WHO ARE U? Scientist? You are so backward! Do u realize that Doctors, Scientist, Pop Stars, Journalist and many more in thousands turns to Islam? Why did they? Because they are intelligent people. what about you? You still believe that you were from an ape? Well, you are now behaving like one.. Uughuh! uhugh! eeerghk!! do u understand that? Nope? Then u are backward and even worse than ape!! What? You want me to interpret it? Go get bananas and punch your nose!!! agree? Never mind...........
Dead-to-the-spirit deluded "God Delusion" author & blithering fool scientist goon Richard Dawkins another "leader" given 2 the profane masses is another useful idiot 4 Jesuit machinations
Jesuitical; pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuit Order completely altered the education system 2 suit their Evo-Hoax Agenda to discredit the Bible
Papal Rome cant have their Counter Reformation 2nd Dark Age DESPOTISM until Bible is destroyed
I do watch Dawkins' videos, but to maintain a fair balance, you should also read books and videos against him. You need to stop saying that muslims accused you being racist, I have never heard of such.
Before King Henry 1 of England could marry Matilda of Scotland, Bishops had to determine if she was a Nun or not, she testified that she had never taken holy vows, insisting that her parents had sent her and her sister to the convent in England for educational purposes, and her aunt had veiled her to protect her from the "lust of the Normans" and that she was scolded by her aunt when she removed the veil.
@NDayatida This tompointzero is just another goatfucker living in a western country promoting his cult that makes them the most backward people on the planet. These muslim parasites produce nothing but; hate, death, destruction and stupidity. He is a very clear example of that.Should be deported.
NOBEL PRIZE was only invented a few years ago, muslims made their inventions atleast 1000 yrs previously, of course western assholes will award each other a bullshit prize.
@tompointzero There is not one muslim, educated in a muslim country, that has a Nobel prize for science/medicine, there are no muslim companies R&D production in the Fortune 1000 lists, there are no industrial production of any kind, WW importance, in any muslim country. Muslims are the parasites of the world, they stole, forced, copied and raped their so called " achievements " from the civilizations they conquered; Persia, India, Byzantine. Muslims are nothing and never will be anything.
Hey asshole, even people like da vinci and gallileo dont have noble prizes because they existed BEFORE this stupid prize, Great Muslim polymaths such as Ibn Shatir Averroes and thousands of others were around many hundreds of years previously, ibn shatir said the earth is not the centre of the universe atleast 500 yrs before copernicus came across his books....industrialisation is a cancer of the environment,
@tompointzero You just proved my point, muslims are nothing, will never be anything and have no future until they shed their backward cult. Most likely you are living in a western country on welfare enjoying the luxury of the western democracies. You are just another muslim parasite.
i do respect many elements of the west however sorry to dissapoint you, but i have never claimed benefits infact i have paid taxes galore. If anybody is the parasite its you, sucking the earth dry for all its worth
the west dont own fuckall this earth is for humanity a muslim can go where we please, you bastards think like u do all the work on this earth, fuck off ur just 10% at the top of the pyramid
Islam is slowly reforming I would say, although it would less evident in places like Afghanistan and Iraq because religion seems to take deeper root during times of war. These things need time but eventually they will change.
U sing a lilittle goofy song that means u win the intellegent agruement? Islam doesn't send their children to jihad and suicide? Letting children to grow up to decide for themselves what they want to believe is child abuse? Your sending your children to a meaningless death. You are a child abuser!
they always revert back to stereotype gutter descriptions of muslims found in sunday tabloids, no reasonable intellectual discussion or scientific evidence
but gutter stereotyping.
Athiests are fucking deluded. You are lost.
You need to take a unbiased look at Islam, your missing out on some good stuff.
The funny thing is the father of Athiesm Friedrich Nietzsche was a madman, and he died because of madness, under Islamic rules, he is considered to be a martyr because he died in a state of not being able to reason for himself, Athiests are destined for hell, when their own leader on all probabilities is heaven bound!
If Muslims are so stupid then why did Alhazen (Ibn al haytham) a Muslim polymath debunk the stupid theories of Ptelomy and Euchlids who said that the human eyes emit light which then helps us to see, Alhazen invented the modern scientific method to prove that the eyes take in light of objects around us! and Also Ibn Shatir stated that the earth is actually revolves around the Sun! It was Chritsians who tried Galileo who agreed with this islamic principle.
Lets take the example of The theory of relativity (which deals with the largest objects in the universe) and theory of quantum mechanics (which deals with the smallest details in the universe) BOTH THESE THEORIES REMAIN THEORIES because they lead back to the SIngularity (a singularity is a point of infinite mass and infinite time), Islam is also a body of work revolved around a singularity (Allah), yet you believe in these theories and not islam, please explain why?
Someone has a complete misunderstanding on Islam. Islam in a way supports evolution and it has been mentioned briefly in the Quran how the people from each time were different. Evolution in almost a sure fact however, God did create the first human being. He did not look exactly as a human being would appear as today. The difference between animals and human being is (as stated int eh Quran) that we have a choice whether or not to worship God or not.
on theory your claims may seem right , but in reality a lot of people do believe in religion and will continue to believe in it till there very last breath . In the essence of spirituality there's nothing that you know for if you did you would know what god is . This temporary world is filled with deceit, lies, false beauty and glamour , a wise man is one who realizes the foolishness of this world and turn to god for true freedom . Islam scientifically is the most logical religion in the world.
I hate Islam, but I don't hate arabs, persians, pashtun ,etc etc. They are subject to the same sort of brainwashing in the modern day that white people were subjected to 70 years ago. Humanity has always been vulnerable to brainwashing and it is up to those who still have control of their minds to oppose it. Not resort to blind hatred of someone cause of their ethnicity. We are all human beings and our struggle is the same.
@Pooternackle5 Persians are not and have never been Muslims, it was shoved down their throats through the sword or the "jaziah", by hordes of lizard eaters who erupted from the desert of Arabia. We were Zoroastrians and Buddhists, we had our own culture and civilization. They took all that away and instead gave us smelly mosques, moronic and barbaric superstitions, etiquettes of toilet, rules of sexual oppression & subjugation, and misery.
@oiMikeyboy No. Racism is focused on discrimination of nationality, race, or ethnicity. By your logic, people who hated nazism would be racists. Same thing goes to religion - as religion is just an ideology. Like nazism.
To any intelligent human-being - my contention is: why would nobody never want to know about the one faith [i.e. Islam] or read the one scripture [i.e. Koran], which is at the centre of almost all global political, social, legal and military subjects - almost everywhere?! I've read it and found it 'an eye opener!' Think about it!
any people who wants to know what islam is all about just google al rassooli, read his writtings and watch his vids. al rassooli is an arabic-as mother tongue-ex muslim, learn about islam from this learned man instead from "muslims" who do not even know the doctrine of al-nasikh wa al-mansukh in their own religion and do not even speak or write arabic.
My grade 12 biology teacher was the best, he said "according to law I'm meant to mention creationism, but that would be wasting your time, so I will spend my time instead telling you how ridiculous it is."
It is interesting how when you compare the grip that religion exerts over different cultures or geographical groups, it seems to dominate the mentality of Western Europeans and Indians more than say Russians. I think that's because when you have 1/6th of the world's surface, you're more pragmatic, as you had to be to get there. When you're on a small peninsula or island, hey, a bit of religion doesn't hurt! Might make you feel more valid, or comforted, or emboldened. You can use it more.
Religion (ALL) is the greatest FRAUD in all history. Still no evidence from any of the 300+ god claims from the past 8000 years. No intelligent person believes in miracles, angels and an eternal afterlife with an imaginary magic boss in the sky.
@goldstead All hail the magic boss in the sky!!! lol alot of trippin' peoples on this planet... its fucking scary when you stop and think about it....
@airpickone we were never monkeys you dumbass. You stupid dipshits can't even properly understand the simple concept of evolution. You retards still think that Evolution claims we came from monkeys, when it teaches something else.
EVOLUTION DOES NOT STATE WE CAME FROM MONKEYS......MONKEY AND HUMANS HAVE A COMMON ANCESTOR WHICH BRANCHED OUT TO BECOME TWO SPECIES....IE - HUMAN AND PRIMATE
You obviously have no idea of the history of India from that period. Do you even know how Mughals ruled the country. To stay in power, they needed support of the powerful Hindu kingdoms spread all over the area. This was done by a lot of kings until Aurangzeb who started to convert people by force which is well documented even by Mughals themselves. This resulted in rebellion by Jats, Marathas, Rajputs, etc and Mughals didn't last much longer after that.
Religion, was in fact the very platform which appealed to people in the past since they thought it would help solve the problem of inequality.
An instance would be when Christianity & Islam were introduced to the Indians. The lower castes in India would do anything they could to get out that, so it was a huge factor contributing to their embracing of religion.
But alas, we have reached a stage whereby religion is more harmful than good.
@S8917560G Islam and Christianity were not introduced in India to root out the evil of caste system. It was rather forced down the throat (Islam more than Christianity) as conversion is an important pillar of these religions. Caste system continues to exist to this day in Muslims and Christians of the subcontinent. So it was not a religion thing. Human beings will always find a reason to put someone down. That is done through ethnicity, political ideology, colour, caste, region, religion, class
If what you were saying is true, when the Mughals ruled in India, why didn't they force everyone to become Muslim? Why is India still pretty much Hindu? But yeah, you're right. There are a million and one reasons other than religion that people will put down other people, but atheists are so hateful and idiotic that they seem only to focus on religion. Can people really be that stupid?
Mughals did force a large part of the population to convert to Islam and it is well documented. Case in point is Aurangzeb. It was not that easy to convert every Hindu as the population was large and there were many powerful Hindu rulers. In same places it was easier to provide a bit of autonomy rather than indulge in direct conflict.
I think if the Mughals were actually committed to that, they would have done it, and India today would be 80% Muslim, not 80% Hindu. Dude are you crazy? If it was a large part of the population, why are only 13% Muslim? Most of them converts from post-Mughal times.
Self-determined conversion to Islam was extremely common, and really accounts for the overwhelming majority of converts in the past 1400 years, especially with a segregating ancient pagan religion just as Hinduism.
Hinduism is not a religion and just a way of life. Are you a Muslim? First let's clear that. You mean to say that there is unity in Islam? Please. Why don't you study about Aurangzeb. His atrocities and forced conversion resulted in mutiny all over his kingdom. Babri Musjid is also a product of the same Mughals. Most people in Islam were forced to adopt it or face death. As I said, it was not easy to convert all the Hindus to Islam as there were many powerful kingdoms.
Are you really that dumb? People were never equal. If it's not religion, it's any number of things people bicker about. If anything, religion has reduced that. But you live in your dream world where every problem comes from 'religion', so I'll leave you do that.
@magicalgold010 the prove ,the prove is in our history ,look at it and see what barbaric acts we performed, we killed on minor issue, abused women , education was backward, science was a crime all these things happen in the time before religion ,religion provided rules , moral laws and guidance which portrayed justice in the true sense Your anger toward religion will be your downfall it has formed a fog around yur head ,in the past a lot of people made their own religion but they are extinct now
@magicalgold010 Religion was essentially just a form of government in ancient through medieval times. Once the early modern age hit and states began to take form, religion SHOULD have been replaced by human laws - which were and are much more moral and rational. Unfortunately, religious leaders have no intent on giving up their influence so religion has continued to thrive. It died a little during the 20th century, but Islam is reversing all our society's progresses.
@antonkhuu Tell that Stalin. It is the people, not religion. I as a Christian do not believe it the world was made in 6x24h. Because it was before time started.
@Strangerinasland Ps 50,2. Read the "Babble" (I hope I misunderstand you, imo this pejorative spelling seems to be chosen by intention). The fact we can not make any statement about things before time started, doesn't mean that nothing happened.
@RedSoxForObama Of course you realise my statement wasn't made to scare Dawkins or anyone else,right?It just bothers me that so many of you atheists ARE awake to only HALF of the picture.You can see the evil of Islam spreading around the world,but you can't see it written down in the Bible,because of prejudice.
Uh.. No. We don't constitute the Bible as evidence for anything. Because there really is no reason for us to. Logic is not prejudice.
Then again, we don't take the Quran as evidence for anything either.
Why couldn't a practictioner of (x religion) say that you Christians are only seeing half the story, and that (y religion) is hellbent on destroying the world? Why is the Bible better than any other holy book?
@RedSoxForObama If you HONESTLY think that two diametricly opposed religions,written by 2 diametricly opposed cultures can coincidentaly confirm what was written in the first book while simultaneously revealing that the organization created by the second book is the evil that will persecute the world.If you really can call that coincidence then you are truly BLIND.
@RedSoxForObama How did the Bible predict a beheading cult that would subjugate women,worship a man made god,bow to an image,exist in ALL the current Muslim nations(which at the time were pagan)hate Jews,and blaspheme the God of the Bible and also kill in the name of their false god???????How could this all be coincidence???And on top of that it is ALL happening in your lifetime AND you are so ignorant of Gods Word you can't see it.
You do realize just how cruel and evil the Old Testament is, right? If not, read it. You'll be surprised at how it's just as evil, if not more, as the Quran.
Read about Arabia, and how they coexisted with Jews for 1400 years, and were a great source of knowledge and wisdom, as compared to Dark Age Europe.
People need to look up just how useful the Arabs have been to us. Do you play Chess? Do you need the number 0? If not for Islam, we might well not have Greek philosophy.
@RedSoxForObama OK,Now whether I accept your position or not....the Mahdi=the Antichrist,Islam=the Beast,Black stone of the Kaaba=the image of the Beast,allah=the serpent ....AND 666=in the name of allah.IT IS TIME FOR YOU TO COME UP WITH A SURVIVAL PLAN!!!!
@RedSoxForObama: Arabia -- not Muslims -- coexisted peacefully with Jews until the pedophile prophet wrote a book stating that if you didn't believe in what his book stated, that you should be killed, and, oh, by the way, Jihad is a way of life, and kill all unbelievers if they appear within your society.
Also, I know Muslims have committed atrocities, and I know that it's not, generally, a peaceful religion. But if someone claims, on no evidence whatsoever, that it's a religion based totally on evil, I feel compelled to fight on its side. I'd do the same for Christianity and -at a stretch- Judaism.
2 facts: Science has given the world stuff like internet, use of electricity, TV, radio, medicines, health. Islam has given us scarfs and carpets. Duno about you but I prefer the things science gives us.
@1tabligh I have no idea of what you're talking about but I do agree that everything can never be explained. So let the religious people keep trying while scientists think about how to make the world a better place.
@Tailgunner757 Before he enters the realm of science and knowledge with all its concerns, man is able to perceive certain truths by means of these innate perceptions. But after entering the sphere of science and philosophy and filling his *brain* with various proofs and deductions, he may forget his natural and innate perceptions or begin to doubt them. It is for this reason that when man moves beyond his innate nature to delineate a belief, differences begin to appear. ...
@1tabligh The natural truths that you speak of are basic and have nothing to do with a god. They are survival, sleep, sex, hunger; only the most crude and animalistic sensations produced by chemical reactions in our brains. You cannot vilify science simply because there is nothing to vilify. It is observable, provable truth. You can refuse to accept it, but that in the end comes to your choice. You would not be typing comments into youtube if we lived in a theocracy. God has given us nothing.
Is that which is necessary in essence and which is considered the first source of existence matter itself or something else beyond the limits of matter?
Dodging ALL the questions and quibbling in vain!
Materialism looks at the world with one eye *closed* and, as a result, is unable to answer numerous questions!
One of the most destructive and misleading factors in thoughts concerning God is to restrict one's thought to the "logic" of the empirical sciences and to *fail* to recognize the *limits* and boundaries of that "logic".
Is that which is necessary in essence and which is considered the first source of existence matter itself or something else beyond the limits of matter?
How can the atheists delude themselve and believe that hydrogen and oxygen, electrons and protons, should first produce themselves, then be the source for all other beings, and finally decree the laws that regulate themselves and the rest of the material world?
@1tabligh No use responding to this comment, people. It's a copypaste from pro-quran websites and he won't read your comment. This comment, you see, was also pasted on the following videoids: user/TheBalafa12 v=Exa1R65Wkxs v=a1WCpUvjLE4 v=6gnQz32c5EA v=j_plXgnoNG4 v=ZhZWGgvRjKI v=C-iQCVdZz1c v=5Qt7puJR4IA v=D3E4TYPBoOs v=ptmNd9fp_5Q v=Rk5Y3VoBeVQ v=5Qt7puJR4IA v=q7eKjSZPVSE v=MH8lMAhHUhQ v=_Wr6jNIzsy8
@1tabligh Seriously? "believe", Atheism has NOTHING to do with what people BELIEVE. Atheism is only about what a person does not believe in, which is the illogical fallacy that is God(s) that religions sprout out. Atheists don't have to believe there isn't a god, just to not believe in one. As it goes, I have never met an Atheist who believes the junk you are on about. If you are on about the Big Bang Theory then that happened, not believed, not just a theory... it happened, we don't have (cont)
a complete picture of it and that picture is bound to change but the signs it occurred are very evident. However the big bang theory has nothing to do with Hydrogen, Oxygen, Electrons or Protons. In fact it's highly probable that none of these even existed before the Singularity that exploded in the big bang... exploded.
Also in science laws are not self-regulatory systems, In layman's terms they are more simply descriptions of behavior of phenomena that always follow the same pattern.
@DoomsdayR3sistance In other words, that which moves is the subject of motion, while the mover is the cause of motion. Can the same thing in the same respect be simultaneously a subject of motion and a cause of it?
@1tabligh This would only be a question of any real relevance if the universe was shifting or moving, but there is nothing to suggest that it is. While things within it might be moving the total momentum of the universe appears to be zero. On a more local level, yes it can because the total momentum of the universe as zero still appears to be preserved and no effect of shifting motion actually changes this as it still requires an equal and opposite force to be applied that negates the effect.
@DoomsdayR3sistance With regard to this issue, this is the only explanation that the dialectic can offer as a justification of the dynamism of matter. However, it is very easy to see why this explanation cannot be adopted from a scientific point of view. If hydrogen were to contain its contradictory essentially and to develop due to this fact, in accordance with the alleged dialectical laws, then why is it that not all the hydrogen atoms were completed?
@1tabligh You are making no sense here, but then given the dribble you have displayed above I am more inclined to believe this is because this is simply nonsense then anything else. Considering we can create a natural process like fire produces a lot of Hydrogen Nuclei which are not complete hydrogen atoms and this is generally due to the heat (or excitement) caused by the fire... a fire compares nothing to initial heat that would been experienced by the universe during the big bang.
I will note I could be wrong about this, as I have never studied Thermo sciences, however if I remember right, such a process as fire does create hydrogen nuclei and that is a much lesser reaction then the big bang.
@1tabligh Because the universe is not an intellectual thing and it is not a governed thing, it does not care about if atoms are fully formed or not, it's just chance and appears random to us but that could just be more related to our lack of understanding of how this universe was formed. Effectively it just happened, if they were all formed or none formed then you'd have a case for a god because that defies chance, this is within chance.
If the whole Universe is the result of chance and accident, what is it that did not emerge on the basis of chance?
If an existent thing came into being not by virtue of chance, what are its distinguishing features and characteristics and can they be applied to the numerous and variegated phenomena of the universe?...
If the origin of the Universe were based on accident, why are the theories even of the materialists based on the supposition of a plan, an ordering, an absence of chance?
How is it possible that accident should lie at the origin of such orderly relationships?
@1tabligh This is meaningless in prove that something like a god has to be tho, because just like this universe, in this scenario the existence of that god could only ever have been "chance" and so the argument of chance is meaningless. In fact by chance, the development of the universe as a single element of energy as a singularity that is as complex as the universe is much much more probable then a god whom is almost infinitely more complex then that.
as for the virtue of things that come along by chance, DNA is a great sign of things just being the result of chance, because it varies between species but it's variation is less between more closely related species then further related species because the effect of chance has not played as much part in the diversity (evolution) of those species then it has further away related species. This phenomena is very much a characteristic of a none-divine creation of species to answer your question.
So far you haven't created a single reason why a god must exist, you have only been prodding for a hopeful gap where god could be placed, but while science doesn't know everything and neither does any one man... science knows enough that the expansion of the universe, the solar system, the earth and even life don't require any external intervention what so ever. to me you are taking a very much god of the gaps scenario, trying to find the gaps you can plug god into, but god is not a default.
A default is simply no explanation, to admit we do not know what we do not know is a much more honest and truthful explanation then coming up with "quick fix" answers of which god is. God has been used for millenniums as way to answer questions that couldn't be answered and almost all cases of this by know have been disproved, the default position was clearly wrong to assume anything behind an unexplained scenario and so the only truthful answer would be, "I do not know".
also just to finish off, I think you have made the assumption that chance is "random", which is not the case, in fact chance tends to be very ordered and probability needs to be guessed only because don't know which way a dice will roll, but when thrown all forces against a dice essentially have been set and so physics will not chance, the fields and particles that order everything are still in effect and the dice will only ever land one way which isn't actually random at all.
@DoomsdayR3sistance Based on the law of probabilities, the result of universal independent motivation could be only dispersal and anarchy, tending to a uniform death.
The law of probabilities also decisively refutes the appearance of the world by way of accident, considering it irrational and impossible. Even calculations based on the mathematical law of probabilities confirm the necessity of correct guidance and planning for the world, ...
in accordance with a precise program and a conscious will.
The law of probabilities deals, in fact, a decisive *blow* to those who believe in theory of the accidental origination of the universe. If we attempt to apply the theory of accident to a simple system or to small numbers, its applicability is not impossible, although extremely unlikely. ...
But it is inconceivable that one should ever chance on a geometric accident expressing the firm orderliness and harmony that prevail in the complex system of the world. Partial and simple changes in the order of existence are also unable to explain the transformation of the world, the coalescing of diverse elements, and the compounding of fundamental atoms to form a harmonious compound. ...
If nature was once engaged autonomously in composition and formation, why does it not now display any initiative in the direction of changing itself further; why does it no longer exhibit profound, automatic change?
@1tabligh I can't be bothered to read all of that anymore... I think it's easy to say that it's essentially junk. You are asserting things on baseless queries. As it goes the universe is heading towards a uniform death thanks to entropy but it's so far off into the future we have a lot of time to come up with a solution... also probabilities are pointless for events in the "past". Saying I threw a dice it came up six has a probability of one because it happened, so saying it's improbable (cont)
because it's a past event is flawed logic, if you add more dice the number that come up 6 is an event that has happened, it becomes harder to replicate because it's in the past, 100 dice, 10,000 dice it doesn't matter it happened, we aren't trying to replicate. Also these probabilities can't actually be calculated at all as the conditions under which the universe formed is much different to the current form of the universe thus without being able to replicate that existence (cont)
any number we come up with now is only metaphysics and has no scientific meaning at all.
Also you say the universe isn't forming and composing? but it is, there are galaxies and solar systems being formed within the universe even now, these areas where this goes the most usually appear as black nebula, and they are so thick with matter they are forming more complex forms, so that's in my opinion an argument from ignorance.
@DoomsdayR3sistance Of course, it is not necessary that the law of causality should always manifest itself to us in familiar forms. The variety and multiplicity of causes is such that an investigator concerned with only one phenomenon might not be able to specify all the causes. However, in all the affairs of mankind, particular and general, past and future, in the circumstances of the individual or of society, not a single point can be found that is accidental. ...
Not only is there a particular order inherent in the creation of each separate phenomenon; there is also observable in the relationship of every phenomenon with other phenomena, as well as the relationship of each phenomenon with the environment within which it exists, a subtle and finely calculated order.
For example, in the cultivation of a tree, the laws of the heavens and the earth operate in perfect harmony with the structure of its roots and branches. There is also a relationship of animals with that tree insofar as they draw nourishment from it. How is it possible that accident should lie at the origin of such orderly relationships?
@1tabligh accident? hello, have you read the theory of evolution? it's about survival of the fittest, such order is used only because it's a better survival trait, however not all trees have their roots fully in the ground, in fact many have the top parts of their roots actually above the ground. Also there isn't a "perfect" harmony at all, that's another baseless assertion by yourself. Can you come back with either evidence or just stop, this dribble is getting annoying.
And by evidence, I mean something actually solid, not some random junk put together in a pretty meaningless form to make it look like everything is "organized", which I have pointed out earlier and you even asked, why Hydrogen isn't perfectly organized, a point to which I pointed out you would only have an argument for god if Hydrogen was all either complete or not complete, not the variety we actually see.
@laflugantabastardo I thought as much, the writing style was attempting to be to eloquent for something purposefully written for youtube, however he also appears to have stopped which is likely my damned for him to provide actual evidence for a god and not just try to find gaps where one could be, since could is still insanely improbable, unlikely and not a default, which I think has stopped him since there is no possible meaningful response to that.
@laflugantabastardo Ah ok, I have seen him around before and this isn't the first time I have out-right defeated him either. In fact I have never seen him ever win anywhere.
@DoomsdayR3sistance If a phenomenon were to take shape at a certain level in the structure of being, unconsciously and on the basis of chance, this would furnish an excellent groundwork for the disappearance and destruction of the world. For the slightest disruption in the balance of elements and the smallest disharmony in the radiant laws of the universe would be enough to make things lose their moorings and the heavenly bodies collide, ...
resulting in a massive explosion and the destruction of the world.
Now since accident is opposed to order and harmony, it follows that whatever bears traces of planning, design and calculation should be disharmonious and discontinuous, because the concepts of planning, design and calculation are opposed to accident and chance. ...
To suppose that accident is the infrastructure of the universe and its governing principle does not rest on any logical proof or scientific evidence cannot be accepted as a definitive solution to the geometry of the structure of being.
@1tabligh *Yawn* of course the only way things would just change against their natural universal laws is if there was something to change those laws, IE an intelligent being capable of it, IE God or a highly advanced race. No Highly advanced alien race seems to have any reason to destroy us... but according to most holy books, the Abrahamic god of Judaism, Christianity and Islam does. So the fact that such events have not happened is likely just more proof god does not exist.
@DoomsdayR3sistance What then is the cause that makes the development of hydrogen to helium limited to a specific quantity [of hydrogen atoms], while setting the rest free from the fetters of this inevitable development?
@DoomsdayR3sistance Can the dialectic show us that if this dialectical progression were to come about in an essential and dynamic form, why then is it limited to a specific quantity of the two elements, and does not occur to every hydrogen and oxygen [atom]?
@DoomsdayR3sistance Can this colossal planning, which ensures that the act of vision falls among the best acts of matter, be without guidance and purpose, even though the mere discovery of it requires strong intellectual efforts?
@1tabligh where did "planning" come from. Don't add your own nonsensical assertions randomly. The conversion via time can, which is not an intellectual process, what follows is meaningless drivel, effort of discovery is meaningless, easy or hard if it's probable, it's probable.
@DoomsdayR3sistance If the theory of self-procreation is dropped, in light of scientific research, how then can they explain the arising of life on the face of the earth?
@DoomsdayR3sistance Would there be a way for the human heart after that to shut off its eyes in the light and to overlook the clear, divine reality that trusted the secret of life to the primary cell or cells?
If this were not so, why then did nature turn away forever from the act of self-procreation? ...
This means that if the materialistic explanation of the primary cell of life by selfprocreation were correct, how could materialism then explain the nonrecurrence of self-procreation in nature with the tong passage of tune?
Indeed, this is a perplexing question for the materialists.
If abiogenesis spontaneous creation *without* specific design can be admitted under such conditions of regularity, then purposeful generation and definitely balanced creation can be the result of *error* ad perplexity, since these two are *opposed* to abiogenesis. ...
Such a statement is highly *absurd* that order and rectitude should come about *without* a Creator, and disorder and impropriety of design and *fate* should suppose a Creator. He is an *ignoramus* who says this, because anything produced *without* design will ***never*** be exact and proportioned, while disorder and contrariness cannot co-exist with orderly design. God is far above what the *ignorant atheists* say.
What is absurd is the assertion that their must be a creator when we already have answers that show one does not need be. Indeed such Absurdity is the result trying to find answers without reason or logic but simply an answer, no matter how false it is. We already know of potential fields, none-intelligent things that appear responsible for such phenomena like the Higgs Field and it's Boson. The theists cry, wanting a gap to *insert* god, such a default is only ever wrong.
P.S. you were asking about life, Abiogenesis has nothing to do with the creation of the universe and Abiogenesis certainly is not *spontaneous*, Abiogenesis takes millions, if not billions of years.
@DoomsdayR3sistance If self-procreation took place at first, in accordance with certain laws and decrees, as water is produced due to a certain chemical composition between oxygen and hydrogen, it becomes necessary for it to be repeated in accordance with those laws and decrees, as the existence of water is repeated whenever certain chemical factors are present, whether or not water is necessary; for necessity in the natural sense is merely the necessity produced by the laws and ...
This has been flagged as spam show
WHO ARE U? Scientist? You are so backward! Do u realize that Doctors, Scientist, Pop Stars, Journalist and many more in thousands turns to Islam? Why did they? Because they are intelligent people. what about you? You still believe that you were from an ape? Well, you are now behaving like one.. Uughuh! uhugh! eeerghk!! do u understand that? Nope? Then u are backward and even worse than ape!! What? You want me to interpret it? Go get bananas and punch your nose!!! agree? Never mind...........
Vunduva 2 weeks ago
Doesn't sound like Dawkins to me?
bigglyguy 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Dead-to-the-spirit deluded "God Delusion" author & blithering fool scientist goon Richard Dawkins another "leader" given 2 the profane masses is another useful idiot 4 Jesuit machinations
Jesuitical; pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuit Order completely altered the education system 2 suit their Evo-Hoax Agenda to discredit the Bible
Papal Rome cant have their Counter Reformation 2nd Dark Age DESPOTISM until Bible is destroyed
SpencerBenedict2nd 3 months ago
I do watch Dawkins' videos, but to maintain a fair balance, you should also read books and videos against him. You need to stop saying that muslims accused you being racist, I have never heard of such.
pokki30 4 months ago
Before King Henry 1 of England could marry Matilda of Scotland, Bishops had to determine if she was a Nun or not, she testified that she had never taken holy vows, insisting that her parents had sent her and her sister to the convent in England for educational purposes, and her aunt had veiled her to protect her from the "lust of the Normans" and that she was scolded by her aunt when she removed the veil.
tompointzero 6 months ago
Mutated apes? FUCK OFF!
blueeagleTFL 6 months ago
@NDayatida This tompointzero is just another goatfucker living in a western country promoting his cult that makes them the most backward people on the planet. These muslim parasites produce nothing but; hate, death, destruction and stupidity. He is a very clear example of that.Should be deported.
Tralgit 6 months ago
NOBEL PRIZE was only invented a few years ago, muslims made their inventions atleast 1000 yrs previously, of course western assholes will award each other a bullshit prize.
tompointzero 6 months ago
@tompointzero What are you on about?!? Please give some examples to your nonsense!
feonor26 6 months ago in playlist Writers - Richard Dawkins 1941 -
@tompointzero There is not one muslim, educated in a muslim country, that has a Nobel prize for science/medicine, there are no muslim companies R&D production in the Fortune 1000 lists, there are no industrial production of any kind, WW importance, in any muslim country. Muslims are the parasites of the world, they stole, forced, copied and raped their so called " achievements " from the civilizations they conquered; Persia, India, Byzantine. Muslims are nothing and never will be anything.
Tralgit 6 months ago
@Tralgit
Hey asshole, even people like da vinci and gallileo dont have noble prizes because they existed BEFORE this stupid prize, Great Muslim polymaths such as Ibn Shatir Averroes and thousands of others were around many hundreds of years previously, ibn shatir said the earth is not the centre of the universe atleast 500 yrs before copernicus came across his books....industrialisation is a cancer of the environment,
tompointzero 6 months ago
@tompointzero You just proved my point, muslims are nothing, will never be anything and have no future until they shed their backward cult. Most likely you are living in a western country on welfare enjoying the luxury of the western democracies. You are just another muslim parasite.
Tralgit 6 months ago
@Tralgit
i do respect many elements of the west however sorry to dissapoint you, but i have never claimed benefits infact i have paid taxes galore. If anybody is the parasite its you, sucking the earth dry for all its worth
tompointzero 6 months ago
@tompointzero Than fuck of to a arab/muslim country, the west doesn't want you. goodbye parasite.
Tralgit 6 months ago
@Tralgit
the west dont own fuckall this earth is for humanity a muslim can go where we please, you bastards think like u do all the work on this earth, fuck off ur just 10% at the top of the pyramid
tompointzero 6 months ago
@tompointzero goodbye parasite.
Tralgit 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@tompointzero Shut up muslim pig. You are no better then all the religious scum that made this world a living hell. Fuck you.
newtubetubetube 5 months ago
BRILLIANT WORDS ! We need Dawkins to take a higher political stance,i feel more would be achieved in ousting religion from indoctrinated teachings.
funkyleaf 6 months ago
Islam is slowly reforming I would say, although it would less evident in places like Afghanistan and Iraq because religion seems to take deeper root during times of war. These things need time but eventually they will change.
akkadianarab 6 months ago
U sing a lilittle goofy song that means u win the intellegent agruement? Islam doesn't send their children to jihad and suicide? Letting children to grow up to decide for themselves what they want to believe is child abuse? Your sending your children to a meaningless death. You are a child abuser!
joctheviper1 7 months ago
when it comes to any debate with any athiest
they always revert back to stereotype gutter descriptions of muslims found in sunday tabloids, no reasonable intellectual discussion or scientific evidence
but gutter stereotyping.
Athiests are fucking deluded. You are lost.
You need to take a unbiased look at Islam, your missing out on some good stuff.
tompointzero 7 months ago
The funny thing is the father of Athiesm Friedrich Nietzsche was a madman, and he died because of madness, under Islamic rules, he is considered to be a martyr because he died in a state of not being able to reason for himself, Athiests are destined for hell, when their own leader on all probabilities is heaven bound!
tompointzero 7 months ago
You western pricks act like eating Pig is a good thing! Ever heard of Pig Toilets????
Yuck, islam is amazing it stops us eating Pigs, because Pigs were used to eat human faeces.
Islam is very intelligent religion. We dont hate Pigs because they are Pigs, but because they help kill humans
tompointzero 7 months ago
@tompointzero
lol
AtheistAnubis 7 months ago
If Muslims are so stupid then why did Alhazen (Ibn al haytham) a Muslim polymath debunk the stupid theories of Ptelomy and Euchlids who said that the human eyes emit light which then helps us to see, Alhazen invented the modern scientific method to prove that the eyes take in light of objects around us! and Also Ibn Shatir stated that the earth is actually revolves around the Sun! It was Chritsians who tried Galileo who agreed with this islamic principle.
tompointzero 7 months ago
Lets take the example of The theory of relativity (which deals with the largest objects in the universe) and theory of quantum mechanics (which deals with the smallest details in the universe) BOTH THESE THEORIES REMAIN THEORIES because they lead back to the SIngularity (a singularity is a point of infinite mass and infinite time), Islam is also a body of work revolved around a singularity (Allah), yet you believe in these theories and not islam, please explain why?
tompointzero 7 months ago
Islam is the world's most peaceful religion.
And if you don't agree they'll cut your head off.
Lathox 8 months ago 9
@Lathox LOL! no way out then
freiheitsalv 8 months ago
@Lathox hahahaha lmao! : )
izzih1234 7 months ago
Very smart and good video!
MsAgnosticatheist 8 months ago
Someone has a complete misunderstanding on Islam. Islam in a way supports evolution and it has been mentioned briefly in the Quran how the people from each time were different. Evolution in almost a sure fact however, God did create the first human being. He did not look exactly as a human being would appear as today. The difference between animals and human being is (as stated int eh Quran) that we have a choice whether or not to worship God or not.
it966 9 months ago
on theory your claims may seem right , but in reality a lot of people do believe in religion and will continue to believe in it till there very last breath . In the essence of spirituality there's nothing that you know for if you did you would know what god is . This temporary world is filled with deceit, lies, false beauty and glamour , a wise man is one who realizes the foolishness of this world and turn to god for true freedom . Islam scientifically is the most logical religion in the world.
magicalgold010 9 months ago
@oiMikeyboy Yes. It absolutely does.
I hate Islam, but I don't hate arabs, persians, pashtun ,etc etc. They are subject to the same sort of brainwashing in the modern day that white people were subjected to 70 years ago. Humanity has always been vulnerable to brainwashing and it is up to those who still have control of their minds to oppose it. Not resort to blind hatred of someone cause of their ethnicity. We are all human beings and our struggle is the same.
Pooternackle5 9 months ago
@Pooternackle5 Persians are not and have never been Muslims, it was shoved down their throats through the sword or the "jaziah", by hordes of lizard eaters who erupted from the desert of Arabia. We were Zoroastrians and Buddhists, we had our own culture and civilization. They took all that away and instead gave us smelly mosques, moronic and barbaric superstitions, etiquettes of toilet, rules of sexual oppression & subjugation, and misery.
ignatei 8 months ago 3
@ignatei
persians? I saw you in the movie 300 (which is based on pre-islamic history)
before islam you were conquered by 300 men.
tompointzero 7 months ago
@tompointzero Because the movie 300 is a good historical source, hahaha.
The Persian empire was a great one. (strong, big powerful)
isubo 7 months ago
@tompointzero
You are seriously referring to a Hollywood cartoon to build your argument????
HAHAHHAHHAHHAAAAA!
RasputinStream 7 months ago
@RasputinStream
no but western media cant even make a factual movie, they love distorting facts and this is why you guys have such a incorrect opinion of the world
tompointzero 7 months ago
@tompointzero
ummm, who is "you guys" exactly????
RasputinStream 7 months ago
@oiMikeyboy No. Racism is focused on discrimination of nationality, race, or ethnicity. By your logic, people who hated nazism would be racists. Same thing goes to religion - as religion is just an ideology. Like nazism.
Pooternackle5 9 months ago
God didnot create men.Men did create God
zangir2007 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
To any intelligent human-being - my contention is: why would nobody never want to know about the one faith [i.e. Islam] or read the one scripture [i.e. Koran], which is at the centre of almost all global political, social, legal and military subjects - almost everywhere?! I've read it and found it 'an eye opener!' Think about it!
robin4good 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
any people who wants to know what islam is all about just google al rassooli, read his writtings and watch his vids. al rassooli is an arabic-as mother tongue-ex muslim, learn about islam from this learned man instead from "muslims" who do not even know the doctrine of al-nasikh wa al-mansukh in their own religion and do not even speak or write arabic.
WalkerTexasWanker 10 months ago
My grade 12 biology teacher was the best, he said "according to law I'm meant to mention creationism, but that would be wasting your time, so I will spend my time instead telling you how ridiculous it is."
OrthodoxDarwinist 11 months ago 13
i was born atheist, like everyone in the world. if these religions were valid, wouldn't we all be born religious?
vespers119 11 months ago
These religions don't seem to understand that we just go one god further than them. Everyone's an Atheist in respect to one or more religions.
EddieTheFishReturns 11 months ago
Islam has to go back to the deserts where they can live in there delusions.
wachnathan 1 year ago
@wachnathan My my, talk about ignorance!
citizenOfNowhere777 9 months ago
@citizenOfNowhere777 Ya a tad bit harsh i know.
wachnathan 9 months ago
It is interesting how when you compare the grip that religion exerts over different cultures or geographical groups, it seems to dominate the mentality of Western Europeans and Indians more than say Russians. I think that's because when you have 1/6th of the world's surface, you're more pragmatic, as you had to be to get there. When you're on a small peninsula or island, hey, a bit of religion doesn't hurt! Might make you feel more valid, or comforted, or emboldened. You can use it more.
avidalocan 1 year ago
I hope soon will be in this world more than 1 billion ex muslims...
nccflorin23 1 year ago
@nccflorin23 yep...we all hope that
muslim leaders admit to being very concerned at groundswell of non belief, saying its happening among the more 'educated'
science/truth/knowledge are killing islam....its crumbling, and from within
proudfemale 1 year ago
Religion (ALL) is the greatest FRAUD in all history. Still no evidence from any of the 300+ god claims from the past 8000 years. No intelligent person believes in miracles, angels and an eternal afterlife with an imaginary magic boss in the sky.
goldstead 1 year ago 6
@goldstead All hail the magic boss in the sky!!! lol alot of trippin' peoples on this planet... its fucking scary when you stop and think about it....
OBSysteme 1 year ago
Comment removed
bbphnix 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Religious kooks. You might enjoy the animated short, "Religious Fanatic tries to debate an Atheist" on my channel. (Brace yourself)
Sweence 1 year ago
Its not 6 days! Its six "Ayaam" ie 6 epochs!!
artistdigital 1 year ago
@artistdigital ha ha
haroon80st 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I accuse you of racism and islamophobic.
brutal6agani 1 year ago
hehe is this james bond?
Takaja316 1 year ago
before religion , everybody was equal .
antonkhuu 1 year ago 67
@antonkhuu everybody is equal, but i am more equal than the rest.
lagemegnorsk 1 year ago
@lagemegnorsk what the hell? you can't be more equal than the rest.
it's like saying you like wearing size Extra- Extra medium shirts -_-
OyonTheAdept 1 year ago
@OyonTheAdept WF is rong with you i was joking tard!
lagemegnorsk 1 year ago
@lagemegnorsk i know, you fruit cake. lol.....
i guess i shouldnt have commented, huh? @_@ im an idiot
OyonTheAdept 1 year ago
@OyonTheAdept You idiot be.
lagemegnorsk 1 year ago
@antonkhuu thats stupid, so when we were monkeys (before we evolved) we all got along?
airpickone 1 year ago
@airpickone - well we did considered any1 alike back then , thats my point .
antonkhuu 1 year ago
@airpickone we were never monkeys you dumbass. You stupid dipshits can't even properly understand the simple concept of evolution. You retards still think that Evolution claims we came from monkeys, when it teaches something else.
EVOLUTION DOES NOT STATE WE CAME FROM MONKEYS......MONKEY AND HUMANS HAVE A COMMON ANCESTOR WHICH BRANCHED OUT TO BECOME TWO SPECIES....IE - HUMAN AND PRIMATE
desichick 1 year ago
@desichick
Even that is almost purely theoretical. There still is no explanation at all for how life came about.
GoldenZealot21 1 year ago
@GoldenZealot21
You obviously have no idea of the history of India from that period. Do you even know how Mughals ruled the country. To stay in power, they needed support of the powerful Hindu kingdoms spread all over the area. This was done by a lot of kings until Aurangzeb who started to convert people by force which is well documented even by Mughals themselves. This resulted in rebellion by Jats, Marathas, Rajputs, etc and Mughals didn't last much longer after that.
stillwater82 1 year ago
@antonkhuu
Hi, I would like to correct your statement.
Religion, was in fact the very platform which appealed to people in the past since they thought it would help solve the problem of inequality.
An instance would be when Christianity & Islam were introduced to the Indians. The lower castes in India would do anything they could to get out that, so it was a huge factor contributing to their embracing of religion.
But alas, we have reached a stage whereby religion is more harmful than good.
S8917560G 1 year ago
@S8917560G Islam and Christianity were not introduced in India to root out the evil of caste system. It was rather forced down the throat (Islam more than Christianity) as conversion is an important pillar of these religions. Caste system continues to exist to this day in Muslims and Christians of the subcontinent. So it was not a religion thing. Human beings will always find a reason to put someone down. That is done through ethnicity, political ideology, colour, caste, region, religion, class
stillwater82 1 year ago
@stillwater82
If what you were saying is true, when the Mughals ruled in India, why didn't they force everyone to become Muslim? Why is India still pretty much Hindu? But yeah, you're right. There are a million and one reasons other than religion that people will put down other people, but atheists are so hateful and idiotic that they seem only to focus on religion. Can people really be that stupid?
GoldenZealot21 1 year ago
@GoldenZealot21
Mughals did force a large part of the population to convert to Islam and it is well documented. Case in point is Aurangzeb. It was not that easy to convert every Hindu as the population was large and there were many powerful Hindu rulers. In same places it was easier to provide a bit of autonomy rather than indulge in direct conflict.
stillwater82 1 year ago
@stillwater82
I think if the Mughals were actually committed to that, they would have done it, and India today would be 80% Muslim, not 80% Hindu. Dude are you crazy? If it was a large part of the population, why are only 13% Muslim? Most of them converts from post-Mughal times.
Self-determined conversion to Islam was extremely common, and really accounts for the overwhelming majority of converts in the past 1400 years, especially with a segregating ancient pagan religion just as Hinduism.
GoldenZealot21 1 year ago
@GoldenZealot21
Hinduism is not a religion and just a way of life. Are you a Muslim? First let's clear that. You mean to say that there is unity in Islam? Please. Why don't you study about Aurangzeb. His atrocities and forced conversion resulted in mutiny all over his kingdom. Babri Musjid is also a product of the same Mughals. Most people in Islam were forced to adopt it or face death. As I said, it was not easy to convert all the Hindus to Islam as there were many powerful kingdoms.
stillwater82 1 year ago
@stillwater82 Yeah, I am aware of that. I never said they were. Please read my post again.
S8917560G 1 year ago
@antonkhuu
Are you really that dumb? People were never equal. If it's not religion, it's any number of things people bicker about. If anything, religion has reduced that. But you live in your dream world where every problem comes from 'religion', so I'll leave you do that.
GoldenZealot21 1 year ago
@antonkhuu That is some straight up bullshit right there buddy. I hope you were being sarcastic.
macnos 1 year ago
@antonkhuu and after religion, everyone will be once again
ajmf35029 10 months ago
@antonkhuu before religion everybody was barbaric , they made their old religions , had no rules , the world was a mess
magicalgold010 9 months ago
@magicalgold010 the prove ,the prove is in our history ,look at it and see what barbaric acts we performed, we killed on minor issue, abused women , education was backward, science was a crime all these things happen in the time before religion ,religion provided rules , moral laws and guidance which portrayed justice in the true sense Your anger toward religion will be your downfall it has formed a fog around yur head ,in the past a lot of people made their own religion but they are extinct now
magicalgold010 9 months ago
@magicalgold010 Religion was essentially just a form of government in ancient through medieval times. Once the early modern age hit and states began to take form, religion SHOULD have been replaced by human laws - which were and are much more moral and rational. Unfortunately, religious leaders have no intent on giving up their influence so religion has continued to thrive. It died a little during the 20th century, but Islam is reversing all our society's progresses.
Pooternackle5 9 months ago
@antonkhuu Tell that Stalin. It is the people, not religion. I as a Christian do not believe it the world was made in 6x24h. Because it was before time started.
TheLi0nnnn 7 months ago
@TheLi0nnnn You don't believe the creation story in the Holy Babble?
Nothing could happen before time started.
Strangerinasland 6 months ago
@Strangerinasland Ps 50,2. Read the "Babble" (I hope I misunderstand you, imo this pejorative spelling seems to be chosen by intention). The fact we can not make any statement about things before time started, doesn't mean that nothing happened.
TheLi0nnnn 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheLi0nnnn I've read it more than you have.
You said I as a Christian do not believe it the world was made in 6x24h. I ask do you not believe the creation story in Genesis?
Holy Babble is spelled correctly & used appropriately.
Nothing can happen without time.
Strangerinasland 6 months ago
@antonkhuu Lol, how so?
CelticKraut 6 months ago
u can wait long time ,Richard
alby3d 1 year ago
Holy shit, brilliant!! You got me laughing in shock and awe!
Ps1locyb1n 1 year ago
Oh,Richard you silly antichristian.Wake up,Islam IS THE ANTIMESSIAH cult that the Bible warns about!! Hold onto your head.
jimmmmybrady 1 year ago
@jimmmmybrady
I'm sure that Richard is very very scared about the Antichrist. Because the BIBLE says so!
RedSoxForObama 1 year ago
@RedSoxForObama Of course you realise my statement wasn't made to scare Dawkins or anyone else,right?It just bothers me that so many of you atheists ARE awake to only HALF of the picture.You can see the evil of Islam spreading around the world,but you can't see it written down in the Bible,because of prejudice.
jimmmmybrady 1 year ago
@jimmmmybrady
Uh.. No. We don't constitute the Bible as evidence for anything. Because there really is no reason for us to. Logic is not prejudice.
Then again, we don't take the Quran as evidence for anything either.
Why couldn't a practictioner of (x religion) say that you Christians are only seeing half the story, and that (y religion) is hellbent on destroying the world? Why is the Bible better than any other holy book?
RedSoxForObama 1 year ago
@RedSoxForObama If you HONESTLY think that two diametricly opposed religions,written by 2 diametricly opposed cultures can coincidentaly confirm what was written in the first book while simultaneously revealing that the organization created by the second book is the evil that will persecute the world.If you really can call that coincidence then you are truly BLIND.
jimmmmybrady 1 year ago
@RedSoxForObama How did the Bible predict a beheading cult that would subjugate women,worship a man made god,bow to an image,exist in ALL the current Muslim nations(which at the time were pagan)hate Jews,and blaspheme the God of the Bible and also kill in the name of their false god???????How could this all be coincidence???And on top of that it is ALL happening in your lifetime AND you are so ignorant of Gods Word you can't see it.
jimmmmybrady 1 year ago
@jimmmmybrady
You do realize just how cruel and evil the Old Testament is, right? If not, read it. You'll be surprised at how it's just as evil, if not more, as the Quran.
Read about Arabia, and how they coexisted with Jews for 1400 years, and were a great source of knowledge and wisdom, as compared to Dark Age Europe.
People need to look up just how useful the Arabs have been to us. Do you play Chess? Do you need the number 0? If not for Islam, we might well not have Greek philosophy.
RedSoxForObama 1 year ago
@RedSoxForObama OK,Now whether I accept your position or not....the Mahdi=the Antichrist,Islam=the Beast,Black stone of the Kaaba=the image of the Beast,allah=the serpent ....AND 666=in the name of allah.IT IS TIME FOR YOU TO COME UP WITH A SURVIVAL PLAN!!!!
jimmmmybrady 1 year ago
@jimmmmybrady Frogs=dogs.
Just putting = doesn't make the 'equation' true.
RedSoxForObama 1 year ago
@RedSoxForObama: Arabia -- not Muslims -- coexisted peacefully with Jews until the pedophile prophet wrote a book stating that if you didn't believe in what his book stated, that you should be killed, and, oh, by the way, Jihad is a way of life, and kill all unbelievers if they appear within your society.
Yeah, that's the religion of peace for you!
kjmergen 1 year ago 2
@kjmergen wikipedia(dot)org/wiki/Islam_and_Judaism#Middle_Ages
And then read:
wikipedia(dot)org/wiki/Persecution_of_Jews_in_the_First_Crusade
See the difference?
Also, I know Muslims have committed atrocities, and I know that it's not, generally, a peaceful religion. But if someone claims, on no evidence whatsoever, that it's a religion based totally on evil, I feel compelled to fight on its side. I'd do the same for Christianity and -at a stretch- Judaism.
RedSoxForObama 1 year ago
@RedSoxForObama well, it was founded by a mass-murdering toddler-fucker, so there's that.
MentalSentinel 1 year ago
@MentalSentinel
Your religion (most likely) was founded by a schizophrenic, masochist megalomaniac, so there's that.
RedSoxForObama 1 year ago 42
@RedSoxForObama don't have a religion, but I agree with you about Jesus
MentalSentinel 1 year ago
@GnosticReality curry or carry?
blueray1969 1 year ago
2 facts: Science has given the world stuff like internet, use of electricity, TV, radio, medicines, health. Islam has given us scarfs and carpets. Duno about you but I prefer the things science gives us.
Tailgunner757 1 year ago
@Tailgunner757 Read below!
1tabligh 1 year ago
@1tabligh I have no idea of what you're talking about but I do agree that everything can never be explained. So let the religious people keep trying while scientists think about how to make the world a better place.
Tailgunner757 1 year ago
@Tailgunner757 Before he enters the realm of science and knowledge with all its concerns, man is able to perceive certain truths by means of these innate perceptions. But after entering the sphere of science and philosophy and filling his *brain* with various proofs and deductions, he may forget his natural and innate perceptions or begin to doubt them. It is for this reason that when man moves beyond his innate nature to delineate a belief, differences begin to appear. ...
1tabligh 1 year ago
@1tabligh The natural truths that you speak of are basic and have nothing to do with a god. They are survival, sleep, sex, hunger; only the most crude and animalistic sensations produced by chemical reactions in our brains. You cannot vilify science simply because there is nothing to vilify. It is observable, provable truth. You can refuse to accept it, but that in the end comes to your choice. You would not be typing comments into youtube if we lived in a theocracy. God has given us nothing.
s9083061 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@s9083061
Is that which is necessary in essence and which is considered the first source of existence matter itself or something else beyond the limits of matter?
Dodging ALL the questions and quibbling in vain!
Materialism looks at the world with one eye *closed* and, as a result, is unable to answer numerous questions!
1tabligh 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
God and Empirical Logic.
One of the most destructive and misleading factors in thoughts concerning God is to restrict one's thought to the "logic" of the empirical sciences and to *fail* to recognize the *limits* and boundaries of that "logic".
Is that which is necessary in essence and which is considered the first source of existence matter itself or something else beyond the limits of matter?
1tabligh 1 year ago
How can the atheists delude themselve and believe that hydrogen and oxygen, electrons and protons, should first produce themselves, then be the source for all other beings, and finally decree the laws that regulate themselves and the rest of the material world?
1tabligh 1 year ago
laflugantabastardo 1 year ago
@1tabligh Seriously? "believe", Atheism has NOTHING to do with what people BELIEVE. Atheism is only about what a person does not believe in, which is the illogical fallacy that is God(s) that religions sprout out. Atheists don't have to believe there isn't a god, just to not believe in one. As it goes, I have never met an Atheist who believes the junk you are on about. If you are on about the Big Bang Theory then that happened, not believed, not just a theory... it happened, we don't have (cont)
DoomsdayR3sistance 1 year ago
a complete picture of it and that picture is bound to change but the signs it occurred are very evident. However the big bang theory has nothing to do with Hydrogen, Oxygen, Electrons or Protons. In fact it's highly probable that none of these even existed before the Singularity that exploded in the big bang... exploded.
Also in science laws are not self-regulatory systems, In layman's terms they are more simply descriptions of behavior of phenomena that always follow the same pattern.
DoomsdayR3sistance 1 year ago
@DoomsdayR3sistance In other words, that which moves is the subject of motion, while the mover is the cause of motion. Can the same thing in the same respect be simultaneously a subject of motion and a cause of it?
1tabligh 1 year ago
@1tabligh This would only be a question of any real relevance if the universe was shifting or moving, but there is nothing to suggest that it is. While things within it might be moving the total momentum of the universe appears to be zero. On a more local level, yes it can because the total momentum of the universe as zero still appears to be preserved and no effect of shifting motion actually changes this as it still requires an equal and opposite force to be applied that negates the effect.
DoomsdayR3sistance 1 year ago
@DoomsdayR3sistance With regard to this issue, this is the only explanation that the dialectic can offer as a justification of the dynamism of matter. However, it is very easy to see why this explanation cannot be adopted from a scientific point of view. If hydrogen were to contain its contradictory essentially and to develop due to this fact, in accordance with the alleged dialectical laws, then why is it that not all the hydrogen atoms were completed?
1tabligh 1 year ago
@1tabligh You are making no sense here, but then given the dribble you have displayed above I am more inclined to believe this is because this is simply nonsense then anything else. Considering we can create a natural process like fire produces a lot of Hydrogen Nuclei which are not complete hydrogen atoms and this is generally due to the heat (or excitement) caused by the fire... a fire compares nothing to initial heat that would been experienced by the universe during the big bang.
DoomsdayR3sistance 1 year ago
correction: Considering we can observe a natural process like fire*
DoomsdayR3sistance 1 year ago
I will note I could be wrong about this, as I have never studied Thermo sciences, however if I remember right, such a process as fire does create hydrogen nuclei and that is a much lesser reaction then the big bang.
DoomsdayR3sistance 1 year ago
@DoomsdayR3sistance [In other words], why did the essential completion pertain to some atoms and not to others?
1tabligh 1 year ago
@1tabligh Because the universe is not an intellectual thing and it is not a governed thing, it does not care about if atoms are fully formed or not, it's just chance and appears random to us but that could just be more related to our lack of understanding of how this universe was formed. Effectively it just happened, if they were all formed or none formed then you'd have a case for a god because that defies chance, this is within chance.
DoomsdayR3sistance 1 year ago
@DoomsdayR3sistance it's just chance ...
______
The Depths of Man's Being Impel Him to Seek God!
If the whole Universe is the result of chance and accident, what is it that did not emerge on the basis of chance?
If an existent thing came into being not by virtue of chance, what are its distinguishing features and characteristics and can they be applied to the numerous and variegated phenomena of the universe?...
1tabligh 1 year ago
If the origin of the Universe were based on accident, why are the theories even of the materialists based on the supposition of a plan, an ordering, an absence of chance?
How is it possible that accident should lie at the origin of such orderly relationships?
1tabligh 1 year ago
@1tabligh This is meaningless in prove that something like a god has to be tho, because just like this universe, in this scenario the existence of that god could only ever have been "chance" and so the argument of chance is meaningless. In fact by chance, the development of the universe as a single element of energy as a singularity that is as complex as the universe is much much more probable then a god whom is almost infinitely more complex then that.
DoomsdayR3sistance 1 year ago
as for the virtue of things that come along by chance, DNA is a great sign of things just being the result of chance, because it varies between species but it's variation is less between more closely related species then further related species because the effect of chance has not played as much part in the diversity (evolution) of those species then it has further away related species. This phenomena is very much a characteristic of a none-divine creation of species to answer your question.
DoomsdayR3sistance 1 year ago
So far you haven't created a single reason why a god must exist, you have only been prodding for a hopeful gap where god could be placed, but while science doesn't know everything and neither does any one man... science knows enough that the expansion of the universe, the solar system, the earth and even life don't require any external intervention what so ever. to me you are taking a very much god of the gaps scenario, trying to find the gaps you can plug god into, but god is not a default.
DoomsdayR3sistance 1 year ago
A default is simply no explanation, to admit we do not know what we do not know is a much more honest and truthful explanation then coming up with "quick fix" answers of which god is. God has been used for millenniums as way to answer questions that couldn't be answered and almost all cases of this by know have been disproved, the default position was clearly wrong to assume anything behind an unexplained scenario and so the only truthful answer would be, "I do not know".
DoomsdayR3sistance 1 year ago
also just to finish off, I think you have made the assumption that chance is "random", which is not the case, in fact chance tends to be very ordered and probability needs to be guessed only because don't know which way a dice will roll, but when thrown all forces against a dice essentially have been set and so physics will not chance, the fields and particles that order everything are still in effect and the dice will only ever land one way which isn't actually random at all.
DoomsdayR3sistance 1 year ago
correction: and so physical will not change
DoomsdayR3sistance 1 year ago
@DoomsdayR3sistance Based on the law of probabilities, the result of universal independent motivation could be only dispersal and anarchy, tending to a uniform death.
The law of probabilities also decisively refutes the appearance of the world by way of accident, considering it irrational and impossible. Even calculations based on the mathematical law of probabilities confirm the necessity of correct guidance and planning for the world, ...
1tabligh 1 year ago
in accordance with a precise program and a conscious will.
The law of probabilities deals, in fact, a decisive *blow* to those who believe in theory of the accidental origination of the universe. If we attempt to apply the theory of accident to a simple system or to small numbers, its applicability is not impossible, although extremely unlikely. ...
1tabligh 1 year ago
But it is inconceivable that one should ever chance on a geometric accident expressing the firm orderliness and harmony that prevail in the complex system of the world. Partial and simple changes in the order of existence are also unable to explain the transformation of the world, the coalescing of diverse elements, and the compounding of fundamental atoms to form a harmonious compound. ...
1tabligh 1 year ago
If nature was once engaged autonomously in composition and formation, why does it not now display any initiative in the direction of changing itself further; why does it no longer exhibit profound, automatic change?
1tabligh 1 year ago
@1tabligh I can't be bothered to read all of that anymore... I think it's easy to say that it's essentially junk. You are asserting things on baseless queries. As it goes the universe is heading towards a uniform death thanks to entropy but it's so far off into the future we have a lot of time to come up with a solution... also probabilities are pointless for events in the "past". Saying I threw a dice it came up six has a probability of one because it happened, so saying it's improbable (cont)
DoomsdayR3sistance 1 year ago
because it's a past event is flawed logic, if you add more dice the number that come up 6 is an event that has happened, it becomes harder to replicate because it's in the past, 100 dice, 10,000 dice it doesn't matter it happened, we aren't trying to replicate. Also these probabilities can't actually be calculated at all as the conditions under which the universe formed is much different to the current form of the universe thus without being able to replicate that existence (cont)
DoomsdayR3sistance 1 year ago
any number we come up with now is only metaphysics and has no scientific meaning at all.
Also you say the universe isn't forming and composing? but it is, there are galaxies and solar systems being formed within the universe even now, these areas where this goes the most usually appear as black nebula, and they are so thick with matter they are forming more complex forms, so that's in my opinion an argument from ignorance.
DoomsdayR3sistance 1 year ago
@DoomsdayR3sistance Of course, it is not necessary that the law of causality should always manifest itself to us in familiar forms. The variety and multiplicity of causes is such that an investigator concerned with only one phenomenon might not be able to specify all the causes. However, in all the affairs of mankind, particular and general, past and future, in the circumstances of the individual or of society, not a single point can be found that is accidental. ...
1tabligh 1 year ago
Not only is there a particular order inherent in the creation of each separate phenomenon; there is also observable in the relationship of every phenomenon with other phenomena, as well as the relationship of each phenomenon with the environment within which it exists, a subtle and finely calculated order.
...
1tabligh 1 year ago
For example, in the cultivation of a tree, the laws of the heavens and the earth operate in perfect harmony with the structure of its roots and branches. There is also a relationship of animals with that tree insofar as they draw nourishment from it. How is it possible that accident should lie at the origin of such orderly relationships?
1tabligh 1 year ago
@1tabligh accident? hello, have you read the theory of evolution? it's about survival of the fittest, such order is used only because it's a better survival trait, however not all trees have their roots fully in the ground, in fact many have the top parts of their roots actually above the ground. Also there isn't a "perfect" harmony at all, that's another baseless assertion by yourself. Can you come back with either evidence or just stop, this dribble is getting annoying.
DoomsdayR3sistance 1 year ago
And by evidence, I mean something actually solid, not some random junk put together in a pretty meaningless form to make it look like everything is "organized", which I have pointed out earlier and you even asked, why Hydrogen isn't perfectly organized, a point to which I pointed out you would only have an argument for god if Hydrogen was all either complete or not complete, not the variety we actually see.
DoomsdayR3sistance 1 year ago
@DoomsdayR3sistance
He's not actually giving you answers. He's copypasting bits of text from pro-Quran websites. Just ignore him, he's a copypasting machine.
laflugantabastardo 1 year ago
@laflugantabastardo I thought as much, the writing style was attempting to be to eloquent for something purposefully written for youtube, however he also appears to have stopped which is likely my damned for him to provide actual evidence for a god and not just try to find gaps where one could be, since could is still insanely improbable, unlikely and not a default, which I think has stopped him since there is no possible meaningful response to that.
DoomsdayR3sistance 1 year ago
@DoomsdayR3sistance
And a horrible attempt it is. :-P
I'm kind of hounding him - wasting my time so others won't - so believe me, you're not the only one arguing that shadow. ;-)
laflugantabastardo 1 year ago
@laflugantabastardo Ah ok, I have seen him around before and this isn't the first time I have out-right defeated him either. In fact I have never seen him ever win anywhere.
DoomsdayR3sistance 1 year ago
@DoomsdayR3sistance If a phenomenon were to take shape at a certain level in the structure of being, unconsciously and on the basis of chance, this would furnish an excellent groundwork for the disappearance and destruction of the world. For the slightest disruption in the balance of elements and the smallest disharmony in the radiant laws of the universe would be enough to make things lose their moorings and the heavenly bodies collide, ...
1tabligh 1 year ago
resulting in a massive explosion and the destruction of the world.
Now since accident is opposed to order and harmony, it follows that whatever bears traces of planning, design and calculation should be disharmonious and discontinuous, because the concepts of planning, design and calculation are opposed to accident and chance. ...
1tabligh 1 year ago
To suppose that accident is the infrastructure of the universe and its governing principle does not rest on any logical proof or scientific evidence cannot be accepted as a definitive solution to the geometry of the structure of being.
1tabligh 1 year ago
@1tabligh *Yawn* of course the only way things would just change against their natural universal laws is if there was something to change those laws, IE an intelligent being capable of it, IE God or a highly advanced race. No Highly advanced alien race seems to have any reason to destroy us... but according to most holy books, the Abrahamic god of Judaism, Christianity and Islam does. So the fact that such events have not happened is likely just more proof god does not exist.
DoomsdayR3sistance 1 year ago
@DoomsdayR3sistance What then is the cause that makes the development of hydrogen to helium limited to a specific quantity [of hydrogen atoms], while setting the rest free from the fetters of this inevitable development?
1tabligh 1 year ago
@1tabligh Time.
DoomsdayR3sistance 1 year ago
@DoomsdayR3sistance Can the dialectic show us that if this dialectical progression were to come about in an essential and dynamic form, why then is it limited to a specific quantity of the two elements, and does not occur to every hydrogen and oxygen [atom]?
1tabligh 1 year ago
@1tabligh yes, it can.
DoomsdayR3sistance 1 year ago
@DoomsdayR3sistance Can this colossal planning, which ensures that the act of vision falls among the best acts of matter, be without guidance and purpose, even though the mere discovery of it requires strong intellectual efforts?
1tabligh 1 year ago
@1tabligh where did "planning" come from. Don't add your own nonsensical assertions randomly. The conversion via time can, which is not an intellectual process, what follows is meaningless drivel, effort of discovery is meaningless, easy or hard if it's probable, it's probable.
DoomsdayR3sistance 1 year ago
@DoomsdayR3sistance If the theory of self-procreation is dropped, in light of scientific research, how then can they explain the arising of life on the face of the earth?
1tabligh 1 year ago
@1tabligh abiogenesis.
DoomsdayR3sistance 1 year ago
@DoomsdayR3sistance Would there be a way for the human heart after that to shut off its eyes in the light and to overlook the clear, divine reality that trusted the secret of life to the primary cell or cells?
If this were not so, why then did nature turn away forever from the act of self-procreation? ...
1tabligh 1 year ago
This means that if the materialistic explanation of the primary cell of life by selfprocreation were correct, how could materialism then explain the nonrecurrence of self-procreation in nature with the tong passage of tune?
Indeed, this is a perplexing question for the materialists.
1tabligh 1 year ago
@1tabligh ABIOGENESIS, it contains ALL these answers.
DoomsdayR3sistance 1 year ago
@DoomsdayR3sistance ABIOGENESIS, it contains ALL these answers.
________
Absurdity of Atheism!
If abiogenesis spontaneous creation *without* specific design can be admitted under such conditions of regularity, then purposeful generation and definitely balanced creation can be the result of *error* ad perplexity, since these two are *opposed* to abiogenesis. ...
1tabligh 1 year ago
Such a statement is highly *absurd* that order and rectitude should come about *without* a Creator, and disorder and impropriety of design and *fate* should suppose a Creator. He is an *ignoramus* who says this, because anything produced *without* design will ***never*** be exact and proportioned, while disorder and contrariness cannot co-exist with orderly design. God is far above what the *ignorant atheists* say.
1tabligh 1 year ago
@1tabligh
What is absurd is the assertion that their must be a creator when we already have answers that show one does not need be. Indeed such Absurdity is the result trying to find answers without reason or logic but simply an answer, no matter how false it is. We already know of potential fields, none-intelligent things that appear responsible for such phenomena like the Higgs Field and it's Boson. The theists cry, wanting a gap to *insert* god, such a default is only ever wrong.
DoomsdayR3sistance 1 year ago
P.S. you were asking about life, Abiogenesis has nothing to do with the creation of the universe and Abiogenesis certainly is not *spontaneous*, Abiogenesis takes millions, if not billions of years.
DoomsdayR3sistance 1 year ago
@DoomsdayR3sistance If self-procreation took place at first, in accordance with certain laws and decrees, as water is produced due to a certain chemical composition between oxygen and hydrogen, it becomes necessary for it to be repeated in accordance with those laws and decrees, as the existence of water is repeated whenever certain chemical factors are present, whether or not water is necessary; for necessity in the natural sense is merely the necessity produced by the laws and ...
1tabligh 1 year ago
decrees of nature.
What then made those laws and decrees different?
The precise hereditary system and the astonishing power in the minute genes, which gives direction to all the cells of the body and p