Added: 3 years ago
From: Thunderf00t
Views: 302,301
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (4,923)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Poisenous little toads... couldt be more offensive then that, BUT I LOVED IT!

  • Look at the likes of Bachmann, Perry and Santorum. They have been marginalized within the Republican Party, but they would drag us back in time and threaten the safety of the whole world. All of these fundies need to be watched, and for the goodness of humanity, not allowed anywhere near high office.

  • yeah canada + northern and western US states :p

  • What with the issues of SOPA and such, this censorship of free speech issue becomes all the more pressing.

  • I'm pretty sure this has been asked before, but does anyone know what movie the scenes at 5:26 are from?

  • @SPWRobbe25 Stephen King's The Dead Zone.

  • @anzwertree Thanks a lot for that info, mate.

  • Bill Hicks FTW!

  • I have to say ... this entertains me.

  • Oh wow. When you really think about it--Thunder has hit the nail on the head with what is going to happen. Some scary shit.

  • 7:30 That's just wrong.

  • Yes! Bill Hicks! Good Choice

  • 4:26 actually the top of philipines is chatholic/christian not Buddhist and bottom is islam

  • You thought wrong

  • i thought china had the biggest army

  • WOOOO Wisconsin survived Jesusland toooooo

  • When it comes to censorship of free speech - take a look at the SOPA bill in the US which seeks to censor the internet on the bogus idea of reducing copyright infringement. Imagine the misuse this abusive bill will create, where corporations have the power to silence the only place individuals can truly share information, by claiming someone owns some copyright (a font for example) that you have used. Anyone who doesnt know about this please take the time to take action while its easy

  • Well said. Thanks for this.

  • i enjoyed your earier vidios poking fun at the young earth creationalisms but now you seem to be bashing all religion and i really cant say i approve of that

  • @kekkres Sometimes intolerance needs a good bashing to keep it in it's cage.

    Religion's all fine and dandy, so long as it's not leading to immorality and idiocy. Once the general public considers something as a joke, then it loses much power, like Scientology or the Westboro Baptist Church.

  • @crazyinsane500 aithests can be every bit as intolerant as religious people but i dont bash them. my point was this was a good seires when it was simply pointing out people who are basicly making fun of themselves, not so much when it took a more serious anti religion aspect

  • @kekkres

    And you don't see the inherent danger of any religion or philosophy which claims it has a superior agenda via it's directive from a Divine Authority???

    This is the whole point of the series, in my humble opinion. Creationism, theist mentality, it all arrogantly states that it is the only way. They're convinced this world doesn't matter, only the next. I wouldn't be so worried if they weren't trying to impose their "way" on everyone else.The Dover trial was a very serious eye-opener.

  • I support this message I'm just not so sure we will win the war against this fundamentalists threat and that worries me.

  • as a fellow atheist and grammar nazi,

    hallelujah is spelled

    H-A-L-L-E-L-U-J-A-H

    im sorry im 3 years late

  • 7:25 scares the hell out of me.

  • @ChromeXk That fucking scares me too.

  • Worth noting, the "world's largest nuclear stockpile" is just outside Seattle. So, not in Jesusland. Though there are quite a few nukes in that part too.

  • Teeg32

    Thanks to the U.S. Military Industrial Complex! In the 60s, they provided Israel with enough Nukes to kill the planet many times over.

  • Bill hicks is amazing!

    

  • What is scientology? What is it really

  • @64notorious In a nutshell, it's science fiction.

  • @64notorious The belief that an alien warlord flew a bunch of aliens to earth in 747-like spaceships and entombed them in volcanoes which exploded and dead alien souls were flung about making us do evil actions.

    Hubbard, the founder, wrote it as a screenplay pitch originally called, "Revolt Among the Stars". He couldn't get it produced so he made it a religion.

  • Fuck!! I live in JesusLand

  • I love your videos. They make me laugh and I learn something new at the same time. It would scare me to death if at least one of creationist or Scientology nut jobs got a seat of power in the u.s. I hope that never happens.

  • @watcher7180 Presidents: Eisenhower, Carter, Reagan, H.W Bush and Bush were all creationists.

  • There has been some confusion. I am watcher7180 not @watcher7180. I never said this mzyzer19. 

  • @watcher7180 lol your funny

  • @mzyzer19 Wow, and Bush was a pretty smart guy

  • we're already getting censored!

  • I always felt that kowtowing to the lowest common denominator of a given group's ability to be "offended" or intolerant is not the same thing as respecting that group's principles.

    The reaction I got on last year's Everybody Draw Mohammad Day showed how people from a similar culture to yours could be swayed by misplaced multiculturalism to uphold the values of another's, even when doing so would remove *your* rights to, say free speech, blasphemy, freedom of expression, or equality.

    Scary shit!

  • A belief that god did it is an explanation of nothing. I don't know the answer, so I'll just fill in the gaps with whatever my imagination can come up with

    Its a shame people waste so much time on pushing stupid mythical stories, rather than actually going out doing real research and producing meaningful explanations of everything

    If they did, we would probably all have a better understanding of how the world really works. But no, people are perfectly happy with the "just because" god answer.

  • @SeanACampbell The atheist Delusion!

    How could some of the scientists permit themselves to make a claim that would necessitate knowledge as extensive as the scheme of the universe, when their knowledge of the total scheme of being is *close* to zero, when confronted with a whole mass of unknowns concerning this very earth and tangible, lifeless matter, let alone the whole universe?

  • Do scientific discoveries and knowledge cause such a scientist to conclude that matter, *unknowing and unperceiving *, is his creator and that of all beings?

    No?

    Then how can the duped and brainwashed atheists and some of the scientists delude themselve and *believe* that hydrogen and oxygen, electrons and protons, should first produce themselves, then be the source for all other beings, and finally decree the laws that regulate themselves and the rest of the material world?

  • What is called science by the *science-worshippers* of the present age and regarded by them as equivalent to the sum total of *reality*, is simply a collection of laws applicable to a single dimension of the world. The result of all human effort and experimentation is a body of knowledge concerning a minute bright dot comparable to the dim light of a candle-surrounded by a dark night enveloping a huge desert of indefinite extent.

    All praise is due to ALLAH, the Lord of the Universe.

  • @1tabligh

    Well until you can provide the means to actually go to those other dimesions & come back safely & w/out having to die, then all we have is YOUR word. Not Allahs'! Just YOURS! So the heats on you & what are you going to do when the people find out that you can't provide what you promised?

  • @Yujifanik Then how can you delude yourself and believe that hydrogen and oxygen, electrons and protons, should first produce themselves, then be the source for all other beings, and finally decree the laws that regulate themselves and the rest of the material world?

  • @1tabligh

    Don't get me wrong, I do believe there is something more. But I won't use that as a pretext to ignore whats in front of me.

    I have limits, I can only do so much unless aided by something else. Belief is just 1 factor in a massive equation. I know that what I personally want to see I know I will never see it made real in my life-time & I feel its incredibly selfish & deceitful to goad someone into following you when the only person to get a reward is the yourself.

  • @Yujifanik We can raise precisely the same objection against the atheists and ask them, "If we follow the chain of causality back, we will ultimately reach the primary cause. Let us say that cause is not God, but matter. Tell us who created primary matter. You who believe in the law of causality, answer us Ws: if matter is the ultimate cause of all things, what is the cause of matter?

    You say that the source of all phenomena is matter-energy; what is the cause and origin of matter-energy?"

  • @1tabligh

    I fwe found the answer to your question, how can that knowledge improve the standard of living for humanity?

  • Since the chain of causality cannot recede into infinity, they can answer only that matter is an eternal and timeless entity for which no beginning can be posited: matter is non-created, has no beginning or end, and its being arises from within its own nature.

    This means that the materialists accept the principle of eternity and non-origination; they believe that all things arose out of eternal matter and that being arises from within the very nature of matter, without any need for a creator.

  • @1tabligh Matter is not eternal , What if matter arises from non matter , saying as you said , From lower to complex right ? Since I now know only 4 % of the universe is matter , Most of the energy and the most powerful forces in the universe are non matter ...... Can you please explain to me what non matter is then ?

    All we know is non matter is seriously powerful and it has a lot of mass , but it does not react with any form of matter . or light ... it passes through it ...

  • @1tabligh

    ok. So w/ this fact that you've provided (uncertainty) how can that be applied to anything thats going on now & improve upon it?

  • @Yuj..In just the same way that atheist regards matter as eternal, believers in God attribute eternity to God. Belief in an eternal being is then common to materialist and religious philosophers: both groups agree that there is a primary cause, but believers in God regard the primary cause as wise, all-knowing, and possessing the power of decision and will, whereas in the view of the materialists, the primary cause has neither consciousness, intelligence, perception, nor the power of decision.

  • Thus, the removal of God in no way solves the problem posed by eternal being.

    Moreover, matter is the locus for motion and change, and its motion is dynamic and situated within its own essence. Now, essential motion is incompatible with eternity, and matter and essential stability are two mutually exclusive categories that cannot be fused in a single locus.

  • @1tabligh Look!

    God, the notion of such a being, is a socially acceptable, socially beneficial part of life. God, like everything else can be measured, its just a question of how!

    However! God, like everything else cannot be measured entirely or by singular factor(s) which in of itself is amazing. But when you tell people that they, your fellow human beings can't or won't be acknowledged because we won't appeal to YOUR personal interpretation of multi-faceted concept is why your side-lined.

  • @Yujifanik Whatever is stable and immutable in its essence cannot accept movement and change within that essence.

    How do deluded and duped atheists, who believe that matter is accompanied by its antithesis, justify the eternity of matter/energy?

  • @1tabligh

    1.) Your talking about the current 'state of being' the here & now. It can & will change unless someone or something keeps it that way. Good, bad or indifferent.

    2.) Neither you nor I have been duped, we're just pretending ignorance so as to be a part of the greater whole rather than being flawed, limited, solitary beings w/ more to gain by being w/ others whom maybe better than us in some regard. & not because of a singular factor over any other.

  • @Yujifanik Eternity means stability and immutability of essence, the impossibility of cessation, but matter/energy is in its essence a compendium of forces and potentialities; it is relativity itself, totally caught up in living and dying.

  • @1tabligh

    Stability & immutability, impossibility of cessation. So nothing does anything unless you want it to & nothing or no one can independently effect it, no matter the potentialities. So its absolute.

    But if the catch w/ absolutes is that if there is ANY exception to that rule good, bad or indifferent than it isn't an absolute!

  • @Yujifanik Eternity is incompatible with the mode of being possessed by matter and the factors and attributes necessitated by its nature. The belief of those who have faith in God concerning a fixed and absolute principle relates to a being who in and of his nature can accept stability and absoluteness; his nature is completely devoid of and remote from the properties of matter.

  • @1tabligh

    So~ hes' inert & impotent unless we utilise 'him' at a degree we can tolerate & at a pace we can keep up w/?

    Well, if thats the case than we only utilising 'him' to keep things the way we know & prefer!

  • @Yujifanik The very nature of matter refuses permanence, eternity and continuity, for it can never separate itself from movement, relativity, and it stands in opposition to being a prime or absolute agent.

  • @1tabligh So its chaos! I'm wondering why your surprised about this, even though you already knew it!

    Yet it astounds me even more that your making claims about entities, which by YOUR own admission are not of, or entirely of, matter! & because of that! They hold a greater authority which, again by YOUR own admission, does not have to appeal or abide to anything we mortals are aware of!  Good, bad or indifferent!

  • @Yujifanik All beings were originally non-beings; they were non-existent, and then they became existent. Deluded atheists wish to say that the energy/matter/universe/natural forces/ etc are eternal, but this notion is incorrect for the following reasons:

    First, if the material energy/matter/universe/natural forces/ etc are eternal, it follows that an eternal being should be subject to change and cessation, which is impossible.

  • @1tabligh

    1.) Eternity w/out change is stagnation, fossilization.

    2.) "By virtue of their essence" - Respect is earned, not given. A gift is wonderful & noble, but when its made as an excuse to get many times more out of it for yourself is Greed disguised as Charity, something religions have been notorious for!

    3.) Anything written by man is made by man! Inspiration is 1 thing its an ENTIRELY different when put to paper & just as much different when put into practice!

  • @Yujifanik We say, then, that the existence of a thing is not possible without a cause of a deficient thing, that is, whose fate is in the hands of its cause and whose permanence is dependent on the existence of its cause. This does not apply to a being that is conscious of its reality and exhibits no trace of defect and limitation.

  • @1tabligh How about you just admit that your book is more important to you than own life & call it a day!

  • @Yujifanik The primary cause is the primary cause by virtue of possessing perfect and unlimited being; not being subject to any agent, it is free from need, condition and dependency, and it contains no trace of mutability or change.

  • @1tabligh "Not subject to any agent" So whats the point of angels & prophets then? Cause god wouldn't need them!

    Plus! Would you want to meet a being that could erase everything of who & what you are? & you couldn't say or do anything to stop them? Are you that convinced that god could do that & you'd happily let him do that, even if he IMPLORED you not to?

    I pity you!  Your the one who has only oblivion to greet you at the end.

  • @Yujifanik When we speak of the first cause and simultaneously assert that God is free of all need for a cause, we do not mean that He generally shares with created beings the need for a cause but was once, as it were, granted an exemption from the law of causality. God is not an effect in order that He might need a cause;

  • He is not a phenomenon in order that He might need a creator. On the contrary, all manifestations and phenomena of being derive from Him, the eternal source of being. The law of causality applies uniquely to the sphere of those things whose non-existence preceded their existence.

  • "Second, if the elements comprising the energy/matter/universe/natural forces/ etc are eternal by virtue of their essence, how is it possible that they should enter the embrace of death and disappearance?

    And if, conversely, they lack life in their essences, how can life surge forth from them?

    "If you say that living beings emerge from living elements and inanimate beings from inanimate elements, we reply that an essence that

  • lacks life in and of itself cannot be eternal and cannot be the source for life.

    Belief in the eternity of the energy/matter/universe/natural forces/ etc is held by those who deny the existence of a ruler and planner of creation, reject the messengers of God, regard the books they bring as the fables of the ancients, and **** concoct **** beliefs pleasing to themselves.

  • @1tabligh this is exactlly what christian fundies and zealots have done and are doing now

  • @scorand How can the atheists delude themselve and believe that hydrogen and oxygen, electrons and protons, should first produce themselves, then be the source for all other beings, and finally decree the laws that regulate themselves and the rest of the material world?

  • @1tabligh they call it the big bang and believe there was no need or evidence that a god or gods did it, and how can some groups of religous nut jobs with control issues twist the scripture so much to talk themselves into some of the gabage they spew using scripture that jesus himself spoke out against in favor for their rhetoric. and you wonder why more and more are not believeing any more

  • @scorand they call it the big bang and believe there was no need or evidence that a god

    ____

    If you will still persist in your ignorance at least assure me as to when this *big bang* created itself-whether it did it before it came into existence, or afterwards?

    If you say afterwards, your assertion is absurd. Because it is impossible for a thing to create its own self when it was already created.

  • The purpose of your assertion would be that the *big bang* made itself twice. It would mean that its first endeavours consisted in creating itself, and when it was quite ready and created, it created itself again. This is the most *absurd* and impossible theory-the acquisition of what is already acquired.

    If you say that it created itself before it came into existence, it is really *stupid*. Because it was absolutely nothing before it came into existence.

  • How is it possible for a non-existing thing to create another thing (*big bang*) ? You consider my belief in an existing thing (God) that creates another non-existing thing (*big bang*) as absurd. But you do not consider your own, as to the non-existing thing having the power to create an already existing thing,(*big bang*) as absurd and stupid.

    Be yourself the judge, and tell me whose theory is absurd and irrational.?

  • In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.

    "Do not the Unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth (Universe) were joined together as one unit (atom) of creation, before we clove (exploded) them asunder? We made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?"

    The Quran 21:30

  • @1tabligh

    Let me ask you again. If a lifeform on a different planet, environment (whatever, however that may mean) is considered alive & it is natural.

    But since the holy books of ANY religion made no mention or even gave the hint that such a creature existed. Would you still consider it unnatural even though thousands of men spending hours observing & testing the natural processes that could have been responsible for that creature/being existing in its current state, no devil involved!

  • @1tabligh As i said , HAHA , all your claims are based on Matter , Matter is just a small part in the universe , If you really wish to study , What created matter , study non matter .

    Chains of Causality , huh ? Ive bee wondering about that myself , but that was till the point I thought matter is eternal , but once I thought about how the big bang could happen and how most of the universe is not matter and most of the matter is hydrogen ? Why only the simplest compounds ? -cotd -

  • @1tabligh the answer is pretty much simple,the chains of causality will collapse once you realize , What if matter did come non matter ,Which is very possible, The infinity we speak tends to collapse ,As we do not have the slightly what non matter is , What if the universe dies after 30 billion after being cooled and another big bang takes place ? What if there are more big bangs than just one , We are just a speck the humility if universes and non matter..... Think about it

  • @djay00009 Use the reply button instead!

    Read below!

  • best video of all ur vids

  • i hate how that scientologist gets his face all in the camera

  • @thunderf00t so, religion cannot sensor science or affect military or government decisions, lest we drag ourselves either into the dark ages or the post-apocalyptic wastelands? then surely, what you are asking is not for the destruction of religion as a whole, but that religions should respect other beliefs and, ultimately, accept that science is the last word in the power of the universe. ultimately, however, the gods could be simply the creators of science, or even metaphors, some parables.

  • I think this is your best "Why do people laugh at creationists"

  • fundamentalists suck they give every religon a bad name

  • thunderf00t you speak the truth and that is all I ask for although we must stop some of the creationist propaganda otherwise we may all perish from the aftermath of war

  • 1219 people believe that a big racist, sexist boogie man in the sky made them.

  • Illinois escaped Jesusland. Thank god. (Yes, that was irony).

  • Respond to this video... Wow ! That XENU guy looks like my 7th grade math teacher ! Who was a complete Asshole !

  • @thunderf00t my state was SO close to making it out of jesus land... (nw OH)

  • Why is Canada part of the "United States of Liberty and Education?"

  • The ONE question no Christian,or other can answer is, Why is EVERY child born an ATHEIST!!? This is a question they can't turn around on an ATHEIST.They can't say why is every child born a CHRISTIAN! Christians are INDOCTRINATED to BELIEVE in a HUMAN MAN MADE STORY!! Christians are DOOMED by the invention of the INTERNET! They try and use it for their own goal,but ATHEIST easily topple the CHRISTIANS in numbers on the W.W.W! Now it's the WORLD VS. CHRISTIANS,not AMERICA VS. ATHEIST!!

  • @MrAmericanzombie

    How many shortcuts did you take to write your conclusion ? 100 ? 1000 ?

  • I wonder who and by what logic created the military power chart. It looks utterly ridiculous

  • Who are the crazy Scientologists around 1:30? That's some scary craziness right there!!

  • The correct response to a scientologist asking you what your crimes are is:

    CRIMES CRIMES CRIMES CRIMES CRIMES CRIMES CRIMES CRIMES.

    It drives them nuts. :3

  • What crimes have I committed recently? Well I killed some people for being annoying, getting up in my face, and asking me stupid loaded questions. Other than that, I think I'm good.

  • Having them pay their fucking taxes is "attacking" them? God damn-it sell your fucking Porsche and pay for the fucking roads you drive on, stop preaching and acting like it somehow separates you from society enough to not have to contribute, because you're sure as hell not Non-profit.

  • I love your videos Thunderf00t. I think they are great.

  • Bonus points for using clips from Stargate Atlantis.

  • tell it like it is man

  • Absolutely correct.

  • This video came out before I went to Bible "college"... I wish I had known more about science a couple of years ago. :/

  • dont fuck with martin sheen. he's the boss.

  • america is 50 years in-front or other militarys? Their tactics suck (kill each other) your tanks are badly designed and outdated the planes are good but not the best, the navy is still pretty good but need modernisation, and most of you small arms are outperfored y a 65 year old relic!

  • I don't agree with you on the reason why we "won" the war in Iraq. Yes, it had to do some with the technology, but we won when we set up the schools and democratic government and the Iraqis showed the insurgents they wouldn't back down by cowardly suicide bombings.

  • @HimesInu

    That's one thing. Also, the beggining of the war was not a Guerilla war.

  • @NorthCitySider Well, it sure as hell wasn't a conventional war.

  • oh i see...lol your point makes sense

  • don't give too much credit to islam...yes there was a time when the islamic caliphate was culturally more sophisticated, but that had absolutely nothing to do with the religion of islam itself. in fact islam, if based solely on its scriptures, is the most backward and superstitious religion of all. and i doubt there was "free speech" in the islamic empire concerning criticism or attacks towards muhammad or the quran

  • @moLeOnPoT

    I heard of one Caliph who allowed free speech because he believed in conversion through reason. Though, I believe this man is an exception and is not backed at all by Islamic scripture.

  • @moLeOnPoT

    Well one more thing I'd like to add is that a lot of what the Islamic scholars believed at the time was in fact contradictory to the Quran. For example, a lot of the Islamic scholars in Baghdad believed that the Earth was spherical, a view that directly contradicts the Quran, since the Quran says the Earth is flat.

    The round earth view was adopted from the Greeks. So that proves your point even more.

  • @NorthCitySider since the Quran says the Earth is flat.

    ___

    Absolutely nonsense!

    Produce your evidence!

    Where?

    Which chapter and verse?

    Show me only one verse from the Quran!

    "Wert thou to follow the common run of those on earth, they will lead thee away from the Way of God. They follow nothing but conjecture: they do nothing but lie."

    The Quran: [6:116]

  • @1tabligh

    43:10- (Yea, the same that) has made for you the earth (like a carpet) spread out, and has made for you roads (and channels) therein, in order that ye may find guidance (on the way);

  • @NorthCitySider Orbits

    Today, the laws governing the celestial systems are well known. Galaxies are balanced by the position of stars and planets in well-defined orbits, as well as the interplay of gravitational forces produced by their masses and the speed of their movements. But is this not what the Qur’an describes in terms which have only become comprehensible in modern times. In chapter al-Ambiyaa we find:

  • @1tabligh First we are on about abiogenesis and now you are going on about – I gather – creativity. Is there a point to this?

    And I mean it: Fucking stop blowing up people. Or fly planes into buildings. It really hurts your...argument.Whatever it is.

  • @TomFynn

    Absurdity of Atheism!

    If abiogenesis spontaneous creation *without* specific design can be admitted under such conditions of regularity, then purposeful generation and definitely balanced creation can be the result of *error* ad perplexity, since these two are *opposed* to abiogenesis.

  • Such a statement is highly *absurd* that order and rectitude should come about *without* a Creator, and disorder and impropriety of design and *fate* should suppose a Creator. He is an *ignoramus* who says this, because anything produced *without* design will ***never*** be exact and proportioned, while disorder and contrariness cannot co-exist with orderly design. God is far above what the *deluded and duped ignorant atheists* say.

  • @1tabligh So the laryngial nerve of the giraffe is evidence of a designer? Bloody incompetent designer.

    *deluded and duped ignorant atheists* Big words from someone who sticks his fingers in his ears and goes "lalala".

  • @TomFynn So the laryngial nerve of the giraffe is evidence of a designer?

    ____

    The Giraffe

    Just consider the constitution of the giraffe and the distinct nature of its organs resembling certain other animals. Its head resembles that of a horse, the neck that of a camel, the cleft hoof' that of a cow, and its skin that of a leopard.

    Some ignorant people have supposed that this results from th, union of several kinds of animals.

  • @1tabligh Larygyeal nerve of the giraffe is evidence for "bad design": watch?v=0cH2bkZfHw4

  • @TomFynn It so happens sometimes that someone among the deluded and duped atheist is aware of a thing but in his ignorance of its reality, purpose and need, begins at once to find fault with it saying, "it is untenably wrong." or "So the laryngial nerve of the giraffe is evidence of a designer?"

  • @1tabligh Oh FSM damnit. First you plague us with ignorant Christians, now we also have to deal with those ignoramuses who put bombs under or seats if we diagree. What have we done to offend thee? Did we not have enough pasta with meatballs? Do not worry, your Noodleyness, I shall rectify this immediately. To the pantry me Hearties, arrgh!

  • @TomFynn Poor fella!

    Drowning like a straw in a maelstrom of vicissitudes .....and catches "who put bombs under or seats if we diagree. What have we done to offend thee? Did we not have enough pasta with meatballs? Do not worry, your Noodleyness, I shall rectify this immediately. To the pantry me Hearties, arrgh! "!

    The argument of an IGNORANT!

    So much science for this stupid brainless pseudo-Scientific Demagogue!

  • @TomFynn Larygyeal nerve of the giraffe is evidence for "bad design": watch?v=0cH2bkZfHw4

    _____

    The waverers failed to grasp the mysteries and causes underlying the genesis of the creatures, and their intellects remain unaware of the faultless ingenuity subsisting underneath the creation of the varied species of the sea and the land, the level and the rough.

  • They became disbelievers, and because of a deficiency of their knowledge and *puerility* of intellect, began *quibbling* inimically with Truth, so much so that they denied creativeness and claimed that all this universe was meaningless and vain, without any ingenious design on the part of a Designer or Creator ALLAH - a purposeless non-entity without balance or poise.

  • ALLAH is far above what they attribute to Him. Brainwashed atheists!

    Flow misguided they are! In their misguided blindness and bewilderment they are like the blind people groping right and left in a well-furnished, well-built house with fine carpets, luscious articles of food and drink, various kinds of clothing and other necessities of essential use, all adequately supplied in proper quantity and placed with perfect decorum and ingenious design.

  • @1tabligh Lol do yourself a favor and go home.

  • @athanasiadis24 How can the atheists delude themselve and believe that hydrogen and oxygen, electrons and protons, should first produce themselves, then be the source for all other beings, and finally decree the laws that regulate themselves and the rest of the material world?

  • @1tabligh This is basic science that you aren't aware of.

  • @athanasiadis24 How can it be supposed that belief in the existence of God is the acceptance of contradiction, whereas belief in the uncaused nature of an effect such as matter is not contradictory?

    How could it be believed that matter should itself be the origin of millions of attributes and characteristics and thus be the equivalent of the purposeful, wise and all-knowing Creator?

  • In their blindness they fail to see the building and its furnishing. They move about from one room to ,another, advancing and retreating. If by chance, any one of them finds anything in its place to supply a need, and not knowing the purpose for which it is set there and unaware of the underlying ingenuity, he might begin to reprimand the architect of the building in his offensive rage, whereas, as a matter of fact, the fault lies with his own inability to see.

  • @TomFynn This analogy holds good in the case of the sect who deny the creative factor and the argument in favour of Divine Design. Failing to appreciate the merit of their provision, the perfection of creation and the beauty of design, they start wandering in the wide world, *bewildered* by their inability to grasp with their *brains* the underlying causes and principles.

    So much science for YOUR "Larygyeal nerve of the giraffe is evidence for "bad design": watch?v=0cH2bkZfHw4"!

  • In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.

    Surely the vilest of animals, in God's sight, are the deaf, the dumb, who do not understand.

    The Quran Chapter 8, Verse 22

    "And the parable of those who disbelieve is as the parable of one who calls out to that which hears no more than a call and a cry; deaf, dumb (and) blind, so they do not understand. "

    The Quran 2:171

  • These ignoramuses say that different species of land animals come to the watering place one species individual enters into sexual union with another species individual, resulting in such an offspring. As such it is a composite model.

    To say this is to betray ignorance, and lack of the gnosis of the Almighty Allah, glory be to Him. No animal enters into sexual union with animals of other species. No union takes place between a horse and a she-Camel or a camel and a cow.

  • Sexual union can take place only between animals of similar constitutional shape, for example a horse and a she-ass resulting in a mule, or a wolf with a badger resulting in a hybrid.

    Moreover, it never happens that the offspring of such a union can borrow one organ from one of the other mate. A giraffe has one organ resembling that of a horse, another that of a camel, another hoof that of a cow. But you see that a mule has its head, ears,back, tail and hoof midway between those of a donkey

  • and a horse, so is its cry midway between neighing and braying. This argument adequately shows that a giraffe is not the offspring of the union of desperate species, but is one wonder of the wonderful creation of the Almighty Allah, demonstrating His Omnipotence.

    It should also be known that the Creator of the numberless species of animals creates the organs of which so ever He likes of them similar to one another and those of others dissimilar.

  • He adds in the composition whatever He Wills and curtails there from whatever He Wills. This is so that His Omnipotence may be demonstrated and that nothing can hinder Him in anything He Wills.

    Why is its neck long and what advantages do accrue to it there from?

    The advantage lies in enabling it to reach up to the leaves and fruits of the tall tress for its nourishment where it lives, dwells, and it is born and has its grazing places, the dense forests.

  • “(God is) the one who created the night, the day, the sun and the moon. Each one is traveling in an orbit with its own motion.” Qur’an,21:33

    The Arabic word which expresses this movement is the verb yasbahoon which implies the idea of motion produced by a moving body, whether it is the movement of one’s legs running on the ground, or the action of swimming in water. In the case of a celestial body, one is forced to translate it, according to its original meaning, as ‘to travel with its own

  • motion.’

    The Day and Night

    The Qur’anic description of the sequence of day and night would, in itself, be rather commonplace were it not for the fact that it is expressed in terms that are today highly appropriate. The Qur’an uses the verb kawwara in chapter az-Zumar to describe the way the night ‘winds’ or ‘coils’ itself around the day and the day around the night.

    “He coils the night upon the day and the day upon the night.” Qur’an, 39:5

  • The original meaning of the verb kis to coil a turban around the head. This is a totally valid comparison; yet at the time the Qur’an was revealed, the astronomical data necessary to make this comparison were unknown. It is not until man landed on the moon and observed the earth spinning on its axis, that the dark half of the globe appeared to wind itself around the light and the light half appeared to wind itself around the dark.

  • The Solar Apex

    The notion of a settled place for the sun is vividly described in chapter Yaa Seen of the Qur’an:

    "The sun runs its coarse to a settled place That is the decree of the Almighty, the All Knowing.” Qur’an, 36:38

  • “Settled place” is the translation of the word mustaqarr which indicates an exact appointed place and time. Modern astronomy confirms that the solar system is indeed moving in space at a rate of 12 miles per second towards a point situated in the constellation of Hercules ( alpha lyrae ) whose exact location has been precisely calculated. Astronomers have even give it a name, the solar apex.

  • The Quran is NOT a monkey toy for any wannabe monkey to play with it's interpretation!

    He it is Who has revealed the Book to you; some of its verses are decisive, they are the basis of the Book, and others are allegorical; then as for those in whose hearts there is perversity ...

  • they follow the part of it which is allegorical, seeking to mislead and seeking to give it (their own) interpretation. but none knows its interpretation except Allah, and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge say: We believe in it, it is all from our Lord; and none do mind except those having understanding.

    The Quran Chapter 3 Verse 7

  • @1tabligh No scientific process is ever final. That’s it’s strength Other than faith, that professes itself to be the final word and thus immune from critique, withdrawing ever deeper into solipsism.

    „prominent and unbiased naturalists“ Who? William Dumbski? Kent – The Fraudster – Hovind? Ray – Don’t know how to eat a banana - Comfort? Michael – Why read other people’s paper? – Behe?

  • @TomFynn Now it may be said that if an unbiased investigator care­fully examines the results of the observations in regard to the genesis of the living organisms, he will come to the FOUR conclusions.

  • @1tabligh "it may be said" So, it also my not be said. Is there a point to that?

  • @TomFynnPrinciples which may be discovered

    (1) The living organisms in accordance with their degree of evolution have a historical succession. In other words, the more developed species have usually appeared over history after the less developed ones.

    (2) This historical succession is similar to that found in all other things of the world. The entire cosmos has evolved from a simple state and gradually galaxies and solar systems have been formed in the environment devoid of all traces of life.

  • Conditions conducive to the appearance of life have developed gradually. Similarly development has taken place successively from the plants to the developed animals. On the whole, the more complex organism have followed the simple ones.

    (3) There exists complete organic similarity between the first living organism and the most developed living organism known to us.

  • (4) The stages through which a human embryo passes during its embryonic development are fully akin to the stages through which living organisms have passed over history.

    When we put all this evidence together, we can scientifi­cally presume that the various species of the living organisms are the progeny of one another (transformism) and have not come into existence independently (fixism).

  • @1tabligh

    (1) Yes, exactly as one would expect from evolution.

    (2) See (1).

    (3) Complete and utter waffle.

    (4) Yes, again, as one would expect from evolution.

    Again. IS THERE A POINT TO THIS?