This is coming from someone who has taken a lot of math courses. I am an engineering major at the University of Michigan. I know a thing or two about mathmatical and scientific proofs. Most proofs in calculus come from our ability to prove that any other possibility is false... and because our hypothesis can't be proven false, it must be true.
This same logic can be used for God. All you need to do to prove God's existence true is to prove the contrary false... which has been done.
Nothing saddens me more than to see men of science tricked into theism. I'm a Mechanical Engineer, and through my time in college, I saw many intelligent peers succumbing to religion. Very sad.
No man of science can truly marriage religion and science. You have to sacrifice parts of one, or both.
"No man of science can truly marriage religion and science."
No intelligent man tries to use the Bible as a science book.
The truth is, the Bible is a philosophy book... I take it to philosophy class. When I go to physics class, I take my phisics book.
Only an idiot would take his Bible to physics class.
Long story short, religion and science have.... absolutely nothing to do with each other. Why try to marry religion and science when they have nothing in common?
The law of controdiction does not say that free will and fate can not simultaniously exist. I like how you just randomly throw that out there hopeing people wont notice that it is an unproven assertion.
The law of controdiction says that free will can not both exist and not exist. It also says that fate can not both exist and not exist. It never says that free will and fate can not both exist.
Look up soft-determinism and then get back to me you dumb fucking cunt.
@collins1188 Your and idiot... Take the definition of fate, meaning every part of our lives is predetermined and will always end up the same regardless of what we do. This is contrary to free will. In order to have free will, we must be able to change our fate? Free will is defined as "the power of making free choices unconstrained by external agencies", if fate was true, free will could not be. The concepts of fate and free will can not simultaneously exist because they counter each other.
"Your and idiot... Take the definition of fate, meaning every part of our lives is predetermined."
HAHAHAHAHA!!!! I seriously laughed after reading this. Wikipedia fatalism r-tard.
Plus, your definition of free will is erroneous because it describes completely RANDOM will... Choices that are based on NOTHING are just random action... and not a choice at all. Why don't you think?
"if fate was true, free will could not be"
Wikipedia soft-determinism and educate yourself r-tard.
@collins1188 Your and idiot... Take the definition of fate, meaning every part of our lives is predetermined and will always end up the same regardless of what we do. This is contrary to free will. In order to have free will, we must be able to change our fate? Free will is defined as "the power of making free choices unconstrained by external agencies", if fate was true, free will could not be. The concepts of fate and free will can not simultaneously exist because they counter each other.
Take the deffinition of god and compare it to science and logic. The don't click. This means that you can not use science and logic to disprove god. Gerald Schroeder can explain things alot better than me.
Free will and faith can simultaneously exist. Predetermination does not necessarily affect choices. It simply means that the choices that were made were always going to be made.
Its a complicated subject, but I believe a deterministic universe is possible, but still believe that no one makes my choices for me.
Can I make a clear point. It is impossible through science to know indefinitely how the universe was made. It is illogical for something to be created from nothing. In our world of cause and effect do you really believe this whole universe just created itself from NOTHING? You can do all the experiments in the world, but you can never recreate an environment that is exactly like the universe before it existed.
How does science say that God did not create man??? The crux of this video attacks the Judeo Christian Creation story not the God he defined earlier in the video. Even if Abiogenesis were true, could it not be that there was a creator whom formed those little particles to set life in motion??
we are in deep trouble because of the religions thinking...wake up people...no evolution and no Gods....we are alone and our relatives are on another planets..they don t care...
If we found that life is possible on Mars,what our leaders would do to populated the planet Mars??? Finnish thinking? Well i think they will send people to start a population there and i think it s the same thing happen to us on Earth,we came from anoter world thats it thats all,no Gods and no evolution too !!!
No there were jews there before, more/most came after though and they gained ownership of the land and set up a government and everything else that goes with a nation.
People who believe in god....there is a place for you.... THE MENTAL HOSPITAL!!! because if you believe in heaven your gonna be in for one hell of a surprise
Nice video man, finally I met someone who seems to be smart. Honestly no matter how many times we prove we absolute evidence that god doesn't exist, they'll just say let us believe in whatever we want blah blah blah. Well if that's what they want why don't they be mental privately not in public because the ridiculous IDEA (that what god is an illusion) is no more real than the anime or cartoons that I used to watch.
HE DIDNT EVEN PROVE GOD DIDN'T EXIST!!! hey if a book written 1000's of years ago can predict things happening 1000's of years later den i think GOD really does exist, Satan wants u to believe God is fake cuz he wants u dead forever and wat does Satan try to use to go against God... SCIENCE
The return of the Jews to Israel is the key to bible prophecy. Most other endtime prophecies depend on the Jewish people living in Israel and not scattered amongst the Gentiles. Israel has not existed as a nation since hundreds of years before the birth of Christ. Israel was established on May 15, 1948. This was prophecied in Deuteronomy 4:27-28,30-31 Isaiah 11:11 Jeremiah 30:3 and more.
holy crap that's vague, i could say man will one day land on mars. That wouldn't be considered prophecy even though its the same level of vagueness. also how does returning to your homeland relate to a place being made a nation
Well its not that vauge more like youd have to give the exact place on mars and the shuttle name or crew. But there are plenty more as i said before. God gave the Jews a specific section of land to be theirs. when they returned to that place they became the nation of Isreal.
And who was living on that land? Or did the Jews just walk into an empty land of milk & honey?
Your wonderful god slaughtered 100s of thousands so his chosen 1s could have that land! They virtually wiped out every Cannanite 2 the child!
I do a lot of research. Six months ago, I found out about some very, very old Texts! I didn't realize it at the time but tthese texts are older than the dead sea scrolls. They blow the lid of the Judeo-Xian religion! Would you like to know more?
I ask u instead of just laying it all out there, out of respect. Even the arrogant Xians who come on our atheist videos..even though I'd love to knock them off their high horse, I instead, hold off. I ask 1st, bcuz this is the real thing! If I give U the info, even if U blow it off, as they always like 2 do, u won't be able to forget the info. It will be in your head, so do U want to know?
You can't un-ring a bell!
Oh, I almost forgot, would U like to take the prayer challenge?
Alright but im sure it will be a long message so you can send it to my inbox. But remember it has to be held to the same standards as the Bible and its reliability so if it dosnt stand up to scrutiny, is archaeologicaly supported,and posess corroboration dont exspect me to take it serious at all. Oh and i will listen to your (im almost positive biased and unreasonable) prayer challenge.
Jesus in the bible claimed "there will be many who will claim they are my followers" This was at a time when he was being persecuted. Now 2000 some odd years later, how many people around the world do you think claim to be followers of Christ? How many people call themselves Christians? I bet the number is a bit larger than 12.
wooow. the books of the New testament are written by witnesses of Christ, He did not write about himself. But if you panana healed the sick miraculously, gave the blind sight, walked on water, and resurrected from the dead maybe you should write a book.
Ummm maybe you never thought that this Jesus fellow didn't do any of those things? Rumors spread and they just exaggerated?? No? Of course not? That's why you're being brain washed.
I am being brainwashed? Sir I am not naive, of course it is possible that Jesus did not do the things written about him and I have been tricked this whole time. But likewise, it is possible that George Washington was never a president of the US, Lincoln never signed the emancipation proclamation, and our country never fought a civil war. We have all been given a measure of faith, we accept by faith that all the aforementioned things happened concerning American History.
I view the evidence for Christ and intelligent design and due to the overwhelmingly favorable evidence I accept by faith that they are true. You have looked at evidence and decided by faith that Christ is nog God, and further that there is no God or intelligent designer.
Oh, there's mor reason to believe he wasn't real! Take prayer. besides never seeing it work, not in Vietnam, and mot in a child's Cancer ward!! i was a Xian back then & believed I had enough faith to walk on water myself, if need be! Yet, I saw again and again, god never answered prayer! So I researched it. a couple years ago, I made a challenge to all Xians that I can prove my claim that god doesn't answer prayer (cuz he ain't there)!
U can bet your bottom dollar that mauch of history is different than what you read! As far as JC is concerned, there is no historicity 4 him! & Josephus, Setonius, Pliney, etc all fail!!...espec. Josephus!!
The Romans supposedly kept good records, yet there's not 1 word of Pontius Pilate trying & executing jesus.
But I think I know where you're coming from Pascal's Wager!! Obvious reasons why that won't work.
Faith?? U mean hope!! Any1 can accept anything by faith, wishful thinking!
@TreTre22ify and what book is this? the bible has no future references in it nor does the torah or even the deuterochononicals every thing writen about every religeous book are of past referenc and of historical events and alot of these stories cant be proven in anyway, by your logic i could wright a storie about how there was a giant monster killing everyone in the city and ppl years from now find it and without anyproff say it has to be real ppl like u are just idiots who believe in a fake god
God is an illogical concept, therefore trying to explain it ( prove or dis-prove) can not be accomplished by logic. That is why it is constantly agrued about. There are logical arguments that seem to prove God exist and there are logical arguments that seem to prove he does not. I can only say that everything has a beginning, a moment of creation. But for this to be true there had to be at least one thing or entity (God) that always was to begin the first thing that needed "began".
Well not everything had a beginning something had to of been not natural or super natural. Lets say our existence on earth here and now is dominoe "X" to answer your question y there must be a begining lets see if no beginning works. Say that theres infinite dominoes before "X" how long does it take to go through infinite dominoes and therefore reach dominoe "X"? an infinte amount of time, in other words we wouldnt exist "yet" if there wasnt a beginning. We exist therefore there was a beginning.
Not at all, what im trying to get across is the universe cant have been eternal, because we'er here. There are a finite # of humans and that is also why we r here. Also where do you get your idea of perfect? a non perfect world would be perfect if there wasnt a perfect God to match it up against.
haha well I met God so you are just fooling yourself, toots!
no way that I teleported into outerspace and saw earth at a vast distance, standing alongside an Almighty Father figure, who then also took me to many fantastic places in other worlds and realms entirely. and this happened on three seperate occasions. He came a day before my 24rth birthday, thus coming when i was 23. and you cannot convince me i was deluded or hallucinated what was MORE real than this stupid mortal life!
And on what basis do you say that a 'pillar' of religion is satan? Problem with boolean logic is that you need to know what you're applying it to! Let's change 'god' to 'being', and 'satan' to non-being, and religion to 'awareness' (standard existential terms: you need being and non-being to create awareness): if you apply boolean logic, the consequence is that after the equation, I, nor you, any longer exist. Of course, that's bullshit, and the logic is as well...(next box...)
...but that's because linguistic logic doesn't always work with existential debates (see Vygotsky) - to use Gilbert Ryle's definition, they are 'category mistakes'. The same applies with religion: we haven't worked out a satisfactory definition of what religion is, so we can't apply any boolean logic to it yet! (Or perhaps you were just having a joke; in which case, it was quite funny... :)
I was kind of interested in the beginning, but at the point of talking about creationism as if it was a 'proof of God', you've got me annoyed. Problem is with your definition of logic. think of quantum mechanics: from empirical logic, light cannot be both a wave and a particle at the same time (a kind of either/or); mathematically it can be. Now either quantum mechanics is wrong (which, by your definition of science, it can't be), or you're definition of logic is. God is always a possibility.
Correction: that should have read 'physics', not quantum mechanics. But the point remains the same. If you want an example from quantum mechanics for why mathematical logic and empirical logic are not the same, think of trans-spacio temporal realities: those can't exactly fit into linguistic logic, can they? Strange that you say that 'god is no way a possibility'. Just reading Martin Rees the other day, and he puts down the concept of 'God' as a possibility for the fine tuning of the universe.
He rejects it, but (as he admits) out of personal preference rather than hard logic. So, if a well-respected cosmologist uses the hypothosis of God, then things aren't as simple as they first appear! (Btw, I admit I'm not an expert on quantum mechanics, but I've got a pretty good source for my info: my brother is a professor of it at Oxford! :)
You didn't even prove anything. You just stated that science proves God wrong, and didn't even back it up. There are also several gaps in your process.
this is lame, you can't use cold-blooded logic and cold-blooded science to prove the existance of a concept that is more related to morality and knowing one's inner self, and that is related to what is now unknown to man.
There is a God, just that everybody's God is different.
all these theoretical discoveries made by 'your' scientists, were explained in Quran 1400 years ago :) by Allah, the creator of the world, and the galaxies. If you still need any more proof, then u yourself will be proving your 'logic' definition wrong. Go get a glass of chilled water, listen to some relaxation music, and think about it... :)
Dear uploader and producer of this video, live with your logic and science for your whole life and enjoy with them, but when you die and you will have to stand in fron of your creator, Allah, I hope you will regret you made this video... good day
one day you will look back at your life and realize that you've wasted an entire lifetime believing in a fairytale instead of understanding basic science and proven facts. The sooner humanity moves on from religion and god/allah the better place this world will be....
It is a test by Allah, that what you are told against Him; if you beleive it, what kind of believer will u be. Bring me a mountain of proofs that Allah doesnt exist and I will still not have a doubt about his sole authority, and not me, any believer. Now just go, have a survey and ask yourself that what is so special in religion... I'd suggest you read Quran's translation on any website, now that wont take much time and help you find answers to the questions you ask here
what? lol how do you know all this stuff. You religious nutcases never seem to be able answer a question with a good answer. Yet another dumbfounded religious moron thinking that he'll see the pearly gates. Wake a live in reality and stop dreaming a fairytale...
sorry, that comment was a response to nick polovino's comments.
Also if you had actually watched the video, he clearly explains that he doesn't actually create an ABSOLUTE PROOF of the nonexistence of god, just merely an evidencial/logical proof. I do agree that he could do better phrasing on it, but it definitely wouldn't have gotten him as many views as he has gotten.
[part 2/2] Specific scientific theories and specific religions will oppose each other. Likewise, specific scientific theories will oppose each other, and specific religions will oppose each other. But the concept of "science" and the concept of "religion" need not be mutually exclusive. Observing the same objects, they ask quantitative and qualitative questions respectively to arrive at different answers, but together, they will understand a greater whole.
[part 1/2] On an episode of Science Friday with Ira Flatow, some men sat down to discuss science vs. religion. One drew an interesting analogy. Imagine a boiling tea kettle. One man asks: how does water boil, and then gives you a lengthy explanation of kinetic energy and so forth. Another asks: why is the water boiling, and answers, because I want to make tea. Both are observing the same pot. One man is asking scientific questions, the other philosophical, and neither are mutually exclusive.
its easy to point a finger at only one source to explain this reallity its closed minded to say a god made everthing and leave out all other possiablities i am so sick of people saying god is everything and made everything there is no way for us to know that for certain so why should we just make this super being the only source when nothing can be proved
I'm pretty sure gravity is a law. So is conservation of energy by the way, it is not created. In theory space and time are one and the same, test have been done. Moving at certain speeds alter the flow of time. If there is no space there is no time. Space is the distance between bodies of matter. If there is no matter, there is no space or time. If something created the universe it must have existed before it and therefore before time. Before time is logicaly impossible since "before" needs time
[part 1] Stephen Hawking used the shape of time to arrive at his own conclusion regarding God in a lecture I attended roughly ten years ago. He concluded that since time is spherical in shape, asking where is the beginning of time is as illogical as asking what lies one mile north of the geographic north pole. Of course, it should also be noted that the spherical shape of time is also theoretical. Future observations of time may inspire a thoroughly different model of its shape and nature.
[part 3] Ironically, I was an atheist, until I attended Hawking's lecture and observed the need for the caveat "...according to the currently accepted theory...". That left room to doubt, and also to grow. I will not say that God, as defined by many major religions, does or does not exist. I only remain open to hearing all arguments. Logically, yes, it does come down to "True!" or "False >:(" in the end, but that Truth may well be far more complicated, or simple, than what is currently accepted.
There is no such thing as "THE TRUTH" only a version of the truth. Like in court systems, someone who got shot in the leg might say he was innocent which was "his truth" and the one who shot him might say that he was about to beat him to death which is his "truth".
The only way to test if a truth is valid is through evidence. So if you can test if God exists, by all means do so. If you successfully do it, congrats, you just went down in history. If not..Lols.
[part A] What you are referring to is not "Truth", but perception. Each and every person will arrive at their own interpretation of a given event according to their ability to process a given experience based on limited information. As such, our perceptions of "Truth" will be as varied as you say. In a courtroom, that's as far is it goes, and is reflected in the legal definition of truth. That same truth, or perception thereof, is rigorously tested via the scientific method to form theories.
Sorry for not explaining more clearly. There are 2 types of truths just like evidence. There is absolute truth such as "What is in this box?" that you can find out just by doing the obvious like opening the box. There is also evidential truth which is most of the truth out there.Evidential truth is using evidential proof like "This man threw a pink spray painted banana at me in the darkest alley in New York!" This can be evidentially proven by...looking for a spray can, and a banana.
[part B] By calling a concept or model a theory, we are acknowledging that it may or may not be the "Truth". Claiming that there is no "Truth" beyond our limited ability to perceive reality is erroneous, because the whole of existence is not defined by our consciousness. The Earth was round while every human on Earth claimed it was flat. Radio waves did not *poof* into existence when we developed the tools to detect them. Likewise, there is much waiting to be discovered.
[part C] One of my professors gave me a great analogy, and I would like to share it with you, though you may have heard it before. Imagine that you have been handed a box, and the volume within has a specific shape. There is an object of unknown size and shape within that space. Your mission is to describe as much as you can about the nature of the object and the volume within the box without opening it. You may shake it, you may roll it about, you may listen to it, but it does not open.
"calling a concept or model a theory, we are acknowledging that it may or may not be the "Truth"" - a scientific theory is a principle that explains a set of facts.
are the facts truth? that seems far to abstract a term does the fact that a theory holds true mean it is 'truth' ofcourse not a theory is not infallible.
[part D] As you pass the box among your colleagues, you will each draw your own conclusions, no doubt. Some answers may be very different from your own, and you may consider some to be outlandish. Even while applying the scientific method, your conclusions will be theories based on your perceptions at best. Yet the volume within does undoubtedly have a specific shape with only one absolutely True answer, likewise the specific nature of the object within it. That is truth vs. "Truth".
Well yes that is a pretty decent analogy and tell your professer "Kudos! You get a cookie"(jk). But anways..there is one flaw to that analogy. Your comparing something that has a linear and clear answer. The origin of the universe is more split and there is no 1 clear answer of the universe. There couldve been multiple events each with its own "box" we need to shake and hear and open to see whats in it.
"your conclusions will be theories" - well not really, your conclusions would be hypothesis' based on your subjective interpretation of objective facts.
Also by presenting your hypothesis to your peers you would be able to eliminate answers that are not actually supported and form a collective consensus that is likely to be far more correct than your opinion alone. essentially peer review.
[part E] Unfortunately, human ego makes such uncertainty very hard to accept. We feel weak and vulnerable when we are uncertain. We prefer the illusions of our perceptions, because it is damned uncomfortable to say "I don't know". It has been said that "truth hurts", but doubt hurts more. So, we proclaim "THIS IS SO!" and fight to protect what we believe. We see this everywhere, from the various spiritual systems to the various schools of science and philosophy. God? What's your perception?
[part 2] At that lecture, Hawking argued that since there is no beginning of time, there is no singular point of creation, and therefor no Creator/God. Since human conception of existence is in a state of flux (i.e. new theories replace the old, and new theories inspire new perspectives that recolor older notions) we can only say, at best "...according to the currently accepted theory...". Ego spurs us to think that our own theory is Truth, and those who refute our claim need to be enlightened.
Since when are older books more accurate? I have a copy of "The Christian Philosopher" dated 1721 and in there it says lightning is caused by sulphurous particles being lifted into the air and heated by unexplained sources.
It's pretty obvious that the newer a book is the more likely it is to be accurate.
The Bible is a classic example of this fact. It's so full of ridiculous notions that it's laughable when read objectively.
in all reality God cannot exist, to believe that one spiritual being created everything in the universe is just plain retarded, science proves the creation of man, organisms, planets and the universe...
GOD exist ok, the devil is using you 2 brainwash people, so much anger for GOD, and the things of the world you belive and the pleasure of the world you like and belive, you are lost in your mind and walking around like a zombi and waiting 4 when you die, you will go 2 hell, you can not go 2 heaven, beques heven is pure, and you are evil!!!!!!!
@frank1lastfall I think you completely misunderstood the video. You don't need proof that god does not exist to prove that he does not exist. just like you don't need to proof that 3 + 4 cannot equal 23, all you have to do is prove that 3 + 20 equals 23. QED.
(1st post)So, in this video you say there isn't any 100% irrefutable evidence that disproves a God. So, why does this video say "Proof that God does not exist?"
And then you go on to say that the 'evidence'(which you present none in this video) disproves the existence of a God. Logic doesn't disprove God, but instead actually provides a better case for his existence in my next comment.
I am going to PM you a response to those 3 arguments. But before i do, i have one general statement that i want to make.
Just because you cannot prove what caused the universe, doesn't neccesarily prove god's existence. All it does it prove our ignorance about our origins. So why fill in a gap of our knowledge with a random god of your choice?
Intelligent design is a very weak argument, i'll PM u details. and can you explain contingency in this context?
I look forward to this conversation, MasterDebator809.
Though we will likely disagree with each others point of view, belief, and/or draw different conclusions of the existence or non-existence of a God, it should still be an intelligent/informative discussion.
Well before we do this i wanted you to define contingency, because there are many definitions, but many of them don't prove a gods existence at all. The other 2 i am quite familiar with, i just want to know what you mean by contingency.
The title of this video is misleading. It should state "There is no evidence that God exists". Its point of emphasis is specific towards the creation theory of 3 major religions but says nothing about why a God couldn't exist. Just that there is no evidence and that there is evidence for other theories. But 1 could postulate that God created evolution or any other scientific phenomena and put the rules in place. I'm not advocating or defending it, but it is possible.
most things in science prove god. like in science the earth strated as a ball of lava. in the bible it says the same since the bible is older then science theres proof for him. plus if god is not real how did the earth make its self. plus why is it not square. and why is not the earth far are near the sun. plus animals don't apper from nothing. and why aren't cats or dogs like people if god is not real. it does say god made people above animals
look, just because the bible is older, doesent mean it is right.
the most popular theory of earth is, that the universe that we live in is not the onley universe, there are infinite universes, ismilar to ours. when the universe stops increasing, it will collapse together, like a massive black hole with all the mass of universe in it. onec all the mass will be concentrated in a wery small space, it will explode again, just like infinite time befour that. that's the theory...
Science can somehow prove that God does not exist. One thing science can't prove is that God does exist. There is not proof. A magical man granting wishes in the sky and watches us pee? LOL. I would like every theist to answer this one.
(Why hasn't anyone ever seen God or Santa Claus)
(They're both fictional, imaginary male characters humans invented.)
HE arrives on the last day of the most important test to decide if you graduate
HE says that if you sign up for his class even on the last day then HE will give you an A and there is nothing the Principle can do about it because the Teacher has the power to give As but at the end of the day the principle can fire HIM but he wont because JESUS now owns the school
AHughman08, First of all i'd like to say im a christian, yes even after i watched your vid. i agree with the statement that proving God exists cant pass the hypothosis stage, which is where faith comes in for christians. but proving God doesnt exist cant pass the hypothosis stage either.
Godel changes the definition of god to mean "that for which no greater can be conceived." In this case, one can say that "god" does exist. But it is arbitrary. Likewise, I can write a proof that goes like this:
1) I am God.
2) I exist.
3) Therefore, God exists.
However, if your definition of god includes 1) created humans 2) created life or 3) is omnipotent, then that god is disproved by the video.
No, you are violating the definition of god. If you said, you are god we would conclude you are deluded. As you are not "supernatural" you are a natural entity. The conclusion of your argument does not follow logically from the premise of your argument. As there is no "proof" you are god.
Godel's definition of God does not include "supernatural" either. Godel's argument goes like this:
1) God is the greatest thing that can be conceived
2) There are a finite number of things a person can conceive
3) Of those things, there is a greatest thing.
4) God exists.
There is nothing about this God being supernatural or even a conscious being. If the greatest thing I can conceive is the entirety of the universe, then Godel says that is god. There is nothing gained from this.
Dude you don't know what Kurt Godel said, he never made an argument for a god, it was not even his field.
Also your argument is stupid, I can convince of a powerful 11 penis monkey with a head of a woman flying on a pink unicorn therefore this thing exists because I can convince of it.
another thing is that you are not using mathematical concepts of real science but merely phylosophical methodologies to try to explain something. And that my friend can't be used to prove anything
Explain the Dark Matter then... Scientists know it is there, that it exist but they can't see it... They know that there is a force or something that keeps things together which isn''t magnetism. They call it Dark Matter.
Heyyy same as God... We know that there is a force out there that not only gives life to matter but also gives intelligence and conciousness... disprove that.
Dis you know tat some think that this Dark Matter is actually the conciousness of the Universe.. that includes us ;)
Actually. dark matter have not been discovered yet. Just as a note before I go any further, I am an atheist. Not an agnostic, but an atheist. There are many things I am skeptical on with science and research, such as the big bang. If you ask me, it seems plausible but does not make much sense as of right now. Many puzzle pieces are missing.
But I doubt dark matter. It is a theory. I'm not saying it's not there, but I'm doubting it at this present time.
"Check it out " - usually when people make a claim like that they post a link. however i'm guessing any link you provide will be to an opinion piece ....considering every piece of evidence you have posted so far has been. if your making a claim of this nature then back it up by posting a link to a credible source ie. a main stream scientific journal.
oh yeh, and Dark Matter is at this very moment STILL a hypothesis, so no it has not been recorded :)
Yes, dark matter is still a hypothesis. It's sad to say that so many people don't even analyze what is actually being said when they look up technological advances. They hear about dark matter and it's causes and they're like "OMFG! HONEY! LISTEN TO THIS!"
Many morons in this world.... it makes me a very sad panda.
But aren't you kind of kicking yourself in the ass using this hypothesis argument. I mean if you go by your logic then believing the big bang theory would to be scientific fact is impossible considering we can`t test the birth of the universe and we have no solid evidence to insure it (unless this theory is only considered to be a hypothesis among the scientific community.) And the big bang is part of the evolution theory which means it`s a hypothesis not fact.
Actually... sceintists (I don't really like just saying "scientists" because it seems like a non-reliable source of creditation due to it being a word that people throw around... but whatever) are actually creating something that can generate how the universe began and how black holes are made. This machine can produce results and they will be able to study things relating to both subjects.
@StainedShuriken333 yeah man i heard of something similar (mite be the same thing) where the say they mite be able to create a black right here on earth or something like that. Pretty interesting to read about. Anyways, just out of curiosity, before you chose to be an atheist were your parents part of a religion that they ultimately forced you to be part of as a kid?
Here's a something a lot of people probably don't know unless you were a catholic at one point. Even if you don't attend their church and your parents are catholic they will continue to reconize you as part of their church and still have you registered under their church. That is the only reason it is one of the largest churches in the world. They aren't the only religion to do this either.
I looked at the topic of the Hadron Collider. The latest one to be built was the LHC it costs billions of dollars to construct and has it's own power station to allow it to function. Interesting? yeah I'd say you can view the topic on youtube I don't know if you did that yet or not.
That's actually the one I was talking about lol. The huge one where it's like below a mountain or something? And the final tube for the atoms is like 11 miles long? It's been a while since I've looked up info on it, but you are talking about the one I was referring to. I think only 2 were ever made and the latest one is the biggest and supposedly best one.
When I read about it, they were having technical difficulties with it. So I don't know if it's up and running as of right now.
@StainedShuriken333 It was running in late 2009 and its down again. And so far no black hole have opened but they haven't even run the thing at it's full potential yet.
Aye. Well, it is to be expected with such a high tech piece of equipment to be going through things such as this. I'm guessing it will be perfected within the next couple years... perhaps... 2012? IS THAT HOW THE WORLD WILL END??
Hah! Just kidding. I don't believe in the 2012 myth lol.
i really like your video.. ure a very intelligent guy and determined.
davidealessio 1 year ago
just because something can't be proved wrong doesn't mean it is right either. it may for some things but not all.
readthis1212 1 year ago
This is coming from someone who has taken a lot of math courses. I am an engineering major at the University of Michigan. I know a thing or two about mathmatical and scientific proofs. Most proofs in calculus come from our ability to prove that any other possibility is false... and because our hypothesis can't be proven false, it must be true.
This same logic can be used for God. All you need to do to prove God's existence true is to prove the contrary false... which has been done.
collins1188 1 year ago
Nothing saddens me more than to see men of science tricked into theism. I'm a Mechanical Engineer, and through my time in college, I saw many intelligent peers succumbing to religion. Very sad.
No man of science can truly marriage religion and science. You have to sacrifice parts of one, or both.
STFUNOWlol 1 year ago
"No man of science can truly marriage religion and science."
No intelligent man tries to use the Bible as a science book.
The truth is, the Bible is a philosophy book... I take it to philosophy class. When I go to physics class, I take my phisics book.
Only an idiot would take his Bible to physics class.
Long story short, religion and science have.... absolutely nothing to do with each other. Why try to marry religion and science when they have nothing in common?
collins1188 1 year ago
The law of controdiction does not say that free will and fate can not simultaniously exist. I like how you just randomly throw that out there hopeing people wont notice that it is an unproven assertion.
The law of controdiction says that free will can not both exist and not exist. It also says that fate can not both exist and not exist. It never says that free will and fate can not both exist.
Look up soft-determinism and then get back to me you dumb fucking cunt.
This guy's an idiot
collins1188 1 year ago
@collins1188 Your and idiot... Take the definition of fate, meaning every part of our lives is predetermined and will always end up the same regardless of what we do. This is contrary to free will. In order to have free will, we must be able to change our fate? Free will is defined as "the power of making free choices unconstrained by external agencies", if fate was true, free will could not be. The concepts of fate and free will can not simultaneously exist because they counter each other.
Rickje1234 1 year ago
"Your and idiot... Take the definition of fate, meaning every part of our lives is predetermined."
HAHAHAHAHA!!!! I seriously laughed after reading this. Wikipedia fatalism r-tard.
Plus, your definition of free will is erroneous because it describes completely RANDOM will... Choices that are based on NOTHING are just random action... and not a choice at all. Why don't you think?
"if fate was true, free will could not be"
Wikipedia soft-determinism and educate yourself r-tard.
collins1188 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@collins1188 Your and idiot... Take the definition of fate, meaning every part of our lives is predetermined and will always end up the same regardless of what we do. This is contrary to free will. In order to have free will, we must be able to change our fate? Free will is defined as "the power of making free choices unconstrained by external agencies", if fate was true, free will could not be. The concepts of fate and free will can not simultaneously exist because they counter each other.
Rickje1234 1 year ago
Take the deffinition of god and compare it to science and logic. The don't click. This means that you can not use science and logic to disprove god. Gerald Schroeder can explain things alot better than me.
lemmywhinks 1 year ago
"Take the definition of god and compare it to science and logic"
God - the greatest conceivable being
Science and logic.... string theory and if a=b and b=c, then a=c.
You're right! They don't click. Because comparing God to science is comparing apples to oranges. Why bother.
"you can not use science and logic to disprove god."
quoted for emphasis and agreement.
collins1188 1 year ago
There is a God!
SummerSunshine1988 1 year ago
there is no god :D
thelion2430 1 year ago
Free will and faith can simultaneously exist. Predetermination does not necessarily affect choices. It simply means that the choices that were made were always going to be made.
Its a complicated subject, but I believe a deterministic universe is possible, but still believe that no one makes my choices for me.
Keeban3 1 year ago
Can I make a clear point. It is impossible through science to know indefinitely how the universe was made. It is illogical for something to be created from nothing. In our world of cause and effect do you really believe this whole universe just created itself from NOTHING? You can do all the experiments in the world, but you can never recreate an environment that is exactly like the universe before it existed.
tbrock211 1 year ago
@tbrock211
But just because it came from something doesn't say that the something that caused its creation is intelligent (or wrote a particular book).
Keeban3 1 year ago
How does science say that God did not create man??? The crux of this video attacks the Judeo Christian Creation story not the God he defined earlier in the video. Even if Abiogenesis were true, could it not be that there was a creator whom formed those little particles to set life in motion??
tbrock211 1 year ago
True.
Keeban3 1 year ago
we are in deep trouble because of the religions thinking...wake up people...no evolution and no Gods....we are alone and our relatives are on another planets..they don t care...
therockpp 1 year ago
If we found that life is possible on Mars,what our leaders would do to populated the planet Mars??? Finnish thinking? Well i think they will send people to start a population there and i think it s the same thing happen to us on Earth,we came from anoter world thats it thats all,no Gods and no evolution too !!!
therockpp 1 year ago
BLOCK COMMENTS
therockpp 1 year ago
AH..
Excellent video!
I like your point about the law of non-contradiction stating that, free will and faith cannot co-exist.
Here's another one, and it's my favorite;
"If man has free-will, then god cannot be omniscient!" "If god is omniscient, as scripture purportedly states, then man cannot have free-will."
Keep up the great work! I subbed!
Cootabux 1 year ago
Good work, informative yet funny.
Most excellent.
EinZweiDie 1 year ago
No there were jews there before, more/most came after though and they gained ownership of the land and set up a government and everything else that goes with a nation.
116Phanatic 1 year ago
People who believe in god....there is a place for you.... THE MENTAL HOSPITAL!!! because if you believe in heaven your gonna be in for one hell of a surprise
panana10000 1 year ago
You my friend will be in for one HELL of a surprise if Christians are right!
tbrock211 1 year ago
tb...
And if the Xian god created hell, and plans on sending most humans there...then I'm right!!!
God is evil! The most evil entity ever devised!
I used to think yahweh was evil...but he's nothing compared to jeebus meek & mild who will torment humans in a furnace for how long?? Eternity??
That's the kicker!! Eternal torment can only be the manifestation of pure evil!! Just think about it.
Shoot..just the fact he let satan off the hook, then sent him here to torment man, is proof enough
Cootabux 1 year ago
Nice video man, finally I met someone who seems to be smart. Honestly no matter how many times we prove we absolute evidence that god doesn't exist, they'll just say let us believe in whatever we want blah blah blah. Well if that's what they want why don't they be mental privately not in public because the ridiculous IDEA (that what god is an illusion) is no more real than the anime or cartoons that I used to watch.
panana10000 1 year ago
HE DIDNT EVEN PROVE GOD DIDN'T EXIST!!! hey if a book written 1000's of years ago can predict things happening 1000's of years later den i think GOD really does exist, Satan wants u to believe God is fake cuz he wants u dead forever and wat does Satan try to use to go against God... SCIENCE
TreTre22ify 1 year ago
but i see no book saying anything about what happens thousand of years in the future and is correct about "now"
M3IZI 1 year ago
There are definitly prophecys that have been fulfilled lately and even more that are shaping up to come to pass.
116Phanatic 1 year ago
such as...
M3IZI 1 year ago
The return of the Jews to Israel is the key to bible prophecy. Most other endtime prophecies depend on the Jewish people living in Israel and not scattered amongst the Gentiles. Israel has not existed as a nation since hundreds of years before the birth of Christ. Israel was established on May 15, 1948. This was prophecied in Deuteronomy 4:27-28,30-31 Isaiah 11:11 Jeremiah 30:3 and more.
116Phanatic 1 year ago
it said that on may 15 1948 years after jesus death israel will become a nation???
M3IZI 1 year ago
It did not give the exact date but it said that they would be returned to their homeland, which they were. oh and theres 2000 others.
116Phanatic 1 year ago
holy crap that's vague, i could say man will one day land on mars. That wouldn't be considered prophecy even though its the same level of vagueness. also how does returning to your homeland relate to a place being made a nation
M3IZI 1 year ago
Well its not that vauge more like youd have to give the exact place on mars and the shuttle name or crew. But there are plenty more as i said before. God gave the Jews a specific section of land to be theirs. when they returned to that place they became the nation of Isreal.
116Phanatic 1 year ago
uh so there where no jews in Israel untill it became a nation
M3IZI 1 year ago
116... #1
And who was living on that land? Or did the Jews just walk into an empty land of milk & honey?
Your wonderful god slaughtered 100s of thousands so his chosen 1s could have that land! They virtually wiped out every Cannanite 2 the child!
I do a lot of research. Six months ago, I found out about some very, very old Texts! I didn't realize it at the time but tthese texts are older than the dead sea scrolls. They blow the lid of the Judeo-Xian religion! Would you like to know more?
Cootabux 1 year ago
116...#2
I ask u instead of just laying it all out there, out of respect. Even the arrogant Xians who come on our atheist videos..even though I'd love to knock them off their high horse, I instead, hold off. I ask 1st, bcuz this is the real thing! If I give U the info, even if U blow it off, as they always like 2 do, u won't be able to forget the info. It will be in your head, so do U want to know?
You can't un-ring a bell!
Oh, I almost forgot, would U like to take the prayer challenge?
Cootabux 1 year ago
Alright but im sure it will be a long message so you can send it to my inbox. But remember it has to be held to the same standards as the Bible and its reliability so if it dosnt stand up to scrutiny, is archaeologicaly supported,and posess corroboration dont exspect me to take it serious at all. Oh and i will listen to your (im almost positive biased and unreasonable) prayer challenge.
116Phanatic 1 year ago
Jesus in the bible claimed "there will be many who will claim they are my followers" This was at a time when he was being persecuted. Now 2000 some odd years later, how many people around the world do you think claim to be followers of Christ? How many people call themselves Christians? I bet the number is a bit larger than 12.
tbrock211 1 year ago
Dude it's a book. Calm down. If I write a book about me being the son of god and put up some rules am I going to be worshipped by some retards?
panana10000 1 year ago
wooow. the books of the New testament are written by witnesses of Christ, He did not write about himself. But if you panana healed the sick miraculously, gave the blind sight, walked on water, and resurrected from the dead maybe you should write a book.
tbrock211 1 year ago
dude that means he is a shaman wtf we were wrong hes no son of a god he's a SHAMAN lol
M3IZI 1 year ago
lol
tbrock211 1 year ago
Ummm maybe you never thought that this Jesus fellow didn't do any of those things? Rumors spread and they just exaggerated?? No? Of course not? That's why you're being brain washed.
panana10000 1 year ago
I am being brainwashed? Sir I am not naive, of course it is possible that Jesus did not do the things written about him and I have been tricked this whole time. But likewise, it is possible that George Washington was never a president of the US, Lincoln never signed the emancipation proclamation, and our country never fought a civil war. We have all been given a measure of faith, we accept by faith that all the aforementioned things happened concerning American History.
tbrock211 1 year ago
I view the evidence for Christ and intelligent design and due to the overwhelmingly favorable evidence I accept by faith that they are true. You have looked at evidence and decided by faith that Christ is nog God, and further that there is no God or intelligent designer.
tbrock211 1 year ago
tb...
Oh, there's mor reason to believe he wasn't real! Take prayer. besides never seeing it work, not in Vietnam, and mot in a child's Cancer ward!! i was a Xian back then & believed I had enough faith to walk on water myself, if need be! Yet, I saw again and again, god never answered prayer! So I researched it. a couple years ago, I made a challenge to all Xians that I can prove my claim that god doesn't answer prayer (cuz he ain't there)!
No one has taken my challenge. Would U like to?
Cootabux 1 year ago
@tbrock211
Did you actually watch the first couple minutes of the video where hughman explained the difference between absolute proof and evidence proof?
I do not take the majority of a history lesson on FAITH, more rather the overwhelming EVIDENCE that supports the events you specified.
greenmeaniez 1 year ago
the point I am getting at is you must have faith in the evidence collected, or at least faith in the sources the evidence was collected from.
tbrock211 1 year ago
tb...
U can bet your bottom dollar that mauch of history is different than what you read! As far as JC is concerned, there is no historicity 4 him! & Josephus, Setonius, Pliney, etc all fail!!...espec. Josephus!!
The Romans supposedly kept good records, yet there's not 1 word of Pontius Pilate trying & executing jesus.
But I think I know where you're coming from Pascal's Wager!! Obvious reasons why that won't work.
Faith?? U mean hope!! Any1 can accept anything by faith, wishful thinking!
Cootabux 1 year ago
H.P. lovecraft could have written that down and it would be true.
M3IZI 1 year ago
@TreTre22ify and what book is this? the bible has no future references in it nor does the torah or even the deuterochononicals every thing writen about every religeous book are of past referenc and of historical events and alot of these stories cant be proven in anyway, by your logic i could wright a storie about how there was a giant monster killing everyone in the city and ppl years from now find it and without anyproff say it has to be real ppl like u are just idiots who believe in a fake god
tylerthe47 1 year ago
God is an illogical concept, therefore trying to explain it ( prove or dis-prove) can not be accomplished by logic. That is why it is constantly agrued about. There are logical arguments that seem to prove God exist and there are logical arguments that seem to prove he does not. I can only say that everything has a beginning, a moment of creation. But for this to be true there had to be at least one thing or entity (God) that always was to begin the first thing that needed "began".
CinemaTodd 1 year ago
"Everything has a beginning". Prove it.
Ronni3no2 1 year ago
Well not everything had a beginning something had to of been not natural or super natural. Lets say our existence on earth here and now is dominoe "X" to answer your question y there must be a begining lets see if no beginning works. Say that theres infinite dominoes before "X" how long does it take to go through infinite dominoes and therefore reach dominoe "X"? an infinte amount of time, in other words we wouldnt exist "yet" if there wasnt a beginning. We exist therefore there was a beginning.
116Phanatic 1 year ago
your looking at this mathamaticly not "really"
M3IZI 1 year ago
And what is "really"?
116Phanatic 1 year ago
real life : a non perfect world
M3IZI 1 year ago
thats like saying the universe is infinit and there are a finite number of humans therefor there are no humans
M3IZI 1 year ago
Not at all, what im trying to get across is the universe cant have been eternal, because we'er here. There are a finite # of humans and that is also why we r here. Also where do you get your idea of perfect? a non perfect world would be perfect if there wasnt a perfect God to match it up against.
116Phanatic 1 year ago
uhh why coundent it also im not arguing for a steady state universe im saying that the universe as always existed in some form.
oh and about the perfect world question i was talking mathamaticly perfect where everything is constant with no varietion
M3IZI 1 year ago
hello atheict u stupid brat ;)
warcraftaz 1 year ago
Sure you did...
Heheheblalala 1 year ago
haha well I met God so you are just fooling yourself, toots!
no way that I teleported into outerspace and saw earth at a vast distance, standing alongside an Almighty Father figure, who then also took me to many fantastic places in other worlds and realms entirely. and this happened on three seperate occasions. He came a day before my 24rth birthday, thus coming when i was 23. and you cannot convince me i was deluded or hallucinated what was MORE real than this stupid mortal life!
ImetGodfacetoface 1 year ago
def. of religion ....god+satan=religion
so god is the good and satan is the bad.
god and satan are the 2 pillars of religion.
god+satan=religion
now use boolean algebra to substitute
either god to (-god)......(-god)=satan
or....satan to (-satan)...(-satan)=god
fill in the first...god+(-god)=religion
makes 0 = religion
so religion is bullshit and god or satan dont exist..
robot014 1 year ago
And on what basis do you say that a 'pillar' of religion is satan? Problem with boolean logic is that you need to know what you're applying it to! Let's change 'god' to 'being', and 'satan' to non-being, and religion to 'awareness' (standard existential terms: you need being and non-being to create awareness): if you apply boolean logic, the consequence is that after the equation, I, nor you, any longer exist. Of course, that's bullshit, and the logic is as well...(next box...)
neoclassicism1 1 year ago
...but that's because linguistic logic doesn't always work with existential debates (see Vygotsky) - to use Gilbert Ryle's definition, they are 'category mistakes'. The same applies with religion: we haven't worked out a satisfactory definition of what religion is, so we can't apply any boolean logic to it yet! (Or perhaps you were just having a joke; in which case, it was quite funny... :)
neoclassicism1 1 year ago
@neoclassicism1 appearantly u know ur math....
i know, its bullshit..but it looks nice..and works sometime..
but with bullshit, u need bullshit to oppose it.
that can u say if someone is asking questions...
robot014 1 year ago
I was kind of interested in the beginning, but at the point of talking about creationism as if it was a 'proof of God', you've got me annoyed. Problem is with your definition of logic. think of quantum mechanics: from empirical logic, light cannot be both a wave and a particle at the same time (a kind of either/or); mathematically it can be. Now either quantum mechanics is wrong (which, by your definition of science, it can't be), or you're definition of logic is. God is always a possibility.
neoclassicism1 1 year ago
@neoclassicism1 please learn some quantum mechanics before making that remark...
god is noway a possibility
robot014 1 year ago
Correction: that should have read 'physics', not quantum mechanics. But the point remains the same. If you want an example from quantum mechanics for why mathematical logic and empirical logic are not the same, think of trans-spacio temporal realities: those can't exactly fit into linguistic logic, can they? Strange that you say that 'god is no way a possibility'. Just reading Martin Rees the other day, and he puts down the concept of 'God' as a possibility for the fine tuning of the universe.
neoclassicism1 1 year ago
@neoclassicism1 a+(-a)=s
a= god..... (-a) =satan.......s=sum
use a simple thing like this to set them up
robot014 1 year ago
He rejects it, but (as he admits) out of personal preference rather than hard logic. So, if a well-respected cosmologist uses the hypothosis of God, then things aren't as simple as they first appear! (Btw, I admit I'm not an expert on quantum mechanics, but I've got a pretty good source for my info: my brother is a professor of it at Oxford! :)
neoclassicism1 1 year ago
Sorry, but Allah does not exist, making it hard for him to 'explain' anything.
Heheheblalala 1 year ago
Watch the rest of the series...
Heheheblalala 1 year ago
You didn't even prove anything. You just stated that science proves God wrong, and didn't even back it up. There are also several gaps in your process.
tdq11 1 year ago
this is lame, you can't use cold-blooded logic and cold-blooded science to prove the existance of a concept that is more related to morality and knowing one's inner self, and that is related to what is now unknown to man.
There is a God, just that everybody's God is different.
dantheman1507 1 year ago
No, he will not, due to the simple fact that Allah does not exist.
Heheheblalala 1 year ago 2
6:06 - 6:25
all these theoretical discoveries made by 'your' scientists, were explained in Quran 1400 years ago :) by Allah, the creator of the world, and the galaxies. If you still need any more proof, then u yourself will be proving your 'logic' definition wrong. Go get a glass of chilled water, listen to some relaxation music, and think about it... :)
HamXXXa 1 year ago
who created allah then??
dbswann 1 year ago
Dear uploader and producer of this video, live with your logic and science for your whole life and enjoy with them, but when you die and you will have to stand in fron of your creator, Allah, I hope you will regret you made this video... good day
HamXXXa 1 year ago
one day you will look back at your life and realize that you've wasted an entire lifetime believing in a fairytale instead of understanding basic science and proven facts. The sooner humanity moves on from religion and god/allah the better place this world will be....
dbswann 1 year ago
It is a test by Allah, that what you are told against Him; if you beleive it, what kind of believer will u be. Bring me a mountain of proofs that Allah doesnt exist and I will still not have a doubt about his sole authority, and not me, any believer. Now just go, have a survey and ask yourself that what is so special in religion... I'd suggest you read Quran's translation on any website, now that wont take much time and help you find answers to the questions you ask here
HamXXXa 1 year ago
what? lol how do you know all this stuff. You religious nutcases never seem to be able answer a question with a good answer. Yet another dumbfounded religious moron thinking that he'll see the pearly gates. Wake a live in reality and stop dreaming a fairytale...
dbswann 1 year ago
we will see that when time comes...
HamXXXa 1 year ago
Bots are bad.
D35J4RD1N5 1 year ago
Not if the faith is nonsensical and irrational.
Heheheblalala 1 year ago
trying to prove or disprove that which is an article of faith seems in my humble opinion kind of fallacious. but i digress
joe018687645 1 year ago
You got blue eyes from your COUSIN? Really?
lol, good video otherwise. Very helpful.
painterofmusic 1 year ago
haha I like how this video explains things. a bit of humor is always good! :D
bangNL94 1 year ago
sorry, that comment was a response to nick polovino's comments.
Also if you had actually watched the video, he clearly explains that he doesn't actually create an ABSOLUTE PROOF of the nonexistence of god, just merely an evidencial/logical proof. I do agree that he could do better phrasing on it, but it definitely wouldn't have gotten him as many views as he has gotten.
MasterDebator809 1 year ago
[part 2/2] Specific scientific theories and specific religions will oppose each other. Likewise, specific scientific theories will oppose each other, and specific religions will oppose each other. But the concept of "science" and the concept of "religion" need not be mutually exclusive. Observing the same objects, they ask quantitative and qualitative questions respectively to arrive at different answers, but together, they will understand a greater whole.
xSilverUnicorn 1 year ago
[part 1/2] On an episode of Science Friday with Ira Flatow, some men sat down to discuss science vs. religion. One drew an interesting analogy. Imagine a boiling tea kettle. One man asks: how does water boil, and then gives you a lengthy explanation of kinetic energy and so forth. Another asks: why is the water boiling, and answers, because I want to make tea. Both are observing the same pot. One man is asking scientific questions, the other philosophical, and neither are mutually exclusive.
xSilverUnicorn 1 year ago
its easy to point a finger at only one source to explain this reallity its closed minded to say a god made everthing and leave out all other possiablities i am so sick of people saying god is everything and made everything there is no way for us to know that for certain so why should we just make this super being the only source when nothing can be proved
wachnathan 2 years ago
I'm pretty sure gravity is a law. So is conservation of energy by the way, it is not created. In theory space and time are one and the same, test have been done. Moving at certain speeds alter the flow of time. If there is no space there is no time. Space is the distance between bodies of matter. If there is no matter, there is no space or time. If something created the universe it must have existed before it and therefore before time. Before time is logicaly impossible since "before" needs time
Coquipirate 2 years ago
[part 1] Stephen Hawking used the shape of time to arrive at his own conclusion regarding God in a lecture I attended roughly ten years ago. He concluded that since time is spherical in shape, asking where is the beginning of time is as illogical as asking what lies one mile north of the geographic north pole. Of course, it should also be noted that the spherical shape of time is also theoretical. Future observations of time may inspire a thoroughly different model of its shape and nature.
xSilverUnicorn 2 years ago
[part 3] Ironically, I was an atheist, until I attended Hawking's lecture and observed the need for the caveat "...according to the currently accepted theory...". That left room to doubt, and also to grow. I will not say that God, as defined by many major religions, does or does not exist. I only remain open to hearing all arguments. Logically, yes, it does come down to "True!" or "False >:(" in the end, but that Truth may well be far more complicated, or simple, than what is currently accepted.
xSilverUnicorn 1 year ago
There is no such thing as "THE TRUTH" only a version of the truth. Like in court systems, someone who got shot in the leg might say he was innocent which was "his truth" and the one who shot him might say that he was about to beat him to death which is his "truth".
The only way to test if a truth is valid is through evidence. So if you can test if God exists, by all means do so. If you successfully do it, congrats, you just went down in history. If not..Lols.
DarkZerkerX 1 year ago
[part A] What you are referring to is not "Truth", but perception. Each and every person will arrive at their own interpretation of a given event according to their ability to process a given experience based on limited information. As such, our perceptions of "Truth" will be as varied as you say. In a courtroom, that's as far is it goes, and is reflected in the legal definition of truth. That same truth, or perception thereof, is rigorously tested via the scientific method to form theories.
xSilverUnicorn 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xSilverUnicorn
"[part A] What you are referring to is not "Truth", but perception" - then we are to take it that truth means what exists objectively?
if so then for all intense and purposes science is a mechanism used to identify 'truth'
types10000 1 year ago
Sorry for not explaining more clearly. There are 2 types of truths just like evidence. There is absolute truth such as "What is in this box?" that you can find out just by doing the obvious like opening the box. There is also evidential truth which is most of the truth out there.Evidential truth is using evidential proof like "This man threw a pink spray painted banana at me in the darkest alley in New York!" This can be evidentially proven by...looking for a spray can, and a banana.
DarkZerkerX 1 year ago
[part B] By calling a concept or model a theory, we are acknowledging that it may or may not be the "Truth". Claiming that there is no "Truth" beyond our limited ability to perceive reality is erroneous, because the whole of existence is not defined by our consciousness. The Earth was round while every human on Earth claimed it was flat. Radio waves did not *poof* into existence when we developed the tools to detect them. Likewise, there is much waiting to be discovered.
xSilverUnicorn 1 year ago
[part C] One of my professors gave me a great analogy, and I would like to share it with you, though you may have heard it before. Imagine that you have been handed a box, and the volume within has a specific shape. There is an object of unknown size and shape within that space. Your mission is to describe as much as you can about the nature of the object and the volume within the box without opening it. You may shake it, you may roll it about, you may listen to it, but it does not open.
xSilverUnicorn 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xSilverUnicorn
"calling a concept or model a theory, we are acknowledging that it may or may not be the "Truth"" - a scientific theory is a principle that explains a set of facts.
are the facts truth? that seems far to abstract a term does the fact that a theory holds true mean it is 'truth' ofcourse not a theory is not infallible.
types10000 1 year ago
[part D] As you pass the box among your colleagues, you will each draw your own conclusions, no doubt. Some answers may be very different from your own, and you may consider some to be outlandish. Even while applying the scientific method, your conclusions will be theories based on your perceptions at best. Yet the volume within does undoubtedly have a specific shape with only one absolutely True answer, likewise the specific nature of the object within it. That is truth vs. "Truth".
xSilverUnicorn 1 year ago
Well yes that is a pretty decent analogy and tell your professer "Kudos! You get a cookie"(jk). But anways..there is one flaw to that analogy. Your comparing something that has a linear and clear answer. The origin of the universe is more split and there is no 1 clear answer of the universe. There couldve been multiple events each with its own "box" we need to shake and hear and open to see whats in it.
DarkZerkerX 1 year ago
@xSilverUnicorn
"your conclusions will be theories" - well not really, your conclusions would be hypothesis' based on your subjective interpretation of objective facts.
Also by presenting your hypothesis to your peers you would be able to eliminate answers that are not actually supported and form a collective consensus that is likely to be far more correct than your opinion alone. essentially peer review.
types10000 1 year ago
[part E] Unfortunately, human ego makes such uncertainty very hard to accept. We feel weak and vulnerable when we are uncertain. We prefer the illusions of our perceptions, because it is damned uncomfortable to say "I don't know". It has been said that "truth hurts", but doubt hurts more. So, we proclaim "THIS IS SO!" and fight to protect what we believe. We see this everywhere, from the various spiritual systems to the various schools of science and philosophy. God? What's your perception?
xSilverUnicorn 1 year ago
[part 2] At that lecture, Hawking argued that since there is no beginning of time, there is no singular point of creation, and therefor no Creator/God. Since human conception of existence is in a state of flux (i.e. new theories replace the old, and new theories inspire new perspectives that recolor older notions) we can only say, at best "...according to the currently accepted theory...". Ego spurs us to think that our own theory is Truth, and those who refute our claim need to be enlightened.
xSilverUnicorn 1 year ago
ok, now i got it, 3 + 20 equals 23, so that's why God doesn't exist, ok, ur right!
frank1lastfall 2 years ago
@frank1lastfall ok now I got it, your just playing stupid. :) As you were champ :).
RedPower012 2 years ago
god is real youtobe or google noah's ark
ianandcharlesfoo 2 years ago
@siblings08081
Since when are older books more accurate? I have a copy of "The Christian Philosopher" dated 1721 and in there it says lightning is caused by sulphurous particles being lifted into the air and heated by unexplained sources.
It's pretty obvious that the newer a book is the more likely it is to be accurate.
The Bible is a classic example of this fact. It's so full of ridiculous notions that it's laughable when read objectively.
warren52nz 2 years ago 2
in all reality God cannot exist, to believe that one spiritual being created everything in the universe is just plain retarded, science proves the creation of man, organisms, planets and the universe...
sckit62 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
GOD exist ok, the devil is using you 2 brainwash people, so much anger for GOD, and the things of the world you belive and the pleasure of the world you like and belive, you are lost in your mind and walking around like a zombi and waiting 4 when you die, you will go 2 hell, you can not go 2 heaven, beques heven is pure, and you are evil!!!!!!!
realisaARUBA1 2 years ago
what are you trying to say?
a1b2c3z44 2 years ago
wow! great video...
just one thing missing... and i think is...
the proof that God does not exist (oh...just like the title of your video...)
frank1lastfall 2 years ago
@frank1lastfall I think you completely misunderstood the video. You don't need proof that god does not exist to prove that he does not exist. just like you don't need to proof that 3 + 4 cannot equal 23, all you have to do is prove that 3 + 20 equals 23. QED.
RedPower012 2 years ago
(1st post)So, in this video you say there isn't any 100% irrefutable evidence that disproves a God. So, why does this video say "Proof that God does not exist?"
And then you go on to say that the 'evidence'(which you present none in this video) disproves the existence of a God. Logic doesn't disprove God, but instead actually provides a better case for his existence in my next comment.
NickPolovino 2 years ago
@NickPolovino
(2nd Post)
Three of the best cases for a God or a creator is The Kalam Cosmological, Intelligent Design, and Contingency.
These are all more probable than the other theories that appose them.
Do your research.
NickPolovino 2 years ago
@NickPolovino Watch the video on my channel and tell me what you think
321lawc 2 years ago
I am going to PM you a response to those 3 arguments. But before i do, i have one general statement that i want to make.
Just because you cannot prove what caused the universe, doesn't neccesarily prove god's existence. All it does it prove our ignorance about our origins. So why fill in a gap of our knowledge with a random god of your choice?
Intelligent design is a very weak argument, i'll PM u details. and can you explain contingency in this context?
MasterDebator809 1 year ago
@MasterDebator809
I look forward to this conversation, MasterDebator809.
Though we will likely disagree with each others point of view, belief, and/or draw different conclusions of the existence or non-existence of a God, it should still be an intelligent/informative discussion.
NickPolovino 1 year ago
Well before we do this i wanted you to define contingency, because there are many definitions, but many of them don't prove a gods existence at all. The other 2 i am quite familiar with, i just want to know what you mean by contingency.
MasterDebator809 1 year ago
The title of this video is misleading. It should state "There is no evidence that God exists". Its point of emphasis is specific towards the creation theory of 3 major religions but says nothing about why a God couldn't exist. Just that there is no evidence and that there is evidence for other theories. But 1 could postulate that God created evolution or any other scientific phenomena and put the rules in place. I'm not advocating or defending it, but it is possible.
agnostic79 2 years ago
most things in science prove god. like in science the earth strated as a ball of lava. in the bible it says the same since the bible is older then science theres proof for him. plus if god is not real how did the earth make its self. plus why is it not square. and why is not the earth far are near the sun. plus animals don't apper from nothing. and why aren't cats or dogs like people if god is not real. it does say god made people above animals
siblings08081 2 years ago
@siblings08081
look, just because the bible is older, doesent mean it is right.
the most popular theory of earth is, that the universe that we live in is not the onley universe, there are infinite universes, ismilar to ours. when the universe stops increasing, it will collapse together, like a massive black hole with all the mass of universe in it. onec all the mass will be concentrated in a wery small space, it will explode again, just like infinite time befour that. that's the theory...
a1b2c3z44 2 years ago
Thats 1 of the theories, its not THE theory.
liamverbinnen 2 years ago
Comment removed
a1b2c3z44 2 years ago
god does exist. because every time I pray it comes true
siblings08081 2 years ago
pray for apocalypse within 15 days see if that comes true
karl1143 2 years ago
@siblings08081 Wow God sounds like a Genie more than a God If he answers your prayers everytime you pray. Pray for me!!!
Riken452 1 year ago
god does NOT exist
28anti28 2 years ago 3
Obvious troll is obvious.
kaikosuke 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
why hasn't that imaginary guy contacted a modern man?
karl1143 2 years ago
So then why did God make so many appearances in biblical times if seeing him killed you?
assaultspearhead 2 years ago
Science can somehow prove that God does not exist. One thing science can't prove is that God does exist. There is not proof. A magical man granting wishes in the sky and watches us pee? LOL. I would like every theist to answer this one.
(Why hasn't anyone ever seen God or Santa Claus)
(They're both fictional, imaginary male characters humans invented.)
666
MichaelSexiJackson 2 years ago
u forgot 2 ask why hasn't that imaginary guy contacted a modern man
karl1143 2 years ago
@karl1143 LOL That too.
MichaelSexiJackson 2 years ago
G()D the FATHER is the principle of a school
JESUS the son is a substitute teacher
HIS wages = one school a day
HE arrives on the last day of the most important test to decide if you graduate
HE says that if you sign up for his class even on the last day then HE will give you an A and there is nothing the Principle can do about it because the Teacher has the power to give As but at the end of the day the principle can fire HIM but he wont because JESUS now owns the school
reconorder 2 years ago
AHughman08, First of all i'd like to say im a christian, yes even after i watched your vid. i agree with the statement that proving God exists cant pass the hypothosis stage, which is where faith comes in for christians. but proving God doesnt exist cant pass the hypothosis stage either.
94jesuschick 2 years ago
The vid is OK, but I think you are a bit condescending and possible arrogant.
b1n 2 years ago
You can't use logic to "disprove god" heard of Kurt Godel?
007Neutrin0 2 years ago
Godel changes the definition of god to mean "that for which no greater can be conceived." In this case, one can say that "god" does exist. But it is arbitrary. Likewise, I can write a proof that goes like this:
1) I am God.
2) I exist.
3) Therefore, God exists.
However, if your definition of god includes 1) created humans 2) created life or 3) is omnipotent, then that god is disproved by the video.
kaikosuke 2 years ago
No, you are violating the definition of god. If you said, you are god we would conclude you are deluded. As you are not "supernatural" you are a natural entity. The conclusion of your argument does not follow logically from the premise of your argument. As there is no "proof" you are god.
007Neutrin0 2 years ago
Godel's definition of God does not include "supernatural" either. Godel's argument goes like this:
1) God is the greatest thing that can be conceived
2) There are a finite number of things a person can conceive
3) Of those things, there is a greatest thing.
4) God exists.
There is nothing about this God being supernatural or even a conscious being. If the greatest thing I can conceive is the entirety of the universe, then Godel says that is god. There is nothing gained from this.
kaikosuke 2 years ago
Dude you don't know what Kurt Godel said, he never made an argument for a god, it was not even his field.
Also your argument is stupid, I can convince of a powerful 11 penis monkey with a head of a woman flying on a pink unicorn therefore this thing exists because I can convince of it.
007Neutrin0 2 years ago
another thing is that you are not using mathematical concepts of real science but merely phylosophical methodologies to try to explain something. And that my friend can't be used to prove anything
pwpg0516 2 years ago
amen, this guy's tryign to be a lawyer or somethin ;)
biggrigga 2 years ago
Explain the Dark Matter then... Scientists know it is there, that it exist but they can't see it... They know that there is a force or something that keeps things together which isn''t magnetism. They call it Dark Matter.
Heyyy same as God... We know that there is a force out there that not only gives life to matter but also gives intelligence and conciousness... disprove that.
Dis you know tat some think that this Dark Matter is actually the conciousness of the Universe.. that includes us ;)
pwpg0516 2 years ago
@pwpg0516
Actually. dark matter have not been discovered yet. Just as a note before I go any further, I am an atheist. Not an agnostic, but an atheist. There are many things I am skeptical on with science and research, such as the big bang. If you ask me, it seems plausible but does not make much sense as of right now. Many puzzle pieces are missing.
But I doubt dark matter. It is a theory. I'm not saying it's not there, but I'm doubting it at this present time.
StainedShuriken333 2 years ago
It has been recorded after the explosion of a star recently. Through gamma rays... Check it out
pwpg0516 2 years ago
"Check it out " - usually when people make a claim like that they post a link. however i'm guessing any link you provide will be to an opinion piece ....considering every piece of evidence you have posted so far has been. if your making a claim of this nature then back it up by posting a link to a credible source ie. a main stream scientific journal.
oh yeh, and Dark Matter is at this very moment STILL a hypothesis, so no it has not been recorded :)
types10000 2 years ago
@types10000
Yes, dark matter is still a hypothesis. It's sad to say that so many people don't even analyze what is actually being said when they look up technological advances. They hear about dark matter and it's causes and they're like "OMFG! HONEY! LISTEN TO THIS!"
Many morons in this world.... it makes me a very sad panda.
StainedShuriken333 2 years ago
@pwpg0516
Are you saying that dark matter has been recorded?
StainedShuriken333 2 years ago
their are no such things in gravity when i fall i fall upwards not down
gangrail 2 years ago
And did you just mention fate? Dude you can't prove fate exists either so that is a hypothesis as well.
neongodinhell 2 years ago 2
But aren't you kind of kicking yourself in the ass using this hypothesis argument. I mean if you go by your logic then believing the big bang theory would to be scientific fact is impossible considering we can`t test the birth of the universe and we have no solid evidence to insure it (unless this theory is only considered to be a hypothesis among the scientific community.) And the big bang is part of the evolution theory which means it`s a hypothesis not fact.
neongodinhell 2 years ago
@neongodinhell
Actually... sceintists (I don't really like just saying "scientists" because it seems like a non-reliable source of creditation due to it being a word that people throw around... but whatever) are actually creating something that can generate how the universe began and how black holes are made. This machine can produce results and they will be able to study things relating to both subjects.
It's called the Hadron Collider. Check it out.
StainedShuriken333 2 years ago
@StainedShuriken333 yeah man i heard of something similar (mite be the same thing) where the say they mite be able to create a black right here on earth or something like that. Pretty interesting to read about. Anyways, just out of curiosity, before you chose to be an atheist were your parents part of a religion that they ultimately forced you to be part of as a kid?
neongodinhell 2 years ago
Actually, yes they were. And they still are. I was a good little christian boy when I was younger. Then life experiences and common sense happened!
StainedShuriken333 2 years ago
Here's a something a lot of people probably don't know unless you were a catholic at one point. Even if you don't attend their church and your parents are catholic they will continue to reconize you as part of their church and still have you registered under their church. That is the only reason it is one of the largest churches in the world. They aren't the only religion to do this either.
neongodinhell 2 years ago
I looked at the topic of the Hadron Collider. The latest one to be built was the LHC it costs billions of dollars to construct and has it's own power station to allow it to function. Interesting? yeah I'd say you can view the topic on youtube I don't know if you did that yet or not.
neongodinhell 2 years ago
That's actually the one I was talking about lol. The huge one where it's like below a mountain or something? And the final tube for the atoms is like 11 miles long? It's been a while since I've looked up info on it, but you are talking about the one I was referring to. I think only 2 were ever made and the latest one is the biggest and supposedly best one.
When I read about it, they were having technical difficulties with it. So I don't know if it's up and running as of right now.
StainedShuriken333 2 years ago
@StainedShuriken333 It was running in late 2009 and its down again. And so far no black hole have opened but they haven't even run the thing at it's full potential yet.
neongodinhell 2 years ago
@neongodinhell
Aye. Well, it is to be expected with such a high tech piece of equipment to be going through things such as this. I'm guessing it will be perfected within the next couple years... perhaps... 2012? IS THAT HOW THE WORLD WILL END??
Hah! Just kidding. I don't believe in the 2012 myth lol.
StainedShuriken333 2 years ago
@neongodinhell
Part #2
by the way, I am an atheist, but a huge skeptic on the Big Bang theory.
StainedShuriken333 2 years ago
If you believe it receive it, if you don't believe it leave it.
(The BIG BANG is real but GOD pulled the trigger :-)
HarvardCreationist 2 years ago
You atheist sure seem to be obsessed with some one you claim doesn't exist.
EarthBeautifull 2 years ago