idea or theme, rewrite in your OWN words and don't give credit. That happens a lot on YT. People read an article and then do a vid talking about it. Not a big deal really. It isn't a science paper. BUT, what Brock did is simply sleazy and despicable. It was basically lying to make his viewers think he was such a wordsmith. hahaha
TruthSurge 1 year ago
@Alitari I just uploaded a vid using Brock as one person in it if you are interested. it's at /watch?v=SADKwEzY7pA your vid here inspired me to put him in!
TruthSurge 1 year ago
@TruthSurge "I just uploaded a vid using Brock as one person in it if you are interested." ... awesome video, very nicely done.
Alitari 1 year ago
@Alitari thank ya!
TruthSurge 1 year ago
that guy only wants to sound intelligent, by relying on the works of others. He certainly doesn't have an "antidote" to anything, but he does have the cause of many delusions.... faith.
IntelligentProbe 1 year ago
@charliesplinter "Fair enough?" where's the video?
BillKiernan 1 year ago
@charliesplinter Of course you never did a video typical
NathanWubs 1 year ago
@NathanWubs
What makes you think im not going to still do it? Ive been busy and dont spend my time on the internet 24/7 okay?
charliesplinter 1 year ago
@charliesplinter Pepe Reina Mistake - Argentina Spain 3-0 -Tevez Goal 7/9/2010
19,010 views - 1 month ago
NathanWubs 1 year ago
@NathanWubs
What?
charliesplinter 1 year ago
@charliesplinter Imagine my suprise to see after checking your profile that as expected you did no such thing even though you have had 4 months since you said you would make this video..bless. Actually following through for your religion was just a bit too much work I take it?
ChrissyChiChi 1 year ago
@ChrissyChiChi
Following through for my religion? Please re-read my comment. I am not defending what Brock Lawley did.
charliesplinter 1 year ago
@charliesplinter Perhaps you should reread your own comment? ''im not endorsing what TAA did. I'm just saying atheists also do the same and I'm going to make a video and post it back here as response. '' Then read your first comment (too long to copy paste)then reread my original response, then feel like an idiot :).
ChrissyChiChi 1 year ago
@ChrissyChiChi
*Yawn*
charliesplinter 1 year ago
@charliesplinter Pretty much the response I was expecting from someone who mysteriously has not made a response he vowed to do 4 months ago when attempting to defend his religion (or attack atheists, your call), im sure Jesus wont see it as a sign that you only make a stand and follow through for your religion when it does not take any actual work or effort on your part :).
ChrissyChiChi 1 year ago
@ChrissyChiChi
You know, I'm looking at my comments and they're very much lacking of the words "Jesus" and "God" you're trying to turn this into a theological debate which I am *not*, I repeat *not*, willing to indulge myself in. So I pass.
"he vowed to do 4 months ago "
LOL @ vowed. Yes it's been 4 months. I know. I didn't mention a specific date nor a time now did I?
"when attempting to defend his religion"
What? Huh?
charliesplinter 1 year ago
@charliesplinter A comment does not have to contain the words jesus or god to be religious in nature, obvious distaste towards atheists is shown in your comments and thats a pretty standard symptom of Christianity, or have I misjudged you? This is further hammered in as you claim atheists go to great lengths to bash the messenger of such videos rather than the message (seeing as the message in this case is highly Christian), its also a somewhat ridiculous point given the armies of videos out
ChrissyChiChi 1 year ago
@ChrissyChiChi
"obvious distaste towards atheists is shown in your comments and thats a pretty standard symptom of Christianity,"
Hahaha.
You: "atheists go to great lengths to bash the messenger"
Me: "atheists we have here on YouTube"
charliesplinter 1 year ago
@charliesplinter there adressing these exact points made by Christians, you can hardly say that the message is not adressed. Furthermore I think in cases such as Brock it certainly is important to look at the character of the person making the points, seeing as Brock endlessly likes to hammer in his view that he due to his Christian beliefs is morally far superior to nasty atheists it is very relevant to note that he is a liar and a theif. If you have not done so already I advise watching the
ChrissyChiChi 1 year ago
@charliesplinter final part of this series where brock is exposed for attempting to sell and profit off work which is not his, that is STEALING and im fairly sure is something considered immoral even by his religion..it is thus VERY relevant as the person in these cases is very much a key part of the message.
You then end by implying that even though it has been 4 months you had not forgotten about your original statement and do intend on following it up. (if you disagree just reread what you
ChrissyChiChi 1 year ago
@charliesplinter typed there, ill remind you 'Yes it's been 4 months. I know. I didn't mention a specific date nor a time now did I?' That is some pretty heavy implication there, and im afraid i dont believe for a second that it is the truth. It seems considerably more likely that you never really intended on doing so and merely threw out that sentence as a form of idle posturing..am I wrong? Think hard before you answer, Jesus does not like lying..dont make him sad :p.
ChrissyChiChi 1 year ago
@ChrissyChiChi
" It seems considerably more likely that you never really intended on doing so"
Wow what a waste of my time you have been. You should have saved yourself all the trouble.
And for the final time, making or not making this video isn't "following through for my religion" or "helping Brock" whatever you're trying to turn this little rant of yours to be.
charliesplinter 1 year ago
@charliesplinter ..reread my comments, im not sure if you are intentionally misunderstanding my points or not but it seems very likely. Either adress them honestly or move along, that shtick gets old and predictable fast.
ChrissyChiChi 1 year ago
@ChrissyChiChi
I'm actually done replying to you.
charliesplinter 1 year ago
@charliesplinter So you chose move along? Fair enough, maybe think before making such ridiculous comments in future next time then.
ChrissyChiChi 1 year ago
@ChrissyChiChi
I don't get what your problem is. I said I would make the video and it's been 4 months. Look at this entire series and see the months between each part. Part 3 was made in August 09, Part 4 December 09. So swallow up your pride and be patient.
Don't bother replying cause I won't bother reading.
charliesplinter 1 year ago
@charliesplinter I made my problem perfectly clear in previous comments you went out of your way to avoid adressing, im not going to repeat it again. What you are trying to do here is pretty obvious and I dont think anyone is fooling for it.
'''I'm actually done replying to you.'''
What a suprise you were not being truthfull when you said that last time either. (shakes head) Although im sure you wont admit it here I hope you learned something about not posting mindless comments in future :).
ChrissyChiChi 1 year ago
@charliesplinter I'm still waiting...is it done yet? You claimed you weren't condoning it, but it sure sounded like an "everyone's doing it" defense...without the proof, of course.
BTW..the message was bad also. There are plenty of videos about the "content". But this one was about the thievery. There's a logical fallacy in your assumption that since this is about the specific words, atheists don't hear the message.
rrpostalagain 1 year ago
@charliesplinter Did you make the video I'd like to watch it. Did TAA ever reply
estragon9 1 year ago
@charliesplinter Hypocrisy is hypocrisy...
Escape2SagaCity 1 year ago
@charliesplinter
Usually, we blast the message. The problem is when the messenger is such a stuck up ass like Brock, it's hard not to want to digitally smack in the nuts.
VigilanteNighthawk 1 year ago
@charliesplinter How is your video coming along finding an atheist who plagarizes as much as Brock (aka TheAtheistAntidote)?
MrJmm999 1 year ago
@charliesplinter Well why don't you get cracking then.
slicingwater 1 year ago
nice burn
this guy has proven to not have even a basic college education.
atheistkyo 1 year ago
Brock is a slug. If you're gonna use someone's work at least have the balls to give them proper credit and acknowledgment.
TheHomelessCripple 1 year ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
HAHHAHA, typcial athiest resorting to ad hominen attacks on people who disprove and challenge the athiest religion. I hope your proud of yourself antybu86. You couldn't refute the content, so you come up with this plagiarist crap.
TypicalRepublican 1 year ago
@TypicalRepublican The content has already been refuted, and in many cases, it's been refuted *decades* ago. But I understand that you're not impressed by this video - by this point, I'm sure you're immune to hypocritical Christians.
antybu86 1 year ago 25
@antybu86 It's not an ad hominem. If it was said that because he steals large portions of his text, none of his points have any merit, then that would be an ad hominem. But this video simply was pointing out some evidence. It could be argued that your post is more of a true ad hominem than this video. At least equally as much of one. It's certainly a fallacy to assume that because this post doesn't deal with the content, none do.
rrpostalagain 1 year ago
@TypicalRepublican "HAHHAHA, typcial athiest resorting to ad hominen attacks" look up "ad hominem." i know it's popular to use that term nowadays, but you obviously have no idea what it means. hint: it doesn't mean criticising someone for being a plagiarism.
BillKiernan 1 year ago
what is a difrence betvene atheist materialist and religius. give evidence to an atheist and he belives you, bring evidence to the religius and he hates you for it.
gooddarkjedi 1 year ago 3
whooo fuuucking carrrreeessss
pepsican84 1 year ago
its even funnier because Christianity is known for plagiarizing Pagans
dun dun dun
Mokenofrs 1 year ago 6
The words of Chesterton do not deserve to be in his mouth...
Though I did notice something about a comment by antybu86 that deserves mentioning.
"Seeing as he lies and steals, it does have a direct effect on his arguments about morality." ad hominem fail to the maximum!
ZackTheProtestant 1 year ago
@ZackTheProtestant From wiki "The argumentum ad hominem is not always fallacious, for in some instances questions of personal conduct, character, motives, etc., are legitimate and relevant to the issue.[3]"
jayfunk13 1 year ago
And relevant to that particular topic it was fallacious.(the moral argument)
Not only that but a straw-man should probably also have been charged.
ZackTheProtestant 1 year ago
What does Brock have to say for himself? Not much, since his channel has been deleted. But don't worry, he's got a second channel where he can play the victim. Poor Brock, got his channel deleted just for stealing other's work. Boo fucking hoo.
atimnie 1 year ago 2
So not only is he a moron, but a criminal.
Grospoliner 1 year ago 3
i don't know too much about this brock lawley chap (he seems a bit unbearable based on the few videos i looked at) but I must dig out a bit of GK Chesterton again, the man had some pretty righteous things to say about spirituality....
arklowrockz 1 year ago
Best video ever
yuothineyesasian 1 year ago
Shit, accidentally rated three stars
redlion7277 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I agree that AA should of give credit where it is due. It is apparent that AA reads a lot. The biggest problem for AA is that it allows his neigh-sayers to redirect the discussion away from the point. They run yelling and pointing their fingers... "PLAGIARIST!!" allowing them to burn the straw man instead of arguing the point he brings.
shawno66 1 year ago
You mean the point that other people bring...
NusquamNihil 1 year ago 8
yes thank you
shawno66 1 year ago
@shawno66
The fact that he does not give credit to his sources undermines any point he may be trying to make. He has presented other people's thoughts and ideas as his own creations, essentially perpetrating a lie.
The fact that he has done this REPEATEDLY and been called on it is very telling. This is not the sort of person one would want supporting their cause, be it religion or anything else. Sadly, he is not the only one doing so in the name of his faith.
MikeTaylorLives 1 year ago
Points? What Points? I've watched a fair number of his videos and can honestly say that I am a little more dumb for it.
TylerBoBylerFyler 1 year ago
Maybe... maybe its a staggering coincidence.
paulbottomley42 1 year ago
Did he claim to have invented these ideas or is he just repeating what he has read? If we must give reference for every statement we would have nothing but references. looks like atheists using mudslinging and attacking the messenger and not the message.
Cennedi 1 year ago
Cennedi, a few things:
1) Yes, Brock did take credit for other people's work. As you can see in this video he made statements like "I recently realized that [insert plagiarized work here]." And when people compl