Added: 4 years ago
From: Trenholmes
Views: 2,375
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (172)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Hi Roger, I wish I would have found your videos sooner. You and I appear to see it all eye to eye. Very rare and isn't it a shame.......... For everyone involved. If you ever get this message I home you contact me as I have some observations you don't touch on in this series and you might find interesting. At any rate......... I very much apprecieat your position and your ability and willingness to express it with such grace and detail........... Well done Old Chum.

  • Great video. More videos please:-)

  • HEY! Can't comment on your page so I'm hitting the comment section instead. Thanks for the sub! Can't believe your last video is 2 years old! Glad to see you're still around though. Cheers ;)

  • Great vid - thank you for clarifying this subject that I've often scratched my head over. (conditional faith)

  • consider that. This reasoning have a problem. Independently on my viewpoint about god, If I want to be rational, I have two exclusive events: A God exists, or God does not exists. According to you, there is no proof of the existance of God, while at the same time, there is not proof that God does not exist. Hence, what I see, you choose one belief based on you "probability model". but, independently on the outcome it is a belief.

  • this dude is a fat turd...he needs to get some real pussy, not rubber pussy

  • Please, If you are going to say me that Evolution is proven or it is a fact or .. any of those religious things, please support your arguments with scientific articles accepted in peer-reviewed journal. Traditional journals.

    If you do this exercise, you will found out the discussions about how fossils are not proof of evolution, the problem with bacterias and the common ancestor.

    Thirdly, one of my problem with Atheism is the axiom that if there is not proof of God, then I should not ...

  • .. out that there is a huge gap between what it is really proven by scientific methods, and what scientific magazines are presenting to the people. Indeed, there is nothing proven on the Evolution, moreover, there is no-consensus how to design experiments that would lead to definitive conclusions.

    The fact that you say that it is disputable, makes me undoubtly think that your religion is evolution. Why? because you have not checked the actual fact and you are just believing the propaganda.

  • I listen the first four minutes of the video, and I see several flaws in the line of reasoning. First of, data is not the key aspect in your decisional process. What about the model? In fact, from the same data I can extract several models. So, thinking that experience is the meaningful factor to your decisional process is wrong.

    Secondly, from 3:10 on, "indisputable case for evolution". I am a person who has spend many hours reading about "Evolution". I have found out ...

  • Hi, Roger! I'm just revisiting some of your old videos. Old they may be by YouTube standards, but they will never be stale. Your crisp, insightful observation elevates your arguments far above the run of videos to be found here. I hope that sometime soon you will make more videos. Another voice of reason can only benefit us all.

  • I believe in God. I also believe she laughs her ass off daily at how badly we think we know about religion.

  • Okay, but how do you know that?  That's the point.

  • How do you know that your signifigant other really loves you?

  • Because I can ask her. I don't have to imagine a response. Do I really know, can I climb inside her head? No, but I can make a fairly accurate judgment based on actual physical evidence.

  • Couldn't I draw the same conclusion from a priest?

  • Not really because I can then ask how does the priest know. In the end the line leading to the priest's source of knowledge will be unconditional faith which requires no evidence be it physical or otherwise.

  • @Trenholmes

    discovered that underground, the temperature was at 2000 degrees. When they lowered the microphones, they heard what sounded like screaming people. Several years later, in a sound studio, they tested and found that indeed was million's of sound sounding simultaneously, and with current technology would be impossible to fabricate.

    2.)The Earth...its size is perfect. The Earth's size and corresponding gravity holds a thin layer of mostly nitrogen and oxygen gases, only extending

  • @Trenholmes The human brain...simultaneously processes an amazing amount of information. Your brain takes in all the colors and objects you see, the temperature around you, the pressure of your feet against the floor, the sounds around you, the dryness of your mouth,

  • @Trenholmes even the texture of your keyboard. Your brain holds and processes all your emotions, thoughts and memories. At the same time your brain keeps track of the ongoing functions of your body like your breathing pattern, eyelid movement, hunger and movement of the muscles in your hands.

  • @Trenholmes Does God exist? The universe had a start - what caused it?

    Scientists are convinced that our universe began with one enormous explosion of energy and light, which we now call the Big Bang. This was the singular start to everything that exists: the beginning of the universe, the start of space, and even the initial start of time itself.

  • @Trenholmes Astrophysicist Robert Jastrow, a self-described agnostic, stated, "The seed of everything that has happened in the Universe was planted in that first instant; every star, every planet and every living creature in the Universe came into being as a result of events that were set in motion in the moment of the cosmic explosion...The Universe flashed into being, and we cannot find out what caused that to happen."

  • @Trenholmes

    Steven Weinberg, a Nobel laureate in Physics, said at the moment of this explosion, "the universe was about a hundred thousands million degrees Centigrade...and the universe was filled with light."

    The universe has not always existed. It had a start...what caused that? Scientists have no explanation for the sudden explosion of light and matter.

  • @Trenholmes

    So what you and every other atheist are saying is that the Universe came from nothing which is literally impossible. Your entire way of believing is therefore deconstructed. And by the way. Nothing in the bible is always exactly what it means. In proverbs it says that only the wise will understand. You may think your wise, but in truth, you are blind, and condemned, not to mention ignorant.

  • @Trenholmes

    We can't know it exactly. That's the point. If it was easy to believe in God, then that would defeat the purpose of the church. The purpose of the church is to make it easy on your faith, since believing in something we have no physical evidence seems to be extremely difficult for us. Now, in 1997, a scientist named Dr. Azzacov drilled about 14.8 kilometers into the earth in Siberia. At one point the drill began to spin wildly and out of control. They stopped the drill and (1/2)

  • I wonder why he doesn't post videos anymore. I really like his eloquence on explaining things. I feel like I learn something new from his videos.

  • Gosh none of you even have a clue what God is about. You think God is looked apon as an answer while ignoring everything else, the morals, the lessions, the way of life. You don't inspire people by simply saying God did this and that, there needs to be meaning behind the words. You treat religion as if it had no substance, as if it's as cold as your beliefs. It's far from it and you fail to realise that.

  • I know what your god is about. I'm very familiar with it. What atheists want is factual, repeatable evidence. And that's something that you nor any religion can ever provide.

  • Exactly!

    So why not leave it at that. Granted some religious people will attempt to stop progress as some atheists want religion destoryed. But surely the best deal is to just leave both sides alone.

  • religious people do not leave it alone. that is the problem. if you dont see that then wake up.

  • Atheists like to throw about their believes like they own the world, and when we try to talk or express our beliefs, they attack us.

    If your bias enough not to see your argument works both ways then you need to wake up.

  • why wouldnt we throw our non beliefs out like we own the world. i mean, all the fucking evidence in the world supports us so yea.. i dont see a problem with it. and atheists attack your retarded beliefs, not the person. and regigious peoples ideas of expression are TEACH CREATIONISM IN SCHOOLS OR ALLAH!!!! (BOOM)

  • "I know what your god is about. I'm very familiar with it."

    Bullshit. If you were, your video would be alot different. The soda example, explaining what you THINK religious faith is.. ugh give me a break. You finish saying christians want to see evo-scientists locked up or worse?

    Yeah you know christianity... what a joke.

  • Unfortunately, Debono, I believe he probably DOES know Christianity. Unfortunately, SO DO I. I DO KNOW fundamentalist Christianity.

    You might be defending a different, more tolerant brand of Christianity. Unfortunately, fundamentalist, anti-scientific Christianity is too prevalent, too powerful today and, for the good of everyone - even of fundamentalist Christians - it must be opposed.

  • (part II)

    (Their and our enjoyment of the benefits of science -like evidence-based medicine, no less- would eventually be greatly hindered should they triumph in imposing their backward, unscientific worldview on children - from whom tomorrow's scientists necessarily must come.)

    When you question Trenholmes' knowledge of Christianity, I dare venture you might be referring to Christianity's tenets of forgiveness and meekness, which would preclude violent treatment of dissenters.

  • (part III)

    Unfortunately, you must be as aware as me of too many religious people's sad history of opposing scientific progress - violently if need be.

    I think all he -and many others, myself included- is saying to fundamentalist Christians -and all such who would impose their narrow views on life and morality on others- is "Keep your dog off our lawn."

    Believe if you must - and let us disbelieve if we will.

  • Hi there. Christianity is clear that we're not ment to run around and try force people to follow our belief, that we should be tolerant of others.

    It's nothing new, Christians however do like to enforce their belief on others, thats wrong, and I'm glad you see a difference between the two kinds, but I do wonder just how many atheists realise not all Christians want to shove a bible down your throat. Because I've met alot that want christianity wiped off the earth =S

  • I've read the bible and I am quite confident in my knowledge in it. It provides no reasonable or logical answers.

  • Trenholmes; Same with me. I studied(lost my time) quite extensively ,when I was young. The bible is fantasy, pure and simple.

  • There's a difference between a speculative theory and a scientific Theory. Do a little research before you spout things like "That's all they are".

  • Debono11, do us all a favor and prove there is a god. Until the shut your hypocrite mouth.

  • speculative theory, scientific Theory they both have something in common. Their not facts. hypocrite huh? No logical answers hm?

    I watch this video and I see a message about what your kind THINK christians are. Sorry but it doesn't match up with real people.

    What I find logical may not seem logical to you, thats fine. I said to read the bible and understand it before you make claims about christianity that make no sense, and not enough of you bother to do that.

  • There is no reason to read the Bible. To be a Christian means one thing: to believe in Jesus Christ as your personal savior. That's it. Nothing else matters. Believe it and you are saved, fail to believe and you are damned. What you do in life makes no difference, just as long as you believe in Jesus Christ you are saved. Period.

  • Debono, you are the one making the claim that God exists. You have the burden of proof. Until you can prove it, you and your fellow sheep should stop legislating your dogma.

  • Just for a fun exercise could you speculate what the case of the universe would be like if the universe had beginning. Play the devils advocate for a minite and describe the creator.

  • Once again eveidence is not proof. Science and experience tell us that;

    1.Everything that begins to exist has a cause.

    2. The universe began to exist.

    3. Therefore, the universe must have a cause

    Are you aware or can you prove that anything that exists that did not have a cause? If you can't you are calling upon the supernatural to explain away the supenatural.

    Here is the bottom line for your type.

    I don't where the universe came from but I know God did not create it.

    Cont.

  • Humans are generally biased and closed minded which is not a good thing. Religion makes it even worse giving people unrational biased opinions even before proper education which distorts future opinions to cause a whole heap of biased unrational opinions. lol

  • Lambasting.  Good word.

  • I've only seen four of your videos and you effectively my favorite personality on Youtube.

  • Deuteronomy 23 :10 -15 dumb God told dumb Moses to tell dumb followers

    that when they take a shit in they camp, they should cover their shit

    by first digging a hole in the ground with a paddle, and then covering

    the hole. God wanted this to happen because when is with you in camp

    trying to beat the enemies, he doesn't want to camp to be unholy. Now, my

    dumb believers, you actually think that God sent a verse through Moses

    on how to properly take a shit?

  • Awesome :)

  • When you say there is no eveidnce for God you are either a liar or ignorant. Have you not read any of the cosmological arguments for God? Have you not heard of the fine tuned universe? Have you not read the volumes written on the subject? Have you not heard of the many brilliant scientists that are and were theists. You may reject the evidence but don't say there isn't any. cont.

  • Your world view fails when it gets to the point of origins. Science has NO EVIDENCE for the origin of the universe or life only speculation. Multiverse and abiogenesis are lathced onto and proclaimed rational and viable options becuase the alternative is that the "evidence" points to God.

    You observe the laws of nature and then take credit for them. Anti bacterial soap works on both evolutionists and theists. Joseph Lister was a Christian by the way. Me thinks he doth protest too much!!

  • You believe on faith. None of the cosmological arguments have evidence. There is no repeatable, scientific proof for the existence of a higher being. If you can show me proof (and any atheist for that matter) belief would be instant. Good luck with that.

  • Your video said evidence not proof. An eternal almighty God is more logical than the universe springing into existance from nothing. How is that repeatable and observable? I have weighed the evidence and I believe by faith the same as you no difference.

  • Evidence and Proof are synonyms. When someone's religious views are questioned they use scripture to verify their religious views: they use the basis of their religion to verify their religion as true. They also claim "Isn't this world proof enough of his existence" which isn't rational. It is proof of his non-existence though, but if he did exist proof he doesn't care.

  • A single set of footprints in the snow is evidence of one person walking down a path not proof. As we know that person could being carrying another.

    1.Everything that begins to exist has a cause.

    2. The universe began to exist.

    3. Therefore, the universe must have a cause.

    Good evidence don't you think?

  • The planet we live on was created through an accretion of material process.

    There is no evidence to support that the Universe didn't exist at one point. And to assume that it didn't exist is to not understand that the universe has multiple dimensions. It is possible for it to have collapsed upon itself destroying space-time, but still exist in other dimensions.

    God is not needed for this to happen.

    Therefore those items do not prove to be good evidence that God exists after all.

  • So you are saying you belive in an actual physical infinity? 

    It is the common view of science that the universe had a beginning, nice try though.

  • Energy can neither be created nor destroyed. I never said it physically has always existed although it's possible to exist physically as a dot in the first dimension with neither width, depth, or height.

    This is a hypothesis that could explain how the Big Bang came from seemingly nothing.

    At least I don't believe the Imaginary and Invisible man created energy out of nothing which as far as we know is: impossible.

  • "There is no evidence to support that the Universe didn't exist at one point."

    "I never said it physically has always existed although it's possible to exist physically"

    The alternative to creation is a universe "seemingly coming from nothing"

    No you have an imaginary,invisable unknown force creating everything from seemingly nothing with no explanation where the original dot came from cool science man.

  • You assume that it had to come from somewhere instead of always existing, and being a cyclical phenomenon. That never occurred to you because if that is possible then God is necessary to create the Universe out of nothing is no longer required, and you just can't accept that.

    God is nothing more than a man-made construct.

  • should read "not necessary*

  • You are right like many scientists I reject a physical infinty. The universe does not appear to have enough mass to collapse on itself as was once suggested. At any rate I admire your blind faith. The Scientismist credo "We don't know how the universe started but we know it is not God, so we will seek alternate impossible, unfalsifiable explantaions for the obvious no matter what so help me Random Blind Force, Amen "

  • Here's the problem with your statement, and it's an observation of what religion does to scientific advancement: religion states that God is the cause of everything; therefore, if you accept this then you no longer need to search for an answer to how or why. This is the exact reason why when a religion of any type gets a grip on a group of people the scientific advancement grinds to either a halt of near stop.

  • This can be seen during the Dark Ages in Europe, and during in the Middle East during the Renaissance in Europe.

    How many scientists is "many": one, two, five, twenty? Are you a scientist yourself? Can you state for a fact that the Universe is finite in every way, and then back it up with information that can be verified?

  • That was a rather amusing bit of fiction about what the scientific community does, and it's rather false. At no point have I actually stated "This is a fact, and it's absolutely true!"; in fact, I stated it was a hypothesis and not a theory. What I did was look at a multi-dimensional model of the Universe, considered what it would look like if it was reduced to one dimension of physical space, and then compared that to the Big Bang theory. Faith has nothing to do with it.

  • There's a lot of debate about whether or not the Universe is infinite in any manner of being infinite whether it physically has no end or has no end to time. You may conclude for yourself that it is physically finite, but until we can see beyond our event horizon or have a way to measure the Universe itself we won't actually know. It's possible that it is finite, and yet still getting bigger or merely stretching like a balloon does.

  • For the kicker: I don't believe my hypothesis to be true on the grounds that it can't actually be proven to be true. For the same reason I don't believe any sort of god exists and/or created everything because it cannot be proven.

    This is a rational conclusion that I have arrived at using logic. "God did it" is not rational thinking, rather it is a cop out used to avoid looking for a real answer.

  • "if you accept this then you no longer need to search for an answer to how or why"

    1.Everything the began to exist has a cause.

    The how and why of eveything we know so far.

    2.The universe began to exist.

    The commonly held position of the day.

    3.The universe had a cause.

    The rational logical conclusion.

    The statements above are logical whether you like it or not.

  • If the universe had a cause the cause must be outside of spacetime, powerful actually all powerful, intelligent, non physical and transcendant. Do you have a problem with my logic here?

  • Yes, it isn't logical.

  • "If" the universe had a cause it's not logical?

  • "If the universe had a cause the cause must be outside of space-time, powerful actually all powerful, intelligent, non physical and transcendent."

    You aren't hiding your meaning of "God did it" very well. Try again.

  • It's a question, simple as that why won't you answer that. Again notice the if.

  • None of those equate to God being the cause, or that it isn't possible that the Universe has always existed just not as a manifestation of physical matter.

  • I do not believe that universe is finite in every way and never said so. I do believe that the universe had a beginning and therefore I do not except an infinite regression where matter and energy have always existed. Red shift, background radition and more have pretty much sealed the deal for me. No I can not state for a fact I can only rely on the evidence and work of brilliant men employing predictive falsifiable science.

  • But energy has to have always existed as it can be neither created nor destroyed. Even God isn't above that law. You want everyone to believe that God defied that and created energy out of nothing, and ignore actual theories that are being worked on that state that it's possible for the Universe to be cyclical.

  • Most of what I read suggests that nothing is known about the universe at time=0. Read it again "nothing" You have no idea if energy can be either created or detroyed only faith.

    My suggestion of a powerful transcendant creative intelligence is more logical than you supposing an infinite regression of energy or at least as valid.

  • Your suggestion is not a valid Theory. My suggestion isn't a theory by my own admission: it's my hypothesis and it's entirely falsifiable/refutable.

    Scientific Laws and Theories don't require faith as they have been proven to be true.

  • You claim that "God did it because there was nothing before time 0" while completely ignoring that Energy cannot be created or destroyed. If Energy can not be created or destroyed then God cannot create it, and it has to exist infinitely at all times. Even before Time=0 because with no physical matter there is no concept of time. With this in mind it's possible to have an infinite number of "time=0" in which the end is the beginning.

  • I never made such a claim. I am refuting your assertion that energy can neither be created nor destroyed. We have no idea what laws if any were in place at time=0 and certainly a created universe would include the creation of energy.

  • So, you are refuting the First Law of Thermodynamics?

    "powerful transcendent creative intelligence"

    No, you are actually claiming "God did it", you're just trying to make it not look like that by describing it instead.

    Try again.

  • No it is a law in place now. Are you asserting that the law was in place at time=0?

  • Tell you what, you keep believing that the invisible sky wizard waved his magic wand and "poof" pulled a Universe out of his magical hat.

    And the rest of the human race will continue to figure out what really happened.

  • Now that's using your brane;-)

  • Considering you are unwilling to accept any answer other than "God did it" because you were brainwashed to believe this there is no point.

    I could point out all of the discoveries science has made, and you would still parrot the line of "God did it". Your stance is ridiculous and illogical. It's like talking to a brick wall: it accomplishes nothing because the brick wall can't think for itself: it's stupid. You are the brick wall in this case.

  • Oh, and for your information, the scientific law I referenced didn't exist until science came up with it: it's a construct to describe what we observe in the natural world. It's provable and fully falsifiable should you feel like attempting to do so unlike your blind assertion of "God did it".

    I hope this doesn't go over your head, but I'm sure you will miss the point entirely.

    Oh, and you misspelled "brane": it's "brain".

  • I hope this doesn't go over your head, but I'm sure you will miss the point entirely.

    Oh, and you misspelled "brane": it's "brain".

    I think it may have been over your head it was a pun. Go back through any of my posts and find one instance of me saying "God did it" I don't think you will find any. By the way you gave no answer to the origins of the universe only wild speculation about the unprovable.

  • Everything you have stated has been double talk for "God did it". You even tried to use a descriptor for God to try and make it look like something else: "powerful transcendent creative intelligence". Meaning God, and coupled with the rest of your BS you are stating "God did it" while thinly disguising your argument as logical when it is anything buy the parroting of the religious line of BS you've bought into for a quick and easy answer.

    Q.E.D.

  • And your assertions are logical? Either the universe has always existed and self directed itself into a state that produced consicousness, order, intelligence and information, or it self created itself from nothing and self directed itself to the state it is in today. My position is "if" The universe had a beginning then the cause of that beginning would be "powerful transcendent creative intelligence". I am clearly more logical than you.

  • Your entire argument is based on circular logic which doesn't prove anything. It's your claim that God exists, and therefore it's your problem to prove it exists. However since it requires a leap of faith to belive God exists then it's not falsifiable. One cannot prove a negative, so if you need to prove something exists you must furnish proof of it.

    If there was such proof there would be no atheists in the world, but since it doesn't exist there are.

  • Also, chaos theory states that anything can happen given enough time.

    Let's assume that a mass collapses creating an infinitely dense point which then creates a singularity. The singularity is for all intents and purposes a dot. Let's assume that this singularity caused a breach in a universe through which pure energy rushes. The First Law of Thermodynamics will already exist within the meshwork of universes. It is the only one that need exist at this time.

  • "My position is "if" The universe had a beginning then the cause of that beginning would be "powerful transcendent creative intelligence". I am clearly more logical than you."

    This is not logic. This is the parroting of BS that you've learned to regurgitate by rote, and nothing more. You may stop trying to be cute by describing your god, and just call it what it really is. I'm pretty sure that everyone else can see right through your pathetic attempt at hiding what you really mean.

  • I am glad that my description of the cause of the universe fits your defintion of God. Finally we both agree.

  • Really? Do you believe that Aliens or the flying spagetti monster are the cause of the universe? Think about it: you're the only one who has defined God. By making the statement you just did means you are assuming my definition of God is the same as yours. My statement points out how ridiculous and illogical yours was.

    Try again.

  • Are you not aware that many of the world's greatest sicentists were and are theists. What a mischaracterization, believers like Newton, Planck, Pasteur, Galileo Galilei and Linnaeus for example were very interested in the how and why and so are modern theist scientists. It is the atheist scientist that rejects possibilities without proof. (cont)

  • Possibilities without proof? Atheists reject God's existence on the basis that there isn't a shred of proof that can be verified. None, nada, zip.

    Science is not the same as theism, and I was not talking about individual people strangling scientific advancement. Pay attention.

  • your so dumb and your a minority go come up with a better reason to say God doesnt exist i cant fucking wait when im going through the pearly gates and your going to hell when im going to life eternal life in paradise and your going to burn in hell

  • You must be kidding.

  • Heh, that's for adding a little humour to my day.

  • OMG, did you know that no other religion even has a god as grudging as Christianity?

    He will torment you for ETERNITY if you do look at him wrong. He let us kill his ONLY son in the most HORRIFIC manners possible. What kind of monster is THAT??? Most of the time if you describe a person in that way they are viewed as a TYRANT or DICTATOR, but not if you call it GOD. In that case it's ok because it's his plan, and his world.

  • Hawking said "the universe was spontaneously created out of nothing"

    "I have a pocket full of Smurfs"

    They both seem like ridiculus statements to me.

    Something from nothing and life from non life are faithful statements no matter how you slice it.

  • I don't think so... he may have said the universe came from an infinite density, zero-volume particle, for which as evidence i would cite black holes in nature and the current expansion of the universe.

    And life from non-life makes perfect sense if you realize that living things are made of the same stuff of non-living things.

  • No in actuality he said exactly "The universe was spontaneously created from nothing".

    Black holes are part of the universe.

    1.All things that began to exist had a cause.

    2.The universe began to exist.

    3.The universe had a cause.

    Has mankind ever observed life coming from nonlife? I don't think so. All life that we have seen or known of comes from other living organisms.

  • No, we haven't, and there is a very good reason for this as well. In order for life to come from non-life there has to be a cause, or set of circumstances that allows it to happen such as a chemical soup. Where did it come from? Simple, torrential rains eroding various compounds from an early earth into the oceans which were probably smaller creating an unstable environment in which through chemical reactions, and the addition of radiation, life could spontaneously form.

  • Remember life on this planet requires the sun to survive. Is the sun our God? I would sooner believe that the Sun is God then some invisible being that doesn't seem to give two shits about us. The sun doesn't really give two shits either because it just does what it does : send life giving and destroying radiation to everything within range.

  • That was very eloquent and lucid. Not one word out of place or without purpose. Thank you so much for this!

  • I still don't understand the knock on Faith ( Religious faith that is) I get the cult and problem within but all around the world there is faith and always has been. - so by evolution standards thats millions upon millions of yeras right? - I know man only here thousands due to some mutation that evolution proves but can't even begin to explain. Science is based on faith & over time it has contridicted itself plenty and only to admit it will due it again. stare into that face.

  • Science isn't based on faith, but for religon it's, certainly, a prerequiste to belief. Also, you talk of science admiting contradictions as if that is a bad thing. Science owns up to it's mistakes in search of the truth. Religon never does this because it cares more about other things. Like scaring the shit out of little children.

  • Do you have a rational reason for believing in "consciousness"?

  • Sorry Nick, you or no one elce can be the saviour, Only Jesus the one that God sent. He will not share His Glory with you,,every knee will bow to Jesus and every person will confess that Jesus is the LORD> As always, Carol

  • And aside from the Bible, what signs are there for the second coming?

  • Organized religion=Organized crime

  • I'm sure it's been said somewhere in these 6 or so pages of comments that religious people are waiting for that "condition" that proves their beliefs credible. Waiting around for irrational proof. "Behold! I am coming soon" Saw it on a bumper sticker. I argue: you cannot "behold" something that has not happened yet. When I die I am going to meet Carl Sagan in a tesseract. Is that irratiional? =D

  • I dont believe you about the invisible smurfs apart from that, great video.

  • Yet again I fail to make a convert to the smurf religion. Damn you poppa smurf!

  • By the way I am more inclined towards atheism, but I feel the need of God(either real or imaginary)to make sense of life.

  • The problem with atheism is that life loses its meaning, we are nothing more than aggregation of organic molecules. Though I can never justify any religion or God, but denying it altogether will make life purposeless. Physical theories are just like a map of reality, we can never take that as reality.

  • I would have to disagree about the loss of meaning. I've found my life more than adequately meaningful. Life isn't meaningful because of the imagined things we may receive in the afterlife. Life is meaningful for what we do in this life. Family, friends, love, this gives life meaning.

  • Yes emotions(love, hatred, happiness, sadness) make us feel like living. But going by Science alone these emotions will mean nothing to us just as God is imaginary in our language of Science.

    PS: Thanks for your prompt reply.

  • Explaining something with science doesn't remove the emotions that may be evoked from the natural world. In fact, knowing scientifically how things behave an evoke awe and joy. Understanding why the sun works is beauty to me. This understanding doesn't take away my appreciation for a sunrise either.

  • I understand your point. But relying on Science alone will pull us out of this world, that's what my personal experience is. I cannot even criticize cannibalism in some societies, because now there is no absolute right or wrong.

  • By understanding sun's motion, we no longer are in awe of sunlight. Earlier people use to worship Sun as God, but nowadays nobody cares about sun. Similarly understanding life only in terms of Science, will make us lose the meaning of life which we have now.

  • Don't know if I am making much sense to you, but I have lost some charm in life by interpreting everything through reasons.

  • I have heard arguments of Prof. Richard Dawkins, he clearly mentioned that his purpose is to seek truth. Based on scientific evidences therefore, he advocates atheism. It seems to me, you value your emotions, even though emotions are also becoming emotional baggage.

  • I have heard arguments of Prof. Richard Dawkins, he clearly mentioned that his purpose is to seek truth. Based on scientific evidences therefore, he advocates atheism. But should we discard God just because it is irrational.

    It seems to me, you value your emotions, even though emotions are also becoming evolutionary baggage.

  • Same way 'belief in God' also helps few people emotionally. Where do homeless, friendless people find love from? God's love has same emotional value as your spouse's love, for few people.

    Why doe we tell our children that Santa Clause exist, even if he doesn't

  • Santa is fun and lighthearted. A few idiots introduce "you wont get any presents if you're bad" but on the whole Santa is harmless fun. God on the other hand is child abuse. The idea that compassion, love, morality and wisdom are dependent on an imaginary being is ludicrous. It floors me that people don't just sit down and think about it. The ones that do become Atheists and Atheists make up a much smaller percentage of the prison population than they do in the general population. Why is that?

  • "A scientific approach to crystals is more illuminating, more uplifting, and also stranger, than anything imagined in the wildest dreams of New Age gurus or paranormal preachers. The blunt truth is that the dreams and visions of gurus and preachers are not nearly wild enough. By scientific standards, that is." -Professor Richard Dawkins

  • I don't think I'm presuming too much by saying that Mr. Dawkins would replace "crystals" with "the universe" and "gurus and preachers" with "gods and religion" in the above quote. Even if he wouldn't, I certainly feel that way.

  • "By understanding sun's motion, we no longer are in awe of sunlight"

    Understanding the suns motion makes me in awe of sunlight in a much more profound way. The more I learn about the universe around me, through the sciences and expirence, the more meaningful the universe becomes.

  • (sp) experience

  • Actually I am! =D

  • Presupposition built upon presupposition is the foundation for faith and religion not atheism. Intellectual atheism is based upon intellect while religion is based upon nonsense like the Bible which constantly contradicts itself, promotes sickening violence and tells of laughable events (the parting of an entire sea?) amongst it's bevy of flaws.

  • Indeed. Thanks for the great comment.

  • Your very eloquent but your intellectual arrogance is frankly nausating.Alot of your arguments are based upon presupposition built upon presupposition.You like to portray yourself as a beacon of rational objectivity underpinned by a mass hard empirical evidence.But some of us can see through your sophistry.You seem to be devoid of any self-critical sensibility in relation to the arguments you advocate.This is typical of intellectual atheism.

  • You make a baseless claim about my argument with additional ad hominem and do nothing to support your claim. I provide logical evidence. When you can do the same in a rational discussion we'll have a foundation for conversation. Otherwise, everything you've said is as worthless as smoke. See what you want but until you can bring something more fruitful to the table, such as I do in every video, I can only conclude that you are blind.

  • I've noticed that during this rant, you've yet to point out an example of presumptions made during any of Rodgers videos.

  • Very good points. One would think they would be more than happy to shake the heavy burden of faith without proof.

  • Ah, proof means so little to clouded and determined minds. But where would mankind be without the proofs we've discovered in the relative truths of the universe? We'd still be in huts I fear.

  • WTF Roger!! That was way to long away from us. I was going through withdrawals...pissing myself, curled up on the floor drooling, speaking incoherently.....all of which is quite normal for me, its just that I was doing a lot more of it. Anyways glad to see your back!

  • Great video! 5/5

    Katalyzt

  • You are too kind sir. Also, we need more of your masked madness!

  • Agreed with zawam, you should definitely write a book on the subject on atheism. It would make for a very interesting read for theists and atheists alike.

  • I'm working on one of that very subject. I hope to make it available freely and through press. More on that soon I promise.

  • Good to hear: I look forward to reading it.

  • Roger, dont ever leave us for that long again. (:

  • I've been a bad boy... =) Another vid hopefully this weekend or even tomorrow.

  • Glad to hear it, and I look forward to watching it.

  • "I've been a bad boy... =) Another vid hopefully this weekend or even tomorrow."

    You said that a week ago... prick. Hurry the fuck up or I'm swithing teams.

  • Awesome!

    We all have "faith" of some sort; we must in order to function. This is a very different faith to the blind variety.

    Atheism is the *result* of rational thought, not a target to move toward.

  • Indeed! =) We so much need more rationalization in this world. I fear for our future as any thinking person should.

  • By your words, blind faith, I can tell you have never experienced The Power of God The HOLY Spirit, The Power of God is WHY I KNOW, without even the smalles't doubt, that God is Creator of all things that you can see and the things you can't see. God gives eternal life and mercy to the humble but He resist the proud. As always, Carol

  • You are probably referring to the same feelings people use to justify their belief in Allah, or Buddha, or any other God. What you sure what "moved you" was the Christian God?

  • Aske, The Creator is Spirit, He spoke the "Worlds" into existence, the things that you can see and the things that you can't see. Adam and Eve disobeyed their Creator. The Creator Cursed the earth, let satan have power, then after what we humans think is along time, The Creator sent a Gift, the Gift was His only begotten Son. To the proud God shows Himself proud, to the humble and contrite He has mercy and takes the vail off the Spirit eyes. As always, Carol

  • Little bunny foo-foo went hoppin' through the forest. Scoopin' up all field mice and boppin on their head.

  • The universe isn't eternal but human beings (a very tiny SUBSECTION of the universe) are? And your reason for this claim is personal, emotional experience? About your other comment, do you think he don't know the story or something? The question was why, not what. Why is this story convincing to you and outlandish to me?

  • DickJohnson3434, Hi this is Carol, your questions,1. God made man Spirit. 2, Knowing God is Spiritual, not emotional, "you must be born again" your spirit must be born to understand this. The carnal,natural man is the emotions. Your last ? It is outlandish to you because your spirit has never been born by the Holy Spirit of the Creator. As always, Carol

  • So what is your spirit?

  • When God Created man He breathed the Holy Spirit into him and they became living souls. When they were kicked out of the garden they died in the spirit, God cursed the land. When man began to call out to God he moved on them again with His Spirit, we are able to become alive in the Holy Spirit, a vail is taken off our spiritual eyes. Jesus became the bridge back to the Father, if we call on the name of Jesus, He will always make Himself known to us. As always, Carol

  • That doesn't really explain what a spirit actually is. It can't be "life", as religious people only apply it to humans and not other forms of life. It can't be thoughts and emotions as they certainly are not exclusive to humans. It sounds like some sort of essence but "God breathed it into us" doesn't really explain what it is he's breathing into us. I've heard these claims before but I don't understand how they are supposed to intersect with reality. My veil hasn't been lifted I guess.