"Dead-to-the-spirit deluded "God Delusion" author & blithering fool scientist goon Richard Dawkins another "leader" given to the profane masses is another useful idiot for Jesuit machinations"-C.O.
Jesuitical: pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuits completely altered the education system to suit their evolution agenda to discredit the Bible. They cant have a Satanic society of 'Do as Thou Wilt' if people still follow the Bible.
I don't like Harris' point where he contends that an argument against the existence of god is that god didn't know about electricity etc., such an argument is weaker before the discovery of such phenomena, but there are so many arguments against the existence of god that could have been made in the past which seems to make them superior.
Somebody please put a muzzle on Dennett. He's probably a really smart person but he sucks at articulating his thoughts. All he really does is break the cadence.
@SChome100 then you're an idiot, he's speaking English. I think you also mean to say you can't understand him because of his accent, an accent would never hinder your ability to hear a sound
@freshdamon listen prick there is no doubt that he speaks English. If you would have paid attention to what I stated you would get the point. I said I have a hard time understanding what he is saying because of accent dumbass.
@SChome100 still writting shit?! you wrote "I can't hear one word Hitchens say because of his accent" i wrote a very funny response stating that you saying "i cant hear one word" should be "i can't understand one word.
the verb to understand and to hear are very different,
The constants of physical laws are not fined tuned for life, but for: the formation of galaxies, the formation of stars, the formation of heavy elements, the possibility of chemistry, and the formation of molecules. That's it. of course, any change in this makes life impossible, but as impossible as many other things that are not life. There's not one single constant that specifically inhibits life. Even if it were, it would be just one or a couple. ALL THE CONSTANTS fine tuned? no sir.
@playmoves95 The world would be in exactly the same place as it is now; the human civilisation upon it however would be greatly advanced in its thinking and its freedoms. IMHO etc etc.
Ugh. The subject of "free will" is dumb. It's an illusion. It's real, but a fucking contrivance of little importance and certainly does not mean infinite freedom like some people seem to think.
@smurfieboo The speed of light in a vacuum, the gravitational constant, the electrical charge of a proton or electron... Just search for "physical constant" on wikipedia, there's loads of examples.
The cosmological constants problem is fallacious: it's not like if the constants were different the universe would have not been possible. If we change them, the universe would be different, there would be different creatures living in it, and they would claim that those constants were too good to be random.
We evolved as a result of those constants. Like taking a pie made of 3 eggs and saying "Oh boy, if only we would have put 2 eggs..."
I get a bit frustrated when people (i.e creationists) gets all caught up with "the finetuning of the universe". Ok, we dont know where that comes from, but it's hardly a miracle. We're not here despite all the different finetuned factor this universe happen to have. We're here precisely because they are tuned the way they are. If not, we wouldnt be here in this shape or form, and we wouldnt be having this debate.
Dawkins's view that any fine-tuned creator would have to be just as fine-tuned as the universe, and Hitchens's view that a creator can't get out of infinite regress, can both be turned against any scientific explanation of the universe and are thus invalid.
@drunkagnostic How so? I don't understand. How do you get out of the uncaused cause loop? What's more, how you do suppose that it goes against scientific explanation? The Big Bang theory hasn't been proven . . . but it hasn't been DISPROVEN either. A theory never "proves" anything, it simply cancels out extraneous and superfluous stuff in between. Now, unless there's some theory that eliminates the infinite regress, it hasn't "countered" scientific explanation. So explain what you mean.
@billbenblue I'm not 'countering' the idea of the big bang. The big bang probably happened in one form or another.
I'm saying that if it were valid to counter the idea of god by saying 'god can't cancel infinite regress' or 'god's as unlikely as what he explains,' then it'd be valid to counter any scientific explanation of the universe by saying 'physics can't cancel infinite regress' or 'physics laws are as unlikely as what they explain.'
The thing that I love about these guys is that who would expect to see a group of bishops or imams asking themselves the question "what reasons can we come up with that we are wrong for doing what we do?" That's unheard of in the public religion square.
The fundamental constants of the universe are too good to be true because they are true. The only reason you can stand at the blackboard in absolute awe of the perfection if these constants, is because you are standing at the blackboard in awe.
@amphitrike You're right that conditionally, the probability of miraculously good laws, constants, and boundary conditions GIVEN that we are here is 100%. But what you are not right about is that the probability of miraculously good laws is high in the first place.
Can we stop using a capital G for god. Why does it deserve this respect? In all my essays I refuse to capitalize the word and will continue doing so whenever it comes up.
@Kapzter I always capitalise God because I see it as a name, not out of respect. If anything, it's a respect for grammatical integrity. Although, when writing 'gods', as in Greek pantheon Zeus, Poseidon, etc or the Norse pantheon of Odin, Thor, etc, it is in lower case because it's more of a way to group these supernatural beings rather than naming them.
I'm not sure on there names as I read more than watch people but the guy on the far left say 'for heaven sake no' @5:46 it made me laugh a little because the irony of the context
What I really appreciate about Dawkins is that he offers an religious idea which gives him pause. He is not so staunchly atheist that he cannot admit to having some doubts and unanswerable questions. His honesty makes so many of his points that much stronger.
There is far more evidence for Santa Claus being real than there is for any god or jesus having ever existed. It amazes me that there are ANY adults living in the 21st century that still believe in god(s) or jesus types that are not locked up with the same people that believe that they are shapeshifting aliens from another planet. Actually, god & jesus believers are MORE absurd!
@Eye2EyeIIIV Ah a humble abrahamic monotheist, so humble you think your channel proves the existence of god when no one else on earth has ever succeeded in doing that. Hey if I told you god is actually in my channel at a table with Santa clause and the Pope would you believe me?
Admittedly, I have not read Victor J. Stenger's book "God: The Failed Hypothesis", but I have heard him lecture concerning the book. From what I heard, his claimed proof that science has shown that God does not exist is circumstantial. Not unlike many of the proofs that religion makes for its claims.
"If you can show me a single sentence in the bible that was omniscient .. One single sentence uttered by someone for whom a wheelbarrow wouldn't have been seen as emergent technology.. show me."
That's not really an answer to the question. Referring to Xpistos2. It's more a "I don't want to believe that things just happen without god" which doesn't answer anything.
I hate to think that your view on scientists is to point out that there is no god. All that scientists are doing is to discover the truths and mysteries of the world we live in. Mysteries you believers have leaped frogged a head too by saying with 100% certainty how the universe started and how it should be governed.
@ashwoods21 exactly. Its not that god is absolutely ridiculous, though its a bit far fetched, its that belief systems that center on an all powerful, all knowing creator are thoroughly unhelpful in describing the world we actually live in, and even more unhelpful in trying to solve the problems that our world actually faces. If god has a master plan for all of us, whats the use in trying to stop genocide, say. if everything is up to god why bother trying to help? thats the attitude i'm afraid of
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
It is fine for these men to pursue science. It is a bit of a waste of time to attack fundy religion. These four men massage their egos, it seems to me. It amuses me that these guys use words like 'obligatory', 'should not'. What is obligatory, what is a moral 'should' without God?
@davie00dj9 I believe in God because I can not believe that things just happen to be without God. No scientist has put forth a theory that precludes my belief in God. They talk about what they think IS and what they think WAS and what they think will BE. I do as well. Attacking the Bible or fundy beliefs is easy. Putting the Bible aside and fundy beliefs away, the hypothesis of God remains of necessity on the table.
@Xpistos2, so you don't get your idea of what god is from a sacred text or an authority or a personal revelation then? You just wish that a god with certain characteristics of which you approve exists and since we can't disprove a negative you think that makes it a reasonable belief? puh-lease... just because you find scientific explanation for creation / existence distasteful doesn't mean that a supernatural one is true. It just means you're unhappy with life. Take a xanax and get over it.
There are a number of assumptions in your reply that are unwarranted. I suggest that even putting the Bible aside and banishing from the argument 'fundy' doctrines, doesn't do away with the persistent hypothesis of the existence of God. One can REASON to the necessary attributes of God. Those attributes are not arbitrary but essential. I don't reject scientific explanations for the evolutionary development of the cosmos. Science doesn't tell me why there is anything at all rather than nothing
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
America, is the best place to be, with the most opportunity. Her people are mostly God fearing Christians.
Even the Indians said God was with George Washington, when he was miss 17 times, about the time of Crossing the Delaware. Their are too many coincidences on why America is so strong, after many years/decades of left wing secular socialsits 'proving' America to be wrong.
America is strong because of its emphasis on individualism.
It has nothing to do with whether a person is God fearing or not.
Its ultimately the individuality and diversity that makes America strong.
I personally am not at all convinced that the only reason america is strong is because of its Judeo-Christian heritage, or that it believes in biblical values, not at all, I find the exact opposite to be true.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I agree with you on America is strong because of its individualism. Obama wants to make us all drones, working for a secular state, and the gov't elite will replace God.
@TAXtheAtheist In your perfect world, would you actually tax atheists for not having the same beliefs as you in the same way as muslim countries would tax non believers that had to live under their rule?
spacecowboy, In a perfect World, Eve never would have 'took fruit' from the forbidden tribe. However, a perfect world in what we have to deal with, Christians could peacefully coexsist with Muslims, Jews, and atheists. Not Muslims trying to convert or kill, Jews innacting financial transgressions, Ahteists trying to abolish Christianity.
My username is a mere rebuttle to relentlace attacks from the 4 horsemen to abolish Christianity. They are so arrogantly pompous as well.
@TAXtheAtheist Well, i would argue that eve never took fruit because there was no fruit to be taken, and eve never existed. But that aside, do you really think that given the multiplicity of religions each making incompatible claims with one another, that we will all be able to "get along"? I mean, you think that every muslim will go to hell for eternity - imagine burning or suffocating for infinity, i find that disgusting. But muslims believe the same will happen to you. Where does it end?
Not my call who goes to heaven or hell. I know I am not a 'better' person than somebody else because of faith, or lack thereof. I don't believe in a god that whould have a man butcher another man for infidelity. I believe in a generous, loving, forgiving God, the one who sent his only Son to die on the cross for us. I do believe God will forgive those who do their best to believe in Him, with what cards they were delt. If somebody is an unrepentant murderer, I'd bet they burn.
@TAXtheAtheist Its obvious that many people including yourself have their own interpretation of how god behaves, but jesus explicitly says that anyone who does not believe in him will burn. Thats jesus, he said it, its one of the defining characteristics of his preachings. But my question was whether so many incompatible beliefs about the eternal destinations of other peoples souls, based on purely "faith" alone is a good recipe for a peaceful future? What does this offer that reason doesnt?
@LordMalice6d9 In a European History textbook of all places, I once read the most fascinating hypothesis that Western individualism is a consequence of belief in an afterlife. Belief in a higher kingdom freed Western peoples from conformity with earthly tyranny and freed people to act rashly and selfishly in the short term instead of taking the safe and sure route as, say, Confucius would encourage. Interesting idea, but regardless of its source, individualism no longer relies on faith.
dennett is clearly deadwood here, kinda seems outta his depth...harris comes across as a bit too smug, dawkins is like a mad professor which would love to build a death ray and kill all the christians...and hitchens...well hitchens has that richard burton attitude,whiskey in one hand cigarette in the other and that honey combed oxford accent...ha ha love the guy and im a christian
The reason Muslims in America tend to largely reject the teachings of Jihad is an economic phenomenon. When you're relatively well off compared to people say in Afghanistan, you tend not to want to risk that. It's almost across the board that Muslim terrorists are poor and desperate regardless of how religious they are.
If by "upper middle class" you mean "financed by Osama Bin Laden but still completely cut out of the global marketplace as legitimate players" then yes they were upper middle class. Yes, the Taliban and others provide access to money, and they are about the only way to acheive any semblence of "wealth" in those countries. There is a difference between having money and having wealth, those people have no legitimate wealth and are only paid so long as they continue their lives as terrorists.
The only reason 'certain Xtians' tend to disassociate their creed from the tag:'religion' is because they prefer to bask in the delusion that their Savior and his message IS THE ONE AND ONLY Truth.Making all others,by default,worthy of but perdition.
I agree. They posit ludicrous claims like the sky being blue, when the first law of thermodynamics clearly demands that it be purple. Do these morons even know what physics is? You need only read Kant to realize this, furthermore. An understanding of either will also disprove this ludicrous 'round earth" fascism. WAKE UP. Unicorns are real. Read Hume somtime. Ron Paul is a leprechaun.
Jesus built my hotrod, blessing it with his semen-the stain being proof of the messiah's will.
Anyone out there that is as tired of religion as myself, rise up and make it known. Make them feel ashamed of what they stand for. You do not have to tolerate them. You have a right to speak out against what they stand for.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I hate religion more than you do especially the atheist belief that objects and static forces get the credit for what we are. That pagan belief is the worst belief ever to have disgraced mankind.
LOL--You hate religion the way Mao Tse Tung hated Communism,seekmost.The only Pagan beliefs that square with your ridiculous "objects mantra" are Shintoism and Totemism.Neither qualify as Atheist.
@Seekmosttoprophesy beliefs can be chosen freely, unfortunately for you the facts cannot. If you refuse to 'believe' in the facts, then you have place in a modern educated society and i suggest you either screw your head on straight, or get out of the way of those who would seek the facts to better human life
@SmartStuff357 Threats have no place in science. It is either true or it is not. You simply cannot trust what people say. You have to take the initiative and responsibility to find out what the tuth is yourself. The truth is that we are created beings. There is no way out of that. It is an observable fact.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
You are the evidence of your Creator. No object is able to speak any of the directives that have made you what you are. The evidence of Creation is all around you. You just are not honest enough to confess the truth.
Christians, Muslims, Jews, if you were made in the image of your creator then your creator is truly a sad being. Full of hate and rage, jealously insisting that you worship only him. Your god destroys out of jealous rage, covets your belongings by demanding sacrifice, and teaches men to kill in his name. Your god shows all the weakness of man, the true creator of the creator.
At 6:07. Dennet was suggesting what could shake his faith, I fell out of my chair and hit my head on my desk. I was laughing so hard at Hitchen's response (I had an injurious ROFLMAO):
"Rabbits in the Precambrian"
It would have been even funnier had he said, "bunnies."
They are the most confused people you can find. Evolution is their fantasy. They wish it is how we came to be. The facts don't support that because no object has any reason to order anything.
Any human being CAN intuitively disprove the existence of God by imagining how a universe that was under the command of an all-powerful creator would behave. It would be 100 million times less chaotic than it actually is. Floods would miraculously occur then cease to be, we could easily talk to the dead. Things could be moved from one point to another with no distance covered in between.
Environment tweaks,modifies and molds the genomic integrity of carbon-based Life the way objects on anvils respond to the percussive stress of the malleus...Selection pressures are wrought on us in ways we take for granted daily.
You were of course aware that the pre-Cochlear ossicles---a.k.a. the malleus,incus,and stapes----of the middle ear have REPRODUCING marrow stromal cells...?...Of course you were!
Cells being fundamental components to orhanic life,DO characteristically reproduce.Skin cells to the tune of every 3 hours,I believe...,and yes,the ossicles of the inner ear.
?...I simply fail to understand the taproot of the facete couched in so ridiculous an inference.Cells reproduce to replace dead cells,that's all.Platyhelminthic worms and starfish possess quite another nuance to cell-regeneration,however.
Lol it wasn't really meant for you to answer, I'm pointing out an absurdity. We're talking about design vs evolutionary reproduction. You cited that the cells of inner ears and other areas can reproduce and form more cells. I'm trying to express that what you're saying isn't in the same context.
I've done enough studies on the effects of cyclin-dependent kinase 1 in pre-mitotic stages not to conflate asexual reproduction with regeneration.Were you alluding to an ostensible Designer missing from my earlier metaphor?
What "jargon"?.....You..."less than three of my arguments"?....is this itself some manner of codified "jargon" I ought own the secret decoder ring to,perhaps?
Except to assert the forces of our planet are there by design is a complete non secuitur. Given what we know about our globe we can confidently assert that the formation of our elements, geology, temperature, gravity, etc.. have came to be through non exactly "random" but unguided natural forces. Whether these forces that operate in our neck of space/time was originally authored is a separate question. In my opinion, its 50/50 THAT it was a intelligence or that its something else we dont..
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
We know that everything is by design because we can observe the result of billions of digits of directives which amount to spoken words that command the formation of interchangeable elements and the orders that result in every structure that life forms need.
Hell for the atheist will be for all of the celestial beings enjoying eternity while they have to face their own error of not admitting the design is so obvious.
All we have to do is to confess the truth, the whole truth. That's it.
What if there is order to the Universe and greater meaning to it but the milkyway galaxy and every other one we can see is just a cluster of dust the the corner of a part of dimensional space time we don't know about.
Do you ever think about it the other way and say maybe we're just of ant intelligence to whatever may be out there?
Wait.. I should have asked if your Christian or something. Because that takes you out of the debate if you can believe that shit.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
You can't be suggesting that everything just happened to fall into order. Things have to be put into order and things fall out of order. They do not fall into order. Order implies direction.
It is people that believe that objects make information that are not qualified to debate truth because what they believe is a fantasy from their wild irresponsible reckless imagination.
Realistically, seekmosttoprophesy, you don't know. You wouldn't have the foggiest idea. You've jumped to a conclusion, decided you must be right, and gone with it, because to you it makes perfect sense.
"All men have purple skin. Greg is a man. He must have purple skin."
This is how you think. It, and your ideas, have no basis in reality.
That might be true if I did not have actual historical accounts that show us the way. What actually happened will not contradict so many accounts of the same flood. We know the accounts are true because we also have the dinosaur bones that match the two descriptions of dinosaur described in the Bible. These are documentaries of actual Jews, Arabs and Egyptians that exist to this day anyway. Why does "science" need to deny actual historical events? Only if their assumptions go contrary to facts.
What you're doing is claiming your place of worth on this planet by telling the rest of the world that you are more intelligent and spiritually more advanced than they are. It's the oldest trick in the book. The con-man's way of rising to the top of an industry. Without knowledge. Without having to work for it.
Science asks 'how' and 'why'. You never asked those questions in your life. You only ask 'how does that fit into what I already believe?'
If you cannot make it fit you discard it. If it can be made to fit, then that is your 'evidence'
Your methods are not accepted by anyone who truly seeks truth. You're taking advantage of people's faith and exploiting it to elevate yourself amongst the ranks.
Do you have even the basest understanding of evolution or natural selection? I'm asking, but it's obvious you do not. You live in this tiny world inside the left hemisphere of your brain following a circular logic train-track around and around saying 'CHOO! CHOO!' and cheering yourself on because you're the train driver.
You're the only person on that train and it's going absolutely nowhere.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Actually, I have determined that no object has ever ordered any information and also never will but you are not addressing any of the issues which means that you are not getting anywhere. You are unable to acknowledge the observable fact of Creation.
"You can't be suggesting that everything just happened to fall into order. Things have to be put into order and things fall out of order. They do not fall into order. Order implies direction."
You see order in things the way others see shapes in the clouds and faces on toast.
You don't understand evolution, still, (which is rather ironic) and I really don't think you have any intentions of doing so.
I'd love to see you write down your understanding of how evolution works.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Evolution doesn't work. It can't even evolve a leg to stand on. It can't even make the first step. It is the baseless fantasy of people who refuse to face the evidence of their Creator who is not an object that has to be caused and formed. Objects do not order anything. That is a pagan belief that thinks that objects do things.
You are mixed up. You cannot compare the billions of directives that command the formation of every life form there is to "shapes in the clouds". That is very irrational to even think such a thing. I would like to see you address the issues. No object ever ordered anything.
This has been flagged as spam show
"You cannot get around the concept of God." -- Adolf Hitler
AlienDominators 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I humbly submit this youtube video to atheists to more deeply understand why theism is more reasonable.
watch?v=s30A9DJcw9A
sciencetheist 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Dead-to-the-spirit deluded "God Delusion" author & blithering fool scientist goon Richard Dawkins another "leader" given to the profane masses is another useful idiot for Jesuit machinations"-C.O.
Jesuitical: pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuits completely altered the education system to suit their evolution agenda to discredit the Bible. They cant have a Satanic society of 'Do as Thou Wilt' if people still follow the Bible.
SpencerBenedict2nd 4 months ago
I don't like Harris' point where he contends that an argument against the existence of god is that god didn't know about electricity etc., such an argument is weaker before the discovery of such phenomena, but there are so many arguments against the existence of god that could have been made in the past which seems to make them superior.
mrfrankincense 4 months ago
OMFG 255 dislkes when did god, jesus and 253 angels create youtube accounts?
Dgoosh1000 4 months ago 6
i can now picture more than 3 dimensions as you can imagine moving along the extra ones like on x y z! who would have thought...............
quuanttum 4 months ago
Comment removed
SChome100 5 months ago
"hey, I don't believe in God."
"I don't either."
"Religion is so stupid."
"People that believe in God are ignorant and stupid."
"Yeah I agree."
"We're so smart."
"Hey let's jack off together."
"Oh great idea!"
S2Cents 6 months ago
@S2Cents wow you really showed them!
ThePresident001 5 months ago
@ThePresident001 They didn't notice. They're still jacking..
S2Cents 5 months ago
@S2Cents Well they can't. It's a recording you see...
ThePresident001 5 months ago
@ThePresident001 Metaphorically speaking they are always jackin... anyway. And so they can't be shown what they can't see. Anyway I don't mind
S2Cents 5 months ago
@S2Cents Gotta love metaphors. Nobody can be shown what doesn't exist. I don't mind either.
ThePresident001 5 months ago
@S2Cents Gee - you actually seem to think that ignoring everything actually said is clever.
Surprise, surprise: another black and white non-thinking Talibangelist thinks the thing to do is simply not take part in the real world.
Keep on cowering, you childish twit...
cinesimonj 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@cinesimonj "talibangelist" That's a good one. Why do you say I'm in agreement with the Taliban?
S2Cents 5 months ago
@cinesimonj Talibangelist!! lolololol beautiful
AneTix101 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Harold Camping was RIGHT about May 21, click on my channel to see...
youneekk 6 months ago
Comment removed
itstonymacaroni 7 months ago
Comment removed
itstonymacaroni 7 months ago
Comment removed
itstonymacaroni 7 months ago
Somebody please put a muzzle on Dennett. He's probably a really smart person but he sucks at articulating his thoughts. All he really does is break the cadence.
itstonymacaroni 7 months ago
I can't hear one word Hitchens say because of his accent
SChome100 7 months ago
@SChome100 then you're an idiot, he's speaking English. I think you also mean to say you can't understand him because of his accent, an accent would never hinder your ability to hear a sound
freshdamon 5 months ago
Comment removed
SChome100 5 months ago
@freshdamon listen prick there is no doubt that he speaks English. If you would have paid attention to what I stated you would get the point. I said I have a hard time understanding what he is saying because of accent dumbass.
SChome100 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@SChome100 still writting shit?! you wrote "I can't hear one word Hitchens say because of his accent" i wrote a very funny response stating that you saying "i cant hear one word" should be "i can't understand one word.
the verb to understand and to hear are very different,
freshdamon 4 months ago
I think we can say, for certain, that there is no supreme entity trying to communicate to us in a way that is obvious to the majority. None.
aslekay 8 months ago 2
The constants of physical laws are not fined tuned for life, but for: the formation of galaxies, the formation of stars, the formation of heavy elements, the possibility of chemistry, and the formation of molecules. That's it. of course, any change in this makes life impossible, but as impossible as many other things that are not life. There's not one single constant that specifically inhibits life. Even if it were, it would be just one or a couple. ALL THE CONSTANTS fine tuned? no sir.
sirdelrio 8 months ago
I think the one thing we need to think about is where would the world be with no religion.
playmoves95 8 months ago in playlist The Four Horsemen: Dawkins, Dennett, Harris & Hitchens
@playmoves95 The world would be in exactly the same place as it is now; the human civilisation upon it however would be greatly advanced in its thinking and its freedoms. IMHO etc etc.
JasonPilley 7 months ago
Ugh. The subject of "free will" is dumb. It's an illusion. It's real, but a fucking contrivance of little importance and certainly does not mean infinite freedom like some people seem to think.
dhx84 9 months ago
What would be an example of a 'fundamental constant of the universe'? Thanks.
smurfieboo 9 months ago
@smurfieboo The speed of light in a vacuum, the gravitational constant, the electrical charge of a proton or electron... Just search for "physical constant" on wikipedia, there's loads of examples.
kjrandom 9 months ago
The cosmological constants problem is fallacious: it's not like if the constants were different the universe would have not been possible. If we change them, the universe would be different, there would be different creatures living in it, and they would claim that those constants were too good to be random.
We evolved as a result of those constants. Like taking a pie made of 3 eggs and saying "Oh boy, if only we would have put 2 eggs..."
The pie would have been different, thats it.
Voiderify 9 months ago
08:55-9:35
Does anybody know to which Wall Street Journal op-ed Sam Harris is referring?
writersblock26 9 months ago
I get a bit frustrated when people (i.e creationists) gets all caught up with "the finetuning of the universe". Ok, we dont know where that comes from, but it's hardly a miracle. We're not here despite all the different finetuned factor this universe happen to have. We're here precisely because they are tuned the way they are. If not, we wouldnt be here in this shape or form, and we wouldnt be having this debate.
jonsen82 10 months ago
these men are so well read, it's amazing
luckycharms8282 11 months ago
Dawkins's view that any fine-tuned creator would have to be just as fine-tuned as the universe, and Hitchens's view that a creator can't get out of infinite regress, can both be turned against any scientific explanation of the universe and are thus invalid.
drunkagnostic 1 year ago
@drunkagnostic How so? I don't understand. How do you get out of the uncaused cause loop? What's more, how you do suppose that it goes against scientific explanation? The Big Bang theory hasn't been proven . . . but it hasn't been DISPROVEN either. A theory never "proves" anything, it simply cancels out extraneous and superfluous stuff in between. Now, unless there's some theory that eliminates the infinite regress, it hasn't "countered" scientific explanation. So explain what you mean.
billbenblue 1 year ago
@billbenblue I'm not 'countering' the idea of the big bang. The big bang probably happened in one form or another.
I'm saying that if it were valid to counter the idea of god by saying 'god can't cancel infinite regress' or 'god's as unlikely as what he explains,' then it'd be valid to counter any scientific explanation of the universe by saying 'physics can't cancel infinite regress' or 'physics laws are as unlikely as what they explain.'
drunkagnostic 11 months ago
@drunkagnostic "Universe From Nothing" Lawrence Krauss. Youtube.
PapaWilk 11 months ago
The thing that I love about these guys is that who would expect to see a group of bishops or imams asking themselves the question "what reasons can we come up with that we are wrong for doing what we do?" That's unheard of in the public religion square.
iFreeThinker 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
to late, I already know that there is no such thing as free will.
Hadesofthe07 1 year ago
"wheelbarrow WOULD have been seen as emergent technology".The misquote above makes no sense.
henryporter101 1 year ago
Is the title a reference to the four horseman of the apocalypse?
derman077 1 year ago
@derman077 i would say yes but obviously sarcastic
cjhmmp 1 year ago
The only reason why we are still discussing god and all that is that the religious posess most of the guns and they are willing to use them.
sieracki001 1 year ago
at what point can we ask that the martini is affecting dan dennett?
twelvetonetechnique 1 year ago
We youtube commenters seem to be missing the bigger issue here:
HOLY SHIT SAM IS SITTING IN AN IMPOSSIBLE M.C. ESCHER CHAIR!!!
7:28
AWESOME!!!
marredsun 1 year ago 22
@marredsun awesome!
equallyeasilyfuqyou 1 year ago
@marredsun It is an act of faith to be able to sit in that chair .Praise the law of gravity
krautsjo 1 year ago
@krautsjo Gravity is no law! It's merely a (probably amoral) theory!
marredsun 1 year ago
@marredsun I googled it and it seems to be a law... just saying.
PopeSnowball 1 year ago
@PopeSnowball Thank you that is what I have learned as well . @marredsun And what morality has to do with physics beats me .
krautsjo 1 year ago
@PopeSnowball It's a theory
TomValedro 1 year ago
@TomValedro I'm sure it can be referred to as both; Law or Theory.
PopeSnowball 1 year ago
Rabbits in the precambrian :-)
Mr Hitchens you are my hero...
melissaconnie 1 year ago 13
The fundamental constants of the universe are too good to be true because they are true. The only reason you can stand at the blackboard in absolute awe of the perfection if these constants, is because you are standing at the blackboard in awe.
amphitrike 1 year ago
@amphitrike You're right that conditionally, the probability of miraculously good laws, constants, and boundary conditions GIVEN that we are here is 100%. But what you are not right about is that the probability of miraculously good laws is high in the first place.
Ledwix 1 year ago
Can we stop using a capital G for god. Why does it deserve this respect? In all my essays I refuse to capitalize the word and will continue doing so whenever it comes up.
Kapzter 1 year ago
@Kapzter I always capitalise God because I see it as a name, not out of respect. If anything, it's a respect for grammatical integrity. Although, when writing 'gods', as in Greek pantheon Zeus, Poseidon, etc or the Norse pantheon of Odin, Thor, etc, it is in lower case because it's more of a way to group these supernatural beings rather than naming them.
boosie007666 1 year ago
@boosie007666 grammatical integrity? what a ridiculous thing
hempartist420 1 year ago
My brain is jacking off to this.
Kan2209 1 year ago 4
@Kan2209 As long as it's only your brain! ;)
Tapiola2007 1 year ago
@Tapiola2007 My genitals lke other things.
Kan2209 1 year ago
@Kan2209 Good for you - just as nature intended! ;)
Tapiola2007 1 year ago
@Tapiola2007 Yeah, aint that great? And religious fools try to take my brain porn and my genital porn away from me. I dont like that.
Kan2209 1 year ago
Dawkins is such a lovely man, Hitchens is charismatic, Harris a dark horse and Dennett well-meaning
MrCuntyballs2U 1 year ago
@MrCuntyballs2U dawkins a wimp hitchens alcoholic harris the slick dude and dennett the fatherchristmas.
TomValedro 1 year ago
@TomValedro yeah.... you attack the messenger not the message... that's ignorance.
SNap15 1 year ago
@SNap15 hehe
TomValedro 1 year ago
@TomValedro are you 3 years old or just lacking in wit.
janto58 1 year ago
I'm not sure on there names as I read more than watch people but the guy on the far left say 'for heaven sake no' @5:46 it made me laugh a little because the irony of the context
grantsnake 1 year ago
@me i prolly shoulda red the highest rated comments first :/
feiggit 1 year ago
"is there a single sentence in here that could not have been uttered by a person for whom a wheelbarrow would have been emerging technology"
oh sam (peace be upon him)... you win my best sentence of the day award!
feiggit 1 year ago
What I really appreciate about Dawkins is that he offers an religious idea which gives him pause. He is not so staunchly atheist that he cannot admit to having some doubts and unanswerable questions. His honesty makes so many of his points that much stronger.
blindside55 1 year ago
hear here
"OH MY GOD" - the secular song
astrologysongs 1 year ago
There is far more evidence for Santa Claus being real than there is for any god or jesus having ever existed. It amazes me that there are ANY adults living in the 21st century that still believe in god(s) or jesus types that are not locked up with the same people that believe that they are shapeshifting aliens from another planet. Actually, god & jesus believers are MORE absurd!
laminator100 1 year ago 6
"wheelbarrow = emerging technology"
lol
ryko26 2 years ago 61
This has been flagged as spam show
"I'm an atheist with respect to the Judeo-Christian God, because there is not a shred of EVIDENCE in favor of the Judeo-Christian God."
~ Richard Dawkins
...Dawkins, that's because you have not visited my channel.
Eye2EyeIIIV 2 years ago
@Eye2EyeIIIV Ah a humble abrahamic monotheist, so humble you think your channel proves the existence of god when no one else on earth has ever succeeded in doing that. Hey if I told you god is actually in my channel at a table with Santa clause and the Pope would you believe me?
GaiusIuliusTaberna 2 years ago 13
Eye2EyeIIIV posts the same spam on every Dawkins page he can find. I DID visit his channel, guess what was there??? lol
Yes, the brain of an ant. We shouldn't laugh, for all we know he's actually mentally handicapped.
ryko26 2 years ago 3
Admittedly, I have not read Victor J. Stenger's book "God: The Failed Hypothesis", but I have heard him lecture concerning the book. From what I heard, his claimed proof that science has shown that God does not exist is circumstantial. Not unlike many of the proofs that religion makes for its claims.
TLM80209 2 years ago
Ok.. best quote in all of this for me..
"If you can show me a single sentence in the bible that was omniscient .. One single sentence uttered by someone for whom a wheelbarrow wouldn't have been seen as emergent technology.. show me."
Precious!
PaleHearse 2 years ago 109
@PaleHearse - yes, that has come to be called the "Hitchens Challenge', a brilliant extrapolation of Russell's Teapot, etc.
gekritzl 2 years ago
That's not really an answer to the question. Referring to Xpistos2. It's more a "I don't want to believe that things just happen without god" which doesn't answer anything.
I hate to think that your view on scientists is to point out that there is no god. All that scientists are doing is to discover the truths and mysteries of the world we live in. Mysteries you believers have leaped frogged a head too by saying with 100% certainty how the universe started and how it should be governed.
ashwoods21 2 years ago
@ashwoods21 exactly. Its not that god is absolutely ridiculous, though its a bit far fetched, its that belief systems that center on an all powerful, all knowing creator are thoroughly unhelpful in describing the world we actually live in, and even more unhelpful in trying to solve the problems that our world actually faces. If god has a master plan for all of us, whats the use in trying to stop genocide, say. if everything is up to god why bother trying to help? thats the attitude i'm afraid of
SmartStuff357 2 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
It is fine for these men to pursue science. It is a bit of a waste of time to attack fundy religion. These four men massage their egos, it seems to me. It amuses me that these guys use words like 'obligatory', 'should not'. What is obligatory, what is a moral 'should' without God?
Xpistos2 2 years ago
Can a theist please tell me and justify why they believe in god?
davie00dj9 2 years ago
@davie00dj9 I believe in God because I can not believe that things just happen to be without God. No scientist has put forth a theory that precludes my belief in God. They talk about what they think IS and what they think WAS and what they think will BE. I do as well. Attacking the Bible or fundy beliefs is easy. Putting the Bible aside and fundy beliefs away, the hypothesis of God remains of necessity on the table.
Xpistos2 2 years ago
@Xpistos2, so you don't get your idea of what god is from a sacred text or an authority or a personal revelation then? You just wish that a god with certain characteristics of which you approve exists and since we can't disprove a negative you think that makes it a reasonable belief? puh-lease... just because you find scientific explanation for creation / existence distasteful doesn't mean that a supernatural one is true. It just means you're unhappy with life. Take a xanax and get over it.
darkmiles22 2 years ago 6
There are a number of assumptions in your reply that are unwarranted. I suggest that even putting the Bible aside and banishing from the argument 'fundy' doctrines, doesn't do away with the persistent hypothesis of the existence of God. One can REASON to the necessary attributes of God. Those attributes are not arbitrary but essential. I don't reject scientific explanations for the evolutionary development of the cosmos. Science doesn't tell me why there is anything at all rather than nothing
Xpistos2 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
America, is the best place to be, with the most opportunity. Her people are mostly God fearing Christians.
Even the Indians said God was with George Washington, when he was miss 17 times, about the time of Crossing the Delaware. Their are too many coincidences on why America is so strong, after many years/decades of left wing secular socialsits 'proving' America to be wrong.
TAXtheAtheist 2 years ago
America is strong because of its emphasis on individualism.
It has nothing to do with whether a person is God fearing or not.
Its ultimately the individuality and diversity that makes America strong.
I personally am not at all convinced that the only reason america is strong is because of its Judeo-Christian heritage, or that it believes in biblical values, not at all, I find the exact opposite to be true.
LordMalice6d9 2 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I agree with you on America is strong because of its individualism. Obama wants to make us all drones, working for a secular state, and the gov't elite will replace God.
TAXtheAtheist 2 years ago
@TAXtheAtheist In your perfect world, would you actually tax atheists for not having the same beliefs as you in the same way as muslim countries would tax non believers that had to live under their rule?
spacecowboy95 2 years ago
spacecowboy, In a perfect World, Eve never would have 'took fruit' from the forbidden tribe. However, a perfect world in what we have to deal with, Christians could peacefully coexsist with Muslims, Jews, and atheists. Not Muslims trying to convert or kill, Jews innacting financial transgressions, Ahteists trying to abolish Christianity.
My username is a mere rebuttle to relentlace attacks from the 4 horsemen to abolish Christianity. They are so arrogantly pompous as well.
TAXtheAtheist 2 years ago
@TAXtheAtheist Well, i would argue that eve never took fruit because there was no fruit to be taken, and eve never existed. But that aside, do you really think that given the multiplicity of religions each making incompatible claims with one another, that we will all be able to "get along"? I mean, you think that every muslim will go to hell for eternity - imagine burning or suffocating for infinity, i find that disgusting. But muslims believe the same will happen to you. Where does it end?
spacecowboy95 2 years ago
Not my call who goes to heaven or hell. I know I am not a 'better' person than somebody else because of faith, or lack thereof. I don't believe in a god that whould have a man butcher another man for infidelity. I believe in a generous, loving, forgiving God, the one who sent his only Son to die on the cross for us. I do believe God will forgive those who do their best to believe in Him, with what cards they were delt. If somebody is an unrepentant murderer, I'd bet they burn.
TAXtheAtheist 2 years ago
@TAXtheAtheist Its obvious that many people including yourself have their own interpretation of how god behaves, but jesus explicitly says that anyone who does not believe in him will burn. Thats jesus, he said it, its one of the defining characteristics of his preachings. But my question was whether so many incompatible beliefs about the eternal destinations of other peoples souls, based on purely "faith" alone is a good recipe for a peaceful future? What does this offer that reason doesnt?
spacecowboy95 2 years ago
@LordMalice6d9 In a European History textbook of all places, I once read the most fascinating hypothesis that Western individualism is a consequence of belief in an afterlife. Belief in a higher kingdom freed Western peoples from conformity with earthly tyranny and freed people to act rashly and selfishly in the short term instead of taking the safe and sure route as, say, Confucius would encourage. Interesting idea, but regardless of its source, individualism no longer relies on faith.
darkmiles22 1 year ago
Harris starting at 1:25 ... hilarious.
mrw21 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
So weird. I loved reading these guys. But watching them talk I find them annoying and patronizing.
davidshanesmith 2 years ago
@davidshanesmith
Haha, watching them talk to each other is pretty dry. But Harris and Dawkins are brilliant speakers.
amusiathread 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
wow, your stupid.
spacecowboy95 2 years ago
God is not much of a creator if his creations have to eat each other to survive
nakedhands 2 years ago 6
Well, he's certainly a creator, but not a loving one.
DinkyDoeDoe 2 years ago
Hmm, but it also made eating really fun...
wearealltubes 2 years ago
God would have to be a shoddy workman at best, or downright evil at worst.
artstuX 1 year ago 3
dennett is clearly deadwood here, kinda seems outta his depth...harris comes across as a bit too smug, dawkins is like a mad professor which would love to build a death ray and kill all the christians...and hitchens...well hitchens has that richard burton attitude,whiskey in one hand cigarette in the other and that honey combed oxford accent...ha ha love the guy and im a christian
shoah42 2 years ago
The reason Muslims in America tend to largely reject the teachings of Jihad is an economic phenomenon. When you're relatively well off compared to people say in Afghanistan, you tend not to want to risk that. It's almost across the board that Muslim terrorists are poor and desperate regardless of how religious they are.
TheFortressMaximus 2 years ago 2
The men on the planes on 911 were well educated and middle to upper middle class.
highlander7 2 years ago
If by "upper middle class" you mean "financed by Osama Bin Laden but still completely cut out of the global marketplace as legitimate players" then yes they were upper middle class. Yes, the Taliban and others provide access to money, and they are about the only way to acheive any semblence of "wealth" in those countries. There is a difference between having money and having wealth, those people have no legitimate wealth and are only paid so long as they continue their lives as terrorists.
TheFortressMaximus 2 years ago
What source are you drawing that information from?
rivalviral 2 years ago
The only reason 'certain Xtians' tend to disassociate their creed from the tag:'religion' is because they prefer to bask in the delusion that their Savior and his message IS THE ONE AND ONLY Truth.Making all others,by default,worthy of but perdition.
djnross 2 years ago
I agree. They posit ludicrous claims like the sky being blue, when the first law of thermodynamics clearly demands that it be purple. Do these morons even know what physics is? You need only read Kant to realize this, furthermore. An understanding of either will also disprove this ludicrous 'round earth" fascism. WAKE UP. Unicorns are real. Read Hume somtime. Ron Paul is a leprechaun.
Jesus built my hotrod, blessing it with his semen-the stain being proof of the messiah's will.
Eldeecue 2 years ago 2
Anyone out there that is as tired of religion as myself, rise up and make it known. Make them feel ashamed of what they stand for. You do not have to tolerate them. You have a right to speak out against what they stand for.
blitzfargunstein1 2 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I hate religion more than you do especially the atheist belief that objects and static forces get the credit for what we are. That pagan belief is the worst belief ever to have disgraced mankind.
Seekmosttoprophesy 2 years ago
LOL--You hate religion the way Mao Tse Tung hated Communism,seekmost.The only Pagan beliefs that square with your ridiculous "objects mantra" are Shintoism and Totemism.Neither qualify as Atheist.
djnross 2 years ago
@Seekmosttoprophesy beliefs can be chosen freely, unfortunately for you the facts cannot. If you refuse to 'believe' in the facts, then you have place in a modern educated society and i suggest you either screw your head on straight, or get out of the way of those who would seek the facts to better human life
SmartStuff357 2 years ago
@SmartStuff357 Threats have no place in science. It is either true or it is not. You simply cannot trust what people say. You have to take the initiative and responsibility to find out what the tuth is yourself. The truth is that we are created beings. There is no way out of that. It is an observable fact.
Seekmosttoprophesy 2 years ago
@Seekmosttoprophesy Observable facts that we are created? OMG OMG, where show me!!!!!
spacecowboy95 2 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
You are the evidence of your Creator. No object is able to speak any of the directives that have made you what you are. The evidence of Creation is all around you. You just are not honest enough to confess the truth.
Seekmosttoprophesy 2 years ago
@Seekmosttoprophesy Im evidence of evolution. Thats all.
spacecowboy95 2 years ago 9
You've been hood-winked. Sorry.
dudeedud7 2 years ago
Christians, Muslims, Jews, if you were made in the image of your creator then your creator is truly a sad being. Full of hate and rage, jealously insisting that you worship only him. Your god destroys out of jealous rage, covets your belongings by demanding sacrifice, and teaches men to kill in his name. Your god shows all the weakness of man, the true creator of the creator.
blitzfargunstein1 2 years ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Your imagination is a horror and the strawman that you create will not save you.
You are very confused by what men do and what God has done for us Himself.
Seekmosttoprophesy 2 years ago
@Seekmosttoprophesy and what would that be exactly?
SmartStuff357 2 years ago
well said.
SofaKingAbsent 2 years ago
mmmm.... sam harris at 3:28
even the best of us seem prone to pronouce "et cetera" as "ekcetra" at times.
why must i notice? :|
TehCybernerd 2 years ago
@TehCybernerd
but that's how it's pronounced
ItsameAlex 11 months ago
around 8:50, hitchens is MUMBLING about the bell curve like an idiot. he's doing it deliberately to cover his ass.
2xcheese 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Our Father in heaven hallowed be your name,
your kingdom come your will be done,
on earth as in heaven.Give us today our daily bread.
Forgive us our sinsas we forgive those who sin against us.
Save us from the time of trialand deliver us from evil.
For the kingdom, the power,and the glory are yours
now and for ever. In Jesus name.Amen.
jaroncreed 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Thank, you, the Bible is true. It always has been about what is true. Everyone else told irresponsible fables while the Bible always told the truth.
Face the issues and address them. You are the evidence of your Creator.
Seekmosttoprophesy 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
What the Bible says is right because it is true. The Bible is all about what is true. It is the truth that rules always.
Seekmosttoprophesy 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Rationality, reason and truth originated from the Bible.
Evolution is the irrational baseless fantasy.
Address the issues.
No object ever did anything.
No lie is ever true.
Seekmosttoprophesy 2 years ago
At 6:07. Dennet was suggesting what could shake his faith, I fell out of my chair and hit my head on my desk. I was laughing so hard at Hitchen's response (I had an injurious ROFLMAO):
"Rabbits in the Precambrian"
It would have been even funnier had he said, "bunnies."
caltrop69 2 years ago
Bunnies don't swim in the seas, they avoid the reptiles and they are much smarter than reptiles.
Seekmosttoprophesy 2 years ago
I would give both nuts just to be able to sit at that table and listen.
brendanrhys 2 years ago
You also gave up your mind. No object ever had a reason to order anything.
Seekmosttoprophesy 2 years ago
Richard Dawkins=is at pains to be an English gentleman all the time
SAM Harris= young and intelligent with fresh ideas
Christopher Hitchens=trying hard to no to leave his ground and stay strictly as an anti theist
Danial Dennet=completely honest(as a philosopher should be)
best four people you can get .
confusedimigrant 2 years ago 2
They are the most confused people you can find. Evolution is their fantasy. They wish it is how we came to be. The facts don't support that because no object has any reason to order anything.
Seekmosttoprophesy 2 years ago
Any human being CAN intuitively disprove the existence of God by imagining how a universe that was under the command of an all-powerful creator would behave. It would be 100 million times less chaotic than it actually is. Floods would miraculously occur then cease to be, we could easily talk to the dead. Things could be moved from one point to another with no distance covered in between.
None of this actually happens.
allaboutdmagic 2 years ago
You have no idea what an 'all-powerful creator' would do, think, smell like, whether it's left, right, quadruple or no-handed.
What the hell are you talking about? Your imagination is really THAT limited?
Terrible.
Skindoggiedog 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
(The spoken directives command the *assembly* of the interchangeable elements that make up the structures for every life form there is.)
Seekmosttoprophesy 2 years ago
Who on earth are you kidding?
I think perhaps someone's had a cocaine-overdose-motorcycle-accident-inspired moment of Gary Busey divinity.
Skindoggiedog 2 years ago
Environment tweaks,modifies and molds the genomic integrity of carbon-based Life the way objects on anvils respond to the percussive stress of the malleus...Selection pressures are wrought on us in ways we take for granted daily.
djnross 2 years ago
Objects on anvils are there by design.
Seekmosttoprophesy 2 years ago
Yet Anvils aren't living organisms and can't reproduce. Your argument of design is invalid.
rba718 2 years ago
You were of course aware that the pre-Cochlear ossicles---a.k.a. the malleus,incus,and stapes----of the middle ear have REPRODUCING marrow stromal cells...?...Of course you were!
djnross 2 years ago
Are you actually suggesting that the inner ear can reproduce? lol Seriously?
rba718 2 years ago
Cells being fundamental components to orhanic life,DO characteristically reproduce.Skin cells to the tune of every 3 hours,I believe...,and yes,the ossicles of the inner ear.
djnross 2 years ago
can you show me an example of say, inner ears ever reproducing to create more inner ears?
rba718 2 years ago
?...I simply fail to understand the taproot of the facete couched in so ridiculous an inference.Cells reproduce to replace dead cells,that's all.Platyhelminthic worms and starfish possess quite another nuance to cell-regeneration,however.
djnross 2 years ago
Lol it wasn't really meant for you to answer, I'm pointing out an absurdity. We're talking about design vs evolutionary reproduction. You cited that the cells of inner ears and other areas can reproduce and form more cells. I'm trying to express that what you're saying isn't in the same context.
rba718 2 years ago
I've done enough studies on the effects of cyclin-dependent kinase 1 in pre-mitotic stages not to conflate asexual reproduction with regeneration.Were you alluding to an ostensible Designer missing from my earlier metaphor?
djnross 2 years ago
dude, i <3 your arguments, but you gotta chill with the jargon
ajboyer 2 years ago
What "jargon"?.....You..."less than three of my arguments"?....is this itself some manner of codified "jargon" I ought own the secret decoder ring to,perhaps?
djnross 2 years ago
Except to assert the forces of our planet are there by design is a complete non secuitur. Given what we know about our globe we can confidently assert that the formation of our elements, geology, temperature, gravity, etc.. have came to be through non exactly "random" but unguided natural forces. Whether these forces that operate in our neck of space/time was originally authored is a separate question. In my opinion, its 50/50 THAT it was a intelligence or that its something else we dont..
VarialProductions 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
We know that everything is by design because we can observe the result of billions of digits of directives which amount to spoken words that command the formation of interchangeable elements and the orders that result in every structure that life forms need.
Hell for the atheist will be for all of the celestial beings enjoying eternity while they have to face their own error of not admitting the design is so obvious.
All we have to do is to confess the truth, the whole truth. That's it.
Seekmosttoprophesy 2 years ago
How solipsistic are you?
What if there is order to the Universe and greater meaning to it but the milkyway galaxy and every other one we can see is just a cluster of dust the the corner of a part of dimensional space time we don't know about.
Do you ever think about it the other way and say maybe we're just of ant intelligence to whatever may be out there?
Wait.. I should have asked if your Christian or something. Because that takes you out of the debate if you can believe that shit.
VarialProductions 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
You can't be suggesting that everything just happened to fall into order. Things have to be put into order and things fall out of order. They do not fall into order. Order implies direction.
It is people that believe that objects make information that are not qualified to debate truth because what they believe is a fantasy from their wild irresponsible reckless imagination.
Seekmosttoprophesy 2 years ago
Realistically, seekmosttoprophesy, you don't know. You wouldn't have the foggiest idea. You've jumped to a conclusion, decided you must be right, and gone with it, because to you it makes perfect sense.
"All men have purple skin. Greg is a man. He must have purple skin."
This is how you think. It, and your ideas, have no basis in reality.
Skindoggiedog 2 years ago
That might be true if I did not have actual historical accounts that show us the way. What actually happened will not contradict so many accounts of the same flood. We know the accounts are true because we also have the dinosaur bones that match the two descriptions of dinosaur described in the Bible. These are documentaries of actual Jews, Arabs and Egyptians that exist to this day anyway. Why does "science" need to deny actual historical events? Only if their assumptions go contrary to facts.
Seekmosttoprophesy 2 years ago
No, it is true.
You have no 'actual historical accounts'
What you're doing is claiming your place of worth on this planet by telling the rest of the world that you are more intelligent and spiritually more advanced than they are. It's the oldest trick in the book. The con-man's way of rising to the top of an industry. Without knowledge. Without having to work for it.
You're a parasite, leeching off peoples faith.
It's disgusting.
Skindoggiedog 2 years ago
Here is the difference:
Science asks 'how' and 'why'. You never asked those questions in your life. You only ask 'how does that fit into what I already believe?'
If you cannot make it fit you discard it. If it can be made to fit, then that is your 'evidence'
Your methods are not accepted by anyone who truly seeks truth. You're taking advantage of people's faith and exploiting it to elevate yourself amongst the ranks.
You should be ashamed.
Skindoggiedog 2 years ago
I love that you used the phrase 'wild irresponsible reckless imagination' Got a mirror at your place?
Skindoggiedog 2 years ago
Do you have even the basest understanding of evolution or natural selection? I'm asking, but it's obvious you do not. You live in this tiny world inside the left hemisphere of your brain following a circular logic train-track around and around saying 'CHOO! CHOO!' and cheering yourself on because you're the train driver.
You're the only person on that train and it's going absolutely nowhere.
Skindoggiedog 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Actually, I have determined that no object has ever ordered any information and also never will but you are not addressing any of the issues which means that you are not getting anywhere. You are unable to acknowledge the observable fact of Creation.
Seekmosttoprophesy 2 years ago
"You can't be suggesting that everything just happened to fall into order. Things have to be put into order and things fall out of order. They do not fall into order. Order implies direction."
You see order in things the way others see shapes in the clouds and faces on toast.
You don't understand evolution, still, (which is rather ironic) and I really don't think you have any intentions of doing so.
I'd love to see you write down your understanding of how evolution works.
Skindoggiedog 2 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Evolution doesn't work. It can't even evolve a leg to stand on. It can't even make the first step. It is the baseless fantasy of people who refuse to face the evidence of their Creator who is not an object that has to be caused and formed. Objects do not order anything. That is a pagan belief that thinks that objects do things.
Seekmosttoprophesy 2 years ago
You are mixed up. You cannot compare the billions of directives that command the formation of every life form there is to "shapes in the clouds". That is very irrational to even think such a thing. I would like to see you address the issues. No object ever ordered anything.
Seek