@BEANPOLE111 I know, it doesn't make sense for him to be superstitious considering how cerebral he is, but then again this show was made mostly for right-wing intellectuals.
@SuperWolfmike You may feel disinclined to say right winged but I can almost assure you that Fraiser and Niles at least are definitely right-wingers (not in the hillbilly sense but the aristocratic sophisticado sense. They are after all very well off.). Personally I'm a lefty but I still enjoy the show. It leaves you with a good feeling. :]
@hobbitydreams What exactly does “right wing” mean here? From what you “lefties” say “all those right-wingers are intolerant haters, bigoted labeling hillbillies, clinging to their bibles and guns, that strive to poison the water, and pollute all the air.” Frasier hasn’t done any of these things. Also are you saying that it is possible to be both right-winged AND intelligent? What I see on this blog is labeling, hating lefties! The usual.
I said 'hillbilly sense' to give a quick example of why this show does *not* cater to that sensibility. I never mentioned bibles, guns, or pollution so I'm not sure why you put that in quotations.Nor was any part of my comment mocking in tone towards right-wingers or anyone else. However, it seems you are pretty fond of labels yourself. If you're just looking to politically rampage at someone at random, please do it elsewhere, under a sitcom video is hardly the place.
@hobbitydreams My self I don’t mind labels. Im pleased to be a right-winger. Im not from the groups you mentioned however. I’m from between. The quotations were due to those being the usual visuals given attempting to shame us into not speaking up. I however dont care about political correctness. I apologize that I took you in a mocking tone. Due to previous posts it was perspective. As for taking conversations elsewhere, many other comments in this list don’t pertain to the show.
@oshawa13 No the Frasier episode is up on the top of the page. I have merely responded to people that have changed it into some kind of "I'm smarter than you because your a Christian" post. I'm tired of being told to sit and keep quite while you freaks teach these lies. I have laid common since at your feet and you brush it aside as you haters always do. No rebuttal, just the gnashing at me with your teeth, bad language, bad attitude and willful ignorance.
@Sullie62 Mate, I get you're upset but if you want to debunk some guy's beliefs in such depth, send him an email. Most of us just want to watch and talk about Frasier.
@butterscotchsoda Thank you Butterscotch for a much more civil answer. I am a fan of the Frasier shows. My wife and I have been taping them on Dish. Used to be when we were younger we saw the show nightly. Hmm, box sets might be a bad idea.
Hmm. Wow. You got me there. What will I do against someone as intellagent as you? Tell me BOY if I am an idiot...and you can't answer a single one of the laws I have put before you... I can't remember if moron or imbecile is under that. How about we just keep this on an adult level from now on people? Quit letting you 3 year olds on your computers.
There are only two choices. Creation vs. evolution. The problem is only one makes since and you just can’t accept it. Seeing your eyes can’t see and hearing your ears can’t hear. Matthew 13:13.
God made time therefore He isn’t bound by it. Your evolution theory doesn’t have the answer to a single one of these scientific Laws. As a mater of fact it seeks to break each and every one of them. I guess Carl Sagan didn’t tell you about that part huh? You see God gives all the answers in His book. His book was never revised. How many times has your book needed revision?
Where did God come from you ask? Do you just believe the whole universe started the day you were born? Let me try to climb up there to put it on that higher level with you smart guys. If God created everything that was made in six literal days (and He did) at what point did time begin? You see, man tells time in seconds, in minutes, hours… How do you tell a year? When the earth goes around the sun one time right? So what was it before God made the sun? Eternity!
You also said something I had to read a few times because you told us all that you were one of the intelligent ones and it didn’t look like something an intelligent person would say. Mr. Jleht32 mentioned that life comes from life. After you turned the question back to him expecting him to explain the existence of God, below that you asked “And where is your proof for life comes from life, other than religion?” WOW really? ! Have you ever heard of the Law of Biogenesis? Google it! LOL.
But even so you still haven’t explained how it got there in the 1st place. As for Christians we got Jn.1:1-3. You just shrug your shoulders and say “I don’t have all the answers”. You can’t say it’s always been there because there is that pesky Law of Entropy. Everything is winding down, loosing energy. That means it started with more energy than there is now. If it started with more energy than that means it had a start. It had a beginning. It had a Maker. It had a being that could make matter.
Matter can neither be created nor destroyed. This is a law. It cannot be broken. Burn it and it just changes forms. The matter is still there. Melt it, freeze it, shoot it into space, you pick one. It cannot be destroyed. You guys try to put this big bang thing in place. Suppose you explain to us with your self proclaimed higher intellect how you can fit every proton, neutron, and electron that are on the earth into a small particle that just bangs. I would think that they only pack so tight.
Just because it fails every test doesn’t mean it can’t be tested. It means it has failed all tests it has been given. Point us to a test that came up successful. Science is on the creationist’s side my friend. Just because you choose not to believe in a power mightier then your pitiful life doesn’t prove you right. It just shows us you are argent. Here are a few things you have chosen to ignore. They are what they call scientific laws. You can find them on your cherished Google site.
Finn also said “A theory is testable. If an idea cannot be subjected to scientific testing, it isn't a theory.” What is it then? Do you get to make it scientific law just because you can’t test it? You see if it is no longer a theory, and YOU can’t think of any other tests to stack it toward your preconceived fantasies then that doesn’t prove you were right. It is still speculation (theory). The thing is though the theory of evolution has been tested time and time again and it always fails.
I’m sorry FinnAtheist but you don’t get to place meaning on words that already exist. The word theory is a word meaning “to speculate”. When I was younger they still called it the theory of evolution. It also used to be that something wasn’t proved by telling the same lies over and over until children accepted it as fact like your elitist friends did with the theory of evolution.
Wow we got a bunch of haters out there. Ever notice how you can put anything out there for people to see unless it is about Christianity? You can post your sister in a compromising situation with the family dog but you can't have the 10 commandments posted on a plaque out in public. Hey people, it says "freedom OF religion" not from religion. You don't like to read this stuff? Read something else.
"Water, Fire, Air and Dirt. Fuckin' Magnets, how do they work. And I don't want to talk to a scientist, yall mothafuckers lyin', and getting me pissed!"
"tens of years"??? so anywho, and no...christians dont believe Jesus was a prophet...do you know anything about Christianity, we all know your an atheist, christians believe Jesus is the son of God. Anyone knows that. What sets Jews and Christians apart...what sets creation scientist and evolution scientist apart??????????
lying at its best, show me 1 example from the Bible of a contradiction, the Bible is actually a good reference historically, lol google it...u just lost all credibility...thats ur resource, but u wont believe the Bible...u will take what any man writes on google, but u wont take what "YOU" say is a book written by many men thousands of years ago. God of the old testament was very sympathetic, loving and caring, but also ecpected his commands to be obeyed, Jesus death gave us free moral will.
I think this is the only episode from Frasier that doesn't have any top comments, and that's just your fault, for being fighting... I'm atheist, but I don't care about what other people believe, and neither should you, and I'm talking with both sides, please someone, say something funny about this episode!!!
Dumest thing I've ever heard. You have obviously no experience in science.
"In science, a theory is a well-supported explanation for a broad set of observations. Here are a few other things to know about theories:
A theory is testable. If an idea cannot be subjected to scientific testing, it isn't a theory.
A theory is falsifiable. There must be a way to disprove the theory, even if it hasn't been done yet. Any idea that cannot be disproven is not a theory.
A theory is parsimonious. That means that it doesn't rely on the existence of things that haven't been shown to exist. For example, saying that gravity exists because invisible elves are pulling everybody down would NOT be parsimonious. It requires the existence of these elves when there's no reason whatsoever to assume they exist.
@MsHannelore Theory merely explains the facts and actions. Just google proof of evolution, there's tons. + evolution has been proven by: fossil records, genetics, observation (Lizards that were introduced to new living conditions [new island], evolved extremely rapidly, so rapidly that it normally takes millions of years to see changes like we did in those lizards), viruses evolve, bacteria etc.
@FinnAtheist ...Wow...reallly? Google evolutiona and you can find tons of info disproving it as well. Why arent we still evolving into better more resilient humans...why are we still dying? If we evolved from an amoeba to what we are now...why did we stop...cause we are no where near perfect...why do we get cancer...which is devolving, Yes things evolve and change...humans didnt come from anything but humans...life comes from life...where did the "amoeba" come from???
@jleht32 There's no info on disproving it. None. 1# Because we are programmed to die, unlike some animals, which live forever. Our purpose is to pass on our genes and pass away, but yet we live over 100% longer than the people only a few centuries back, has that for you? We are now Homo Sapiens. Why did we stop? Natural selection didn't need to take place anymore as there is nothing that poses a threat to us, + We are in almost every corner of the eart and in great numbers, too great.
@jleht32 No info on disproving it. None that is compelling. 1# Because nothing poses a threat to us anymore, so there is no need for natural selection. We are programmed to die unlike some animals, that's why. Although we have expanded our life-spans by over 100% from only a few centuries back. What is perfect to you? Why would you think cancer is devolving? Many things affect getting cancer. Life style, toxicity (Industrial), food choices etc. We didn't used to get cancer cause we..>
@jleht32 >...Didn't live long enough. Humans did come from others than humans. Search: Human evolution, fossil records. WE HAVE FOSSIL RECORDS FOR NATURE'S SAKE HOW CAN YOU DISPROVE THAT ? Good luck trying.
@jleht32 It's pretty clear that all the organisms living today, even the simplest ones, are removed from some initial life form by four billion years or so, so one has to imagine that the first forms of life would have been much, much simpler than anything that we see around us. But they must have had that fundamental property of being able to grow and reproduce and be subject to Darwinian evolution.
So it might be that the earliest things that actually fit that definition were little strands of nucleic acids. Not DNA yet—that's a more sophisticated molecule—but something that could catalyze some chemical reactions, something that had the blueprint for its own reproduction.
@jleht32 I'll respond to that later, as I'm leaving the house now and don't have much time. But for the sake of it, if life comes from life, unless your god is dead, it/he is alive > Life comes from life, where did god come from ?
And where is your proof for the life comes from life, other than religion ?
@FinnAtheist exactly...ur the the nonreligious 1 here,,,ur all about science, so u tell me about life coming from life, being religious, i dont have to, I know God has always been here.
@FinnAtheist Carl Sagan and aliens and such, and spontaneous generation of life could have happened "once", but now impossible because the earth changed...ok, you will believe what this man wrote in a book about science which has been proved and proved itself wrong so many times, but u wont give the Bible a glimpse. The Bible does not contradict itself, it even talks about rivers in the oceans, something which "science" only recently discovered. Carbon dating proves itself wrong continuously
@jleht32 Please point me to the direction, where it has appeared that he is wrong? Good luck finding that. The bible does not contradict itself ? Genesis. And as Christians believe that Jesus is the Messiah, implying they also believe that the Torah is the word of God, it does contradict. Torah: God is never changing. Torah: God is angry, jealous, approves genocide and encourages it. New Testament: Buddhism repackaged.
@FinnAtheist lol, nice try, torah is only used and believed in by the jews...very few other chirstians follow anything from or about the torah or believe in it
@jleht32 lol, nice try? What leads you to believe that Jesus is the messiah? For most Christians, it's the torah. And most Christians believe that the Torah is from God, so..
@FinnAtheist wrong...but believe what u want, only jews use the torah, and what leads me to believe in Jesus is the Bible which is not contradicted, unlike science, which proves itself wrong daily...
@jleht32 Ignorance at best. Jesus is the last Prophet among the many Prophets, only he was prophecised in the Torah (Or so the Christians believe, as Jews don't believe the Torah is speaking of Jesus). True, Jews believe in the Torah, but what sets Jews and Christians apart? Christians believe Jesus is the Messiah, Jews don't. Christians do believe the Yahveh of the Old Testament is God. And this much I can tell you: He's not very sympathetic.
@jleht32 The bible has contradictions with numbers, years, stories, almost anything you can imagine. Why? It was based on hearsay TENS OF YEARS after Jesus had lived, written by different authors, and the Gospels were cherry-picked for it. Google: The Lost Gospels.
This sort of infuriates me. Frasier is, as Daphne said "a man of science". He is, for the most part, quite logical. It simply does not make sense for him to believe in a god at all. I guess it's because religion appeals to the average viewer, but still, why ruin the integrity of a character JUST to not alienate viewers?
That's just how I see it though, it doesn't seem realistic to me is all. Other than that part, the episode (and the show) are great :D
@IHearYourSilence I think it's only because when people reach that desperate time in their life they reach for God even if they don't believe in God. That's how people are in reality, they only pray to God if they need him and don't believe in him...as a last chance type thing. At least that's how I see it. Lol
@IHearYourSilence It infuriates me that people seem to have the idea now that academia and the intellectual world belong exclusively to non-believers. I recommend you listen to some Ravi Zacharias or John Lennox. You might be surprised at how other such logical and intelligent men could have arrived at the conclusion that God exists.
@Bystander81 there is no such revelation as "the conclusion that god exist"... that's absurd... one can not ever conclude something they have no evidence... that's what people of lower iq and income call "faith" and what intelligent, well paid, higher responsible people call delusional paranoid episode.
@skershaw2000 It actually isn't because if you have faith then it is its own evidence, so then you can't really label a person who has faith as delusional. They're acting based on personal evidence, something that they feel has been revealed to them. Your logic breaks down quickly under those circumstances.
@Bystander81 "evidence" isnt defined by subjective, individual belief... I dont mean to get Symantec, but faith isnt representational of evidence.. faith is pure belief without evidence.
its not logic, its vocabulary and meaning... not subjective nonsense... but then again, the majority of the world doesnt believe in Santa Claus (i.e. God, the same thing)... its mythology created from limited intelligence in very barbaric times without science, math, understanding.
@skershaw2000 Delusion is the belief in something for absolutely no reason...it's something you make up just to believe in it because you're crazy. God cannot be a delusion because the people who believe don't make him up and don't just decide to start believing for no reason. It's a choice. And the only reason people believe in anything is because of conditioning. You choose a belief system that fits your personal worldview. Everybody does it.
@Bystander81 that's totally illogical and asinine... its like rationalizing a mental illness... even your subconscious realizes its absurd, like intelligent, well paid people do.
delusion is not defined by "belief in something for absolutely no reason"... in fact, that's what the belief in god is defined by... so you would be claiming its delusion... except you're incorrect on the definition... however, i digress, its apparent you have absolutely no clue what you are talking about
@skershaw2000 So you think that people that believe in God do so for no reason? You also forgot to mention the second part of my argument, that a delusion is something that is made up by the people that believe in it. God is not made up by people that believe in him, the idea of God existed long before people born in our lifetime came to believe in it. It doesn't fit the definition of a delusion. Maybe you think it's irrational or illogical, but it's not a delusion.
@FinnAtheist There is no "superior evidence" against God. Why would I choose any specific god? Because it's my life and I can do whatever I want, believe whatever I want, think whatever I want, and pray to whatever I want regardless of proof. My mind is my own and I am the one who decides what it believes, not you.
@Bystander81 I never said there's superior evidence against god. There's superior evidence against RELIGION. So if you are in a specific religion, there's most likely evidence against it, which in turn is evidence against a god ( within that religion ).
But granted, there's no evidence against a god.
Technically, you can't do whatever you want, but it hasn't got anything to do with religion.
@FinnAtheist You defined belief in god as a delusion and by extension (using the definition you yourself provided) an idea devoid of "superior evidence". You even went further as to say I have "no proof of god". Then you come back with this response and entirely contradict yourself, twice.
And I can do whatever I want, I am a being created with complete and total free will. There's a big irony there, but I doubt you'll get it.
@Bystander81 I cannot see where I contradicted myself at all... And actually believing in a god can be classified as delusion. Why? Even though it lacks evidence against it, it doesn't have any evidence to support it.
@FinnAtheist Then you entirely missed the point of the first post that I had here that you replied to. Your circular reasoning has already pushed you into two self-contradictions, now an outright denial of fact isn't going to help you.
@FinnAtheist The contradiction is that you're saying there's no proof of god, then you say there's no evidence against god. Choose one. The other is that you've told me that I "can't do whatever I want", yet you are advocating a belief system (and it is one) that would cater much more to that idea than even my own. The fact you're ignoring is that faith is its own evidence. That's what separates it from a "delusion". It's entirely subjective, but not irrational on that level.
@Bystander81 "There's no proof of god-There's no evidence against god" They're not contradicting...? Simply there is no proof of god, so there can't be ecidence against something that can't be proven. There's no proof of unicorns either, yet there is no evidence against them.
And I was just joking around with the " You can't do whatever you want, regardless of your faith", and meant your anatomy & biology which doesn't allow you to jump to moon with no equipment for example...
@FinnAtheist "Simply there is no proof of god, so there can't be ecidence against something that can't be proven." Then what are we even discussing? Why are you going out of your way to make comments about my having no proof of God if you admittedly can't furnish anything to the contrary? Your entire argument undoes itself and you have basically said nothing, proven nothing, and made no point at all. You've reasoned yourself into the middle of a big empty circle.
@Bystander81 No, what I'm saying is it is foolish to believe in something told in a book, told by several different authors centuries ago, when we have contradicting evidence ( assuming you follow a judeo-christian religion).
@FinnAtheist But you just finished saying for the last three posts that there is no contradicting evidence, unless you're counting your own statements, which I think you're up to five now.
@FinnAtheist How does evolution contradict religion? The Bible doesn't say that things don't change over time. I think that your beef on a scientific level wouldn't be with religion, it would be with intelligent design, something that in many cases has absolutely nothing to do with religion or God. People who propose ID will cite aliens, ghosts, all kinds of other things that are totally out of the scope of what's commonly accepted as "religion".
@Bystander81 The funniest comment I've read today.. How does evolution contradict religion? It contradicts a literal interpretation of the first chapter of Genesis. There you go.
@FinnAtheist No it doesn't. The first chapter of Genesis doesn't say that organisms don't tend to change over time. Evolution supposedly contradicts the idea of intelligent design, which is not exclusive to religion. And even a "literal" reading of the first chapter of Genesis could lend itself to evolution depending on your opinion of ancient Hebrew adjectives.
@Bystander81 Yes, it doesn't say that they don't change. But if god made them, surely they wouldn't have to change to thrive in this world? And evolution is very clear that ALL OF THE ANIMALS IN GENESIS evolved from a single "ancestor", if you will. Thus god didn't create each one individually, but they parted ways long before and evolved to what they are. And evolution contradicts genesis in the account of human "creation"....
@FinnAtheist It doesn't. Genesis says that Adam was formed from the dust of the ground. This could be taken to mean that he evolved from a microbe in the dust. I know it sounds strange, but a lot of people interpret it that way. A lot of scientists interpret it that way. Genesis Gap theory is widely accepted among scientists. But it still doesn't knock out the element of intelligent design, which is what you are really against, not so much religion itself.
@Bystander81 First of all, I don't know many scientist who would agree on genesis. Maybe one respectable one. "This could be taken to mean that he evolved from a microbe in the dust. I know it sounds strange"Seriously, do you think your god was unable to acknowledge the difference between microbes and dust ? If I'd believe in god I'd want him to know the difference + if he's gonna help someone write a book, it better mean what it says, rather than being open to interprentation.
@Bystander81 Second, we now know life started in the oceans. So no, that's a no for the dust. Third, It is very clear in genesis that the animals were made individually, evolution disagrees, and we have proof of it.
@FinnAtheist To be honest I'm not a science buff so I really can't debate you on the intricacies of scientific evidence. What I can debate is that belief in God is not a delusion. I think I have proven my case as you've had to steer the conversation back to science since you couldn't win with philosophy. I really have no interest in what is possible or impossible scientifically...science really just bores me to death and I have no desire to pursue it as a hobby or a study.
@Bystander81 Philosophy might accept god, science won't until it can be proven :) Though there's always the possibility of there being a higher power, but it is quite delusional to believe in it with absolutely no proof. Maybe we'll see after we're dead, right ?
@FinnAtheist I still don't think it's "delusional" to believe in God and philosophy is on my side in that. Besides, if you're looking for scientific proof of God, you'll never find it. It would defeat the need for faith which would be totally contradictory to the entire message of salvation in the first place. Why would God provide absolute proof of himself in this tangible earth if we are to believe based on faith? That's why science is no help in this discussion.
@Bystander81 Philosophy isn't necessarily on your side here, but it can be. It searches and philosophies the existence of god. wikipedia org/wiki/List_of_atheist_philosophers
put a dot in the space between -pedia org-. If you wish to continue this conversation maybe we could move this to PMs as we both enjoy Frasier ( ? ) and I don't think it's right to spam the comments with our debate. PM me if you still want to.
@Bystander81 the pure and only reason some people believe in such folklore and absurdity is CONDITIONING... its what they were taught... its not natural to people in "the man in the sky wastching over us"... that's fantasy.... just like Thomas Jefferson and other forefathers said "pure mythology and absurdity"
@IHearYourSilence Eh, it's not all that weird. Frasier may not be super religious, but there are times when he mentions a higher power. I recall one episode where it's a really beautiful day, and Frasier says something about acknowledging the power that created it. (I think it's the leap year episode, which is HILARIOUS.)
I agree it's a little strange, considering his personality. I'm just saying, it's not all that out-of-character for him. :)
Very insightful. I hate seeing other nonbelievers spew ludicrous insults and absolute rejections as opposed to so reassuring and intellectual a comment as yours.
Look at the episode where she wears the Oriental outfit or the one where she dances in the red dress or the one where she wears the Vegas wedding outfit.
@hiphoponeworld idc what the situation is (unless she's dead, puking, or using her ass in any non-sexual way) if a woman is hot, she's hot. daphne isn't myfavorite character on the show, but she's hot, and esp. in that sexy nurse outfit
@RJCunningham I'm the exact opposite, I love Niles and Daphne together. They are the reason I watch. I don't think their relationship ruined the show at all. I mean that was part of the premise of the show, they had always planned on putting Niles and Daphne together, it was just a matter of time. I would have been stupid for Niles to pine after Daphne all those years and then nothing come of it. But to each their own I guess.
@ddjmfan I just didn't like how they made Daph such a bitch after they got together. Perhaps the writers were trying to make the point she was an equal to them now, but shyte, they didn't have to make her so often the harpy bitch. I think that it was turned people off. Something changed in the writing of the character, but people thinking how they do, blame the actual fictitious character & the actress instead of the writers & show format. When she wasn't made the bitch, they were sweet2gether
Frasier's slowly-crumbling expression during his internal monologue with God in the hospital room made me tear up too :( I like how the rest of the episode is almost all laughs, but there's that sudden heartbreaking moment showing how frightened Frasier is about the idea of his brother dying.
I noticed that frasier introduced himself as Dr. Frasier Crane to God. I love how he always manages to throw doctor and Harvard into almost every conversation.
Daphne being English should have been able to pronounce scone as "scon". What went wrong here?
mohamed001 1 week ago
Did any one else see that Niles opened that bag twice at 15:23 O.o
Other than that AMAZING show! i've seen every episode at least twice.
Thank you for uploading Jos! :D
11wolvesrock 2 weeks ago 4
@11wolvesrock i laugh at your "twice"
stringtangledman 1 week ago
I once took Frasier to be more intelligent and sensible than this... then again, the show fell apart once Niles and Daphne got together anyway
BEANPOLE111 2 weeks ago
@BEANPOLE111 I know, it doesn't make sense for him to be superstitious considering how cerebral he is, but then again this show was made mostly for right-wing intellectuals.
hobbitydreams 1 week ago
@hobbitydreams i wouldnt say right winged ..but definately intelelctuals
SuperWolfmike 1 week ago
@SuperWolfmike You may feel disinclined to say right winged but I can almost assure you that Fraiser and Niles at least are definitely right-wingers (not in the hillbilly sense but the aristocratic sophisticado sense. They are after all very well off.). Personally I'm a lefty but I still enjoy the show. It leaves you with a good feeling. :]
hobbitydreams 1 week ago
@hobbitydreams What exactly does “right wing” mean here? From what you “lefties” say “all those right-wingers are intolerant haters, bigoted labeling hillbillies, clinging to their bibles and guns, that strive to poison the water, and pollute all the air.” Frasier hasn’t done any of these things. Also are you saying that it is possible to be both right-winged AND intelligent? What I see on this blog is labeling, hating lefties! The usual.
Sullie62 1 week ago
@Sullie62
I said 'hillbilly sense' to give a quick example of why this show does *not* cater to that sensibility. I never mentioned bibles, guns, or pollution so I'm not sure why you put that in quotations.Nor was any part of my comment mocking in tone towards right-wingers or anyone else. However, it seems you are pretty fond of labels yourself. If you're just looking to politically rampage at someone at random, please do it elsewhere, under a sitcom video is hardly the place.
hobbitydreams 1 week ago
@hobbitydreams My self I don’t mind labels. Im pleased to be a right-winger. Im not from the groups you mentioned however. I’m from between. The quotations were due to those being the usual visuals given attempting to shame us into not speaking up. I however dont care about political correctness. I apologize that I took you in a mocking tone. Due to previous posts it was perspective. As for taking conversations elsewhere, many other comments in this list don’t pertain to the show.
Sullie62 6 days ago
@Sullie62 Oh well. :p
lol
hobbitydreams 6 days ago
You know I'm not so sure that an elevator is a good place to ask for a sign when you renege on an oath. That’s a long way down.
Sullie62 3 weeks ago 5
@Sullie62 lol
jleht32 3 weeks ago
ok sullie,ur fucking nuts.this a fraiser episode,not church.
oshawa13 3 weeks ago
@oshawa13 No the Frasier episode is up on the top of the page. I have merely responded to people that have changed it into some kind of "I'm smarter than you because your a Christian" post. I'm tired of being told to sit and keep quite while you freaks teach these lies. I have laid common since at your feet and you brush it aside as you haters always do. No rebuttal, just the gnashing at me with your teeth, bad language, bad attitude and willful ignorance.
Sullie62 3 weeks ago
@Sullie62 Mate, I get you're upset but if you want to debunk some guy's beliefs in such depth, send him an email. Most of us just want to watch and talk about Frasier.
butterscotchsoda 3 weeks ago 3
@butterscotchsoda Thank you Butterscotch for a much more civil answer. I am a fan of the Frasier shows. My wife and I have been taping them on Dish. Used to be when we were younger we saw the show nightly. Hmm, box sets might be a bad idea.
Sullie62 3 weeks ago
Hmm. Wow. You got me there. What will I do against someone as intellagent as you? Tell me BOY if I am an idiot...and you can't answer a single one of the laws I have put before you... I can't remember if moron or imbecile is under that. How about we just keep this on an adult level from now on people? Quit letting you 3 year olds on your computers.
Sullie62 3 weeks ago
Everyones entitled to their own beliefs people
Kirrieboy118 3 weeks ago in playlist More videos from frasiervideosjos
There are only two choices. Creation vs. evolution. The problem is only one makes since and you just can’t accept it. Seeing your eyes can’t see and hearing your ears can’t hear. Matthew 13:13.
Sullie62 3 weeks ago
@Sullie62 Who cares, this excessive replying of yours makes you look like an idiot.... The crazy religious nutjob kind of idiot that is.
Monzterman 3 weeks ago
God made time therefore He isn’t bound by it. Your evolution theory doesn’t have the answer to a single one of these scientific Laws. As a mater of fact it seeks to break each and every one of them. I guess Carl Sagan didn’t tell you about that part huh? You see God gives all the answers in His book. His book was never revised. How many times has your book needed revision?
Sullie62 3 weeks ago
Where did God come from you ask? Do you just believe the whole universe started the day you were born? Let me try to climb up there to put it on that higher level with you smart guys. If God created everything that was made in six literal days (and He did) at what point did time begin? You see, man tells time in seconds, in minutes, hours… How do you tell a year? When the earth goes around the sun one time right? So what was it before God made the sun? Eternity!
Sullie62 3 weeks ago
You also said something I had to read a few times because you told us all that you were one of the intelligent ones and it didn’t look like something an intelligent person would say. Mr. Jleht32 mentioned that life comes from life. After you turned the question back to him expecting him to explain the existence of God, below that you asked “And where is your proof for life comes from life, other than religion?” WOW really? ! Have you ever heard of the Law of Biogenesis? Google it! LOL.
Sullie62 3 weeks ago
But even so you still haven’t explained how it got there in the 1st place. As for Christians we got Jn.1:1-3. You just shrug your shoulders and say “I don’t have all the answers”. You can’t say it’s always been there because there is that pesky Law of Entropy. Everything is winding down, loosing energy. That means it started with more energy than there is now. If it started with more energy than that means it had a start. It had a beginning. It had a Maker. It had a being that could make matter.
Sullie62 3 weeks ago
Matter can neither be created nor destroyed. This is a law. It cannot be broken. Burn it and it just changes forms. The matter is still there. Melt it, freeze it, shoot it into space, you pick one. It cannot be destroyed. You guys try to put this big bang thing in place. Suppose you explain to us with your self proclaimed higher intellect how you can fit every proton, neutron, and electron that are on the earth into a small particle that just bangs. I would think that they only pack so tight.
Sullie62 3 weeks ago
Just because it fails every test doesn’t mean it can’t be tested. It means it has failed all tests it has been given. Point us to a test that came up successful. Science is on the creationist’s side my friend. Just because you choose not to believe in a power mightier then your pitiful life doesn’t prove you right. It just shows us you are argent. Here are a few things you have chosen to ignore. They are what they call scientific laws. You can find them on your cherished Google site.
Sullie62 3 weeks ago
Finn also said “A theory is testable. If an idea cannot be subjected to scientific testing, it isn't a theory.” What is it then? Do you get to make it scientific law just because you can’t test it? You see if it is no longer a theory, and YOU can’t think of any other tests to stack it toward your preconceived fantasies then that doesn’t prove you were right. It is still speculation (theory). The thing is though the theory of evolution has been tested time and time again and it always fails.
Sullie62 3 weeks ago
I’m sorry FinnAtheist but you don’t get to place meaning on words that already exist. The word theory is a word meaning “to speculate”. When I was younger they still called it the theory of evolution. It also used to be that something wasn’t proved by telling the same lies over and over until children accepted it as fact like your elitist friends did with the theory of evolution.
Sullie62 3 weeks ago
Wow we got a bunch of haters out there. Ever notice how you can put anything out there for people to see unless it is about Christianity? You can post your sister in a compromising situation with the family dog but you can't have the 10 commandments posted on a plaque out in public. Hey people, it says "freedom OF religion" not from religion. You don't like to read this stuff? Read something else.
Sullie62 3 weeks ago
"Water, Fire, Air and Dirt. Fuckin' Magnets, how do they work. And I don't want to talk to a scientist, yall mothafuckers lyin', and getting me pissed!"
So, jleht32, you're a juggalo?
UncleJoe53 4 weeks ago
You idiots ruined the comments section with your religious arguments. Do it through Private Messages, please.
soursimon 1 month ago 2
@soursimon no thx, when some1 attacks religion publicly, I will defend publicly
jleht32 4 weeks ago
@soursimon *sigh* Agreed.
Bellatrix22 4 weeks ago
press like if the only reason you put on this episode was to see dafney in the maid outfit!
scrambledpenis 1 month ago
Also...Death was a girl... Classic Martin...claaaaaaasic
WritingJosh 1 month ago
"tens of years"??? so anywho, and no...christians dont believe Jesus was a prophet...do you know anything about Christianity, we all know your an atheist, christians believe Jesus is the son of God. Anyone knows that. What sets Jews and Christians apart...what sets creation scientist and evolution scientist apart??????????
jleht32 1 month ago
lying at its best, show me 1 example from the Bible of a contradiction, the Bible is actually a good reference historically, lol google it...u just lost all credibility...thats ur resource, but u wont believe the Bible...u will take what any man writes on google, but u wont take what "YOU" say is a book written by many men thousands of years ago. God of the old testament was very sympathetic, loving and caring, but also ecpected his commands to be obeyed, Jesus death gave us free moral will.
jleht32 1 month ago
Well played, God.
allyful2012 1 month ago
I think this is the only episode from Frasier that doesn't have any top comments, and that's just your fault, for being fighting... I'm atheist, but I don't care about what other people believe, and neither should you, and I'm talking with both sides, please someone, say something funny about this episode!!!
es2812 1 month ago
Frasier loosing and punching the clown was hilarious LMAO :)
gowatchvideo 1 month ago
Havent you heard that evelution is a theory, Never proven. But the bible has historical evidence that has been proven.
MsHannelore 1 month ago
Dumest thing I've ever heard. You have obviously no experience in science.
"In science, a theory is a well-supported explanation for a broad set of observations. Here are a few other things to know about theories:
A theory is testable. If an idea cannot be subjected to scientific testing, it isn't a theory.
A theory is falsifiable. There must be a way to disprove the theory, even if it hasn't been done yet. Any idea that cannot be disproven is not a theory.
FinnAtheist 1 month ago
@MsHannelore
A theory is parsimonious. That means that it doesn't rely on the existence of things that haven't been shown to exist. For example, saying that gravity exists because invisible elves are pulling everybody down would NOT be parsimonious. It requires the existence of these elves when there's no reason whatsoever to assume they exist.
FinnAtheist 1 month ago
@MsHannelore Theory merely explains the facts and actions. Just google proof of evolution, there's tons. + evolution has been proven by: fossil records, genetics, observation (Lizards that were introduced to new living conditions [new island], evolved extremely rapidly, so rapidly that it normally takes millions of years to see changes like we did in those lizards), viruses evolve, bacteria etc.
FinnAtheist 1 month ago
@FinnAtheist ...Wow...reallly? Google evolutiona and you can find tons of info disproving it as well. Why arent we still evolving into better more resilient humans...why are we still dying? If we evolved from an amoeba to what we are now...why did we stop...cause we are no where near perfect...why do we get cancer...which is devolving, Yes things evolve and change...humans didnt come from anything but humans...life comes from life...where did the "amoeba" come from???
jleht32 1 month ago
@jleht32 There's no info on disproving it. None. 1# Because we are programmed to die, unlike some animals, which live forever. Our purpose is to pass on our genes and pass away, but yet we live over 100% longer than the people only a few centuries back, has that for you? We are now Homo Sapiens. Why did we stop? Natural selection didn't need to take place anymore as there is nothing that poses a threat to us, + We are in almost every corner of the eart and in great numbers, too great.
FinnAtheist 1 month ago
@jleht32 No info on disproving it. None that is compelling. 1# Because nothing poses a threat to us anymore, so there is no need for natural selection. We are programmed to die unlike some animals, that's why. Although we have expanded our life-spans by over 100% from only a few centuries back. What is perfect to you? Why would you think cancer is devolving? Many things affect getting cancer. Life style, toxicity (Industrial), food choices etc. We didn't used to get cancer cause we..>
FinnAtheist 1 month ago
@jleht32 >...Didn't live long enough. Humans did come from others than humans. Search: Human evolution, fossil records. WE HAVE FOSSIL RECORDS FOR NATURE'S SAKE HOW CAN YOU DISPROVE THAT ? Good luck trying.
FinnAtheist 1 month ago
@jleht32 It's pretty clear that all the organisms living today, even the simplest ones, are removed from some initial life form by four billion years or so, so one has to imagine that the first forms of life would have been much, much simpler than anything that we see around us. But they must have had that fundamental property of being able to grow and reproduce and be subject to Darwinian evolution.
FinnAtheist 1 month ago
So it might be that the earliest things that actually fit that definition were little strands of nucleic acids. Not DNA yet—that's a more sophisticated molecule—but something that could catalyze some chemical reactions, something that had the blueprint for its own reproduction.
FinnAtheist 1 month ago
@FinnAtheist but life comes from life...so where did the first life come from?
jleht32 1 month ago
@jleht32 I'll respond to that later, as I'm leaving the house now and don't have much time. But for the sake of it, if life comes from life, unless your god is dead, it/he is alive > Life comes from life, where did god come from ?
And where is your proof for the life comes from life, other than religion ?
FinnAtheist 1 month ago
@FinnAtheist exactly...ur the the nonreligious 1 here,,,ur all about science, so u tell me about life coming from life, being religious, i dont have to, I know God has always been here.
jleht32 1 month ago
@jleht32 ..... I don't have time to write to you about how life came to be, so I'll just redirect you: Cosmos, Carl Sagan #2
FinnAtheist 1 month ago
@FinnAtheist Carl Sagan and aliens and such, and spontaneous generation of life could have happened "once", but now impossible because the earth changed...ok, you will believe what this man wrote in a book about science which has been proved and proved itself wrong so many times, but u wont give the Bible a glimpse. The Bible does not contradict itself, it even talks about rivers in the oceans, something which "science" only recently discovered. Carbon dating proves itself wrong continuously
jleht32 1 month ago
@jleht32 Please point me to the direction, where it has appeared that he is wrong? Good luck finding that. The bible does not contradict itself ? Genesis. And as Christians believe that Jesus is the Messiah, implying they also believe that the Torah is the word of God, it does contradict. Torah: God is never changing. Torah: God is angry, jealous, approves genocide and encourages it. New Testament: Buddhism repackaged.
FinnAtheist 1 month ago
@FinnAtheist lol, nice try, torah is only used and believed in by the jews...very few other chirstians follow anything from or about the torah or believe in it
jleht32 1 month ago
@jleht32 lol, nice try? What leads you to believe that Jesus is the messiah? For most Christians, it's the torah. And most Christians believe that the Torah is from God, so..
FinnAtheist 1 month ago
@FinnAtheist wrong...but believe what u want, only jews use the torah, and what leads me to believe in Jesus is the Bible which is not contradicted, unlike science, which proves itself wrong daily...
jleht32 1 month ago
@jleht32 Ignorance at best. Jesus is the last Prophet among the many Prophets, only he was prophecised in the Torah (Or so the Christians believe, as Jews don't believe the Torah is speaking of Jesus). True, Jews believe in the Torah, but what sets Jews and Christians apart? Christians believe Jesus is the Messiah, Jews don't. Christians do believe the Yahveh of the Old Testament is God. And this much I can tell you: He's not very sympathetic.
FinnAtheist 1 month ago
@jleht32 The bible has contradictions with numbers, years, stories, almost anything you can imagine. Why? It was based on hearsay TENS OF YEARS after Jesus had lived, written by different authors, and the Gospels were cherry-picked for it. Google: The Lost Gospels.
FinnAtheist 1 month ago
I loved the video...but am finding the conversation between Bystander81 and FinnAtheist far more interesting.
TheHjbookman 1 month ago
OMG when frasier froze when the lightning sounded as so damn funny hahaha, him thinking it was a warning from god XD
goth9ever 2 months ago
Have you read the OT...hahahahaha that was funny, I love this show
ArthurTheChristian 2 months ago
Full seasons on playlists? You're a Youtube hero
pouyaouya 2 months ago in playlist Season 10
whats the episode where niles has the heart attack??
bluemama26 2 months ago
@bluemama26 He never has a heart attack. You have to see the episode before this to find out what happens. Bristle While You Work.
pouyaouya 2 months ago in playlist Season 10
@pouyaouya i kno i jus realized it when i started watchin them again haha my bad
bluemama26 2 months ago
Daphne as nurse.. well, that Niles is one lucky guy. :-)
k3nny111 2 months ago in playlist Season 10
I love how even when he's talking to God, he still calls himself 'Dr Frasier Crane'!
bassretro1993 2 months ago 2
This sort of infuriates me. Frasier is, as Daphne said "a man of science". He is, for the most part, quite logical. It simply does not make sense for him to believe in a god at all. I guess it's because religion appeals to the average viewer, but still, why ruin the integrity of a character JUST to not alienate viewers?
That's just how I see it though, it doesn't seem realistic to me is all. Other than that part, the episode (and the show) are great :D
IHearYourSilence 2 months ago
@IHearYourSilence I think it's only because when people reach that desperate time in their life they reach for God even if they don't believe in God. That's how people are in reality, they only pray to God if they need him and don't believe in him...as a last chance type thing. At least that's how I see it. Lol
wrestlingluv 2 months ago in playlist More videos from frasiervideosjos
@IHearYourSilence It infuriates me that people seem to have the idea now that academia and the intellectual world belong exclusively to non-believers. I recommend you listen to some Ravi Zacharias or John Lennox. You might be surprised at how other such logical and intelligent men could have arrived at the conclusion that God exists.
Bystander81 2 months ago
@Bystander81 there is no such revelation as "the conclusion that god exist"... that's absurd... one can not ever conclude something they have no evidence... that's what people of lower iq and income call "faith" and what intelligent, well paid, higher responsible people call delusional paranoid episode.
skershaw2000 2 months ago
@skershaw2000 It actually isn't because if you have faith then it is its own evidence, so then you can't really label a person who has faith as delusional. They're acting based on personal evidence, something that they feel has been revealed to them. Your logic breaks down quickly under those circumstances.
Bystander81 2 months ago
@Bystander81 "evidence" isnt defined by subjective, individual belief... I dont mean to get Symantec, but faith isnt representational of evidence.. faith is pure belief without evidence.
its not logic, its vocabulary and meaning... not subjective nonsense... but then again, the majority of the world doesnt believe in Santa Claus (i.e. God, the same thing)... its mythology created from limited intelligence in very barbaric times without science, math, understanding.
skershaw2000 2 months ago
@skershaw2000 Delusion is the belief in something for absolutely no reason...it's something you make up just to believe in it because you're crazy. God cannot be a delusion because the people who believe don't make him up and don't just decide to start believing for no reason. It's a choice. And the only reason people believe in anything is because of conditioning. You choose a belief system that fits your personal worldview. Everybody does it.
Bystander81 2 months ago
@Bystander81 that's totally illogical and asinine... its like rationalizing a mental illness... even your subconscious realizes its absurd, like intelligent, well paid people do.
delusion is not defined by "belief in something for absolutely no reason"... in fact, that's what the belief in god is defined by... so you would be claiming its delusion... except you're incorrect on the definition... however, i digress, its apparent you have absolutely no clue what you are talking about
skershaw2000 2 months ago
@skershaw2000 So you think that people that believe in God do so for no reason? You also forgot to mention the second part of my argument, that a delusion is something that is made up by the people that believe in it. God is not made up by people that believe in him, the idea of God existed long before people born in our lifetime came to believe in it. It doesn't fit the definition of a delusion. Maybe you think it's irrational or illogical, but it's not a delusion.
Bystander81 2 months ago
@Bystander81 "A delusion is a false belief held with absolute conviction despite superior evidence"
WHy would you choose any specific god over any of the HUNDREDS of gos humans have come up with? You have absolutely no proof of god.
FinnAtheist 1 month ago in playlist Season 10
@FinnAtheist There is no "superior evidence" against God. Why would I choose any specific god? Because it's my life and I can do whatever I want, believe whatever I want, think whatever I want, and pray to whatever I want regardless of proof. My mind is my own and I am the one who decides what it believes, not you.
Bystander81 1 month ago
@Bystander81 I never said there's superior evidence against god. There's superior evidence against RELIGION. So if you are in a specific religion, there's most likely evidence against it, which in turn is evidence against a god ( within that religion ).
But granted, there's no evidence against a god.
Technically, you can't do whatever you want, but it hasn't got anything to do with religion.
FinnAtheist 1 month ago
@FinnAtheist You defined belief in god as a delusion and by extension (using the definition you yourself provided) an idea devoid of "superior evidence". You even went further as to say I have "no proof of god". Then you come back with this response and entirely contradict yourself, twice.
And I can do whatever I want, I am a being created with complete and total free will. There's a big irony there, but I doubt you'll get it.
Bystander81 1 month ago
@Bystander81 I cannot see where I contradicted myself at all... And actually believing in a god can be classified as delusion. Why? Even though it lacks evidence against it, it doesn't have any evidence to support it.
FinnAtheist 1 month ago
@FinnAtheist Then you entirely missed the point of the first post that I had here that you replied to. Your circular reasoning has already pushed you into two self-contradictions, now an outright denial of fact isn't going to help you.
Bystander81 1 month ago
@Bystander81 Would you gladly tell me the contradiction? and what fact? And I didn't reply to your first post.
FinnAtheist 1 month ago
@FinnAtheist The contradiction is that you're saying there's no proof of god, then you say there's no evidence against god. Choose one. The other is that you've told me that I "can't do whatever I want", yet you are advocating a belief system (and it is one) that would cater much more to that idea than even my own. The fact you're ignoring is that faith is its own evidence. That's what separates it from a "delusion". It's entirely subjective, but not irrational on that level.
Bystander81 1 month ago
@Bystander81 "There's no proof of god-There's no evidence against god" They're not contradicting...? Simply there is no proof of god, so there can't be ecidence against something that can't be proven. There's no proof of unicorns either, yet there is no evidence against them.
And I was just joking around with the " You can't do whatever you want, regardless of your faith", and meant your anatomy & biology which doesn't allow you to jump to moon with no equipment for example...
FinnAtheist 1 month ago
@FinnAtheist "Simply there is no proof of god, so there can't be ecidence against something that can't be proven." Then what are we even discussing? Why are you going out of your way to make comments about my having no proof of God if you admittedly can't furnish anything to the contrary? Your entire argument undoes itself and you have basically said nothing, proven nothing, and made no point at all. You've reasoned yourself into the middle of a big empty circle.
Bystander81 1 month ago
@Bystander81 No, what I'm saying is it is foolish to believe in something told in a book, told by several different authors centuries ago, when we have contradicting evidence ( assuming you follow a judeo-christian religion).
FinnAtheist 1 month ago
@FinnAtheist But you just finished saying for the last three posts that there is no contradicting evidence, unless you're counting your own statements, which I think you're up to five now.
Bystander81 1 month ago
@Bystander81 I was talking about god when I said there isn't contradicting evidence. To religion, there is. It's called evolution.
FinnAtheist 1 month ago
@FinnAtheist How does evolution contradict religion? The Bible doesn't say that things don't change over time. I think that your beef on a scientific level wouldn't be with religion, it would be with intelligent design, something that in many cases has absolutely nothing to do with religion or God. People who propose ID will cite aliens, ghosts, all kinds of other things that are totally out of the scope of what's commonly accepted as "religion".
Bystander81 1 month ago
@Bystander81 The funniest comment I've read today.. How does evolution contradict religion? It contradicts a literal interpretation of the first chapter of Genesis. There you go.
FinnAtheist 1 month ago
@FinnAtheist No it doesn't. The first chapter of Genesis doesn't say that organisms don't tend to change over time. Evolution supposedly contradicts the idea of intelligent design, which is not exclusive to religion. And even a "literal" reading of the first chapter of Genesis could lend itself to evolution depending on your opinion of ancient Hebrew adjectives.
Bystander81 1 month ago
@Bystander81 Yes, it doesn't say that they don't change. But if god made them, surely they wouldn't have to change to thrive in this world? And evolution is very clear that ALL OF THE ANIMALS IN GENESIS evolved from a single "ancestor", if you will. Thus god didn't create each one individually, but they parted ways long before and evolved to what they are. And evolution contradicts genesis in the account of human "creation"....
FinnAtheist 1 month ago
@FinnAtheist It doesn't. Genesis says that Adam was formed from the dust of the ground. This could be taken to mean that he evolved from a microbe in the dust. I know it sounds strange, but a lot of people interpret it that way. A lot of scientists interpret it that way. Genesis Gap theory is widely accepted among scientists. But it still doesn't knock out the element of intelligent design, which is what you are really against, not so much religion itself.
Bystander81 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Bystander81 First of all, I don't know many scientist who would agree on genesis. Maybe one respectable one. "This could be taken to mean that he evolved from a microbe in the dust. I know it sounds strange"Seriously, do you think your god was unable to acknowledge the difference between microbes and dust ? If I'd believe in god I'd want him to know the difference + if he's gonna help someone write a book, it better mean what it says, rather than being open to interprentation.
FinnAtheist 1 month ago
@Bystander81 Second, we now know life started in the oceans. So no, that's a no for the dust. Third, It is very clear in genesis that the animals were made individually, evolution disagrees, and we have proof of it.
FinnAtheist 1 month ago
@FinnAtheist To be honest I'm not a science buff so I really can't debate you on the intricacies of scientific evidence. What I can debate is that belief in God is not a delusion. I think I have proven my case as you've had to steer the conversation back to science since you couldn't win with philosophy. I really have no interest in what is possible or impossible scientifically...science really just bores me to death and I have no desire to pursue it as a hobby or a study.
Bystander81 1 month ago
@Bystander81 Philosophy might accept god, science won't until it can be proven :) Though there's always the possibility of there being a higher power, but it is quite delusional to believe in it with absolutely no proof. Maybe we'll see after we're dead, right ?
FinnAtheist 1 month ago
@FinnAtheist I still don't think it's "delusional" to believe in God and philosophy is on my side in that. Besides, if you're looking for scientific proof of God, you'll never find it. It would defeat the need for faith which would be totally contradictory to the entire message of salvation in the first place. Why would God provide absolute proof of himself in this tangible earth if we are to believe based on faith? That's why science is no help in this discussion.
Bystander81 1 month ago
@Bystander81 Philosophy isn't necessarily on your side here, but it can be. It searches and philosophies the existence of god. wikipedia org/wiki/List_of_atheist_philosophers
put a dot in the space between -pedia org-. If you wish to continue this conversation maybe we could move this to PMs as we both enjoy Frasier ( ? ) and I don't think it's right to spam the comments with our debate. PM me if you still want to.
FinnAtheist 1 month ago
@Bystander81 the pure and only reason some people believe in such folklore and absurdity is CONDITIONING... its what they were taught... its not natural to people in "the man in the sky wastching over us"... that's fantasy.... just like Thomas Jefferson and other forefathers said "pure mythology and absurdity"
skershaw2000 2 months ago
@IHearYourSilence Eh, it's not all that weird. Frasier may not be super religious, but there are times when he mentions a higher power. I recall one episode where it's a really beautiful day, and Frasier says something about acknowledging the power that created it. (I think it's the leap year episode, which is HILARIOUS.)
I agree it's a little strange, considering his personality. I'm just saying, it's not all that out-of-character for him. :)
MissGrapeNehi 2 months ago
fav line: "well played god...I'll see you at Easter"
sha8808 3 months ago
The communion of Frasier and "God" is such a subtle yet powerful indictment of the desperate, self-serving nature of "Faith"
creegimdendright 3 months ago
@creegimdendright
Very insightful. I hate seeing other nonbelievers spew ludicrous insults and absolute rejections as opposed to so reassuring and intellectual a comment as yours.
QWho2005 3 months ago
Daphne just doesn't work as sexy, every scene where she tries to be hot is awkward
hiphoponeworld 4 months ago
@hiphoponeworld
Look at the episode where she wears the Oriental outfit or the one where she dances in the red dress or the one where she wears the Vegas wedding outfit.
MKShaggy1985 3 months ago
@hiphoponeworld idc what the situation is (unless she's dead, puking, or using her ass in any non-sexual way) if a woman is hot, she's hot. daphne isn't myfavorite character on the show, but she's hot, and esp. in that sexy nurse outfit
MrAweeze 3 months ago
What commercial was Ross talking about? Or is it just a fictional thing from the writer? :o
L1b3rta 4 months ago
@L1b3rta you mean roz, ross was on friends
nirvanafan91ify 4 months ago
@nirvanafan91ify ...
L1b3rta 4 months ago
"Also, Death was a girl. "
ARGUMENT. OVER.
preyaswolves 5 months ago in playlist More videos from frasiervideosjos 7
Daphne: "Niles! What happened? Are you allright?"
Niles: "Yes, I just jumped in your bed with your mother!" I love the two xD
Sonnnymausi 5 months ago 3
god any time i know its a daphne/niles episode i just skip.
ruined the show so much
RJCunningham 5 months ago
@RJCunningham seriously? they're spectacular. the old ones, I mean.
butterscotchsoda 5 months ago
@RJCunningham I'm the exact opposite, I love Niles and Daphne together. They are the reason I watch. I don't think their relationship ruined the show at all. I mean that was part of the premise of the show, they had always planned on putting Niles and Daphne together, it was just a matter of time. I would have been stupid for Niles to pine after Daphne all those years and then nothing come of it. But to each their own I guess.
ddjmfan 5 months ago 12
@ddjmfan I just didn't like how they made Daph such a bitch after they got together. Perhaps the writers were trying to make the point she was an equal to them now, but shyte, they didn't have to make her so often the harpy bitch. I think that it was turned people off. Something changed in the writing of the character, but people thinking how they do, blame the actual fictitious character & the actress instead of the writers & show format. When she wasn't made the bitch, they were sweet2gether
Dehzee 4 months ago in playlist More videos from frasiervideosjos
@ddjmfan and i only took them about 8 years to get together, which was more than half of the show's run anyway.
LKSPR13 1 month ago
"Lets see, i got shot by a gun, and you ate a bunch of cheese" :DDDD
KevariGrazyInarista 5 months ago 3
i bet Jane's husband doesn't like to see his wife like that in another mans arms -_-
KaoriProductionz 6 months ago
@KaoriProductionz I don't think he had anything to worry about. Jane was just acting.
ddjmfan 6 months ago
@ddjmfan And David Hyde-Pierce is gay haha.
psychicbyinternet 3 months ago
@psychicbyinternet Yes, I know that.
ddjmfan 2 months ago
@KaoriProductionz David is gay and has a very long happy relation with his husband (they are together since he was in his 20s)
potocatepetl 5 months ago
Comment removed
KaoriProductionz 6 months ago
That 'nurse naughty' thing was quite... hot.
heroxrr 6 months ago
"Well played God". How cute! LOL!!!
LiveAsLoveInfinite 6 months ago
HILARIOUS how Frasier introduces himself to God! LOL!!!
LiveAsLoveInfinite 6 months ago
"Trust me, if my heart can take that, it can take anything!"
LOL!
Water3Monkey 6 months ago 3
Frasier's slowly-crumbling expression during his internal monologue with God in the hospital room made me tear up too :( I like how the rest of the episode is almost all laughs, but there's that sudden heartbreaking moment showing how frightened Frasier is about the idea of his brother dying.
grumpytosnowwhite 6 months ago 3
What was the episode before this?
smileyface31799 6 months ago
@smileyface31799 Its called 'rooms with a view', and the episode before that is called 'bristle while you work'
BabyIGotsYou 6 months ago
@BabyIGotsYou Thanks!
smileyface31799 6 months ago
Haha I've been watching this show for over a year now and I knew right before he said it that frasier would say, "well played god" (:
murponz 7 months ago
and also, death was a girl
:D:D:D
LebMir 7 months ago
Good, so few cats dress for the symphony any more.. :D Frasier's the best..!!
sundeep903 7 months ago 32
What exactly does this sentence mean? As I am translating the show, and I do not understand it. thanks
liuxiliang 3 months ago in playlist Frasier Season 10
This has been flagged as spam show
@sundeep903 What exactly does this sentence mean? As I am translating the show, and I do not understand it. thanks
liuxiliang 3 months ago in playlist Frasier Season 10
"Let's see. I got shot by a gun, and you ate a bunch of cheese."
XD
TheSteelStallion 7 months ago in playlist Season 10 4
I noticed that frasier introduced himself as Dr. Frasier Crane to God. I love how he always manages to throw doctor and Harvard into almost every conversation.
harrylongbaugh1 8 months ago 51
@glitterz2010...Yes I noticed that too. :D
kellmax001 8 months ago
Did anyone notice the on air light at the end was on while roz and frasier were messing with the chinese take out?
glitterz2010 9 months ago