The rageface at 18:04 is probably when Comfort didn't quite agree that Spanish and Italian were derived from Latin. "Ok, I'll have to trust you on that one," he said. It's a look of disgusted disbelief.
And to those who compare this convention to going to church: people are social and want to converse with like-minded people. But gathering and sharing ideas and methods is not remotely the same as espousing that crude, ancient myths are ultimate guidelines for modern life.
I juste love Matt... He's a great guy, really great debater. And although I really love Richard Dawkins too, Matt seems more "human" to me somehow. Maybe because he was "one of them" once.
@Seshat666 Dawkins is pretty robotic and he can be very hardcore. Dawkins believes that we shouldn't read fairy tales and such to our children because it teaches them fantastical (creative?) thinking. Dawkins was planning on making a childrens book about facts and reality or something. I saw him give a speech on it and it was all rather scary to me, somebody who is creative and lives for that stuff. Pfft, I'm smart enough to separate fantasy from reality.
@LukeShetler he was talking about the fairy tales in the bible that are taught as truth. i really dont think he has a problem with fairy tales being read as fairy tales :)
@MrWaddefak I cannot find the video, and my memory isn't perfect, but he was defintitely not talking about the Bible. He was saying that fairy tales in general have a hurtful effect on the minds of children because it teaches them fantastical thinking. We all say shit we don't mean sometimes, so I don't know.
"If God did not create the universe then who did?is the wrong question"!?why is the question wrong?because you don't have an answer to it?how come?you are not a narrowed minded relegios guy,you think out of the box you are smarter than the belivers!?so who created the universe E.T.with his glowing finger?
Also, any concrete "answer" to that question (other than the honest 'we don't know') is bullshit. Pulled out of someone's arse. No use wasting time believing in it, let alone have one's life governed by it.
So: We don't know "who" or "what" created the universe/the Big Bang and what 'was' before them. Your E.T.-hypothesis is as good/bad/accurate as all the other creation myths.
Don't think they haven't been hearing the same response over and over. It's a political agenda, trying to raise the illusion of a "debate" or "controversy".
They don't care about what's true, they care about keeping the fencesitters and flock in line.
@sonykroket Le sigh. I know. While writing the reply to adi2200, I was so tempted to just go all-caps, telling him/her to go back to that second in which this statement is made in the video and then just /listen/ for the next ten-or-so seconds... because Matt gives a *direct* answer to the question.
It's just that Matt, in this video, inspires me to be an avatar of patience and tenacious hope and repeat things over and over for all the eejits and silly muppets out there.
I know what you mean. It's easy to just lash out no holds barred. I've been guilty of doing it many times myself, especially when it comes to the preaching and condemning fundies
But one should pick battles, it seems like the best approach next to ridicule.
For me Harris and Dawkins are the symbols of how you can stay calm and still destroy religious irrationality, i've learned a lot from them
Unfortunately there's no template-answers but logic will always prevail
@sonykroket Completely agreed. I should pick my battles and watch more Sam Harris videos to try to follow his example. For me, too, he personifies impossible calm and patience in the face of the most ridiculous, ludicruous, vacuous, religious crap. (Have you seen his "debate" with Deepak Chopra?)
Or maybe I should just stay away from youtube comment sections :D Engaging in "discussions" with disagreeing people here is a bit of a dead duck, most of the time.
Yes, i sawy the debate with Harris, Shermer, Deepagaga and that baglady. It was a fieldday for Harris and Shermer, good fun to watch.
I can't believe Deepakfans will still support him after watching that, he pretty much did exactly what creationists do. Lying, quotemining, arguments from ignorance, anecdotal BS etc, the works.
He's also one pompous childish noisy little shit but it's good to see clowns like him exposed in public
ALTHOUGH I'M A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN (Baptist), I no longer believe that the Bible teaches eternal torment or suffering. The Bible teaches eternal punishment, but it's not eternal torment. In my popular Internet article, TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE OF HELL EVOLVED FROM GREEK ROOTS, I explain how and why teaching of eternal torment entered early into Christianity and how Scriptures have been misinterpreted and taken out of context to support that teaching. ~Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology)
SCIENCE SHOWS THAT THE UNIVERSE could not have sustained itself eternally because of entropy (even in an open system). Einstein confirmed that space, matter, and time had a beginning! That beginning had to be supernatural because natural laws have no ability to bring the universe into existence from nothing. The supernatural cannot be proved by science but science points to a supernatural intelligence for the origin and order of the universe ~ HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM (Article)
EINSTEIN CONFIRMED that space and time are just as physical as matter. That's why space and time can be altered by gravity, and space produces particles. Einstein's equations show that the universe couldn’t be eternal. It had a beginning. Einstein believed, because of science, in the existence of God behind the origin and order of the universe. He didn't believe in a personal God like Christians do, but he did believe science pointed to the existence of an all powerful and intelligent Creator
THE SCIENTIFIC CASE AGAINST ATHEISM: Please read this Internet article of mine published in Russia's English Pravda. It will be a real eye-opener for all who think belief in a Creator is merely subjective blind faith. Also read my article, LIFE ON MARS NO SURPRISE (In the Earth's past there was powerful volcanic activity which spewed life-containing dirt and rocks (meteors) into outer space. Mars may literally have millions tons of Earth soil)
NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Only evolution within "kinds" is genetically possible (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). How were species living and reproducing if their vital structures, organs, reproductive systems hadn't evolved yet? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic/biological similarities between species
DAWKINS, HITCHENS, AND HAWKING REFUSE TO DEBATE with creationists who are SCIENTISTS, such as the scientists at The Institute for Creation Research. Dawkins and his friends only debate non-scientist creationists. Read articles by scientists supporting creation at The Institute for Creation Research site. Read analysis from creation scientists about the latest news on fossils, genetics, astronomy, etc. that you won't read in the main stream media. Visit the Institute for Creation Research site.
WHAT IS SCIENCE? Science simply is knowledge based on observation. No one observed the universe coming by chance or by design, by creation or by macro-evolution. These are positions of faith. The issue is which faith the scientific evidence best supports. Natural laws can explain how an airplane or living cell works, but it's irrational to believe that undirected natural laws can bring about an airplane or a living cell. Read my Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
THE ODDS of the sequence of molecules in a cell coming together by chance are similar to the odds of magnetic letters randomly bonding together in a sequence to form all the words and sentences in a dictionary. Without the right sequence, a cell's molecules won't work. Amino acids can come by chance but not proteins. Without DNA there can be no proteins and vice versa. Gradually won't do. It's all at once or not at all for a cell's survival. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
NATURAL SELECTION DOESN'T PRODUCE ANYTHING. It can only "select" from what is produced that has survival value. If a variation occurs that helps a species survive, that survival is called being "selected." That's all its is. There's no conscious selection by nature. It's a passive process. Natural selection is a figure of speech. The term itself is a tautology. Natural selection only operates once there is life and reproduction, not before. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM.
NATURAL SELECTION IS NO BLIND WATCHMAKER because it can only "select," not produce or arrange. If a variation survives, that's called being "selected." Natural selection operates only once there is life and reproduction, not before, so it couldn't have been involved in life's origins. A partially-evolved cell (an oxymoron) would quickly disintegrate. It couldn't wait ("survive") millions of years for chance to complete it and then make it alive! Read: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
ARE FOSSILS REALLY MILLIONS OF YEARS OLD? Popular Internet article examines assumptions concerning fossil deposition as well as built-in assumptions involved in modern radiometric dating (not used for dating fossils but other rocks), and arguments from starlight and time. Discusses lack of true transitional forms in the fossil record and lack of "age" sequence of the fossil layers. Discussion of mixed species (i.e. dinosaur, reptile, mammal fossils in the same stratum).
IMAGINE A FISH WITH PART FINS, part feet with the fins evolving (transitioning) into feet. What survival benefit would there be? The fish couldn't use its fins or its feet, and there are no fossils showing such a creature ever existed. They only exist on automobile bumper stickers! There are no true transitional forms, either living or fossilized. Evolutionists realize this fact! Read my Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
APES ARE QUITE COMFORTABLE IN HOW THEY WALK, just as humans are quite comfortable in how they walk. Even a slight change in the position of a muscle or bone, for either, would be excruciatingly painful and would not be an advantage for survival. There's no hard evidence that humans evolved from ape-like creatures anymore than there's hard evidence that apes evolved from four-legged-pawed dog-like creatures. Read Internet article: MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE.
GENETIC INFORMATION CANNOT HAPPEN BY CHANCE, so it's more logical to believe that genetic similarities between all forms of life are due to a common Designer who designed similar functions for similar purposes. It doesn't mean all forms of life are biologically related! Also, "Junk DNA" isn't junk. These non-coding segments of DNA have recently been found to be vital in regulating gene expression. Read my popular Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
ALL REAL EVOLUTION ( i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.) in nature is the expression, over time, of already existing genes. Evolution is possible only if there’s information (genes) directing it. Only variations of already existing genes are possible, which means only limited evolution and adaptations are possible. Nature has no ability to invent new genes via random mutations caused by random environmental forces. That’s evolutionary faith, not science. Read my article, WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
DO EYES CARRY SCARS OF EVOLUTION? Read this fantastic Internet article by biologist and creationist Brian Thomas. Thomas refutes every argument of a "flawed" design for the eye, and explains how and why the so-called flaw is actually the best thing for the eye. Read the article! It's amazing what facts evolutionists will ignore. Numerous times evolutionists have been proven wrong about their interpretation of a structure as being flawed or useless
ALTHOUGH I'M A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN (Baptist), I no longer believe that the Bible teaches eternal torment or suffering. The Bible teaches eternal punishment, but it's not eternal torment. In my popular Internet article, TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE OF HELL EVOLVED FROM GREEK ROOTS, I explain how and why teaching of eternal torment entered early into Christianity and how Scriptures have been misinterpreted and taken out of context to support that teaching. ~Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology)
THE SCIENTIFIC CASE AGAINST ATHEISM: Please read this Internet article of mine published in Russia's English Pravda. It will be a real an eye-opener for all who think belief in a Creator is merely subjective blind faith ~ Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology).
SCIENCE SHOWS THAT THE UNIVERSE could not have sustained itself eternally because of entropy (even in an open system). Einstein confirmed that space, matter, and time had a beginning! That beginning had to be supernatural because natural laws have no ability to bring the universe into existence from nothing. The supernatural cannot be proved by science but science points to a supernatural intelligence for the origin and order of the universe ~ HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM (Article)
EINSTEIN CONFIRMED that space and time are just as physical as matter. That's why space and time can be altered by gravity, and space produces particles. Einstein's equations show that the universe couldn’t be eternal. It had a beginning. Einstein believed, because of science, in the existence of God behind the origin and order of the universe. He didn't believe in a personal God like Christians do, but he did believe science pointed to the existence of an all powerful and intelligent Creator
NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Only evolution within "kinds" is genetically possible (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). How were species living, reproducing if their vital structures, organs, and reproductive system hadn't evolved yet? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic/biological similarities between species
DAWKINS, HITCHENS, AND HAWKING REFUSE TO DEBATE with creationists who are SCIENTISTS, such as the scientists at The Institute for Creation Research. Dawkins and his friends only debate non-scientist creationists. Read articles by scientists supporting creation at The Institute for Creation Research site.
BLIND WATCHMAKER NO ARGUMENT. Natural selection is no "blind watchmaker" because it can only "select," not produce. It only operates once there is life and reproduction, not before, so it couldn't have been involved in life's origins. A partially-evolved cell (an oxymoron) would quickly disintegrate. It couldn't wait ("survive") millions of years for chance to complete it and then make it living! Read: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
APES ARE QUITE COMFORTABLE IN HOW THEY WALK, just as humans are quite comfortable in how they walk. Even a slight change in the position of a muscle or bone, for either, would be excruciatingly painful and would not be an advantage for survival. There's no hard evidence that humans evolved from ape-like creatures anymore than there's hard evidence that apes evolved from four-legged-pawed dog-like creatures. Read Internet article: MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE.
GENETIC INFORMATION DOESN'T HAPPEN BY CHANCE, so it's more logical to believe that genetic similarities between all forms of life are due to a common Designer who designed similar functions for similar purposes. It doesn't mean all forms of life are biologically related! "Junk DNA" isn't junk. These non-coding segments of DNA have recently been found to be vital in regulating gene expression. Read: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
ALL REAL EVOLUTION ( i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.) is the expression, over time, of already existing genes. Evolution is possible only if there’s information (genes) directing it. Only variations of already existing genes are possible, which means only limited evolution and adaptations are possible. Nature has no ability to invent new genes via random mutations caused by random environmental forces. That’s evolutionary faith, not science. Read my article, WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
DO EYES CARRY SCARS OF EVOLUTION? Read this fantastic Internet article by biologist and creationist Brian Thomas. Thomas refutes every argument of a "flawed" design for the eye, and explains how and why the so-called flaw is actually the best thing for the eye. Read the article! It's amazing what facts evolutionists will ignore. Numerous times evolutionists have been proven wrong about their interpretation of a structure as
Fuck GOD! suck by cock jesus christ Allah or abra-fuckin-ham! Holy spirit? fuck you too. Get thee in FRONT of me satan but you're imaginary too.
I equally say; fuck the 911 official story, global warming is a great way to tax the world at a billion a day and vaccinations is a perfect way to introduce internal tracking
What do you actually mean by "i do believe in God. But this speech is very logical."?
This speech isn't addressing the existence or not of God per se. It's addressing the importance of non-believers actually engaging and challenging the (irrational) beliefs of the population at large (and the best ways of doing it).
You've got it backwards - it's those who don't give credence to the theories that are drinking the flavor aid because I've refused to swallow anything.
I haven't introduced to my body any vaccinations, I don't support those who pine for a mandatory carbon credits only because it smacks of the fox guarding the henhouse and when it comes to the official 911 which most atheists rally behind - I'm baffled why they, or anyone, believes it.
Oh, and I never edit when I drink my Lagunita's LOL
"freethought"? I don't think so. Most, not all, are as enslaved as any staunch born-again christian instilling their belief in a global-political savior with an equally untenable gospel.
@rysw19 Meaning anything politically correct, take your pick;
- blind faith of vaccinations being safe - knowing global warming is a fact - the official 911 story; these are not scrutinized by atheists. Don't get me wrong; I'm more an atheist than Matt is; I NEVER believed in any notion of god. I burned a bible and urinated on it when I was 12 - nor did I ever believe in the talking heads of CNN.
@MrSmackdab to believe that vaccines are safe, that global warming is a fact, and that 911 was not a conspiracy are all overwhelmingly supported by the relevant scientific and engineering disciplines. the fact is that there is an unbelievable incentive for any member of this discipline to prove these views wrong, being that it would catapult them to the very top of their field; and yet the enormous consensus (supported to their expert eyes with evidence) is exactly to the contrary.
@MrSmackdab i also never believed in god (at least since i was 7 or so, though i was still terrified that i might be wrong). and i don't believe the picture elaborated on cable news, because of the underlying structure of the institution. i find it kind of pathetic to burn and piss on a bible just for its own sake. i mean i've rolled joints with bible paper, but not for the spite of it. it was just the best material around.
@rysw19 Yeah - it was an emotional plea (and a dare) and I was not yet a teenager. I was more furious with the notion that it had taken root with everyone around me and they had become slaves - so it seemed fitting as an act of defiance. I have since grown up although admittedly not all that much. All this plays into my extreme nature as a hardened skeptic - so much harder than any of the 4 henchmen.
@MrSmackdab four horsemen i think you mean, right? your "extreme nature" doesn't seem to be extreme in its views, only in its practice. maybe you can further explain.
@rysw19 Although we have a difference of opinion you so seem logical and would like to open a rational dialogue. I thought I'd find some solidarity in my fellow atheists but I feel so alone; it's eerie - almost like I'm being hoodwinked by all hip conventional wisdom. I do have an open mind but cannot tolerate irrationality.
Seem kinda funny that as I sit here listening to Matt, the Youtube ad in the top right hand corner of the screen is for a Christian online college. BTW thank you Seth for sharing!
@jeffmg40402000 Haha, I've noticed that for all of these videos. I think the Christian websites paid some extra money to have their ads put on these videos specifically, to try and snatch back any on the fence believers, or maybe just to say "fuck you."
" A bit of an assumption isn't it? How do they know Beth is getting pleasure from Matt? - Lol!! - I have never been sure even about all or any of the women in my past life!!
@Brandt761 "why don't they just call him "that old pervert"?"
Probably because even at 23, Beth would be what's called a "consenting adult". If you don't understand the significance of that, maybe Matt's not the "old pervert" here...
@PatchesRips that would be expecting her family to behave rationally, but if they did that, they would have no reason to dislike him at all, would they?
For God so loved the world, that he sent his only son the earth to be barbarically slaughtered like an animal, so that whosoever believes in him, shall not perish in God's eternal torture chamber, but have ever lasting life, sympathetically detached from the trillions of people eternally burning in hell. John 3:16
@daeamarth he already has on athiestexperience show and destroyed ray. my fav part is where matt destroyed ray's "painting has a painter" theory. at one point ray had to re-treat and admit he analogy was wrong.
@elvigia666 Eh, you don't get the money to become an investor by letting ideaology stand in the way of profit. Either the network would have to be economically viable, or the investor would be okay just being a donator.
@SothManigan How many movies have you seen where a guy propositions a woman he just met in a place like a hotel, and she says yes? Just about every James Bond movie, for starters.
"...to put parents in a position of being fearful that the son who they love is gonna burn forever in hell. I hate that. I hate their religion with the fiery passion of a thousand fucking suns." ~ Matt Dillahunty.
Matt is perhaps one of the smartest, and dedicated atheists we have around, not only in the USA but around the world, and he is among my 'atheist' heroes, alongside Dawkins and several other atheists we can find through youtube :)
I really like the idea of taking skype calls... it will allow international calls :) yey I can call :D
Alexbl100 1 week ago
The rageface at 18:04 is probably when Comfort didn't quite agree that Spanish and Italian were derived from Latin. "Ok, I'll have to trust you on that one," he said. It's a look of disgusted disbelief.
And to those who compare this convention to going to church: people are social and want to converse with like-minded people. But gathering and sharing ideas and methods is not remotely the same as espousing that crude, ancient myths are ultimate guidelines for modern life.
chinngis83 2 weeks ago
My name is so-and-so....and I'm most definitely not a Mormon!
MidwestThinker 1 month ago
I juste love Matt... He's a great guy, really great debater. And although I really love Richard Dawkins too, Matt seems more "human" to me somehow. Maybe because he was "one of them" once.
Seshat666 1 month ago
@Seshat666 Dawkins is pretty robotic and he can be very hardcore. Dawkins believes that we shouldn't read fairy tales and such to our children because it teaches them fantastical (creative?) thinking. Dawkins was planning on making a childrens book about facts and reality or something. I saw him give a speech on it and it was all rather scary to me, somebody who is creative and lives for that stuff. Pfft, I'm smart enough to separate fantasy from reality.
LukeShetler 3 weeks ago
@LukeShetler he was talking about the fairy tales in the bible that are taught as truth. i really dont think he has a problem with fairy tales being read as fairy tales :)
also, he has already written the book.
MrWaddefak 1 week ago
@MrWaddefak I cannot find the video, and my memory isn't perfect, but he was defintitely not talking about the Bible. He was saying that fairy tales in general have a hurtful effect on the minds of children because it teaches them fantastical thinking. We all say shit we don't mean sometimes, so I don't know.
LukeShetler 1 week ago
@LukeShetler i probably haven't seen the video, i cannot imagine him making such a statement.
MrWaddefak 1 week ago
LMAO now i'm getting muslim datingsite-ads
WTF is going on, yo...
sonykroket 2 months ago
@sonykroket Yep, me too ... so not interested!
ianjrivers 1 month ago
This whole convention was fuckin awesome to watch on Youtube.
Seth, you're doing an amazing job trying to bring atheism into the 21st century with the polished and professional way of presenting, editing, etc
Never stop
sonykroket 2 months ago
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOooooooohhhhhhhhhhhhhh! He said, 'Fuck"! I'm telling!
cmfic36 2 months ago
"If God did not create the universe then who did?is the wrong question"!?why is the question wrong?because you don't have an answer to it?how come?you are not a narrowed minded relegios guy,you think out of the box you are smarter than the belivers!?so who created the universe E.T.with his glowing finger?
adi2200us 2 months ago
@adi2200us "Why is the question wrong?"
Why would it be a 'who'? Why not a 'what'?
Also, any concrete "answer" to that question (other than the honest 'we don't know') is bullshit. Pulled out of someone's arse. No use wasting time believing in it, let alone have one's life governed by it.
So: We don't know "who" or "what" created the universe/the Big Bang and what 'was' before them. Your E.T.-hypothesis is as good/bad/accurate as all the other creation myths.
GreyLabyrinthine 2 months ago
@GreyLabyrinthine
Don't think they haven't been hearing the same response over and over. It's a political agenda, trying to raise the illusion of a "debate" or "controversy".
They don't care about what's true, they care about keeping the fencesitters and flock in line.
The silly muppets they are...
sonykroket 2 months ago
@sonykroket Le sigh. I know. While writing the reply to adi2200, I was so tempted to just go all-caps, telling him/her to go back to that second in which this statement is made in the video and then just /listen/ for the next ten-or-so seconds... because Matt gives a *direct* answer to the question.
It's just that Matt, in this video, inspires me to be an avatar of patience and tenacious hope and repeat things over and over for all the eejits and silly muppets out there.
GreyLabyrinthine 2 months ago
@GreyLabyrinthine
I know what you mean. It's easy to just lash out no holds barred. I've been guilty of doing it many times myself, especially when it comes to the preaching and condemning fundies
But one should pick battles, it seems like the best approach next to ridicule.
For me Harris and Dawkins are the symbols of how you can stay calm and still destroy religious irrationality, i've learned a lot from them
Unfortunately there's no template-answers but logic will always prevail
sonykroket 2 months ago
@sonykroket Completely agreed. I should pick my battles and watch more Sam Harris videos to try to follow his example. For me, too, he personifies impossible calm and patience in the face of the most ridiculous, ludicruous, vacuous, religious crap. (Have you seen his "debate" with Deepak Chopra?)
Or maybe I should just stay away from youtube comment sections :D Engaging in "discussions" with disagreeing people here is a bit of a dead duck, most of the time.
GreyLabyrinthine 2 months ago
@GreyLabyrinthine
Yes, i sawy the debate with Harris, Shermer, Deepagaga and that baglady. It was a fieldday for Harris and Shermer, good fun to watch.
I can't believe Deepakfans will still support him after watching that, he pretty much did exactly what creationists do. Lying, quotemining, arguments from ignorance, anecdotal BS etc, the works.
He's also one pompous childish noisy little shit but it's good to see clowns like him exposed in public
Keep commenting, people will read
sonykroket 2 months ago
Im in the begging of the video, SO COOL. That was a fun day
FutureScience2012 3 months ago
Matt's the man who gives me sexual pleasure. ;D
GuacamoleKun 4 months ago
Be happy about the catholic match ads... it means they're wasting money on ad impressions for the completely wrong demographic :)
Arkalius80 5 months ago in playlist More videos from TheThinkingAtheist
Lol, ad for catholic match in the banner
mcalsip 5 months ago
It's weird that in a world dominated by delusional people, the mentally sane should call themselves free-thinkers.
s4m10sug1 5 months ago
@s4m10sug1 The delusional people often call themselves mentally sane.
MoonwalkerWorshiper 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ALTHOUGH I'M A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN (Baptist), I no longer believe that the Bible teaches eternal torment or suffering. The Bible teaches eternal punishment, but it's not eternal torment. In my popular Internet article, TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE OF HELL EVOLVED FROM GREEK ROOTS, I explain how and why teaching of eternal torment entered early into Christianity and how Scriptures have been misinterpreted and taken out of context to support that teaching. ~Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology)
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
SCIENCE SHOWS THAT THE UNIVERSE could not have sustained itself eternally because of entropy (even in an open system). Einstein confirmed that space, matter, and time had a beginning! That beginning had to be supernatural because natural laws have no ability to bring the universe into existence from nothing. The supernatural cannot be proved by science but science points to a supernatural intelligence for the origin and order of the universe ~ HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM (Article)
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
EINSTEIN CONFIRMED that space and time are just as physical as matter. That's why space and time can be altered by gravity, and space produces particles. Einstein's equations show that the universe couldn’t be eternal. It had a beginning. Einstein believed, because of science, in the existence of God behind the origin and order of the universe. He didn't believe in a personal God like Christians do, but he did believe science pointed to the existence of an all powerful and intelligent Creator
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
THE SCIENTIFIC CASE AGAINST ATHEISM: Please read this Internet article of mine published in Russia's English Pravda. It will be a real eye-opener for all who think belief in a Creator is merely subjective blind faith. Also read my article, LIFE ON MARS NO SURPRISE (In the Earth's past there was powerful volcanic activity which spewed life-containing dirt and rocks (meteors) into outer space. Mars may literally have millions tons of Earth soil)
Mogley52 5 months ago
Comment removed
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Only evolution within "kinds" is genetically possible (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). How were species living and reproducing if their vital structures, organs, reproductive systems hadn't evolved yet? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic/biological similarities between species
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
DAWKINS, HITCHENS, AND HAWKING REFUSE TO DEBATE with creationists who are SCIENTISTS, such as the scientists at The Institute for Creation Research. Dawkins and his friends only debate non-scientist creationists. Read articles by scientists supporting creation at The Institute for Creation Research site. Read analysis from creation scientists about the latest news on fossils, genetics, astronomy, etc. that you won't read in the main stream media. Visit the Institute for Creation Research site.
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
WHAT IS SCIENCE? Science simply is knowledge based on observation. No one observed the universe coming by chance or by design, by creation or by macro-evolution. These are positions of faith. The issue is which faith the scientific evidence best supports. Natural laws can explain how an airplane or living cell works, but it's irrational to believe that undirected natural laws can bring about an airplane or a living cell. Read my Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
THE ODDS of the sequence of molecules in a cell coming together by chance are similar to the odds of magnetic letters randomly bonding together in a sequence to form all the words and sentences in a dictionary. Without the right sequence, a cell's molecules won't work. Amino acids can come by chance but not proteins. Without DNA there can be no proteins and vice versa. Gradually won't do. It's all at once or not at all for a cell's survival. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NATURAL SELECTION DOESN'T PRODUCE ANYTHING. It can only "select" from what is produced that has survival value. If a variation occurs that helps a species survive, that survival is called being "selected." That's all its is. There's no conscious selection by nature. It's a passive process. Natural selection is a figure of speech. The term itself is a tautology. Natural selection only operates once there is life and reproduction, not before. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM.
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NATURAL SELECTION IS NO BLIND WATCHMAKER because it can only "select," not produce or arrange. If a variation survives, that's called being "selected." Natural selection operates only once there is life and reproduction, not before, so it couldn't have been involved in life's origins. A partially-evolved cell (an oxymoron) would quickly disintegrate. It couldn't wait ("survive") millions of years for chance to complete it and then make it alive! Read: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ARE FOSSILS REALLY MILLIONS OF YEARS OLD? Popular Internet article examines assumptions concerning fossil deposition as well as built-in assumptions involved in modern radiometric dating (not used for dating fossils but other rocks), and arguments from starlight and time. Discusses lack of true transitional forms in the fossil record and lack of "age" sequence of the fossil layers. Discussion of mixed species (i.e. dinosaur, reptile, mammal fossils in the same stratum).
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
IMAGINE A FISH WITH PART FINS, part feet with the fins evolving (transitioning) into feet. What survival benefit would there be? The fish couldn't use its fins or its feet, and there are no fossils showing such a creature ever existed. They only exist on automobile bumper stickers! There are no true transitional forms, either living or fossilized. Evolutionists realize this fact! Read my Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
APES ARE QUITE COMFORTABLE IN HOW THEY WALK, just as humans are quite comfortable in how they walk. Even a slight change in the position of a muscle or bone, for either, would be excruciatingly painful and would not be an advantage for survival. There's no hard evidence that humans evolved from ape-like creatures anymore than there's hard evidence that apes evolved from four-legged-pawed dog-like creatures. Read Internet article: MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE.
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
GENETIC INFORMATION CANNOT HAPPEN BY CHANCE, so it's more logical to believe that genetic similarities between all forms of life are due to a common Designer who designed similar functions for similar purposes. It doesn't mean all forms of life are biologically related! Also, "Junk DNA" isn't junk. These non-coding segments of DNA have recently been found to be vital in regulating gene expression. Read my popular Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ALL REAL EVOLUTION ( i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.) in nature is the expression, over time, of already existing genes. Evolution is possible only if there’s information (genes) directing it. Only variations of already existing genes are possible, which means only limited evolution and adaptations are possible. Nature has no ability to invent new genes via random mutations caused by random environmental forces. That’s evolutionary faith, not science. Read my article, WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
DO EYES CARRY SCARS OF EVOLUTION? Read this fantastic Internet article by biologist and creationist Brian Thomas. Thomas refutes every argument of a "flawed" design for the eye, and explains how and why the so-called flaw is actually the best thing for the eye. Read the article! It's amazing what facts evolutionists will ignore. Numerous times evolutionists have been proven wrong about their interpretation of a structure as being flawed or useless
Mogley52 5 months ago
There is a script that will turn a Christian into an atheist. It's called the Bible.
acr08807 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ALTHOUGH I'M A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN (Baptist), I no longer believe that the Bible teaches eternal torment or suffering. The Bible teaches eternal punishment, but it's not eternal torment. In my popular Internet article, TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE OF HELL EVOLVED FROM GREEK ROOTS, I explain how and why teaching of eternal torment entered early into Christianity and how Scriptures have been misinterpreted and taken out of context to support that teaching. ~Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology)
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
THE SCIENTIFIC CASE AGAINST ATHEISM: Please read this Internet article of mine published in Russia's English Pravda. It will be a real an eye-opener for all who think belief in a Creator is merely subjective blind faith ~ Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology).
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
SCIENCE SHOWS THAT THE UNIVERSE could not have sustained itself eternally because of entropy (even in an open system). Einstein confirmed that space, matter, and time had a beginning! That beginning had to be supernatural because natural laws have no ability to bring the universe into existence from nothing. The supernatural cannot be proved by science but science points to a supernatural intelligence for the origin and order of the universe ~ HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM (Article)
Mogley52 5 months ago
@Mogley52 Mogley - you're getting flagged because you're linking; write something.
MrSmackdab 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
EINSTEIN CONFIRMED that space and time are just as physical as matter. That's why space and time can be altered by gravity, and space produces particles. Einstein's equations show that the universe couldn’t be eternal. It had a beginning. Einstein believed, because of science, in the existence of God behind the origin and order of the universe. He didn't believe in a personal God like Christians do, but he did believe science pointed to the existence of an all powerful and intelligent Creator
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Only evolution within "kinds" is genetically possible (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). How were species living, reproducing if their vital structures, organs, and reproductive system hadn't evolved yet? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic/biological similarities between species
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
DAWKINS, HITCHENS, AND HAWKING REFUSE TO DEBATE with creationists who are SCIENTISTS, such as the scientists at The Institute for Creation Research. Dawkins and his friends only debate non-scientist creationists. Read articles by scientists supporting creation at The Institute for Creation Research site.
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
BLIND WATCHMAKER NO ARGUMENT. Natural selection is no "blind watchmaker" because it can only "select," not produce. It only operates once there is life and reproduction, not before, so it couldn't have been involved in life's origins. A partially-evolved cell (an oxymoron) would quickly disintegrate. It couldn't wait ("survive") millions of years for chance to complete it and then make it living! Read: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
APES ARE QUITE COMFORTABLE IN HOW THEY WALK, just as humans are quite comfortable in how they walk. Even a slight change in the position of a muscle or bone, for either, would be excruciatingly painful and would not be an advantage for survival. There's no hard evidence that humans evolved from ape-like creatures anymore than there's hard evidence that apes evolved from four-legged-pawed dog-like creatures. Read Internet article: MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE.
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
GENETIC INFORMATION DOESN'T HAPPEN BY CHANCE, so it's more logical to believe that genetic similarities between all forms of life are due to a common Designer who designed similar functions for similar purposes. It doesn't mean all forms of life are biologically related! "Junk DNA" isn't junk. These non-coding segments of DNA have recently been found to be vital in regulating gene expression. Read: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ALL REAL EVOLUTION ( i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.) is the expression, over time, of already existing genes. Evolution is possible only if there’s information (genes) directing it. Only variations of already existing genes are possible, which means only limited evolution and adaptations are possible. Nature has no ability to invent new genes via random mutations caused by random environmental forces. That’s evolutionary faith, not science. Read my article, WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
DO EYES CARRY SCARS OF EVOLUTION? Read this fantastic Internet article by biologist and creationist Brian Thomas. Thomas refutes every argument of a "flawed" design for the eye, and explains how and why the so-called flaw is actually the best thing for the eye. Read the article! It's amazing what facts evolutionists will ignore. Numerous times evolutionists have been proven wrong about their interpretation of a structure as
Mogley52 5 months ago
Fuck GOD! suck by cock jesus christ Allah or abra-fuckin-ham! Holy spirit? fuck you too. Get thee in FRONT of me satan but you're imaginary too.
I equally say; fuck the 911 official story, global warming is a great way to tax the world at a billion a day and vaccinations is a perfect way to introduce internal tracking
you see - I'm not bias
MrSmackdab 6 months ago
@MrSmackdab
The correct spelling is "I'm not biased".
I'll ignore the conspiracy theories. You clearly like swallowing them all.
uvauva2 6 months ago
i do believe in God. But this speech is very logical. I cant prove logic wrong in the end can i..
MLiebeU 6 months ago
@MLiebeU
What do you actually mean by "i do believe in God. But this speech is very logical."?
This speech isn't addressing the existence or not of God per se. It's addressing the importance of non-believers actually engaging and challenging the (irrational) beliefs of the population at large (and the best ways of doing it).
uvauva2 6 months ago
@uvauva2 im sorry.. i didnt mean to offend you..
MLiebeU 6 months ago
@MLiebeU
You didn't offend me (I'm rather hard to offend, actually).
But I found your comment a bit weird, and not entirely sensical. I was just asking what you actually meant by it.
uvauva2 6 months ago
@uvauva2 ah, well im a bit high i have you know.. lol
MLiebeU 6 months ago
You've got it backwards - it's those who don't give credence to the theories that are drinking the flavor aid because I've refused to swallow anything.
I haven't introduced to my body any vaccinations, I don't support those who pine for a mandatory carbon credits only because it smacks of the fox guarding the henhouse and when it comes to the official 911 which most atheists rally behind - I'm baffled why they, or anyone, believes it.
Oh, and I never edit when I drink my Lagunita's LOL
:)
MrSmackdab 5 months ago
@MrSmackdab
You're merely repeating your acceptance of every conspiracy theory under the sun. What you are not doing is providing any actual justification for it.
But I wouldn't really expect it from someone like you.
uvauva2 5 months ago
@MrSmackdab Im sorry. im christian, i dont understand what your saying lol
MLiebeU 5 months ago
@MrSmackdab Im sorry. im not understanding what your saying. lol. Is it because im christian?
MLiebeU 5 months ago
"freethought"? I don't think so. Most, not all, are as enslaved as any staunch born-again christian instilling their belief in a global-political savior with an equally untenable gospel.
MrSmackdab 6 months ago
@MrSmackdab global political savior? i'm a bit lost.
rysw19 6 months ago
@rysw19 Meaning anything politically correct, take your pick;
- blind faith of vaccinations being safe - knowing global warming is a fact - the official 911 story; these are not scrutinized by atheists. Don't get me wrong; I'm more an atheist than Matt is; I NEVER believed in any notion of god. I burned a bible and urinated on it when I was 12 - nor did I ever believe in the talking heads of CNN.
MrSmackdab 6 months ago
@MrSmackdab to believe that vaccines are safe, that global warming is a fact, and that 911 was not a conspiracy are all overwhelmingly supported by the relevant scientific and engineering disciplines. the fact is that there is an unbelievable incentive for any member of this discipline to prove these views wrong, being that it would catapult them to the very top of their field; and yet the enormous consensus (supported to their expert eyes with evidence) is exactly to the contrary.
rysw19 5 months ago
@MrSmackdab i also never believed in god (at least since i was 7 or so, though i was still terrified that i might be wrong). and i don't believe the picture elaborated on cable news, because of the underlying structure of the institution. i find it kind of pathetic to burn and piss on a bible just for its own sake. i mean i've rolled joints with bible paper, but not for the spite of it. it was just the best material around.
rysw19 5 months ago
@rysw19 Yeah - it was an emotional plea (and a dare) and I was not yet a teenager. I was more furious with the notion that it had taken root with everyone around me and they had become slaves - so it seemed fitting as an act of defiance. I have since grown up although admittedly not all that much. All this plays into my extreme nature as a hardened skeptic - so much harder than any of the 4 henchmen.
MrSmackdab 5 months ago
@MrSmackdab four horsemen i think you mean, right? your "extreme nature" doesn't seem to be extreme in its views, only in its practice. maybe you can further explain.
rysw19 5 months ago
@rysw19 Although we have a difference of opinion you so seem logical and would like to open a rational dialogue. I thought I'd find some solidarity in my fellow atheists but I feel so alone; it's eerie - almost like I'm being hoodwinked by all hip conventional wisdom. I do have an open mind but cannot tolerate irrationality.
MrSmackdab 5 months ago
@MrSmackdab i've never heard myself called conventional.
rysw19 5 months ago
@MrSmackdab and i appreciate your complement regarding my rationality.
rysw19 5 months ago
@MrSmackdab "their belief in a global-political savior "
Who is...?
PatchesRips 6 months ago
Was the cameraman drunk? Center the subject!!!
aaronjblake 6 months ago
Comment removed
gupsphoo 6 months ago
@gupsphoo Point taken.
aaronjblake 6 months ago
Seem kinda funny that as I sit here listening to Matt, the Youtube ad in the top right hand corner of the screen is for a Christian online college. BTW thank you Seth for sharing!
jeffmg40402000 6 months ago
@jeffmg40402000 I see an ad for Orion Telescopes. Much better then the Christian ad.
AstronomyGuru84 6 months ago
@jeffmg40402000 Haha, I've noticed that for all of these videos. I think the Christian websites paid some extra money to have their ads put on these videos specifically, to try and snatch back any on the fence believers, or maybe just to say "fuck you."
TheDudimus 6 months ago
@TheDudimus The advertisement I see is for the Church of Scientology : /
merykwalker 6 months ago in playlist More videos from TheThinkingAtheist
All hail the Arch-atheist of Austin!
Brandt761 6 months ago
" A bit of an assumption isn't it? How do they know Beth is getting pleasure from Matt? - Lol!! - I have never been sure even about all or any of the women in my past life!!
Joking aside though: - Great speech - as usual!!
Tobytrim 6 months ago
@Tobytrim
actually, since Beth seems to be like 23. why don't they just call him "that old pervert"?
Brandt761 6 months ago
@Brandt761 "why don't they just call him "that old pervert"?"
Probably because even at 23, Beth would be what's called a "consenting adult". If you don't understand the significance of that, maybe Matt's not the "old pervert" here...
PatchesRips 6 months ago
@PatchesRips that would be expecting her family to behave rationally, but if they did that, they would have no reason to dislike him at all, would they?
Brandt761 6 months ago
I hate people who say, it must be true because it's in the Bible.
LLOYD19851012 6 months ago
Its very easy to see why Matt was going to be a preacher. He's definitely a great public speaker, and represents atheism very well.
Glad he made it out of the darkness.
Lawlessuk 6 months ago
THE LAST VIDEO. I want to come to one of these....If I can? o.0
maxitae 6 months ago
Matt rocks!
corydorastube 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Man created god from his own imagination
octoron85 6 months ago
27:10 "I hate that. I hate their religion with the fiery passion of a thousand fucking suns."
shaedies 6 months ago
29:00 or so, someone has a Star Trek ring tone.
Gforce2424 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
And you might want to loosen your belt a little next time, Wheezy!
legionmantis 6 months ago
Comment removed
legionmantis 6 months ago
Comment removed
legionmantis 6 months ago
Comment removed
legionmantis 6 months ago
Nice "pack of hotdogs" on the back of his neck! Love ya, Matt!
legionmantis 6 months ago
Oh, it's good to see new stuff with Matt in it.
TheSeanoftheBread 6 months ago
Man created god from his own imagination.
octoron85 6 months ago
@octoron85 amen
ScamallDorcha 6 months ago in playlist watch later
“He who sees all beings
In his own self
And finds the reflection
Of his own self in all beings
Never looks down upon any body.” - Yajur Veda 40/6
ganados0 6 months ago
For God so loved the world, that he sent his only son the earth to be barbarically slaughtered like an animal, so that whosoever believes in him, shall not perish in God's eternal torture chamber, but have ever lasting life, sympathetically detached from the trillions of people eternally burning in hell. John 3:16
EvolvedParadigm 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@EvolvedParadigm
"Thou shalt shoveth thy bible up ye anus"
Sony 10:19
sonykroket 6 months ago
Matt is so very easy to listen to isn't he, that 34 minutes passed in the blink of an eye.
Sarge084 6 months ago
Matt Dillahunty should debate someone like Ray Comfort if nothing else further advertising.
daeamarth 6 months ago
@daeamarth Already did in March. It took up an entire episode of The Atheist Experience.
Zemed87 6 months ago
@daeamarth he already has on athiestexperience show and destroyed ray. my fav part is where matt destroyed ray's "painting has a painter" theory. at one point ray had to re-treat and admit he analogy was wrong.
chinamanspeakenlis 6 months ago
Go MD. You are definitely a "doctor" to many.
daeamarth 6 months ago
Matt Dillahunty is definitely one of the best, if not The best.
HimmuraTube 6 months ago
Matt Dillahunty is awesome!
online4videos 6 months ago
I just find it ironic how the ad I got on the video was one for Christian Mingle.com
Kippz214 6 months ago
I didn't know David Wells was an atheist
pmk422 6 months ago
A secular science TV station - Science, philosophy, news, charity events etc...
No bullshit reality shows, X-factor, Soaps etc...
QuantumGh0st 6 months ago
Everyone who gets a religious Google ad: CLICK IT!!! I know it's vindictive, but this is a game of chess.
dayati 6 months ago
"apostate decadence the archatheist of Austin." I will be rendeing artistically
comslave 6 months ago
''I hate that, I hate the religion with a fiery passion of a thousand fucking suns''
I COULD NOT have said that ANY better MYSELF!
honeyblossom17 6 months ago
There are a lot of secular or atheists investors, the idea of having a secular tv network is doable IMHO.
elvigia666 6 months ago
@elvigia666 Eh, you don't get the money to become an investor by letting ideaology stand in the way of profit. Either the network would have to be economically viable, or the investor would be okay just being a donator.
Sines314 6 months ago
Are religious owned TV stations losing their funding?
hgeny 6 months ago
yes, we do need a secular TV network. Yes, we do need a atheist in the white house. Silence is death.
hgeny 6 months ago
What made two people vote THUMBS DOWN ? They must have been Religious People !
k9a2g6 6 months ago
so. Are they going to have a wedding in a church?
gulbirk 6 months ago
@gulbirk You can get married anywhere lol
Seiku 6 months ago
That's one of my favorite paintings, too.
Roan7995 6 months ago
Thanks to Seth for posting these.
DarthDrizzt 6 months ago
went to this awsome event, thanks to Dr. Morgan, Seth, Abbie and Matt.
DarthDrizzt 6 months ago
Give us proof and evodence atheism is accurate and correct. :p
jk
LOL!
TheMrgoku1985 6 months ago
Most people are watching this to see matt and aron speak after seeing thunderfoot recommended this.
Whatever4690 6 months ago
Now that´s a nice nickname!
kirafan68 6 months ago
this series is completely weak....
Sourpusscandy 6 months ago
@Sourpusscandy
You're in the minority ;-)
codeythesilent 6 months ago
wheres part 2?..........PLEASE
yislamislame 6 months ago
@yislamislame ask and ye shall recieve
H4L0K1LL4 6 months ago
At 28:54... was that the "door bell" sound from Star Trek: The Next Generation?
Pretty sure it was. x]
derAnubis 6 months ago
"I hate their religion with the firey passion of a thousand fucking suns." I want that t-shirt
comslave 6 months ago
Does anyone know if Skepchick was there? I'd love to have some coffee with her sometime...
SothManigan 6 months ago
@SothManigan How many movies have you seen where a guy propositions a woman he just met in a place like a hotel, and she says yes? Just about every James Bond movie, for starters.
MrAdvancedAtheist 6 months ago
I love that the Google Ad that gets posted over this is
"Meet Christian Singles"
richo61 6 months ago
Wonderful lecture!
chiropra1 6 months ago
"...to put parents in a position of being fearful that the son who they love is gonna burn forever in hell. I hate that. I hate their religion with the fiery passion of a thousand fucking suns." ~ Matt Dillahunty.
Tr1pTr0p 6 months ago
Notice what Matt doesn't say: "One day I decided to have a meaningless life, so I stopped believing in god."
MrAdvancedAtheist 6 months ago
Matt is perhaps one of the smartest, and dedicated atheists we have around, not only in the USA but around the world, and he is among my 'atheist' heroes, alongside Dawkins and several other atheists we can find through youtube :)
wargamion 6 months ago
Great talk.
photodube 6 months ago
Thank You, Matt!
And thanks, Seth =)
You are both wonderful representatives of Atheists!
PixelSlayer247 6 months ago
Thank you VERY much for posting all of these.
deconverts 6 months ago
The Christian Mingle ad seems a little out of place
supergenius2450cr 6 months ago
@supergenius2450cr Get firefox and the add on add block+ no more watching you tube ads
Jewhommad 6 months ago
What's a "gree gree"? Is that what he said?
sketto 6 months ago
@sketto A gris-gris in this context is a talisman.
dbzscott88 6 months ago
@dbzscott88 thanks. never heard it before.
sketto 6 months ago
Give us proof and evodence atheism is accurate and correct. :p
LOL!
TheMrgoku1985 6 months ago
@TheMrgoku1985 "evodence"?
mcrd2001 6 months ago
@TheMrgoku1985 ????
wowamonn 6 months ago
@wowamonn
It was LOL!
TheMrgoku1985 6 months ago
Matt should hold back on the bacon.. the world needs him for as long as it can get him!
coRnflEks 6 months ago
@coRnflEks See, atheists live as slaves to their lusts and practice gluttony!
MrAdvancedAtheist 6 months ago
I hate this fucking religion with the burning power of a 1000 suns. - Matt Dillahunty
JamesCizuz 6 months ago
Bravo, Matt!
cosmos11 6 months ago
In other words, "Love the believer, hate the belief," with the fiery passion of a thousand fucking suns! I like it! Thanks, Matt.
jodo40 6 months ago
That was the worst, I mean best speech I ever saw on youtube this morning.
wwickeddogg 6 months ago
umm.......why is there a christian mingle dating website in the ad spot on an Atheist channel?
XxHITMAN11895xX 6 months ago
halleluiah! finally parts 4 and 5
xyoop 6 months ago
Still no part 2.
Whatever4690 6 months ago