Added: 2 years ago
From: DiarmaidGNR
Views: 1,769
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (32)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • ted faggard logged on 6 different youtube accounts and watched this video.

  • LOL. Hilarious

  • Awesome Parody!!! Hilarious!!!!!!! Well Done!

  • hahah great impression of ted haggard, what a phyco he is

  • LOL this is funny!

  • 2:49 XD

  • Ted Haggard is out of his fucking mind! I can't stop laughing at him when he speaks. He's clearly tweeking. 

  • hilarious!

  • I liked it. Good job.

  • What christians tend to forget also is the process under which God was said to have created life. The bible didn't say God created Amino Acids, which were the building blocks to life. The bible says Earth, man and other living things were made by God in SIX DAYS. The fact that people are arguing that maybe God created DNA is just a pathetic case of repeatedly trying to change the story (oh, suddenly it's 'just a metaphor') to make a single precis potentially true long after it was disproven.

  • 0:32 holy shit.

  • Long Live Professor Dawkins. If there was god, he would have made Dawkins a prophet. since Dawkins never claimed to be contacted by the sky junk, it disproves the existance of god.,

  • Haha! - Brilliant!!

  • ..... So do you watch anything but atheist related videos?

  • I love atheist related videos, I have strong opinions on the subject. The world needs more critical thinkers.

  • Same here. Like Dawkins wanted to do, I became a clear Atheist, when I used to be on the line, and not from his book, but just by watching his debates and interviews, as well as Hitchens, they are my two favorites. I'm very happy how they brought my attention to the problem of religion and how harmful it really is. And yes, watching Atheistic videos is probably the most intriguing and educational form of video I believe there is to watch. Its science, history, philosophy, language mixed into one

  • I 100%, totally, and completely agree with you! Dawkins and Hitchens are my idols.

  • I was talking to SundriedAtheist, but I agree the world needs more critical thinkers who don't blindly follow the theory of evolution to the conclusion 'there is no God'.

  • I think the majority of people who follow evolution, and look at the mountains of evidence and the solid theory of it all, come to that conclusion eventually anyway. Besides I think that all evolutionists are critical thinkers anyway, they wouldn't be evolutionists if they weren't critical thinkers.

  • You don't have to think critically, it's taught as truth in school. Taught like a story.

  • I was brought up in a Catholic primary school (which is the norm in Ireland (98%)) for 8 years religious dogma was rammed down my throat, then for the 5 years in secondary I studied science, of those 5 years we glanced over the subject of evolution for less than 1 class never to be mentioned again - and this was a normal school. Because of religious politics everywhere, evolution is taught as a weak "theory", when it is clearly it is an established FACT.

  • I'm not arguing that evolution doesn't happen. I'm saying the deduction that life originated from non-living matter there for there is no God is fallacious to say the least. First we don't know if the first living organism was a one celled or multicell. We don't know the process or even if it is possible. We don't really know how old the earth is some say 4.5 billion some 1.9 billion some say 6,000, etc. Origin of life is not the theory of evolution, yet it seems you believe it does.

  • Firstly, the world IS around 4.5 billion years old. Yes - the process is possible, - who suggested it wasn't? And lastly, - there is mountains of proof for evolution and a well proven record for science (look at everything around you), and where is the proof for your god? To believe that there is a supernatural being somewhere that cares what you do and rewards you for it is well and truly arrogant.

  • We haven't seen life arise from non-living material. Natural chemical binding for amino acids has been suggested, but it hasn't held up in the lab. You are assuming something occurred when it cannot be demonstrated nor not proved to be possible. Your assumption that life can arise out of non-living material is taken on faith. BTW mountains lol, there are a few observations and a lot of fantasy. It's as concrete as Scientology. (not talking about change in species, but the origin of life.)

  • I will try to be as polite you were :)

    "It's a fallacy to say that life originated from non-living matter"? With genetics we can: 1--clone living being (DNA is just 'recipe', the "matter" wasn't alive); 2--I 'm not sure but I read we are able to create living beings from no DNA at all (it's something I heard or I thought that I heard when I was younger); 3--"If" you find as a fact that a Lab made the 1o human being using periodic table elements. What would you think?

  • We aren't making pizza here. Dough, cheese, sauce, peperoni, heat and a pizza. We are talking the ingredients + an unknown, life itself. Yes we could construct a cell with Periodic table, We can rip apart a cell and put it back together, but what would you have, a dead cell. Once a cell dies, it's dead.

  • @gbvegeta: Agreed until "...a dead cell". I didn't say it will happen because it's seems like that for me. In this case, it would be just an empty prediction. In the other hands, you are sure about something that you haven't anything except your opinion to support it.

  • @gbvegeta Not really. There was an experiment some months ago in which a dead cell was brought back to life by injecting new DNA into it. And it was awesome.

  • @gbvegeta Religious-based science criticism at it best. At its best in ignorance, that is.

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more