"Actually..." Ep. 18

[Emilydogcat]

God created all life. He created space. He created all matter.

[akg41470]

How is it that you know this?

[bigbowser101]

@Emilydogcat do you have a piece of god that you would like to share with us? Irrefutable proof would be lovely.

[Conservmom]

@Emilydogcat "For by him (JESUS CHRIST) all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him." Colossians 1:16...for understanding physics and the Bible google or you tube Chuck Missler physics. He is one of the most informative scholars of our time! Answers in Genesis also does a great job with apologetics and creationism. One day every knee will bow to Jesus, Creator God!

[akg41470]

@Conservmom Now you're just being silly.

[Liftinglinguist]

The only thing the creationist in this video accomplished was admitting before the camera that his entire prime tenet(The Bible) is based upon ring arguments... Good job there, buddy.

akg rules, as usual. ;-)

[Censeo]

If we destroyed all but single celled organisms here on earth, the probability of an identic course of evolution coming to be once again might be 1 in 10^26. Though that math is done in retrospect as of now, and we're not saying it can be duplicated. It is not of importance to estimate the chances of getting a particular combination from 30 billion dices that has occurred cause the probability in retrospect of that combination is 1 in 1. Duplicating that combo might be hard though.

[ctastrophe]

WTF is a level of impossibility? Moron...

[Boerni1983]

thank you so much for this series. It always makes me sad when I see people spreading creationist bullshit and on the other side people who believe it.

[englishballerco]

in relation to space because what we see is our present while in actually what we see has already occured so are we witnessing history of that area or viewing present events for us. in relation to the explained thing so say wecan't test the supernatural? With science improving can't we look forward to test supernatural in the future

[akg41470]

re: "history of that area" - so ok, nobody was there to record it, but we're seeing it. are you saying this doesn't count as "history"?

re: "With science improving can't we look forward to test supernatural in the future"? - no, the supernatural cannot have any demands for testing put upon it, ever. Things that SEEM "magical" or "supernatural" may be explained, but they are never ACTUALLY supernatural.

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic" - Arthur C. Clarke

[englishballerco]

but isn't that the point that you can't define God. he is mysterious.

[akg41470]

Exactly. And therefore, NOT science.

Any supernatural source cannot be measured or tested and cannot be used as an explanation for anything in a scientific manner.

[englishballerco]

okay yes you can't use science to measure god. So you can only believe in the explained then why test anything

also can something be considered history if no one was there to record it. Evrey thing we know about creation of the planets by god or not were not seen by humans eyes. I think we can discuss creation in schools but students shouldn't be tested on it as part of some science doctrine.

[akg41470]

"So you can only believe in the explained then why test anything" - I'm not sure I follow you here.

"can something be considered history if no one was there to record it" - most certainly. First off, you need to further define what you mean by "no one". A human? A pre-human? Someone who was able to write? An animal? A rock? A plant?

Nature holds history. We CAN see into the past given what we see in space (speed of light) or in rocks (fossils). Is that considered "recorded" to you?

[englishballerco]

Yes animals, viruses, and plants evolve just like humans do, but when dogs are closer in relation to humans than apes genetically its hard to believe in macro evolution. I just think that evolution like natural laws are workings of a intelligent designer known to me as "I am" why ca't evolutionist accept their theory as a tool of god's creation than rather plainly reject God. Also I belive we spend to much time wondering how we go here but rather we should focus on now that were here no what?

[akg41470]

"...but when dogs are closer in relation to humans than apes genetically..."

Citation, please.

"I just think that evolution like natural laws are workings of a intelligent designer..."

That's just great, you can THINK that all you want. But it that what it IS?

"why ca't evolutionist accept their theory as a tool of god's creation"

We would if there was a way to define "God".

"...I belive we spend to much time wondering how we go here..."

So you don't believe history is important?

[middlekk]

Man, the things that come out of creationist mouths. "Dogs are closer in relation to humans"...

I think we have a candidate for the new Creationist Idiot of the Year award.

But I'm upset. There's no spot on my Creationist Bingo card for that assertion.

We need to update Creationist Bingo!

[TheGreaterGood80]

Cultish? Dead theory? THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT CREATIONISM IS! These freaks just don't realize it yet!

I don't get this guy. He spouts off flawed psuedo-science claims, yet at the end of the day he believes a poorly-written fairy tale about two naked people in a garden with a talking snake and apples!

[phmayor]

Well I'm a Christian, I enjoyed the video, but why don't any of you realize this doesn't matter?

[akg41470]

Can you explain this to us? Why doesn't it matter?

There are a good lot of people who believe it does matter a great deal - perhaps in different ways than you might be thinking.

[666daedsidog]

The chances of me watching this vid on this day in 2008 would be one in 365

I cant be assed finding my calculator but the chances of me watching this at this particular hour/minute/sec must be astronomical

You could say it was virtually impossible i watched it

[ThetaOmega]

Assuming an 80-year lifespan, the chances of you watching this video at this moment in your life is around 1 in 2.5x10^9, however that is not taking into account the fact the video was made last year, or many other factors like, for the first 5 or so years, you could not operate a computer.

[middlekk]

And of course, if you add the odds of any one person on the earth watching this video over the course of a lifetime, and you get something like 1 in 6 x 10^10! (factorial, cuz each probability for each individual needs to be multiplied individually against each life-second) x 1 in 2.5 x 10^9. Now, that's a whopping big number.

Clearly, it's IMPOSSIBLE that you're watching this video.

[petehjr1]

Brilliant.. simply brilliant deduction. Creationists really need to get a better job, like pencil salesman or paper shreder. Or as we used to say in the Army, "Inflight missle repairman."

[ctastrophe]

"Levels of impossibility." Ha!

[jakeatkisson]

No, no...they're right. Ignorance = Bliss, Heaven = Bliss...Heaven = Ignorance? Whoa, new math, unrelated concepts, but the correlative impact might be astounding!  ...what a wheeze.

[WhyDontYouUK]

Great video - Bring on more!!!

[matereymate]

how can someone talk so much about a subject they don't even comprehend....

[mrdaym]

Well he started off kinda shaky but then he got on a roll and maybe thought that he was making sense, started throwing around numbers and arguments he pulled from his rear and then prayed to whatever deity he happens to believe in that no one would bother to check the facts.

[busymartian]

MORE! MORE! MORE!

[deltacreeper]

lol great vid, but you should know by now creationists leave out the stuff devastating to their case! (Natural Selection) 5/5

[AL102933]

you are my god akg41470 top stuff keep proving those morons wrong! :)

[x2nobody]

I wonder what the odds are that there is an all powerful being that always existed...hmmm..... that must be 1 and a shitload of googols

[themadhair]

I had a good giggle at this one.

[mrdaym]

I really enjoy the "Actually..." series, must've watched all of them at least a hojillion times.

Also;

"02:53: The probability of getting toward the goal (a survivable, reproducible organism) is must better WITH selection than WITHOUT."

Evolution has no set goal! ;)

[akg41470]

Well, this is true, there is no *goal* in that sense, but there is a *requirement* for a population in order to evolve - an organism (many, in fact) must survive and reproduce within its lifetime.

[mrdaym]

Another awesome video, keep them coming!

[khartoba]

LOL!!! What a nutjob. The fact that something occurs at a probability greater than 10^-26 disproves math???? WTF?

There are googles upon googles of particles in the universe. What would be the odds of any one of these particles in the universe being lucky enough to have me touch it... like this particle of sand on my desk? Oh Damn! I just touched it and in so doing beat the odds greater than 10^-26 and disproved math!

[busymartian]

I think mathmatics should be attacked. It suggests that God can't divide by zero. And what's with all this "imaginary number" nonsense. Obviously mathmatics is based on faith if i squared equals -1. I think we need an alternate side of math, one that doesn't make my head hurt or threaten my family values.

[Raimaius]

I like how he says "Evolution HAPPENED", as if it was a thing that stopped when humans came about. A perfect example of how these people don't even have a basic grasp of what evolution actually is.

[busymartian]

If you're going to have a evolution/creation debate, you should be required to take a test to make sure you even know what you're arguing about. This is probably one of the main reasons why scientsts don't debate this subject much. Many people think it's all about monkeys vs. Noah's ark.

[Mordecai36]

I love when they try to sound smart, yet they can't even pronounce simple terms correctly. What a douche.

[soulhunger1]

Haha wow. I remember I rolled a Yahtzee back in middle school on the first roll. That was a great example for evolution and natural selection.

Oh, and it's actually spelled "googol". Sorry, I obsess over spelling. And actually, this is probably the only thing I even saw wrong with the video. Other than that, great job.

[mikesatomicdustbin]

Yet another fantastic video...just subscribed...no idea why I diddnt do it sooner :)

-Mike

[Grimlore]

Is it just me, or does this guy look like he is related to jezuzfreek777? Like an equally mathematically challenged cousin or something.

[dannyjam]

yes i agree the chances of life in this universe are 1 in a google of googles lol. But guess what. Earth is one of google of google planets. dick head christians. Bane of the planet.

[mistoline]

Circular logic = Creationist logic,

Looking for fact after making the theory = Creationist logic,

... you'd think they'd notice.

[Faustuss1]

Great video as usual, I hope you continue the series.

[Faustuss1]

I forgot to include, you should keep doing the short "Any last words?" since it's just funny. :P

[boyoben]

Yeah, I was gunna yell at you about the "google" thing but somebody already beat me to the punch.

[Brianj1234]

Desertphile is busy debunking this guy too. Probability.. pffft. You can't assign a probability to someting that has already happened! Noone ever wins the lottery right? too improbable.

Basically if something has already happened, the probability of it happening is 1:1/ The probability of it happening the exact same way AGAIN is astronomical.

[busymartian]

Yeah! Ken Miller had a great example of that in getting the exact hand of cards. Things are the way they are, The planet, life, organisms, etc. The odds of that happening again with the EXACT same results is amazingly high. But the key word is AGAIN. Happening once requires no intelegence.

[RuinedSaint]

Total pwnage.

[shopwreckin]

i feel bad for this creationist. he feels so sure that his argument is bulletproof. i wonder how he felt after watching his argument get pimp slapped. i have to admit though, my poor indoctrinated friends never cease to make me laugh. ridicule is the only reaction they deserve.

[pauljanetzki]

no ed to iicule themtydo a grt job theselves :)

[Osire]

"Religiously come out and say" -_- *wants to strangle someone*

[MonkeyOctober]

You rock

[Dondonovan]

Hahaha. The ending on this one was just perfect. Nicely done! Keep up the good work.

[Killersepp]

BTW: The number is called "gogool", not "google". Sorry for the nitpick ;-)

[akg41470]

Actually, I'll nitpick right back, it's "googol", but you're right, they ARE spelled differently than what I did in the video. Duly noted.

[philip1201]

A "googol of googols" is called a googolplex

(googol to the googolth)

[akg41470]

You are correct! I had forgotten about that...

[Killersepp]

OK, so I guess we're even :-D

[Knowntje]

another creationist made to look ridiculous. great job

[DaveJonesBSNews]

Why do people claim that Small odds = Impossible. They just admitted it is possible, so where does the impossible come from?

[genetix101]

Exactly, good job. He should have used "imporabable" not "impossible".

But you own, bro! Good job

[thumbsdownman]

Yay! I missed these.

[phoenixshade3]

Great job, as usual. I have subscribed.

[hegbert]

Awesome job yet again!

[SkepticPhenomenology]

Great video.