Dead-to-the-spirit deluded "God Delusion" author & blithering fool scientist goon Richard Dawkins another "leader" given 2 the profane masses is another useful idiot 4 Jesuit machinations
Jesuitical; pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuit Order completely altered the education system 2 suit their Evo-Hoax Agenda to discredit the Bible
Papal Rome cant have their Counter Reformation 2nd Dark Age DESPOTISM until Bible is destroyed
Topics: The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balanceddiet1.yolasite.com etc.
See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc.yolasite.com
or
figure4etc3.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com announcements-balancedway.yolasite.com
dawkins will never disproof religion, but what he claims is that science, if understood, wil open our eyes to a non-religious world. and i think that's the right path
I'm making short comedy skit videos and am partial towards physics and math humor. I'm going around to popular physics/math videos promoting to try to find a crowd that can understand the jokes. If you have some time please check out my channel and the video subatomic particle party, or particle project. Thanks for your time.
@ChuckNorrisKratosLOL "It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it. " - A. Einstein.
@ChuckNorrisKratosLOL Nothing could be further from the truth. "The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this"
@ChuckNorrisKratosLOL That depends on how you define "religious". Einstein was a pantheist, which is very different from being a theist who worships and pray to a personal god.
@ChuckNorrisKratosLOL Einstein never claimed to be religious? thats the total opposite actually, he went through some serious scrutiny over remarks he made about religion. In the end he never verified what he truly believed in. Youd know this if you were a little more open minded. I suggest you reading the God Delusion
@ShietEverywhere man what a very stupid thing you just said more open minded read the god delusion. Dawkins is so one sided the ship is tipping over and sinking. einstein was smart he wasn t atheist or pantheist or anything he didn t want to be the center of attention and sway people on such things as religion. completely unlike the useless dawkins
@joywonder well have you read that book? cuz if you havent then your ignorance would contradict the statement you made about me saying something "stupid." and if you have read the book then you would realize at no point does Dawkins say that god does not exist, instead he states why it is improbable for there to be a god. He himself has stated that if someone could prove that there was a god without any doubt, then he would gladly accept it.
@ShietEverywhere truely I should not have said stupid sorry. weither or not Dawkins would accept god if god was proven to him does not make him not close minded he openly insults all the religions he can think of, laughs in the face of earnest people ect, ect. That is so close minded and biggoted, to think other wise is not being honest.
@joywonder its all good man, its nice to have a more rational person that wouldnt be offended to discuss these kinda things with. However, i dont think its being closed minded. I see it more as being logical. How would you explain the supernatural? and the answer "you cant, its supernatural" to me is just an excuse used by people who simply cant justify the existence of said supernatural being.
@ShietEverywhere I can see what you are saying and some might not look for ways to truely expain the supernatural. I used to say why explain it its god working. but now people are finding lost cities,lost names and lost ideas in the bible that weren t realized before. Dawkins however truely has a call to arms,wants to get rid of religion, relies on insults and ridicule he once retified his 99.9% and made it 100% for bill maher
Singularity in observance and the illusion of freedom in the perspective of the observer must have sth to do with it. But than the 'self' observes and defines simultanuously, and could be therefore affected in the multiplication of his or her defining the singularity within the act of observing. This one is difficult to crack.
Read Landau and Lifshitz: Quantum Theory is not "how the quantum world works". It is how we make measurements of a world we cannot interact with. That's why it's so mysterious and stupifying.. We're using a purely probabilistic theory to interact with the quantum world, because that's the only way we know how.. If Griffiths' Q.M. book questions whether in the future we'll look back and wonder how naive we were? Dawkins should stick to biology.
Quantum uncertainty and indeterminism does not reflect our 'lack' of knowledge about the nature of universe it actually reflects The knowledge that we have. Its like "we know that we cannot know beyond this limit". And the limit is that we can only predict about the averages of experimental observations and not about individual quantum events. QM makes it clear by the Bell's theorem that there is NO physical law or mechanism that decides the individual results.
Quantum mechanics shows clearly that if we try to prove existence of any attribute in the universe with 100% accuracy, the experiment will fail. God can either exist or not exists, so every theory, explaination and seek for evidence will conclude in uncertainty, even the answer is yes or no. If God doesn't exist, you cannot prove it, because it's not God that is the problem: We cannot prove anything that at all, only saying "probably" or "not likely".
Is Richard Dawkins a douche? He probably acts like one. Did he make absolute statements like humans being seeded from aliens or shit like that? He probably DIDN'T.
Stop.
Fucking.
Quote mining.
Stop.
Taking.
People's words.
OUT. OF. THEIR. ORIGINAL. CONTEXT ARGHHHH!
I'm sick of smug theists saying "oh he once made a hypothetical statement, that must be his primary opinion lololololol"
What the hell!! what does this man know about qed?!?!?! In fact, what does he know about science? he is probable the most unscientific scientist there is.
@Tait011 I've seen him dismissed so many hypotheses simply because he doesn't "believe" in them, the "god hypothesis" is a good example. Dismissing without knowing is the most unscientific approach to science. Besides, who told this man that science can prove or disprove the existence of God? where did he read that, did he learn that while he was studying theory of evolution?
@mutichurrasco Exactly! God does exist, and it is the FSM! Stupid religions giving credit to their false gods simply because they either never heard of the FSM or don't believe in it. Stupid science too, in that regard. That's so disgustingly wrong! Why can't people open their eyes!? The fact that there is religion is proof that FSM is the one true god! It's true! You can't disprove it, so believe it! But stupid people don't understand that if they can't disprove the FSM they should worship him.
@mutichurrasco "Dismissing without knowing is the most unscientific approach to science"
no, the scientific approach is people making a claim (a hypothesis) then collecting evidence and demonstrating that the evidence supports their hypothesis. then people accept that the theory is true until new evidence comes to light.
tell me, when someone tells you there are unicorns do you feel you have to search the planet for unicorns before you can dismiss this hypothesis?
@AussiePolitics Don't know about Unicorns but listen: has ten indistinguishable appendages which all appear the same length and which radiate from the main axis of the body like spokes on a bicycle wheel. All of the appendages have a sharp bend, like an elbow, from which the rest of the arm hangs straight down. Other particularly "weird" features are the two enormous fins that stick out from a comparatively tiny body. The two fins are like elephant ears that flap as the creature floats around.
@AussiePolitics So you must be thinking WTF? what I'm trying to show is that if someone had told me such a creature existed (and it does exist BTW, this is the description of a deep sea squid discovered in 2001) I would've been skeptical. My point is science hasn't been able to replicate life in the lab, and while that doesn't happen we have to leave the door to the unknown ajar, we shouldn't be so quick to dismiss. I'm equally open to a Creator as I am to life being chemistry and nothing else
@AussiePolitics We should approach all hypotheses on the origin of life with caution, and dismiss none. In this particular case I would apply the following :"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence". So let's keep searching for the truth until the truth is revelaed, then sicence can tick that box and move forward.
@mutichurrasco just because we dont know how something happened doesn't mean that we automatically say "right god did it". there is no evidence for it, so why should anyone believe it until there is?
"sicence can tick that box and move forward"
thats the problem tho, whenever 'scientists' say that god did something science does NOT go forward. it stagnates and we dont learn anything else. as science has advanced the areas we used to believe god had a hand in have grown smaller and smaller.
@AussiePolitics The truth is what matters, if there is no room for God in the Universe so be it, but there are too many unsolved misteries out there, the origin of life is one of them. And until science finds the answer I'll keep an open mind. You don't know anything about the origin of life and choose not to believe, I don't know and I choose to believe, it's called faith.
@mutichurrasco faith is what people have done for thousands of years from the very beginning when they did not know where thunder came from and thought there was a god up in the sky making the noise. the default position should always be "I don't know" because we honestly don't. however saying "god did it" has always been the lazy human way of trying to "understand" the universe because it has never told us anything at all
@mutichurrasco Science knows, and has knows about the origin of life for a long time. In fact there are multiple possible sources for organic mollecule development on primordial earth. It's just a matter of time, and we've had plenty.
Respond to this video... Because he is not that smart.... Like a lot of folks do who are educated beyond their intelligence... he simply ACTS arrogant in order to LOOK smart! LOL!!!
This method really does work. In business, government, religion, sheeple follow these blokes ALL THE TIME!
Why does he always have to sound like a stuck up headmaster finger wagging at people. At least Richard Feynman had a sense of humour, I'd bet he'd be the one firing spit balls at Dawkins from the back of the room.
quantum theory and mechanics scares Dawkins. because many of the quantum theories state that what we see as solid is not. and that there are multiple dimensions on earth at the same time. This would severly fuck up all of what dawkins believes.. much like what he thinks that evolutions fucks up what christians believe. kind of ironic, isnt it?
@postmasterw00t You have no idea, you probably see it that way because hes hurt your feelings somehow (godlover?), hes constantly telling the story of an old scientist he knew that devoted his life to a particular idea then was gratified to be proven wrong
ANYONE CAN TELL A SENTIMENTAL STORY, dawkins a whinghey, negative, rude prick, doesnt matter if hes hindu,lucifarian, jewish or an atheist...hes a pompous dickhead.
hes a closed minded douchebag and you should remove your cock from his ass
your a braindead pompus moron who cant accept others may have a different opinion than yourself even though your worldview is likely just as much up for debate as anyone elses. Personally im happy for everyone to have their own opinions, you should get laid and stop trying to thrust your bratwurst into dawkins colon
@postmasterw00t Start an argument with you?! You made a completely unfounded claim, I corrected you (without a harsh word), you responded by calling Richard Dawkins a "dickhead" and then suggested my cock was in his ass lol.
Correcting my spelling is smarmy too, you clearly knew what i meant but had to find whatever leverage you could to help yourself feel vindicated in the argument. I merely voiced an opinion and you took exception,i dont see why you are getting so worked up, its irrelevant really, peace.
Well thats good i think to truly understand the world we have to explore our own consiousness and embrace cold hard science but also philosophy and ideas/theories.
@postmasterw00t Yeah, I have no idea what that argument was about lol (I clearly have too much time on my hands, embarassing...). Just me wanting to look like the winner in some pointless exchange.
Yeah, exploration is the only way forward, im not even sure what the destination will look like. Just finding fruits in the journey.
Im surprised at the level of humility you have shown here, i appologise also for being too rude in my comments, i erspect humility it is one of the finest virtues a human can have.
People like dawkins , and other comments here that say "quantum physics must be right" do not seem to grasp the fact that it explains nothing. It goes a very short way to maybe say how,but that is all.
Stating "quantum physics must be right" means nothing,its like saying rainbows must be right,for example.
Must dawkins always generalise when he steps outside his own field.Stick to your own reasonable knowledge of biology sir.
@TimCOM62 Quantum physics explains and predicts the behaviour (to a mystifying order of accuracy) of not only the atom and its constituents but also other fundamental particles such as the photon.
In other words it explains the behaviour of both light and matter. Given that pretty much accounts for our entire experience of the universe I'd say quantum theory explains quite a lot.
This *is* my field and I can confirm that Professor Dawkins is sufficiently qualified to make this 80 second analogy.
@BrandNewLtd Actually,quantum physics/mechanics says many things,as it is a field of physics with many opposing theories.If we accept the copenhagen ideas,as most modern scientests do,we have to conclude that in fact,predicting what particles will do next is as hard as predicting how many lives a cat has . (Being your field,Im sure you get the allusion)
@VMG934 Obviously it is not possible (nor was it intended) to reproduce the field of quantum physics in a YouTube post, anymore than in the video here.
The predictive power of quantum theory *is not* the ability to predict the position of a fundamental particle, which is known to be impossible under the conditions of Heisenberg's uncertainty principal.
Using methods such as density functional theory, it is able to produce incredibly accurate predictions about larger objects such as molecules.
@VMG934 By the way, the allusion to Schrodinger's cat seems out of place. It was never concerned with determining the number of lives a cat had (nor in fact, as is commonly erroneously believed - whether a cat in a box is alive or dead until you open the lid)
It is far less general than most people believe and is concerned with the effect of observation on specific unpredictable events such as radioactive decay.
@BrandNewLtd This is strange but my reply to your comment seems to have vmg934s name to it . I do not believe the allusion to Schrodinger's cat is out of place.
Yes,quantum physics does make predictions that are observable.However this is not to say it offers a sort of panacea to finding a "unified theory." Was it Bohr who said that sometimes it seems that the sub atomic world is waiting to be observerved before it decides how to react.
@BrandNewLtd Also,given that light and matter is now believed in fact to make up
a very small part of the universe,Id say quantum physics is only just starting to scratch the surface. As you know,there are a dozen or so opposing theories re.quantum mechanics,as I said the copenhagen theory being the generally accepted one,string,super string,multiverse,broglie / Bohm,decoherence,historical consistancy, et al.being others.Anyone who can read could make this 80 sec analogy,point is , so what?
@TimCOM62 I don't want a debate about the nature of quantum theory... it's not relevant here. Dawkins is not giving a lecture on Quantum physics. It was never his intention to elucidate anything that goes on at the level of fundamental particles or why.
The reason for him talking about this is two-fold:
1, as a contrast to his oft-made point that the scale of the error in the belief that the Earth is 10,000 years old is equivalent to believing America is yards across.
Wel I keep getting 'Error. Try again'' if I try to post the above. So maybe with a few added unnecessary words I can get it posted. 286 characters remaining
2, to make the point that just because we do not understand something fully, that does not mean it is without merit.
He is entitled to use quantum physics as an analogy to make his point without a comprehensive description of the various arguments supporting it.
This, by definition, is what an analogy is.
If I were to describe the phenomenon of discrete energy levels in quantum physics using the analogy of a staircase I would not be obliged to have a full understanding of architecture.
@TimCOM62 But he has done great work in terms of trying to educate the masses, who are willfully ignorant about many scientific theories like evolution (especially in the states). And he should be creditet for that.
@knuthoem85 I would suggest that many educated scientests are willfully ignorant about any field outside their own. I would suggest also that most non biologists("the masses" and "scientests" alike) are pretty ignorant about evolution,apart from a relatively basic understanding,despite the fact that one group has read some peer reviewed works.
@TimCOM62 Dawkins scientific work has, lately, been in popularising science (like Sagan, DeGrasse etc.) . Bringing biology to the public. This is what he has been hired for, and it is an important task for any research institution, and the scientific advances Dawkins makes lies in increasing the knowledge of evolution to among non-biologists.
Physicists like Einstein had to struggle to reconcile their ordinary intuitions with the evidence of their equations. Dr. Feynman happily gave up the struggle. He and the physicists of his generation made peace with a way of describing nature that only explained how, not why.
Much of what he accomplished he would admit to not understanding. ''I can live with doubt and uncertainty,'' he once said. ''I think it's much more interesting to live not knowing than to have answers which might be wrong.
''I don't feel frightened by not knowing things, by being lost in a mysterious universe without any purpose, which is the way it really is, so far as I can tell,'' he added. ''It doesn't frighten me.''
''I think it's much more interesting to live not knowing than to have answers which might be wrong. I don't feel frightened by not knowing things, by being lost in a mysterious universe......"
Hahahahahahahaha! He was fighting with the reality of FREE WILL - which he simply couldn't bring himself to adopt as an explanation for what he was seeing in quantum mechanics - although it was and IS the BEST POSSIBLE EXPLANATION of the data! Hahahahahahahahaha!
How people PRONOUNCED CLINICALLY DEAD but STILL are able to have vivid experiences is something that should give pause for thought to those declaring the Afterlife doesn't exist - and that consciousness is merely a product of brain activity! But, of-course, they're FAR TOO STUPID to give serious consideration to such things! Hahahahahahahah! Their excuse for faggotry is too important to them and might be undermined! Hahahahahahahha!
what the heck has "Faggotry" to do with any of this?
you retard.
Fear of what is to come? what? death? it's just natural to fear death, you moron. if you don't your life won't last long. or you'll waste your time praying to a made up bullshit story instead of learning and using your life for something useful.
Hahahahahahaha! You're not looking forward to what is coming to you, are you, dolt? Hahahahahahahaha! What ARE you losing YOUR life for - FAGGOTRY? Hahahahahahahahahah!
I asked creationists to stop posting bullshit at one Richard Dawkins video and they started posting at my home and threatening me. When I wrote back, I was blocked. Real Christ-like. How about those entangled particles? We were all entangled at the singularity or pre-bang state of anti-particles.
@cletusnze That's my point, Clitty. You blocked me at your home. I ignore you and you come into my home with that stupid bullshit. It's still fantasy, boy. How about an intelligent comment on the fact that the universities of the world disagree with you. Go ahead. I'll wait. How about those entangled particles. You respond with dolt, like a christian. Yelling bullshit. hahahahahahfuku
No, bonehead! What would be significant is if you could present the LOGICAL REASONING behind the arguments of those who oppose Intelligent Design! What is it? Do YOU know?
By the way, it is NOT true that ALL the universities of the world are opposed to Intelligent Design. The US is NOT the whole, dolt!
@cletusnze Hi, Clitty, I missed you. Thought you grew a brain. ID is bullshit. We don't allow it here. We had that trial. What else. Fuck you, idiot. You wouldn't say shit to me in person. You're the dumbest white man I've ever heard of. Which universities? None of you fucks answered that. hahahahabonehead,fucu
@doncourtreporter Intelligent design. That's clitty's response to my challenge to name a university on Planet Earth who agrees with him. No theological schools, please, since they don't count as bona fide institutes of high learning. That's lower learning. hahahaha. Bring it on, boy. Bonehead, dolt, idiot, fuck nut. That's clitty's language. He might not understand me if I omit the insults. How about some quantum instruction from you. Teach me something.
Hahahahahahahahah! You just want to waste time with a endless back and forth denying that ANY university I cite in my support was actually in support of ID. What is more useful is to explain the flaws in the Darwinian Mechanisms of Random Mutation and Natural Selection exposed by Behe and his colleagues!
@cletusnze Hey, Clitty, what problem are you referring to regarding entangled particles and me? Do you have pressure on your brain, man? Give me something to respect you for, like some fucking new information. Why are particles apparently communicating at a distance? Hurry up, bitch. After five hours, my kids could answer me.
Hahahahahahahahah! That's because they ARE a unified entity, dolt! They only appear to be separated but are actually connected via their wave-functions! You haven't heard of particle-wave duality, have you, dolt?
And, please, I don't need your respect - not whilst you find yourself INCAPABLE of respecting Truth! Hahahahahahaha!
@cletusnze Yeah, we've got wave function over here, too. I'm astonished, no kidding, that a man who can understand wave function believes ghost stories. Your religion is total bullshit and you know it. That's funny, to call it particle wave duality. Only took a few hours for you. Good work. Keep it up. You're the best thing about some of the Dawkins sites. Can't stop laughing. Keep up the dolt, dolt, dolt. hahahahahaha. You're cute. How old?
Hahahahaha! On the contrary, if you really understood things like wave-functions and quatised space-time, why would you think that ghosts are strange, bonehead? It's all very well googling and cutting and pasting stuff from the internet - quite another REALLY UNDERSTANDING the material you've accessed! People like you remind me of ignorant peasants living on land rich in diamonds and using the precious rocks to for their building projects - not knowing their value! Hahahahah!
@cletusnze Yeah, I guess I don't get wave function since you say so. That's your philosophy, whatever you say. You're a little girl inside, bitch. How about those universities that agree with you. That shut you up, didn't it? hahaha doltfucku. You did not and could not answer that simple question, you fucking idiot. Ha. Come on, smart ass, let's curse at one another since you can't cite one university which agrees with your phony, vile religion. Let's compare income. ha.
Hahahahahahahah! Ok, I'll mention one university: Meerut Institute of Technology in India! Now how do you propose to check on them, dolt? Hahahahahahaha!
@cletusnze Thanks. You win. Now I believe in God. You convinced me with your filthy Eastern ways. Ha. You a Beatles fan? If you're right, one in 25,000 ain't bad.
You're pretty cool, Clitty. Keep it up. The insults really convinced me that God is the only way. A man your age who introduces himself by insulting strangers must be connected to the mob. hahaha. cya.
@cletusnze Poor Clitty. I made an effort to befriend you. You'll say don't befriend me, dolt. But you lied to us again. Meerut University does not agree with your bullshit. Here are the programs offered: Botany, microbiology, statistics, math, physics, zoology, toxicology, chemistry, English, history, phychology, Languages, etc. No god there. Fail. I don't like you anymore. Clitty, you lied to me. I'm hurt.
@cletusnze Clitty, now I'm disappointed with you. You lied through your teeth. I checked the programs they offered in about two minutes, and god ain't there. I realized you'd lie about your major premise, you'd lie about anything. No offense, that's so weak, and I'm so old, I can't play with you anymore. You're no fun. hahaha.
Hahahahahahahah! Don't be stupid! Are you saying you were actually looking for a course called "God"? Hahahahahahahah! What a bonehead! They DO have courses in Cosmology - in their physics department. Now go look at the research programs there! Hahahahahahah!
@cletusnze That's what you would think with limited capacity. God must be covered in Cosmology now. You're a buffoon. You must be doing this for amusement. Don't be stupid. Are you saying you thought I was looking for a course called "God." See how fucked up you are? No university on Planet Earth agrees with you that god exists. No theological schools or ballet schools, please. Nothing has changed. You're delusional.
Hahahahahahahahah! What a bonehead! You think that ALL the lecturers in India's universities are atheists? Hahahahhhahahah! What an IMBECILE! Hahahahahahahaha!
He said universities are not theist. This does not imply that all of it's lecturers are atheist, but that it adopts an atheist or god-neutral policy. To ask if god exists is not even a scientific question, so it would be silly for a university to even take a position on it.
You would, of course, resort to this ridiculous form of internet ridicule in an attempt to demean your opponents position, when you know you're being dishonest.
Don't be stupid! A god-neutral policy is NOT atheistic but AGNOSTIC! And the idea that asking about Ultimate Reality is not scientific is idiotic in the extreme! That IS what science is ALL ABOUT - the search for Ultimate Reality! Sheeeesh! These crazy brain-crippled atheistic IMBECILES! Hahahahahahahahaha!
Did you even read my post? Try addressing what I actually said, and not whatever you want to make up. I said atheist OR god-neutral. I didn't say god-neutral IS atheist. (A policy/person/whatever can be atheist and agnostic at the same time by the way)
God is a supernatural concept which is, in fact, DEFINED to be outside of the physical realm which can be investigated by science. If you cannot respond without childish remarks and insults, this will be my last comment to you.
No, dolt! It's NOT POSSIBLE to be atheist and agnostic at the same time! To be atheist is to COMMIT to a view about the Existence of God. And agnistic is UNCOMMITTED! Neither is supernatural defined as being outside what can be investigated by science but only what APPEARS so!
You atheists and your ridiculous complaints about language make me want to puke at the hypocrisy of it! NO ONE misuses language more than you do!
You're committing a definitional fallacy. That is not the definition of atheism used by most atheists, and you CAN be atheist and agnostic at the same time. Agnosticism IS NOT a view about the existence of god, it is an epistemological view about knowledge.
I am an agnostic atheist with respect to gods not developed from religion. I do not believe in god, but I acknowledge that there is a small possibility that a god may exist. Atheism/Theism comes in varying degrees of certainty.
As I've said: Atheism pertains to belief, agnosticism pertains to knowledge. They are not mutually exclusive. You can be Agnostic, you can be agnostic, you can also be both. (Same applies to theism)
They come in different degrees of certainty. Most atheists don't claim that there is no god, but that they don't believe in one (Agnostic Atheists). Some atheists do claim that there is no god - these are GNOSTIC Atheists.
Dictionaries are just descriptions of what words mean - they don't "know" anything. I haven't even said anything that contradicts the dictionary. You don't have to be absolute in your disbelief. To say otherwise would be a false dichotomy (Or false trichotomy if you include agnosticism?). There is more than just absolute belief or disbelief, but many stages in between as well.
Quantum Mechanics is the branch of physics that deals with the behaviour of matter and radiation at the most fundamental level - where wave-particle duality is strongly manifest.
Wave duality implies random patterns. With zero deliberate cause.
Behaviour of matter also proves there is no such thing as deliberate. you can't tell the momentum and position at the same time. that explain a universe with zero superntatural intervention.
You're just waffling inanely, dolt! You're UTTERLY out of your depth here! You even think the laws of physics are made up by humans, rather than discovered, don't you? hahahahahahahaha! And your assertion that NOTHING is deliberate just reveals you're nothing but a LUNATIC! I suppose the decisions you apparently make are actually coming from the demons that possess you, eh faggot? Hahahahahahahah!
i can't define what? we both know i can. We both know that ANY definition doesn't mean the object define is real. We both know that ALL of my arguments are EMPIRICALLY true, and in an Empirical point of logic, that's ALL that matters in matters of Practical Reason.
Kant said it perfectly: God is not the matter of Reason, but of the Methaphysical.
It's obvious that God or any other god are pure made up crap.
This has been flagged as spam show
Dead-to-the-spirit deluded "God Delusion" author & blithering fool scientist goon Richard Dawkins another "leader" given 2 the profane masses is another useful idiot 4 Jesuit machinations
Jesuitical; pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuit Order completely altered the education system 2 suit their Evo-Hoax Agenda to discredit the Bible
Papal Rome cant have their Counter Reformation 2nd Dark Age DESPOTISM until Bible is destroyed
SpencerBenedict2nd 4 months ago
NEW BOOK FOR DEBATES AND GOVERNANCE
Topics: The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balanceddiet1.yolasite.com etc.
See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc.yolasite.com
or
figure4etc3.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com announcements-balancedway.yolasite.com
TheServiceWeb 6 months ago
The New Age philosophers took the incomprehensibility of quantum theory and ran into woo woo land with it a la. Deepak Chopra and co.
Mrmoc7 7 months ago
that fish did not talk to me, I'm not on pot again, I'm not I'm not I'm not I'm not
aierce 7 months ago
@aierce you hallucinate when you smoke pot?
afatdutch 7 months ago
@afatdutch Da fish said YO!
aierce 7 months ago
dawkins will never disproof religion, but what he claims is that science, if understood, wil open our eyes to a non-religious world. and i think that's the right path
23noszz 8 months ago
I'm making short comedy skit videos and am partial towards physics and math humor. I'm going around to popular physics/math videos promoting to try to find a crowd that can understand the jokes. If you have some time please check out my channel and the video subatomic particle party, or particle project. Thanks for your time.
BendableCard 11 months ago
@ChuckNorrisKratosLOL "It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it. " - A. Einstein.
lormendi 11 months ago
@ChuckNorrisKratosLOL Nothing could be further from the truth. "The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this"
Doesnt seem religious to me at all.
lormendi 11 months ago
Quantum Ass in Quantum Cock
gen6k 11 months ago
@ChuckNorrisKratosLOL That depends on how you define "religious". Einstein was a pantheist, which is very different from being a theist who worships and pray to a personal god.
gupsphoo 1 year ago
@ChuckNorrisKratosLOL lol...im glad we had this educated debate...you opened my eyes in ways no one will ever comprehend
ShietEverywhere 1 year ago
@ChuckNorrisKratosLOL Einstein never claimed to be religious? thats the total opposite actually, he went through some serious scrutiny over remarks he made about religion. In the end he never verified what he truly believed in. Youd know this if you were a little more open minded. I suggest you reading the God Delusion
ShietEverywhere 1 year ago
@ShietEverywhere man what a very stupid thing you just said more open minded read the god delusion. Dawkins is so one sided the ship is tipping over and sinking. einstein was smart he wasn t atheist or pantheist or anything he didn t want to be the center of attention and sway people on such things as religion. completely unlike the useless dawkins
joywonder 1 year ago
@joywonder well have you read that book? cuz if you havent then your ignorance would contradict the statement you made about me saying something "stupid." and if you have read the book then you would realize at no point does Dawkins say that god does not exist, instead he states why it is improbable for there to be a god. He himself has stated that if someone could prove that there was a god without any doubt, then he would gladly accept it.
ShietEverywhere 1 year ago
@ShietEverywhere truely I should not have said stupid sorry. weither or not Dawkins would accept god if god was proven to him does not make him not close minded he openly insults all the religions he can think of, laughs in the face of earnest people ect, ect. That is so close minded and biggoted, to think other wise is not being honest.
joywonder 1 year ago
@joywonder its all good man, its nice to have a more rational person that wouldnt be offended to discuss these kinda things with. However, i dont think its being closed minded. I see it more as being logical. How would you explain the supernatural? and the answer "you cant, its supernatural" to me is just an excuse used by people who simply cant justify the existence of said supernatural being.
ShietEverywhere 1 year ago
@ShietEverywhere I can see what you are saying and some might not look for ways to truely expain the supernatural. I used to say why explain it its god working. but now people are finding lost cities,lost names and lost ideas in the bible that weren t realized before. Dawkins however truely has a call to arms,wants to get rid of religion, relies on insults and ridicule he once retified his 99.9% and made it 100% for bill maher
joywonder 1 year ago
Singularity in observance and the illusion of freedom in the perspective of the observer must have sth to do with it. But than the 'self' observes and defines simultanuously, and could be therefore affected in the multiplication of his or her defining the singularity within the act of observing. This one is difficult to crack.
Joke9972 1 year ago
Read Landau and Lifshitz: Quantum Theory is not "how the quantum world works". It is how we make measurements of a world we cannot interact with. That's why it's so mysterious and stupifying.. We're using a purely probabilistic theory to interact with the quantum world, because that's the only way we know how.. If Griffiths' Q.M. book questions whether in the future we'll look back and wonder how naive we were? Dawkins should stick to biology.
Ikjyot 1 year ago
Quantum uncertainty and indeterminism does not reflect our 'lack' of knowledge about the nature of universe it actually reflects The knowledge that we have. Its like "we know that we cannot know beyond this limit". And the limit is that we can only predict about the averages of experimental observations and not about individual quantum events. QM makes it clear by the Bell's theorem that there is NO physical law or mechanism that decides the individual results.
bachelor2009 1 year ago
Quantum mechanics shows clearly that if we try to prove existence of any attribute in the universe with 100% accuracy, the experiment will fail. God can either exist or not exists, so every theory, explaination and seek for evidence will conclude in uncertainty, even the answer is yes or no. If God doesn't exist, you cannot prove it, because it's not God that is the problem: We cannot prove anything that at all, only saying "probably" or "not likely".
bvssvni 1 year ago
Is Richard Dawkins a douche? He probably acts like one. Did he make absolute statements like humans being seeded from aliens or shit like that? He probably DIDN'T.
Stop.
Fucking.
Quote mining.
Stop.
Taking.
People's words.
OUT. OF. THEIR. ORIGINAL. CONTEXT ARGHHHH!
I'm sick of smug theists saying "oh he once made a hypothetical statement, that must be his primary opinion lololololol"
rukifellthcreuz 1 year ago
What the hell!! what does this man know about qed?!?!?! In fact, what does he know about science? he is probable the most unscientific scientist there is.
mutichurrasco 1 year ago
@mutichurrasco
On what assumption do you
state such a claim??
Tait011 1 year ago
@Tait011 I've seen him dismissed so many hypotheses simply because he doesn't "believe" in them, the "god hypothesis" is a good example. Dismissing without knowing is the most unscientific approach to science. Besides, who told this man that science can prove or disprove the existence of God? where did he read that, did he learn that while he was studying theory of evolution?
mutichurrasco 1 year ago
@mutichurrasco Exactly! God does exist, and it is the FSM! Stupid religions giving credit to their false gods simply because they either never heard of the FSM or don't believe in it. Stupid science too, in that regard. That's so disgustingly wrong! Why can't people open their eyes!? The fact that there is religion is proof that FSM is the one true god! It's true! You can't disprove it, so believe it! But stupid people don't understand that if they can't disprove the FSM they should worship him.
blazearmoru 1 year ago
@mutichurrasco "Dismissing without knowing is the most unscientific approach to science"
no, the scientific approach is people making a claim (a hypothesis) then collecting evidence and demonstrating that the evidence supports their hypothesis. then people accept that the theory is true until new evidence comes to light.
tell me, when someone tells you there are unicorns do you feel you have to search the planet for unicorns before you can dismiss this hypothesis?
AussiePolitics 1 year ago
@AussiePolitics Don't know about Unicorns but listen: has ten indistinguishable appendages which all appear the same length and which radiate from the main axis of the body like spokes on a bicycle wheel. All of the appendages have a sharp bend, like an elbow, from which the rest of the arm hangs straight down. Other particularly "weird" features are the two enormous fins that stick out from a comparatively tiny body. The two fins are like elephant ears that flap as the creature floats around.
mutichurrasco 1 year ago
@AussiePolitics So you must be thinking WTF? what I'm trying to show is that if someone had told me such a creature existed (and it does exist BTW, this is the description of a deep sea squid discovered in 2001) I would've been skeptical. My point is science hasn't been able to replicate life in the lab, and while that doesn't happen we have to leave the door to the unknown ajar, we shouldn't be so quick to dismiss. I'm equally open to a Creator as I am to life being chemistry and nothing else
mutichurrasco 1 year ago
@AussiePolitics We should approach all hypotheses on the origin of life with caution, and dismiss none. In this particular case I would apply the following :"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence". So let's keep searching for the truth until the truth is revelaed, then sicence can tick that box and move forward.
mutichurrasco 1 year ago
@mutichurrasco just because we dont know how something happened doesn't mean that we automatically say "right god did it". there is no evidence for it, so why should anyone believe it until there is?
"sicence can tick that box and move forward"
thats the problem tho, whenever 'scientists' say that god did something science does NOT go forward. it stagnates and we dont learn anything else. as science has advanced the areas we used to believe god had a hand in have grown smaller and smaller.
AussiePolitics 1 year ago
@AussiePolitics The truth is what matters, if there is no room for God in the Universe so be it, but there are too many unsolved misteries out there, the origin of life is one of them. And until science finds the answer I'll keep an open mind. You don't know anything about the origin of life and choose not to believe, I don't know and I choose to believe, it's called faith.
mutichurrasco 1 year ago
@mutichurrasco faith is what people have done for thousands of years from the very beginning when they did not know where thunder came from and thought there was a god up in the sky making the noise. the default position should always be "I don't know" because we honestly don't. however saying "god did it" has always been the lazy human way of trying to "understand" the universe because it has never told us anything at all
AussiePolitics 1 year ago
@mutichurrasco Science knows, and has knows about the origin of life for a long time. In fact there are multiple possible sources for organic mollecule development on primordial earth. It's just a matter of time, and we've had plenty.
WTFNoNamesLeft2 1 year ago
@mutichurrasco LOOK! Richard Dawkins said that he can explain the lack of problems of evolution by Little Green Men.
Seriously. He says the earth was seeded by Aliens...
SO WHERE DID THE ALIENS COME FROM??
A preacher standing behind a pulpit making fun of Evolutionists IS NOT evidence against evolution.... and visa versa.
loggerbuck 1 year ago
Hi, I have never heard him say that to be honest.But I agree with you that making fun of peoples beliefs doesn't mean those beliefs are wrong.
mutichurrasco 1 year ago
Respond to this video... Because he is not that smart.... Like a lot of folks do who are educated beyond their intelligence... he simply ACTS arrogant in order to LOOK smart! LOL!!!
This method really does work. In business, government, religion, sheeple follow these blokes ALL THE TIME!
loggerbuck 1 year ago
Why does he always have to sound like a stuck up headmaster finger wagging at people. At least Richard Feynman had a sense of humour, I'd bet he'd be the one firing spit balls at Dawkins from the back of the room.
DJSpinoza 1 year ago
i didn't realise dawkins had any quantum mechanical pedigree?
jimmyshitbags 1 year ago
Gee...
I've read Feynman's books too. I can quote him too. Maybe I should be a Master Debater... like this nut.
InaneRex 1 year ago
@daemonowner - would it make any difference to you,, i think not,,!
SovereignBeing 1 year ago
he is a patronizing godless prick who deserves to be sent straight to hell..
with that up himself toff arrogant ' isnt one so educated, one went to harrow' accent,
we can tell he has bearly evolved from the serpents that he claims are his ancestors.. !
SovereignBeing 1 year ago
@SovereignBeing guess what, i'm a psychic: i can use my mysterious powers and your comment to identify that you are an ignorant christian!
daemonowner 1 year ago
@daemonowner lol wrong! guess your demons got to u...!
SovereignBeing 1 year ago
@SovereignBeing so you aren't a christian? really?
daemonowner 1 year ago
What a stoner
DougieG75 1 year ago
quantum theory and mechanics scares Dawkins. because many of the quantum theories state that what we see as solid is not. and that there are multiple dimensions on earth at the same time. This would severly fuck up all of what dawkins believes.. much like what he thinks that evolutions fucks up what christians believe. kind of ironic, isnt it?
zeineguy 1 year ago
"This would severly fuck up all of what dawkins believes."
dawkins has stated repeatetly that he is only interested in the truth whatever it may turn out to be
if it tuns out that dawkins was wrong about a subject he will be glad to hear it so he can get a little closer to the truth
Dreamerx47 1 year ago 31
@Dreamerx47
i think if the truth is not what he wants it to be he will be gutted though, he is very negative as a person
postmasterw00t 6 months ago
@postmasterw00t You have no idea, you probably see it that way because hes hurt your feelings somehow (godlover?), hes constantly telling the story of an old scientist he knew that devoted his life to a particular idea then was gratified to be proven wrong
mehico33 5 months ago
@mehico33
when did i say i believed in a "god" ???
ANYONE CAN TELL A SENTIMENTAL STORY, dawkins a whinghey, negative, rude prick, doesnt matter if hes hindu,lucifarian, jewish or an atheist...hes a pompous dickhead.
hes a closed minded douchebag and you should remove your cock from his ass
postmasterw00t 5 months ago
Comment removed
mehico33 5 months ago
@mehico33
your a braindead pompus moron who cant accept others may have a different opinion than yourself even though your worldview is likely just as much up for debate as anyone elses. Personally im happy for everyone to have their own opinions, you should get laid and stop trying to thrust your bratwurst into dawkins colon
postmasterw00t 5 months ago
Comment removed
mehico33 5 months ago
@mehico33
Well why diddnt you take your parents advice in the first place and not start an argument with me?
postmasterw00t 5 months ago
@postmasterw00t Start an argument with you?! You made a completely unfounded claim, I corrected you (without a harsh word), you responded by calling Richard Dawkins a "dickhead" and then suggested my cock was in his ass lol.
You fuckin started the argument!
mehico33 5 months ago
@mehico33 "You have no idea, you probably see it that way because hes hurt your feelings somehow (godlover?),"
if thats not smarmy and presumptious i dont know what is, you have lost, just move on and moan at somebody else, jeesh.
postmasterw00t 5 months ago
Comment removed
mehico33 5 months ago
@mehico33
Correcting my spelling is smarmy too, you clearly knew what i meant but had to find whatever leverage you could to help yourself feel vindicated in the argument. I merely voiced an opinion and you took exception,i dont see why you are getting so worked up, its irrelevant really, peace.
postmasterw00t 5 months ago
Comment removed
mehico33 5 months ago
@mehico33 Have you even taken DMT?
postmasterw00t 5 months ago
@postmasterw00t Only once, then was caught cooking up a batch by my mother (thought I was cooking meth) and got into a lot of shit lol.
Id like to try it again but ill have to wait until I can cook up another batch safely, saving for a sensory deprivation tank too haha
mehico33 4 months ago
@mehico33
Well thats good i think to truly understand the world we have to explore our own consiousness and embrace cold hard science but also philosophy and ideas/theories.
postmasterw00t 4 months ago
@postmasterw00t Yeah, I have no idea what that argument was about lol (I clearly have too much time on my hands, embarassing...). Just me wanting to look like the winner in some pointless exchange.
Yeah, exploration is the only way forward, im not even sure what the destination will look like. Just finding fruits in the journey.
mehico33 4 months ago
@mehico33
Im surprised at the level of humility you have shown here, i appologise also for being too rude in my comments, i erspect humility it is one of the finest virtues a human can have.
postmasterw00t 4 months ago
People like dawkins , and other comments here that say "quantum physics must be right" do not seem to grasp the fact that it explains nothing. It goes a very short way to maybe say how,but that is all.
Stating "quantum physics must be right" means nothing,its like saying rainbows must be right,for example.
Must dawkins always generalise when he steps outside his own field.Stick to your own reasonable knowledge of biology sir.
TimCOM62 1 year ago
@TimCOM62 Quantum physics explains and predicts the behaviour (to a mystifying order of accuracy) of not only the atom and its constituents but also other fundamental particles such as the photon.
In other words it explains the behaviour of both light and matter. Given that pretty much accounts for our entire experience of the universe I'd say quantum theory explains quite a lot.
This *is* my field and I can confirm that Professor Dawkins is sufficiently qualified to make this 80 second analogy.
BrandNewLtd 1 year ago
@BrandNewLtd Actually,quantum physics/mechanics says many things,as it is a field of physics with many opposing theories.If we accept the copenhagen ideas,as most modern scientests do,we have to conclude that in fact,predicting what particles will do next is as hard as predicting how many lives a cat has . (Being your field,Im sure you get the allusion)
VMG934 1 year ago
@VMG934 Obviously it is not possible (nor was it intended) to reproduce the field of quantum physics in a YouTube post, anymore than in the video here.
The predictive power of quantum theory *is not* the ability to predict the position of a fundamental particle, which is known to be impossible under the conditions of Heisenberg's uncertainty principal.
Using methods such as density functional theory, it is able to produce incredibly accurate predictions about larger objects such as molecules.
BrandNewLtd 1 year ago
@VMG934 By the way, the allusion to Schrodinger's cat seems out of place. It was never concerned with determining the number of lives a cat had (nor in fact, as is commonly erroneously believed - whether a cat in a box is alive or dead until you open the lid)
It is far less general than most people believe and is concerned with the effect of observation on specific unpredictable events such as radioactive decay.
BrandNewLtd 1 year ago
@BrandNewLtd This is strange but my reply to your comment seems to have vmg934s name to it . I do not believe the allusion to Schrodinger's cat is out of place.
Yes,quantum physics does make predictions that are observable.However this is not to say it offers a sort of panacea to finding a "unified theory." Was it Bohr who said that sometimes it seems that the sub atomic world is waiting to be observerved before it decides how to react.
TimCOM62 1 year ago
@BrandNewLtd Also,given that light and matter is now believed in fact to make up
a very small part of the universe,Id say quantum physics is only just starting to scratch the surface. As you know,there are a dozen or so opposing theories re.quantum mechanics,as I said the copenhagen theory being the generally accepted one,string,super string,multiverse,broglie / Bohm,decoherence,historical consistancy, et al.being others.Anyone who can read could make this 80 sec analogy,point is , so what?
TimCOM62 1 year ago
@TimCOM62 I don't want a debate about the nature of quantum theory... it's not relevant here. Dawkins is not giving a lecture on Quantum physics. It was never his intention to elucidate anything that goes on at the level of fundamental particles or why.
The reason for him talking about this is two-fold:
1, as a contrast to his oft-made point that the scale of the error in the belief that the Earth is 10,000 years old is equivalent to believing America is yards across.
BrandNewLtd 1 year ago
@BrandNewLtd
Counting.
1 = 1
2 = 1 + 1 (i.e. not 1)
Wel I keep getting 'Error. Try again'' if I try to post the above. So maybe with a few added unnecessary words I can get it posted. 286 characters remaining
tenfingerstwohands 9 months ago
@TimCOM62
2, to make the point that just because we do not understand something fully, that does not mean it is without merit.
He is entitled to use quantum physics as an analogy to make his point without a comprehensive description of the various arguments supporting it.
This, by definition, is what an analogy is.
If I were to describe the phenomenon of discrete energy levels in quantum physics using the analogy of a staircase I would not be obliged to have a full understanding of architecture.
BrandNewLtd 1 year ago
@BrandNewLtd Ok My original point re.Dawkins was not to become involved in a debate on QP.
Rather to constat my dislike for him , nothing more.
As I said,he is a biologist,noted more for his celebrity status than any particular advances in his own field.
TimCOM62 1 year ago
@TimCOM62 But he has done great work in terms of trying to educate the masses, who are willfully ignorant about many scientific theories like evolution (especially in the states). And he should be creditet for that.
knuthoem85 1 year ago
@knuthoem85 I would suggest that many educated scientests are willfully ignorant about any field outside their own. I would suggest also that most non biologists("the masses" and "scientests" alike) are pretty ignorant about evolution,apart from a relatively basic understanding,despite the fact that one group has read some peer reviewed works.
Disclaimer ; I'm not a creationalist.
Disclaimer ; But I am open minded,100 percent.
TimCOM62 1 year ago
@TimCOM62 Dawkins scientific work has, lately, been in popularising science (like Sagan, DeGrasse etc.) . Bringing biology to the public. This is what he has been hired for, and it is an important task for any research institution, and the scientific advances Dawkins makes lies in increasing the knowledge of evolution to among non-biologists.
Fuglebolle 1 year ago 18
Physicists like Einstein had to struggle to reconcile their ordinary intuitions with the evidence of their equations. Dr. Feynman happily gave up the struggle. He and the physicists of his generation made peace with a way of describing nature that only explained how, not why.
TheBrucew 1 year ago
Much of what he accomplished he would admit to not understanding. ''I can live with doubt and uncertainty,'' he once said. ''I think it's much more interesting to live not knowing than to have answers which might be wrong.
''I don't feel frightened by not knowing things, by being lost in a mysterious universe without any purpose, which is the way it really is, so far as I can tell,'' he added. ''It doesn't frighten me.''
Interesting.......
TheBrucew 1 year ago
@TheBrucew
''I think it's much more interesting to live not knowing than to have answers which might be wrong. I don't feel frightened by not knowing things, by being lost in a mysterious universe......"
Hahahahahahahaha! He was fighting with the reality of FREE WILL - which he simply couldn't bring himself to adopt as an explanation for what he was seeing in quantum mechanics - although it was and IS the BEST POSSIBLE EXPLANATION of the data! Hahahahahahahahaha!
cletusnze 1 year ago
This is pretty funny, trying to use Quantum Mechanics to prove determinism.
Another Feynman quote on his Quantum Theory - 'I won the Nobel prize for shoving a great problem under the carpet,'' -
TheBrucew 1 year ago
How people PRONOUNCED CLINICALLY DEAD but STILL are able to have vivid experiences is something that should give pause for thought to those declaring the Afterlife doesn't exist - and that consciousness is merely a product of brain activity! But, of-course, they're FAR TOO STUPID to give serious consideration to such things! Hahahahahahahah! Their excuse for faggotry is too important to them and might be undermined! Hahahahahahahha!
cletusnze 1 year ago
@cletusnze
If a person is clinically dead, the person can't have any experience at all.
Your mention of NDE is laughable, they have all been debunked.
I can provide you with the studies if you want to.
They all mention the same: THERE IS NO AFTERLIFE, or supernatural crap. It's all brain activity messing up with you.
transtlantic 1 year ago
@transtlantic
Hahahahahahahah! You'll say ANYTHING to defend faggotry, dolt! Hahahahahhahaha!
cletusnze 1 year ago
@cletusnze
what did i say that defends "faggotry"?
you are just afraid of what i have to say. you have no points to make.
transtlantic 1 year ago
@transtlantic
You're scared you'll have to answer for your faggotry, aren't you, dolt? Hahahahahahahahah!
cletusnze 1 year ago
@cletusnze
what "faggotry"? you are just trolling now. You are just a writer of vacuous posts.
make a point, or leave, moron.
Go pray to your Unicorns, or something.
transtlantic 1 year ago
@transtlantic Aw cmon transtlantic let him have his fun. He is a little kid after all.
firevortex500 1 year ago
@transtlantic
Hahahahahahahaha! The fear of what is to come makes you deny the Afterlife, faggot! Hahahahahahaha!
cletusnze 1 year ago
@cletusnze hahahah yes cliitty the after life what a fag eh clitty
lifeson46 1 year ago
@cletusnze
what the heck has "Faggotry" to do with any of this?
you retard.
Fear of what is to come? what? death? it's just natural to fear death, you moron. if you don't your life won't last long. or you'll waste your time praying to a made up bullshit story instead of learning and using your life for something useful.
transtlantic 1 year ago
@transtlantic
Hahahahahahaha! You're not looking forward to what is coming to you, are you, dolt? Hahahahahahahaha! What ARE you losing YOUR life for - FAGGOTRY? Hahahahahahahahahah!
cletusnze 1 year ago
@cletusnze
losing my life? lol
I am dedicating my life to saving lives. why would my sexual orientation (heterossexual) matter in my profession as a medical doctor?
transtlantic 1 year ago
@transtlantic
Hahahahahahahaha! Don't LIE! You're a FAGGOT, dolt! You've admitted it before! Hahahahahahahahaha!
cletusnze 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@cletusnze
admit what?
you really are not making any sense.
transtlantic 1 year ago
@cletusnze hahahah more faggots and dolts eh clittus
lifeson46 1 year ago
@cletusnze How old are you?
firevortex500 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@firevortex500
"How old are you?"
Why is this relevant, dolt?
cletusnze 1 year ago
@cletusnze hahahahahahaaha losing his life to faggottry hahahaha what a dolt eh clitts
lifeson46 1 year ago
@cletusnze he's scared of you clitty hahahahaha now we got him aint we Mr C
lifeson46 1 year ago
@lifeson46
Piss off, faggot!
cletusnze 1 year ago
so its impossible because you dont understand it? nice.
demondim5 1 year ago
@demondim5
Who/What are you referring to?
cletusnze 1 year ago
I asked creationists to stop posting bullshit at one Richard Dawkins video and they started posting at my home and threatening me. When I wrote back, I was blocked. Real Christ-like. How about those entangled particles? We were all entangled at the singularity or pre-bang state of anti-particles.
doncourtreporter 1 year ago
@doncourtreporter
Why do you wish to stifle free comment, dolt?
cletusnze 1 year ago
@cletusnze That's my point, Clitty. You blocked me at your home. I ignore you and you come into my home with that stupid bullshit. It's still fantasy, boy. How about an intelligent comment on the fact that the universities of the world disagree with you. Go ahead. I'll wait. How about those entangled particles. You respond with dolt, like a christian. Yelling bullshit. hahahahahahfuku
doncourtreporter 1 year ago
@doncourtreporter
No, bonehead! What would be significant is if you could present the LOGICAL REASONING behind the arguments of those who oppose Intelligent Design! What is it? Do YOU know?
By the way, it is NOT true that ALL the universities of the world are opposed to Intelligent Design. The US is NOT the whole, dolt!
cletusnze 1 year ago
@cletusnze Hi, Clitty, I missed you. Thought you grew a brain. ID is bullshit. We don't allow it here. We had that trial. What else. Fuck you, idiot. You wouldn't say shit to me in person. You're the dumbest white man I've ever heard of. Which universities? None of you fucks answered that. hahahahabonehead,fucu
doncourtreporter 1 year ago
@doncourtreporter Intelligent design. That's clitty's response to my challenge to name a university on Planet Earth who agrees with him. No theological schools, please, since they don't count as bona fide institutes of high learning. That's lower learning. hahahaha. Bring it on, boy. Bonehead, dolt, idiot, fuck nut. That's clitty's language. He might not understand me if I omit the insults. How about some quantum instruction from you. Teach me something.
doncourtreporter 1 year ago
@doncourtreporter
Hahahahahahahahah! You just want to waste time with a endless back and forth denying that ANY university I cite in my support was actually in support of ID. What is more useful is to explain the flaws in the Darwinian Mechanisms of Random Mutation and Natural Selection exposed by Behe and his colleagues!
cletusnze 1 year ago
@doncourtreporter
Hahahahahaha! You've imploded, haven't you, dolt? Hahahahahah!
cletusnze 1 year ago
@doncourtreporter
And, if it is quantum mechanics you're talking about, then the universities in the US don't even disagree with me - quite the OPPOSITE!
And what is your problem with entangled particles, bonehead?
cletusnze 1 year ago
@cletusnze Hey, Clitty, what problem are you referring to regarding entangled particles and me? Do you have pressure on your brain, man? Give me something to respect you for, like some fucking new information. Why are particles apparently communicating at a distance? Hurry up, bitch. After five hours, my kids could answer me.
doncourtreporter 1 year ago
@doncourtreporter
Hahahahahahahahah! That's because they ARE a unified entity, dolt! They only appear to be separated but are actually connected via their wave-functions! You haven't heard of particle-wave duality, have you, dolt?
And, please, I don't need your respect - not whilst you find yourself INCAPABLE of respecting Truth! Hahahahahahaha!
cletusnze 1 year ago
@cletusnze Yeah, we've got wave function over here, too. I'm astonished, no kidding, that a man who can understand wave function believes ghost stories. Your religion is total bullshit and you know it. That's funny, to call it particle wave duality. Only took a few hours for you. Good work. Keep it up. You're the best thing about some of the Dawkins sites. Can't stop laughing. Keep up the dolt, dolt, dolt. hahahahahaha. You're cute. How old?
doncourtreporter 1 year ago
@doncourtreporter
Hahahahaha! On the contrary, if you really understood things like wave-functions and quatised space-time, why would you think that ghosts are strange, bonehead? It's all very well googling and cutting and pasting stuff from the internet - quite another REALLY UNDERSTANDING the material you've accessed! People like you remind me of ignorant peasants living on land rich in diamonds and using the precious rocks to for their building projects - not knowing their value! Hahahahah!
cletusnze 1 year ago
@cletusnze Yeah, I guess I don't get wave function since you say so. That's your philosophy, whatever you say. You're a little girl inside, bitch. How about those universities that agree with you. That shut you up, didn't it? hahaha doltfucku. You did not and could not answer that simple question, you fucking idiot. Ha. Come on, smart ass, let's curse at one another since you can't cite one university which agrees with your phony, vile religion. Let's compare income. ha.
doncourtreporter 1 year ago
@doncourtreporter
Hahahahahahahah! Ok, I'll mention one university: Meerut Institute of Technology in India! Now how do you propose to check on them, dolt? Hahahahahahaha!
cletusnze 1 year ago
@cletusnze Thanks. You win. Now I believe in God. You convinced me with your filthy Eastern ways. Ha. You a Beatles fan? If you're right, one in 25,000 ain't bad.
You're pretty cool, Clitty. Keep it up. The insults really convinced me that God is the only way. A man your age who introduces himself by insulting strangers must be connected to the mob. hahaha. cya.
doncourtreporter 1 year ago
@doncourtreporter
Aw! Don't be such as sore loser! Hahahahahahahah!
cletusnze 1 year ago
@cletusnze Poor Clitty. I made an effort to befriend you. You'll say don't befriend me, dolt. But you lied to us again. Meerut University does not agree with your bullshit. Here are the programs offered: Botany, microbiology, statistics, math, physics, zoology, toxicology, chemistry, English, history, phychology, Languages, etc. No god there. Fail. I don't like you anymore. Clitty, you lied to me. I'm hurt.
doncourtreporter 1 year ago
@doncourtreporter
Where does it say they don't agree with me, dolt?
cletusnze 1 year ago
@cletusnze Clitty, now I'm disappointed with you. You lied through your teeth. I checked the programs they offered in about two minutes, and god ain't there. I realized you'd lie about your major premise, you'd lie about anything. No offense, that's so weak, and I'm so old, I can't play with you anymore. You're no fun. hahaha.
doncourtreporter 1 year ago
@doncourtreporter
Hahahahahahahah! Don't be stupid! Are you saying you were actually looking for a course called "God"? Hahahahahahahah! What a bonehead! They DO have courses in Cosmology - in their physics department. Now go look at the research programs there! Hahahahahahah!
cletusnze 1 year ago
@cletusnze That's what you would think with limited capacity. God must be covered in Cosmology now. You're a buffoon. You must be doing this for amusement. Don't be stupid. Are you saying you thought I was looking for a course called "God." See how fucked up you are? No university on Planet Earth agrees with you that god exists. No theological schools or ballet schools, please. Nothing has changed. You're delusional.
doncourtreporter 1 year ago
@doncourtreporter
Hahahahahahahahah! What a bonehead! You think that ALL the lecturers in India's universities are atheists? Hahahahhhahahah! What an IMBECILE! Hahahahahahahaha!
cletusnze 1 year ago
@cletusnze
He said no such thing. That is a straw-man argument.
Skepnostic 1 year ago
@Skepnostic
What did he say then, dolt? You think a university can be atheist and its lecturers theist? Hahahahahahahahaha!
cletusnze 1 year ago
@cletusnze
He said universities are not theist. This does not imply that all of it's lecturers are atheist, but that it adopts an atheist or god-neutral policy. To ask if god exists is not even a scientific question, so it would be silly for a university to even take a position on it.
You would, of course, resort to this ridiculous form of internet ridicule in an attempt to demean your opponents position, when you know you're being dishonest.
"Hahahahahahahahah! What a bonehead!"
Skepnostic 1 year ago
@Skepnostic
Don't be stupid! A god-neutral policy is NOT atheistic but AGNOSTIC! And the idea that asking about Ultimate Reality is not scientific is idiotic in the extreme! That IS what science is ALL ABOUT - the search for Ultimate Reality! Sheeeesh! These crazy brain-crippled atheistic IMBECILES! Hahahahahahahahaha!
cletusnze 1 year ago
@cletusnze
Did you even read my post? Try addressing what I actually said, and not whatever you want to make up. I said atheist OR god-neutral. I didn't say god-neutral IS atheist. (A policy/person/whatever can be atheist and agnostic at the same time by the way)
God is a supernatural concept which is, in fact, DEFINED to be outside of the physical realm which can be investigated by science. If you cannot respond without childish remarks and insults, this will be my last comment to you.
Skepnostic 1 year ago
@Skepnostic
No, dolt! It's NOT POSSIBLE to be atheist and agnostic at the same time! To be atheist is to COMMIT to a view about the Existence of God. And agnistic is UNCOMMITTED! Neither is supernatural defined as being outside what can be investigated by science but only what APPEARS so!
You atheists and your ridiculous complaints about language make me want to puke at the hypocrisy of it! NO ONE misuses language more than you do!
cletusnze 1 year ago
@cletusnze
You're committing a definitional fallacy. That is not the definition of atheism used by most atheists, and you CAN be atheist and agnostic at the same time. Agnosticism IS NOT a view about the existence of god, it is an epistemological view about knowledge.
I am an agnostic atheist with respect to gods not developed from religion. I do not believe in god, but I acknowledge that there is a small possibility that a god may exist. Atheism/Theism comes in varying degrees of certainty.
Skepnostic 1 year ago
@Skepnostic
Here's the definition of "Atheism" from Webster's, dolt:
Main Entry: athe·ism
Function: noun
1 archaic : ungodliness, wickedness
2 a : a disbelief in the existence of deity b : the doctrine that there is no deity
cletusnze 1 year ago
@cletusnze
As I've said: Atheism pertains to belief, agnosticism pertains to knowledge. They are not mutually exclusive. You can be Agnostic, you can be agnostic, you can also be both. (Same applies to theism)
They come in different degrees of certainty. Most atheists don't claim that there is no god, but that they don't believe in one (Agnostic Atheists). Some atheists do claim that there is no god - these are GNOSTIC Atheists.
Skepnostic 1 year ago
@Skepnostic
Don't be silly! Are you claiming that you know more than the dictionary about the meanings of words, dolt?
cletusnze 1 year ago
@cletusnze
Dictionaries are just descriptions of what words mean - they don't "know" anything. I haven't even said anything that contradicts the dictionary. You don't have to be absolute in your disbelief. To say otherwise would be a false dichotomy (Or false trichotomy if you include agnosticism?). There is more than just absolute belief or disbelief, but many stages in between as well.
Skepnostic 1 year ago
@Skepnostic
So are you saying you accept the dictionary definiton of "Atheism" then, dolt? Hahahahahahahhahahah!
cletusnze 1 year ago
@cletusnze
"a disbelief in the existence of deity"
I accept this definition of atheism, yeah.
What's the definition of Quantum Mechanics?
Skepnostic 1 year ago
@Skepnostic
Quantum Mechanics is the branch of physics that deals with the behaviour of matter and radiation at the most fundamental level - where wave-particle duality is strongly manifest.
cletusnze 1 year ago
@cletusnze
what is the most "fundamental level"?
Wave duality implies random patterns. With zero deliberate cause.
Behaviour of matter also proves there is no such thing as deliberate. you can't tell the momentum and position at the same time. that explain a universe with zero superntatural intervention.
transtlantic 1 year ago
@transtlantic
You're just waffling inanely, dolt! You're UTTERLY out of your depth here! You even think the laws of physics are made up by humans, rather than discovered, don't you? hahahahahahahaha! And your assertion that NOTHING is deliberate just reveals you're nothing but a LUNATIC! I suppose the decisions you apparently make are actually coming from the demons that possess you, eh faggot? Hahahahahahahah!
cletusnze 1 year ago
The laws of physics are abstract concepts that try model and explain what is SEEN.
The humans making laws of physics are the result of discovery, you ignorant fuck.
The ONLY thing that is deliberate is the acts commited by organisms with a nervous system, you moron.
I ask again: what evidence do you have that mutations aren't random?
WHy do you say that Down syndrome is not random?
WHy do you talk about science and know no science?
transtlantic 1 year ago
@transtlantic The laws of physics are just our form of putting a nametag to cosmological constants that we've observed.
You don't honestly think that the nucleotides that make up DNA are actually stamped with the letters "A,T, C, G and U", do you?
Shrewmy 1 year ago
@Shrewmy
I Know the DNA doesn't have a U nucletodie, that's in the RNA.
i understand your point. Hope you review mine.
transtlantic 1 year ago
@transtlantic
Hahahahahahahaha! That's just drivel, dolt! Hahahahahahahah1
cletusnze 1 year ago
@cletusnze hahahaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah
hekoka 1 year ago
@hekoka
You've gone bonkers, haven't you? Hahahahahahahah!
cletusnze 1 year ago
@cletusnze hahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahahah
hekoka 1 year ago
@hekoka
You've gone bonkers, haven't you, dolt? Hahahahahahahahaha!
cletusnze 1 year ago
@transtlantic
I should mention I don't disagree with you, I still think cletus is a douchebag.
Shrewmy 1 year ago
@transtlantic
Hahahahahahahaha! I've got to keep a copy of this! This is a classic! Sheeeeesh! How stupid can a human being be???? Hahahahahahahah!
cletusnze 1 year ago
@cletusnze
how stupid a human can be: some believe in astrology, god, gods, elves, homeopathy, chiropractice, creationism,......
that's you cletus!
transtlantic 1 year ago 4
@transtlantic
Hahahahahahahah! What a silly faggot!
cletusnze 1 year ago
@cletusnze You act just like a 4 year old.
firevortex500 1 year ago
@firevortex500
And you hate kids, eh dolt? Hahahahahahahahah!
cletusnze 1 year ago
@firevortex500
Based on what LOGIC, dolt?
cletusnze 1 year ago
@transtlantic
You can't even define ANY of those things let alone have a LOGICAL basis for ANY stand you have against them, dolt! Hahahahahahahahah!
cletusnze 1 year ago
@cletusnze
i can't define what? we both know i can. We both know that ANY definition doesn't mean the object define is real. We both know that ALL of my arguments are EMPIRICALLY true, and in an Empirical point of logic, that's ALL that matters in matters of Practical Reason.
Kant said it perfectly: God is not the matter of Reason, but of the Methaphysical.
It's obvious that God or any other god are pure made up crap.
transtlantic 1 year ago
@transtlantic
Hahahahahahahahah! You have NEVER been able to define the Word "God", dolt! So you're in NO POSITION to philosophise about God!
cletusnze