"God by definition is self existant" <-- Stopped watching at that point. No point continuing. I want to see the guy's source before bothering any more on this one.
because the answer is god had no beginning.. he has always been. really as powerful as god is to create heaven and earth space and time.. you really think he had a beginning. HE CREATED THE BEGINNING!.
@GunneLPercher fuck, fuck your questions already. We've already answered a million by now yet you Christian fucks keep covering them up with dust and ask again as if nothing happened. You are willing to give up common sense just to win! Quit asking the same fucking questions over and over, just fucking admit we have answers.
@xchris1800 Learn to construct a sentence using correct grammar, and maybe then I will consider you worthy. Whether you accept it or not, evolution is true and your god almost certainly does not exist.
More people deceived by Satan. I guess you folks weren't aware that Charles Darwin was a member of the Royal Society, an arm of the Illuminati, and that he was greatly praised by none other than Karl Marx.
@RevivalOfBuzzBuzz "More people deceived by Satan" Got any evidence for the existence of Satan?
"the Royal Society, an arm of the Illuminati" and "was greatly praised by none other than Karl Marx" are irrelevant. Evolution is a fact, his theory being correct is not dependent on who or which organisations supported him.
Why don't you try to posts some evidence or arguments against evolution instead of asinine fallacies and arguments from ignorance.
This video is a joke, it is so simple, my friends you will never learned, I cannot laugh at you, it is understandable, but you should recognize, you are ...., what is the word? blind is the word. As you dont put God as Creator, you will reason as a fool.
Forgive my ignorance, but can someone give me an explanation about the wallagupis term? I've never heard of it before, and I didn't find anything detailed about it on Google.
To say that the universe always existed is a statement ignoring the facts. The universe is expanding so, by logic, it can be traced back to a beginning. All things in the universe would have burned up their fuel supply by the time we got here (how has the sun not burned out yet if it has existed infinitely). One cannot traverse an actual infinite (if you have an infinite amount of days before today, do you ever get to today?). It is impossible for the universe to exist infinitely.
@VanNicky75 for you to believe in an infinitely existing universe you would have to believe that time exists infinitely, but it does not. As mass accumulates together time slows down due to it's gravitational effect. In a black hole, that amount of mass can only exist in one location at the same time because time itself does not exist. The same is true for the universe before the big bang. There was no before, time did not exist. Therefore the universe cannot exist infinitely.
@VanNicky75 I can make a similar argument for the real numbers not being a valid mathematical object. If you have an infinite amount of space before 0, how do you get to 0?
what is it worth for a monkey to read if it has no the capacity to read?, in the same way what is it worth for an evolutionist to read books, and investigate if he has not understanding? He himself is a self-contradiction, what he defines by truth today is wrong tomorrow, bks everything evolves, even he is evolving, so we can never take seriously his claims. Serious claims are from something stable. Intelligence. Creation comes from a Designer.
@xchris1800 Of course we can take seriously the claims. It is because science and reasoning are capable of evolving that we can reach a higher understanding of how everything works. How exciting it is to discover something new, that can change the way we view the world! There is indeed a designer, and it is called nature... Ever changing, ever innovating. :)
@groar86 Interesting, Since nature is encircled in time, space, and mass, define these concepts to understand how is it that nature could assemble itself. I want to discover your definitions of them to take serious your words.
@xchris1800 I'm not going to pretend I am a connoisseur of the subject. I try to document myself as much as I can, but I do know that whatever I know isn't enough to give me the confidence to write down complex answers. However, I still say this: if we couldn't take seriously the words of those who do these researches, then we'd never have the opportunity to be where we are now. Everything is made of trial and error. That is the human intellect, and that is nature.
What i find funny, is that people believe god exists so their life has a reason. But on the other hand, if the reason is fulfilling gods plan; God can make everything, so he can also make a plan like this in completion, instead of creating humans to fulfill this plan. That makes your life as a believer in any god kind of useless doesn't it?
No creationist can explain why a finite crime should be met with an infinite punishment. I have two theories:
1. God is a sadist.
2. Religion is made up, originally to control society, and has evolved into an internation belief with dozens of variations that cannot agree with each other.
If adam disobeyed god by eating the fruit and gaining the knowledge of good and evil, then before he ate it he wouldn't have known about good and evil and wouldn't know what was wrong about disobeying god. :)
ahahahahhaah AHAHAHAHA ahahahaha these are 10 INTELLIGENT ...answers? My GOD,the world is reall f..... up if nowaday darwinists and atheists calling themselves and these ,,answers,, ..INTELLIGENT...hahaa...lol...-.-,
@TheKak300 tell me if we as humans are made from something and animals are made from something and this planet is made from something and stars everywhere are made from something where does the cycle start? NOTHING that exist came from thin air so it makes perfect sense to think there had to be a creator. or do you believe gasses and dust just appeared from NOTHING???
Yet anoher smug asshole demolished by scientific logic. The tragic part is that smug dude is probably still clinging fiercely to his bible like a security blanket and shouting, "No, no, no I won't believe it, I refuse to believe it, I want my mommy!"
Dead-to-the-spirit deluded "God Delusion" author & blithering fool scientist goon Richard Dawkins another "leader" given 2 the profane masses is another useful idiot 4 Jesuit machinations
Jesuitical; pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuit Order completely altered the education system 2 suit their Evo-Hoax Agenda to discredit the Bible
Papal Rome cant have their Counter Reformation Despotism 2nd Dark Age until Bible is destroyed
The one thing that creationists always avoid raising is that if evolution was proven to be false then it would validate the christian gods existence any more than it would validate the existence of all of those hundreds of other gods throughout history.
If atheists are arrogant then creationists are solipsistic.
If atheists cling to science instead of faith, it is because we are intelligent and mature enough not to need someone watching over us to avoid feeling insecure and lonely.
Carl Sagan IS A GOD!!! Well, at least a SCIENTIFIC god. BTW, anyone else ever notice Richard Dawkins looks like Hermione Granger from Harry Potter? I'M SO CONFLICTED NOW!!!
No, not really. I am incredibly attracted to Hermione Granger, or at least the actress that plays her. I respect Dawkins a LOT, but I wouldn't go that far.
@MegaSolipsist I saw a gif somewhere and it had Hermione morphing into Dawkins, they was in the same pose and it was startling how much they look alike. They could pass as siblings from the pics they used of them.
ALTHOUGH I'M A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN (Baptist), I no longer believe that the Bible teaches eternal torment or suffering. The Bible teaches eternal punishment, but it's not eternal torment. In my popular Internet article, TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE OF HELL EVOLVED FROM GREEK ROOTS, I explain how and why teaching of eternal torment entered early into Christianity and how Scriptures have been misinterpreted and taken out of context to support that teaching. ~Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology)
ALTHOUGH I'M A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN (Baptist), I no longer believe that the Bible teaches eternal torment or suffering. The Bible teaches eternal punishment, but it's not eternal torment. In my popular Internet article, TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE OF HELL EVOLVED FROM GREEK ROOTS, I explain how and why teaching of eternal torment entered early into Christianity and how Scriptures have been misinterpreted and taken out of context to support that teaching. ~Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology)
ALTHOUGH I'M A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN (Baptist), I no longer believe that the Bible teaches eternal torment or suffering. The Bible teaches eternal punishment, but it's not eternal torment. In my popular Internet article, TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE OF HELL EVOLVED FROM GREEK ROOTS, I explain how and why teaching of eternal torment entered early into Christianity and how Scriptures have been misinterpreted and taken out of context to support that teaching. ~Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology)
SCIENCE SHOWS THAT THE UNIVERSE, because of entropy, could not have sustained itself eternally. Einstein confirmed that space, matter, and time had a beginning! That beginning had to be supernatural because natural laws have no ability to bring the universe into existence from nothing. The supernatural cannot be proved by science but science points to a supernatural intelligence for the origin and order of the universe ~ HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM (Article)
NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Only evolution within "kinds" is genetically possible (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). How were species living, reproducing if their reproductive system, vital structures, and organs hadn't evolved yet? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic/biological similarities between species.
BLIND WATCHMAKER NO ARGUMENT. Natural selection is no "blind watchmaker" because it can only "select" from traits having survival value. It doesn't produce those traits. It only operates once there is life and reproduction, not before, so it couldn't be involved in life's origins. A partially-evolved cell (an oxymoron) would quickly disintegrate. It couldn't wait ("survive") millions of years for chance to complete it and then make it living! Read: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
DAWKINS, HITCHENS, AND HAWKING REFUSE TO DEBATE with creationists who are SCIENTISTS, such as the scientists at The Institute for Creation (ICR) Research. Dawkins and his friends only debate non-scientist creationists. ICR scientists have written excellent articles on "Vestigial" Structures, Fossils, Genetics, Mutations, "Junk DNA," Natural Selection, Age of The Earth, Emergence of New Species (but not new genes), etc., etc. Just peruse their articles archive.
DEBATE IS NOT OVER. In Darwin's time not enough science was known to refute macro-evolution. There was no understanding of genetics. Darwin thought the cell was just a simple glob. No one knew about DNA, RNA, proteins. Modern evolutionists now know, but the theory is entrenched as gospel and a lot of personal motives are at stake as well. Just saying that something evolved doesn't make it so! Schools should present both sides! Read my article WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
@Mogley52 Mogley, the debate is over,creationists have not stopped the work of scientists for a second, the fact that you go around to all these videos and spam the same thing over and over just shows that creationists are reduced to moronic spam and nonsensical ramblings. Your religious beliefs will never again stop scientific progress, society is beyond bending to the will of the church, religion is declining, science just gets stronger and stronger, its fact, arguing against it wont change it
@iseezapie I know, doesn't it just annoy you to death when you find 20 comments from Mogley52 on a video? It's time to report this guy because spamming is a violation of the community guidlines on youtube.
@iseezapie I'm a christian. We've worked hard, and we have succeeded in stopping the progress of science. Meanwhile, science always has and always will fail to stop the progress of religion. The debate is over. The score is:
Science and logic: 0
Religion: 100
Science never gets anything done. Religion makes me live longer. :)
@anticorncob6 I hope you keep this logic next time you fall ill or when you get old...boycott all medication and medical advances...Why are you on a computer?? That was developed by science not god. Either that or you're being sarcastic...which I hope.
@cararacs Trolling iseezapie. He's right, the debate is prettymuch over among scientists. Atheism has been shown over and over to be true. The debate among the general public is still in progress, but between scientists and intellectuals the debate is over. Science has an explanation for the universe, I highly doubt God would choose things that science shows can exist without him.
Never again will creationists stop the progress of atheistic or evolutionary science.
@iseezapie By the way, I'm interested how you got to the conclusion that creationism has not stopped the progress of science. Remember the dark ages? Religion has held back science for 1,000 years.
@anticorncob6 Believers in X can *always* point to consequences of X and say "The people who did that weren't really Xians - they only said they were. We're the real Xians".
Happens with christians, members of any political party, socialists, and followers of every religion. Probably including satanists :-)
IMAGINE A FISH WITH PART FINS, part feet with the fins evolving (transitioning) into feet. What survival benefit would there be? The fish couldn't use its fins or its feet, and there are no fossils showing such a creature ever existed. They only exist on automobile bumper stickers! There are no true transitional forms, either living or fossilized. Evolutionists realize this fact! Read my Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
APES ARE QUITE COMFORTABLE IN HOW THEY WALK, just as humans are quite comfortable in how they walk. Even a slight change in the position of a muscle or bone, for either, would be excruciatingly painful and would not be an advantage for survival. There's no hard evidence that humans evolved from an ape-like creature anymore than there's hard evidence that apes evolved from a four-legged dog-like creature. Read Internet article: MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE.
ALL REAL EVOLUTION ( i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.) is the expression, over time, of already existing genes. Evolution is possible only if there’s information (genes) directing it. Only variations of already existing genes are possible, which means only limited evolution and adaptations are possible. Nature can only work with the "cards" it has. Nature is not a genetic engineer! It can't invent new genes. That’s evolutionary faith, not science. Read my article, WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
GENETIC INFORMATION DOESN'T HAPPEN BY CHANCE, so it's more logical to believe that genetic similarities between all forms of life are due to a common Designer who designed similar functions for similar purposes. It doesn't mean all forms of life are biologically related! "Junk DNA" isn't junk. These non-coding segments of DNA have recently been found to be vital in regulating gene expression. Read: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
ARE FOSSILS REALLY MILLIONS OF YEARS OLD? Popular Internet article that examines assumptions concerning fossil deposition as well as built-in assumptions involved in modern radiometric dating (not used for dating fossils but other rocks), and arguments from starlight and time. Discusses lack of both transitional forms and lack of sequence of the fossil layers. Discusses mixed species in fossils (i.e. dinosaur, reptile, mammal fossils in the same stratum conveniently ignored by evolutionists).
AMINO ACIDS CAN HAPPEN BY CHANCE BUT NOT PROTEINS: Read my popular Internet articles, "How Forensic Science Refutes Atheism," and "Origin of Life Deception by Evolutionists"
I'VE GIVEN LECTURES defending scientific creationism before science faculty and students at various secular colleges. At the end, I opened up for comments, questions, rebuttals. Very few of the evolutionist science faculty criticized what I had to say, and, when they did, I successfully answered them. They knew enough science to realize that what I was saying was true. Read my Internet article in Pravda: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
There's no real violation of church/state separation in teaching the scientific arguments for Intelligent Design alongside of macro-evolutionary theory because no one is being forced to believe in God's existence or any religion. Taxpayers on the both sides of the issue pay for public education. It is only fair that scientific arguments and evidence used by both sides be presented.The issue is important because it affects people's lives, their values, philosophy, and worldview.
Humans are not smarter than God, nor His Holy Word.
And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; - Romans 1:28
Atheists are the true retards of all time. Of course if there is a God capable of bringing the universe and time and life into existence - He would be impossible to define with our usual ruler and measuring tape approaches.
@xNoReligionx - you pretty much describe yourself with those obnoxious terminologies - but then again atheism deadens the brains and worse .....the conscience. matter is eternal clown.
@xNoReligionx There is no scientific evidence for chemical chance evolution either. We're stupid because we see that actually creationism is based on science. Evolution cannot explain the first living one cell organism where creationism can. science insists that the first single cell organism must have been created, otherwise it cannot be explained oor duplicated
@xNoReligionx There is no scientific evidence for chemical chance evolution either. We're stupid because we see that actually creationism is based on science. Evolution cannot explain the first living one cell organism where creationism can. science insists that the first single cell organism must have been created, otherwise it cannot be explained oor duplicated. Your smart because you cannot explain it so you''ll exclude a possible theory becase it doesn't align with you religious beleif
Maybe you should get more updated question instead of ones from the 70's. I have a few questions! How can life come from non living matter. How come scientist can't change the genetic code of a human into a animal dna code. If a cell can't live without oxygen how could it have servived in the dirt. How come scientist can't take non living mater and change it into living mater meaning dirt.
@ada2step Ok lets start here, we have evidence of life coming from non-life, google "The Miller Urey experiment". Your second question is implying that humans aren't animals, if you change the DNA of one cell, that won't change anything, in fact that cell might be killed by the rest of your body because it could be claimed as a foreigner. the first bits of cells and life were in an aquatic environment, not on land. and your last question is just poor use of english, I can't understand it.
@KyuubiNaruto1337XD So they created a human from dirt I don't think so! Humans can drown so I don't believe that theory. sorry it was late at night and I do not have word on my computer. I was trying to say that to prove that life just came from dirt or water what ever you believe how come they can't duplicate it
@KyuubiNaruto1337XD There has been a recent wave of skepticism concerning Miller's experiment because it is now believed that the early earth's atmosphere did not contain predominantly reductant molecules. Another objection is that this experiment required a tremendous amount of energy. While it is believed lightning storms were extremely common on the primitive Earth, they were not continuous
Which is why they did the experiment a SECOND time and they got EVEN BETTER RESULTS!!! they got Adedine, RNA and amino acids, as opposed to the regular amino acids they got before.
@KyuubiNaruto1337XD This situation completely negates Miller’s experiment, in which oxygen was completely neglected. If oxygen had been used in the experiment, methane would have decomposed into carbon dioxide and water, and ammonia into nitrogen and water. On the other hand, in an environment where there was no oxygen, there would be no ozone layer either; therefore, the amino acids would have immediately been destroyed,
@ada2step no, you're forgetting that this experiment was done in an aqueous environment, life didn't get into the air for millions of years, just look at some places today that could feed such a thing as abiogenesis, OK how about hawaii's hot spot under the ocean, its got plenty of heat, sulfates, and other metals found to form this.
Also Oxygen can form other ways that just THIS chemical reaction you're referring to right? not all amino acids survive, granted.
In the beginning there was void. However, where there is nothing, there is always a potential for their to be something.
And, because potential is always realized in the absence of an inhibitor, everything came to be. And i mean EVERYTHING. Infinite potential creates infinite realization in the absence of inhibition.
This is my own personal theory. It is simple, and it works with M-theory.
However, going from nothing to a god is not likely.
The one thing creationists consistently fail to understand, among so many, is the amount of time regarding the early development of DNA/RNA. They, as well as most people, cannot fathom how long 4 billion years actually is.
religious people are just in denial, they think death and such is much more comfortable if there is a god(s). Add indoctrination and propaganda from parents and churches, and we know why future generations listen to this crap.
Love the Potholer54 segment, showing that life emerged from clay. If the Bible could be handled metaphorically, as it should be, much wisdom could be gleaned from it. Taken literally, it just makes people stupid.
@alachabre Why would God need to speak in metaphors? And also why would the Bible be the right book? There is many others, you know. Many consider the argument that the Bible is written in metaphors a cop-out.
@TTDMFfreaknew Why would God speak in metaphors? Ask Jesus. He might tell you a story about seeds sown on rocks and sand, or making poor use of one's assets being akin to not living a proper life, or prodigal daughters. He may even destroy a fig tree to show how bearing bad fruit is comparable to living a sinful life, or tell you not to cast pearls before swine. Yeah, ask Jesus about metaphors.
Hey guys, God has no begining or end. "How is it that God has no begining? That's stupid." Well, before he created anything, there was no space. Anyone familiar to this knows that if there is no space, there is no time. Therefore: no time = no begining
@r4v3nh34rt LOOOL I have nothing against athiest but I think it's funny when they get mad at others for not believing what they believe. I postes that comment expecting a rough answer
@chocolatehater001 Expect what you want lmao, I find you pathetic that's all. And the saying that "you expected a rough answer" doesn't make you any bigger nor pro.
The real trouble with creationists is not that they are delusional. Rather, they feel that they should be in charge of my life and tell me how to live because of their delusion. I do not tell them they have to do things, but they tell me I can't eat bacon and must go to church on Sundays and can't have sex outside of marriage and must give them 10% of my wage because they have a delusion.
"Same time" equals the span of millions of years. It's just very 'quick' in regards to geological dating. The Cambrian Explosion happened over many thousands of years.
@KnowImillian I wasn't saying for us the human experience is a joke. I'm merely stating that it could be for a higher intelligence. And it doesn't necessitate evil.
@KnowImillian I swear I will laugh if it comes out that whoever "God" may be that he/she/it was playing a joke or has a running bet with something on us.
@KnowImillian I know people use science to lie and gain power, as people have used religion to do the same thing. And I believe their are higher beings, I just never argue the same side over and over again. I will play devil's advocate. Though I tend to believe that some of the "Gods" of the past, and quite possibly the "God" of Christianity, Islam, and Judaism could have been aliens that used primitive man's ignorance, relative, against them and called themselves "Gods." And I wasn't angry.
@KnowImillian I never said knowledge started in Europe. Nor did I say the Dark Ages was a world wide thing. And if you actually read what happened in Europe and to scientists during the Dark Ages, you would actually know why I say Christianity inhibited science. I never stated religion inhibits science in general. Like you said, some where in a Golden Age. I'm saying people have used religion to inhibit science.
@KnowImillian No, we don't refuse to admit they built it, we are unable to explain how they did it without help. And I don't care how much the man ruling today knows. I'm going on with how much science has answered. When I say religion inhibits science I use the Dark Ages as evidence. And the ancient religions didn't inhibit science like Christianity has. But I don't refute that humans as a species is removed from nature.
@KnowImillian You're talking the pyramids and the Nazca lines in your first point. I'm going to take the Ancient Alien theory with that one. It would make sense, both in how they built the pyramids and Nazca Lines and why they believed in "Gods."
I'm not saying all societies, ancient, were without science, that's complete bull. I'm saying that they didn't know as much as we do.
The reason their societies lasted so long is because their religions didn't inhibit science.
@KnowImillian The reason they believed in higher beings was because they couldn't answer the question of why the sun rose, or why the moon rose, or why anything happened. They created these stories to explain nature and for entertainment and education. Had they known what caused the sun to rise or lightning and thunder, they would have never created their gods and the stories that ensued.
That means nothing. Mankind didn't have as sophisticated technology as we did even though they did amazingly well for what they had. We'd actually be even better if we are today if not for the fundamentalist nutjobs from the dark ages. We only just got set back on the right track and now the maniacs wanna pull us back into the darkness.
Asking that would be saying someone intelligently made our eyes to form cataracts or to give us a useless organ which can possibly kill us if it's damaged (the appendix). Evolution is a unguided process, done through natural selecton, mutations, and vast amounts of time.
Where do you think anyone gets answers to these shitty excuses of questions anyway? From peopel who know at least some of what the fuck isbeing asked. IDIOT.
@Postie218 and?
INMATE2468 5 days ago
"God by definition is self existant" <-- Stopped watching at that point. No point continuing. I want to see the guy's source before bothering any more on this one.
gleehmee 2 weeks ago
everyone whatch "dr dyno" and shut up
rudyyy911 4 weeks ago
because the answer is god had no beginning.. he has always been. really as powerful as god is to create heaven and earth space and time.. you really think he had a beginning. HE CREATED THE BEGINNING!.
rudyyy911 4 weeks ago
@rudyyy911 You are so funny:) thanks I needed a laugh :)
ebilly99 2 weeks ago
@GunneLPercher fuck, fuck your questions already. We've already answered a million by now yet you Christian fucks keep covering them up with dust and ask again as if nothing happened. You are willing to give up common sense just to win! Quit asking the same fucking questions over and over, just fucking admit we have answers.
anticorncob6 1 month ago
@xchris1800 I have some friendly advice for you. 1. Slap your parents 2. Start by learning your ABC's 3. Finish 2nd grade.
4. Slap your parents again 5. Stop talking about concepts you have no understanding of. 6. Finally, most important, SLAP YOUR PARENTS!
paramattic70 1 month ago
@xchris1800 Learn to construct a sentence using correct grammar, and maybe then I will consider you worthy. Whether you accept it or not, evolution is true and your god almost certainly does not exist.
shredder767 1 month ago
Hah,
More people deceived by Satan. I guess you folks weren't aware that Charles Darwin was a member of the Royal Society, an arm of the Illuminati, and that he was greatly praised by none other than Karl Marx.
Still think evolution is real?
RevivalOfBuzzBuzz 1 month ago
@RevivalOfBuzzBuzz "More people deceived by Satan" Got any evidence for the existence of Satan?
"the Royal Society, an arm of the Illuminati" and "was greatly praised by none other than Karl Marx" are irrelevant. Evolution is a fact, his theory being correct is not dependent on who or which organisations supported him.
Why don't you try to posts some evidence or arguments against evolution instead of asinine fallacies and arguments from ignorance.
thomaseshuis 1 month ago
@RevivalOfBuzzBuzz Hitler had a mustache, does that make everyone with mustaches a Nazi?
XxI3ioHazardxX 1 month ago
@RevivalOfBuzzBuzz And if Darwin would have been a genocidal maniac...his theory would still have been true.
Helge129 1 month ago
@RevivalOfBuzzBuzz Yes.
AegisNova 1 month ago
This video is a joke, it is so simple, my friends you will never learned, I cannot laugh at you, it is understandable, but you should recognize, you are ...., what is the word? blind is the word. As you dont put God as Creator, you will reason as a fool.
xchris1800 1 month ago
Forgive my ignorance, but can someone give me an explanation about the wallagupis term? I've never heard of it before, and I didn't find anything detailed about it on Google.
groar86 1 month ago
Comment removed
Challengestheworld 2 months ago
To say that the universe always existed is a statement ignoring the facts. The universe is expanding so, by logic, it can be traced back to a beginning. All things in the universe would have burned up their fuel supply by the time we got here (how has the sun not burned out yet if it has existed infinitely). One cannot traverse an actual infinite (if you have an infinite amount of days before today, do you ever get to today?). It is impossible for the universe to exist infinitely.
VanNicky75 2 months ago
@VanNicky75 for you to believe in an infinitely existing universe you would have to believe that time exists infinitely, but it does not. As mass accumulates together time slows down due to it's gravitational effect. In a black hole, that amount of mass can only exist in one location at the same time because time itself does not exist. The same is true for the universe before the big bang. There was no before, time did not exist. Therefore the universe cannot exist infinitely.
Earendur08 2 months ago
@VanNicky75 I can make a similar argument for the real numbers not being a valid mathematical object. If you have an infinite amount of space before 0, how do you get to 0?
idunnononame 2 months ago
Understanding of nature comes from people who love God.
xchris1800 3 months ago
what is it worth for a monkey to read if it has no the capacity to read?, in the same way what is it worth for an evolutionist to read books, and investigate if he has not understanding? He himself is a self-contradiction, what he defines by truth today is wrong tomorrow, bks everything evolves, even he is evolving, so we can never take seriously his claims. Serious claims are from something stable. Intelligence. Creation comes from a Designer.
xchris1800 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xchris1800 What you said makes no sense at all.
MegaSolipsist 2 months ago
@xchris1800 Of course we can take seriously the claims. It is because science and reasoning are capable of evolving that we can reach a higher understanding of how everything works. How exciting it is to discover something new, that can change the way we view the world! There is indeed a designer, and it is called nature... Ever changing, ever innovating. :)
groar86 1 month ago
@groar86 Interesting, Since nature is encircled in time, space, and mass, define these concepts to understand how is it that nature could assemble itself. I want to discover your definitions of them to take serious your words.
xchris1800 1 month ago
@xchris1800 I'm not going to pretend I am a connoisseur of the subject. I try to document myself as much as I can, but I do know that whatever I know isn't enough to give me the confidence to write down complex answers. However, I still say this: if we couldn't take seriously the words of those who do these researches, then we'd never have the opportunity to be where we are now. Everything is made of trial and error. That is the human intellect, and that is nature.
groar86 1 month ago
But we know that the universe couldn't have always been. I mean, come on.
RubixWizz199109 3 months ago
@RubixWizz199109 Well tell a person in 1021 how a computer works and see if he understands a word you are saying.
TheBattlefield101 3 months ago
What i find funny, is that people believe god exists so their life has a reason. But on the other hand, if the reason is fulfilling gods plan; God can make everything, so he can also make a plan like this in completion, instead of creating humans to fulfill this plan. That makes your life as a believer in any god kind of useless doesn't it?
TopppieJopppie 3 months ago
Montmorillonite !!!
IvanderHaisley 3 months ago
No creationist can explain why a finite crime should be met with an infinite punishment. I have two theories:
1. God is a sadist.
2. Religion is made up, originally to control society, and has evolved into an internation belief with dozens of variations that cannot agree with each other.
If adam disobeyed god by eating the fruit and gaining the knowledge of good and evil, then before he ate it he wouldn't have known about good and evil and wouldn't know what was wrong about disobeying god. :)
MegaSolipsist 3 months ago 3
@MegaSolipsist And why is educating yourself so evil to the point where the entire human race is damned forever? just thought I would add a question.
cararacs 3 months ago
Carl Sagan owned creationists!!!
INMATE2468 3 months ago 19
This has been flagged as spam show
@INMATE2468 see Roger Morneau ex Satanist pt 5
Darwin is a religion
IdaSputum 1 month ago
@INMATE2468 I remember back when I was in an Astronomy class in college. The Prof, a Phd in Astronomy, called Sagan a "New Age nut sack".
Postie218 5 days ago
By definition unicorns have horns therefore they exist.
shinokiba 3 months ago
ahahahahhaah AHAHAHAHA ahahahaha these are 10 INTELLIGENT ...answers? My GOD,the world is reall f..... up if nowaday darwinists and atheists calling themselves and these ,,answers,, ..INTELLIGENT...hahaa...lol...-.-,
giska1000 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@giska1000
More intelligent than a lady made from a rib, doncha think?
odinata 3 months ago
Dude I love this guy he proves what idiocy the "believers" have but honestly saying a magic man in the sky made us makes who look stupid?
TheKak300 4 months ago 8
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheKak300 tell me if we as humans are made from something and animals are made from something and this planet is made from something and stars everywhere are made from something where does the cycle start? NOTHING that exist came from thin air so it makes perfect sense to think there had to be a creator. or do you believe gasses and dust just appeared from NOTHING???
rudyyy911 4 weeks ago
@TheKak300 God provides answers on creation. Do you have an answer on how EVERYTHING came into existence?
lady1955 3 weeks ago
@lady1955 Do you?
gleehmee 2 weeks ago
30 creationists disliked this video
Doomphx 4 months ago 3
Yet anoher smug asshole demolished by scientific logic. The tragic part is that smug dude is probably still clinging fiercely to his bible like a security blanket and shouting, "No, no, no I won't believe it, I refuse to believe it, I want my mommy!"
tcal1277 4 months 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 2 the profane masses is another useful idiot 4 Jesuit machinations
Jesuitical; pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuit Order completely altered the education system 2 suit their Evo-Hoax Agenda to discredit the Bible
Papal Rome cant have their Counter Reformation Despotism 2nd Dark Age until Bible is destroyed
SpencerBenedict2nd 4 months ago
Brilliantly put together.
dirtydonki 4 months ago
Creationism is the pinnacle of human stupidity. Religion is poison. It should be a priority of all free humans to fight against superstition.
bary1234 4 months ago 3
The one thing that creationists always avoid raising is that if evolution was proven to be false then it would validate the christian gods existence any more than it would validate the existence of all of those hundreds of other gods throughout history.
If atheists are arrogant then creationists are solipsistic.
If atheists cling to science instead of faith, it is because we are intelligent and mature enough not to need someone watching over us to avoid feeling insecure and lonely.
Grow up.
MegaSolipsist 5 months ago 4
5:55 Get in there Dawkins! You kick ass!!!
Bluevetteboy2012 5 months ago 2
Carl Sagan IS A GOD!!! Well, at least a SCIENTIFIC god. BTW, anyone else ever notice Richard Dawkins looks like Hermione Granger from Harry Potter? I'M SO CONFLICTED NOW!!!
MrWill7980 5 months ago
@MrWill7980 lolololol!
CarlSagan6 5 months ago
@MrWill7980
No, not really. I am incredibly attracted to Hermione Granger, or at least the actress that plays her. I respect Dawkins a LOT, but I wouldn't go that far.
MegaSolipsist 3 months ago
@MegaSolipsist I saw a gif somewhere and it had Hermione morphing into Dawkins, they was in the same pose and it was startling how much they look alike. They could pass as siblings from the pics they used of them.
MrWill7980 3 months ago
@MrWill7980 I probably shouldn't watch that, it might put me off watching the Harry Potter movies in future.
MegaSolipsist 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ALTHOUGH I'M A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN (Baptist), I no longer believe that the Bible teaches eternal torment or suffering. The Bible teaches eternal punishment, but it's not eternal torment. In my popular Internet article, TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE OF HELL EVOLVED FROM GREEK ROOTS, I explain how and why teaching of eternal torment entered early into Christianity and how Scriptures have been misinterpreted and taken out of context to support that teaching. ~Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology)
Mogley52 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ALTHOUGH I'M A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN (Baptist), I no longer believe that the Bible teaches eternal torment or suffering. The Bible teaches eternal punishment, but it's not eternal torment. In my popular Internet article, TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE OF HELL EVOLVED FROM GREEK ROOTS, I explain how and why teaching of eternal torment entered early into Christianity and how Scriptures have been misinterpreted and taken out of context to support that teaching. ~Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology)
Mogley52 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ALTHOUGH I'M A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN (Baptist), I no longer believe that the Bible teaches eternal torment or suffering. The Bible teaches eternal punishment, but it's not eternal torment. In my popular Internet article, TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE OF HELL EVOLVED FROM GREEK ROOTS, I explain how and why teaching of eternal torment entered early into Christianity and how Scriptures have been misinterpreted and taken out of context to support that teaching. ~Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology)
Mogley52 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
SCIENCE SHOWS THAT THE UNIVERSE, because of entropy, could not have sustained itself eternally. Einstein confirmed that space, matter, and time had a beginning! That beginning had to be supernatural because natural laws have no ability to bring the universe into existence from nothing. The supernatural cannot be proved by science but science points to a supernatural intelligence for the origin and order of the universe ~ HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM (Article)
Mogley52 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Only evolution within "kinds" is genetically possible (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). How were species living, reproducing if their reproductive system, vital structures, and organs hadn't evolved yet? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic/biological similarities between species.
Mogley52 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
BLIND WATCHMAKER NO ARGUMENT. Natural selection is no "blind watchmaker" because it can only "select" from traits having survival value. It doesn't produce those traits. It only operates once there is life and reproduction, not before, so it couldn't be involved in life's origins. A partially-evolved cell (an oxymoron) would quickly disintegrate. It couldn't wait ("survive") millions of years for chance to complete it and then make it living! Read: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
DAWKINS, HITCHENS, AND HAWKING REFUSE TO DEBATE with creationists who are SCIENTISTS, such as the scientists at The Institute for Creation (ICR) Research. Dawkins and his friends only debate non-scientist creationists. ICR scientists have written excellent articles on "Vestigial" Structures, Fossils, Genetics, Mutations, "Junk DNA," Natural Selection, Age of The Earth, Emergence of New Species (but not new genes), etc., etc. Just peruse their articles archive.
Mogley52 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
DEBATE IS NOT OVER. In Darwin's time not enough science was known to refute macro-evolution. There was no understanding of genetics. Darwin thought the cell was just a simple glob. No one knew about DNA, RNA, proteins. Modern evolutionists now know, but the theory is entrenched as gospel and a lot of personal motives are at stake as well. Just saying that something evolved doesn't make it so! Schools should present both sides! Read my article WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
Mogley52 6 months ago
@Mogley52 Mogley, the debate is over,creationists have not stopped the work of scientists for a second, the fact that you go around to all these videos and spam the same thing over and over just shows that creationists are reduced to moronic spam and nonsensical ramblings. Your religious beliefs will never again stop scientific progress, society is beyond bending to the will of the church, religion is declining, science just gets stronger and stronger, its fact, arguing against it wont change it
iseezapie 4 months ago
@iseezapie I know, doesn't it just annoy you to death when you find 20 comments from Mogley52 on a video? It's time to report this guy because spamming is a violation of the community guidlines on youtube.
AtheismIsCorrect 4 months ago
@iseezapie I'm a christian. We've worked hard, and we have succeeded in stopping the progress of science. Meanwhile, science always has and always will fail to stop the progress of religion. The debate is over. The score is:
Science and logic: 0
Religion: 100
Science never gets anything done. Religion makes me live longer. :)
anticorncob6 3 months ago
@anticorncob6 I hope you keep this logic next time you fall ill or when you get old...boycott all medication and medical advances...Why are you on a computer?? That was developed by science not god. Either that or you're being sarcastic...which I hope.
cararacs 3 months ago
@cararacs Trolling iseezapie. He's right, the debate is prettymuch over among scientists. Atheism has been shown over and over to be true. The debate among the general public is still in progress, but between scientists and intellectuals the debate is over. Science has an explanation for the universe, I highly doubt God would choose things that science shows can exist without him.
Never again will creationists stop the progress of atheistic or evolutionary science.
anticorncob6 3 months ago
@anticorncob6 lol
Poes' are awesome.
MegaSolipsist 3 months ago
Comment removed
anticorncob6 2 months ago
@iseezapie By the way, I'm interested how you got to the conclusion that creationism has not stopped the progress of science. Remember the dark ages? Religion has held back science for 1,000 years.
anticorncob6 2 months ago
@anticorncob6 Believers in X can *always* point to consequences of X and say "The people who did that weren't really Xians - they only said they were. We're the real Xians".
Happens with christians, members of any political party, socialists, and followers of every religion. Probably including satanists :-)
KapStuf 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
IMAGINE A FISH WITH PART FINS, part feet with the fins evolving (transitioning) into feet. What survival benefit would there be? The fish couldn't use its fins or its feet, and there are no fossils showing such a creature ever existed. They only exist on automobile bumper stickers! There are no true transitional forms, either living or fossilized. Evolutionists realize this fact! Read my Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
Mogley52 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
APES ARE QUITE COMFORTABLE IN HOW THEY WALK, just as humans are quite comfortable in how they walk. Even a slight change in the position of a muscle or bone, for either, would be excruciatingly painful and would not be an advantage for survival. There's no hard evidence that humans evolved from an ape-like creature anymore than there's hard evidence that apes evolved from a four-legged dog-like creature. Read Internet article: MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE.
Mogley52 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ALL REAL EVOLUTION ( i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.) is the expression, over time, of already existing genes. Evolution is possible only if there’s information (genes) directing it. Only variations of already existing genes are possible, which means only limited evolution and adaptations are possible. Nature can only work with the "cards" it has. Nature is not a genetic engineer! It can't invent new genes. That’s evolutionary faith, not science. Read my article, WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
Mogley52 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
GENETIC INFORMATION DOESN'T HAPPEN BY CHANCE, so it's more logical to believe that genetic similarities between all forms of life are due to a common Designer who designed similar functions for similar purposes. It doesn't mean all forms of life are biologically related! "Junk DNA" isn't junk. These non-coding segments of DNA have recently been found to be vital in regulating gene expression. Read: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
Mogley52 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ARE FOSSILS REALLY MILLIONS OF YEARS OLD? Popular Internet article that examines assumptions concerning fossil deposition as well as built-in assumptions involved in modern radiometric dating (not used for dating fossils but other rocks), and arguments from starlight and time. Discusses lack of both transitional forms and lack of sequence of the fossil layers. Discusses mixed species in fossils (i.e. dinosaur, reptile, mammal fossils in the same stratum conveniently ignored by evolutionists).
Mogley52 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
AMINO ACIDS CAN HAPPEN BY CHANCE BUT NOT PROTEINS: Read my popular Internet articles, "How Forensic Science Refutes Atheism," and "Origin of Life Deception by Evolutionists"
Mogley52 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I'VE GIVEN LECTURES defending scientific creationism before science faculty and students at various secular colleges. At the end, I opened up for comments, questions, rebuttals. Very few of the evolutionist science faculty criticized what I had to say, and, when they did, I successfully answered them. They knew enough science to realize that what I was saying was true. Read my Internet article in Pravda: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
Mogley52 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
There's no real violation of church/state separation in teaching the scientific arguments for Intelligent Design alongside of macro-evolutionary theory because no one is being forced to believe in God's existence or any religion. Taxpayers on the both sides of the issue pay for public education. It is only fair that scientific arguments and evidence used by both sides be presented.The issue is important because it affects people's lives, their values, philosophy, and worldview.
Mogley52 6 months ago
Ugh Thunderf00t's voice is literally un-listenable to...
Gravija1980 6 months ago
Humans are not smarter than God, nor His Holy Word.
And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; - Romans 1:28
co2isgoodal 6 months ago
@co2isgoodal You just quoted a passage written by superstitious men from the bronze age, you have not provied anything to the discussion...
QueeqegF 6 months ago
@co2isgoodal I suppose by "His Holy Word" you mean that book written by desert nomads in the bronze age.
KevinReconAlpha 6 months ago
Btw there have been recent experiments (mainly at oxford university) which heavily enforce our current theories about primordial soup.
Lherbistro 6 months ago
I.E. low data profile. (I couldnt watch the whole thing on my phone, it was to slow to load!)
Lherbistro 6 months ago
Uhhg learn how to upload things
Lherbistro 6 months ago
Wow, the comments here really show that a lot of people hate me just for believing in God. I'm a good person, I swear.
MsMydaisy 6 months ago
@MsMydaisy OK, you are a good person, now go get an education!
tammyterry 6 months ago
@tammyterry Just because I believe in different things than you do doesn't mean that I'm not smart or educated.
MsMydaisy 6 months ago
I have just one question for Christian Creationists..... How can you be so fucking stupid?
xNoReligionx 6 months ago
Atheists are the true retards of all time. Of course if there is a God capable of bringing the universe and time and life into existence - He would be impossible to define with our usual ruler and measuring tape approaches.
whiteliketar 6 months ago
@whiteliketar He's just not necessary, and there is no evidence of this God... so lets just skip him and your stupid superstitions!
It always amazes me how Theists can be such Fucktards
xNoReligionx 6 months ago 28
@xNoReligionx - you pretty much describe yourself with those obnoxious terminologies - but then again atheism deadens the brains and worse .....the conscience. matter is eternal clown.
whiteliketar 6 months ago
@whiteliketar Oh I see, Oh great one! In that case can you please tell me... as you are so smart and I am not...
What do you believe (with respect to God or a higher power) and Why?
xNoReligionx 6 months ago
@whiteliketar shows how much you know, energy is eternal because matter is converted.
KyuubiNaruto1337XD 6 months ago
@KyuubiNaruto1337XD any bet you felt profound with that ultra stupid self-contradicting rebuttal. lol
whiteliketar 6 months ago
@whiteliketar contradicting? energy is the last frontier, matter decays into it.
KyuubiNaruto1337XD 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xNoReligionx There is no scientific evidence for chemical chance evolution either. We're stupid because we see that actually creationism is based on science. Evolution cannot explain the first living one cell organism where creationism can. science insists that the first single cell organism must have been created, otherwise it cannot be explained oor duplicated
CodProphett 3 months ago
@xNoReligionx There is no scientific evidence for chemical chance evolution either. We're stupid because we see that actually creationism is based on science. Evolution cannot explain the first living one cell organism where creationism can. science insists that the first single cell organism must have been created, otherwise it cannot be explained oor duplicated. Your smart because you cannot explain it so you''ll exclude a possible theory becase it doesn't align with you religious beleif
CodProphett 3 months ago
@CodProphett You just showed that you dont know anything about evolution.
Sweddude 2 months ago
@xNoReligionx Not only unnecessary and without evidence but, in many ways there is actually evidence against the idea of gods.
Azakhiel 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@whiteliketar Atheists are statistically smarter. Saying "Atheists are the true retards of all time." only shows how much you ignore facts.
AtheismIsCorrect 4 months ago
Question 1: If there is A god, why did he create anything at all?
guillatra 6 months ago
Maybe you should get more updated question instead of ones from the 70's. I have a few questions! How can life come from non living matter. How come scientist can't change the genetic code of a human into a animal dna code. If a cell can't live without oxygen how could it have servived in the dirt. How come scientist can't take non living mater and change it into living mater meaning dirt.
ada2step 6 months ago
@ada2step
All of those either have nothing to do with evolution or are so insipid that they aren't worth addressing.
TheZooCrew 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheZooCrew so you don't have a answer do you! They are what atheist believe
ada2step 6 months ago
@ada2step Ok lets start here, we have evidence of life coming from non-life, google "The Miller Urey experiment". Your second question is implying that humans aren't animals, if you change the DNA of one cell, that won't change anything, in fact that cell might be killed by the rest of your body because it could be claimed as a foreigner. the first bits of cells and life were in an aquatic environment, not on land. and your last question is just poor use of english, I can't understand it.
KyuubiNaruto1337XD 6 months ago
@KyuubiNaruto1337XD So they created a human from dirt I don't think so! Humans can drown so I don't believe that theory. sorry it was late at night and I do not have word on my computer. I was trying to say that to prove that life just came from dirt or water what ever you believe how come they can't duplicate it
ada2step 6 months ago
@ada2step I didn't say that, no one has ever ever created a human, I said they've created life from non life.
can't tell if ur a troll or just plain stupid, sorry to say.
KyuubiNaruto1337XD 6 months ago
@KyuubiNaruto1337XD There has been a recent wave of skepticism concerning Miller's experiment because it is now believed that the early earth's atmosphere did not contain predominantly reductant molecules. Another objection is that this experiment required a tremendous amount of energy. While it is believed lightning storms were extremely common on the primitive Earth, they were not continuous
ada2step 6 months ago
@ada2step >recent? source?
Which is why they did the experiment a SECOND time and they got EVEN BETTER RESULTS!!! they got Adedine, RNA and amino acids, as opposed to the regular amino acids they got before.
KyuubiNaruto1337XD 6 months ago
@KyuubiNaruto1337XD This situation completely negates Miller’s experiment, in which oxygen was completely neglected. If oxygen had been used in the experiment, methane would have decomposed into carbon dioxide and water, and ammonia into nitrogen and water. On the other hand, in an environment where there was no oxygen, there would be no ozone layer either; therefore, the amino acids would have immediately been destroyed,
ada2step 6 months ago
@ada2step since they would have been exposed to the most intense ultraviolet rays without the protection of the ozone layer
ada2step 6 months ago
@kyuubinaruto since they would have been exposed to the most intense ultraviolet rays without the protection of the ozone layer
ada2step 6 months ago
@ada2step no, you're forgetting that this experiment was done in an aqueous environment, life didn't get into the air for millions of years, just look at some places today that could feed such a thing as abiogenesis, OK how about hawaii's hot spot under the ocean, its got plenty of heat, sulfates, and other metals found to form this.
Also Oxygen can form other ways that just THIS chemical reaction you're referring to right? not all amino acids survive, granted.
KyuubiNaruto1337XD 6 months ago
This is how it happened, at the very beginning:
In the beginning there was void. However, where there is nothing, there is always a potential for their to be something.
And, because potential is always realized in the absence of an inhibitor, everything came to be. And i mean EVERYTHING. Infinite potential creates infinite realization in the absence of inhibition.
This is my own personal theory. It is simple, and it works with M-theory.
However, going from nothing to a god is not likely.
looncraz 6 months ago
Well they are not "stupid" just not very smart
pochopaz7381 7 months ago
The one thing creationists consistently fail to understand, among so many, is the amount of time regarding the early development of DNA/RNA. They, as well as most people, cannot fathom how long 4 billion years actually is.
pillowbugg 7 months ago
religious people are just in denial, they think death and such is much more comfortable if there is a god(s). Add indoctrination and propaganda from parents and churches, and we know why future generations listen to this crap.
magnus3318 7 months ago
Why is this dipshit asking us? CAN YOU PICK UP A FUCKING BOOK AND READ IT, BESIDES THE FUCKING BIBLE? GUESS NOT!
JMKL88 7 months ago 23
If there was nothing there would be no one to ask those questions
visavillem 7 months ago
This vid is crap.
dinopad10 7 months ago
Love the Potholer54 segment, showing that life emerged from clay. If the Bible could be handled metaphorically, as it should be, much wisdom could be gleaned from it. Taken literally, it just makes people stupid.
alachabre 7 months ago
@alachabre Why would God need to speak in metaphors? And also why would the Bible be the right book? There is many others, you know. Many consider the argument that the Bible is written in metaphors a cop-out.
TTDMFfreaknew 7 months ago
@TTDMFfreaknew Why would God speak in metaphors? Ask Jesus. He might tell you a story about seeds sown on rocks and sand, or making poor use of one's assets being akin to not living a proper life, or prodigal daughters. He may even destroy a fig tree to show how bearing bad fruit is comparable to living a sinful life, or tell you not to cast pearls before swine. Yeah, ask Jesus about metaphors.
alachabre 7 months ago
Opening answer with Carl Sagan = INSTANT WIN. As soon as I saw his face, I was just like *Oh man, pwn.*
DaggVids 7 months ago
Ah yes, creationism, the ultimate form of stupid
TheGuest5976 7 months ago
Hey guys, God has no begining or end. "How is it that God has no begining? That's stupid." Well, before he created anything, there was no space. Anyone familiar to this knows that if there is no space, there is no time. Therefore: no time = no begining
:)
chocolatehater001 7 months ago
@chocolatehater001 just shut the fuck up lol
r4v3nh34rt 7 months ago
@r4v3nh34rt :
why? he didn't offend anyone. and i think the same, if god has no beggining or end then nothing should exist
CryoKatana97 7 months ago
@r4v3nh34rt LOOOL I have nothing against athiest but I think it's funny when they get mad at others for not believing what they believe. I postes that comment expecting a rough answer
chocolatehater001 7 months ago
@chocolatehater001 Expect what you want lmao, I find you pathetic that's all. And the saying that "you expected a rough answer" doesn't make you any bigger nor pro.
r4v3nh34rt 6 months ago
whats so awesome about Richard Dawkins wing example SOOO many flying animals learn to fly from falling from branch to branch
Hereticofreason 7 months ago
THis is all guess work and cant be reprduced in the lab and is not science.
j919or 7 months ago
The universe cannot have always existed...2nd law of thermodynamics
j919or 7 months ago
Why is it always this or that. :(
I agree 100 percent with evolution .. . and i have faith in a God. . . does that make me odd?
MichaelVarcade 8 months ago
@MichaelVarcade No - it's when you cannot keep the two separate there's a problem.
bit4man 8 months ago
@MichaelVarcade Yes bc u share faith in God with faith in man, ie. science, for science is but a tool in the hands of evil MEN!
j919or 7 months ago
The real trouble with creationists is not that they are delusional. Rather, they feel that they should be in charge of my life and tell me how to live because of their delusion. I do not tell them they have to do things, but they tell me I can't eat bacon and must go to church on Sundays and can't have sex outside of marriage and must give them 10% of my wage because they have a delusion.
spacecadet35 8 months ago
"Same time" equals the span of millions of years. It's just very 'quick' in regards to geological dating. The Cambrian Explosion happened over many thousands of years.
MonicaKn17 8 months ago
@KnowImillian If it doesn't necessitate evil, it doesn't necessitate good. There's your balance.
HimesInu 8 months ago
@KnowImillian I wasn't saying for us the human experience is a joke. I'm merely stating that it could be for a higher intelligence. And it doesn't necessitate evil.
HimesInu 8 months ago
@KnowImillian I swear I will laugh if it comes out that whoever "God" may be that he/she/it was playing a joke or has a running bet with something on us.
HimesInu 8 months ago
@KnowImillian I know people use science to lie and gain power, as people have used religion to do the same thing. And I believe their are higher beings, I just never argue the same side over and over again. I will play devil's advocate. Though I tend to believe that some of the "Gods" of the past, and quite possibly the "God" of Christianity, Islam, and Judaism could have been aliens that used primitive man's ignorance, relative, against them and called themselves "Gods." And I wasn't angry.
HimesInu 8 months ago
@HimesInu that's exactly what sometimes I think, been watching too much sci-fi i admit
r4v3nh34rt 7 months ago
@r4v3nh34rt I read too much of it.
HimesInu 7 months ago
@KnowImillian I never said knowledge started in Europe. Nor did I say the Dark Ages was a world wide thing. And if you actually read what happened in Europe and to scientists during the Dark Ages, you would actually know why I say Christianity inhibited science. I never stated religion inhibits science in general. Like you said, some where in a Golden Age. I'm saying people have used religion to inhibit science.
HimesInu 8 months ago
@KnowImillian No, we don't refuse to admit they built it, we are unable to explain how they did it without help. And I don't care how much the man ruling today knows. I'm going on with how much science has answered. When I say religion inhibits science I use the Dark Ages as evidence. And the ancient religions didn't inhibit science like Christianity has. But I don't refute that humans as a species is removed from nature.
HimesInu 8 months ago
@KnowImillian You're talking the pyramids and the Nazca lines in your first point. I'm going to take the Ancient Alien theory with that one. It would make sense, both in how they built the pyramids and Nazca Lines and why they believed in "Gods."
I'm not saying all societies, ancient, were without science, that's complete bull. I'm saying that they didn't know as much as we do.
The reason their societies lasted so long is because their religions didn't inhibit science.
HimesInu 8 months ago
@KnowImillian The reason they believed in higher beings was because they couldn't answer the question of why the sun rose, or why the moon rose, or why anything happened. They created these stories to explain nature and for entertainment and education. Had they known what caused the sun to rise or lightning and thunder, they would have never created their gods and the stories that ensued.
HimesInu 8 months ago
if i was the creationist i wouldv started with the banana
raidersSolja 8 months ago
Creationist are such stupid fucking idiots
TheKipKadillac 8 months ago 20
@KnowImillian
That means nothing. Mankind didn't have as sophisticated technology as we did even though they did amazingly well for what they had. We'd actually be even better if we are today if not for the fundamentalist nutjobs from the dark ages. We only just got set back on the right track and now the maniacs wanna pull us back into the darkness.
NUTCASE71733 8 months ago
@KnowImillian
Asking that would be saying someone intelligently made our eyes to form cataracts or to give us a useless organ which can possibly kill us if it's damaged (the appendix). Evolution is a unguided process, done through natural selecton, mutations, and vast amounts of time.
NUTCASE71733 8 months ago
You didn't answer the questions at all; you just stole a bunch of other stuff created by other people.
Loser.
ProtestantsRUs 8 months ago
@ProtestantsRUs
Where do you think anyone gets answers to these shitty excuses of questions anyway? From peopel who know at least some of what the fuck isbeing asked. IDIOT.
NUTCASE71733 8 months ago
I'm not sure I understand the "Walla" part... Could someone explain it to me?
JimThinks 8 months ago
Hell is the single biggest empty threat ever invented! -Stupid
Lennon4ever1 9 months ago 5
God doesn't need a creator because theists say so.
JJPHILLYLG 9 months ago
@JJPHILLYLG - I quite like that one. Very curt.
TheSpankymonkey 9 months ago
that is what I beleive the universe has always been here.
thesageofohio 9 months ago
Ladies and Gentlemen, Mr Richard Dawkins (applause)
LegionIscariot 10 months ago
Hi. This is a good video, although I don't think it a dresses God.
Peace. chuck
chumola9 10 months ago
there are no stupid questions, only stupid creationists
managarm1349 10 months ago 64
@managarm1349 Brilliant!
TheKipKadillac 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@managarm1349 PhD level scientists around the world reject evolution, So only atheists can be s