This is too funny. So what you;'re saying is I should relinquish my free will, stop thinking, and become a slave and essentially summit my mind and body to this god who, lets say, did in fact create everything besides itself. That's like me creating a robot, giving it A.I. and saying I am its god for creating it and therefore, it should live for my purposes only, not its own. Shit, if the christian god were true, I would rather die free than to live as a slave. And if that didn't work, I'd fight
@nlytend1 You know nothing about Christianity then. God wants love. Atheism requires you to be a slave as it - like Satanism - encourages you to be a slave to your own body and follow whatever carnal desires you may have, be they pedophilia, homosexuality or necrophilia. Don't give me that bullshit that atheism isn't a religion because we know it is. The way you atheists all attack religion and speak of your evolution is just as religious as the believer's speeches.
@KookyincSucksShit I'm not a Satanist so don't talk to me like I am one. And just because atheists speak out against gov't endorsing religion in a public sphere that doesn't make atheism a religion. If you don't see the logic in that, take a class on critical thinking. Anyhow, if you want a better explanation for why atheists speak out, go to "opposingviews" website and enter in their search bar: "an atheist explains his activism." Click the first link. He says it better than I can.
So is there a hell for Non-Deists? The way that I understand Deism is that some intelligence created the universe and then went on to do other things. So the Deistic intelligence is not a Theistic God and doesn't really require anything of us. Maybe it would want us to take care of our planet but that's about it.
Deism is a path of understanding the Infinite. This Force/Power that the billions of us rightly honor with the sacred title of God. A Deist is any person that believes in God. A pure Deist is any person who follows the path of Deism which is studying the collective whole of the product that comes from this Source,"EVERYTHING". Oppose to just one book.
You seem to get your definition of what a pure Deist believes on matters of God from a Christian view?
@DeistReality Did you ever see the Skeptic Bible Study videos that came out a few years ago? A Deist guy made those videos. And he always used to say at the end "May God's gift of reason light our way."
PS: William Lane Craig is an awesome theist debater, too. He's so good, in fact, that Dawkins refuses to debate him... because he knows he'll get his butt handed to him.
Good video! Thumbs up. Do a search of the debate between Richard Dawkins and John Lennox. Lennox wipes up the floor with Dawkins ... Ravi Zacharias is a genius, too.
Dawkins is not a very clever man its sad how many are taken in by him he has no or little understanding of what ID is really about s resorts to straw men arguments he has this bizare idea that any signs of design must be a illusion there can't be any room for a creator this is not a scientific statement but a ideological one from a man who has a pet hatred of faith.
Let's try that "creation proves creator" logic another way:
The sun god Frith created existence, things exist, thus Frith is undeniably the creator.
Even if existence DID require a creator, you can't possibly know WHICH creator. Honestly, this is the kind of painfully obvious shit I thought of when I was, like, 6. So small child me is smarter than full grown adult Christians. Not surprising.
too much going on in your video. Music too overpowering when Dawkins speaks. Talking, music, other text going on screen to read. Really hard to process this as more than noise. You sound angry and you mis-represent the very nature of atheism. At the end of the video, I think you're a deist, in which case you would believe in a creator, but realize said creator has no personal interest in you.
You are an IDIOT claiming God gives people blessings of Food,Water & Health. Maybe you should take notice of the thousands of people that die everyday from starvation, Something that can easily be remedied by your all Knowing all Powerful God.
@bumper302 - YOU are the FOOL! GOD has indeed provided for all our needs! He has even given all of us free will to exercise it for the good or evil of mankind. Now, people dying from starvation is the direct result of greed stemming from the hearts of a majority of individuals in this world. Mahatma Gandhi once stated - "There is enough for everybody's need but NOT for everybody's GREED! Open your eyes and mind to this.
@sparkleNshine70 I do not have the time to argue with someone whom is obviously delusional. You should have the BALLS to attempt to debate Mr Dawkins directly. He would thoroughly DECAPITATE you INTELLECTUALLY.
Everybody either dies earlier with their mental faculties intact, or lives to a point where their mental faculties begin to decline and they become subject to mental errors in their reasoning processes. I have seen this over and over in my grandparent's lives, followed in their turn by my parents. Actually, it is the onset of a mental decline that I fear more, much more, than death. I dread that I should ever become a God believer cause it is just plain stupid!!!
@Slik00Silk - And your belief much better? Better than everybody else's? How silly are you, really? Do you have a better alternative and can you make it ever happen? We all know the answer to that, don't we?
@sparkleNshine70 Of course my belief is better than the God believers because it is based on rational consideration of the evidence. Religious beliefs are based on dusty old books that were written by men who were very ignorant of the processes that govern the real world. Perhaps they were advanced thinkers for their time, but they drew conclusions based only on the limited knowledge availible to them. Since then, their followers have killed those who disagreed with them. For shame!
@sparkleNshine70 Yes the better alternative is to believe only in that for which there is evidence. To base your life on a delusion because you can't face up to the fact of your impending death is stupid and infantile....as well as futiule.
@listenup345 "he just lands low blows like moral attacks on christians and God when he cant deny the science that they provide,"
What science?
The only infantile foot-stomping going on here is from some inarticulate youtube theist calling some a SICK FUCK for failing to check their brain at the door of the church.
But you said you have science on your side. Let's hear your "evidence" again. What is it, the ontological, teleological, moral or personal argument?
Deism is BS its understanding theirs God an spirituality without finding which God and what kind of spirituality is the correct to relate with aforce that is great enough to create this universe and cetainly great enough to have a spirtual relationship and a guiding force with his creations,Christianity is the way all other religions have been corrupted and do not come the important truth it does i have researched all the religions their are out their and it make sense of them all and evrything.
I mean all the things he said he would expect to display good evidence of God for him to beleive, do show more than enough evidence and more finite evidence than any of his ideas for any of his theorys this fucker is suffering from a bad case of double standards I used to be sure this guy was right thank God i saw the light, this way thinking is depressing and most the ppl are so bleek and dull him hitchens even flew its like these ppl have no guiding force or natural conviction for any good.
Dawkins is like a fuckin child stomping all around his house because he never got his way, I dont think this moron will ever find a satysfying arguement,even when their better than his he just lands low blows like moral attacks on christians and God when he cant deny the science that they provide, im starting to beleive he knows hes wrong and he must have a bigger agenda i think hes just avoiding conversion to keep his flock of very lost sheep all the way behind him to hell SICK FUCK!
There is something I respect about Deism, as well as Pantheism. They both acknowledge something divine about the natural world. But the word of God is probably not revealed to us in the form of some holy book of religious myths. And God is accessed by experience - not empirical evidence. God is not an explanation for anything so much as it is a realization of how wonderous the universe is. And lastly, the pseudoscience of intelligent design is not a scientific argument for God.
@BillofRightsBrutus what patronising bull Flew realised there might be something in ID so the militant atheists start to name call . Dawkins is a arrogant lying follower of the religion of secular humanism he sees ID a threat to his world view.
@lv4ev5 lol. that's funny. Anybody that's buying he fell over into the land of theism by a concept that is little more than evolution with ID squeezed into it should go back and read his earlier writings or listen to debates when he was in his prime. You're probably one of those people that's impressed the god gene looks like a cross too, I would almost bet. Ooooh. lol. Here's a tip. That thing that might look like jesus to you in your cereal bowl tomorrow morning will be just cereal. lol.
This video is stupid. Dawkins is dead on; maybe some day there will be a basis from which to really ponder something in the fields he spoke concerning. That said, evolution gets better every day. ID hasn't been viable for 2-3 decades. It might have been a nice argument then, but not anymore. It's hot now because people understand less about biology and the transitional record now than high school students did back in the day. The proofs of evolution are exponential to what they were even then.
i don't understand why people think that the complexity of life is proof of god, its not. its actually the opposite. if god can create anything anyway he wants, he could create something simply. what possible reason is there to create something complex when you can create it simply? if god can create us the way we are without the need of all our complexity in being, why wouldn't he? the is no logical reason. the complexity of life is evidence of the absence of a god, not the presence of one.
@lovexhater well naturally we wouldn't have knowledge of DNA or anything that wouldn't exist. but if god could do anything he could make us out of clay and still grant us life. if god can do anything why would he make us so complex? its not for our own benefit. it wouldn't make a difference to us whether we were made of neurons and cells or magic and clay cause we wouldn't know any different. we understand why we are made the way we are by evolution, but being designed like this makes no sense.
@jinofthethunder I see what your saying now. I'm a deist like Flew, so I believe in evolution. Whether designed by evolution or something like the Christian God, I think we would be built this way for survival purposes regardless.
"There is a God: How the World's Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind" by Anthony Flew
This book makes Richard Dawkins' book or Christopher Hirchens book look like comic books.
If Anthony Flew can see these things, why not Dawkins or why didn't Hitchens? The answer is Flew used his mind sufficiently in regards to arguments while Dawkins and Hitchens have not done so. They failed to put pieces together.
@tubejpr Well when you are just making things up, like saying that atheists have doctrine I am goin to call you on your bullshit. Dont make dumb, ignorant comments and I will leave you alone.
belief in a god is silly, but the evils of organized religion- not so easy to laugh at. The catholic church, islam, fundie christianity are all evil and holding back helpful science such as stem cell research. christians are so fucking stupid to believe in fairy tales. How could a woman ever get pregnant without sperm? Dead come back to life several times in the bible-seriously? What do believers really get from this shit? life is not that hard that you have to believe in nonsense. fools.
@mikemfd232 Hahahah, maybe you should read Dawkins paper called "why atheism is so fatally flawed!"
You atheists think your so smart, but in reality atheism is not intellectual at all, its pure ignorance!, you might awsell bury your head in the sand like an ostrich!, thats you!
The sad fact is most atheists say "well god cannot be real as he never speaks to me!' well thats just dumb! as most atheists dont want to know!, Thats it, so its you!, God gave us free will mate, remember that
@Sabianstix85 Actually, I don't think atheist think they are 'so smart', as you state. It really doesn't require an abundance of knowledge to understand all god claims are false. Of course, the nearly two dozen spelling and grammatical errors, to say nothing of faulty reasoning on your part lead me to the conclusion that perhaps you can see the irony of your post calling atheists 'dumb', mate.
Oh boy,now Anthony is old and has suddenly become senile,and he only used to be a great philosopher now that he believes in a Creator,how pathetic of you Richie.
@Rozmic I'm sure this is true,but why would he believe in a Creator now? He has told us why,because of the discovery of DNA and exactly what it means.I don't see Anthony babbling incoherently,he makes a very good case,however he hasn't believed in Jesus as his Savior,but soon he may,that's up to God.
@Rozmic Actually I don't think that's the reason.When we realized that any life is so complex and that all life must have DNA before it can exist,that throws a wrench into life just popping up.Also the universe is so incredibly tuned for life on our planet,it boggles the mind that it could just happen by chance,from nowhere and from nothing.
@CBALLEN I agree with this 'fine-tuned' universe theory. Dr. Gerald Schroeder of MIT has presented a very compelling argument for the existence of God based upon this theory, and I must say, it convinced me.
DNA is not a 'code' per se; it is a complicated series of chemical reactions. The complexity of such reactions would suggest there was a higher intelligence behind it; it is explained in greater detail here: Put this at the end of your URL: =yV-LzTO-xdg
@efb1991 Amen,I've listened to some of Dr.Schoeder's work and it's very interesting.The thing about DNA ,as well as all information( sender,receiver systems) when traced back to it's sender,will always be intelligent life and that's in every case.Those who try to deny God don't take these truths into account.No physical laws can be broken either,in fact, science is based on these laws,if they weren't then we couldn't be sure of anything.
Holy crap! I was totally sure the circular reasoning and nonsense of the start of the vid with the Wizard of Oz voice was an Atheist presenting a strawman argument for deism. Wow! Someone actually believers all that nonsense non-ironically! Hilarious!
@DanTheGerbil360 Wow, you must be desperate to talk about my punctuation. You can't support your idiotic comments and have to resort to attacking my punctuation. Way to go.
@MrKGatl And you're the pinnacle of human evolution, remember to take your antidepressants. Some of the dumbest and arrogance people I've met were atheists.
I am not a theist, Internet discussion is a waste of time
@HomuncuIus you should also remember that theists make up nearly the entire psychiatric population. Dumbest and arrogant? You are just a dishonest person, making things up. Im sure you are aware that atheism is rapidly growing. Atheists are better educated than theists and generally have higher IQ's. Whats your reason for the vast number of atheists among scientists, doctors, academics, professors? Its not a coincidence that smart people dont believe in fairy tales.
@MrKGatl At least you found something to feel superior to, I am sure persecuting others gives your life meaning. Your statistics are wrong, not that follow things based on popularity. I share the same views as Einstein, I used to be an atheist.
@HomuncuIus Why would I feel superior about simple facts and truths. I dont persecute people, but I do not hold back on bad ideas. When you make such uneducated and ignorant comment I am going to let you know. Sorry if I didnt sugarcoat it for you.
@HomuncuIus If you have the same views as Einstein, you *are* an atheist.
"The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish." He didn't believe in the soul. He didn't believe in spirits or the supernatural. His views were like those of Sagan or Dawkins, except he sometime used the word "god" as a metaphor for the natural world.
@MrKGatl Unfortunately, however, atheists have an SQ of ZERO, and, typically an EQ below average, because they 'think' IQ is the metric of intelligence, wrongly. They also believe that, given this position, they are superior creatures, and that - since they 'believe' God does not exist - a theist MUST be less intelligent and inferior, because they do believe. The perhaps harsh reality is that athiests simply have difficulty in things unverifiable.
@9b8 Lets not get ridiculous. Being an atheist does not make you smarter or more educated. There is however a correllation between smarter and more educated people an atheism. The vast majority of atheists are educated, and fairly intellegent people. While there are many theists who are smart, the vast majority of uneducated people are theists as well. You sound like an angry kid.
@MrKGatl That is so incredibly fallacal to say the majority of uneducated people are theist. Yet you admit that the majority of the world are theist. This correlation is useless for this argument. And to then use a simile "like an angry kid" serves no useful purpose, either. Do you desire to just rersort to personal attacks? That is a two-way street, bubba.
@9b8 It is absolutely true that the majority of uneducated people are theists. Read the above comment about Einstein's beliefs, ideologger is exactly right. I'm sure you will discredit and refuse to listen since it has those things you hate so much, you know, facts.
@MrKGatl FWIW there is also a "vast" number of theists among both the sciences and arts, and well distributed across the respective disciplines and throughout history. Interestingly however, the atheists that do hold science positions are finding increasing evidence that supports intelligent design more, not vice versa. There is all the concern in the world about science proving God, but absolutely no concern about science disproving God.
@9b8 Theists are 85% of the population in the US, so of course there are theists everywhere. Thats is just plain bullshit about intelligent design, there are very few scientists who believe in intelligent design. They are not finding any evidence of intelligent design. ID is just a trojan horse for creation science, which ironically is devoid of science.
@MrKGatl The majority of the world poulation is theist, not just the US. The evidence is right in front of anyone's face. It is an issue of literal ignorance. Hawking has strongly implied it. So did Einstein. Many biologists have. The incredible complexity of DNA and the human genome alone is ore than enough. subatomic particles, dark energy, dark matter, Astro-physics itself has all but surrendered itself to this. There is nothing ironic about intelligent design. It is inherent.
@9b8 The evidence is not in front of anyone's face because there is no evidence. You are the ignorant one who claims that there is evidence where there is not. Hawkins does not believe in a god, and Einstein did not believe in a personal god. You are falling into primitive thinking, "oh this is complicated, it must be god". There is no such thing as intelligent design. Intelligent design was created by religious groups, not scientists or experts.
@tubejpr Can you provide proof of your statement being true? My personal experience was the opposite; I learned more and more and came to have less and less faith until I gave up Christianity as a paranoid recording of bronze age peasants. But that's my opinion on it, science has already proven many points to be false already. Do you have proof of my increased faith?
@CheffBryan thanks for your response on my input. I believe I have no advantage over you regarding the availability of proof for God's existence, We are in the same position so to speak in proving God's existence. And the main proof is our own physical existence. That is, we are not self-made nor we self-exist. This simple but hard fact is indispensable to justify belief in Him.And that is where a solution to your problem begins.
That's putting words in my mouth an uncalled for. I have no problem beyond people denying truths in favor of their comfort in what it is they believe. Also, "self-exist" is terminology that has only been used by the religious; an isolated person since birth knows they exist, simply by their interactions with the world. And please don't take that argument to mean that we only existed after eating forbidden fruit, that would make you sound stupid, just saying. :/
@CheffBryan Your response does not amount to anything but just plain rhetoric and sarcasm by just responding ''And please don't take that argument to mean that we only existed after eating forbidden fruit, that would make you sound stupid, just saying. '' which indeed literally, are words coming from your own mouth. tsk..tsk..tsk..
Please refute therefore my arguments on the reality of our existence in a more academic and philosophical way but never on just rhetorical non sense tone. Thanks.
@Fredonia2k . Please elaborate further what you meant by your statement above which is "That's a talking point cherished by people who don't know what the word faith means.''
@tubejpr "I takes more faith to believe in the non existence of God than to have faith in His existence."
Theists like to trot that out because they like to say that atheism is the claim that no gods exist. That's not the case. Atheism is the denial of your god claim based on the lack of evidence. It takes absolutely zero faith to reject that claim. There is some room for nuance if you meant that atheists claim there are absolutely no gods, but that is a mischaracterization of what atheism is.
@tubejpr Thats just an ignorant and uneducated comment. There is absolutely zero evidence of a god or gods, so it doesnt take faith to be a non believer. It just takes intellect and logic. Faith just means you have no reason to believe something but still do. And we dont have any ridiculous faith in our lives.
@MrKGatl By definition, atheism is the doctrine of belief that there is no God. It is an affirmation of God nonexistence. Postulating the nonexistence of God, atheism immediately commits the blunder of an absolute negation, which is self-contradictory. For to sustain the belief that there is no God, it has to demonstrate infinite knowledge, which is tantamount in saying, "I have infinite knowledge that there is no being in existence with infinite knowledge.''
@tubejpr Atheism has no doctrines. Do I need infinite knowledge to not believe in a flying teapot orbiting the earth? Do you have infinited knowledge that there is no monkey in your butt? Or to not believe that I am inside the matrix? What about the absurd claim that there IS a god. Its always funny how so many people on your side twist logic to support their beliefs.
@MrKGatl You do not even understand that Atheism is a kind of doctrine? Wowowie!. How hilarious your way of illustrating your non sensible ideas. And indeed, it always funny how so many people like you, have your own kind of twisted logic to support your non belief of a higher Being than yourself. Who gave you the very ability to reason and to think in the first place.
@tubejpr You are such a moron. I am also a non believer in fairies, like many other people. Do we non fairie believers have a doctrine. How is it non sensible to disbelieve bronze age myths. You're just another uneducated and ignorant person who cant imagine a world without your fairy tales. Well if god gave me the ability to think, why did he not give you the same ability. You have no idea what you're talking about and im a little embarrassed for you.
@MrKGatl Yes, you are an embarrassing individual exhibiting the usual atheism habits of responding often by sarcasm expressions only which are non sensible matters. Which is indeed right to throw back to you, since these words are very applicable to your kind of thinking like.." your are such a moron'', ''you are just another uneducated and ignorant person.'' and ''you have no idea of what you're talking about". Very convincing arguments coming from you, right? Ngek!
@InnerSmile72 theists will say anything they can to make themselves feel better about believing in fairy tales. Its always ironic how intellectually dishonest they are
When Dawkins mentioned Flew's old age, I immediately knew he was going to bullshit his way through the conversation. Dawkins rationale always becings with bias against religion. He calls it reality. But the reality is that he shows no open mindedness at all with religion. Saddest part is that his own field is what Flew is referring to. Yet, he ignores the evidence and blows it off as illegitimate. This is typical political motivated BS and shows that Dawkins isn't a serious scientist at all.
@highnote606 Actually the point he gave was a perfectly valid scientific one, he knows more about his own field than you or i ever will, thus he knows there are perfedctly rational scientific explantions for all the phenomena observed in the natural world. The Athropic principle he was referrfin to is about eh only reasonable scientific explantion to belive in a higher intelligence.
FUCK YOU DAWKINS! Nahh but how dare he say someone is less intelligent for beleiving in God? Seriously? I think atheists r the ones that think they're bein cool and rebellious because of a more complex reason for the universe being here. Thats all scientific atheisim is, looking for another possible reason thats not just God. the Smart ones are people like Professer Gerald Schroeder, Deists and Flew here.
Thanks to the speed of the internet to and the search for the truth that you cannot pull the wool on any bodies head in this day and age, every thing is open for a debate people question their doctor their politician etc some is fact some is not then they make up their mind , so why do we have to believe this man ward as the absolute truth , check these links then question your self what you believe
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
@mattetho If you could read, (which I doubt) you would have noticed that I said that ABSOLUTE morality is a myth.
All morality is subjective and is vital for the survival of any social group. It evolves within any social group without any need for the imposition of it from any higher force or being.
Anyway, if you read the bible, its morality is no morality at all, merely the bigoted views of bronze age peasants. If you fully followed gods laws today, you would be arrested as a psychopath.
We are the product of the laws of physics and probability. The physics of our universe make life unlikely but possible. Under different physical laws the probability of life could range anywhere from virtually certain to virtually impossible. Despite the odds of life occuring in any one place and time being small the sheer size and age of our universe makes it a good bet life has and will continue to arise from time to time.
I have no intention of praying to the laws of physics and probability.
Dawkins gives little reason not to believe in Flew in this little audio clip. He only says that we shouldnot because Flewis old and can't reason well anymore. And he states that anyone who knowsanything would not accpet the ID argument. Dawkins bad argumnetation is clear and makes him look silly.
You people are distorting the meaning of the word "faith." You make it something ignorant, even dirty. The Bible's definition of faith is is akin to that of our confidence that the sun will come out tomorrow. We have every reason to believe that it will, therefore we have faith, in the Biblical sense, that it will. It is not supposed to be a "leap" into the "unknown" or something done blindly. If you can't justify, with fact and reason why you have faith, then you dishonor God by claiming to.
For the truth about religion try Robert M. Price, ' The reason driven life ' or John W. Loftus or Victor J. Stenger, ' God, the failed hypothesis' . Also interesting to have a look at the 1500BCE papyrus of Ani, with its god Osiris who weighs the heart to decide who can pass to the land of the living.[ The need to know the names of the gods & the negative confession & other magic texts to get there]. James Frazer's 'The Golden Bough' and C.S. Lewis, 'Mere Christianity'
Our existence IS a REASON for believing in god, if your mind is pre-disposed to think along those lines, but in no way is it proof of god, anymore that my wish to believe that finding my wife and discovering that we were ideally suited for each other is proof that we were destined to meet and marry.
The human mind has evolved through Natural selection to look for and find reason in everything as a survival mechanism. Belief in a deity is just an extreme manifestation of this natural compulsion.
Why is there music playing and text scrolling....? This is a dumb video for people who don't actually want to hear a devoted scientist who's arguments are genius compared to the drivel of this video's counter claims.
Richard Dawkins is incredibly hilarious. He automatically discredits anyone who subscribes to the idea of intelligent design, despite what experience or knowledge they would have on biology. When Antony Flew was an atheist, he was the cream of the crop amidst intelligent academia, but as soon as he converted, he was an old fool. I also love how he determines what is acceptable evidence or arguments for God, asserting that only modern science could provide a suitable case for such. Funny.
@Sickopath333 You should automatically discredit anyone who subscribes to ideas that have zero evidence, like intelligent design. How could you even call it "intelligent" design, since over 99% of all things have ever lived on this planet have gone extinct, sounds pretty unintelligent to mean. Also not a great design to create stars only to blow them up to make planets.
@MrKGatl I totally agree. If you are just looking at humans for instance.
If it comes to design, we are a bit of a mess with many built in flaws, redundancies and Inefficiencies. Exactly what would be expected if we had evolved.
But if we are supposed to have been intelligently designed, then our designer is pretty poor and in human terms wouldn't even pass first year engineering at any university.
After seriously looking into works of Dawkins , Hitchens ,Shermer ect I was about to throw my faith out the window and become an atheist. I was desperately looking for the answer if God existed or not and my humble conclusion is that even the atheists don't have the definite answer to this question. Science has some very compelling speculations on that matter but definite answers are lacking. I chose faith until science answers all big questions faith seems more plausible. (Atleast to me)
@PhysiologicAli Hmmmm... interesting. An atheist is someone who is not convinced that any religion has the ultimate answer(OR ANY FOR THAT MATTER)to the truth of reality. It sounds as if you just decided that having faith in something that has absolutely NO evidence is better than being in the position of understanding that there IS NO ANSWER. Kinda weird, especially since it seems that you were nearly convinced that those beliefs are nonsense.
I object to your idea of atheists as ungrateful. I am very grateful to the being that I believe gave me life--the unfeeling but beautiful universe. If I'm wrong and the being is actually an intelligent entity, then I was grateful to the wrong thing--but not UNgrateful. I don't consider consciousness or complexity as proof of a conscious creator, but I do respect deism above all other religions as it has more reasons and less "baggage" (no 'inerrant' scriptures, rituals, prophets, churches, etc).
Topics: WINNING ARGUMENTS NOW ADDED For The Creationism-Evolutionism Debate (See Subchapter 10.2.2.), 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: balanceddiet1.yolasite.com
See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
@Caitob123 You forgot the spaghetti and the tea cup. What's distorted about what I said? Isn't what I said correct? First find the meaning of what a superstition is before you apply it.
Topics: WINNING ARGUMENTS NOW ADDED For The Creationism-Evolutionism Debate (See Subchapter 10.2.2.), 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: balanceddiet1.yolasite.com
See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
Science does not, and cannot examine and quantify the metaphysical. People who dont want to believe in a creator will not believe simply because it is their worldview that nothing but the material universe exists. Most scientists agree that there is a great amount of evidence that there are more dimensions of reality than we can observe or percieve, yet they also want to insist that they have all the answers to the questions of life within their limited experience.
You are clueless. A bunch of buzz words and a complete misunderstanding of atheism does not equal an argument. Atheist don't "DENY" God you moron! At best, the universe is proof of one thing... a mystery, not a creator. The universe is not artificial, so, we cannot postulate intellect just because there are functioning-fancy things in it! You're creating a false dichotomy and it is severely hindering your ability to not look like an ass on youtube. Thanks for publicizing your ingnorance.
@chedillychedilly1 You forget that you are intellect and not simply a "functioning fancy thing." Not hard to connect that intellect begets intellect. Now, if you believe that intellect comes from non-intellect, then how intellectual is that?
@ray7685 NO!! I did not forget that I was (an) "intellect." Yes.... you are just a functioning fancy thing. I am calling sentients functioning fancy things, if you don't like that term than get over it. "Intellect comes from non-intellect." I'm pretty sure you're misunderstanding the theory of evolution. I came from my parents and they from theirs as well. A single cell did not give birth to me, but yes; the evidence fully shows that we are the products of hundreds of millions of yrs adaptation.
@chedillychedilly Relax. Make your statements without getting yourself in a twist. Do you really believe that intellect came from non-intellect? When has evolution shown this to be correct [just] at a probable level. You forget that you and I look at the same evidence, but we give it different interpretations. Both views are biased. But I'm ok with that. Because what I look for is what is the better bias. I see that life always comes from life, and no evolutionist has shown the opposite.
@ray7685 All of the biological and geological evidence supports the evolutionary theoretical paradigm. If you have a better one I'm open to it, but please don't say something so overly simplistic and, I'm sorry but, stupid like... "intellect comes from intellect." You're wrong on more levels than I care to waste my time explaining. The way you seem to be misunderstanding conciousness implys a concept that paints conciousness/intellect as a sort of magical property: con
@ray7685 Any person, who approaches this question seriously and honestly, with enough "intellect" and information should come away with a little bit more than just an extremely-ignorant-overly-simplistic assessment.I'm going to ask you one serious question and I expect for you to fail miserably.If the theory of evolution IS true, than why can't intellect EVOLVE from non-intellect given enough time.HINT: the dumbest thing you can say is 'intellect can't come from non-intellect.'
@chedillychedilly1 It's simplistic, because I don't have to contort what I see. I don't play games with my mind. There is something wrong when all these evolutionist are trying to get people rattled, but have not shown that intellect comes from non-intellect. At least Antony Flew came to his senses on this issue. You see...I can point to intellect coming from intellect, but you and the 4 horseless men can't point to intellect coming from non-intellect. My view is self-evident, not yours.
@ray7685 BTW:In the third message I quoted you as saying(intellect comes from non-intellect).What I meant was that you're asserting that to be the position of evolutionary scientist/anyone who accepts the theory of evolution.You obviously believe the opposite, which seems to make sense if you're confused, simply cannot grasp the time scales involved, or you don't understand the emergence of behavioral algorithms, all of which I am certain you do not understand, or care to understand.
@ray7685 "Mental gymnastics! ever changing theories!" You are a bold-faced moron. Tell me how I'm doing mental gymnastics! Avoiding the question I posed to you is not an argument. You said that intellect cannot come from non-intellect. I asked you to explain why, if the theory of evolution is true..... you did not, and furthermore you cannot, because you have no idea what you are talking about! Your mind is the product of trillions of cells working together, all of which have NO INTELLECT!
@ray7685 That is just one simplistic example of how intellect is an emergent property (did I lose you yet?) of non-intellectually-driven-physical algorithms. I'm almost 100% sure that I'm talking over your head. Your problem, aside from being utterly clueless about this subject, is that you're not willing to learn about the science behind these concepts. Like I said before, you're over simplifying. The only thing that I can imagine is causing this sort of severe confusion is ignorance. con:
@chedillychedilly1 If you find a computer and turn it on, you'll find that there are instructions inside. Did those algorithms come from all the physical parts of the computer? No doubt that parts of the computer are being used to display the information, but that in no way means that the information emerged from the physical. An intellect put that information inside the computer. So simple. Hope I didn't lose you.
@ray7685 Trust me, you didn't lose me. All you did was state the same dumb-uninformed-poorly-thought-out arguments of (like I said you would) other creationist. You still didn't answer the question. Let me see if I can help you think a little. COMPUTERS DO NOT HAVE BABY COMPUTERS YOU IDIOT! Comuters have to be made and instructed what to do, because there is no NATURAL PROCESS by which this can take place, but there IS A NATURAL PROCESS for biological creatures genius.... it's called evolution.
@ray7685 I've tried over and over again to get you to answer a simple question. If you would have taken the time to actually think about the question, instead of repeating stuff YOU DON'T FULLY COMPREHEND, I could have started the buisness of explaining exactly how the process of evolution MORE THAN ACCOUNTS for all of the complexity we see in nature. Creationist want to, and have, confuse you. Things that humans "design" are ARTIFICIAL, living creatures are NOT! Get a clue.
@ray7685 If the transistors, microchips, and vacuume tubes could replicate somehow, and their offspring had slight variations which could be selected for in the consecutive generations, then the damn computers would evolve by natural selection. That is essentially what we are. We are biological machines, each with the aformentioned ability to have offspring which vary, and can thus be selected for. The combinations and build up, or loss, of variation results in morphology.( over your head?)
@ray7685 BTW: The information programed in, and displayed on, a computer IS physical. The thoughts that come from the minds are biochemical, the actions taken to design and build the machine and the programs are all ELECTROMAGNETIC, and the very language itself (binary) is, at its physical base, electrons. What we are talking about is the process by which these things come together and function. COMPUTERS ARE BUILT; ANIMALS EVOLVE!... sorry if you can't accept reality.
@ray7685 First of all: the theory of evolution explains EXACTLY HOW intellect arises from non-intellect. So, saying something like,"intellect can't come from non-intellect," is extremely STUPID, because you're simply framing the fact that you don't even understand what you are supposed to be arguing against! Secondly: not all theories change; do you think that one day the heliocentric THEORY of the solar system is going to be uprooted!....NO DUMB DUMB! Science is CONVERGENT: con
@chedillychedilly1 Christianity explains the origen of intellect as well, Mr. Professional Scientist. So, Dilly, I'm stupid because I don't see nor has it ever shown that intellect comes form non-intellect. I'm supposed to jump on the wagon. What should i do with the theory of Aliens? should I jump on the wagon too. See, Dilly, intellect begets intellect is a fact, not a theory. I can show it, because i see it everyday. What part of this don't you get?
@ray7685 NO! Mr not professional scientist! Christianity MAKES UP THE EXPLAINATION OF THE ORIGIN OF INTELLECT. Christianity is, at it's core, a mythological explaination of reality, one which, in most factual cases, is WRONG! "The theory of aliens!???" WTF are you talking about? More nonsense piled on top of more nonsense. There is no scientific theory of aliens dumb dumb, and if there were you probably wouldn't understand that either. BIOLOGIST ARE NOT JUST JUMPING ON A WAGON! U R STUPID! lol
This is too funny. So what you;'re saying is I should relinquish my free will, stop thinking, and become a slave and essentially summit my mind and body to this god who, lets say, did in fact create everything besides itself. That's like me creating a robot, giving it A.I. and saying I am its god for creating it and therefore, it should live for my purposes only, not its own. Shit, if the christian god were true, I would rather die free than to live as a slave. And if that didn't work, I'd fight
nlytend1 1 week ago
@nlytend1 You know nothing about Christianity then. God wants love. Atheism requires you to be a slave as it - like Satanism - encourages you to be a slave to your own body and follow whatever carnal desires you may have, be they pedophilia, homosexuality or necrophilia. Don't give me that bullshit that atheism isn't a religion because we know it is. The way you atheists all attack religion and speak of your evolution is just as religious as the believer's speeches.
Farewell.
KookyincSucksShit 1 week ago
@KookyincSucksShit I'm not a Satanist so don't talk to me like I am one. And just because atheists speak out against gov't endorsing religion in a public sphere that doesn't make atheism a religion. If you don't see the logic in that, take a class on critical thinking. Anyhow, if you want a better explanation for why atheists speak out, go to "opposingviews" website and enter in their search bar: "an atheist explains his activism." Click the first link. He says it better than I can.
nlytend1 1 week ago
So is there a hell for Non-Deists? The way that I understand Deism is that some intelligence created the universe and then went on to do other things. So the Deistic intelligence is not a Theistic God and doesn't really require anything of us. Maybe it would want us to take care of our planet but that's about it.
LifeIsABigPuzzle 2 weeks ago
@LifeIsABigPuzzle
Deism is a path of understanding the Infinite. This Force/Power that the billions of us rightly honor with the sacred title of God. A Deist is any person that believes in God. A pure Deist is any person who follows the path of Deism which is studying the collective whole of the product that comes from this Source,"EVERYTHING". Oppose to just one book.
You seem to get your definition of what a pure Deist believes on matters of God from a Christian view?
DeistReality 1 week ago
@DeistReality Did you ever see the Skeptic Bible Study videos that came out a few years ago? A Deist guy made those videos. And he always used to say at the end "May God's gift of reason light our way."
LifeIsABigPuzzle 1 week ago
PS: William Lane Craig is an awesome theist debater, too. He's so good, in fact, that Dawkins refuses to debate him... because he knows he'll get his butt handed to him.
Yrhp8268 2 weeks ago
Good video! Thumbs up. Do a search of the debate between Richard Dawkins and John Lennox. Lennox wipes up the floor with Dawkins ... Ravi Zacharias is a genius, too.
Yrhp8268 2 weeks ago
No need to worship or ass-kiss Death, it just deosn't care lol
alex3st 2 weeks ago
God = Death
alex3st 2 weeks ago
Are you guys afraid of Death? (the one true God)
alex3st 2 weeks ago
all quiet and listen, the empty chair is speaking...
swingplato 2 weeks ago
Dawkins is not a very clever man its sad how many are taken in by him he has no or little understanding of what ID is really about s resorts to straw men arguments he has this bizare idea that any signs of design must be a illusion there can't be any room for a creator this is not a scientific statement but a ideological one from a man who has a pet hatred of faith.
lv4ev5 2 weeks ago
Richard Dumbkins is an opinionated pathetic poser.
m904begley 2 weeks ago
This video is annoying. I thought the whole point of deism was to not create dogma or bitch about anything?
JMB177 1 month ago
Want a mature discussion? Dr. Spitzer at magisreasonfaith d org Cheers!
WorldMoment1 1 month ago
You forgot to mention 'quantum'...
Jaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay 1 month ago
Let's try that "creation proves creator" logic another way:
The sun god Frith created existence, things exist, thus Frith is undeniably the creator.
Even if existence DID require a creator, you can't possibly know WHICH creator. Honestly, this is the kind of painfully obvious shit I thought of when I was, like, 6. So small child me is smarter than full grown adult Christians. Not surprising.
blackkakari 1 month ago
too much going on in your video. Music too overpowering when Dawkins speaks. Talking, music, other text going on screen to read. Really hard to process this as more than noise. You sound angry and you mis-represent the very nature of atheism. At the end of the video, I think you're a deist, in which case you would believe in a creator, but realize said creator has no personal interest in you.
CosmosFiddler 1 month ago
You are an IDIOT claiming God gives people blessings of Food,Water & Health. Maybe you should take notice of the thousands of people that die everyday from starvation, Something that can easily be remedied by your all Knowing all Powerful God.
bumper302 1 month ago
@bumper302 - YOU are the FOOL! GOD has indeed provided for all our needs! He has even given all of us free will to exercise it for the good or evil of mankind. Now, people dying from starvation is the direct result of greed stemming from the hearts of a majority of individuals in this world. Mahatma Gandhi once stated - "There is enough for everybody's need but NOT for everybody's GREED! Open your eyes and mind to this.
sparkleNshine70 3 weeks ago
@sparkleNshine70 I do not have the time to argue with someone whom is obviously delusional. You should have the BALLS to attempt to debate Mr Dawkins directly. He would thoroughly DECAPITATE you INTELLECTUALLY.
bumper302 3 weeks ago
Everybody either dies earlier with their mental faculties intact, or lives to a point where their mental faculties begin to decline and they become subject to mental errors in their reasoning processes. I have seen this over and over in my grandparent's lives, followed in their turn by my parents. Actually, it is the onset of a mental decline that I fear more, much more, than death. I dread that I should ever become a God believer cause it is just plain stupid!!!
Slik00Silk 1 month ago
@Slik00Silk - And your belief much better? Better than everybody else's? How silly are you, really? Do you have a better alternative and can you make it ever happen? We all know the answer to that, don't we?
sparkleNshine70 3 weeks ago
@sparkleNshine70 Of course my belief is better than the God believers because it is based on rational consideration of the evidence. Religious beliefs are based on dusty old books that were written by men who were very ignorant of the processes that govern the real world. Perhaps they were advanced thinkers for their time, but they drew conclusions based only on the limited knowledge availible to them. Since then, their followers have killed those who disagreed with them. For shame!
Slik00Silk 3 weeks ago
@sparkleNshine70 Yes the better alternative is to believe only in that for which there is evidence. To base your life on a delusion because you can't face up to the fact of your impending death is stupid and infantile....as well as futiule.
Slik00Silk 2 weeks ago
@listenup345 "...Christianity is the way all other religions have been corrupted..."
Hear hear!
Oh, did you miss a period there? The devil is in the punctuation.
Terncote 1 month ago
@listenup345 "he just lands low blows like moral attacks on christians and God when he cant deny the science that they provide,"
What science?
The only infantile foot-stomping going on here is from some inarticulate youtube theist calling some a SICK FUCK for failing to check their brain at the door of the church.
But you said you have science on your side. Let's hear your "evidence" again. What is it, the ontological, teleological, moral or personal argument?
Terncote 1 month ago
He was a great thinker till we disagreed.
coooldeal 1 month ago
Deism is BS its understanding theirs God an spirituality without finding which God and what kind of spirituality is the correct to relate with aforce that is great enough to create this universe and cetainly great enough to have a spirtual relationship and a guiding force with his creations,Christianity is the way all other religions have been corrupted and do not come the important truth it does i have researched all the religions their are out their and it make sense of them all and evrything.
listenup345 1 month ago
I mean all the things he said he would expect to display good evidence of God for him to beleive, do show more than enough evidence and more finite evidence than any of his ideas for any of his theorys this fucker is suffering from a bad case of double standards I used to be sure this guy was right thank God i saw the light, this way thinking is depressing and most the ppl are so bleek and dull him hitchens even flew its like these ppl have no guiding force or natural conviction for any good.
listenup345 1 month ago
Dawkins is like a fuckin child stomping all around his house because he never got his way, I dont think this moron will ever find a satysfying arguement,even when their better than his he just lands low blows like moral attacks on christians and God when he cant deny the science that they provide, im starting to beleive he knows hes wrong and he must have a bigger agenda i think hes just avoiding conversion to keep his flock of very lost sheep all the way behind him to hell SICK FUCK!
listenup345 1 month ago
@listenup345 Sound like you're a child stomping around because you're not getting what you want
MrPooBrainHorse 1 month ago
There is something I respect about Deism, as well as Pantheism. They both acknowledge something divine about the natural world. But the word of God is probably not revealed to us in the form of some holy book of religious myths. And God is accessed by experience - not empirical evidence. God is not an explanation for anything so much as it is a realization of how wonderous the universe is. And lastly, the pseudoscience of intelligent design is not a scientific argument for God.
prschuster 1 month ago
All function, working parts and mechanisms always have a maker and life forms are not exempt from the rules of science, they have a Maker too.
JungleJargon 1 month ago
It is sad to see Flew go out like that. He said some brilliant things no doubt. ID and fucking crockaducks claims another.
BillofRightsBrutus 1 month ago
@BillofRightsBrutus what patronising bull Flew realised there might be something in ID so the militant atheists start to name call . Dawkins is a arrogant lying follower of the religion of secular humanism he sees ID a threat to his world view.
lv4ev5 1 month ago
@lv4ev5 lol. that's funny. Anybody that's buying he fell over into the land of theism by a concept that is little more than evolution with ID squeezed into it should go back and read his earlier writings or listen to debates when he was in his prime. You're probably one of those people that's impressed the god gene looks like a cross too, I would almost bet. Ooooh. lol. Here's a tip. That thing that might look like jesus to you in your cereal bowl tomorrow morning will be just cereal. lol.
BillofRightsBrutus 1 month ago
This video is stupid. Dawkins is dead on; maybe some day there will be a basis from which to really ponder something in the fields he spoke concerning. That said, evolution gets better every day. ID hasn't been viable for 2-3 decades. It might have been a nice argument then, but not anymore. It's hot now because people understand less about biology and the transitional record now than high school students did back in the day. The proofs of evolution are exponential to what they were even then.
BillofRightsBrutus 1 month ago
LOL this is satire. The voice and what not, it's surely a joke.
mrgejwaites 1 month ago
i don't understand why people think that the complexity of life is proof of god, its not. its actually the opposite. if god can create anything anyway he wants, he could create something simply. what possible reason is there to create something complex when you can create it simply? if god can create us the way we are without the need of all our complexity in being, why wouldn't he? the is no logical reason. the complexity of life is evidence of the absence of a god, not the presence of one.
jinofthethunder 2 months ago
@jinofthethunder What seem complex to us may not be complex to a being of greater intelligence. We wouldn't be the same if we were created 'simply.'
lovexhater 2 months ago
@lovexhater are you saying god couldn't create us the same but made more simply? i thought god could supposedly do anything.
jinofthethunder 2 months ago
@jinofthethunder What would you define as more simply? If we were created differently, we wouldn't be the same.
lovexhater 1 month ago
@lovexhater well naturally we wouldn't have knowledge of DNA or anything that wouldn't exist. but if god could do anything he could make us out of clay and still grant us life. if god can do anything why would he make us so complex? its not for our own benefit. it wouldn't make a difference to us whether we were made of neurons and cells or magic and clay cause we wouldn't know any different. we understand why we are made the way we are by evolution, but being designed like this makes no sense.
jinofthethunder 1 month ago
@jinofthethunder I see what your saying now. I'm a deist like Flew, so I believe in evolution. Whether designed by evolution or something like the Christian God, I think we would be built this way for survival purposes regardless.
lovexhater 1 month ago
dawkins you sound like a you trying to beat a dead horse mate... give it a rest...
SteelFoundation 2 months ago
Give it up Dawkins. Just give it up.
PureAirSolutions 2 months ago
@PureAirSolutions Give up being rational and intelligent? I hope he never does.
Rozmic 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"There is a God: How the World's Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind" by Anthony Flew
This book makes Richard Dawkins' book or Christopher Hirchens book look like comic books.
If Anthony Flew can see these things, why not Dawkins or why didn't Hitchens? The answer is Flew used his mind sufficiently in regards to arguments while Dawkins and Hitchens have not done so. They failed to put pieces together.
PureAirSolutions 2 months ago
@tubejpr Well when you are just making things up, like saying that atheists have doctrine I am goin to call you on your bullshit. Dont make dumb, ignorant comments and I will leave you alone.
MrKGatl 2 months ago
belief in a god is silly, but the evils of organized religion- not so easy to laugh at. The catholic church, islam, fundie christianity are all evil and holding back helpful science such as stem cell research. christians are so fucking stupid to believe in fairy tales. How could a woman ever get pregnant without sperm? Dead come back to life several times in the bible-seriously? What do believers really get from this shit? life is not that hard that you have to believe in nonsense. fools.
mikemfd232 2 months ago
@mikemfd232 Hahahah, maybe you should read Dawkins paper called "why atheism is so fatally flawed!"
You atheists think your so smart, but in reality atheism is not intellectual at all, its pure ignorance!, you might awsell bury your head in the sand like an ostrich!, thats you!
The sad fact is most atheists say "well god cannot be real as he never speaks to me!' well thats just dumb! as most atheists dont want to know!, Thats it, so its you!, God gave us free will mate, remember that
Sabianstix85 2 months ago
@Sabianstix85 Actually, I don't think atheist think they are 'so smart', as you state. It really doesn't require an abundance of knowledge to understand all god claims are false. Of course, the nearly two dozen spelling and grammatical errors, to say nothing of faulty reasoning on your part lead me to the conclusion that perhaps you can see the irony of your post calling atheists 'dumb', mate.
mikemfd232 2 months ago
Oh boy,now Anthony is old and has suddenly become senile,and he only used to be a great philosopher now that he believes in a Creator,how pathetic of you Richie.
CBALLEN 2 months ago
@CBALLEN Well of course, he doesn't want to die.
Rozmic 2 months ago
@Rozmic I'm sure this is true,but why would he believe in a Creator now? He has told us why,because of the discovery of DNA and exactly what it means.I don't see Anthony babbling incoherently,he makes a very good case,however he hasn't believed in Jesus as his Savior,but soon he may,that's up to God.
CBALLEN 2 months ago
@CBALLEN I mean he's aware he's reaching the end of his life, and as a result is clutching desparately at straws because he's afraid.
Rozmic 2 months ago
@Rozmic Actually I don't think that's the reason.When we realized that any life is so complex and that all life must have DNA before it can exist,that throws a wrench into life just popping up.Also the universe is so incredibly tuned for life on our planet,it boggles the mind that it could just happen by chance,from nowhere and from nothing.
CBALLEN 2 months ago
@CBALLEN I agree with this 'fine-tuned' universe theory. Dr. Gerald Schroeder of MIT has presented a very compelling argument for the existence of God based upon this theory, and I must say, it convinced me.
DNA is not a 'code' per se; it is a complicated series of chemical reactions. The complexity of such reactions would suggest there was a higher intelligence behind it; it is explained in greater detail here: Put this at the end of your URL: =yV-LzTO-xdg
efb1991 2 months ago
@efb1991 Amen,I've listened to some of Dr.Schoeder's work and it's very interesting.The thing about DNA ,as well as all information( sender,receiver systems) when traced back to it's sender,will always be intelligent life and that's in every case.Those who try to deny God don't take these truths into account.No physical laws can be broken either,in fact, science is based on these laws,if they weren't then we couldn't be sure of anything.
CBALLEN 2 months ago
i'm embarrassed for you
robertmmcclay 2 months ago
Holy crap! I was totally sure the circular reasoning and nonsense of the start of the vid with the Wizard of Oz voice was an Atheist presenting a strawman argument for deism. Wow! Someone actually believers all that nonsense non-ironically! Hilarious!
wamyc 2 months ago
This is hilarious.
bobrobertMT 2 months ago
Dawkins is so arrogant. He claims people are indoctrinated when he is himself.
DanTheGerbil360 2 months ago
@DanTheGerbil360 dumb comment. How is Dawkins indoctrinated
MrKGatl 2 months ago
@MrKGatl dumb, unpunctuated comment. He is completely close-minded to anything that contradicts his "theories".
DanTheGerbil360 2 months ago
@DanTheGerbil360 Wow, you must be desperate to talk about my punctuation. You can't support your idiotic comments and have to resort to attacking my punctuation. Way to go.
MrKGatl 2 months ago
Lame....... ignorant video
fizzizzizzix 3 months ago
So as soon as Dawkins gets to Flew's age should we discount everything he says? That door swings both ways.
apacheboxingfan 3 months ago
Is the irritating background music needed.
MrEvangelist777 3 months ago
I agree, atheists are obnoxious tools
HomuncuIus 3 months ago
@HomuncuIus Theists are primitive thinking, uneducated, fairy tale believers
MrKGatl 2 months ago
@MrKGatl And you're the pinnacle of human evolution, remember to take your antidepressants. Some of the dumbest and arrogance people I've met were atheists.
I am not a theist, Internet discussion is a waste of time
HomuncuIus 2 months ago
@HomuncuIus you should also remember that theists make up nearly the entire psychiatric population. Dumbest and arrogant? You are just a dishonest person, making things up. Im sure you are aware that atheism is rapidly growing. Atheists are better educated than theists and generally have higher IQ's. Whats your reason for the vast number of atheists among scientists, doctors, academics, professors? Its not a coincidence that smart people dont believe in fairy tales.
MrKGatl 2 months ago
@MrKGatl At least you found something to feel superior to, I am sure persecuting others gives your life meaning. Your statistics are wrong, not that follow things based on popularity. I share the same views as Einstein, I used to be an atheist.
HomuncuIus 2 months ago
@HomuncuIus Why would I feel superior about simple facts and truths. I dont persecute people, but I do not hold back on bad ideas. When you make such uneducated and ignorant comment I am going to let you know. Sorry if I didnt sugarcoat it for you.
MrKGatl 2 months ago
@HomuncuIus If you have the same views as Einstein, you *are* an atheist.
"The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish." He didn't believe in the soul. He didn't believe in spirits or the supernatural. His views were like those of Sagan or Dawkins, except he sometime used the word "god" as a metaphor for the natural world.
ideologger 2 months ago
@MrKGatl Unfortunately, however, atheists have an SQ of ZERO, and, typically an EQ below average, because they 'think' IQ is the metric of intelligence, wrongly. They also believe that, given this position, they are superior creatures, and that - since they 'believe' God does not exist - a theist MUST be less intelligent and inferior, because they do believe. The perhaps harsh reality is that athiests simply have difficulty in things unverifiable.
9b8 2 months ago
@9b8 Lets not get ridiculous. Being an atheist does not make you smarter or more educated. There is however a correllation between smarter and more educated people an atheism. The vast majority of atheists are educated, and fairly intellegent people. While there are many theists who are smart, the vast majority of uneducated people are theists as well. You sound like an angry kid.
MrKGatl 2 months ago
@MrKGatl That is so incredibly fallacal to say the majority of uneducated people are theist. Yet you admit that the majority of the world are theist. This correlation is useless for this argument. And to then use a simile "like an angry kid" serves no useful purpose, either. Do you desire to just rersort to personal attacks? That is a two-way street, bubba.
9b8 2 months ago
@9b8 It is absolutely true that the majority of uneducated people are theists. Read the above comment about Einstein's beliefs, ideologger is exactly right. I'm sure you will discredit and refuse to listen since it has those things you hate so much, you know, facts.
MrKGatl 2 months ago
@MrKGatl FWIW there is also a "vast" number of theists among both the sciences and arts, and well distributed across the respective disciplines and throughout history. Interestingly however, the atheists that do hold science positions are finding increasing evidence that supports intelligent design more, not vice versa. There is all the concern in the world about science proving God, but absolutely no concern about science disproving God.
9b8 2 months ago
@9b8 Theists are 85% of the population in the US, so of course there are theists everywhere. Thats is just plain bullshit about intelligent design, there are very few scientists who believe in intelligent design. They are not finding any evidence of intelligent design. ID is just a trojan horse for creation science, which ironically is devoid of science.
MrKGatl 2 months ago
@MrKGatl The majority of the world poulation is theist, not just the US. The evidence is right in front of anyone's face. It is an issue of literal ignorance. Hawking has strongly implied it. So did Einstein. Many biologists have. The incredible complexity of DNA and the human genome alone is ore than enough. subatomic particles, dark energy, dark matter, Astro-physics itself has all but surrendered itself to this. There is nothing ironic about intelligent design. It is inherent.
9b8 2 months ago
@9b8 The evidence is not in front of anyone's face because there is no evidence. You are the ignorant one who claims that there is evidence where there is not. Hawkins does not believe in a god, and Einstein did not believe in a personal god. You are falling into primitive thinking, "oh this is complicated, it must be god". There is no such thing as intelligent design. Intelligent design was created by religious groups, not scientists or experts.
MrKGatl 2 months ago
@DeistReality
I agree. Because
I takes more faith to believe in the non existence of God than to have faith in His existence.
tubejpr 3 months ago
@tubejpr Can you provide proof of your statement being true? My personal experience was the opposite; I learned more and more and came to have less and less faith until I gave up Christianity as a paranoid recording of bronze age peasants. But that's my opinion on it, science has already proven many points to be false already. Do you have proof of my increased faith?
CheffBryan 3 months ago
Comment removed
tubejpr 3 months ago
@CheffBryan thanks for your response on my input. I believe I have no advantage over you regarding the availability of proof for God's existence, We are in the same position so to speak in proving God's existence. And the main proof is our own physical existence. That is, we are not self-made nor we self-exist. This simple but hard fact is indispensable to justify belief in Him.And that is where a solution to your problem begins.
tubejpr 3 months ago
@tubejpr "...your problem begins."
That's putting words in my mouth an uncalled for. I have no problem beyond people denying truths in favor of their comfort in what it is they believe. Also, "self-exist" is terminology that has only been used by the religious; an isolated person since birth knows they exist, simply by their interactions with the world. And please don't take that argument to mean that we only existed after eating forbidden fruit, that would make you sound stupid, just saying. :/
CheffBryan 3 months ago
@CheffBryan Your response does not amount to anything but just plain rhetoric and sarcasm by just responding ''And please don't take that argument to mean that we only existed after eating forbidden fruit, that would make you sound stupid, just saying. '' which indeed literally, are words coming from your own mouth. tsk..tsk..tsk..
Please refute therefore my arguments on the reality of our existence in a more academic and philosophical way but never on just rhetorical non sense tone. Thanks.
tubejpr 3 months ago
@tubejpr That's a talking point cherished by people who don't know what the word faith means.
Fredonia2k 3 months ago
@Fredonia2k . Please elaborate further what you meant by your statement above which is "That's a talking point cherished by people who don't know what the word faith means.''
tubejpr 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@tubejpr "I takes more faith to believe in the non existence of God than to have faith in His existence."
Theists like to trot that out because they like to say that atheism is the claim that no gods exist. That's not the case. Atheism is the denial of your god claim based on the lack of evidence. It takes absolutely zero faith to reject that claim. There is some room for nuance if you meant that atheists claim there are absolutely no gods, but that is a mischaracterization of what atheism is.
Fredonia2k 3 months ago
@tubejpr Thats just an ignorant and uneducated comment. There is absolutely zero evidence of a god or gods, so it doesnt take faith to be a non believer. It just takes intellect and logic. Faith just means you have no reason to believe something but still do. And we dont have any ridiculous faith in our lives.
MrKGatl 2 months ago
@MrKGatl By definition, atheism is the doctrine of belief that there is no God. It is an affirmation of God nonexistence. Postulating the nonexistence of God, atheism immediately commits the blunder of an absolute negation, which is self-contradictory. For to sustain the belief that there is no God, it has to demonstrate infinite knowledge, which is tantamount in saying, "I have infinite knowledge that there is no being in existence with infinite knowledge.''
tubejpr 2 months ago
@tubejpr Atheism has no doctrines. Do I need infinite knowledge to not believe in a flying teapot orbiting the earth? Do you have infinited knowledge that there is no monkey in your butt? Or to not believe that I am inside the matrix? What about the absurd claim that there IS a god. Its always funny how so many people on your side twist logic to support their beliefs.
MrKGatl 2 months ago
@MrKGatl You do not even understand that Atheism is a kind of doctrine? Wowowie!. How hilarious your way of illustrating your non sensible ideas. And indeed, it always funny how so many people like you, have your own kind of twisted logic to support your non belief of a higher Being than yourself. Who gave you the very ability to reason and to think in the first place.
tubejpr 2 months ago
@tubejpr You are such a moron. I am also a non believer in fairies, like many other people. Do we non fairie believers have a doctrine. How is it non sensible to disbelieve bronze age myths. You're just another uneducated and ignorant person who cant imagine a world without your fairy tales. Well if god gave me the ability to think, why did he not give you the same ability. You have no idea what you're talking about and im a little embarrassed for you.
MrKGatl 2 months ago
@MrKGatl Yes, you are an embarrassing individual exhibiting the usual atheism habits of responding often by sarcasm expressions only which are non sensible matters. Which is indeed right to throw back to you, since these words are very applicable to your kind of thinking like.." your are such a moron'', ''you are just another uneducated and ignorant person.'' and ''you have no idea of what you're talking about". Very convincing arguments coming from you, right? Ngek!
tubejpr 2 months ago
What do you idiots think of Flew repeating the lie that Darwin had a deathbed conversion? Clearly you can see that is part of his mental decline...
InnerSmile72 3 months ago
@InnerSmile72 theists will say anything they can to make themselves feel better about believing in fairy tales. Its always ironic how intellectually dishonest they are
MrKGatl 2 months ago
When Dawkins mentioned Flew's old age, I immediately knew he was going to bullshit his way through the conversation. Dawkins rationale always becings with bias against religion. He calls it reality. But the reality is that he shows no open mindedness at all with religion. Saddest part is that his own field is what Flew is referring to. Yet, he ignores the evidence and blows it off as illegitimate. This is typical political motivated BS and shows that Dawkins isn't a serious scientist at all.
highnote606 3 months ago
@highnote606 Actually the point he gave was a perfectly valid scientific one, he knows more about his own field than you or i ever will, thus he knows there are perfedctly rational scientific explantions for all the phenomena observed in the natural world. The Athropic principle he was referrfin to is about eh only reasonable scientific explantion to belive in a higher intelligence.
gar77772221able1 3 months ago
I do not deny the existance of god, i just dont see god.
Yahweigh 3 months ago
FUCK YOU DAWKINS! Nahh but how dare he say someone is less intelligent for beleiving in God? Seriously? I think atheists r the ones that think they're bein cool and rebellious because of a more complex reason for the universe being here. Thats all scientific atheisim is, looking for another possible reason thats not just God. the Smart ones are people like Professer Gerald Schroeder, Deists and Flew here.
0mrinsertname0 4 months ago
Ae911truth.or g Atheism was responsible
dxvxvx 4 months ago
Dawkins is an angry bigot who is wrecking the case for Darwinism and Atheism.
Entropy56 4 months ago
@Entropy56 LOL..... WHAT?
chedillychedilly1 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Thanks to the speed of the internet to and the search for the truth that you cannot pull the wool on any bodies head in this day and age, every thing is open for a debate people question their doctor their politician etc some is fact some is not then they make up their mind , so why do we have to believe this man ward as the absolute truth , check these links then question your self what you believe
simonmathew615 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
youtube.com/watch?v=0hQFO6ugWxU . youtube.com/watch?v=HlCp-OH72B4&feature=related .youtube.com/watch?v=cCTuiugo7mU
simonmathew615 4 months 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 4 months ago
@mattetho If you could read, (which I doubt) you would have noticed that I said that ABSOLUTE morality is a myth.
All morality is subjective and is vital for the survival of any social group. It evolves within any social group without any need for the imposition of it from any higher force or being.
Anyway, if you read the bible, its morality is no morality at all, merely the bigoted views of bronze age peasants. If you fully followed gods laws today, you would be arrested as a psychopath.
HonestMan395 4 months ago
horrible quality of sound
bajskorvaren 4 months ago
We are the product of the laws of physics and probability. The physics of our universe make life unlikely but possible. Under different physical laws the probability of life could range anywhere from virtually certain to virtually impossible. Despite the odds of life occuring in any one place and time being small the sheer size and age of our universe makes it a good bet life has and will continue to arise from time to time.
I have no intention of praying to the laws of physics and probability.
studentofsmith 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
You are dreaming
HelicopterRedFlag 5 months ago
Comment removed
HelicopterRedFlag 5 months ago
This force as you call it, is science, and it doesnt need a sacred title or worship/praise!
avrahams1 5 months ago
Dawkins gives little reason not to believe in Flew in this little audio clip. He only says that we shouldnot because Flewis old and can't reason well anymore. And he states that anyone who knowsanything would not accpet the ID argument. Dawkins bad argumnetation is clear and makes him look silly.
MrBlackhaw 5 months ago
You people are distorting the meaning of the word "faith." You make it something ignorant, even dirty. The Bible's definition of faith is is akin to that of our confidence that the sun will come out tomorrow. We have every reason to believe that it will, therefore we have faith, in the Biblical sense, that it will. It is not supposed to be a "leap" into the "unknown" or something done blindly. If you can't justify, with fact and reason why you have faith, then you dishonor God by claiming to.
Ant1Live 5 months ago
For the truth about religion try Robert M. Price, ' The reason driven life ' or John W. Loftus or Victor J. Stenger, ' God, the failed hypothesis' . Also interesting to have a look at the 1500BCE papyrus of Ani, with its god Osiris who weighs the heart to decide who can pass to the land of the living.[ The need to know the names of the gods & the negative confession & other magic texts to get there]. James Frazer's 'The Golden Bough' and C.S. Lewis, 'Mere Christianity'
zytigon 5 months ago
Our existence IS a REASON for believing in god, if your mind is pre-disposed to think along those lines, but in no way is it proof of god, anymore that my wish to believe that finding my wife and discovering that we were ideally suited for each other is proof that we were destined to meet and marry.
The human mind has evolved through Natural selection to look for and find reason in everything as a survival mechanism. Belief in a deity is just an extreme manifestation of this natural compulsion.
HonestMan395 5 months ago
Very enjoyable. Looks like I'm in the minority of likes on this one, oh well, just shows I think for myself.
KevinAnthonyB 6 months ago
Fail
MrLas74 6 months ago
descr.: "You can't learn about something by denying its existence"
You also can't learn about something if it doesn't exists.
jiin5993 6 months ago
Why is there music playing and text scrolling....? This is a dumb video for people who don't actually want to hear a devoted scientist who's arguments are genius compared to the drivel of this video's counter claims.
talbaugh2 6 months ago 2
Richard Dawkins is incredibly hilarious. He automatically discredits anyone who subscribes to the idea of intelligent design, despite what experience or knowledge they would have on biology. When Antony Flew was an atheist, he was the cream of the crop amidst intelligent academia, but as soon as he converted, he was an old fool. I also love how he determines what is acceptable evidence or arguments for God, asserting that only modern science could provide a suitable case for such. Funny.
Sickopath333 6 months ago
@Sickopath333 You should automatically discredit anyone who subscribes to ideas that have zero evidence, like intelligent design. How could you even call it "intelligent" design, since over 99% of all things have ever lived on this planet have gone extinct, sounds pretty unintelligent to mean. Also not a great design to create stars only to blow them up to make planets.
MrKGatl 6 months ago
@MrKGatl I totally agree. If you are just looking at humans for instance.
If it comes to design, we are a bit of a mess with many built in flaws, redundancies and Inefficiencies. Exactly what would be expected if we had evolved.
But if we are supposed to have been intelligently designed, then our designer is pretty poor and in human terms wouldn't even pass first year engineering at any university.
HonestMan395 5 months ago
After seriously looking into works of Dawkins , Hitchens ,Shermer ect I was about to throw my faith out the window and become an atheist. I was desperately looking for the answer if God existed or not and my humble conclusion is that even the atheists don't have the definite answer to this question. Science has some very compelling speculations on that matter but definite answers are lacking. I chose faith until science answers all big questions faith seems more plausible. (Atleast to me)
PhysiologicAli 6 months ago
@PhysiologicAli Hmmmm... interesting. An atheist is someone who is not convinced that any religion has the ultimate answer(OR ANY FOR THAT MATTER)to the truth of reality. It sounds as if you just decided that having faith in something that has absolutely NO evidence is better than being in the position of understanding that there IS NO ANSWER. Kinda weird, especially since it seems that you were nearly convinced that those beliefs are nonsense.
chedillychedilly1 6 months ago
Calling yourself a deist is just as ignorant as calling yourself a Christian. They both have no evidence, and are both useless beliefs.
The driving force of deism though...seems quite silly. Hey! I believe that God made us and then left us alone! Ok.
There's no proof to want to believe, and there is no reason to acknowledge his existence if he's just leaving us alone now.
Phaze252 6 months ago
I object to your idea of atheists as ungrateful. I am very grateful to the being that I believe gave me life--the unfeeling but beautiful universe. If I'm wrong and the being is actually an intelligent entity, then I was grateful to the wrong thing--but not UNgrateful. I don't consider consciousness or complexity as proof of a conscious creator, but I do respect deism above all other religions as it has more reasons and less "baggage" (no 'inerrant' scriptures, rituals, prophets, churches, etc).
Megaritz 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NEW BOOK (DONATED) FOR DEBATES AND GOVERNANCE
Topics: WINNING ARGUMENTS NOW ADDED For The Creationism-Evolutionism Debate (See Subchapter 10.2.2.), 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: balanceddiet1.yolasite.com
See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
etc.
TheServiceWeb 6 months ago
@Caitob123 You forgot the spaghetti and the tea cup. What's distorted about what I said? Isn't what I said correct? First find the meaning of what a superstition is before you apply it.
ray7685 6 months ago
Nice video.
hdregmore 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NEW BOOK (DONATED) FOR DEBATES AND GOVERNANCE
Topics: WINNING ARGUMENTS NOW ADDED For The Creationism-Evolutionism Debate (See Subchapter 10.2.2.), 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: balanceddiet1.yolasite.com
See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
etc.
TheServiceWeb 6 months ago
@Caitob123 And just because something is comfortable doesn't make it untrue either
ray7685 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ray7685 Correction: And just because something is comforting doesn't make it untrue.
ray7685 6 months ago
Science does not, and cannot examine and quantify the metaphysical. People who dont want to believe in a creator will not believe simply because it is their worldview that nothing but the material universe exists. Most scientists agree that there is a great amount of evidence that there are more dimensions of reality than we can observe or percieve, yet they also want to insist that they have all the answers to the questions of life within their limited experience.
logicnreason1 7 months ago
@logicnreason1 Nice comment.
ray7685 6 months ago
You are clueless. A bunch of buzz words and a complete misunderstanding of atheism does not equal an argument. Atheist don't "DENY" God you moron! At best, the universe is proof of one thing... a mystery, not a creator. The universe is not artificial, so, we cannot postulate intellect just because there are functioning-fancy things in it! You're creating a false dichotomy and it is severely hindering your ability to not look like an ass on youtube. Thanks for publicizing your ingnorance.
chedillychedilly1 7 months ago
@chedillychedilly1 You forget that you are intellect and not simply a "functioning fancy thing." Not hard to connect that intellect begets intellect. Now, if you believe that intellect comes from non-intellect, then how intellectual is that?
ray7685 6 months ago
@ray7685 NO!! I did not forget that I was (an) "intellect." Yes.... you are just a functioning fancy thing. I am calling sentients functioning fancy things, if you don't like that term than get over it. "Intellect comes from non-intellect." I'm pretty sure you're misunderstanding the theory of evolution. I came from my parents and they from theirs as well. A single cell did not give birth to me, but yes; the evidence fully shows that we are the products of hundreds of millions of yrs adaptation.
chedillychedilly1 6 months ago
@chedillychedilly Relax. Make your statements without getting yourself in a twist. Do you really believe that intellect came from non-intellect? When has evolution shown this to be correct [just] at a probable level. You forget that you and I look at the same evidence, but we give it different interpretations. Both views are biased. But I'm ok with that. Because what I look for is what is the better bias. I see that life always comes from life, and no evolutionist has shown the opposite.
ray7685 6 months ago
@ray7685 All of the biological and geological evidence supports the evolutionary theoretical paradigm. If you have a better one I'm open to it, but please don't say something so overly simplistic and, I'm sorry but, stupid like... "intellect comes from intellect." You're wrong on more levels than I care to waste my time explaining. The way you seem to be misunderstanding conciousness implys a concept that paints conciousness/intellect as a sort of magical property: con
chedillychedilly1 6 months ago
@ray7685 Any person, who approaches this question seriously and honestly, with enough "intellect" and information should come away with a little bit more than just an extremely-ignorant-overly-simplistic assessment.I'm going to ask you one serious question and I expect for you to fail miserably.If the theory of evolution IS true, than why can't intellect EVOLVE from non-intellect given enough time.HINT: the dumbest thing you can say is 'intellect can't come from non-intellect.'
chedillychedilly1 6 months ago
@chedillychedilly1 It's simplistic, because I don't have to contort what I see. I don't play games with my mind. There is something wrong when all these evolutionist are trying to get people rattled, but have not shown that intellect comes from non-intellect. At least Antony Flew came to his senses on this issue. You see...I can point to intellect coming from intellect, but you and the 4 horseless men can't point to intellect coming from non-intellect. My view is self-evident, not yours.
ray7685 6 months ago
@ray7685 BTW:In the third message I quoted you as saying(intellect comes from non-intellect).What I meant was that you're asserting that to be the position of evolutionary scientist/anyone who accepts the theory of evolution.You obviously believe the opposite, which seems to make sense if you're confused, simply cannot grasp the time scales involved, or you don't understand the emergence of behavioral algorithms, all of which I am certain you do not understand, or care to understand.
chedillychedilly1 6 months ago
Good mental gymnastics. Eventually, like many evolutionist I know, you will get tired of keeping up with their ever changing theories.
ray7685 6 months ago
@ray7685 "Mental gymnastics! ever changing theories!" You are a bold-faced moron. Tell me how I'm doing mental gymnastics! Avoiding the question I posed to you is not an argument. You said that intellect cannot come from non-intellect. I asked you to explain why, if the theory of evolution is true..... you did not, and furthermore you cannot, because you have no idea what you are talking about! Your mind is the product of trillions of cells working together, all of which have NO INTELLECT!
chedillychedilly1 6 months ago
@ray7685 That is just one simplistic example of how intellect is an emergent property (did I lose you yet?) of non-intellectually-driven-physical algorithms. I'm almost 100% sure that I'm talking over your head. Your problem, aside from being utterly clueless about this subject, is that you're not willing to learn about the science behind these concepts. Like I said before, you're over simplifying. The only thing that I can imagine is causing this sort of severe confusion is ignorance. con:
chedillychedilly1 6 months ago
@chedillychedilly1 If you find a computer and turn it on, you'll find that there are instructions inside. Did those algorithms come from all the physical parts of the computer? No doubt that parts of the computer are being used to display the information, but that in no way means that the information emerged from the physical. An intellect put that information inside the computer. So simple. Hope I didn't lose you.
ray7685 6 months ago
@ray7685 Trust me, you didn't lose me. All you did was state the same dumb-uninformed-poorly-thought-out arguments of (like I said you would) other creationist. You still didn't answer the question. Let me see if I can help you think a little. COMPUTERS DO NOT HAVE BABY COMPUTERS YOU IDIOT! Comuters have to be made and instructed what to do, because there is no NATURAL PROCESS by which this can take place, but there IS A NATURAL PROCESS for biological creatures genius.... it's called evolution.
chedillychedilly1 6 months ago
@ray7685 I've tried over and over again to get you to answer a simple question. If you would have taken the time to actually think about the question, instead of repeating stuff YOU DON'T FULLY COMPREHEND, I could have started the buisness of explaining exactly how the process of evolution MORE THAN ACCOUNTS for all of the complexity we see in nature. Creationist want to, and have, confuse you. Things that humans "design" are ARTIFICIAL, living creatures are NOT! Get a clue.
chedillychedilly1 6 months ago
@ray7685 If the transistors, microchips, and vacuume tubes could replicate somehow, and their offspring had slight variations which could be selected for in the consecutive generations, then the damn computers would evolve by natural selection. That is essentially what we are. We are biological machines, each with the aformentioned ability to have offspring which vary, and can thus be selected for. The combinations and build up, or loss, of variation results in morphology.( over your head?)
chedillychedilly1 6 months ago
@ray7685 BTW: The information programed in, and displayed on, a computer IS physical. The thoughts that come from the minds are biochemical, the actions taken to design and build the machine and the programs are all ELECTROMAGNETIC, and the very language itself (binary) is, at its physical base, electrons. What we are talking about is the process by which these things come together and function. COMPUTERS ARE BUILT; ANIMALS EVOLVE!... sorry if you can't accept reality.
chedillychedilly1 6 months ago
@ray7685 First of all: the theory of evolution explains EXACTLY HOW intellect arises from non-intellect. So, saying something like,"intellect can't come from non-intellect," is extremely STUPID, because you're simply framing the fact that you don't even understand what you are supposed to be arguing against! Secondly: not all theories change; do you think that one day the heliocentric THEORY of the solar system is going to be uprooted!....NO DUMB DUMB! Science is CONVERGENT: con
chedillychedilly1 6 months ago
@chedillychedilly1 Christianity explains the origen of intellect as well, Mr. Professional Scientist. So, Dilly, I'm stupid because I don't see nor has it ever shown that intellect comes form non-intellect. I'm supposed to jump on the wagon. What should i do with the theory of Aliens? should I jump on the wagon too. See, Dilly, intellect begets intellect is a fact, not a theory. I can show it, because i see it everyday. What part of this don't you get?
ray7685 6 months ago
@ray7685 NO! Mr not professional scientist! Christianity MAKES UP THE EXPLAINATION OF THE ORIGIN OF INTELLECT. Christianity is, at it's core, a mythological explaination of reality, one which, in most factual cases, is WRONG! "The theory of aliens!???" WTF are you talking about? More nonsense piled on top of more nonsense. There is no scientific theory of aliens dumb dumb, and if there were you probably wouldn't understand that either. BIOLOGIST ARE NOT JUST JUMPING ON A WAGON! U R STUPID! lol
chedillychedilly1 6 months ago
@chedillychedilly1 You are going to have to prove that statement, buddy. Good luck!
ray7685 5 months ago