Why do people constantly fall for these idiots? Just ridicule them and move on. To partially quote Thomas Jefferson: “Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them"
I don't think Nephilimbecile wanted a debate for a moment.
He wanted to either set a trap where he could bullshit you to death with Cock-of-shite backing him up. Or if he couldn't set that trap make it look like you where to afraid to debate him.
Creatards are dishonest like that. That's what their god wants they feel.
Dude, Nephlem, or whatever his name is, scares me. I swear if I logged onto youtube tomorrow and found out the cops busted him for collecting humans heads, or keeping Phillipino kids caged in his basement I wouldn't be surprised at all, not at all.
My girlfriend told me the other day that youtube needs a really sexy atheist on youtube making vids, so before she finished her sentence I said "baby you haven't seen the Don". She was very pleased.
"All the lying and special pleading tends to diminish atheists sex appeal." but you just happened to put a space between a and theist? what if christianity is true?
@55metalmonkey Atheists are aswell, they have been easily manipulated to believe Richard Dawkins is intellectual when his book have been easily destroyed by theologians. that would make atheists rather unsexy
@MoonwalkerWorshiper Never been a huge fan of Richard Dawkins, I prefer the work of scientists who do practical research in their chosen field and can demonstrate their findings, I do respect Richard Dawkins for being a well spoken public speaker who is versed in science but he just comes off a little too pretencious IMO... could be the accent. Regardless, anyone who blindly devotes their life to bronze age worship of an invisible holy magic man gets my vote for being more gullible.
@55metalmonkey [could be the accent.] Seriously, just because someone speaks british makes them pretentious? I'd say the content in the way Dawkins throws crap at religion but can't take what he dish out.
[The problem lies with organized religion]
No, the problem lies with INTOLERANT organized religion. Intolerant atheistic organizations are a threat to democracy aswell. Having the goal to elinimate the church for example is biggotry.
@MoonwalkerWorshiper It's not the accent so much as the tone in which he uses it, When he is doing a monolouge to a camera it's a suble English accent when he is in a debate his accent becomes seriously pronounced and it makes him seem pompus, still a great speaker but you can tell the difference in tone. I don't know of any athiest groups that are a threat to democracy, the only threat is to the attendance at church and their profit margin & ALL religions are intolerant to some degree ALL!
@MoonwalkerWorshiper Just one question on your comment, Do you have any examples where Richard Dawkins work (books) have been destroyed by theologians? I mean real examples by coherant people...not some bat shit crazy creatard making dumb shit up that only sounds reasonable to other brain dead fundimentalists
@55metalmonkey Yes I have one example. His name is William Lane Craig, and he's due to debate Dawkins in a month or so and Dawkins have refused to because he feel embarrased. Just search for Craig and The God Delusion. I hope you realize there's a difference between theists and creationists, or "creatards".
@MoonwalkerWorshiper Yes I do know the difference, I accually have some respect for Theists. Theists have the ability to understand advancements in knowledge, comprehend what it means and will seek out knowledge to gain a deeper understanding of things even if they don't agree with the subject and contemplate it's effect on their belief in God. Creationists reject anything that threatens their delusions regardless of the weight of evidence. I'll check out the rest of the vids.
@MoonwalkerWorshiper Also I hope you realize that Athiests don't have a problem with God (since we/they don't belive in him) The problem lies with organized religion and it's followers who can't STFU becuse others don't belive in their paticular brand of bullshit. It's fine to have a theistic approch to life (what ever you need to get through the day IMO) but keep it to yourself.
@MoonwalkerWorshiper Oh yes, do you have a quote of Richard Dawkins saying that "he would feel embarassed to debate William Lane Craig" or is that statement made up and just wild speculation on your part? Richard Dawkins rarely debates Creationists or Fundementalists (or like minded people) because he doesn't want to give anyone the impression that they have any credibility when it comes to scientific discussion on the origins of the universe. He has stated this MANY MANY times.
@55metalmonkey [because he doesn't want to give anyone the impression that they have any credibility when it comes to scientific discussion on the origins of the universe. He has stated this MANY MANY times.]
This is where your gullibility as an atheist comes in. You simply buy any bullshit Dawkins give you.
Search for
William Lane Craig Q&A and UK Tour Preview (in 2011 Oct. 17-26)
@MoonwalkerWorshiper First off...how exactly do I "buy any bullshit Dawkins gives me"?
if you go back and READ, I said I'm not a fan of Dawkins, I don't follow anything he does or says nor would I or have I bought anything he has written That being said I also do not care to defend his choices in accepting a debate or not,,,I really don't give a shit one way or the other, I just don't care. So your attempt to point out the failings of my ATHIEST HERO is nothing but a FAIL.
@MoonwalkerWorshiper Second point, the "truth" you claim at min8 is merly Craig stating something he heard some one else say second hand, NOT Dawkins saying that "he would feel embarassed to debate William Lane Craig" this is the old chinese telephone game with speculation vs fact. If you could find Dawkins acually saying it I'd belive it....so fail #2
@55metalmonkey [if you go back and READ, I said I'm not a fan of Dawkins, I don't follow anything he does or says]
Yeah you claim that, but then you say he has stated that he doesn't want to give people the impression that his debate opponents have any credibility, as if you grant this excuse as a truthful premise. You refuse to analyze this, instead you just blindly accept it because it's Dawkins who said it.
@55metalmonkey [Craig stating something he heard some one else say second hand] ...who was somebody in position to know.
You could choose to dismiss this as a lie if you want, which you clearly are doing right now, which shows a bias. I find it amusing, your hypocrisy. You're fighting to show off as objective, at the same time you're defending one part because it's an atheist. How's it gonna be? Are mentally strong enough to ACTUALLY be objective and not PRETEND cuz it makes you look good?
@55metalmonkey [If you could find Dawkins acually saying it I'd belive it....]
Yes, and that's because you believe anything Dawkins tells you. Obviously he's not going to publicly confess that he's not gonna debate dr Craig due to embarrassment - because of exactly that he is too embarrassed to admit it. He will give excuses and you will buy it because you're an atheist.
Once again you are proposing that I listen to Dawkins, Just because I point out the holes in your argument and failures with regard to burden of proof doesn't mean I'm pretending to be nutral. I call bullshit when I see it....Some would call it Devils advocate. This is one of the main reasons I don't listen to RD's lectures/ debates, they usually revolve around making assumptions to debate things and have no conclusion
@55metalmonkey [Once again you are proposing that I listen to Dawkins]
Because you did. Quoting you again:
[he doesn't want to give anyone the impression that they have any credibility when it comes to scientific discussion on the origins of the universe. He has stated this MANY MANY times.]
[Just because I point out the holes in your argument and failures with regard to burden of proof]
Hmmm, where exactly did you do THAT? I didn't realize we argued anything.
@MoonwalkerWorshiper 1:Just because I used statements from the guy doesn't mean I listen to him, If I quote the bible it doesn't mean I follow it. 2:Your main failure is stating RD is embarrased of something when you base that satement on third hand information. Also that I believe everything RD says, must be because I'm an athiest huh?And 3:any voiced/ written position which takes a side on a subject can be considered YOUR argument (as in your position) it doesn't always imply verbal conflict.
@55metalmonkey [Just because I used statements from the guy doesn't mean I listen to him]
The issue was, is Dawkins hiding from debating dr Craig because he doesn't want to give Craig credibility like he says it is, or is it because Dawkins is embarrassed and don't know how to defend atheism? You said later that you don't care about this, though.
[you base that satement on third hand information]
That information is more consistent with how Dawkins have behaved, than Dawkins own account.
@MoonwalkerWorshiper I still don't care, to be more accurate I don't give a fuzzy monkeys ass about it, MY point was that you lead an assumption based on little information (aka: presented a rumor as fact). I could care less if it was about R.Dawkins, the Pope, Ray Comfort, or Steven Hawkin the fact is it gives the impression of dishonesty which regardless of whom your speaking of I'll call bullshit.
@55metalmonkey [MY point was that you lead an assumption based on little information]
Really? I don't follow how you view things because each time I see your replies there's something new that has happened, that I apperantly have missed.
There's no assumption, Dawkins is clear about being embarrassed due to have challenged theists to the debate arena and then turn down offers to debate them after John Lennox "took him to the woodshed". That's sufficient proof.
Then why aren't you calling out Dawkins on his bullshit, instead of pretending that granting his excuses as the truth by default is somehow objective? Don't sit there and start an argument with me. I'm just showing you how you're not objective.
[I don't listen to RD's lectures/ debates, they usually revolve around making assumptions]
If you don't listen to Dawkins debates, how do you know they revolve around assumptions?
@MoonwalkerWorshiper To call him out would take more reasearch and time than I can afford to waste, This whole thing started when you made the statement "his book have been easily destroyed by theologians". If your going to make a staement like this about anything, state the facts and don't streach it by embeding your opinion. The facts will stand for themselves
@55metalmonkey [If your going to make a staement like this about anything, state the facts]
Well, it's pretty obvious and simple anyways. Dawkins refuse to debate people in order to defend his God Delusion, so it would be pretty much a default position at this point to declare his book as worthless and his atheistic arguments as destroyed.
[Both sides need to make assumptions to begin their case.]
You don't get the point of the debates, they are atheism vs christianity not science vs bible.
@MoonwalkerWorshiper no I understand debates quite well, aperently you don't. Debates generaly have a opening question posed to open with such as " Is the origins of the universe better explained by the bible or by science. You normaly wouldn't debate an entire belief system vs a non belief system, it would be futile.
Speaking of futile, I'm done with this conversation.
Appearantly is spelled this way, and for explaning that a debate titled with "Atheism vs Christianity" is about atheism and christianity is really not to misunderstanding the point of the debates. Atheism doesn't represent science, because an atheist is not necessarily a scientist. Christianity is not necessarily limited to the bible, because a theist can argue independantly of biblical scripture. It's ok to admit you were mistaken. You haven't watched it.
@MoonwalkerWorshiper Holy fuck, your correcting spelling on you tube, lame... maybe you should go back and check your posts and look for bad grammer and poorly formed sentences with missing letters, I'll let you find them for yourself, I'd hate to be a duchebag and point them out. and the title of the debate is "Athiesm vs Christanity: Where does the evidence point to?" & I know not all Athiests are scientists, but my point was you can't debate beliefs or lack of beliefs
@MoonwalkerWorshiper If you don't listen to Dawkins debates, how do you know they revolve around assumptions? Simply because to discuss a topic like the origins of life you need to make cirtain basic assumptions to begin your argument (sorry..position) the Thiest assumes that the bible was written by god & has all the answers, and the scientist will state what is known and make assumptions which are probable based on the known science. Both sides need to make assumptions to begin their case.
@MoonwalkerWorshiper And RD did explain why he won't debate WLC, search YT for "Richard Dawkins explains why he won't debate William Lane Craig"....... It's right from the horses mouth but I forgot you don't try to find first hand information,
@55metalmonkey [And RD did explain why he won't debate WLC]
No he gave an excuse (again), and you take it for granted as it's somehow a valid point, because Dawkins is an atheist aswell as yourself and you need to be biased about it. If you're not a fan of Dawkins, which you said you weren't, it would be perfectly consistent of you to just admit "yes Dawkins is a coward for not debating the most famous apologetic" but instead you choose to wriggle out of it due to your biased atheism.
@MoonwalkerWorshiper Your a persistant little fucktard aren't you. I'm not going to make excuses and defend a grown man that can speak for himself (which he has) I could care less if you belive him or not, if you have a problem with his reason, send him an email and tell him he's full of shit. Do you defend every bible thumper retard you see just because of like minded beleifs, I don't think so. So why do you assume that I'm making excuses for RD based on a like minded lack of beleif in God?
Actually you can, many people have done so, even Dawkins himself did it against John Lennox.
[why do you assume that I'm making excuses for RD]
I don't, and once again you make something new up that is completely unrelated to what I or you have been discussing. I'm saying you grant the excuses Dawkins give, as some kind of "information".
Not all proof is biology. The Amizaduga Venus texts declare Adam as 4025bc (not 4026 not 4024) and all wrong chronology including evolution comes from that year. This is not biological, it is calendrical, and astral, and historic as in bleeds down into every twisted culture today whether religious or atheistic. Example of atheism is believing a Jewish calendar comes from Nineveh in 3761bc ignoring that its a year late Jews calculated as Adam.
@ChollieD well youre all screwed up like major schools that your sci-fi cult worships and taxes us for. Just because our Sumerian forefathers invented glue doesnt mean YOUR tag of 5000bc is truth. Jericho was built in 2237bc and it carbon dates as 7000bc. So its older than your glue.
youre the one who minds so much and never minds every one else. If you werent so busy educating your smart-ess, you could pull the stick out and let it educate itself on its own enough to sit down and take a break resting.
Question: youre good at sticking your face on a video, can you do the voice only and add it to video. I dont know how to. I have materials, can you post it. Or dont you post counter information you disagree with.
HEY WAIT i change my challenge. I dont challenge you to be against you as if you need to be defeated because youre so big & bad effecting the world. Hmmm Madonna & Oprah & Gaga effect it worse than YOU. SO my challenge is THIS. The world is soon to end, go under 2 miles of water and come back up. So I challenge you to join me in posting all the evidence so that your reward can be suvive it and be happy inside with all those you save with you.
I also found it odd that you even ask for a referee & call him a moderator because doesnt a moderator have power to delete all these crappy comments that fill up our precious internet space. Our internet space acnt be too precious if all this crap cant be edited. 90% of what is unremovable on the net is the very mind of man that God will soon wipe out. CONSIDER YOURSELF CHALLENGED BY ME not because youre a fool or arrogant, there are worse than YOU.But I doubt you can touch the world changing it
I also found it odd that you even ask for a referee and call him a moderator because doesnt a moderator have power to delete all these crappy comments that fill up our precious internet space. Our internet space acnt be too precious if all this crap cant be edited. 90% of what is unremovable on the net is the very mind of man that God will soon wipe out.
EVOLUTION BEVER WAS SET IN STONE, IT IS JUST LIKE YOU, AGREEMENTS WITH NO STONE. OH WAIT MAYBE YOU ARE STONED. If you want answers, ask me, I know my God. But ask before your death. Doesnt do anyone good giving answers over a corpse. Think about it, someone dead has to wake by the power of God BEFORE they can hear the person who shouts WAKE UP UP SIT UP AND COME TO LIFE.
Don Exodus likes arguing for the sake of argument. To create shock jock videos to get people mad and to stir poopy because inside him is a little girl dying to get out. Don't believe me. Change the sound of his voice to your girlfriends or wifes and then place him in her period mode, and tell me if he doesn't sound like her! This guy sounds like a little bitch! No fruist of the spirit here whooooaaaa aayyyyy nooo waaayyy. Just chaos. If this is athiest serenity I don't want any LOL
Hey Don Exodus if your so at peace with yourself about your evolution athiest little self; how come you smear your crap all over the internet. You know what I think. I think your under heavy conviction by God. I also think your mom may have been neglectful of you as a baby letting you lay in a dirty diaper for long periods before changing it. You had diaper rash and your mom used the rough side of the wash rag; hence why you have a chapped ass at an early age syndrome. Or your gay.
you inspire me sir. 2 learn more , also i was in special ed class in high school so im not that brite in learning , but you inspire me , so im ganna start reading books on intelligent stuff , thank you !
Why would you wanna debate that retard? Clearly he's gonna talk a bounch of crap and at the end you won't achive anything. I doubt he can humiliate himself more then he already did..
I was listening to you and thought, "He looks and sounds pretty reasonable," and then heard you say, "... you have no problem overruling every career scientist on the planet..." and I realized that you're not only not reasonable, you're a liar like every other evolutionist on YouTube.
What exactly is an "evolutionist"? The simple use of that word in a sentence flushes all your credibility right down the crapper. I doubt you could see the truth if it walked up and kicked you in the nuts.
@HalfCrazy520 Why waste your time making such stupid remarks? Kindly make all your stupid remarks, here, though and don't PM me. I have enough garbage there already.
@HalfCrazy520 Gee... silly me. I tend to focus on one thing and often miss the other, sometimes more important issue. I see why you remarked with nonsense. It was your attempt to deflect from my BULLSEYE accusation that you're an INCREDIBLE LIAR!
You succeeded too! lol Until I read it again and realized THAT'S why you did it. Check out Rev21:8 and you'll see only the 2nd sin I know you're guilty of, the first being dishonoring the Holy One of Israel.
@HalfCrazy520 (cont.2) What I mean by that is that I've met the LIVING GOD, the Lord Jesus Christ. What that means is I'm not an, (what you think are) idiot wannabe fan boys of "God." I know Him; I hear His voice; I receive revelation; I know the Word of God; and I'm not here to collect brownie points from God. I know the Gospel and I'm here to present it as the Word of Truth, which is what it is and you guys are nothing but uneducated fools, LYING and pretending science is on your side.
@123Atheist He wasn't exaggerating at all. He was lying. They're related, yet one can be regarded as carelessness, the other is simply lack of character, like you can see from HalfCrazy520
Here is what you're missing. What you believe has no bearing on what is true. If you don't believe in math, 60 + 40 still equals 100. If you don't believe in gravity, still better not sleep too close to the edge of the bed.
Use of the term 'evolutionist' implies an agenda. You believe that the scienfic community is involved in some huge conspiracy against relgion. People have been trying to disprove evolution for 150+ years and can't because it's true. Like it or not.
@HalfCrazy520 The "scienfic" community is involved in a huge conspiracy against truth because their master is your master and your master is smart enough to motivate without revealing his true agenda because if he did, you wouldn't cooperate. The "scienfic" community's cornerstone of their conspiracy is pretending the nonsense they promote is science. Think of it this way. Imagine the "food" industry selling you junk food made up of useless, non-nutritive garbage and calling it "food." (cont.a)
Atheism is junk food for the brain. Fatsos eat junk, but I don't remember seeing the RICH wobbling into McDonalds! LOLOL.
Similarly, atheists are making the corrupted and powerful rich, but the corrupted believe in God just like Satan DOES, lol. Because his very own existance depends on God, lol.
@HalfCrazy520 (cont.b) That's exactly what the "scienfic" community is doing and you blind, stupid and gullible fools don't have the integrity to call them on it. "Hey, how about giving us some REAL science," which is ludicrous because you guys DON'T WANT REAL SCIENCE! You've quite content with your delusion that the magnificent order of the world, and the Universe "just happened." lol The MOST preposterous idea EVER postulated but YOU buy it because it helps SHUT UP your conscience. FOOLS.
@911dispatcher Actually, once you learn the math, it's easy enough to verify the science for yourself. I'm guessing that you never learned the math. Do you know algebra? trig? calculus? Who's the blind one?
@HalfCrazy520 Let me illustrate what I just said to you. IF ANY ONE OF YOU had the slightest bit of integrity and character (well, first, you wouldn't be a fan boy of stupidity), your response to my last post would be: "Wait, that's a STRAW MAN! Evolution CANNOT be proved scientifically so you're just shooting off your mouth!" But you guys don't have the integrity to admit that evolution can't be proved scientifically because that would relegate it to a religious belief and you'd have (cont.A)
@HalfCrazy520 (cont.B) to admit that you FAR LESS ground to stand on than Christians do! So you are quite content to compromise any honor you might wish to have for what you think is "leverage." But when leverage is a pretense, it's not leverage at all; it's deceit. Thus, we're back to where every real Christian (who hasn't been brainwashed by the lies of evolutionary theory -- and unfortunately, there are ignorant Christians who don't know God and His Word well enough to realize that (cont.B)
@HalfCrazy520 (cont.C) they have been brainwashed) has always KNOWN where you are. So, here you are laughing at Christians for "being so dumb and brainwashed" and the Christians (because they don't have the mean-spirited hatefulness you have), are accurately laughing for the very same reason, but not nearly so much as they are praying that God will have mercy on you and open your eyes to the glorious light of the gospel of Jesus, who loved you and gave His life's blood so that you could (cont.C)
@HalfCrazy520 (cont.D) be forgiven and accepted into fellowship with God.
If you have trouble reading my remarks, it's because I don't write on a second grade reading level, which, it seems, is about the intelligence level of most of these evolutionist/atheist YouTube pages. If that sounds insulting, it was intentional. You guys are so arrogant and hateful and pretentiously "intelligent" but there is no intelligence that's demonstrated. The VAST majority of your responses to those (cont.D)
@splicedenergy That's illustrative of the kinds of remarks that show what idiots and fools you all are. It's impossible to respect fools like the lot of you. Take your remark and the one from HalfCrazy below and examine three dozen remarks from your partners in stupidity and you'll see that none of you have the slightest regard for facts or truth. Add ALL OF YOU TOGETHER and you still get ZERO integrity. ... it makes your mockery completely hollow. No one respects fools, and you're all fools.
@911dispatcher Homo habilis, homo erectus, and australopithecus all suggest humans have ancestral connections to the rest of the animal kingdom.
We have the fossils, the geologic record, radioisotopic dating, and all of the corroboration from the non-evo fields of biology. You have a book that doesn't have ANY signs of an Omniscient Author/inspiration: no mention of DNA, electricity, FOSSIL fuels, dinosaurs, or penicillin, the latter of which would have been a great boon to mankind.
@ChollieD Neither does it mention the magnet on a pin which has come to be only THE universal symbol of guidance and direction (key concepts in biblical texts). One really has to wonder how an omniscient could have missed that one.
lets start with geologic record shall we? GOOGLE: PETRIFIED TREES
Pictures show trees, hundreds of them in few locations like JUNO, Canada, which grow through 3 supposedly millions-year-old strata e.g cretatious and jurassic. Yet the trees show that all of those stratas happened in less than a year.
Disproving "millions of years of evolution" as well as the whole strata theory. Petrified trees just blow this as nonsense.
biloxy river footprints prove coex. of hum and din
@PawelKolasa "lets start with geologic record shall we?" Fine, I found a link immediately that demolishes the (apparently well-worn) Creationist argument about petrified trees. Google "don lindsay polystrate" for the actual scientific story.
Pav, if there was any basis to this so-called evidence, it should be written up in reputable, peer-reviewed scientific journals. If it was well-done, careful research with conclusions following from evidence, it would NOT be suppressed.
@PawelKolasa Sir, the Polystrate trees were refuted in the 19th Century. You're about 150 years behind the times, and Creationist geologists working not long after Darwin's time new better. Sediment can pile up behind a natural levee and then a few meters of earth get deposited at once. Geologists don't refute this, and it does NOT contradict the 4.5BY-old earth. But these fast depositions are LOCAL, and occur in strata of vastly different ages.
@HalfCrazy520 (cont.E) who disagree with you are demeaning, hateful, profane, obnoxious, often devoid of reason or rationality and if they've challenged a point made either here or elsewhere, it's virtually NEVER answered in an honorable way. Simply put, you guys are the epitome of both how NOT to win an argument and how NOT to behave, but AMAZINGLY, NONE of you ever shows (that I've seen) that you have the slightest sense of responsibility or decorum or decency. In a word, the lot of you SUCK.
DonExodus2: I don't know why you would waste your time with Nephy. Even I with my relatively limited education was able to pwn his ass in a couple of threads in the comment area of videos and he still couldn't grasp how he is wrong! Debating him would be beneath you.
Created by & Still Controlled by Zionist Bankers are the JeSUITS
see cashkelesh channel, EX-JESUIT Alberto Rivera told of a SECRET GROUP controlling the Jesuits
They Bring in DRUGS to Your Community, Zionist Bankers with Jesuits
Google Oliver North Iran Contra, Barry Seals, Al Gore Studied to be a JESUIT, Google Jesuit Oath taken in fornt of Skull & Bones CIA=TATUM CHRONICLES, VATICAN ASSASSINS,
They have us DRUGGED with NEUROTOXIN =FLUORIDEALERT(dot)ORG
Debating someone who denies that we evolved through the process of natural selection is like debating a child with severe disabilities. It is pointless and a waste of time. I like a good debate, but the other person has to have at least some sense of reality.
Lesson: Creationists, like all habitual liars and mental cripples, require special handling. If anyone in YouTube's reality-based community has to coordinate with a Creationist about bloody anything, insist that all communication about time, venue, rules, etc., be conducted on the record and in the public eye via video. Like nuking from orbit, it's the only way to be sure.
" I signed the Scientific Dissent From Darwinism statement, because I am absolutely convinced of the LACK of True scientific evidence in favour of Darwinian dogma. Nobody in the biological sciences, medicine included, needs Darwinism at all. Darwinism is certainly needed, however, in order to pose as PHILOSOPHER, since it is primarily a worldview. And an awful one, as George Bernard Shaw used to say."
Dr. Leguizamon, Pathologist, and a Professor of Medicine at the at the Auto Uni,Mexico
@EvolutionLIE Wow. You don't get it. A rock ape isn't even a thing, and YOUR ancestor is the sea slug too... like billions of generations ago. Also, my previous comment contained no opinions, only a question and a fact.
@AboyNAmEDsued Why use your brain when you can dismiss men with more education and intelligence than you with presumptuous and dishonest platitudes?
What's funny is there are NO evolutionists (ZERO, NONE, NADA) on YouTube with the character and integrity to refute and rebuke this type of arrogantly WORTHLESS remark that is standard fare on YouTube. If anyone knows of a SINGULAR exception, I'd like to know. It would be an AMAZING SURPRISE. Your reputations for dishonesty are 100% CONSISTENT!
@911dispatcher Three days an NARY an answer from the thousands of evolutionist/atheist LIARS.
Am I surprised? I would have been surprised to see ANY evidence of character from you low-lifes. LOL Your shame knows no bounds and no limits and it's evidenced by the fact that YOU ALL LIE ALL THE TIME.
Nephilimfree saw how you presented yourself in this video and evolve into a coward and grew a vagina. Wow if I saw this before I was going to debate donExodus2 I would have back out too.
oh get over it, what did you expect? Old expression: when a man argues with a fool, there are two fools arguing. Please. I'm into this 4 min. and quitting. argh Suggestion: your time would be better spent with the girlfriend.
the professional,busy and business men atheists on youtube are more than misquotes on hot summer day in saint Laurent,which makes me wonder why we ,Christians,have to pay high taxes to feed these incompetent people so that they can play scientists on youtube.from evolutionary point of view their existence falsifies evolution.
Why do you even try to debate with creationist. Trying to debate with creationist and religious people is like tring to have an intelligent conversation with a brick wall
I've got no dog in this fight but have to wonder why anyone would waste valuable seconds of their precious life engaging or even paying attention to intellectual Neanderthals like NephllimFree.
Self-absorbed, narcissistic goobers like that guy are best left alone to whither in the confines of their rural, trailer park existence so they can be left alone to mumble to themselves until such a time as they get the psychiatric assistance that they obviously need.
neph says such incredibly outlandish things that people consider him lost and perhaps even quasi dangerous. He isn't dumb by any stretch of the imagination but he actually has some type of disorder or complex that makes him feel intellectually indestructible - and this is why he will say practically anything. He knows if he says something odd or new, someone will believe it. And even though others will destroy his "arguments" he really gets off on having the misguided believe in him.
Hey Don, I've seen a couple of these videos you made about the debate and I have a question. In one video, Neph tells you to make a video by Friday, accepting whatever. If you didn't, the debate was off. Did he make that video AFTER having time to see this one? If so, I don't know if you picked up on this, but his demand that you make a video by Friday follows you saying you weren't going to watch any videos he made in response to this! IOW, he KNEW you wouldn't see his demand.
Hey Don! It's really no use trying to have an intelligent debate with Nephilimfree. As my dearly departed mother once said, "Never get into an argument with an idiot, because you'll never win!" Also, engaging in a battle of wits with Nephilimfree would be very unfair to him because he is unarmed! Just forget it, and send him home on the short bus!
"As my dearly departed mother once said, As my dearly departed mother once said, "Never get into an argument with an idiot, because you'll never win!"
Worm food, I mean your dearly departed mother was trying to explain to you why she chose not to argue with you about anything.
@WildCatsKitten1 "Worm food, I mean your dearly departed mother was trying to explain to you why she chose not to argue with you about anything" BINGO!!!
well, well, well, if it isn't maximusarurealius using his sock account. hi max, tell everyone how god pulled the legs off of snakes. you, nephy, aaugoaa [aka cunt], and wildcatskitten1/dishrackdarwin are made for each other. you are all stupid creatards
hi dishrackdarwin, maybe you should read a biology textbook
the theory has been tested, observed and confirmed
that is why it is still used today, grow up. i think it is funny that you think i am trans. max doesn't believe it and neither does eternalskeptic8. so that makes you dumber than them, and that is saying something
maybe you should stick to videos that block evolutionists, your bullshit stops here
@MrMegatruth Why use the term evolutionsists?! Dont you understand it is a label used by Creationists who claim that evolution is a religion. Dont let it become mainstream.
@MrMotorMouthDouche said, "i am an evolutionist" har har har you're an idiot. You don't know shit about evolution. Evolution TEST SCORE = 7% Tell us asshole what are natural enemies? HAR HAR HAR HAR
YOUR STUPID ANSWER: "natural enemies, presupposes the notion that animals hate eachother."
hi maximusarurealius, i see you are using this account now. maybe next week you can use your moogoogaipancakes or sockpuppet357 account. why do you need so many accounts?
btw, tell how god pulled the legs off of snakes and how you failed your own test
what is the difference between the pope and a pedophile?????
"Also, engaging in a battle of wits with Nephilimfree would be very unfair to him because he is unarmed! Just forget it, and send him home on the short bus!"
@WildCatsKitten1 - What??? You say I'm retarded??? Hey! It's Nephilimfree who's the fucking retard! He's a geo-centrist who believes the the sun revolves around the earth, and one of those Christard Funny-mentalists who believes in creationism, while I support Darwin's theory of evolution. So, fuck off and hit the road Bimbo!!!
There is no Darwins theory mentally stunted fat man, Nobody has tested, repeated or observed amphibian to reptile, reptile to mammal etc, thus it does not merit the title of theory as it has never even reached the testing phase, Going on a net crusade and using lame retorts like "christard" might be appropriate behaviour for angry emo teenage atheists, but for a man of 51 to behave that way and judge others shows your lack of self awareness.
Why do people constantly fall for these idiots? Just ridicule them and move on. To partially quote Thomas Jefferson: “Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them"
Typhoonbladefist 3 months ago
wow, wow ..... dude, ease up on the facts man, remember who youre dealing with
rs1372 6 months ago
don, you are a compulsive liar
castormccree 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@castormccree lol? Evidence to support your claim?
MisterRedstone 7 months ago
@castormccree
Looks like truth to me!
Primordialfan1 6 months ago
I don't think Nephilimbecile wanted a debate for a moment.
He wanted to either set a trap where he could bullshit you to death with Cock-of-shite backing him up. Or if he couldn't set that trap make it look like you where to afraid to debate him.
Creatards are dishonest like that. That's what their god wants they feel.
TheSkunkCat 7 months ago
Having seen this Nephlem, I would question, why try to debate with some one who is clearly mentally unbalanced?
AthenaSchroedinger 7 months ago
Dude, Nephlem, or whatever his name is, scares me. I swear if I logged onto youtube tomorrow and found out the cops busted him for collecting humans heads, or keeping Phillipino kids caged in his basement I wouldn't be surprised at all, not at all.
ThePuzzler81 8 months ago
yup... sexy atheist LMAO
joey6961 9 months ago
My girlfriend told me the other day that youtube needs a really sexy atheist on youtube making vids, so before she finished her sentence I said "baby you haven't seen the Don". She was very pleased.
ThePuzzler81 10 months ago 10
@ThePuzzler81 what about a sexy theist
MoonwalkerWorshiper 8 months ago
@MoonwalkerWorshiper
All the lying and special pleading tends to diminish a theists sex appeal.
ThePuzzler81 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ThePuzzler81 where you trying to say
"All the lying and special pleading tends to diminish atheists sex appeal." but you just happened to put a space between a and theist? what if christianity is true?
MoonwalkerWorshiper 8 months ago
@MoonwalkerWorshiper because the're gullible and easy to manipulate:)
55metalmonkey 5 months ago
@55metalmonkey Atheists are aswell, they have been easily manipulated to believe Richard Dawkins is intellectual when his book have been easily destroyed by theologians. that would make atheists rather unsexy
MoonwalkerWorshiper 5 months ago
@MoonwalkerWorshiper Never been a huge fan of Richard Dawkins, I prefer the work of scientists who do practical research in their chosen field and can demonstrate their findings, I do respect Richard Dawkins for being a well spoken public speaker who is versed in science but he just comes off a little too pretencious IMO... could be the accent. Regardless, anyone who blindly devotes their life to bronze age worship of an invisible holy magic man gets my vote for being more gullible.
55metalmonkey 5 months ago
@55metalmonkey [could be the accent.] Seriously, just because someone speaks british makes them pretentious? I'd say the content in the way Dawkins throws crap at religion but can't take what he dish out.
[The problem lies with organized religion]
No, the problem lies with INTOLERANT organized religion. Intolerant atheistic organizations are a threat to democracy aswell. Having the goal to elinimate the church for example is biggotry.
MoonwalkerWorshiper 5 months ago
@MoonwalkerWorshiper It's not the accent so much as the tone in which he uses it, When he is doing a monolouge to a camera it's a suble English accent when he is in a debate his accent becomes seriously pronounced and it makes him seem pompus, still a great speaker but you can tell the difference in tone. I don't know of any athiest groups that are a threat to democracy, the only threat is to the attendance at church and their profit margin & ALL religions are intolerant to some degree ALL!
55metalmonkey 5 months ago
@MoonwalkerWorshiper Just one question on your comment, Do you have any examples where Richard Dawkins work (books) have been destroyed by theologians? I mean real examples by coherant people...not some bat shit crazy creatard making dumb shit up that only sounds reasonable to other brain dead fundimentalists
55metalmonkey 5 months ago
@55metalmonkey Yes I have one example. His name is William Lane Craig, and he's due to debate Dawkins in a month or so and Dawkins have refused to because he feel embarrased. Just search for Craig and The God Delusion. I hope you realize there's a difference between theists and creationists, or "creatards".
MoonwalkerWorshiper 5 months ago
@MoonwalkerWorshiper Yes I do know the difference, I accually have some respect for Theists. Theists have the ability to understand advancements in knowledge, comprehend what it means and will seek out knowledge to gain a deeper understanding of things even if they don't agree with the subject and contemplate it's effect on their belief in God. Creationists reject anything that threatens their delusions regardless of the weight of evidence. I'll check out the rest of the vids.
55metalmonkey 5 months ago
@MoonwalkerWorshiper Also I hope you realize that Athiests don't have a problem with God (since we/they don't belive in him) The problem lies with organized religion and it's followers who can't STFU becuse others don't belive in their paticular brand of bullshit. It's fine to have a theistic approch to life (what ever you need to get through the day IMO) but keep it to yourself.
55metalmonkey 5 months ago
@MoonwalkerWorshiper Oh yes, do you have a quote of Richard Dawkins saying that "he would feel embarassed to debate William Lane Craig" or is that statement made up and just wild speculation on your part? Richard Dawkins rarely debates Creationists or Fundementalists (or like minded people) because he doesn't want to give anyone the impression that they have any credibility when it comes to scientific discussion on the origins of the universe. He has stated this MANY MANY times.
55metalmonkey 5 months ago
@55metalmonkey [because he doesn't want to give anyone the impression that they have any credibility when it comes to scientific discussion on the origins of the universe. He has stated this MANY MANY times.]
This is where your gullibility as an atheist comes in. You simply buy any bullshit Dawkins give you.
Search for
William Lane Craig Q&A and UK Tour Preview (in 2011 Oct. 17-26)
here on youtube. 8 min in, there's the truth.
MoonwalkerWorshiper 5 months ago
@MoonwalkerWorshiper First off...how exactly do I "buy any bullshit Dawkins gives me"?
if you go back and READ, I said I'm not a fan of Dawkins, I don't follow anything he does or says nor would I or have I bought anything he has written That being said I also do not care to defend his choices in accepting a debate or not,,,I really don't give a shit one way or the other, I just don't care. So your attempt to point out the failings of my ATHIEST HERO is nothing but a FAIL.
55metalmonkey 5 months ago
@MoonwalkerWorshiper Second point, the "truth" you claim at min8 is merly Craig stating something he heard some one else say second hand, NOT Dawkins saying that "he would feel embarassed to debate William Lane Craig" this is the old chinese telephone game with speculation vs fact. If you could find Dawkins acually saying it I'd belive it....so fail #2
55metalmonkey 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@55metalmonkey [if you go back and READ, I said I'm not a fan of Dawkins, I don't follow anything he does or says]
Yeah you claim that, but then you say he has stated that he doesn't want to give people the impression that his debate opponents have any credibility, as if you grant this excuse as a truthful premise. You refuse to analyze this, instead you just blindly accept it because it's Dawkins who said it.
MoonwalkerWorshiper 5 months ago
@55metalmonkey [Craig stating something he heard some one else say second hand] ...who was somebody in position to know.
You could choose to dismiss this as a lie if you want, which you clearly are doing right now, which shows a bias. I find it amusing, your hypocrisy. You're fighting to show off as objective, at the same time you're defending one part because it's an atheist. How's it gonna be? Are mentally strong enough to ACTUALLY be objective and not PRETEND cuz it makes you look good?
MoonwalkerWorshiper 5 months ago
@55metalmonkey [If you could find Dawkins acually saying it I'd belive it....]
Yes, and that's because you believe anything Dawkins tells you. Obviously he's not going to publicly confess that he's not gonna debate dr Craig due to embarrassment - because of exactly that he is too embarrassed to admit it. He will give excuses and you will buy it because you're an atheist.
MoonwalkerWorshiper 5 months ago
@MoonwalkerWorshiper "that's because you believe anything Dawkins tells you"
Once again you are proposing that I listen to Dawkins, Just because I point out the holes in your argument and failures with regard to burden of proof doesn't mean I'm pretending to be nutral. I call bullshit when I see it....Some would call it Devils advocate. This is one of the main reasons I don't listen to RD's lectures/ debates, they usually revolve around making assumptions to debate things and have no conclusion
55metalmonkey 5 months ago
@55metalmonkey [Once again you are proposing that I listen to Dawkins]
Because you did. Quoting you again:
[he doesn't want to give anyone the impression that they have any credibility when it comes to scientific discussion on the origins of the universe. He has stated this MANY MANY times.]
[Just because I point out the holes in your argument and failures with regard to burden of proof]
Hmmm, where exactly did you do THAT? I didn't realize we argued anything.
MoonwalkerWorshiper 5 months ago
@MoonwalkerWorshiper 1:Just because I used statements from the guy doesn't mean I listen to him, If I quote the bible it doesn't mean I follow it. 2:Your main failure is stating RD is embarrased of something when you base that satement on third hand information. Also that I believe everything RD says, must be because I'm an athiest huh?And 3:any voiced/ written position which takes a side on a subject can be considered YOUR argument (as in your position) it doesn't always imply verbal conflict.
55metalmonkey 5 months ago
@55metalmonkey [Just because I used statements from the guy doesn't mean I listen to him]
The issue was, is Dawkins hiding from debating dr Craig because he doesn't want to give Craig credibility like he says it is, or is it because Dawkins is embarrassed and don't know how to defend atheism? You said later that you don't care about this, though.
[you base that satement on third hand information]
That information is more consistent with how Dawkins have behaved, than Dawkins own account.
MoonwalkerWorshiper 5 months ago
@MoonwalkerWorshiper I still don't care, to be more accurate I don't give a fuzzy monkeys ass about it, MY point was that you lead an assumption based on little information (aka: presented a rumor as fact). I could care less if it was about R.Dawkins, the Pope, Ray Comfort, or Steven Hawkin the fact is it gives the impression of dishonesty which regardless of whom your speaking of I'll call bullshit.
So IMHO the discusion is over, goodnight/ goodbye
55metalmonkey 5 months ago
@55metalmonkey [MY point was that you lead an assumption based on little information]
Really? I don't follow how you view things because each time I see your replies there's something new that has happened, that I apperantly have missed.
There's no assumption, Dawkins is clear about being embarrassed due to have challenged theists to the debate arena and then turn down offers to debate them after John Lennox "took him to the woodshed". That's sufficient proof.
MoonwalkerWorshiper 5 months ago
@55metalmonkey (2)
[I call bullshit when I see it...]
Then why aren't you calling out Dawkins on his bullshit, instead of pretending that granting his excuses as the truth by default is somehow objective? Don't sit there and start an argument with me. I'm just showing you how you're not objective.
[I don't listen to RD's lectures/ debates, they usually revolve around making assumptions]
If you don't listen to Dawkins debates, how do you know they revolve around assumptions?
MoonwalkerWorshiper 5 months ago
@MoonwalkerWorshiper To call him out would take more reasearch and time than I can afford to waste, This whole thing started when you made the statement "his book have been easily destroyed by theologians". If your going to make a staement like this about anything, state the facts and don't streach it by embeding your opinion. The facts will stand for themselves
55metalmonkey 5 months ago
@55metalmonkey [If your going to make a staement like this about anything, state the facts]
Well, it's pretty obvious and simple anyways. Dawkins refuse to debate people in order to defend his God Delusion, so it would be pretty much a default position at this point to declare his book as worthless and his atheistic arguments as destroyed.
[Both sides need to make assumptions to begin their case.]
You don't get the point of the debates, they are atheism vs christianity not science vs bible.
MoonwalkerWorshiper 5 months ago
@MoonwalkerWorshiper no I understand debates quite well, aperently you don't. Debates generaly have a opening question posed to open with such as " Is the origins of the universe better explained by the bible or by science. You normaly wouldn't debate an entire belief system vs a non belief system, it would be futile.
Speaking of futile, I'm done with this conversation.
55metalmonkey 5 months ago
@55metalmonkey [aperently you don't]
Appearantly is spelled this way, and for explaning that a debate titled with "Atheism vs Christianity" is about atheism and christianity is really not to misunderstanding the point of the debates. Atheism doesn't represent science, because an atheist is not necessarily a scientist. Christianity is not necessarily limited to the bible, because a theist can argue independantly of biblical scripture. It's ok to admit you were mistaken. You haven't watched it.
MoonwalkerWorshiper 5 months ago
@MoonwalkerWorshiper Holy fuck, your correcting spelling on you tube, lame... maybe you should go back and check your posts and look for bad grammer and poorly formed sentences with missing letters, I'll let you find them for yourself, I'd hate to be a duchebag and point them out. and the title of the debate is "Athiesm vs Christanity: Where does the evidence point to?" & I know not all Athiests are scientists, but my point was you can't debate beliefs or lack of beliefs
55metalmonkey 5 months ago
@MoonwalkerWorshiper If you don't listen to Dawkins debates, how do you know they revolve around assumptions? Simply because to discuss a topic like the origins of life you need to make cirtain basic assumptions to begin your argument (sorry..position) the Thiest assumes that the bible was written by god & has all the answers, and the scientist will state what is known and make assumptions which are probable based on the known science. Both sides need to make assumptions to begin their case.
55metalmonkey 5 months ago
@MoonwalkerWorshiper And RD did explain why he won't debate WLC, search YT for "Richard Dawkins explains why he won't debate William Lane Craig"....... It's right from the horses mouth but I forgot you don't try to find first hand information,
55metalmonkey 5 months ago
@55metalmonkey [And RD did explain why he won't debate WLC]
No he gave an excuse (again), and you take it for granted as it's somehow a valid point, because Dawkins is an atheist aswell as yourself and you need to be biased about it. If you're not a fan of Dawkins, which you said you weren't, it would be perfectly consistent of you to just admit "yes Dawkins is a coward for not debating the most famous apologetic" but instead you choose to wriggle out of it due to your biased atheism.
MoonwalkerWorshiper 5 months ago
@MoonwalkerWorshiper Your a persistant little fucktard aren't you. I'm not going to make excuses and defend a grown man that can speak for himself (which he has) I could care less if you belive him or not, if you have a problem with his reason, send him an email and tell him he's full of shit. Do you defend every bible thumper retard you see just because of like minded beleifs, I don't think so. So why do you assume that I'm making excuses for RD based on a like minded lack of beleif in God?
55metalmonkey 5 months ago
@55metalmonkey I thought you were done with this convo?
[you can't debate beliefs or lack of beliefs]
Actually you can, many people have done so, even Dawkins himself did it against John Lennox.
[why do you assume that I'm making excuses for RD]
I don't, and once again you make something new up that is completely unrelated to what I or you have been discussing. I'm saying you grant the excuses Dawkins give, as some kind of "information".
MoonwalkerWorshiper 5 months ago
@ThePuzzler81 Aren't you worried^^?
d007ization 2 months ago
@ThePuzzler81
Tell her to look up TheoreticalBullshit.
anglicantian 2 months ago
@ThePuzzler81 How do you feel about Aziernoch and MeridianFrost.
ObliviousBurrito 1 week ago
you have lovely teeth.
ilvadel 11 months ago
You can't be logical with creazy people. It does not work.
gregrutz 11 months ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
@gregrutz [You can't be logical with creazy people. It does not work.]
Will it work with being illogical then? Or what is required?
MoonwalkerWorshiper 5 months ago
Not all proof is biology. The Amizaduga Venus texts declare Adam as 4025bc (not 4026 not 4024) and all wrong chronology including evolution comes from that year. This is not biological, it is calendrical, and astral, and historic as in bleeds down into every twisted culture today whether religious or atheistic. Example of atheism is believing a Jewish calendar comes from Nineveh in 3761bc ignoring that its a year late Jews calculated as Adam.
JehovahsElijah 1 year ago
@JehovahsElijah Never mind that the Sumerians had invented glue in approximately 5000 BC.
ChollieD 1 year ago
@ChollieD well youre all screwed up like major schools that your sci-fi cult worships and taxes us for. Just because our Sumerian forefathers invented glue doesnt mean YOUR tag of 5000bc is truth. Jericho was built in 2237bc and it carbon dates as 7000bc. So its older than your glue.
JehovahsElijah 1 year ago
youre the one who minds so much and never minds every one else. If you werent so busy educating your smart-ess, you could pull the stick out and let it educate itself on its own enough to sit down and take a break resting.
JehovahsElijah 1 year ago
Question: youre good at sticking your face on a video, can you do the voice only and add it to video. I dont know how to. I have materials, can you post it. Or dont you post counter information you disagree with.
JehovahsElijah 1 year ago
HEY WAIT i change my challenge. I dont challenge you to be against you as if you need to be defeated because youre so big & bad effecting the world. Hmmm Madonna & Oprah & Gaga effect it worse than YOU. SO my challenge is THIS. The world is soon to end, go under 2 miles of water and come back up. So I challenge you to join me in posting all the evidence so that your reward can be suvive it and be happy inside with all those you save with you.
JehovahsElijah 1 year ago
I also found it odd that you even ask for a referee & call him a moderator because doesnt a moderator have power to delete all these crappy comments that fill up our precious internet space. Our internet space acnt be too precious if all this crap cant be edited. 90% of what is unremovable on the net is the very mind of man that God will soon wipe out. CONSIDER YOURSELF CHALLENGED BY ME not because youre a fool or arrogant, there are worse than YOU.But I doubt you can touch the world changing it
JehovahsElijah 1 year ago
I also found it odd that you even ask for a referee and call him a moderator because doesnt a moderator have power to delete all these crappy comments that fill up our precious internet space. Our internet space acnt be too precious if all this crap cant be edited. 90% of what is unremovable on the net is the very mind of man that God will soon wipe out.
JehovahsElijah 1 year ago
The Flood isn't a fairy tail. You people are the one's who make it such by making movies about Earth getting micorwaved in year 2012.
JehovahsElijah 1 year ago
you dont have to cover EVERYTHING, try covering ANYTHING. it could be what he meant. Anything covers God and touches God because he is everything
JehovahsElijah 1 year ago
EVOLUTION BEVER WAS SET IN STONE, IT IS JUST LIKE YOU, AGREEMENTS WITH NO STONE. OH WAIT MAYBE YOU ARE STONED. If you want answers, ask me, I know my God. But ask before your death. Doesnt do anyone good giving answers over a corpse. Think about it, someone dead has to wake by the power of God BEFORE they can hear the person who shouts WAKE UP UP SIT UP AND COME TO LIFE.
JehovahsElijah 1 year ago
Don Exodus likes arguing for the sake of argument. To create shock jock videos to get people mad and to stir poopy because inside him is a little girl dying to get out. Don't believe me. Change the sound of his voice to your girlfriends or wifes and then place him in her period mode, and tell me if he doesn't sound like her! This guy sounds like a little bitch! No fruist of the spirit here whooooaaaa aayyyyy nooo waaayyy. Just chaos. If this is athiest serenity I don't want any LOL
gurggy 1 year ago
@gurggy troll
2CSST2 10 months ago
Hey Don Exodus if your so at peace with yourself about your evolution athiest little self; how come you smear your crap all over the internet. You know what I think. I think your under heavy conviction by God. I also think your mom may have been neglectful of you as a baby letting you lay in a dirty diaper for long periods before changing it. You had diaper rash and your mom used the rough side of the wash rag; hence why you have a chapped ass at an early age syndrome. Or your gay.
gurggy 1 year ago
anyone know where the videos to the debate are/went or the "his thoughts" video?
wlchambers 1 year ago
How about PRINTING OUT THE SUPPOSED AGREEMENT SENT BY EMAIL AND SHOWING IT ON YOUTUBE FOR ALL TO SEE?!
IT'S ENOUGH OF THIS MUTUAL ACCUSATIONS!
PROVE IT BY SHOWING ON YOUTUBE OR SHUT UP!
PawelKolasa 1 year ago
Youtube debates are like highschool fighrts
Lots of shit talking, but when it comes down to it someone pussys out and tells their friends they won or the other person backed out
:/
ManicTheManic 1 year ago
you inspire me sir. 2 learn more , also i was in special ed class in high school so im not that brite in learning , but you inspire me , so im ganna start reading books on intelligent stuff , thank you !
unknown142313 1 year ago
Why would you wanna debate that retard? Clearly he's gonna talk a bounch of crap and at the end you won't achive anything. I doubt he can humiliate himself more then he already did..
jerneje 1 year ago
I was listening to you and thought, "He looks and sounds pretty reasonable," and then heard you say, "... you have no problem overruling every career scientist on the planet..." and I realized that you're not only not reasonable, you're a liar like every other evolutionist on YouTube.
911dispatcher 1 year ago
@911dispatcher
What exactly is an "evolutionist"? The simple use of that word in a sentence flushes all your credibility right down the crapper. I doubt you could see the truth if it walked up and kicked you in the nuts.
HalfCrazy520 1 year ago
@HalfCrazy520 Your remark is meaningless nonsense, and typical, not only for crazies but halfcrazies as well.
911dispatcher 1 year ago
@HalfCrazy520 Why waste your time making such stupid remarks? Kindly make all your stupid remarks, here, though and don't PM me. I have enough garbage there already.
911dispatcher 1 year ago
@HalfCrazy520 Gee... silly me. I tend to focus on one thing and often miss the other, sometimes more important issue. I see why you remarked with nonsense. It was your attempt to deflect from my BULLSEYE accusation that you're an INCREDIBLE LIAR!
You succeeded too! lol Until I read it again and realized THAT'S why you did it. Check out Rev21:8 and you'll see only the 2nd sin I know you're guilty of, the first being dishonoring the Holy One of Israel.
You met a real believer, boy. (cont.1)
911dispatcher 1 year ago
@HalfCrazy520 (cont.2) What I mean by that is that I've met the LIVING GOD, the Lord Jesus Christ. What that means is I'm not an, (what you think are) idiot wannabe fan boys of "God." I know Him; I hear His voice; I receive revelation; I know the Word of God; and I'm not here to collect brownie points from God. I know the Gospel and I'm here to present it as the Word of Truth, which is what it is and you guys are nothing but uneducated fools, LYING and pretending science is on your side.
911dispatcher 1 year ago
@911dispatcher Well about 99% of scientists in related fields accept evolution as a fact. He wasn't exaggerating by a lot.
123Atheist 1 year ago
@123Atheist He wasn't exaggerating at all. He was lying. They're related, yet one can be regarded as carelessness, the other is simply lack of character, like you can see from HalfCrazy520
911dispatcher 1 year ago
@911dispatcher
Here is what you're missing. What you believe has no bearing on what is true. If you don't believe in math, 60 + 40 still equals 100. If you don't believe in gravity, still better not sleep too close to the edge of the bed.
Use of the term 'evolutionist' implies an agenda. You believe that the scienfic community is involved in some huge conspiracy against relgion. People have been trying to disprove evolution for 150+ years and can't because it's true. Like it or not.
HalfCrazy520 1 year ago
@HalfCrazy520 The "scienfic" community is involved in a huge conspiracy against truth because their master is your master and your master is smart enough to motivate without revealing his true agenda because if he did, you wouldn't cooperate. The "scienfic" community's cornerstone of their conspiracy is pretending the nonsense they promote is science. Think of it this way. Imagine the "food" industry selling you junk food made up of useless, non-nutritive garbage and calling it "food." (cont.a)
911dispatcher 1 year ago
@911dispatcher
Atheism is junk food for the brain. Fatsos eat junk, but I don't remember seeing the RICH wobbling into McDonalds! LOLOL.
Similarly, atheists are making the corrupted and powerful rich, but the corrupted believe in God just like Satan DOES, lol. Because his very own existance depends on God, lol.
Isn't that something?
PawelKolasa 1 year ago
@PawelKolasa It would be something if any of what you said made any sense at all.
trippinlikegod 1 year ago
@HalfCrazy520 (cont.b) That's exactly what the "scienfic" community is doing and you blind, stupid and gullible fools don't have the integrity to call them on it. "Hey, how about giving us some REAL science," which is ludicrous because you guys DON'T WANT REAL SCIENCE! You've quite content with your delusion that the magnificent order of the world, and the Universe "just happened." lol The MOST preposterous idea EVER postulated but YOU buy it because it helps SHUT UP your conscience. FOOLS.
911dispatcher 1 year ago
@911dispatcher Actually, once you learn the math, it's easy enough to verify the science for yourself. I'm guessing that you never learned the math. Do you know algebra? trig? calculus? Who's the blind one?
ExtantFrodo 1 year ago
@ExtantFrodo You are. You don't have enough sense to read a simple remark, recognize the accuracy of it and say, "Gee, you're right."
911dispatcher 1 year ago
@HalfCrazy520 Let me illustrate what I just said to you. IF ANY ONE OF YOU had the slightest bit of integrity and character (well, first, you wouldn't be a fan boy of stupidity), your response to my last post would be: "Wait, that's a STRAW MAN! Evolution CANNOT be proved scientifically so you're just shooting off your mouth!" But you guys don't have the integrity to admit that evolution can't be proved scientifically because that would relegate it to a religious belief and you'd have (cont.A)
911dispatcher 1 year ago
@HalfCrazy520 (cont.B) to admit that you FAR LESS ground to stand on than Christians do! So you are quite content to compromise any honor you might wish to have for what you think is "leverage." But when leverage is a pretense, it's not leverage at all; it's deceit. Thus, we're back to where every real Christian (who hasn't been brainwashed by the lies of evolutionary theory -- and unfortunately, there are ignorant Christians who don't know God and His Word well enough to realize that (cont.B)
911dispatcher 1 year ago
@HalfCrazy520 (cont.C) they have been brainwashed) has always KNOWN where you are. So, here you are laughing at Christians for "being so dumb and brainwashed" and the Christians (because they don't have the mean-spirited hatefulness you have), are accurately laughing for the very same reason, but not nearly so much as they are praying that God will have mercy on you and open your eyes to the glorious light of the gospel of Jesus, who loved you and gave His life's blood so that you could (cont.C)
911dispatcher 1 year ago
@HalfCrazy520 (cont.D) be forgiven and accepted into fellowship with God.
If you have trouble reading my remarks, it's because I don't write on a second grade reading level, which, it seems, is about the intelligence level of most of these evolutionist/atheist YouTube pages. If that sounds insulting, it was intentional. You guys are so arrogant and hateful and pretentiously "intelligent" but there is no intelligence that's demonstrated. The VAST majority of your responses to those (cont.D)
911dispatcher 1 year ago
@911dispatcher Of course you hold the position that we're stupid. It's only because you wouuldnt know intelligence when you encounter it.
splicedenergy 1 year ago
@splicedenergy That's illustrative of the kinds of remarks that show what idiots and fools you all are. It's impossible to respect fools like the lot of you. Take your remark and the one from HalfCrazy below and examine three dozen remarks from your partners in stupidity and you'll see that none of you have the slightest regard for facts or truth. Add ALL OF YOU TOGETHER and you still get ZERO integrity. ... it makes your mockery completely hollow. No one respects fools, and you're all fools.
911dispatcher 1 year ago
@911dispatcher See, I was right!
splicedenergy 1 year ago
@911dispatcher Homo habilis, homo erectus, and australopithecus all suggest humans have ancestral connections to the rest of the animal kingdom.
We have the fossils, the geologic record, radioisotopic dating, and all of the corroboration from the non-evo fields of biology. You have a book that doesn't have ANY signs of an Omniscient Author/inspiration: no mention of DNA, electricity, FOSSIL fuels, dinosaurs, or penicillin, the latter of which would have been a great boon to mankind.
ChollieD 1 year ago 2
@ChollieD Neither does it mention the magnet on a pin which has come to be only THE universal symbol of guidance and direction (key concepts in biblical texts). One really has to wonder how an omniscient could have missed that one.
ExtantFrodo 1 year ago
@ExtantFrodo Frodo lives! Very good point, pointed north.
ChollieD 1 year ago
@ChollieD
lets start with geologic record shall we? GOOGLE: PETRIFIED TREES
Pictures show trees, hundreds of them in few locations like JUNO, Canada, which grow through 3 supposedly millions-year-old strata e.g cretatious and jurassic. Yet the trees show that all of those stratas happened in less than a year.
Disproving "millions of years of evolution" as well as the whole strata theory. Petrified trees just blow this as nonsense.
biloxy river footprints prove coex. of hum and din
PawelKolasa 1 year ago
@PawelKolasa "lets start with geologic record shall we?" Fine, I found a link immediately that demolishes the (apparently well-worn) Creationist argument about petrified trees. Google "don lindsay polystrate" for the actual scientific story.
Pav, if there was any basis to this so-called evidence, it should be written up in reputable, peer-reviewed scientific journals. If it was well-done, careful research with conclusions following from evidence, it would NOT be suppressed.
ChollieD 1 year ago
@ChollieD
The link contains confirmation of what I said.
1. Polystrate trees found in many places, mostly Joggins, Nova Scotia, Canada.
2. Sediments thought previously to be strata like jurassic, taking millions of year, happen in less than a year. Others the same.
PawelKolasa 1 year ago
@PawelKolasa Sir, the Polystrate trees were refuted in the 19th Century. You're about 150 years behind the times, and Creationist geologists working not long after Darwin's time new better. Sediment can pile up behind a natural levee and then a few meters of earth get deposited at once. Geologists don't refute this, and it does NOT contradict the 4.5BY-old earth. But these fast depositions are LOCAL, and occur in strata of vastly different ages.
ChollieD 1 year ago
@ChollieD You fail at Thought
ThePuppyTurtle 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ThePuppyTurtle "You fail at Thought"
{crickets chirping}
ChollieD 1 year ago
@PawelKolasa How about you actually look at evidence while you're googling for petrified trees. talkorigins{dot}org /faqs/polystrate/trees{dot}html
trippinlikegod 1 year ago
@HalfCrazy520 (cont.E) who disagree with you are demeaning, hateful, profane, obnoxious, often devoid of reason or rationality and if they've challenged a point made either here or elsewhere, it's virtually NEVER answered in an honorable way. Simply put, you guys are the epitome of both how NOT to win an argument and how NOT to behave, but AMAZINGLY, NONE of you ever shows (that I've seen) that you have the slightest sense of responsibility or decorum or decency. In a word, the lot of you SUCK.
911dispatcher 1 year ago
@911dispatcher
My friend, all the mean-spirited hatefulness is coming from you. Take your medication, OK?
HalfCrazy520 1 year ago
@911dispatcher TL;DR
Ghutom 1 year ago
GO MAN GO!
pandapalace11 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
he chickened out, didn't he?
MrEvidencefree 1 year ago
DonExodus2: I don't know why you would waste your time with Nephy. Even I with my relatively limited education was able to pwn his ass in a couple of threads in the comment area of videos and he still couldn't grasp how he is wrong! Debating him would be beneath you.
mjh012363 1 year ago
@mjh012363 Isn't it SOP for all evolutionists to claim they've pwned EVERYONE who disagrees with them regardless of substance?
911dispatcher 1 year ago
@911dispatcher Show us "evolutionist" a creationist who isn't pwnable then I would give your comment some creadence but until then stfu!!
mjh012363 1 year ago
what's the hard on for this guy? it's obvious the debate is purely for comic relief.
humanity6fl9 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Created by & Still Controlled by Zionist Bankers are the JeSUITS
see cashkelesh channel, EX-JESUIT Alberto Rivera told of a SECRET GROUP controlling the Jesuits
They Bring in DRUGS to Your Community, Zionist Bankers with Jesuits
Google Oliver North Iran Contra, Barry Seals, Al Gore Studied to be a JESUIT, Google Jesuit Oath taken in fornt of Skull & Bones CIA=TATUM CHRONICLES, VATICAN ASSASSINS,
They have us DRUGGED with NEUROTOXIN =FLUORIDEALERT(dot)ORG
TakePure WATER & MAGNeSIUM
deadadelta 1 year ago
Nephy is a demonstrable idiot
xephyr1000 1 year ago
Debating someone who denies that we evolved through the process of natural selection is like debating a child with severe disabilities. It is pointless and a waste of time. I like a good debate, but the other person has to have at least some sense of reality.
godnotfound 1 year ago
this just sounds aggravating
blankcanvasgirl 1 year ago
Lesson: Creationists, like all habitual liars and mental cripples, require special handling. If anyone in YouTube's reality-based community has to coordinate with a Creationist about bloody anything, insist that all communication about time, venue, rules, etc., be conducted on the record and in the public eye via video. Like nuking from orbit, it's the only way to be sure.
PDXOutsider 1 year ago
" I signed the Scientific Dissent From Darwinism statement, because I am absolutely convinced of the LACK of True scientific evidence in favour of Darwinian dogma. Nobody in the biological sciences, medicine included, needs Darwinism at all. Darwinism is certainly needed, however, in order to pose as PHILOSOPHER, since it is primarily a worldview. And an awful one, as George Bernard Shaw used to say."
Dr. Leguizamon, Pathologist, and a Professor of Medicine at the at the Auto Uni,Mexico
EvolutionLIE 1 year ago
@EvolutionLIE Uhh... We evolved is a world view? riiight... also: 98 percent of scientits believe in evolution. Bam.
AboyNAmEDsued 1 year ago
@AboyNAmEDsued ...your opinions are no more valid than your ancestors, the hairy rock ape and the sea slug....BAM !
EvolutionLIE 1 year ago
@EvolutionLIE Wow. You don't get it. A rock ape isn't even a thing, and YOUR ancestor is the sea slug too... like billions of generations ago. Also, my previous comment contained no opinions, only a question and a fact.
AboyNAmEDsued 1 year ago
@EvolutionLIE
Rock ape? Sea slug? Are you high? You must be.
NUTCASE71733 1 year ago 8
@AboyNAmEDsued Why use your brain when you can dismiss men with more education and intelligence than you with presumptuous and dishonest platitudes?
What's funny is there are NO evolutionists (ZERO, NONE, NADA) on YouTube with the character and integrity to refute and rebuke this type of arrogantly WORTHLESS remark that is standard fare on YouTube. If anyone knows of a SINGULAR exception, I'd like to know. It would be an AMAZING SURPRISE. Your reputations for dishonesty are 100% CONSISTENT!
911dispatcher 1 year ago
@911dispatcher Three days an NARY an answer from the thousands of evolutionist/atheist LIARS.
Am I surprised? I would have been surprised to see ANY evidence of character from you low-lifes. LOL Your shame knows no bounds and no limits and it's evidenced by the fact that YOU ALL LIE ALL THE TIME.
911dispatcher 1 year ago
Neppy got mad becuz Don has a girlfriend XD
HybridD91 1 year ago 34
You should go ahead and debate him. But if you do, nail him down on a topic, and make sure he follows the rules.
Stitchman3875 1 year ago
Why not just submit the email exchange and put the question to rest?
benthemiester 1 year ago
Nephilimfree saw how you presented yourself in this video and evolve into a coward and grew a vagina. Wow if I saw this before I was going to debate donExodus2 I would have back out too.
Lethal752 1 year ago
oh get over it, what did you expect? Old expression: when a man argues with a fool, there are two fools arguing. Please. I'm into this 4 min. and quitting. argh Suggestion: your time would be better spent with the girlfriend.
chromolitho 1 year ago
the professional,busy and business men atheists on youtube are more than misquotes on hot summer day in saint Laurent,which makes me wonder why we ,Christians,have to pay high taxes to feed these incompetent people so that they can play scientists on youtube.from evolutionary point of view their existence falsifies evolution.
SoSaCA100 1 year ago
Comment removed
SoSaCA100 1 year ago
just stop running!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
SoSaCA100 1 year ago
Look up YouTube Games by TheraminTrees
His video perfectly describes what you have said in this video.
It clearly shows that they are scared to debate with you because they are chicken shits and they know they will lose.
8BitPerception 1 year ago
Why do you even try to debate with creationist. Trying to debate with creationist and religious people is like tring to have an intelligent conversation with a brick wall
blackdog154 1 year ago
I've got no dog in this fight but have to wonder why anyone would waste valuable seconds of their precious life engaging or even paying attention to intellectual Neanderthals like NephllimFree.
Self-absorbed, narcissistic goobers like that guy are best left alone to whither in the confines of their rural, trailer park existence so they can be left alone to mumble to themselves until such a time as they get the psychiatric assistance that they obviously need.
Vulcanscienceacademy 1 year ago
Subscribed...your videos are so intelligent.
supersmash43 1 year ago
neph says such incredibly outlandish things that people consider him lost and perhaps even quasi dangerous. He isn't dumb by any stretch of the imagination but he actually has some type of disorder or complex that makes him feel intellectually indestructible - and this is why he will say practically anything. He knows if he says something odd or new, someone will believe it. And even though others will destroy his "arguments" he really gets off on having the misguided believe in him.
robertchflynn 1 year ago
Comment removed
robertchflynn 1 year ago
Neph is a troll. And as such, he should die of malnutrition.
lolgepwnt 1 year ago 2
are you wearing scrubs?
Frog869 1 year ago
Nephfree has alot of time on his hands, being out of work for 3 years, so he can fuck around with you.
sclf 1 year ago
Hey Don, I've seen a couple of these videos you made about the debate and I have a question. In one video, Neph tells you to make a video by Friday, accepting whatever. If you didn't, the debate was off. Did he make that video AFTER having time to see this one? If so, I don't know if you picked up on this, but his demand that you make a video by Friday follows you saying you weren't going to watch any videos he made in response to this! IOW, he KNEW you wouldn't see his demand.
Astrobrant2 1 year ago
Where is the debate in question?
FibonaziProductions 1 year ago
How did this pan out?
GhostyFilms 1 year ago
Are those OR scrubs?
MelleB90 1 year ago
Hey Don! It's really no use trying to have an intelligent debate with Nephilimfree. As my dearly departed mother once said, "Never get into an argument with an idiot, because you'll never win!" Also, engaging in a battle of wits with Nephilimfree would be very unfair to him because he is unarmed! Just forget it, and send him home on the short bus!
BigFatMan1951 1 year ago
@BigFatMan1951
"As my dearly departed mother once said, As my dearly departed mother once said, "Never get into an argument with an idiot, because you'll never win!"
Worm food, I mean your dearly departed mother was trying to explain to you why she chose not to argue with you about anything.
WildCatsKitten1 1 year ago
@WildCatsKitten1 "Worm food, I mean your dearly departed mother was trying to explain to you why she chose not to argue with you about anything" BINGO!!!
HAR HAR HAR
brayingjackass 1 year ago
@brayingjackass
BigOldretardedFatass is trying to get down with the retarded atheist emo kids on youtube.
hahhahahahahhahahha
WildCatsKitten1 1 year ago
@WildCatsKitten1
what did you say about sophomoric insults?
MrMegatruth 1 year ago
@brayingjackass
well, well, well, if it isn't maximusarurealius using his sock account. hi max, tell everyone how god pulled the legs off of snakes. you, nephy, aaugoaa [aka cunt], and wildcatskitten1/dishrackdarwin are made for each other. you are all stupid creatards
MrMegatruth 1 year ago
@brayingjackass
Don't reply to megatroll he is a sock puppet of translantic and he will start spamming you and trolling you with his retarded crap.
He does not even know that for something to be a theory it has to have been tested, he is that retarded.
let the troll go back under his bridge.
WildCatsKitten1 1 year ago
@WildCatsKitten1
hi dishrackdarwin, maybe you should read a biology textbook
the theory has been tested, observed and confirmed
that is why it is still used today, grow up. i think it is funny that you think i am trans. max doesn't believe it and neither does eternalskeptic8. so that makes you dumber than them, and that is saying something
maybe you should stick to videos that block evolutionists, your bullshit stops here
MrMegatruth 1 year ago
@MrMegatruth Why use the term evolutionsists?! Dont you understand it is a label used by Creationists who claim that evolution is a religion. Dont let it become mainstream.
bojoben 1 year ago
@bojoben
i understand your point, but i really do not care, my world is not dictated by creationists.
i am an evolutionist
MrMegatruth 1 year ago
@MrMotorMouthDouche said, "i am an evolutionist" har har har you're an idiot. You don't know shit about evolution. Evolution TEST SCORE = 7% Tell us asshole what are natural enemies? HAR HAR HAR HAR
YOUR STUPID ANSWER: "natural enemies, presupposes the notion that animals hate eachother."
PWNED
brayingjackass 1 year ago
@brayingjackass
hi maximusarurealius, i see you are using this account now. maybe next week you can use your moogoogaipancakes or sockpuppet357 account. why do you need so many accounts?
btw, tell how god pulled the legs off of snakes and how you failed your own test
what is the difference between the pope and a pedophile?????
the hat
MrMegatruth 1 year ago
@BigFatMan1951
"Also, engaging in a battle of wits with Nephilimfree would be very unfair to him because he is unarmed! Just forget it, and send him home on the short bus!"
So says the big fat retarded man.
WildCatsKitten1 1 year ago
@WildCatsKitten1 - What??? You say I'm retarded??? Hey! It's Nephilimfree who's the fucking retard! He's a geo-centrist who believes the the sun revolves around the earth, and one of those Christard Funny-mentalists who believes in creationism, while I support Darwin's theory of evolution. So, fuck off and hit the road Bimbo!!!
BigFatMan1951 1 year ago
@BigFatMan1951
"You say I'm retarded?"
No your behaviour says it.
"Christard Funny-mentalists"
You are a 51 year old man with nothing but lame sophomoric insults and you are not aware that you are mentally and emotionally stunted.
hahahhahahahahhahahahhaha
WildCatsKitten1 1 year ago
There is no Darwins theory mentally stunted fat man, Nobody has tested, repeated or observed amphibian to reptile, reptile to mammal etc, thus it does not merit the title of theory as it has never even reached the testing phase, Going on a net crusade and using lame retorts like "christard" might be appropriate behaviour for angry emo teenage atheists, but for a man of 51 to behave that way and judge others shows your lack of self awareness.
WildCatsKitten1 1 year ago
@WildCatsKitten1
darwin's theory is not a theory?
wow, that was incredibly stupid, open a biology textbook and read.
you know, READ, left to right, top to bottom, put words together to makes sentences
MrMegatruth 1 year ago
@BigRetardedLardAss1951 You don't even know what Darwin's theory is dummass.
brayingjackass 1 year ago