Why not the full implementation of James Clerk Maxwell's original 20 quaternion equations, instead of the reduced Maxwell's equations as amended by Oliver Heaviside commonly taught today?
@ExtantFrodo2 that is the most ridiculous explination. per wiki - Idealization is the process by which scientific models assume facts about the phenomenon being modeled that are strictly false.
@SimplyAsunder Ridiculous? No, but quite true. In a strict sense, they are false. Modeling a bullet fired on earth and excluding friction from air is strictly false, but it provides the student the gist of the problem.
Some of you are making science your religion if you think that at least parts of it has not been corrupted or is not corruptable. Scientist are only humans and rely on money. Some of them will bend to the powers that be.
@SimplyAsunder yeah, but the good thing about trying to corrupt a scientist is that there's always 10 scientists standing right behind him waiting to call him out. you have to keep in mind that fudging data or lying about experiment results is not only extremely easy to find out about (cause of peer review) but will most certainly ruin a scientists career. even if they manage to take the secret to their grave, someone else will eventually come along and put the pieces together.
Science is reliable and you can trust it, science is based on theories that can be tested with the same result every time, however, pseudoscience is not reliable and not trustworthy... btw i think it was the church who were claiming that the earth was flat, not science, but correct me if i am wrong, sorry for my bad English it is not my native language.
@JokerPokerUberSmoker It was commonly accepted that the earth was flat, because it was obvious. So nobody up to a point did question that. Scientists (if you can call the philosophers of that time scientists) and religious people (which often where the same) both thought it was flat.
@blenderpanzi Yeah but the beauty of science is the word THEORY! Nothing is proven till it is observed, we observed the world to be round so that earlier theory was abolished..
@HardGravy you're right about not being able to disprove faith, and yes that is one of it's strengths, but faith is most certainly not a type of science. not even a simple or stupid one. faith is the opposite of science, because faith is the opposite of reason.
@JokerPokerUberSmoker back in that day the church and science were much more closely connected. christians used to believe that science was a way to understand god's creation, and therefore become closer to god (i know, fancy that huh). when darwin went to the Galapagos he did so on behalf of the church. Mendel was basically a monk when he did his pea pod experiments. but the honeymoon ended when scientists came up with results that were different from the bible. whoops!
...well... if, say, the earth was destroyed or damaged by some cosmic force that changed it's shape then it would no longer be a sphere. Science can only study what we know is tangible. But the tangible is ever-changing. So who knows what the next thing will be that Science says is true because of change.
@DavidAMIs Thus Science changes with it. A perfect example of what you speak of is the protein structures of the influenza virus and and change of an annual flu vaccine.
'science once thought the earth was flat' what a ridiculously false statement, it was a belief that the earth was flat due to assumptions made WITHOUT any empirical evidence
they thought it was flat because it was the dark ages. they knew it was round for a long time because of the Greeks. then when Europe entered the dark ages, it lost all that information.
The bottom line is, that Science is merely the articulation (understanding) and subsequent manipulation (use) of the matter & energy that exists around us.
From a theological perspective, the fact that all this matter & energy IS around us, WHY & HOW is it all here, ARE the most fundamental questions of all. Which are far beyond our puny little mind's comprehension to cope with at the moment. So we 'invent' 'Gods' as a coping mechanism in the meantime.
Back when people thought that the earth had edges science didn't exist (and yes, the notion of science is directly linked to the modern scientific method later in the video). The message of this video may be good, but such intellectual sloppiness should be shameful for science fan boys.
I view the many religions in the way of the story of the blind men and the elephant. For those of you who are not familiar with it, there were 4 blind men and they came across an elephant. The first touched its trunk and said it was hairy, the second touched its tail and said it was more like a rope, the third touched its foot and said it was hard and connected to the earth, the fourth touched its side and said it was hard like leather. They were all right but it was seen from different angles.
okay god existes, all things about us arent from munkeys or goop! god make us! creativity is not science studied so of course ya'll be sayin' he aint real you believe one thing and one thing only, if it changes you lose your minds! well face facts! god exists and thats that! i dont care what you say! let me believe him! why did so many people say they died and came back even a few seconds they saw god! open your minds and add some fact! not everything is evolved! i dont even believe in evelution
@PAINTgal100 So explain what happened to the Italian Wall lizards that were placed on an island off the coast of Croatia. If evolution doesn't exist, are you saying what happened to those lizards....didn't happen?
And no, we didn't evolve from monkeys, and no scientist or biologist is saying so. Modern day monkeys have evolved for the same amount of time we have, but we did not evolve from them. You can't say science is stupid just because you are.
@PAINTgal100 Show proof that god exists, and maybe people will believe you. You don't believe in evolution? Evolution is a FACT and has EVIDENCE to PROVE it.
Well theoretically religion has two things going for it, even if you are the strongest atheist in the world. Namely circumcision which reduces risk of infections and infectious diseases and long term it made people behave back when it was so difficult to survive that had there not been a threat of horrible things happening top you many people, well many more people would have done far worse things to each other. This is less important now that we have strong society imposed norms though.
Science when with it is ruled by the health care system is not right. When was the last time they cured something? A long time ago. They don't cure anything anymore, b/c they can't make money once they cure something. BTW, I got this from Chris Rock, but it makes a lot of sense to me.
There are other parts of science where the powers that be suppress knowledge. Such as alternative and free energy.
@NefariousVirtuoso88 So when you type and drink, I'm not going to take anything you say with any merit. I could drive my point home more, but since you've been drinking, it's not really necessary. I wonder when the day will come when science finds a cure for drunk drivers and drunk typers.
I dont think Science has to find a cure for drunk drivers people should take responsibility but they have them machines attached to your engine that you need to breathe into ( like a Breathalyzer ) and if there is alcohol the car / bike wont start.
" So the answer for what the last thing that Science has cured would be the last thing that was cured "
@SimplyAsunder Are you talking about diseases? If so i think you should say destroyed or eradicated. Since cure implies the disease is still around. The last 'major' thing to be completly eradicated i believe was smallpox (or polio maybe?). It is hard to destroy a disease since the entire worlds population must be vaccinated against it. This is VERY expensive and hard to accomplish (particuarly within 3rd world countries.)
@N0xN0ctis Yes, I ment cure, b/c the other is definitely something else. But my point is science regarding health care is now only for them making money, if you wish, read my past comments on this video.
@maalaea Medicine does not cure, it controls. We did not cure small pocks, we made vaccines and controlled the spreading. You want to know the last illness they thwarted? H1N1.
@PivotXL1 When you take penicillin for syphilis you don't just control it. You cure the body of that infection. The body is ultimately mechanical and controlling the mechanics is really all there is to curing.
@ExtantFrodo2 Actually, the person I replied to said the "medicine" cured it. Medicine does not cure anything. The most medicine can do is help your immune system eradicate the illness.
@PivotXL1 - thank you for your response, but a couple of things. 1) would you say that H1N1 is no longer a threat as small pox or polio? b/c I still hear concerns of it from time to time. 2) H1N1, some say was in fact engineered by NWO agents. 3) as for money for the vaccine, what do you think of watch?v=LyopxiXJRQE. for the profit made, no wonder it could have been man made. 4) if they can make a vaccine for H1N1 virus so quickly why not the Aids virus after all this time?
@maalaea Scientists and "TPTB" want nothing less than to be able to cure everything. Don't you think they want to live forever and healthy? Some conspiracy notions are simply to ridiculous for words.
@ExtantFrodo2 Science my want to but mix it with health care and it is not science, it is politics. If you have no clue of the state of the healthcare industry and it corrupution with govt, you have your head way in the sand. Science takes a backseat.
@squishyfaceguy You are asking wrong question. This is what you should ask. Why theist people does not commit suicide? Because they are bound to what they were told. Atheist wont simply commit suicide because we understand how precious life is and there is no other chance to live again like now.
@SlideMaster2007 then why is it every atheist friend of mine has depression and wants to die regardless of all the cool shit they have. how could life be precious if we exist only as a result of an accident that is a contradiction in itself. and by that i mean that nothing can be made or destroyed, yet the big bang theory says that the universe was made my a small amount of matter
@squishyfaceguy the big bang wasnt a small piece of matter leading to more matter. more accurately (but still not perfect) it was hyper condensed energy that expanded, creating space, then became atoms and matter. its like reverse nuclear fission. we are depressed because 1. we see the ignorance of theists around us and get bummed out by the problems it causes. 2. for us who used to be theists, we didnt develop any other coping mechanism outside of god, prayer, and religion.
@squishyfaceguy yes and many stupid religious people have too wonder what its like not being forced to believe things. why would we just kill ourselves, life is fucken great. the meaning to my life is the one i CHOOSE to give it, not the one i am commanded to give or forced to live because some fucken book or invisible faggot sais so.
@squishyfaceguy What i always wandered is if the religious guys think that this life is just a small passage on their way to their god's bussom then why don't they shorten it by killing themselves. They would have a lot more reasons for that then us.
The only truth in science is a law. Do not believe any theory because it can be changed as stated in the video, but a scientific law cannot be changed and has been proven factual. Now onto christianity and truth.
KJV John 20:29 "Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed."
Why must people have to actually see things to believe it? Blessed is thee who hasn't seen and still believes. Still not enough to
All so-called fulfilled Bible prophecies were either self-fulfilled, actually written after the fact, or shoehorned after the fact to fit by vague interpretation. You could make the same argument for the stuff written by Nostradamus.
@ChristianKid99 1. Depends on your definition of "fulfilled prophecy". If mean self-fulfilled, shoehorned, or written afterwards, tons of them. Here's a counter - challenge for you: Find me a "prophecy" that was specifically tied to an event before said event happened, and actually used as a reliable guide to impact it.
@ytmndman In Ezekiel 29:15, the prophet says that Egypt would recover from a desolation, but that it would never again rule over other nations. Up until the time of Ezekiel, Egypt had been a world power for centuries. But for most of the past 2500 years, Egypt has been controlled by foreign powers. Today, Egypt is an independent nation again. In 1948, 1967 and 1973, Egypt tried to dominate Israel but was unsuccessful each time. Since the time of Ezekiel, Egypt no longer rules over other nations.
@ChristianKid99 and for 2, that can't be true. Many paintings don't have names on them, but that is a good point of evidence to look for. The Mona Lisa doesn't even have a signature, but it is a painting, right? Again, how do you know a painting has a painter?
@ChristianKid99 Because a painting is made on a piece of cloth or cardboard, using a pencil or brush to spread thin layers of paint. And we know how to make all of these from other materials and we know that someone must put them together for the painting to appear.
This explanation can be extended all the way to the entire universe, where science currently stops. Religion claims that there is a creator of the universe . Then who has created that creator?
@ChristianKid99 Way to be selective. Said "prophecy" also says that man and beasts will be removed from Egypt and everyone living there would be scattered to other countries, but that never happened. Even afterwards in the part you're referencing it says Egypt will be the "basest of kingdoms", despite the fact that it's not a kingdom and hasn't been for a long time, and there both are and have been many poorer and weaker kingdoms in the world. So, in other words, prophecy fail
@ytmndman Well, my Bible translating program is actually not working, so I can't reply to the "kingdoms" thing, but I think the word would be referring to a government, not just a kingdom because there were no other forms of government in that day. And I'd like you to point out where it says the beasts will be removed of Egypt.
@ChristianKid99 A kingdom is a specific type of monarchy. There were other forms. Look just a few passages earlier from the one you quoted: Ezekiel 29:8 and 29:11.
@ChristianKid99 Also Egypt was one of the founding members of the Arab League, and its headquarters and many of its leaders were from there, I think that counts as "exalting itself above other nations" (which is the proper quote from that passage, not "ruling", as you seem to like lying about
@ytmndman "one of" doesn't mean "exalting" and with the exalting, not ruling. There are different Bible translations. I can find the Greek word when my Bible software starts to work again (it's like not working, so I'm trying to figure out what's wrong)
@ChristianKid99 Not just one of, founding member with their headquarters located in Cairo, having multiple presidents of the AL from their country, and having more influence than the rest. Also you ignored the rest of my post and other post. BTW I'm using the King James version, so if that's not the version you use then tell me
@ChristianKid99 You're referring to Ray Comfort's take on William Paley's very elegant 1802 Watchmaker argument with the painting question. I suggest you read the wikipedia entry for "Watchmaker analogy." You can also do a youtube search for "watchmaker atheist experience" they give a pretty good explanation as well. In simple terms, you know a painting has a painter because you already know what a painting is and that paintings do not occur naturally. Good luck.
@ChristianKid99 You don't have a basis for that claim, however, one knows specifically that people paint painting or make watches. Again, I strongly suggest you look at that Wikipedia page. Paley's argument has been thoroughly disputed. I won't respond any more. Good luck.
Thanks for mentioning Circumcision. Invented By Religion. Supported By Science. Later Refuted By Science. Currently Topic-Hijacking Discussion Boards Worldwide - men and our fragile egos.
And Christians totally agree with the fact that you can trust science. Medicine and computers are wonderful inventions. Our argument is that SINCE science was wrong about some things, it is wrong about religion. Soon, you will discover God created everything, and that God was the God of the Bible. Science just hasn't figured that out.
@ChristianKid99 I'm taking your age into account here. Every one of the prophecies listed in that link are both predicted and fulfilled in the Bible and often very vague. A prophecy has to be specific and apply to a single event. Suppose I give you a book that has a prediction. Then I show you a part later in the same book that says the prediction happened. Would you accept that as a fulfilled prophecy? I hope not. I Bible prophecies are often weaker than that.
@ChristianKid99 Just because science doesn't know everything, doesn't mean you can fill in the gaps with fairytales. Yes there's things we can't explain yet. Science knows this, otherwise it would stop. Science is discovery. If science knew everything already, it wouldn't need to carry on would it? In a few hundred years religion will be obselete, because more people will see that science is the only thing that makes sense.
@aaddaammize I totally agree with your point science doesn't know everything, but neither does religion. And i also agree that someday one of the two will be obsolete. But here's the thing. Religion is the filling in the gap that science can't explain acids turning into life, because they can't. There is NO way to make life without previous life. I agree with your stance, and I agree with all science, but you can't explain life as it is. Where did life come from?
@ChristianKid99 Then all you have to do is to prove that it is indeed Yeshua the one that created the universe, and not Ptah, Marduk, Brahma, Cronos or any other creator god.
you should be praying to science before it leaves you out of everything u use now to live you boring ass life....we are learning and discovering at the same time otherwise who would God? what we need now is fusion to grow more like a planetary civilization.
The problem with science is called the problem of induction, if i want to attack science i wouldnt use the word agenda i`d take a book of philosophy of science.
in all honesty the only people who I as a christian have heard say this are third-world uneducated primitive rural redneck fundamentalists in the deep south of the USA
@blackoutninja Then i recommend to you to start visiting churches - the bigger it is , the greater the stupidity. You would be amazed what people can gobble up from their preachers as pure and eternal truth.
BTW the only xian denominations that refuse to accept science (most or even all of it - hello, young earth) are the anglo-saxon (specifically american) ones.
All the others have had to accept the fact and now claim that all this is true, it's just that all has happened this way because their god designed it that way.
I call Bullshit! Everyone knows that everything godly is invisible to us like tiny atoms to the human eye. Just because you can't see it, hear it, smell it, touch it, or taste it it doesn't mean its not there.
God is everywhere except he doesn't really do anything... like a cat
@TheDesertonfire False. How do you know a painting has a painter? Because a painting doesn't occur naturally. Neither does life my friend. We have a creator, and that creator is the God of the Bible.
@ChristianKid99 Because we can prove that a painter exists. Science can prove that the "painter" in question of the universe is random chance, and a massive explosion. The concept of a divine creator was conceived to explain why the universe exists. A more valid, fact based explanation has been discovered, so the religious explanation is obsolete. To continue to believe in an outdated, disproven theory is simply closed minded.
@TheDesertonfire No, it can't be random chance. Where did life start. Any pyrotechnic can blow up as much stuff as he wants, he won't get life. There is no theory out there that explains WHERE LIFE STARTS
@ChristianKid99 In the far distant past, lightning, heat, pressure, and various materials combined in just the right way to form amino acids, which developed into RNA, then DNA, then single celled organisms, then multi celled organisms, so on and so forth, and here we are. To the closed mind, it sounds absud that a random occurence could create such a complex organism as a human being, but that is the origin of life as we have proven thus far.
@TheDesertonfire Okay, so I'd like to see 1) the odds of that, and 2) if that happened, then why can't we find life on any other planets? 3) how does amino acid make RNA, in the video it even talks of our 25,000 genes. The odds of this are infinitely small (just as small as the sub-atomic particle that some how created the universe we live in today)
@ChristianKid99 I suppose other planets just didn't have the right collection of circumstances to combine and create life. As far as the odds, I know they're rather extreme, but it's the only current plausible explanation. As far as RNA developing into DNA, I remember reading the process, but I do not recall a bit of it, as it was basically a diagram of proteins and chemicals. Though let me ask you a question. Where is the evidence to support the idea of divine creation?
@ChristianKid99 The odds don't matter. Fact is... thats how it happened. And excuse me.... How many planets have you been to? Who are you to say that there are no life on other planets? We've only been to one. And how the hell do you want us to tell you how Amino Acid makes RNA. We're not scientists. Maybe you should ask a Biologist. And its not "Infinitely Small" because it happened. At its more logical than a magical flying being creating everything from nothing.
@Helldog6 So evidence doesn't matter? That's not logical. The matter is that it is more likely that God created everything. And really. Ameno acid to life? No
@ChristianKid99 What? dude. The amount of evidence for this process is Insurmountable. Its called "Google"... Use it. I'm not a walking Encyclopedia, nor am I a scientist. Another thing. You think its more probable for a Mystical, Intangible, Omnipotent, Omnipresent, All knowing, infinite god created this ENTIRE Universe? Yeah... okay bro, One more thing. You have no evidence of god. There is countless (literally COUNTLESS) amount of evidence for Evolution.
@ChristianKid99 So you're an YEC? No wonder you're so pig-headed in your beliefs - you have chosen to ignore all the evidences and shut down your brain.
@Helldog6 I'd like to warn you that arguing with most religious people is like trying to halt a tank by throwing individual slices of baloney at it. Wasted effort! If someone is closed minded, uneducated, or uninterested in truth (like ChristianKid99), then arguing with them directly will only cause them to get defensive. You've got to gently lead them out of ignorance and into reality, something very hard to do in YT comments!
@tomasusan True that. I've never thought of it like that. I always pictured them as dragons. I just point my gun, aim, close my eyes, and shoot out facts and problems with religions and hope that maybe one will hit him and then they'll see the REAL light. And its worked... but some people are just immuned to logic.
@ChristianKid99 You can only say so many mind-bogglingly stupid things before you deserved to be mocked for the amusement of all... lol (watch?v=-h9XntsSEro)
@ChristianKid99 Response to your comment regarding life from nothing, a little viewing material on abiogenesis.
/watch?v=U6QYDdgP9eg
I consider it sufficiently dumbed down so that you should be able to understand it, but I must warn you that there are some long and technical terms involved.
@Grnvolpe Then why would you worship someone who's never done anything for you? Should we worship a God just because we're afraid of what he or she'll do to us if we don't?
@UberREDKitteh 1. Because in HIS book, the Bible it refers to God THE FATHER. As he. (Duh)
And no, I'm trying to help you guys so you can get your "little cloud in heaven" too. That's why I'm here. Jesus said no one can get to the father except through Jesus. Trust Jesus, please.
@ChristianKid99 You misread my 2nd point. I'm not saying you're helping people getting their own little cloud in heaven, I said you were a coward who'd let someone die so YOU could go to heaven.
@silverwingpegasus While those are indeed words which I favor, this argument was a type favoured by the ancient Greek skeptics, and may have been wrongly attributed to Epicurus by Lactantius, who, from his Christian perspective, regarded Epicurus as an atheist.It has been suggested that it may actually be the work of an early skeptic writer, possibly Carneades. Since those Qs and As are sacred to me, I propound a closer examination of their origins.
@silverwingpegasus God is unwilling to prevent evil because he wants humans to have free will. This means they can do whatever they want to do, they are just punished for it. Is it better to choose what you want to do or run around like a robot all day?
Actually, the white church bus, religious TV, communion wafers are all because of science as well.
TheBrettBretterson 2 hours ago
2007 people came here for boobs
thealltedrygt 1 day ago
That woman doesn't have breast implants. Her name's Lucy Pinder, and she's all natural. :)
bosman1988 1 day ago
Science is fucking awesome.
UnionGarside 1 day ago
Can someone direct me to a good resource of for the physics of spinning objects including both magnetic and nonmeagnectic?
SimplyAsunder 2 days ago
Why not the full implementation of James Clerk Maxwell's original 20 quaternion equations, instead of the reduced Maxwell's equations as amended by Oliver Heaviside commonly taught today?
SimplyAsunder 2 days ago
@SimplyAsunder For the same reason they teach 'idealized models' when teaching physics and engineering. Students have to walk before they can run.
ExtantFrodo2 13 hours ago
@ExtantFrodo2 that is the most ridiculous explination. per wiki - Idealization is the process by which scientific models assume facts about the phenomenon being modeled that are strictly false.
SimplyAsunder 13 hours ago
@SimplyAsunder Ridiculous? No, but quite true. In a strict sense, they are false. Modeling a bullet fired on earth and excluding friction from air is strictly false, but it provides the student the gist of the problem.
ExtantFrodo2 12 hours ago
Some of you are making science your religion if you think that at least parts of it has not been corrupted or is not corruptable. Scientist are only humans and rely on money. Some of them will bend to the powers that be.
SimplyAsunder 2 days ago
@SimplyAsunder What's your point?
AristotlEYE 2 days ago
@SimplyAsunder Don't actually answer me you're clearly an idiot.
AristotlEYE 2 days ago
@AristotlEYE pot calling the kettle black.
SimplyAsunder 1 day ago
@SimplyAsunder yeah, but the good thing about trying to corrupt a scientist is that there's always 10 scientists standing right behind him waiting to call him out. you have to keep in mind that fudging data or lying about experiment results is not only extremely easy to find out about (cause of peer review) but will most certainly ruin a scientists career. even if they manage to take the secret to their grave, someone else will eventually come along and put the pieces together.
redrounin 1 day ago
Science is reliable and you can trust it, science is based on theories that can be tested with the same result every time, however, pseudoscience is not reliable and not trustworthy... btw i think it was the church who were claiming that the earth was flat, not science, but correct me if i am wrong, sorry for my bad English it is not my native language.
JokerPokerUberSmoker 3 days ago
@JokerPokerUberSmoker It was commonly accepted that the earth was flat, because it was obvious. So nobody up to a point did question that. Scientists (if you can call the philosophers of that time scientists) and religious people (which often where the same) both thought it was flat.
blenderpanzi 3 days ago
@blenderpanzi Yeah but the beauty of science is the word THEORY! Nothing is proven till it is observed, we observed the world to be round so that earlier theory was abolished..
HardGravy 3 days ago in playlist More videos from TheThinkingAtheist
@HardGravy Yes, of course.
blenderpanzi 2 days ago
@HardGravy remember though nothing is proven, it's it only fails to be disproven. the true beauty of science imho.
redrounin 1 day ago
@redrounin Very true, except you can't disprove faith because there's always a possibility, faith is a type of science, just the simple stupid one.
HardGravy 22 hours ago
@HardGravy Without evidence and measurements there is no science.
ExtantFrodo2 13 hours ago
@HardGravy you're right about not being able to disprove faith, and yes that is one of it's strengths, but faith is most certainly not a type of science. not even a simple or stupid one. faith is the opposite of science, because faith is the opposite of reason.
redrounin 8 hours ago
@JokerPokerUberSmoker back in that day the church and science were much more closely connected. christians used to believe that science was a way to understand god's creation, and therefore become closer to god (i know, fancy that huh). when darwin went to the Galapagos he did so on behalf of the church. Mendel was basically a monk when he did his pea pod experiments. but the honeymoon ended when scientists came up with results that were different from the bible. whoops!
redrounin 1 day ago
Comment removed
angrylittlegiant 3 days ago
...well... if, say, the earth was destroyed or damaged by some cosmic force that changed it's shape then it would no longer be a sphere. Science can only study what we know is tangible. But the tangible is ever-changing. So who knows what the next thing will be that Science says is true because of change.
DavidAMIs 3 days ago
@DavidAMIs Thus Science changes with it. A perfect example of what you speak of is the protein structures of the influenza virus and and change of an annual flu vaccine.
salamut2202 2 days ago
why is the title you can't trust science??!
yougonasorry 3 days ago
@yougonasorry you can just love the irony in the title can't you?!
siggesatan 3 days ago
'science once thought the earth was flat' what a ridiculously false statement, it was a belief that the earth was flat due to assumptions made WITHOUT any empirical evidence
yougonasorry 3 days ago
@yougonasorry
they thought it was flat because it was the dark ages. they knew it was round for a long time because of the Greeks. then when Europe entered the dark ages, it lost all that information.
aceofspades477 3 days ago
science be praised. Otters attack!!
tonyblackops 3 days ago
Scientists never claimed that the earth was flat, in fact religion claimed that.
Thumbs down for that and the retarded claims against religion.
maorvanu 3 days ago
@maorvanu it was not scientific prof that the earth was flat! it was a scientific / religion philosophic dispute that cling'd to the idea
siggesatan 3 days ago
This argument is sooo tired.
The bottom line is, that Science is merely the articulation (understanding) and subsequent manipulation (use) of the matter & energy that exists around us.
From a theological perspective, the fact that all this matter & energy IS around us, WHY & HOW is it all here, ARE the most fundamental questions of all. Which are far beyond our puny little mind's comprehension to cope with at the moment. So we 'invent' 'Gods' as a coping mechanism in the meantime.
xoio 3 days ago
Back when people thought that the earth had edges science didn't exist (and yes, the notion of science is directly linked to the modern scientific method later in the video). The message of this video may be good, but such intellectual sloppiness should be shameful for science fan boys.
27182818284590452354 3 days ago
its not what sience can do for you , but what you can do for sience!!!
egvoosten 3 days ago
@egvoosten That's pretty good. I like that. but I have to quibble that it's spelled "science".
ExtantFrodo2 3 days ago
i never understood listing scientific achievements, seeing as pretty much everything in our human lives are the result of science
raptoresque 3 days ago
science is unreliable... thats why you have a laptop right now, haha ignorants
yopa18 3 days ago
science works bitches
dattebenforcer 4 days ago
Haha at arguing keyboard warriors.
KristovGaedkavich 4 days ago
I view the many religions in the way of the story of the blind men and the elephant. For those of you who are not familiar with it, there were 4 blind men and they came across an elephant. The first touched its trunk and said it was hairy, the second touched its tail and said it was more like a rope, the third touched its foot and said it was hard and connected to the earth, the fourth touched its side and said it was hard like leather. They were all right but it was seen from different angles.
narutorockz999 4 days ago
okay god existes, all things about us arent from munkeys or goop! god make us! creativity is not science studied so of course ya'll be sayin' he aint real you believe one thing and one thing only, if it changes you lose your minds! well face facts! god exists and thats that! i dont care what you say! let me believe him! why did so many people say they died and came back even a few seconds they saw god! open your minds and add some fact! not everything is evolved! i dont even believe in evelution
PAINTgal100 4 days ago
@PAINTgal100 So explain what happened to the Italian Wall lizards that were placed on an island off the coast of Croatia. If evolution doesn't exist, are you saying what happened to those lizards....didn't happen?
And no, we didn't evolve from monkeys, and no scientist or biologist is saying so. Modern day monkeys have evolved for the same amount of time we have, but we did not evolve from them. You can't say science is stupid just because you are.
seventh77 4 days ago
@PAINTgal100 Show proof that god exists, and maybe people will believe you. You don't believe in evolution? Evolution is a FACT and has EVIDENCE to PROVE it.
cbfd234 4 days ago
WTF? I clicked for tits and now I'm embroiled in science vs religion debate?
kulcid254 4 days ago
1:35 penicillin: GG bacteria
xdopiex 4 days ago
Comment removed
xdopiex 4 days ago
I can't be the only person who came here because of the boobs.
copybook21 4 days ago
@copybook21 half way through the video i wondered why the fuck i clicked on this lol, ya same reason for me:D
messi996 4 days ago
Really well made :) but these christians shouldnt judge us cause after all god made us atheists XD (im agnostic)
asar123321 4 days ago
Well theoretically religion has two things going for it, even if you are the strongest atheist in the world. Namely circumcision which reduces risk of infections and infectious diseases and long term it made people behave back when it was so difficult to survive that had there not been a threat of horrible things happening top you many people, well many more people would have done far worse things to each other. This is less important now that we have strong society imposed norms though.
Slobezero 4 days ago
Comment removed
Slobezero 4 days ago
Science when with it is ruled by the health care system is not right. When was the last time they cured something? A long time ago. They don't cure anything anymore, b/c they can't make money once they cure something. BTW, I got this from Chris Rock, but it makes a lot of sense to me.
There are other parts of science where the powers that be suppress knowledge. Such as alternative and free energy.
maalaea 5 days ago
@maalaea
Maybe you should not get your stuff from Chris Rock.
Science has a 100% better record of curing disease than anything else, nothing else deserves a mention.
" There are other parts of science where the powers that be suppress knowledge "
- bollocks.
NefariousVirtuoso88 5 days ago
@NefariousVirtuoso88 so tell me, when/what was the last major thing that was cured, mr. defensive know it all?
SimplyAsunder 5 days ago
@SimplyAsunder
I dont recall being defensive.
I have been drinking and its late but it doesn't really matter Science has no peer, rival or competition.
Its genuinely in a class of its own when it comes to separating fact from fiction and its ability to deliver the goods.
So the answer for what the last thing that Science has cured would be the last thing that was cured.
Its not like anything else would step in.
NefariousVirtuoso88 5 days ago
@NefariousVirtuoso88 So when you type and drink, I'm not going to take anything you say with any merit. I could drive my point home more, but since you've been drinking, it's not really necessary. I wonder when the day will come when science finds a cure for drunk drivers and drunk typers.
SimplyAsunder 4 days ago
@SimplyAsunder
There is no point you could make.
I made my point perfectly.
I dont think Science has to find a cure for drunk drivers people should take responsibility but they have them machines attached to your engine that you need to breathe into ( like a Breathalyzer ) and if there is alcohol the car / bike wont start.
" So the answer for what the last thing that Science has cured would be the last thing that was cured "
- That killed you.
NefariousVirtuoso88 4 days ago
@NefariousVirtuoso88 - in essence you have no clue what you are talking about.
SimplyAsunder 4 days ago
@SimplyAsunder
Ha.
The last thing Science cured was the last thing that was cured.
This sentence kills you.
Me Drunk > You Whatever
NefariousVirtuoso88 4 days ago
@NefariousVirtuoso88 - repeating what you don't know only shows how much you don't know. So make yourself look bad.
SimplyAsunder 3 days ago
@SimplyAsunder Are you talking about diseases? If so i think you should say destroyed or eradicated. Since cure implies the disease is still around. The last 'major' thing to be completly eradicated i believe was smallpox (or polio maybe?). It is hard to destroy a disease since the entire worlds population must be vaccinated against it. This is VERY expensive and hard to accomplish (particuarly within 3rd world countries.)
N0xN0ctis 4 days ago
@N0xN0ctis Yes, I ment cure, b/c the other is definitely something else. But my point is science regarding health care is now only for them making money, if you wish, read my past comments on this video.
SimplyAsunder 4 days ago
@N0xN0ctis fyi - i was agreeing with maalaea's comments.
SimplyAsunder 4 days ago
@maalaea
That is why health care should never be run as a business.
DearBossMusic 5 days ago
@maalaea Medicine does not cure, it controls. We did not cure small pocks, we made vaccines and controlled the spreading. You want to know the last illness they thwarted? H1N1.
PivotXL1 3 days ago
Comment removed
maalaea 3 days ago
@PivotXL1 When you take penicillin for syphilis you don't just control it. You cure the body of that infection. The body is ultimately mechanical and controlling the mechanics is really all there is to curing.
ExtantFrodo2 3 days ago
@ExtantFrodo2 Actually, the person I replied to said the "medicine" cured it. Medicine does not cure anything. The most medicine can do is help your immune system eradicate the illness.
PivotXL1 3 days ago
@PivotXL1 I already gave you one example, do you need more?
ExtantFrodo2 3 days ago
@ExtantFrodo2 I was just saying you took my comment out of context.
PivotXL1 3 days ago
Comment removed
maalaea 2 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@PivotXL1 - thank you for your response, but a couple of things. 1) would you say that H1N1 is no longer a threat as small pox or polio? b/c I still hear concerns of it from time to time. 2) H1N1, some say was in fact engineered by NWO agents. 3) as for money for the vaccine, what do you think of watch?v=LyopxiXJRQE. for the profit made, no wonder it could have been man made. 4) if they can make a vaccine for H1N1 virus so quickly why not the Aids virus after all this time?
maalaea 3 days ago
@maalaea Scientists and "TPTB" want nothing less than to be able to cure everything. Don't you think they want to live forever and healthy? Some conspiracy notions are simply to ridiculous for words.
ExtantFrodo2 2 days ago
@ExtantFrodo2 Science my want to but mix it with health care and it is not science, it is politics. If you have no clue of the state of the healthcare industry and it corrupution with govt, you have your head way in the sand. Science takes a backseat.
SimplyAsunder 2 days ago
@SimplyAsunder no, fear takes a front seat. Say you have all the bucks. What good do they do you if you are sickly or dead?
ExtantFrodo2 2 days ago
@ExtantFrodo2 - You know the guys with all the money, they put more fear into the scientists. This is energy too.
SimplyAsunder 2 days ago
No point arguing with Christians. They'll deny any evidence you show them.
HHRoblox 5 days ago
just wondering. if atheists don't believe that existence has anykind of meaning, then why not just commit suicide? i've always wondered about this
squishyfaceguy 5 days ago
@squishyfaceguy You are asking wrong question. This is what you should ask. Why theist people does not commit suicide? Because they are bound to what they were told. Atheist wont simply commit suicide because we understand how precious life is and there is no other chance to live again like now.
SlideMaster2007 5 days ago
@SlideMaster2007 then why is it every atheist friend of mine has depression and wants to die regardless of all the cool shit they have. how could life be precious if we exist only as a result of an accident that is a contradiction in itself. and by that i mean that nothing can be made or destroyed, yet the big bang theory says that the universe was made my a small amount of matter
squishyfaceguy 4 days ago
Comment removed
asar123321 4 days ago
@squishyfaceguy I think you hang out with the wrong type of people man.
asar123321 4 days ago
@squishyfaceguy the big bang wasnt a small piece of matter leading to more matter. more accurately (but still not perfect) it was hyper condensed energy that expanded, creating space, then became atoms and matter. its like reverse nuclear fission. we are depressed because 1. we see the ignorance of theists around us and get bummed out by the problems it causes. 2. for us who used to be theists, we didnt develop any other coping mechanism outside of god, prayer, and religion.
morqwal 4 days ago
@squishyfaceguy yes and many stupid religious people have too wonder what its like not being forced to believe things. why would we just kill ourselves, life is fucken great. the meaning to my life is the one i CHOOSE to give it, not the one i am commanded to give or forced to live because some fucken book or invisible faggot sais so.
Menelyagor12 5 days ago
@squishyfaceguy What i always wandered is if the religious guys think that this life is just a small passage on their way to their god's bussom then why don't they shorten it by killing themselves. They would have a lot more reasons for that then us.
AzraelI666 3 days ago
@AzraelI666 because some religions believe that sucide sends you directly to hell. you should try it and see if its true.
squishyfaceguy 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AzraelI666 because some religions believe that sucide sends you directly to hell. you should try it and see if its true.
squishyfaceguy 3 days ago
christian or atheist, you can't arque with boobs
jvome 5 days ago
@jvome or type whilr disracteb by then.
callumnik117 5 days ago
The only truth in science is a law. Do not believe any theory because it can be changed as stated in the video, but a scientific law cannot be changed and has been proven factual. Now onto christianity and truth.
KJV John 20:29 "Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed."
Why must people have to actually see things to believe it? Blessed is thee who hasn't seen and still believes. Still not enough to
danosdrake 5 days ago
It's amazing how short of an attention span the majority of humans have for history and science.
stealthfighter077 5 days ago
What a fantastic voice for narration!
ProxiedRoadblock 5 days ago
All so-called fulfilled Bible prophecies were either self-fulfilled, actually written after the fact, or shoehorned after the fact to fit by vague interpretation. You could make the same argument for the stuff written by Nostradamus.
ytmndman 5 days ago
@ytmndman Give me another holy book that has fulfilled prophecy, and let me ask you a question. How do you know a painting has a painter?
ChristianKid99 5 days ago
@ChristianKid99 1. Depends on your definition of "fulfilled prophecy". If mean self-fulfilled, shoehorned, or written afterwards, tons of them. Here's a counter - challenge for you: Find me a "prophecy" that was specifically tied to an event before said event happened, and actually used as a reliable guide to impact it.
2. Because they sign their name on it
ytmndman 5 days ago
@ytmndman In Ezekiel 29:15, the prophet says that Egypt would recover from a desolation, but that it would never again rule over other nations. Up until the time of Ezekiel, Egypt had been a world power for centuries. But for most of the past 2500 years, Egypt has been controlled by foreign powers. Today, Egypt is an independent nation again. In 1948, 1967 and 1973, Egypt tried to dominate Israel but was unsuccessful each time. Since the time of Ezekiel, Egypt no longer rules over other nations.
ChristianKid99 5 days ago
@ChristianKid99 and for 2, that can't be true. Many paintings don't have names on them, but that is a good point of evidence to look for. The Mona Lisa doesn't even have a signature, but it is a painting, right? Again, how do you know a painting has a painter?
ChristianKid99 5 days ago
@ChristianKid99 Because a painting is made on a piece of cloth or cardboard, using a pencil or brush to spread thin layers of paint. And we know how to make all of these from other materials and we know that someone must put them together for the painting to appear.
This explanation can be extended all the way to the entire universe, where science currently stops. Religion claims that there is a creator of the universe . Then who has created that creator?
AzraelI666 3 days ago
@ChristianKid99 Way to be selective. Said "prophecy" also says that man and beasts will be removed from Egypt and everyone living there would be scattered to other countries, but that never happened. Even afterwards in the part you're referencing it says Egypt will be the "basest of kingdoms", despite the fact that it's not a kingdom and hasn't been for a long time, and there both are and have been many poorer and weaker kingdoms in the world. So, in other words, prophecy fail
ytmndman 4 days ago
@ytmndman Well, my Bible translating program is actually not working, so I can't reply to the "kingdoms" thing, but I think the word would be referring to a government, not just a kingdom because there were no other forms of government in that day. And I'd like you to point out where it says the beasts will be removed of Egypt.
ChristianKid99 4 days ago
@ChristianKid99 A kingdom is a specific type of monarchy. There were other forms. Look just a few passages earlier from the one you quoted: Ezekiel 29:8 and 29:11.
ytmndman 3 days ago
@ChristianKid99 Also Egypt was one of the founding members of the Arab League, and its headquarters and many of its leaders were from there, I think that counts as "exalting itself above other nations" (which is the proper quote from that passage, not "ruling", as you seem to like lying about
ytmndman 4 days ago
@ytmndman "one of" doesn't mean "exalting" and with the exalting, not ruling. There are different Bible translations. I can find the Greek word when my Bible software starts to work again (it's like not working, so I'm trying to figure out what's wrong)
ChristianKid99 4 days ago
@ChristianKid99 Not just one of, founding member with their headquarters located in Cairo, having multiple presidents of the AL from their country, and having more influence than the rest. Also you ignored the rest of my post and other post. BTW I'm using the King James version, so if that's not the version you use then tell me
ytmndman 4 days ago
@ChristianKid99 You're referring to Ray Comfort's take on William Paley's very elegant 1802 Watchmaker argument with the painting question. I suggest you read the wikipedia entry for "Watchmaker analogy." You can also do a youtube search for "watchmaker atheist experience" they give a pretty good explanation as well. In simple terms, you know a painting has a painter because you already know what a painting is and that paintings do not occur naturally. Good luck.
UCMolosser 5 days ago
@UCMolosser Yes, paintings don't occur naturally. Neither do life containing planets. That's why there has to be a God.
ChristianKid99 5 days ago
@ChristianKid99 You don't have a basis for that claim, however, one knows specifically that people paint painting or make watches. Again, I strongly suggest you look at that Wikipedia page. Paley's argument has been thoroughly disputed. I won't respond any more. Good luck.
UCMolosser 5 days ago
Thanks for mentioning Circumcision. Invented By Religion. Supported By Science. Later Refuted By Science. Currently Topic-Hijacking Discussion Boards Worldwide - men and our fragile egos.
khbkb 5 days ago
And Christians totally agree with the fact that you can trust science. Medicine and computers are wonderful inventions. Our argument is that SINCE science was wrong about some things, it is wrong about religion. Soon, you will discover God created everything, and that God was the God of the Bible. Science just hasn't figured that out.
ChristianKid99 6 days ago
@ChristianKid99 and why do u believe that its the god in the bible?
len6nar42 6 days ago
@len6nar42 Because the Bible is the only book with fulfilled prophecy.
ChristianKid99 6 days ago
@ChristianKid99 tell me ONE fulfilled prophecy that happened FOR SURE
piguillaud 6 days ago in playlist More videos from TheThinkingAtheist
@piguillaud
/carm.org/prophecy-bible-and-jesus
ChristianKid99 5 days ago
@ChristianKid99 I'm taking your age into account here. Every one of the prophecies listed in that link are both predicted and fulfilled in the Bible and often very vague. A prophecy has to be specific and apply to a single event. Suppose I give you a book that has a prediction. Then I show you a part later in the same book that says the prediction happened. Would you accept that as a fulfilled prophecy? I hope not. I Bible prophecies are often weaker than that.
UCMolosser 5 days ago
@ChristianKid99 Just because science doesn't know everything, doesn't mean you can fill in the gaps with fairytales. Yes there's things we can't explain yet. Science knows this, otherwise it would stop. Science is discovery. If science knew everything already, it wouldn't need to carry on would it? In a few hundred years religion will be obselete, because more people will see that science is the only thing that makes sense.
aaddaammize 5 days ago
@aaddaammize I totally agree with your point science doesn't know everything, but neither does religion. And i also agree that someday one of the two will be obsolete. But here's the thing. Religion is the filling in the gap that science can't explain acids turning into life, because they can't. There is NO way to make life without previous life. I agree with your stance, and I agree with all science, but you can't explain life as it is. Where did life come from?
ChristianKid99 5 days ago
@ChristianKid99 Then all you have to do is to prove that it is indeed Yeshua the one that created the universe, and not Ptah, Marduk, Brahma, Cronos or any other creator god.
AzraelI666 3 days ago
Other than suggesting that memory foam is NASA great contribution to mankind. Exactly !! LOVE SCIENCE.
vdst1 6 days ago
you should be praying to science before it leaves you out of everything u use now to live you boring ass life....we are learning and discovering at the same time otherwise who would God? what we need now is fusion to grow more like a planetary civilization.
McParcero 6 days ago
The problem with science is called the problem of induction, if i want to attack science i wouldnt use the word agenda i`d take a book of philosophy of science.
CROCEX 6 days ago
My little philosophy is "If you can't trust science then what can you trust".
ChainsawVsGod 6 days ago
"Science has an agenda! Science is unreliable!"
in all honesty the only people who I as a christian have heard say this are third-world uneducated primitive rural redneck fundamentalists in the deep south of the USA
blackoutninja 6 days ago
@blackoutninja Then i recommend to you to start visiting churches - the bigger it is , the greater the stupidity. You would be amazed what people can gobble up from their preachers as pure and eternal truth.
AzraelI666 6 days ago
@AzraelI666 Not true. All true Christian churches have no problems with the laws of science, excluding evolution. I mean really, who does?
ChristianKid99 4 days ago
@ChristianKid99 they accept evolution in their own way. half way acceptence really
MIXEDUPTHROWNTOGETHR 3 days ago
@ChristianKid99 the rc church believes in evolution.
so go back to school creatard- evolution is fact. you can stick your head in the sand, deny all you want, but it wont change a thing- fact.
and btw- plenty of evidence that the christian god is bullshit and doesnt exist. too bad for you.
RippdUb 3 days ago
@RippdUb The "rc" church also believes you can become a god after you die.
ChristianKid99 2 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@RippdUb The "rc" church also believes you can become a god after you die.
ChristianKid99 2 days ago
@ChristianKid99 Really? You have to ask that?
BTW the only xian denominations that refuse to accept science (most or even all of it - hello, young earth) are the anglo-saxon (specifically american) ones.
All the others have had to accept the fact and now claim that all this is true, it's just that all has happened this way because their god designed it that way.
Remember - when science advances, god retreats.
AzraelI666 3 days ago
After 3:30 the video turns into a joke. Worthless
ThisMemory 6 days ago
the number dislikes (1991) is the year I was born
LightningLion1585 6 days ago
Uh oh, looks like we got some butthurt people.
iBenJay 6 days ago
I call Bullshit! Everyone knows that everything godly is invisible to us like tiny atoms to the human eye. Just because you can't see it, hear it, smell it, touch it, or taste it it doesn't mean its not there.
God is everywhere except he doesn't really do anything... like a cat
Grnvolpe 1 week ago
@Grnvolpe y but kitties are cute and god isn't.
linkuei83 6 days ago
@Grnvolpe One issue, the existence of things like atoms can be proved. Not so with a deity.
TheDesertonfire 6 days ago
@TheDesertonfire False. How do you know a painting has a painter? Because a painting doesn't occur naturally. Neither does life my friend. We have a creator, and that creator is the God of the Bible.
ChristianKid99 5 days ago
@ChristianKid99 Because we can prove that a painter exists. Science can prove that the "painter" in question of the universe is random chance, and a massive explosion. The concept of a divine creator was conceived to explain why the universe exists. A more valid, fact based explanation has been discovered, so the religious explanation is obsolete. To continue to believe in an outdated, disproven theory is simply closed minded.
TheDesertonfire 5 days ago
@TheDesertonfire No, it can't be random chance. Where did life start. Any pyrotechnic can blow up as much stuff as he wants, he won't get life. There is no theory out there that explains WHERE LIFE STARTS
ChristianKid99 5 days ago
@ChristianKid99 In the far distant past, lightning, heat, pressure, and various materials combined in just the right way to form amino acids, which developed into RNA, then DNA, then single celled organisms, then multi celled organisms, so on and so forth, and here we are. To the closed mind, it sounds absud that a random occurence could create such a complex organism as a human being, but that is the origin of life as we have proven thus far.
TheDesertonfire 5 days ago
@TheDesertonfire Okay, so I'd like to see 1) the odds of that, and 2) if that happened, then why can't we find life on any other planets? 3) how does amino acid make RNA, in the video it even talks of our 25,000 genes. The odds of this are infinitely small (just as small as the sub-atomic particle that some how created the universe we live in today)
ChristianKid99 5 days ago
@ChristianKid99 I suppose other planets just didn't have the right collection of circumstances to combine and create life. As far as the odds, I know they're rather extreme, but it's the only current plausible explanation. As far as RNA developing into DNA, I remember reading the process, but I do not recall a bit of it, as it was basically a diagram of proteins and chemicals. Though let me ask you a question. Where is the evidence to support the idea of divine creation?
TheDesertonfire 5 days ago
@ChristianKid99 The odds don't matter. Fact is... thats how it happened. And excuse me.... How many planets have you been to? Who are you to say that there are no life on other planets? We've only been to one. And how the hell do you want us to tell you how Amino Acid makes RNA. We're not scientists. Maybe you should ask a Biologist. And its not "Infinitely Small" because it happened. At its more logical than a magical flying being creating everything from nothing.
Helldog6 5 days ago
@Helldog6 So evidence doesn't matter? That's not logical. The matter is that it is more likely that God created everything. And really. Ameno acid to life? No
ChristianKid99 5 days ago
@ChristianKid99 What? dude. The amount of evidence for this process is Insurmountable. Its called "Google"... Use it. I'm not a walking Encyclopedia, nor am I a scientist. Another thing. You think its more probable for a Mystical, Intangible, Omnipotent, Omnipresent, All knowing, infinite god created this ENTIRE Universe? Yeah... okay bro, One more thing. You have no evidence of god. There is countless (literally COUNTLESS) amount of evidence for Evolution.
Helldog6 5 days ago
@Helldog6 If matter can neither be created or destroyed than where did the amino acids come from?
ChristianKid99 5 days ago
@ChristianKid99 Dude. I told you. I'm not a scientist. So... I don't know. Still doesn't prove god.
Helldog6 5 days ago
@Helldog6 still doesn't prove evolution, natural selection, or old earth.
ChristianKid99 5 days ago
@ChristianKid99 watch?v=vss1VKN2rf8
tomasusan 5 days ago
@tomasusan THANK YOU!
Helldog6 5 days ago
@ChristianKid99 But the proof of Evolution is there. There is no proof of god. I told you before. Google Evolution and look at the evidence.
Helldog6 5 days ago
@ChristianKid99 So you're an YEC? No wonder you're so pig-headed in your beliefs - you have chosen to ignore all the evidences and shut down your brain.
I feel sorry for you.
AzraelI666 3 days ago
@Helldog6 I'd like to warn you that arguing with most religious people is like trying to halt a tank by throwing individual slices of baloney at it. Wasted effort! If someone is closed minded, uneducated, or uninterested in truth (like ChristianKid99), then arguing with them directly will only cause them to get defensive. You've got to gently lead them out of ignorance and into reality, something very hard to do in YT comments!
tomasusan 5 days ago
@tomasusan True that. I've never thought of it like that. I always pictured them as dragons. I just point my gun, aim, close my eyes, and shoot out facts and problems with religions and hope that maybe one will hit him and then they'll see the REAL light. And its worked... but some people are just immuned to logic.
Helldog6 5 days ago
@Helldog6 Haha, I love the "closed eyes shooting at dragons" imagery.
tomasusan 5 days ago
@tomasusan Wow, resulting to slander? Which one of us isn't openminded?
ChristianKid99 5 days ago
@ChristianKid99 You can only say so many mind-bogglingly stupid things before you deserved to be mocked for the amusement of all... lol (watch?v=-h9XntsSEro)
tomasusan 5 days ago
@ChristianKid99 Response to your comment regarding life from nothing, a little viewing material on abiogenesis.
/watch?v=U6QYDdgP9eg
I consider it sufficiently dumbed down so that you should be able to understand it, but I must warn you that there are some long and technical terms involved.
Hope you take the time to educate yourself.
TheBahamunt 4 days ago
@ChristianKid99
argument from ignorance
... you do this ALOT.
NefariousVirtuoso88 5 days ago
@Grnvolpe Then why would you worship someone who's never done anything for you? Should we worship a God just because we're afraid of what he or she'll do to us if we don't?
UberREDKitteh 6 days ago
@UberREDKitteh No, we should worship God because he gave us life, and he gave his sons to die for our sins so we don't have to go to hell.
ChristianKid99 5 days ago
@ChristianKid99
1- Why should it be a he?
2- So you're telling me you're a coward? Letting people die just so you can get your own little cloud in heaven?
UberREDKitteh 4 days ago
@UberREDKitteh 1. Because in HIS book, the Bible it refers to God THE FATHER. As he. (Duh)
And no, I'm trying to help you guys so you can get your "little cloud in heaven" too. That's why I'm here. Jesus said no one can get to the father except through Jesus. Trust Jesus, please.
ChristianKid99 4 days ago
@ChristianKid99 You misread my 2nd point. I'm not saying you're helping people getting their own little cloud in heaven, I said you were a coward who'd let someone die so YOU could go to heaven.
You're kinda ignorant...Even for a christian.
UberREDKitteh 3 days ago
@Grnvolpe
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?"
- Epicurus
silverwingpegasus 6 days ago
@silverwingpegasus greatest coment ever my friend
len6nar42 6 days ago
@silverwingpegasus While those are indeed words which I favor, this argument was a type favoured by the ancient Greek skeptics, and may have been wrongly attributed to Epicurus by Lactantius, who, from his Christian perspective, regarded Epicurus as an atheist.It has been suggested that it may actually be the work of an early skeptic writer, possibly Carneades. Since those Qs and As are sacred to me, I propound a closer examination of their origins.
khbkb 6 days ago
@silverwingpegasus God is unwilling to prevent evil because he wants humans to have free will. This means they can do whatever they want to do, they are just punished for it. Is it better to choose what you want to do or run around like a robot all day?
ChristianKid99 5 days ago
@ChristianKid99 How you explain the grand plan then? After all, you can't say no to his plan.
silverwingpegasus 4 days ago
you sir just earned yourself a subscriber
IrishAmerican1234 1 week ago
3:20
SigmarusOne 1 week ago
SUBSCRIBED!
spiderskater3 1 week ago
can u explain electricty
Glenforbes60 1 week ago