Topics: WINNING ARGUMENTS FOR CREATIONISM-EVOLUTIONISM DEBATE (See Subchapter 10.2.2, Chapter 10, of Part Two.), The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balancedway.yolasite.com
balancedway1.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
I know Ray Comfort personally. WE grew up in the same home town and I sat under his preaching in the speakers corner at Cathedral Square Christchurch NZ.
your comment about highjacking and emotional blackmail or in my words bullying, are entirely apt. he is a thug.
there is no point in engaging in private debate with him as in debate he is a cheat and as i said a bully.
he wil decline to debate with some more intelligent than him.
BTW I am a christian and hold his preaching to be evil
@Strefanasha reading his first book you see that he did not want to preach in the first place, he only did it out of guilt and fear. and he still does.
he does bully the weak, and for that God will judge him with terrible severity.
you would be better to discus with me. I am a mensa member and have a good general knowlege of science history etc, but then I am not a public figure
Ray Comfort would NEVER want to have a discussion with you....for obvious reasons. You are intelligent and he can't keep up... Would love to see it however!!
@RubixWizz199109 There is a different, dawkins foundation isnt going right into dawkins pocket, its actually going to something. Also there is another important difference, Venom fangX once said he would NEVER ask for money, while dawkins foundation or Thunderfoot has never claimed not to ask for money.
@RubixWizz199109 He exposes Ray's hypocritical tendencies. Ray also wanted to have the money donated in his OWN name, not in t-f00ts name. AKA Ray wanted to be paid $100 000 to have this debate with t-foot, when he earlier claimed that taking money to profit from "saving" someone is highly immoral and he would never do it. The whole point of Ray's debating IS to "save" people...
This is why you're wrong about Thunderf00t, and you should look at what people actually say before you judge them...
Do I have this right? Ray Comfort will debate you if you will give Richard Dawkins 100,000.00 buckaroos? Well, if that's the case, he's not actually asking you to give him,Ray, the money, Right?He's saying if you will give Dawkins the cash,in his name,he will debate you. Dawkins being one of the preimminant naysayers of God and Jesus.Odd request,but it won't bolster Rays bottom line in cash as far as I can tell.
@lifeseeker51 You have "the google." Do a search. Thunderf00t debated Ray Comfort nearly two years ago and the footage is here on YouTube. In addition to learning how to do a simple search please learn how to spell...once you learn how to do that you might search "the scientific method" and save us all a lot of trouble explaining simple shit to someone who can't be bothered to read and think for himself. Thanks.
Darwin and Einsteins, both decreased and susceptible to Ray's misuse of their name and denigration. Shame on you for depriving both a chance to defend for themselves. Who will be Ray's victim? Mahatma Gandhi etc? Shame on Ray Comfort.
I like the way you think. See my comment in support of your challenge to dear Thunderf00t. I'm tempted to believe that athiests are too afraid to accept the POSSIBILITY of judgement after death, maybe this cowardice is demonstrated by Thunderf00t ignoring your challenge. Thank you for the reference to "Talk Origin".
Its nice that TF got to talk with ray. Not that ray would ever heal from his braindamage, or say anything interesting. Its just bit more publicity for christianitys stupidity. Shame that we still have to fight superstition. Embarrassment.
What am I missing here? I understood you to say $100,000 TO Richard Dawkins Foundation and then you mocked Ray for "making money"? How would he be making money if the money was given to Richard Dawkins?
You say "the Smithsonian where they actually try to educate people." Are you saying that you're ignorant of the things the Smithsonian has hidden from the public?
"Please provide testable, repeatable, observable evidence that your god is real"
Belief in God is a primary belief and cannot be proven nor disproven by the secularly derived standards of evidence and assessment. I personally have no issue with people holding primary beliefs, but you seem to. So, to avoid accusations of hypocrisy, why don't you provide evidence for your own faith-based beliefs?
"Please provide? testable, repeatable, observable evidence that your god is real"
Belief in God is a primary belief and cannot be proven nor disproven by secularly derived standards of evidence.
I have no problems with primary beliefs, as I believe that our very cognitive framework mandates root principles without an evidence basis. These root principles determine whether you are theistic or naturalistic in your world view, and operate above the very standards of evidence.
"You can only claim that you beleive, and that beleif has no factual evidence to back it up"
If evidence is so important to you, then provide evidence for your own doctrinal ideas as I've asked below.
I've explained that we, by our very nature, are obligate doctrinalists. Our paradigms require non-evidence-based presuppositions as core standards at the very root of our thoughts. Belief in God versus naturalistic dogma, neither disprovable nor provable by the secular method.
If you're asking for proof that we are "obligate doctrinalists," consider this:
In order to begin to conceive of ideas like "evidence" or "proof", you need a basic "framework" of standards and concepts (ie. paradigms). These standards and concepts cannot be proven by evidence, because they determine how you interpret and validate your experience of reality, and thus how you interpret these experiences as evidence of what is truthful, real or accurate.
Because they cannot be proven through evidence, they can only operate as faith-based ideas.
Among such ideas are the following: Belief in God. Scriptural/biblical principles. Disbelief in God. Logical principles. Mathematical principles. Principles of causality. And countless others, both atheistic or theistic.
If you think otherwise, then the challenge for you is simple: Provide an evidence base for any of the principles above.
@Calenfeyn41 Just because it is untestable doesn't mean believing in god is justified.
/watch?v=mf7LXPSYTbk
How can you compare faith with logic and math? Math and logic is based on reality. Logic is a complex system of which the universe is based of. It is self-evident. Math is debatable, that is, whether we invented it or not, but my answer is the same. Belief, on the other hand, is definitely man-made. Whether there is a god or not, it is MAN who places faith in his mind, and in his system.
Confronting this idea was a rude revelation for me when I was obliged to confront my own atheistic preconceptions.
The feeling of these principles being "self-evident" or "obvious" is merely the degree to which we've subsumed them as unquestionable fact without really questioning them. ie. It is a marker of malignant indoctrination.
If it is not a primary faith-based assumption then it can be proven with evidence. So where is the evidence?
Now I'm not advocating that we abandon our current models of logic and mathematics, as my personal belief is that these are consistent with (if not actually derivations of) theistic precepts. It may be worth considering, however, that there are alternate or supplemental "rulesets" in logic/causality:
1. The christian notion of "faith" being primary to experience, rather than vice-versa.
2. Subatomic particles whose properties vary depending on the expectations of the observer.
@Calenfeyn41 What the devil are you talking about? Merely throwing quantum mechanics into this doesn't help anyone. Your primary point doesn't make sense either.
These are just examples to demonstrate idea that there may be alternatives, or addendums, to the rules of logic/causality that you are familiar with.
The first is an example of a belief precept which people have adhered to historically, and is less prevalent today.
The second is an example of a contemporary research finding which suggests that there may be more to logic/causality than in the currently popular models.
@Calenfeyn41 Yes, but it doesn't change the fact that quantum physics are based on reality. Quantum physics is based on what we have observed and tested on the subject. Faith is untestable.
Do not think I am ignoring the logic-evidence-logic loop because I'm not. I'm merely saying that all we have are our senses, and if we can't cut out untrue information from our senses, then we have nothing. Logic and math is something we have to walk out from. Otherwise science is impossible.
I never questioned the plausibility of Quantum physics. All I did was highlight a finding in this field which was inconsistent with the accepted beliefs in causation.
"we have are our senses, and if we can't cut out untrue information from our senses, then we have nothing."
But what determines our perception of reality, or "senses"? Our "senses" require faith-based standards for them to operate in the first instance. You can't use your "senses" to then validate those standards.
"Logic and math is something we have to walk out from. Otherwise science is impossible."
Exactly. Ultimately, we are obliged to have primary beliefs, such as logic and mathematics, because that is the way our minds are constructed. The human mind cannot operate without an absolutistic base. Without it, all capacity for structured thought collapses.
Whether you believe in a supernatural agency, or in a purely naturalistic metaphysics, you are subject to faith-based assumptions.
@Calenfeyn41 You have achieved something which I have not been able to. Provide viable proof for god. I have always been a pantheist deep inside me, but I sometimes jump between atheism and pantheism.
Yet I still see something wrong with this... How is faith equivalent to math and logic, if math and logic continually self-prove themselves in our reality? I'm not saying math and logic are true, but how is faith equivalent in terms of conception of reality?
"if math and logic continually self-prove themselves in our reality?"
That's the beauty of the nature of these paradigms and primary principles.
They create the fabric of experience of reality for us, and thus, our experience of reality reciprocally affirms them. You really aren't able to appreciate how all-encompassingly fundamental they are until you've experienced alternate paradigms, or are among the rare minds who can perceive above the level of paradigms.
As with other primary beliefs, the existence of God cannot be proven nor disproven by the tools of secular logic.
For those who truly have strong belief in a supernatural primary creator, their experience of reality affirms this primary belief with as much clarity and congruity as logic and mathematics seem as valid and real to you.
If you're asking which belief system is superior, you're opening up a whole new debate on an altogether different level.
@Calenfeyn41 But what suffices as proof to a theist? Often the theist suits facts to fit theories, as Sherlock Holmes so wonderfully put it. It has now come to this: What, in terms of perception of reality, does the believer consider proof for his belief? Math and logic has plenty. Faith is usually based on either untrue facts, false claims or logical fallacies. I know you say faith is like math and logic, that we take it as true, but what points to it?
"Faith is usually based on either untrue facts, false claims or logical fallacies."
They appear fallacious simply because you are seeing them from within a paradigm which is incongruous or conflicting with that faith. Certain secular paradigms can appear equally limiting, false or incongruous from a theistic perspective.
There's no real way to demonstrate this clearly using words, except by make indirect allusions to it, due to the fundamental nature of these paradigms.
As I've described, the theistic premise can't operate by proof, it operates by faith. The same way that you operate by faith, rather than proof, in mathematics and logic.
Neither belief systems are provable, except via the fallacious circular logic of principle determining experience validating principle.
This validation occurs with as much clarity, if not more so, in theistic rather than in atheistic doctrines.
@Calenfeyn41 I really want to believe this. I really do. Somehow I just can't. I guess the concepts "proof", "math" and "logic" are too engraved into me that I can't do anything else.
That deep creedal respect for logic and mathematics that you have (ie. to the degree that you consider it an unchallengeable existential fundamental truth) is, as mentioned below, an indication of the degree that you have internalised them without question from early development.
This is as clear a demonstration of indoctrination there is, whether it be malignant or valid with respect to representing the true nature of "real world" mechanics.
I understand it isn't easy. Most people's initial reaction when confronting problems of this type is often of a coping nature, and many do not have the courage and/or insight to challenge these fundamentals.
It also demonstrates the often irreconcilable schism that exists between different belief systems, whether they be theistic or atheistic.
However it's this conundrum which is often a beginning of journey for some. People often refer to it as an existential "search for Truth."
People often find themselves driven by an urge to look for higher meaning in their lives. They go on a figurative and/or literal journey, often visiting different cultures and countries, examining different belief systems and mentalities attempting to sate that feeling of existential emptiness, or the conviction that there is more to reality than is tangible.
A degree of intelligence is necessary, but proportionately greater honesty and courage, in my case more than motivated by anger that I had been subjugated by a system of precepts without my explicit consent or knowledge.
Over a period of a few years, I went from being a sceptical atheist to a biblical christian more like Ray Comfort. I was motivated to challenge every secular dogma I had taken aboard from early education, and attempted to understand how I had been compromised.
I was, like yourself, pantheistic for a time, and looked into a variety of eastern mystical creeds. In a way, pantheism does appear most acceptable or "logical" from an original basis of atheism, in that it has most resemblance to the doctrine of naturalism. ie. Belief in the universe and its natural laws as a "god" in itself.
The rationale behind my choice of Christianity does have a basis of considerable deliberation, though that's another story for another time.
@Calenfeyn41 I don't think it's a story for another time, I'm curious about how you managed to nullify logic for determining reality yet you chose your reality with the help of logic. Logic is the only way in which we can identify, measure and think about reality. Relying on complete faith is impossible.
I said "deliberation" though, not logic. The modality of reasoning when it comes to determining or discerning these primary beliefs is a whole different kettle of fish as compared to all that we've described so far.
I guess one can refer to it as "looking above" logic, but it's extremely difficult to describe to someone who doesn't have the genuine motivation to challenge these fundamentals.
As I've said, I'm not advocating that we deny or "nullify" root precepts we rely on practically in day-to-day life, such as logic or mathematics, but that we be aware of their limitations, especially when it comes to assessing other fundamental beliefs.
As I've stated before, logic and mathematics are not inconsistent with the key theistic belief systems. My own personal assertion is that, if anything, they appear to be directly derived from a theistic premise.
I've received your PM, so moving this discussion to private.
It's been an interesting discussion so far, with a layman-level debate regarding philosophical concepts such as foundationalism and First Principles, the Munchhausen trilemma, the logical fallacy of axiomatic "self-evidence" as applied to secularist paradigms.
I've received your PM, so moving this discussion to private.
It's been an interesting discussion so far, with a layman-level debate regarding philosophical concepts such as foundationalism, First Principles, the Munchhausen trilemma and the logical fallacy of axiomatic "self-evidence" as applied to secularist paradigms.
It's been an interesting layman-level discussion so far regarding epistomologic concepts such as foundationalism, First Principles, the Munchhausen trilemma and the logical fallacy of axiomatic "self-evidence" as applied to secularist paradigms.
Moving this to private would be a good idea given that further elaboration of these points simply require more breathing space than the comments system.
Ladies and Gentlemen...I have a massive scientific discovery to announce! A living Cro-magnon life form has been captured on tape. He goes by the moniker Thunderf00t, and his videos are proof that evolution hasn't ironed out all the kinks...
Read Vox Days' "The Irrational Atheist" and Wired Magazines observation that atheists tend to be quarrelsome, socially challenged people with unpleasant personalities such as Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens and Madalyn Murray O'Hair. One could reasonably hypothesize that there is likely to be a strong correlation between Aspergers and atheism. Aspergers Syndrome (AS) is a neurobiological disorder on the autism spectrum (some even claim it is merely Autism)
i certainly liked this discussion between COmfort and Thunderf00t...I dont think Comfort is a horrible guy...but when Thunderf00t began discussing how differnet species form and explained it to Comfort...you begin to see the futility of discussion OR debate...neither has a chance in hell at convincing the other no matter how much evidence...COmfort really has no evidence because you cant PROVE the Bible with the Bible...I think Thunderf00t could really be a force in debate with some practice
Ray Comfort is an odd sort. Why are some personality types prone to this one road thought process? That's the key. There are folks who behave this way who haven't gone the religious route but 'see' only one way in other core beliefs/behaviors. Weird psychological phenomena in my opinion. Thankfully most of these folks never get to be a huge threat. In this amateur analysis I equate a Hitler with a Ray Comfort. Same one track...diff. message maybe but same unyielding 'one-way' thought process.
Ray Comfort is an odd sort. Why are some personality types prone to this one road thought process? That's the key. There are folks who behave this way who haven't gone the religious route but 'see' only one way in other core beliefs/behaviors. Weird psychological phenomena in my opinion. Thankfully most of these folks never get to be a huge threat. In this amateur analysis I equate a Hitler with a Ray Comfort. Same one track...diff. message maybe but same unyielding 'one-way' thought process.
Don't really understand why people wonder what happens after death.The same as before your born most likely.Who would want to live for eternity anyway,I like the fact that there's probably nothing after you die as what could be more peaceful than that? When relatives die you except it,no matter how hard,and say goodbye.Seeing them all again would just be weird.
@BenPN1000 Lol yeah! If religious people genuinely can’t wait to get into some wonderful afterlife then why do they wear seatbelts? Why do they protect their children if they will go to a better place when they die? Why do they cry at funerals? Why do hospitals and medicine even exist? Why does the pope of all people is driven around in a bullet-proof car?
@BenPN1000 true. personally, I think that there is no afterlife, because we do not have the bodily functions and (like the brain) to do so. We will not be aware of our existence after life because we will not exist except as a pile of bones in the dirt.
Thunderfoot, not sure if you read all these comments or not, but I just wanted to let you know that I consider you to be a great man. Your ability to maintain composure amidst speaking to these brainwashed buffoons is beyond my own. I truly aspire to be as pleasant as you are in dealing with them. We need more people to speak to them respectably, so that they will listen, rather than kneejerk to criticism. Until I'm better at such a skill, I will have to rely on you. :)
@fearguis so you're opinion on brainwashed is?.. How do you know my friend, you are not brainwashed?, What is the definite reference to which everyone's minds are measured? I would love to know.
Here At Now You See TV We do Christian Video Testimonies of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and how people have come to find him as real in their life. If you could checkout our videos, leave us some feedback, and subscribe to our channel we would greatly appreciate it, or at least stop by and say hi. Also if you have a testimony of How the Lord has changed your life personally we would love to hear it.
We will find out the answer to "the big God mystery" when we die, that is one matter that EVERYONE must face. Is it not? so what happens when we die, It's not like people are coming back from the dead to tell us what the other side is like and what happens. No, you only get one shot at death, I would want to be darn sure I was on the right side.
@wooowmeato How do you know which side is the right one? There are more than two you know. There are plenty of religions (many that predate christianity), so how do you know you have the right one? To be safe shouldn't you worship EVERY god? lol.
@SkeksisRule To clear something, I did not advocate in favor of one side or another, in my statement. But rather I am trying to point out the fact, that everyone must face what's on the other side of death... Well as it's not a question of how many choices or options there are, but instead which one is right. doesn't matter if you have a million options to answer a math problem, the only answer that matters is the right one. So how do you know which one is right? or if none at all?
@wooowmeato And the biggest scare tactic of them all! If I don't believe in god then I might go to hell, but if I do then nothing will happen. Seems a pretty obvious choice. This "decision" you need to make completely nulls logic and reason and, in my opinion, is the reason we still have religion today.
@tmiddled `I never said that, Never spoke about hell either. Never once spoke about religion for that matter. (Although those are worthy for discussion) So as I repeat myself: how sure are we as 'living people' of what goes on after we die? Because it's a dilemma that everyone must face, In case you haven't realized yet, at one point we will all die. And as for 'the decision' you're talking about, what religion are you referring to?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Creation is winning here in the USA less than 4 in 10 believe in the incorrect science of evolution. God bless America we are not brainwashed like the atheists in the U.K.
Idot, he doesn't have $100,000 and he wants to be able to speak with the cowardsome rickard dawkins who is so afraid of critisism. He isn't going to make money! Its being donated to the worthless rickard dawkins society, R U That ignorant? you should be pleased because the money wouldn't go to WOTM but to whom you support.
@NinjaForeChrist I'm sorry, just a random thought: you are ignorant. You totally overlooked what Ray did, and chose to attack the one who (from what i gather) holds beliefs different than yours. For shame...
I watched the debate/discussion, and thunderfoot spewed gibberish. He made people eyes glaze over when he started saying something about societies tolerable levels of murder LOL
To put it simply, comfort is a con artist. No con man want you to point obvious flaws in all his bullshit. He will cling to his ideas as long as they make him money.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
The creationist did not ask for 100 000 dollars on the behalf of a Christian cause you liar. Nice try.
By the way , you proclaim yourself to be so wise but you are really a jackass and a nobody thunderfoot, you just want publicity to gain YouTube fame , you are nothing but a YouTube loser.
it wasn't a debate... it was a discussion.. where ray comfort talked about trees and the glory of god and thunderf00t was constantly interrupted whilst trying to get ray into a proper discussion... go watch it and u'll see how he brilliantly lures ray into a bible morality trap about pedophilia.
@lukeism2 He didn't really interrupt him all that much it was more like he was redirecting him because the guy either has a low attention span, or knew he had lost the initial argument and tried moving on the the next point of the discussion.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Praise you Jesus...
Your Father revealed Himself to me when I accepted you Jesus as my Lord and Saviour. My last day in Jerusalem when photographing the conflict in the West Bank. And what a day! I was born again and thank you Jesus for Saving me. I was an atheist just as much as the atheist who is reading this now but Lord you choose me and I was Saved by your Grace. I am a new Creation born of God. It is with the Holy Spirit inside of me that testifies to your Glory Lord God
How is Ray comfort your problem?he has better things to do I'm sure than to debate you. He dies that everyday.I've seen what he does and in no way is it blackmail telling people what the bible says. He didn't write it,take it up with who did?do you even know what the word blackmail means?
Thunderf00t, thank you for taking the time to debunk these modern-day snake oil salesmen! You are an excellent presenter! I was a Christian for 28 years before I was able to throw off the yoke of religious mind control. Please continue to do this great service for mankind!
He only got pwned if you care more about presentation than substance. Also, Tf00t didn't tell any lies, like Comfort did. There are plenty of transitional forms to support evolution. Check out the People Vs Dover High school to learn more!!
This guy is a joke, trying to leverage the evolutionists on youtube and solicit more subscribers by taunting and slandering a man that you don't even know.
I would say you are intelligent. The problem is that you are also manipulative.
Do you really think a man who blatantly doesnt know what evolution is and cant even define is worth a circus which wastes the time of one of our great scientists who is working to contribute to the quality of life and survival of the species?
If Comfort actually understood the subject and was educated Id say game on but he clearly isnt, he doesnt even know what he is fighting against, so in this light ask yourself why is he fighting something he doesnt understand?
Mmm.. Isn't it Richard Dawkins that was after the $100,000. Ray asked that you pay Richard Dawkins $1,000,000. That would then enable Dawkins to debate with Comfort. I don't see how you can say that Comfort is greedy when he would not be making a penny! Dawkins is the one hiding behind the money. Comfort has just played the same card but with no gain for himself.
bananas probably fit better in a monkey's hand.
test123ok 3 months ago
I like to high jack people for money .. not to have a talk about GOD.
crissybeautiful 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NEW BOOK (Donated) For Debates And Governance
Topics: WINNING ARGUMENTS FOR CREATIONISM-EVOLUTIONISM DEBATE (See Subchapter 10.2.2, Chapter 10, of Part Two.), The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balancedway.yolasite.com
balancedway1.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
announcements-balancedway.yolasite.com
TheServiceWeb 5 months ago
What happens after we die...see "God's Prison" to find out.
Electfilmproductions 5 months ago
Am i the only one who is wondering why f00t has no reflection...
TheGuyFromDownstairs 6 months ago
@TheGuyFromDownstairs It's because light reflects specularly off appropriate surfaces, and the camera is not at an angle to catch the reflected rays.
SCIENCE RULES, MYTHS DROOL!
ShallowThoughts 6 months ago
@ShallowThoughts I know it was off angle..im not stupid sorry *Ray comfort :P
TheGuyFromDownstairs 6 months ago
Can anyone tell me how I can find that coward Thunderf00t , I want to debate with him !!!
isawman1 6 months ago
@isawman1 Wait in line.
ShallowThoughts 6 months ago
The day will come when you will regreat all that you're saying now, and then...will be to late !
I am soooooo sorry for you...
janeschneeman 6 months ago
@janeschneeman I was thinking the same.
RefinersFire298 6 months ago
EPIC ENDING!
mcdblaze 6 months ago
I know Ray Comfort personally. WE grew up in the same home town and I sat under his preaching in the speakers corner at Cathedral Square Christchurch NZ.
your comment about highjacking and emotional blackmail or in my words bullying, are entirely apt. he is a thug.
there is no point in engaging in private debate with him as in debate he is a cheat and as i said a bully.
he wil decline to debate with some more intelligent than him.
BTW I am a christian and hold his preaching to be evil
Strefanasha 7 months ago
@Strefanasha reading his first book you see that he did not want to preach in the first place, he only did it out of guilt and fear. and he still does.
he does bully the weak, and for that God will judge him with terrible severity.
you would be better to discus with me. I am a mensa member and have a good general knowlege of science history etc, but then I am not a public figure
Strefanasha 7 months ago
Ring Ring Ring Ring Ring RING! BANANA PHONE.
ShavedKnuckle 7 months ago
This is a good way of asking for your publicity.... $100,000 is not that much for YOUR publicity... you want to be popular????
ElyonBen 7 months ago
"Beautyintheuniverse was votebotted after this video was posted"
*sigh* of course it was.
taffysaur 8 months ago
thunderf00t you seem like you have more decency and morality than most christian folk
joey6961 8 months ago 17
Ray Comfort would NEVER want to have a discussion with you....for obvious reasons. You are intelligent and he can't keep up... Would love to see it however!!
kastnmagic 8 months ago
@kastnmagic Oh WAIT... I'm REALLY behind here because it appears that there WAS a discussion.... MY BAD... I'm going to go check that out NOW!! :o)
kastnmagic 8 months ago
I am sexually attracted to his voice.
haohyou12 9 months ago 11
@haohyou12 you're not alone :p
Hundrings 7 months ago
You state that he wanted you to give the money to dawkins foundation, then you try and make him look bad by saying he is trying to make money?
This is the intellectual dishonesty that I keep seeing from youtubers like yourself.
RubixWizz199109 9 months ago
@RubixWizz199109 There is a different, dawkins foundation isnt going right into dawkins pocket, its actually going to something. Also there is another important difference, Venom fangX once said he would NEVER ask for money, while dawkins foundation or Thunderfoot has never claimed not to ask for money.
gulbirk 9 months ago
@RubixWizz199109 He exposes Ray's hypocritical tendencies. Ray also wanted to have the money donated in his OWN name, not in t-f00ts name. AKA Ray wanted to be paid $100 000 to have this debate with t-foot, when he earlier claimed that taking money to profit from "saving" someone is highly immoral and he would never do it. The whole point of Ray's debating IS to "save" people...
This is why you're wrong about Thunderf00t, and you should look at what people actually say before you judge them...
Pinkaugust 8 months ago
I am almost 90% sure that Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort are closet cases. Poor guys.
Very good video sir.
Kekermonger 10 months ago
stutterfoot
Treefrogs2 11 months ago
@Treefrogs2 Troll-mmenter
glitchuser4 9 months ago
thunderfoot just asking what is your job, i all ways wanted to know
bellyzbad 11 months ago
Comment removed
pompousprick 11 months ago
Do I have this right? Ray Comfort will debate you if you will give Richard Dawkins 100,000.00 buckaroos? Well, if that's the case, he's not actually asking you to give him,Ray, the money, Right?He's saying if you will give Dawkins the cash,in his name,he will debate you. Dawkins being one of the preimminant naysayers of God and Jesus.Odd request,but it won't bolster Rays bottom line in cash as far as I can tell.
lifeseeker51 1 year ago
@lifeseeker51 You have "the google." Do a search. Thunderf00t debated Ray Comfort nearly two years ago and the footage is here on YouTube. In addition to learning how to do a simple search please learn how to spell...once you learn how to do that you might search "the scientific method" and save us all a lot of trouble explaining simple shit to someone who can't be bothered to read and think for himself. Thanks.
sleepcity 11 months ago
@sleepcity Are you a scientist?
lifeseeker51 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
She will come to you tonight with special gift **rockmycity.info**
tinishawalckbvh 1 year ago
If you come to my church in Tacoma, I will be more than excited to host you in a debate. We can record and broadcast it on your channel.
bigjrritchie 1 year ago
brilliant!! I watched this AFTER the interview, nonetheless, this was still great!!
joeyz103 1 year ago
Darwin and Einsteins, both decreased and susceptible to Ray's misuse of their name and denigration. Shame on you for depriving both a chance to defend for themselves. Who will be Ray's victim? Mahatma Gandhi etc? Shame on Ray Comfort.
no181c 1 year ago
Case closed.
Spinprovisation 1 year ago
I suggest 48 hours.
in 6.5 mins
Spinprovisation 1 year ago
Anyone wanna put a deadline on this?
He's ignorin mine.
Spinprovisation 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Meet hot sexy Latino women now**rockmycity.info**
SHERRICORA9 1 year ago
Tick-tock....Ignoring Spinprovisation's challange gives the perception (to me) you're smug and cowardly.
Timothyk11 1 year ago
@Timothyk11
Give him time.
It's like chess. Right now, he's (trying) to compute every possible scenario, to make sure he can win.
Battles are won B4 they are fought.
That's why he wont fight.
Spinprovisation 1 year ago
I guess that proves this guy only picks on people he thinks he can win.
Spinprovisation 1 year ago 2
@Spinprovisation
I like the way you think. See my comment in support of your challenge to dear Thunderf00t. I'm tempted to believe that athiests are too afraid to accept the POSSIBILITY of judgement after death, maybe this cowardice is demonstrated by Thunderf00t ignoring your challenge. Thank you for the reference to "Talk Origin".
Timothyk11 1 year ago
Tick Tock
Spinprovisation 1 year ago
Day 1) and counting.
Spinprovisation 1 year ago
That's recorded challenge 1).
Just in case you/your P.R people, get confused.
Spinprovisation 1 year ago
This sword swings both ways, Dear Thunderfoot.
I challenge you to exactly the same terms & conditions, as Ray. (Without the $100000) fee.
As the simpsons used to say.
You may remember me from such classics as "Talk Origin", "Advanced Physics", etc.
Anyhoo. I'm spintronic, unlike Ray. I bite.
Spinprovisation 1 year ago
Its nice that TF got to talk with ray. Not that ray would ever heal from his braindamage, or say anything interesting. Its just bit more publicity for christianitys stupidity. Shame that we still have to fight superstition. Embarrassment.
bary1234 1 year ago
What am I missing here? I understood you to say $100,000 TO Richard Dawkins Foundation and then you mocked Ray for "making money"? How would he be making money if the money was given to Richard Dawkins?
911dispatcher 1 year ago
You say "the Smithsonian where they actually try to educate people." Are you saying that you're ignorant of the things the Smithsonian has hidden from the public?
911dispatcher 1 year ago
GOD wants to speak with you. HE wants your attention. HE's there, HE's real. The universe was created. It did not simply "poof" into existence.
latech1116 1 year ago
@latech1116 Please provide testable, repeatable proof that god exists
podoau 1 year ago
@podoau
"Please provide testable, repeatable proof that god exists"
Why not provide evidence for your own faith-based assumptions first? Why not get started with:
(1) Evidence for the logical and mathematical principles which you have presupposed to even begin to grasp concepts such as "evidence" or "proof."
(2) Evidence for the naturalistic paradigm.
Both operate primary to, and unilaterally determine the very standards of evidence-based assessment, hence cannot be proven by evidence.
Calenfeyn41 1 year ago
@Calenfeyn41 Please provide testable, repeatable, observable evidence that your god is real
podoau 1 year ago
Comment removed
Calenfeyn41 1 year ago
Comment removed
Calenfeyn41 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@podoau
"Please provide testable, repeatable, observable evidence that your god is real"
Belief in God is a primary belief and cannot be proven nor disproven by the secularly derived standards of evidence and assessment. I personally have no issue with people holding primary beliefs, but you seem to. So, to avoid accusations of hypocrisy, why don't you provide evidence for your own faith-based beliefs?
Calenfeyn41 1 year ago
@podoau
"Please provide? testable, repeatable, observable evidence that your god is real"
Belief in God is a primary belief and cannot be proven nor disproven by secularly derived standards of evidence.
I have no problems with primary beliefs, as I believe that our very cognitive framework mandates root principles without an evidence basis. These root principles determine whether you are theistic or naturalistic in your world view, and operate above the very standards of evidence.
Calenfeyn41 1 year ago
@Calenfeyn41 Then you cannont claim that "god is real"
You can only claim that you beleive, and that beleif has no factual evidence to back it up
podoau 1 year ago
Comment removed
Calenfeyn41 1 year ago
Comment removed
Calenfeyn41 1 year ago
Comment removed
Calenfeyn41 1 year ago
@podoau
"You can only claim that you beleive, and that beleif has no factual evidence to back it up"
If evidence is so important to you, then provide evidence for your own doctrinal ideas as I've asked below.
I've explained that we, by our very nature, are obligate doctrinalists. Our paradigms require non-evidence-based presuppositions as core standards at the very root of our thoughts. Belief in God versus naturalistic dogma, neither disprovable nor provable by the secular method.
Calenfeyn41 1 year ago
@Calenfeyn41 Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidene. I won't believe you until you enable me to.
crywolf30 1 year ago
@crywolf30
If you're asking for proof that we are "obligate doctrinalists," consider this:
In order to begin to conceive of ideas like "evidence" or "proof", you need a basic "framework" of standards and concepts (ie. paradigms). These standards and concepts cannot be proven by evidence, because they determine how you interpret and validate your experience of reality, and thus how you interpret these experiences as evidence of what is truthful, real or accurate.
Calenfeyn41 1 year ago
@crywolf30
Because they cannot be proven through evidence, they can only operate as faith-based ideas.
Among such ideas are the following: Belief in God. Scriptural/biblical principles. Disbelief in God. Logical principles. Mathematical principles. Principles of causality. And countless others, both atheistic or theistic.
If you think otherwise, then the challenge for you is simple: Provide an evidence base for any of the principles above.
Calenfeyn41 1 year ago
@Calenfeyn41 Just because it is untestable doesn't mean believing in god is justified.
/watch?v=mf7LXPSYTbk
How can you compare faith with logic and math? Math and logic is based on reality. Logic is a complex system of which the universe is based of. It is self-evident. Math is debatable, that is, whether we invented it or not, but my answer is the same. Belief, on the other hand, is definitely man-made. Whether there is a god or not, it is MAN who places faith in his mind, and in his system.
crywolf30 1 year ago
Comment removed
Calenfeyn41 1 year ago
Comment removed
Calenfeyn41 1 year ago
@crywolf30
"It is self-evident."
Confronting this idea was a rude revelation for me when I was obliged to confront my own atheistic preconceptions.
The feeling of these principles being "self-evident" or "obvious" is merely the degree to which we've subsumed them as unquestionable fact without really questioning them. ie. It is a marker of malignant indoctrination.
If it is not a primary faith-based assumption then it can be proven with evidence. So where is the evidence?
Calenfeyn41 1 year ago
Comment removed
Calenfeyn41 1 year ago
@crywolf30
Now I'm not advocating that we abandon our current models of logic and mathematics, as my personal belief is that these are consistent with (if not actually derivations of) theistic precepts. It may be worth considering, however, that there are alternate or supplemental "rulesets" in logic/causality:
1. The christian notion of "faith" being primary to experience, rather than vice-versa.
2. Subatomic particles whose properties vary depending on the expectations of the observer.
Calenfeyn41 1 year ago
@Calenfeyn41 What the devil are you talking about? Merely throwing quantum mechanics into this doesn't help anyone. Your primary point doesn't make sense either.
crywolf30 1 year ago
Comment removed
Calenfeyn41 1 year ago
@crywolf30
These are just examples to demonstrate idea that there may be alternatives, or addendums, to the rules of logic/causality that you are familiar with.
The first is an example of a belief precept which people have adhered to historically, and is less prevalent today.
The second is an example of a contemporary research finding which suggests that there may be more to logic/causality than in the currently popular models.
Calenfeyn41 1 year ago
@Calenfeyn41 Yes, but it doesn't change the fact that quantum physics are based on reality. Quantum physics is based on what we have observed and tested on the subject. Faith is untestable.
Do not think I am ignoring the logic-evidence-logic loop because I'm not. I'm merely saying that all we have are our senses, and if we can't cut out untrue information from our senses, then we have nothing. Logic and math is something we have to walk out from. Otherwise science is impossible.
crywolf30 1 year ago
@crywolf30
I never questioned the plausibility of Quantum physics. All I did was highlight a finding in this field which was inconsistent with the accepted beliefs in causation.
"we have are our senses, and if we can't cut out untrue information from our senses, then we have nothing."
But what determines our perception of reality, or "senses"? Our "senses" require faith-based standards for them to operate in the first instance. You can't use your "senses" to then validate those standards.
Calenfeyn41 1 year ago
@crywolf30
"Logic and math is something we have to walk out from. Otherwise science is impossible."
Exactly. Ultimately, we are obliged to have primary beliefs, such as logic and mathematics, because that is the way our minds are constructed. The human mind cannot operate without an absolutistic base. Without it, all capacity for structured thought collapses.
Whether you believe in a supernatural agency, or in a purely naturalistic metaphysics, you are subject to faith-based assumptions.
Calenfeyn41 1 year ago
@Calenfeyn41 You have achieved something which I have not been able to. Provide viable proof for god. I have always been a pantheist deep inside me, but I sometimes jump between atheism and pantheism.
Yet I still see something wrong with this... How is faith equivalent to math and logic, if math and logic continually self-prove themselves in our reality? I'm not saying math and logic are true, but how is faith equivalent in terms of conception of reality?
crywolf30 1 year ago
Comment removed
Calenfeyn41 1 year ago
@crywolf30
"if math and logic continually self-prove themselves in our reality?"
That's the beauty of the nature of these paradigms and primary principles.
They create the fabric of experience of reality for us, and thus, our experience of reality reciprocally affirms them. You really aren't able to appreciate how all-encompassingly fundamental they are until you've experienced alternate paradigms, or are among the rare minds who can perceive above the level of paradigms.
Calenfeyn41 1 year ago
@crywolf
"Provide viable proof for god."
As with other primary beliefs, the existence of God cannot be proven nor disproven by the tools of secular logic.
For those who truly have strong belief in a supernatural primary creator, their experience of reality affirms this primary belief with as much clarity and congruity as logic and mathematics seem as valid and real to you.
If you're asking which belief system is superior, you're opening up a whole new debate on an altogether different level.
Calenfeyn41 1 year ago
@Calenfeyn41 But what suffices as proof to a theist? Often the theist suits facts to fit theories, as Sherlock Holmes so wonderfully put it. It has now come to this: What, in terms of perception of reality, does the believer consider proof for his belief? Math and logic has plenty. Faith is usually based on either untrue facts, false claims or logical fallacies. I know you say faith is like math and logic, that we take it as true, but what points to it?
crywolf30 1 year ago
@crywolf30
"Faith is usually based on either untrue facts, false claims or logical fallacies."
They appear fallacious simply because you are seeing them from within a paradigm which is incongruous or conflicting with that faith. Certain secular paradigms can appear equally limiting, false or incongruous from a theistic perspective.
There's no real way to demonstrate this clearly using words, except by make indirect allusions to it, due to the fundamental nature of these paradigms.
Calenfeyn41 1 year ago
@crywolf30
"But what suffices as proof to a theist?"
As I've described, the theistic premise can't operate by proof, it operates by faith. The same way that you operate by faith, rather than proof, in mathematics and logic.
Neither belief systems are provable, except via the fallacious circular logic of principle determining experience validating principle.
This validation occurs with as much clarity, if not more so, in theistic rather than in atheistic doctrines.
Calenfeyn41 1 year ago
@Calenfeyn41 I really want to believe this. I really do. Somehow I just can't. I guess the concepts "proof", "math" and "logic" are too engraved into me that I can't do anything else.
crywolf30 1 year ago
@crywolf30
That deep creedal respect for logic and mathematics that you have (ie. to the degree that you consider it an unchallengeable existential fundamental truth) is, as mentioned below, an indication of the degree that you have internalised them without question from early development.
This is as clear a demonstration of indoctrination there is, whether it be malignant or valid with respect to representing the true nature of "real world" mechanics.
Calenfeyn41 1 year ago
@crywolf30
I understand it isn't easy. Most people's initial reaction when confronting problems of this type is often of a coping nature, and many do not have the courage and/or insight to challenge these fundamentals.
It also demonstrates the often irreconcilable schism that exists between different belief systems, whether they be theistic or atheistic.
However it's this conundrum which is often a beginning of journey for some. People often refer to it as an existential "search for Truth."
Calenfeyn41 1 year ago
@Calenfeyn41 Jesus, you're intelligent. I bow to you. No sarcasm. What beginning of what journey are you talking about?
crywolf30 1 year ago
@crywolf30
People often find themselves driven by an urge to look for higher meaning in their lives. They go on a figurative and/or literal journey, often visiting different cultures and countries, examining different belief systems and mentalities attempting to sate that feeling of existential emptiness, or the conviction that there is more to reality than is tangible.
Calenfeyn41 1 year ago
@Calenfeyn41 What is your personal belief? I've always found spiritual pantheism the most ... "logical". :P
crywolf30 1 year ago
Comment removed
Calenfeyn41 1 year ago
@crywolf30
A degree of intelligence is necessary, but proportionately greater honesty and courage, in my case more than motivated by anger that I had been subjugated by a system of precepts without my explicit consent or knowledge.
Over a period of a few years, I went from being a sceptical atheist to a biblical christian more like Ray Comfort. I was motivated to challenge every secular dogma I had taken aboard from early education, and attempted to understand how I had been compromised.
Calenfeyn41 1 year ago
Comment removed
Calenfeyn41 1 year ago
Comment removed
Calenfeyn41 1 year ago
@Calenfeyn41 I'm assuming you used logic to determine what was right for you? :p
crywolf30 1 year ago
@crywolf30
It wasn't easy.
I was, like yourself, pantheistic for a time, and looked into a variety of eastern mystical creeds. In a way, pantheism does appear most acceptable or "logical" from an original basis of atheism, in that it has most resemblance to the doctrine of naturalism. ie. Belief in the universe and its natural laws as a "god" in itself.
The rationale behind my choice of Christianity does have a basis of considerable deliberation, though that's another story for another time.
Calenfeyn41 1 year ago
@Calenfeyn41 I don't think it's a story for another time, I'm curious about how you managed to nullify logic for determining reality yet you chose your reality with the help of logic. Logic is the only way in which we can identify, measure and think about reality. Relying on complete faith is impossible.
crywolf30 1 year ago
@crywolf30
"you chose your reality with the help of logic"
I said "deliberation" though, not logic. The modality of reasoning when it comes to determining or discerning these primary beliefs is a whole different kettle of fish as compared to all that we've described so far.
I guess one can refer to it as "looking above" logic, but it's extremely difficult to describe to someone who doesn't have the genuine motivation to challenge these fundamentals.
Calenfeyn41 1 year ago
Comment removed
Calenfeyn41 1 year ago
@crywolf30
As I've said, I'm not advocating that we deny or "nullify" root precepts we rely on practically in day-to-day life, such as logic or mathematics, but that we be aware of their limitations, especially when it comes to assessing other fundamental beliefs.
As I've stated before, logic and mathematics are not inconsistent with the key theistic belief systems. My own personal assertion is that, if anything, they appear to be directly derived from a theistic premise.
Calenfeyn41 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@crywolf30
I've received your PM, so moving this discussion to private.
It's been an interesting discussion so far, with a layman-level debate regarding philosophical concepts such as foundationalism and First Principles, the Munchhausen trilemma, the logical fallacy of axiomatic "self-evidence" as applied to secularist paradigms.
Calenfeyn41 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@crywolf30
I've received your PM, so moving this discussion to private.
It's been an interesting discussion so far, with a layman-level debate regarding philosophical concepts such as foundationalism, First Principles, the Munchhausen trilemma and the logical fallacy of axiomatic "self-evidence" as applied to secularist paradigms.
Calenfeyn41 1 year ago
@crywolf30
Thanks for the PM.
It's been an interesting layman-level discussion so far regarding epistomologic concepts such as foundationalism, First Principles, the Munchhausen trilemma and the logical fallacy of axiomatic "self-evidence" as applied to secularist paradigms.
Moving this to private would be a good idea given that further elaboration of these points simply require more breathing space than the comments system.
Calenfeyn41 1 year ago
Comment removed
Calenfeyn41 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Why do you hate Jesus? Everything he did he did for you. There's no logical reason to hate him. So why do you hate him?
psycofloyd 1 year ago
Ladies and Gentlemen...I have a massive scientific discovery to announce! A living Cro-magnon life form has been captured on tape. He goes by the moniker Thunderf00t, and his videos are proof that evolution hasn't ironed out all the kinks...
TrueBlueJMS 1 year ago
@TrueBlueJMS
I think that's probably a mirror you're looking into, actually.
Vire70 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Read Vox Days' "The Irrational Atheist" and Wired Magazines observation that atheists tend to be quarrelsome, socially challenged people with unpleasant personalities such as Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens and Madalyn Murray O'Hair. One could reasonably hypothesize that there is likely to be a strong correlation between Aspergers and atheism. Aspergers Syndrome (AS) is a neurobiological disorder on the autism spectrum (some even claim it is merely Autism)
moonlightbateman 1 year ago
sexy
jabush27 1 year ago
i certainly liked this discussion between COmfort and Thunderf00t...I dont think Comfort is a horrible guy...but when Thunderf00t began discussing how differnet species form and explained it to Comfort...you begin to see the futility of discussion OR debate...neither has a chance in hell at convincing the other no matter how much evidence...COmfort really has no evidence because you cant PROVE the Bible with the Bible...I think Thunderf00t could really be a force in debate with some practice
Metamorphosis33 1 year ago
I love thunderf00t I really do!
zxeritross 1 year ago
I think dunderf00t increasing my faith in God. thank you!!
DrJustin557 1 year ago
Thunder got his arse handed to him on a plate.
It wasn't a nice site... :-)
Thats another one for the creationists...
AronRaHAHAHA 1 year ago
the "hooker" telescope? lolz
evilresidence4 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Ray Comfort is an odd sort. Why are some personality types prone to this one road thought process? That's the key. There are folks who behave this way who haven't gone the religious route but 'see' only one way in other core beliefs/behaviors. Weird psychological phenomena in my opinion. Thankfully most of these folks never get to be a huge threat. In this amateur analysis I equate a Hitler with a Ray Comfort. Same one track...diff. message maybe but same unyielding 'one-way' thought process.
jerykk1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Ray Comfort is an odd sort. Why are some personality types prone to this one road thought process? That's the key. There are folks who behave this way who haven't gone the religious route but 'see' only one way in other core beliefs/behaviors. Weird psychological phenomena in my opinion. Thankfully most of these folks never get to be a huge threat. In this amateur analysis I equate a Hitler with a Ray Comfort. Same one track...diff. message maybe but same unyielding 'one-way' thought process.
jerykk1 1 year ago
Don't really understand why people wonder what happens after death.The same as before your born most likely.Who would want to live for eternity anyway,I like the fact that there's probably nothing after you die as what could be more peaceful than that? When relatives die you except it,no matter how hard,and say goodbye.Seeing them all again would just be weird.
BenPN1000 1 year ago 9
@BenPN1000 lol wow
7chris77 1 year ago
@BenPN1000 Lol yeah! If religious people genuinely can’t wait to get into some wonderful afterlife then why do they wear seatbelts? Why do they protect their children if they will go to a better place when they die? Why do they cry at funerals? Why do hospitals and medicine even exist? Why does the pope of all people is driven around in a bullet-proof car?
NAP0LE0NDYNAM1TE 1 year ago
@BenPN1000 true. personally, I think that there is no afterlife, because we do not have the bodily functions and (like the brain) to do so. We will not be aware of our existence after life because we will not exist except as a pile of bones in the dirt.
geraldkho 1 year ago
thunderfoot debating Ray was really enjoyable but sad for Ray,,,Ray is not an apologist nor an expert,,,Id like to see him debate James White
candiceevans1 1 year ago
For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.
(1 Corinthians 3:19)
disciplemike1 1 year ago
@disciplemike1
Shut the fuck up
Reality 101
Boomx2Brian 1 year ago
lol he wanted the money to go to the Richard Dawkins foundations from the sounds of it... how was he trying to get money from you?
I am not a fan of Ray Comfort though...
therexCo 1 year ago
Thunderfoot, not sure if you read all these comments or not, but I just wanted to let you know that I consider you to be a great man. Your ability to maintain composure amidst speaking to these brainwashed buffoons is beyond my own. I truly aspire to be as pleasant as you are in dealing with them. We need more people to speak to them respectably, so that they will listen, rather than kneejerk to criticism. Until I'm better at such a skill, I will have to rely on you. :)
fearguis 1 year ago
@fearguis so you're opinion on brainwashed is?.. How do you know my friend, you are not brainwashed?, What is the definite reference to which everyone's minds are measured? I would love to know.
wooowmeato 1 year ago
Comment removed
fearguis 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Here At Now You See TV We do Christian Video Testimonies of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and how people have come to find him as real in their life. If you could checkout our videos, leave us some feedback, and subscribe to our channel we would greatly appreciate it, or at least stop by and say hi. Also if you have a testimony of How the Lord has changed your life personally we would love to hear it.
Thanks and God Bless
NowYouSeeTV 1 year ago
We will find out the answer to "the big God mystery" when we die, that is one matter that EVERYONE must face. Is it not? so what happens when we die, It's not like people are coming back from the dead to tell us what the other side is like and what happens. No, you only get one shot at death, I would want to be darn sure I was on the right side.
wooowmeato 1 year ago
@wooowmeato How do you know which side is the right one? There are more than two you know. There are plenty of religions (many that predate christianity), so how do you know you have the right one? To be safe shouldn't you worship EVERY god? lol.
SkeksisRule 1 year ago
Comment removed
wooowmeato 1 year ago
@SkeksisRule To clear something, I did not advocate in favor of one side or another, in my statement. But rather I am trying to point out the fact, that everyone must face what's on the other side of death... Well as it's not a question of how many choices or options there are, but instead which one is right. doesn't matter if you have a million options to answer a math problem, the only answer that matters is the right one. So how do you know which one is right? or if none at all?
wooowmeato 1 year ago
@wooowmeato And the biggest scare tactic of them all! If I don't believe in god then I might go to hell, but if I do then nothing will happen. Seems a pretty obvious choice. This "decision" you need to make completely nulls logic and reason and, in my opinion, is the reason we still have religion today.
tmiddled 1 year ago
@tmiddled `I never said that, Never spoke about hell either. Never once spoke about religion for that matter. (Although those are worthy for discussion) So as I repeat myself: how sure are we as 'living people' of what goes on after we die? Because it's a dilemma that everyone must face, In case you haven't realized yet, at one point we will all die. And as for 'the decision' you're talking about, what religion are you referring to?
wooowmeato 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Creation is winning here in the USA less than 4 in 10 believe in the incorrect science of evolution. God bless America we are not brainwashed like the atheists in the U.K.
shockofgod 1 year ago
@shockofgod Are u sure... really...
MidwinterSon 1 year ago
Side "A" plays with their Bibles while side "B" plays with their amoebas and monkeys. East is east and west is west and the train shall never meet.
MrAssbaron 1 year ago
Idot, he doesn't have $100,000 and he wants to be able to speak with the cowardsome rickard dawkins who is so afraid of critisism. He isn't going to make money! Its being donated to the worthless rickard dawkins society, R U That ignorant? you should be pleased because the money wouldn't go to WOTM but to whom you support.
NinjaForeChrist 1 year ago
@NinjaForeChrist I'm sorry, just a random thought: you are ignorant. You totally overlooked what Ray did, and chose to attack the one who (from what i gather) holds beliefs different than yours. For shame...
SeeMattGo 1 year ago 3
Honestly, when I first saw Kirk & Ray doing that banana thing, I thought it was a parody of creationists.
jakefree24 1 year ago 4
I watched the debate/discussion, and thunderfoot spewed gibberish. He made people eyes glaze over when he started saying something about societies tolerable levels of murder LOL
Treefrogs2 1 year ago
To put it simply, comfort is a con artist. No con man want you to point obvious flaws in all his bullshit. He will cling to his ideas as long as they make him money.
Boudiga 1 year ago 5
Who's the woman at 5:15?
MetalSwitch95 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The creationist did not ask for 100 000 dollars on the behalf of a Christian cause you liar. Nice try.
By the way , you proclaim yourself to be so wise but you are really a jackass and a nobody thunderfoot, you just want publicity to gain YouTube fame , you are nothing but a YouTube loser.
carrrrera 1 year ago
it wasn't a debate... it was a discussion.. where ray comfort talked about trees and the glory of god and thunderf00t was constantly interrupted whilst trying to get ray into a proper discussion... go watch it and u'll see how he brilliantly lures ray into a bible morality trap about pedophilia.
lukeism2 1 year ago 30
@lukeism2 He didn't really interrupt him all that much it was more like he was redirecting him because the guy either has a low attention span, or knew he had lost the initial argument and tried moving on the the next point of the discussion.
ZachNeiman 1 year ago
18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.
sepirocth 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Praise you Jesus...
Your Father revealed Himself to me when I accepted you Jesus as my Lord and Saviour. My last day in Jerusalem when photographing the conflict in the West Bank. And what a day! I was born again and thank you Jesus for Saving me. I was an atheist just as much as the atheist who is reading this now but Lord you choose me and I was Saved by your Grace. I am a new Creation born of God. It is with the Holy Spirit inside of me that testifies to your Glory Lord God
The One true God
ImagesByDavid 1 year ago
@ImagesByDavid Another dolt.
AuthenticIdiot 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AuthenticIdiot
""Another dolt""
Another what? Dolt? haha
ImagesByDavid 1 year ago
@AuthenticIdiot
""another dolt"""
Another what?? Dolt? lol
ImagesByDavid 1 year ago
What a low self esteem guy. Get off the telescopes and get yourself a girl.
BigNadz23 1 year ago
Ya, then you sat there with your thumb up your arse and let that moron get all over ya. Painful and disappointing
TheWhatever41 1 year ago
What is the point of all of this but to prove "you" are right? What kind of preaching are you doing?
wmcdo1 1 year ago
this guy is very silly!.
seven2me 1 year ago
i know this clip was made b4 They had a dicussion but
Why didnt u follow Him? and talk to him that way.
Cuz u were the first one who actually asked 4 it bro. it sounds like u're the coward one when u called Ray cowards.
and plus, why didnt u do it infront of thousand of ppl? why just 1 on 1?
u need audience to listen so that if u wanna judge, they can tell u what they think right away.
very pointless
lThellRockl 1 year ago
How is Ray comfort your problem?he has better things to do I'm sure than to debate you. He dies that everyday.I've seen what he does and in no way is it blackmail telling people what the bible says. He didn't write it,take it up with who did?do you even know what the word blackmail means?
astropeck123 1 year ago
Thunderf00t, thank you for taking the time to debunk these modern-day snake oil salesmen! You are an excellent presenter! I was a Christian for 28 years before I was able to throw off the yoke of religious mind control. Please continue to do this great service for mankind!
mcsnavely 1 year ago
u're not true Christian at all.
lThellRockl 1 year ago
Comment removed
GeetarSound3 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
thunderfoot got pwned.
BritishBeliever 1 year ago
He only got pwned if you care more about presentation than substance. Also, Tf00t didn't tell any lies, like Comfort did. There are plenty of transitional forms to support evolution. Check out the People Vs Dover High school to learn more!!
peoplepowered1 1 year ago
at about 4:00 the best moment of the video !
Lioobayoyo 2 years ago
100 grand??? wtf??
TheRooDog123 2 years ago
This guy is a joke, trying to leverage the evolutionists on youtube and solicit more subscribers by taunting and slandering a man that you don't even know.
I would say you are intelligent. The problem is that you are also manipulative.
TheManY2K3 2 years ago
Do you really think a man who blatantly doesnt know what evolution is and cant even define is worth a circus which wastes the time of one of our great scientists who is working to contribute to the quality of life and survival of the species?
If Comfort actually understood the subject and was educated Id say game on but he clearly isnt, he doesnt even know what he is fighting against, so in this light ask yourself why is he fighting something he doesnt understand?
myboybooth 2 years ago 2
He pwned u. hes Kiwi
twistanz 2 years ago
He wanted a debate with Richard Dawkins because he already knew that there isn't much of a debate with a beginner like Thunderf00t.
gt5323b 2 years ago
or he just wanted to get some large media coverage.
0rangeFlamingo 2 years ago
Mmm.. Isn't it Richard Dawkins that was after the $100,000. Ray asked that you pay Richard Dawkins $1,000,000. That would then enable Dawkins to debate with Comfort. I don't see how you can say that Comfort is greedy when he would not be making a penny! Dawkins is the one hiding behind the money. Comfort has just played the same card but with no gain for himself.
foveostag 2 years ago