Added: 3 years ago
From: 5THunderlord
Views: 2,528
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (182)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Most convincing theory so far, but it doesn't prove the existence of a god in the religious sense. Just an all-powerful sentient being that created the universe. But being converted to matter means that god is the whole universe, which is a theory I quite like. Also, thumbs up for the song! I love Evanescence!

  • 10th dimension, 11th dimension, ...whatever u want to call

    it's all a theory, so much energy you put in proving that god does not exist ... go and use this energy in improving peoples lives, what do you gain in proving that there is no god ? people are free to believe what they want to. if this makes them feel good why not !!!!

  • @proudpersian Know Nozick's experience machine? This is potentionally even better, since it's real.

    Secondly, I was just trying to reply to a video (I believe it was deleted long ago) that claimed to prove the existence of a god.

    Lastly, if people are simply wrong,one should point that out to them, so they can improve their understanding of life. And regardless of that, religion tends to be corrosive to a democratic, understanding society.

  • @proudpersian13 Oh, and your punctuation sucks; I'd have a look at that if I were you.

  • @5THunderlord lol, thanks i am going to imrove it. sorry ! english is not my first language.

  • this is the dumbest video ive ever seen there is no way energy was just thereidc what you say what stupid theory you can come up with God was the one who created the universe hes timeless and omnipresent he was always there trying to imagine his power with our minds is incomprehensible so stop trying energy was never just there................

  • your "GOD" was invented before people knew where the sun went at night

    you say that nothing can only create nothing, so who created your "GOD"?

    does "GOD" have a dad? or rather a creator? before everything came in to being was he just chilling in the void of space for a few millenia and realized one day, "hey this is boring" and decided to create everything

    sooner or later christianity will be dead and gone

  • @TehFoo1 Please research Christianity before you try to refute it with things that you just made up. God is the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. He was not created. And no, He does not have a "dad"... He wasn't bored, He created us because He loves us, and desires a relationship with us. I pray that your eyes will be opened to Him.

  • @GitErDoneYo how do you know he doesnt have a dad or wasnt bored? and nothing i said is made up unless of course 2000 years ago people knew that the earth completes a cycle around the sun once every 365 days, i could be wrong. and if god truly loved me he wouldnt have created a place to torture me forever on the basis of me not thinking he exists.

  • What worthless poorly thought out arguments. f homosexuality is not acceptable in gods eyes could you explain why he created homosexuals as part of man kind. Evolutions is proven fact. Sadly nothing about god is proven it is seen as an explanation for what we cannot yet explian. Why is the quality of life in the most reigious parts of the world less than the West or why is life so cheap in the religious middle east.

  • @welshjim22 Evolution isn't a proven fact. And nobody can prove that God doesn't exist, nor can we prove that He does. Please read "The Case For Christ" by Lee Strobel. He was an atheist and set out to prove God didn't exist and realized how wrong he was. He ended up giving his life to God and became a pastor.

  • What's worse than this argument is the retarded remix in the background.

  • You say whatever you want, you'll be forgiven on Judgement Day.

  • religion and the laughable ''GOD'' belongs in the past

  • You may think your intelligent saying that the big bang is proven? The truth is the big bang is a theory. A theory is not proven, a theory has a lot of support. Just because a theory has support, does not mean it is true, for a long time scientists believed the Earth was the center of the universe. Before you say the big bang is proven realize it is still called the big bang theory.

  • @smittyx3 A theory is a model which generates an output when information is put in. The formula for gravity is a theory in the same way that the big bang is. If the formula (constant.m1.m2)/r² = Fz works 100 times, it's not proven that it will generate the right output (=the output we measure) the 101th time. There is a certain probabilty-level, at which we consider a theory as "proven". Without that, it's easier to prove that every raven is black than above formula.

  • @5THunderlord you should not compare gravity being proven to the big bang being proven, I say this because gravity is all around us every day. Gravity can be proven easily with simple tests, such as jumping in the air, gravity will pull you down. The big bang is said to have happened a long time ago, not something testable like gravity. By the way, not saying it did not happen, however that is the type of logic that you are criticizing.

  • @smittyx3 Aren't the results of the Big Bang around us even more prominently than gravity? The universe is expanding, time and space was created, matter and anti-matter were introduced in this universe, etc.

    And what if - and if I'm not mistaking, it has been done already - we recreate a Big Bang (on a small scale)? If the results of that experiment, make sense when compared to what this universe is (doing), would that prove it?

  • @5THunderlord If we could re-create the big bang, we could create life, which has never been done. Possibly a similarity but not the exact big bang on a smaller scale.

  • @smittyx3 You'd have to let it "settle" for a loooooong time before any life started to appear (that is if the pogression of time in that small universe is related to ours).

  • Nothing did not create nothing.

    Look up string theory. I am only 13, yet even i am intelligent enough to understand the universe was created by energy.

    Religion was first used 10,000 years ago to explain things. NOW WE HAVE SCIENCE, WE CAN SEE THE INNERMOST STRUCTURES OF OUR BODY, WE CAN SEE EVIDENCE OF THE BIG BANG!

    And also, if god can just ''exist'' why cant energy and matter?

  • @0ggabOgga You might be asking the question: "What was there before the Big Bang?" The problem with this question, is that time itself only existed from the moment the Big Bang occured. What caused the Big Bang has to be higher-demensional (such as the super-strings vibrating in the 10th or 11th dimension)... if you claim that nothing can't create anything.

  • @5THunderlord

    Sure, But....

    Answer my question.

    If god can exist forever, why cannot energy? Energy can create matter, that has been proven.

    And if there was neither time nor space, how would something like god exist? For in your logic, energy does not exist?

    Also, even i believe some aspects of the big bang theory are wrong. BUT we can see evidence of the big bang. Some light takes quadrillions of years to reach your eye. Therefore, hubble telescope can see light from the big bang.

  • @0ggabOgga Wait wait, I think there's a misunderstanding here. When have I ever claimed that a god/God exists, let alone forever? The "RE:" in the title of the video stands for "Response:".

    I'm well aware of the fact that energy and matter are interchangable.

    I'm also aware of the fact that looking in the distance is actually looking in the past. What are you trying to prove?

  • @5THunderlord

    CRAPS!

    I searched the title up, and none allowed comments, so i went to this one.

  • @0ggabOgga Yeah, the reason I made this response is because the creator of the video - this video is a response to - didn't allow comments.

  • GOD is alien!

    Angles are aliens!

    Anything we can't explain are ALIENS!

  • @llnetbeast

    We can explain it, but yes, i too belive there are aliens, but these did not creater the universe

  • oh and did u guys forget that the definition of divine, paranormal, supernatural etc. means can not b explained by science, its sumthin beyond our intelligence. the problem with mankind is that its tries 2 know EVRYTHING when it will never know all, there are just things that were not meant to know.

  • everyone its as easy as this. God said to have created the earth. it is said he created it in what like a few days? and according to the bible, the earth is only a couple thousand years old (6000 i beleive). science and our general knowledge has proved that the earth is actually THOUSANDS OF MILLIONS years old. there, done. if it is that badly off and wrong about the age of the earth, how can you give credit to anything else it says.

  • Part 2 But wait, then how do you know somebody made it? If you've never seen the person who made it, how do you know somebody designed it and put it all together. I am far more complex than a computer (which took planning and designing to be made) and you are trying to tell me that nobody designed me? Just because you can't see god doesn't mean he doesn't exist

  • For those who don't believe there was a creator who planned and designed the earth let me give you an example. Look at your computer, did somebody make that computer? Did somebody design it? You will most likely say yes. Ok do you know who made the computer or who designed it? Have you seen the creator of the computer? Did you watch him design it and put it all together? No.

  • was the law of probability at work. So before either of you morons, whether Christian or Atheist, start claiming there is PROOF, PLEASE.....consider the logical fallacy of that move....There. I'm done ranting.

  • And Christians, stop claiming scientific discoveries are miracles of God. That pisses me off. Your mindset is to believe the Bible, and that it must be true because they contain moral truths that have withstood thousands of years. You have welcomed scientific discoveries throughout history by stoning revolutionaries, thinking that your God knows best, and that change is bad. So now, in the modern ages, you say "God cured his cancer! It's a miracle!" when all you saw *CONTINUED2*

  • There is no evidence to support the existence of God. There is no evidence to support the NON-existence of God. We don't know yet. NO ONE DOES. Atheists, you are just as retarded as Christians. Christians believe in that which hasn't been proven, and you believe that it CANT be proven. Both of your viewpoints are based on BELIEFS. Atheists, how the hell can you rely on science and fact when you actually rely on beliefs? *CONTINUED*

  • ok so if 10th dimension is the source...where did the 10th dimension come from???

  • PEOPLE WHO DON'T BELIEVE THAT GOD EXISTS ARE WORSE THAN THE DEVIL,

    BECAUSE SATAN HIMSELF KNOWS THERE IS GOD!

  • @30cuteforever PEOPLE WHO DON'T BELIEVE THAT THE FLYING SPAGHETTI MONSTER EXISTS ARE WORSE THAN THE SEWER-SHARK,

    BECAUSE SEWER-SHARK HIMSELF KNOWS THERE IS FLYING SPAGHETTI MONSTER!

    P.S.: Your channel states: "I can say that I am kindhearted and a cheerful person.. n_n". I'd consider reviewing that statement.

  • @5THunderlord Say I was wondering if you've seen this argument before:

    1.) The wave-function of the universe is self-collapsing. (true by definition)

    2.) Self-collapsing wave-functions are minds. (Roger Penrose's Orch-OR model)

    Therefore the wave-function of the universe is a Mind: watch?v=Kj8UdHuP5l8

  • @JohananRaatz I hadn't heard of this model before you posted it here. I watched part 1 of the video and read some articles on the model mentioned above.

    The model seems interesting, but if it turned out to be true, I think that both you and the author of the video deduct incorrect things from this. From what I understand, the model doesn't say wave-functions are minds. It says consciousness is a result of the uncertain state of electrons (and nucleus'.)

  • @JohananRaatz Also, you talk about this "monoism". I don't understand how you could state that as a truth. "Dualism creates unherent contradictions"? I don't see the contradiction.

    I'm a materialist myself, but I don't think everything consist of 1 "thing". And if it would, this "thing" would be energy. Since that's what the superstrings use to influence these dimension (string theory).

    P.S.: Didn't notice you were the author of the vid until now.

  • @JohananRaatz And regarding your question: "How was the very first wave-function collapsed?"

    This is a problem many people adress, though likely in another conext. This is how I describe the problem regarding the Big Bang:

    "So how did the first wave of probablitity collapse (and thus creating space and time for anything to live in) if there was no quantum obsever to make it do so?"

    The reply: there is no need for an observer to be there in the first place.

  • @JohananRaatz Because when there's the possibility of an observer (which is not guaranteed for every universe in the multiverse), this possibility takes place in one of the timelines that follows from this Big Bang (Many worlds theory). This "creates" the obsever, so he can collapse his own wavefuntions into the history of "his" universe up to that point in (the elapsed) time.

  • @30cuteforever  AMEN TO THAT BROTHER THEY ARE WORSE THAN THE DEVIL !!WAT A PITIFUL PEOPLE NOT BELIEVING THAT GOD EXISTS.ONE DAY BRO THEY WILL SEE THE POWER OF OUR GOD, WHEN THE END TIMES COME AND THEY WILL TREMBLE..

  • @MrTagheur

    Fine with me, but if so then you people are worse than the supposed god you worship (and that's saying something, 'cause he's the most evil, sick, twisted, vindictive, drunk with blood, short sighted, unreasonable and incompetent character in your fairy tale book).

    Also had a quick look at your channel and some of your responses, DAMN that christian love is just so... non-existant.

    I swear, some religitards are just sickening.

    Religion needs to die, either on it's own or forcefully.

  • @30cuteforever satan doesnt exist either

  • GOD IS DEAD

  • @johnwaynegacy94 More than dead, he is NOT

  • I sent the guy who made the video about god existing a message, it said:

    in one of your video you give some points about how god exist but you said there was nothing at one time and nothing can make nothing,

  • but you said energy is eternal meaning that there is no beginning or and meaning energy existed so there was never nothing, and quantum physics proves that particles can appear in space and time and after build up of particles in space high speed collisions of particles and reactions can begin to create things and rip holes in space-time continuum creating more and more advanced things which would then begin to shape out planets and suns etc.

  • and the reason things have complex features and shapes are the laws that come from energy, for example gravity causes other elements and planets to be forced in a direction because of it and other energy in the universe can shape the entities floating in space, not an ingenious mind, and if there was an ingenious mind, or god creating all of this how does the living entity live and can not be seen heard or sensed in any way?

  • a lot of people think that god doesn't exist because they expect the Christian god to be like every other god. They think that all gods would just make the world with their magical powers. But, they can see the world is not magic, but it's science. But, the God i know, actually created science itself. He deliberately made the world that way, so people can see how complex the world, and so people can realise that an intelligent being created everything.

    Look at different perspectives people!

  • LAUGHING!!! No one can know how many dimensions there are since we can only see 3 and DETECT only 3...So already here your theory fails...And everything your video says are just theories nothing more.None of the facts you stated is not proven and you wrote it's unreasonable to ASSUME :) I can assume i'm a crocodile in 5th multiverse 11th dimesnion but that does not prove anything especially in scientific way. ...Staying atheist...

  • @oggisimus1 I do understand your [insert appropriate word here]. However, look at the date of this video: it was posted over 2 years ago. I was 14...

    What I say might be mere theories, but you're wrong on the 3 dimensions. We can clearly see the effects of the 4th dimension (which is duration (often called "time")). If there were only 3 dimensions, you'd be stuck in place, as you're defined in only 3 dimensions and not in an extra dimension, allowing you to move.

  • @5THunderlord I'm not saying only 3 dimensions exist...I said we can only detect 3 (because you can't see 4th or imagine how would an object look like in 4 dimension) and no one can know how many are out there (because you specificly said 11th dimension).

  • @oggisimus1 I can perfectly imagine how 4D objects look like. 5D objects is another story though...

    The philosophical path I follow ends in 10 or 11 dimens (there it hits a roadblock). This is mathematically possible. But I know that our maths also work in more dimens (16 is one of those, if I'm not mistaking; The M-model?)

  • @5THunderlord nah m8 you can't see how a 4D object looks like we can only it's 3D shadow...It's not possible for us to see 4th (5th-6th etc.) dimension with our eyes... Only thing we can do is as you say imagine and that is it...But i'm going to be honest with you and say i'm not very well informed in this topic so do not take my opinion as my final claim,i'm just starting to look into this so i really appreciate your comments and thoughts...Very interested in scientifically way...

  • Four reasons why I think there is no god; A) Total absence from the natural world. No sign of a god, before, during or after, natural disastres B) The absolute absence of favoritism towards believers. Even chruches need lightning-rods to protect them from god. C) The absence of any reaction, when crimes are committed in his name. C) The suffering of the innocent. One could accept that the guilty must suffer, but children ???

  • waaaahahahahaha....

    the only thing religious idiots can do is talking bullshit and manipulate words......

    there is nothing...

  • @robot014 that's what atheists does, we just tell you how it is and most of you don't care for the truth so you twist God's word into something that is cruel and evil... there's no portrayal of God in the bible as a cruel being or even evil... that's atheists imagination

  • @princeztrouble God's moral standards? No thanks! Look at how God rewards child sacrifice for Jephthah, how he arranges the killing of Job's beloved children just because Job trusted God, how God commands his people to rip little girls from the bloody arms of their murdered mothers and take them home to share with YHVH's priests, how he approves of public rape to punish people. Look at the command to practice ritualized cannibalism! What a wonderful pattern for morality!

  • @lizazoon typical atheist

  • Super strings vibrating in the 10th dimension? Are you out of your f-cking mind..?

  • LMAO! seriously? u gotta be kidding me...

    i love physics... but i dont believe in SHIT that it says about the world..

    and if there is NO God, and the Bible is JUST A BOOK!! then how come it relates to ALL OF OUR LIVES!! remember this was written hundreds of yrs ago.. yet it predicts the future and for every question u have about life, theres an answer in there... so how can u tell me that there's NO GOD?

  • @princeztrouble the bible is just a book. written by men to artificially enhance the churches power. the bible doesn't predict the future or answer every question. it contains storys with such vague writing that the only reason that people think it predicts the future is because dimwits like you find something you don't understand in life so you look in your holy book and find some vague story that barely relates to what happened but you take it as fact. face it, faith is an infantile belief.

  • @deadmoron1 so saying that there's Judgment Day, so i guess that's not predicting the future... it's really ignorant of atheists to think or assume that all Christians are unintelligent, just because they believe in God... well it really doesn't bug me since you don't even know me... but one day we both will find out what happens after death, and since i'm right, and i am going to heaven and you might not, so i'm gonna pray for you, have a good day sir... God Bless!

  • @princeztrouble you can't take the story of the judgement day and use it as proof of "predicting the future" when it has yet to happen, meaning that there is nothing supporting the idea that it predicts the future. and just for the record, i'm not assuming that you are both unintelligent and ignorant for simply believing in a god, i'm calling you ignorant because you have shown yourself as ignorant. you can't just say that you are right and make it true, you need evidence

  • @princeztrouble After you die, will find out nothing. The dead don`t talk,see or hear. Your prayer is welcome, but I would appreciate it more, if you would open a science book for a change.

  • @lizazoon and how are you so sure that i don't open a science book... you are making assumptions about me when you don't even know who i am and you are making assumption about a God that you barely even know...

  • @princeztrouble And you make silly assumptions about my knowledge of the bible. I do hope that you will study your bible as much as I did, maybe you will then loose your faith too.

  • @lizazoon guess your faith wasn't strong as mine... it is clearly stated in the Bible that if you don't read it with an open mind and faith you will never understand it... you have to be willing to let God guide you..

  • @princeztrouble Good luck man. Sooner or later reality will set-in. Mother Theresa doubted her faith in the end, so did a few popes. This imaginary being will one day stop providing inspiration.

  • @princeztrouble The bible does no more predict the future as Ali Baba does. That`s just your imagination.

  • @lizazoon yeah clearly God's word are an imagination even though it is written in a scared book... and is believed by people all over the world

  • @princeztrouble The O.T. is the most exhalted accumulation of nonsense ever assembled by man.

  • @princeztrouble Ezekiel 23:19-20 NET

    Yet she increased her prostitution, remembering the days of her youth when she engaged in prostitution in the land of Egypt. She lusted after their genitals as large as those of donkeys, and their seminal emission was as strong as that of stallions.

  • WOW u freaking atheist u guyz are probably retarded or just so stupid.

  • @TOXIN0PAT Uhm... tautology?

  • @TOXIN0PAT irony, how i love you.

  • @TOXIN0PAT trolololol

  • @TOXIN0PAT@TOXIN0PAT

    I dont want to offend anyone, i have nothing against the belief of god or any religion but you call people stupid yet you believe in a guy that no one can sense in any way who made everything.

  • @nellyr06 Atoms (in the most common form) consist of elektrons, neutrons and protons. Neutrons contain 2 down-quarks and 1 up-quark. Protons contant 2 up-quarks and 1 down-quark. The egg was first, since the chicken mutated from a dinsasour --> the egg held an embryo of a chicken. The big bang has very likely occured in this universe. But it's your right to deny all this, though I think it would be the same as denying the existence of, fire (when the first person who saw it, told you about it).

  • There is an constradiction in the following statement: "The energy always existed" ; the energy concept is "the capacity for making an work", in the begining there had not potential differences; therefore, there had not energy, the energy didn`t existed because according the "bigbang theory" the universe was concentrated inside an infinitely tiny point. Note: I use normal english; do not use phrasal verb, or dialectical sentences if you feel like discussing with me, please.

  • @Leivinn20 That infitely tiny point held a lot of matter and antimatter at a high pressure and temperature. So there was a lot of energy there, at that time: you can make heat and matter "work". I could argue that the energy came from a higher dimension, but that would be contradicting the law of constant energy (if that's the correct name for it).

    This is going towards the "what was before the big-bang" discussion. I'm not sure what to say to. I see your point though.

  • @5THunderlord : But, «where» was the potential difference?, how it took «place»?, if the space didn`t existed. According the "Bigbang Theory" all (matter, space, and time) was concentrated in an very tiny point without differences. Thanks for using normal english; I guess you are from northamerican.

  • @Leivinn20 There are hypotheses about the "disrupting" of the balance. There is this theoritcal particle that can switch between matter and anti-matter state, but has more "problems" while changing to anti-matter than vise versa. The energy came from the anhilation of matter and anti-matter in equal numbers (cfr. Einstein). The potential to change was in the matter all along. If there wasn't any potentional in it, would we exist (assuming the theory is correct)?

    P.S.: I'm from Europe.

  • @5THunderlord: by the way, excuse me by grammatical mistakes, it`s common problem of the intermediate level bilingual people.  We frequently confuse the grammatical rulers of both languages. I will reply soon your questions. Have nice day. Ok, God bless Europe. I am from Venezuela (I dislike emigrate, Europe is for the European)

  • @5THunderlord: consider the following experiment: if we switch on an light source in front of three sensitive devices (sensors), one at the center (in front of light source), one at the left, and one at the right; and then switch on. The result will be all sensors will activate at same time, regardless how long lasted the light. This phenomenon or natural event don´t has natural explaination, however, the light exists. My statment is: God exists, the human mind is not the reality limit.

  • @Leivinn20 I'm not sure what you're trying to explain/prove. If all sensors are equal (have equal response time), then I find it logical that (when placed on the edge of a circle and the source is in the center) all 3 activate simulataniously.

    v = x/t

    so t = x/v

    The speed of light in vacuum is constant and the distance is constant. So the time has to be the same.

    And regarding your final statement: if God would exist, would be able to comprehend that it's above our comprehension?

  • @5THunderlord I think you`re making a description, it`s different to an explaination, I mean, all sensors are activated regardless how long last the light emition. All sensors are activated if even one photon is emited. The question is: how is it possible?, - simple, one light particle can to be in two places at same time. The human mind aren`t the reality limit. The natural phenomenons aren`t usefull for support the statment: "God don`t exists". God can be omnipresent and real.

  • @Leivinn20 It is possible that particles are in an "undetermined" state, which allows them to be at multiple places simultaniously (or none at all, depending on how you look at it). It is only when particles are observed, that their state gets fixed. e.g.: the Schrödinger formula discribes an area in which an elektron has x% chance to be (x is freely chosen; higher chance = larger area). Even omnipresence can be described in formulas. So I still don't see your point.

  • @5THunderlord: My piont is: the natural laws aren`t usefull for support the idea: God don`t exists. an natural phenomenon never repeats identically. Can the particles reminds all its movements for avoid repeat of one from them?., - absolutely not, the answers in simple: the universe chances by inteligent design (God`s decision). By the way, we are inteligent beings, therefore, we need an universe predictable, your evidence is ciscunstantial.

  • @5THunderlord Let me add little more: because a natural phenomenon never repeats itself identically, the probability of occurring of natural event that has never happened is zero. The particles change by inteligent design. Richard Dawkins is wrong, God exists and the probabilities exists too. Your statment: "indeterminated state" is interesting.

  • @Leivinn20 Why would a "natural phenomenon" never repeat itself? We know how we can make wood (mainly carbon) burn and turn into CO2. It happens every time we set it on fire. So isn't that "phenomenon" repeating itself over and over? I also don't see why a universe should be predictable to us. As Niels Bohr said: "If quantum mechanics hasn't profoundly shocked you, you haven't understood it yet."

  • @5THunderlord If we based on the hipothesis: "We are created beings", - we need an world predictable to avoid the crazy, therefore, your evidence is circunstantial, it is equal regardless the view points. Each leaf on an tree is unique (singular) and unrepeatable. ¿how is this possible?, - the particles don`t has memory, the unique logic answer is: God exists, the Bible`s God is the means where all things exist (Facts 17: 25- 28, quote from apostle Paul in the Athens Areopagus, first century).

  • @Leivinn20 Not everything (barely anything) that is writen by the apostles is true. In fact, I know a lot more about the world, than the people who lieved in the first century did. Secondly there is no relation to being created and having (the need for) a predictable world. And how can you say all the leaves are unique? They're made of cells, and cells multiply. They pass their DNA/RNA on to the next one, with slight changes every now and then. But 2 equal cells are eventually unevidable.

  • @5THunderlord: Each leaf on a tree is unique as finger prints are unique; no one has discovered two finger prints perfectly equals. Each natural event or phenomenon is singular. The likehood of an unique phenómenon do not exists because never has ocurred and will not repeats. The reality changes by Intelligent design (ID). Look around the stones, screws, peoples, your skin, your relatives, stars and other things. the particles don`t has memory. Bye, God bless you. Thanks a lot. from venezuela.

  • @Leivinn20 just thought id point out, the ''unique logic answer'' being god is simply a theory or hipothesis (excuse me for getting the two mixed up, i want the one which is unproven scientificaly) just because the bible says its real doesn't mean it is. There have been multiple occasions where the bible was proved wrong. Also, if that particular bible is right, who's to say the others are wrong?

  • @5THunderlord let me repeat. Richard dawkins is wrong; the likehood calculus isn´t usefull for support the statment "God don`t exists. exists probabilities".

  • Unfortunately, I can't take you seriously if you can't do something as simple as spelling something correctly. (undeniable, incredibly, dimensions)

    I'm not even going to bother mentioning your grammatical errors.

  • your god is my boo. When I need a good bit of sodomy, jesus comes over and spreads his ass cheeks for me. if he takes it like a man... I sometimes give him a reach-around.

  • You will all be punished from straying away the path of the Lord

  • @miguelz234 I'm a lord myself. Haven't you checked my nickname? =P

  • @5THunderlord *shakes head* i will pray for u and everyone else here..

  • someone just called atheism a religion but in reality it is the lack or belief in one ... just thought i would mention that

  • The problem you got there is that there is no such things like 10th, 8th dimensions etc. it has never been proven scientificaly, it's a fairy tale.the original source of energy can create an infinite amount of energy because it's a source.energy can convert into another type of energy but and it would have to if it didn't gave a source.But a SOURCE of energy doesn't have to convert itself.You atheist are so afraid of having your religion disproven that you are quick and fierce to post videos.

  • @myhood25 It appears that you are misinformed about the scientific method. Pointing out the fact that string theory can not "prove" the origin of energy does not give you license to make any claim you want and proclaim it as a scientific fact. Judging by your abstract of the law of conservation, it is clear that you have no background in science so I don't blame you too much for your naivity to science. Please leave science alone...you might hurt yourself.

  • you'll all regret of putting away the fact that God exists! and will always exisT!

  • "1. Something that actually exists; reality; truth.

    2. Something known to exist or to have happened.

    3. A truth known by actual experience or observation; something known to be true.

    4. Something said to be true or supposed to have happened.

    5. Law. Often, facts. an actual or alleged event or circumstance, as distinguished from its legal effect or consequence."

    Source: dictionary. c o m

    Nope, I don't see the existence of a god fitting any of these descriptions.

  • its fine if i wasnt able to convince you. at least i tried. :)

  • @useurcamera dont worry man.. let them believe what i want.... as long as we believe what we do.. we will be saved :)

  • @miguelz234 these ppl realy dont understand who jesus is

  • Wow....I love how starts off his argument in this video with one of the toughest and one of the most unprovable (sp?) theories ever created. Sounds almost like you took God and replaced him with what you THINK happens. Now why is it so hard to believe that a tenth dimension is not part of a design? Why does God have to exist in the physical world? Anyone? Is it because we said so? Well I

    ll tell you, the more you realize that God resides outside, the more room for science is made.

  • Whomever posted this needs to calmly look again at what they are responding to. At about the 45 second mark of your video you state energy existed before the universe. That is what was being stated by the video your commenting on. You agree on that one. Look closer.

  • Haven't checked, but I certainly don't need to disagree on every aspect some else came up with.

  • wow ur reeeeli deluded mayyynn (may god hav mercy on all ov us)

  • oops why are ratings disabled??? RETARD

  • Because I prefer arguments over a cowardly click on the 1 or 5 stars button.

  • I believe we all have this inner desire to feel significant when we correct each other, and in the time we live now, it's a trap we all end up falling into. But I don't think that's any way to be significant. It's the easy way out. I think it's much harder to try to have a real conversation with someone. Do you think there is some way we can talk about the things we believe to be right, instead of what we disagree with?

  • You know, I can't help but think it's my fault; maybe I got a little carried away or something, but I'm getting tired of getting in conversations like these. We disagree and then we try to correct each other.

  • @5THunderlord

    It seems that science has a way of explaining things in this world, making them seem insignificant.

    'that's just the quantum particles'

    'that's just super string vibrations'

    'the 10th dimension'

    'universe collapsing onto itself'

    'the conversion of energy to mass'

    Yes, they may all be true, but why would you ever allow this lullaby make you believe that any of these things are either insignificant, purposeless, or sacred from the point of view of life or intelligence?

  • correction*

    "Yes they may all be true, but why would you ever allow this lullaby make you to [not]* believe that any of these things are insignificant, purposeless, or sacred from the point of view of life or intelligence."

  • uncorrection*

    lol, scratch that correction. (I have a problem with double negatives =P)

    The only word that should be changed in my original reply to 5Thunderlord is the word "sacred" to the word "unsacred"

  • god of the gaps logical fallacy.

    We cant explain the big bang, therefore god did it.

    I cant explain the holes in my swiss cheese, therefore god did it.

  • The theory of ignorance... what about it?

  • Reply @ zebraone100

    "god of the gaps is a logical fallacy. We can't explain the big bang, therefore god did it. I can't explain the holes in my swiss cheese, therefore god did it."

    We can't explain something, therefore Chance did it.

    I can't explain the holes in swiss cheese: Random Mutation.

    Why did the coin land on chance: luck.

    See? Science has it's extremes to.

  • "...Chance did it"

    I love how you creationist always conveniently "forget" the 'non random natural selection' half of the process.

  • I forget your chance comment. Let me know if and when you want me to reply to it.

  • wait so do u believe in god or not???? ur video was confusing.... u dint really give any good facts. tell me...

  • I was religious for about the first 11 years of my life. But then I started thinking and eventually became a pure atheist.

  • ur a faggot saying that god exists to get people to watch then saying all this atheis shit that is bull fucking shit that vid bull shit ur a a coward,deceivng and denying idiot

  • You're the ignorant one here.

    I assume that you're refering to the title of this vid ("RE: GOD EXISTS, ATHEISTS I'll prove it SCIENTIFICALLY").

    Well, I haven't writen the part "GOD EXISTS, ATHEISTS I'll prove it SCIENTIFICALLY".

    I just added "RE: " to it. Which basically means, for the ignorant ones among us, it is a REply or REsponce to the video with the following name.

    Before you start trying to insult ppl, make sure you understand what you're talking about.

  • Lol bro you where lost here

  • "truthhitmanisback" is not only a coward, he (or she) also tends to give very irrelevant information. Please avoid confrontation.

  • NO ! I come from the first people to populate the Planet. Without Africans no race would exist. I want to stay alive for as long as I can to fight inJustice. My purpose in life is not to celebrate death, or Korn, or vampires, or Satanic worship, but to fight white supremacy, and meet it head on. lol...

    By the why, some people believe in Satanism, yet they foolishly doubt God. lol... They must know that Satan exist, but God is a DON for the boy Satan. He live on lies. Illusion. Fake. lol

  • Comment removed

  • So everything you can, you intend to do? How about starting with suicide then? That looks like a nice point to start, no?

    Your last 2 comments just don't make sense. I'm not wasting my time on you anymore.

  • Still, Gregor Mendel Smashed Charles Darwin's theory with experimental proof. Im dealing with reality not some theory. That theory was used as an excuse for white supremacy to go in and Kill the American Indians , and then boast about it with pride. They are scared of Mendel because he exposed white supremacy by descovering Genetics. Now DNA has slaughtered it. But because most white people are racist they want to hold on to it, and have the nerve to condem Chistians. lol... This is too easy

  • I really don't see what Darwin has to do with that so-called "white supremacy". Are you stating here that evolution theory has been developed to "proof" that "white is better than any other color"?

    And what's the connection between the fail of religion and racistic ppl? Religion just can't stand with the current amount of knowledge available, what has that got to do with enslaving Indians?

    Besides, those crusades weren't too peaceful either.

  • lol, don't waste time on him. hes racist.. thats what he is, and he always will be. hes just to stupid to see not all black ppl are bad, and that there are white dumbasses to. so all u have to comment on him is : ,,!,, ò.ó ,,!,, . [for all those dumb racists..: i am white :D]

  • And you removed one of your comments... Why? I want other ppl to be able to follow this discussion.

    Did you do it because you're afraid? That is what I call easy.

  • lol.. You may try to sound intelligent but , Just like Charles Darwin, it just a theory that cant be proven scientifically. Gregor Mendel was greater than Darwin. Fact. He is the one who discovered genetics. Your theories spring from him but ya dont know it. What dimension was the spirit in ? You dont know. Period. You may , if you want , come up with another theory. lol...

  • The evelution theory is nevertheless the best standing theory ever made. There's nothing that can be doubted less. "Greatness" is relative, so you can't claim that a fact... I had never even heard of him. And to answer your question of the spirit: it was in none dimension. As it didn't exist, nor it had to potential to exist (it has no wavefunction).

    Lastly, "theory" got the meaning of "wild speculation" by abuse of to ignorant ppl. I use it in its proper meaning.

  • @5Thunderlord

    Wild speculation... Let me ask you something. If there is a group of people who claim to see something, and you go to see, with your eyes, the very thing they claim to see, and you don't see it, then does that really mean that that particular thing does not exist?

    Is your eyes the only way you can perceive the world?

  • "Is your eyes...only way..."

    Your question implies that it is OK to perceive the world through somebody else's eyes, which is patently absurd.

    Science demands objective evidence. Evidence that is different depending on who is viewing it is not science. Science would have no meaning if it relied on that kind of observation.

  • I know, I know, I know. Science doesn't want truth; it wants facts.

    It is fine that science wants only a certain way to harvest knowledge. But to denying the existence of other knowledge is absurd to, and stubborn.

    You also just told me that seeing the world through another perspectives is absurd... You should rethink that =)

  • "just told me-"

    'Perspective' is an interesting choice of words as it almost completely transforms the meaning of your post and my response to it. Science demands objective evidence that is consistent across all observers regardless of opinion or desires.

    There's nothing wrong with the idea that people have different opinions of the world they live in. Understanding those differences helps us to get along.

    These are two very different subjects that you inappropriately twisted together.

  • Yeah, I know. The different point of view/perspective is a complicated subject to go into. But the reason I decided to add that in there was not to add onto my original message, but to point out that seeing through someone else's eyes seems to be the same as seeing through another perspective.

    You should reply to the difference between fact and truth.

  • "fact and truth"

    Just a quick analogy:

    If Joe tells Jill that he saw a ghost in Seattle on 1 Jan 2000, it would be reasonable for Jill to accept as a truth that he saw a ghost.

    But if later on Jill discovers that objective forensic evidence(DNA, video, credit card receipts, etc) places Joe at the scene of a murder in China on that date, Jill must question her original 'truth.'

    'Truth,' doesn't require facts in order to be valid, but it cant survive when facts contradict it.

  • I don't think so about facts and truth. I believe they depend on each other. And I don't think it's really sciences job to refute truths, but rather to confirm them.

    But you're right when you say Truths cannot survive when facts contradict it, but I would suspect it's the other way around to. To say Truth and Fact are not interrelated is like saying the left and right brain has no relationship.

  • But I think telling another person that you've seen a Ghost, I think is a matter of fact not truth. The implications that it would imply if it were true would be truth. And I don't think it would be reasonable for Jill to accept the Ghost without investigation, as it is an anomaly to what Man currently knows.

    I think this is a case where they should deal with it as a fact before dealing with it as a truth.

  • But you know, I have a question. Some scientists will argue for the objectivity of the world, or physical reality. But how could they, if most of them being relative physicists don't even study the fundamentals of physical reality, the subatomic world?

  • "...subatomic world"

    Your argument here boils down to: If we can't know everything, we cant know anything so why bother.

    Another analogy: If a person knew nothing about how an internal combustion engine works, it is still useful and practical knowledge (and knowable) to know how to drive a car.

    Even if I knew nothing about subatomic particles, it is still useful (and knowable) to know the characteristics of a ball rolling down a hill.

  • @your analogy

    Well, yes it's useful. And you make a good point. I want you to know I acknowledge that. But my argument is never the acceptance of either knowing everything or knowing nothing at all. I think some scientists err on the side of knowing everything, and I think that religion errs on the other, so they proceed to make assumptions. My argument is always a balance between 2 sides. So in this, it would be a case of knowing enough; and still in after, being humble to the possibility.

  • @your analogy again

    I really have to say something though. I happened to think about your analogy when I was reading up on the subject of NCC (neural-correlates to consciousness), and it suddenly hit me.

    There is a completely other side to the analogy you presented, and it has to do with consciousness.