Can anybody tell me what show this is? Using the clip in a documentary. I've credited CNN obviously but knowing the exact name of the show would be a huge help. Thanks.
Liked for having a less offensive title than the other video of the same story. The religious aren't necessarily stupid and insulting them isn't the way to win them over to reason.
Why is everyone so surprised. Why do you think we are atheists? Because we educated ourselves. Any educated person can clearly see that religion is a farce..
to quote penn of penn and teller "the fastest way to become an atheist is to read the bible or the koran cover to cover" why because the more people learn about the contridictory ludicris statements in the bible or the koran the more they realize that religion in any context doesnt make any sense....therefore leading them to be an atheist....its as simple as that
@Xlivesforever I do not believe in the bible due to the many contradictions that you mentioned, yet I still find Atheism as an arrogant and distasteful disposition: religion is not just about deities and Gods, religion can be an ideology that makes it illegal for its citizens to criticize it, therefore I fail to see why Atheism is this reasonable disposition when it does not even manages to criticize religion from an objective stand point.
@Xlivesforever (cont) I mean, I do think that people who believe in deities are full of shit, and that makes me reject the religions that revolve around Gods, but having said that, I think it is hypocritical to reject the existence of deities and Gods, because when you do that, you are rejecting the religions that revolve around imaginary friends, but any other religion that doesn't revolve around deities will pass under your radar, and I just find that religious in its own light.
@Xlivesforever (cont) Personally, I am against all religions, the religions that revolve around deities and the religions that revolve around patents, I am against religion in general, not just deities and Gods. I think science is the only objective constitution that can protect a constitution from the government, and I do not think that Atheism is a disposition that protects the human rights of people, Atheism is essentially a party that can be used for religious purposes.
@leadleader2023 well that being said how can you say so much on a group of people that only really have one thing in common witch is to simply not beleive in god....after that point we as a people have to make choices on whats best for people atheism is not a religion therefor it cant be used for religious purposes its simply the answer to a claim on god
is there one (the theist asks)
No (says the atheist)
nothing more or less complicated then that after thats said however
@leadleader2023 (cont) we as atheists still have rights same as everyone else and if a belief in god discriminates atheists because of the difference of opinion your damned right were gonna speak up....if it doesnt theres no problem you can believe whatever you chose a persons right to swing there arm ends at the other persons nose
@leadleader2023 (cont) we as atheists still have rights same as everyone else and if a belief in god discriminates atheists because of the difference of opinion your damned right were gonna speak up....if it doesnt theres no problem you can believe whatever you chose a persons right to swing there arm ends at the other persons nose
@leadleader2023 (cont) we as atheists still have rights same as everyone else and if a belief in god discriminates atheists because of the difference of opinion your damned right were gonna speak up....if it doesnt theres no problem you can believe whatever you chose a persons right to swing there arm ends at the other persons nose
@leadleader2023 (cont) we as atheists still have rights same as everyone else and if a belief in god discriminates atheists because of the difference of opinion your damned right were gonna speak up....if it doesnt theres no problem you can believe whatever you chose a persons right to swing there arm ends at the other persons nose
@leadleader2023 (cont) we as atheists still have rights same as everyone else and if a belief in god discriminates atheists because of the difference of opinion your damned right were gonna speak up....if it doesnt theres no problem you can believe whatever you chose a persons right to swing there arm ends at the other persons nose
@leadleader2023 (cont) we as atheists still have rights same as everyone else and if a belief in god discriminates atheists because of the difference of opinion your damned right were gonna speak up....if it doesnt theres no problem you can believe whatever you chose a persons right to swing there arm ends at the other persons nose
@leadleader2023 (cont) we as atheists still have rights same as everyone else and if a belief in god discriminates atheists because of the difference of opinion your fuckin right were gonna speak up. if it doesnt theres no problem you can believe whatever you chose a persons right to swing there arm ends at the other persons nose
@leadleader2023 (cont) we as atheists still have rights same as everyone else and if a belief in god discriminates atheists because of the difference of opinion your darned right were gonna speak up. if it doesnt theres no problem you can believe whatever you chose a persons right to swing there arm ends at the other persons nose
@leadleader2023 we as atheists still have rights same as everyone else and if a belief in god discriminates atheists because of the difference of opinion your darned right were gonna speak up. if it doesnt theres no problem you can believe whatever you chose a persons right to swing there arm ends at the other persons nose
@nublered they use the common meaning for agnostic, they dont know that agnostic means not to know if there is or there is not a god, im a gnostic atheist, i know that there is no god and i dont believe in one
@ComAntNeLib are you kidding me? a christian says: the earth looks like it was created, therefore there is a creator, therefore god exists. that is circular logic is it not? yes it is. what you just said was equally circular logic. fantasy is not real, god is fantasy, therefore god doesn't exist. you didn't provide any evidence. the best argument to use as a gnostic atheist would be that you don't have to provide evidence but to use circular logic is just revolting.
@slytherinspy1960 circular logic is where the conclusion leads to the conclusion. me saying fantasy is not real, god is fantasy, therefore god doesnt exist; isnt circular logic
because im not saying god doesnt exist therefore god doesnt exist
@ComAntNeLib your premise was that god doesn't exist because it is fantasy. you didn't explain WHY it is fantasy. that is circular logic. fantasy isn't real, god is fantasy, god isn't real. your conclusion is the same as your premise. that is circular logic.
3 therfore cats arent animals, although it is false it is not circular reasoning, and the god silogism i made isnt false and is not circular reasoning
go learn logic to explain why god is fantasy i would need another silogism that goes like this. characters made up by humans are fantasy, god is a character made up by humans, therefore god is fantasy
@ComAntNeLib ok so i used circular reasoning wrong. doesn't change the fact that your logic was faulty even though you came with the right conclusion.
@ComAntNeLib did you read my comment? i said i agree with your conclusion. i'm saying you did not say the REASON WHY you god is fantasy. that is all i said. that how you got to that conclusion was wrong not the conclusion itself.
@ComAntNeLib dude it wouldnt be your job to prove me wrong if i said i believe the lockness monster exists now would it why ask the same of an atheist your making the claim that god exists its not our job to prove that he doesnt is your job as the claimer to prove that he does
@Xlivesforever im not proving that god doesnt exist. im proving that god is the fantasy it is, i can prove that the lake ness monster is fantasy. he thing is because those things are fantasy they are not real.
@TheJDorian Sure, atheists are more intelligent, but 2-4 IQ points really aren't that much of an improvement. Apart from religion, there are other factors that contribute to dampening the intellect.
"Atheists ang agnostics aren't particularly religious" Loved that part.
No one should be suprised. Most atheists or agnostics are not religious because they thought about and studied religion and realized it was all BS.
Religion doesn't preach knowledge. In fact it is not welcome as knowledge and evidence remove the need of faith, the ultimate fake virtue upon which all religions are based.
The three questions were not relevant questions about religion. They were about the history of judaism, geography and judicial tradition. Relevant questions about religion would have been about the ten commandments, the books in the bible, the number of genocides ordered by god in the old testament.
@trakkaton i'm not trolling you here, but how are questions about the history of judaism not relevant? the history of judaism is intimately tied up with the development of judaism and christianity as cultural entities. i appreciate the suggestions for relevant questions though...so many youtubers just bitch about the negative without putting out ideas of their own.
@trakkaton well, i'm sorry your mind is too stunted to notice the intertwining of various disciplines. if i had known that you were a simpleton, i wouldn't have bothered asking a question. i even tried to be positive with you about asking, and you reply with an asinine comment. i'm guessing you're either a child or you just weren't breastfed long enough in your infancy.
I think it has something to do with your general tendency to be either naive or skeptic.
On the one side, there are the people who don't like to think independently, who don't have a strong desire to gain knowledge, and who just stick to the religion they've been raised with because that is what seems "right" to them.
On the other side, there are the skeptics and scientists who crave to learn new things and to think on a larger scale, and they'll obviously know a lot more about religions, too.
If this is the same study I'm thinking of, then yes atheists and agnostics did better overall, but I think believers did better when it came to questions about their specific religion.
I'm an Atheist and I'm sorry but I fail to see the relevance of these quiz test questions to determining how well a particular Christian or Muslim knows their own brand of religious texts. I only got 1 out of those 3 questions correctly, the one about Indonesia. Why did I get that one? Because I'm an ex-Muslim! How do you say a Christian doesn't know his Bible well because he doesn't realize that most Indonesians are Muslims? Nonsense.
@Mrmoc7 its not that the study is nonsense, its just misleading. Athiest on average have higher IQs, its not that they know more about religion, they just know more period. And the average US citizen has the IQ of 100. Not all that well education. The study just makes connections that are not needed. The average white guy knows more than the average black guy- so of course white protestants > black ones on the quiz by 10 points. Hispanics did the worst.
I got into an argument with my ex over religion. She goes to church every Sundays and "loves" Jesus but when I asked her if she has READ the bible on her own, the simple answer was no. Then I asked, if you love your God/Jesus so much and believe He created us then why don't you read the bible so she'd know more about her loving God?
In the ebd I told her NOT to read the bible otherwise she too will become an Atheist like me... ^.^
if religous people actually stood back and read their "holy books", the shear ridiculous nature of religion might actually get through to them instead of them constantly accepting it as fact because their told to do so from a young age
Not at all a surprise, faith by definition consists of belief INDEPENDENT of evidence & critical examination, why would the religious need to know about the tenants of their own religion when they've already adopted it as automatic truth? Besides... anyone ever read the bible? It could make the most exciting topics boring as hell.
Atheism merely requires a modest level of intellect and cognitive skill; as opposed to being a Theist, which only requires having an anus to stick ones head into. This correlation explains the overwhelming number of Theists.
What atheist know about the bible is bullshit; they do all their "learning" from liberal scholars and whatever "Zeitgiest" has to say. Im in no way impressed with the results of this poll.
Well, I sure some doubts have been raised in the parts that talk about how god likes the smell of burning animal flesh. or am i wrong? are you 100% that what's in that book is factual?
Im not surprised about that. Last month I thaught my mother who belived that human reincarnate over and over until they become purified that this isn't a christian belief but actually a buddist one. She has never read the bible...
Atheists did better on the test because they are more intelligent not because they like to debate. If they are debating, aren't they debating religous people?? Who's this idiot think he is anyway??!
@anubis1974 I agree with you that atheists tend to be more intelligent, there is also some research about the relation between IQ and religiosity that indicated this. I think this guy is just trying to be politically correct by not calling a group of people dumb on national TV.
@RepentAmerica454 You wanna talk about moral? Religious people crash planes into buildings, circumcise baby boys and young girls, stone woman for driving a car, priests raping and groping boys and girls. There is no such thing as gay perversions. And who are you to decide for other people if they want to keep their baby or not?
People are different, if you can't wrap your head around this, its your problem!
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 could not have sustained itself eternally because of entropy (even in an open system). 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)
EINSTEIN CONFIRMED that space and time are just as physical as matter. That's why space and time can be altered by gravity, and space produces particles. Einstein's equations show that the universe couldn’t be eternal. It had a beginning. Einstein believed, because of science, in the existence of God behind the origin and order of the universe. He didn't believe in a personal God like Christians do, but he did believe science pointed to the existence of an all powerful and intelligent Creator
THE SCIENTIFIC CASE AGAINST ATHEISM: Please read this Internet article of mine published in Russia's English Pravda. It will be a real eye-opener for all who think belief in a Creator is merely subjective blind faith. Also read my article, LIFE ON MARS NO SURPRISE (In the Earth's past there was powerful volcanic activity which spewed life-containing dirt and rocks (meteors) into outer space. Mars may literally have millions of tons of Earth soil)
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 did species survive if their vital structures, organs, reproductive systems were still evolving? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic and biological similarities between species.
DAWKINS, HITCHENS, AND HAWKING REFUSE TO DEBATE with creationists who are SCIENTISTS, such as the scientists at The Institute for Creation Research. Dawkins and his friends only debate non-scientist creationists. Read articles by scientists supporting creation at The Institute for Creation Research site. Read analysis from creation scientists about the latest news on fossils, genetics, astronomy, etc. that you won't read in the main stream media. Visit the Institute for Creation Research site.
EXPLAINING HOW AN AIRPLANE WORKS doesn't mean no one made the airplane. Explaining how life and the universe work don’t mean there was no Maker behind them. Natural laws explain how the order in the universe works, but mere undirected natural laws can't explain the origin of that order. Once you have a complete and living cell, the genetic code/mechanisms exist to direct the formation of more cells, but how did the cell originate when no directing code or mechanisms existed in nature?
WHAT IS SCIENCE? Science is knowledge based on observation. No one observed the universe coming by chance or by design, by creation or by macro-evolution. These are positions of faith. The issue is which faith science supports. Natural laws explain how an airplane or a cell works, but undirected natural laws cannot bring about either. Once there's a complete cell, the code/mechanisms exist to direct the formation of more cells, but how did the cell originate when there was no directing code.
SCIENTISTS HAVE NEVER CREATED LIFE. And, even if they do it won't be by chance but by intelligent design. By genetically engineering already existing forms of life, scientists have produced new forms of life, but they did not produce these new life forms from non-living matter. Even in synthetic life, scientists design and build DNA from scratch, through intelligent design, and then insert their man-made DNA into an already living cell. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
THE ODDS of the sequence of molecules in a cell coming together by chance are similar to the odds of magnetic letters randomly bonding together in a sequence to form all the words and sentences in a dictionary. Without the right sequence, a cell's molecules won't work. Amino acids can come by chance but not proteins. Without DNA there can be no proteins and vice versa. Gradually won't do. It's all at once or not at all for a cell's survival. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
NATURAL SELECTION DOESN'T PRODUCE ANYTHING. It can only "select" from what is produced that has survival value. If a variation occurs that helps a species survive, that survival is called being "selected." That's all it is. There's no conscious selection by nature. It's a passive process. Natural selection is a figure of speech. The term itself is a tautology. Natural selection only operates once there is life and reproduction, not before. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM.
NATURAL SELECTION IS NO BLIND WATCHMAKER because it can only "select," not produce or arrange. If a variation survives, that's called being "selected." Natural selection operates only once there is life and reproduction, not before, so it couldn't have been 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 alive! Read: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
ARE FOSSILS REALLY MILLIONS OF YEARS OLD? Popular Internet article 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 true transitional forms in the fossil record and lack of "age" sequence of the fossil layers. Discussion of mixed species (i.e. dinosaur, reptile, mammal fossils in the same stratum).
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 ape-like creatures anymore than there's hard evidence that apes evolved from four-legged-pawed dog-like creatures. Read Internet article: MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE.
GENETIC INFORMATION CANNOT 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! Also, "Junk DNA" isn't junk. These non-coding segments of DNA have recently been found to be vital in regulating gene expression. Read my popular Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST prevents macro-evolution. Natural selection wouldn't preserve the evolution of new traits because they wouldn't have any survival value. A partially-evolved hand evolving from a previous trait, partially-evolved tissues, organs, biological structures would make a species unfit for survival. There are no fossils of partially-evolved species. All species of plants and animals in the fossil record are complete and fully-formed. They came into existence as complete!
NEW SPECIES: Although new species have come into existence, they don't carry any new genes. They've become new species only because they can't be crossed back with the original parent stock for various biological reasons. A biological "kind" allows for new species but not new genes. Nature has no ability to invent new genes for new traits. Only limited variations and adaptations are possible in nature, and all strictly within a biological "kind" (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.).
ALL REAL EVOLUTION ( i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.) in nature 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 has no ability to invent new genes via random mutations caused by random environmental forces. That’s evolutionary faith, not science. Read my article, WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
"JUNK DNA" ISN'T JUNK: Recent research shows that these segments of DNA are vital in regulating gene expression (when, where, and how genes are expressed). There's no room for random mutations to operate safely. Random mutations, from radiation, are destructive. Even for every good one there would be hundreds of harmful ones with the net effect, over time, causing harm and even extinction, not upward evolution. Genetic similarities are better explained due to a common design for common purposes.
DO EYES CARRY SCARS OF EVOLUTION? Read this fantastic Internet article by biologist and creationist Brian Thomas. Thomas refutes every argument of a "flawed" design for the eye, and explains how and why the so-called flaw is actually the best thing for the eye. Read the article! It's amazing what facts evolutionists will ignore. Numerous times evolutionists have been proven wrong about their interpretation of a structure as being flawed or useless
DISORDER IN THE UNIVERSE is no argument against God's existence. The disorder is because of chance and entropy, but the order can only be rationally explained due to design. If I discovered a broken watch on the ground, the disorder is no evidence that there wasn't a designer behind the watch. Please read my Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
BURDEN OF PROOF: Anyone who claims the level of complexity and order in life and the universe happened by chance has the burden of proof. Many atheists think they have no burden of proof because they’re not claiming the existence of something. That is not true. Atheists are claiming something. They are claiming that we are here by chance and atheists expect for everyone to accept that claim on faith because they certainly can’t prove it. Read: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
I loved it when the second guy argues that atheists spend a lot of time arguing with religious people, so that is why they know so much. Did he ever consider that, for many people, knowing so much can CAUSE the atheism?
hmnn, Judaism, most indonesians would consider themselves muslim(Islamic) and reading from the Bible as lit, yeah, as fact, as history, as religion? nah!!!!
Well, of course. Believers don't want to know what's in their holy books, because they don't want to have to try to defend the really stupid and/or violent parts, which make up most of them. Most believers are also relatively simple people who have neither the education nor the motivation to read and understand their holy book. Obviously.
it's because in order to live amongst the theists, who are prominent and run the state/how we live, u need to know where theyre coming from. you need to understand the fools and have a defense. cause, like the guys below said, the more you read into the texts, the more obvious and horrendously offensive you realize they are. An enormous shitload of misogyny. Endless crude hints at slavery, even its management! Praises to war, killing infidels. the list goes on. and lord child, incest & pedos.
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important differences between heterosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption and homosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption. Even non-religious people know this.
Homosexual activists, with support from the media, have succeeded at framing themselves as noble victims; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
The more you study your religion, the more absurd and insulting it becomes. I don't think atheists know more. I believe that the more you know, the more likely you are to become atheist.
@jpmouri actually athiest are correalted with higher IQs. they do generally know more. Its not that one causes the other. Liberatarism is correalted with higher education though.
why does that last question matter?----can it be used as literature?---well wtf do you think it is? a better question is if it can be used for scientific or historical verification---which it CANT
I am an atheist because I'm very well informed in regards to religion(s).
I'm very well informed in regards to religion(s) because I researched it extensively. However, one can loose their religion in a single day online, all they have to do is cross reference various information given as fact by their religion to see where it has been definitively proven false.
I read the Bible about eight times in my 30's and some books many more times. In my 50's I Googled the word "god" and became an Atheist in about three months. Ha.
This is the biggest "Crock-A-Shit" I have ever seen, these guys are doing all they can to protect their Bullshit. The biggest reason Atheism is growing is because people are starting to learn how bad religion really is.
It's quite obvious, really. Atheists are atheists because they have been thinking hard about religion and have come to the conclusion that it doesn't make any sense. Believers just go along with what some authority have told them.
They claim that atheists are a very small group.. I am in my 60's and I know only a hand full of people that actually believe in God. I think that atheists are a much larger group that lacks the courage to stand up and be counted
This shows how ignorant u are just because they are siding with atheists u say they are having a "civilized adult conversation" just shows how funny people get these days..
unlike many religious people (you know, like many Creationist) most atheist are not ignorant in what they are trying to refute (ie ancient religious text) whereas many religious people are usually completely ignorant
What a load of bull. Atheist and agnostics for the most part picked up their knowledge not by debating christians but because of their religious upbringing. It's just that they are the more intelligent and clever ones that understood what religion really is truely is: a man made fenomenon that helps explain away the unexplainable and will keep the flock ignorant and obedient.
One would think that an event of this perceived magnitude, the creator of the Universe who will determine the fate of It's "subjects" and consign them either to eternal pain and damnation or bliss, after they die (?), would leave evidence that is a bit more concise versus vague, conflicting manuscripts plagiarized from competing dogmas.
It's amazing how many Christians know nothing of the history of Christianity, which, in a nutshell, is based on an hallucination Saul of Tarsus, later calling himself Paul, had allegedly on the road to Damascus. Forty years later, the fab four, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, started writing what we now call the gospels, full of contrast and contradiction and much "hero" embellishments that were coincidentally similar, to nearly identical, to other hero gods of the time.
This country is a nation of believers only when it is convenient for them; however, when it is time to cross the road, those "believers" tend to look both ways.
@WorldBibleUnion454 Lol! I'll be surprised if very many Christians are able to answer all five!
In any case, why not create a more expanded online test for everyone to take, including atheists. We can even keep the religious affiliation stats categorized just like on this other test.
so when are you guys in america mainstream media really going to take up the marxism paradigm.. i give u one.. why is people so uninformed? what is the media presenting ( in this case debating why people are dumb, hmm whats media part in it) beliving that either religious belive makes one smart is really unintelligent. why is america school so poor in practising the pupiöls?
@hansson2000 The world is remarkably consistent when seen though those glasses. Capitalist econ and social science has shabby, inconsistent explanations for phenomena and exactly ZERO predictive ability. Have you seen this? /watch?v=qOP2V_np2c0
Skin diseases can heal on their own. I've got psoriasis -- it comes and goes. Believe it or not, the best thing for it is sunlight (or a tanning bed). My brother has a much worse case of it -- he has to take immunosuppressives. Then again, his lifestyle is much more stressful than mine.
Those are softball questions. Maimonides was Jewish. There are a lot of Muslims in Indonesia, and the Bible can be read as literature in the classroom.
Not that any of these things have anything at all to do with any particular religious doctrine. They're simply trivia.
Faith on faith? WTF! If you have Faith you do not need anything else you do not need to prove anything or question anything otherwise is not faith what a fucking redundant and dumb question especially for a journalist.
Do you know that your reactions are predicted in the Bible?In the end times there will be scoffers and mockers of God. They will profess themselves wise,only to remain fools and the fool says in their heart there is no God. Doesen't that sound like today?Do you REALLY think you are no more than just an educated monkey? Or are we wonderfully and fearfully created by a powerful sentient being? Could it be that by saying no to him,you are saying YES to satan?No Hell? Are you sure? May God Bless.
@roddy35wv wow, a book with outlandish stories predicted that people wouldn't buy it? You don't say. Now go on and cure leprosy with bird blood as the bible says (exodus 14:6). Oh and you should probably go off and kill people that work on Sunday (exodus 35:2)...again as the bible commands. Oh and kill witches too (exodus 22:18). Or better yet, go ahead and and be a good christian; drink poison and handle snakes to prove you are a true disciple of jesus (Mark 16:18).
Can anybody tell me what show this is? Using the clip in a documentary. I've credited CNN obviously but knowing the exact name of the show would be a huge help. Thanks.
LARRYLONGSTRETH 4 days ago
Liked for having a less offensive title than the other video of the same story. The religious aren't necessarily stupid and insulting them isn't the way to win them over to reason.
MrGoldenChocobo 2 weeks ago
Why is everyone so surprised. Why do you think we are atheists? Because we educated ourselves. Any educated person can clearly see that religion is a farce..
awAdmin 3 weeks ago 4
I am atheist and i got all of the questions right
RedJoker9000 1 month ago
to quote penn of penn and teller "the fastest way to become an atheist is to read the bible or the koran cover to cover" why because the more people learn about the contridictory ludicris statements in the bible or the koran the more they realize that religion in any context doesnt make any sense....therefore leading them to be an atheist....its as simple as that
Xlivesforever 1 month ago
@Xlivesforever I do not believe in the bible due to the many contradictions that you mentioned, yet I still find Atheism as an arrogant and distasteful disposition: religion is not just about deities and Gods, religion can be an ideology that makes it illegal for its citizens to criticize it, therefore I fail to see why Atheism is this reasonable disposition when it does not even manages to criticize religion from an objective stand point.
leadleader2023 1 month ago
@Xlivesforever (cont) I mean, I do think that people who believe in deities are full of shit, and that makes me reject the religions that revolve around Gods, but having said that, I think it is hypocritical to reject the existence of deities and Gods, because when you do that, you are rejecting the religions that revolve around imaginary friends, but any other religion that doesn't revolve around deities will pass under your radar, and I just find that religious in its own light.
leadleader2023 1 month ago
@Xlivesforever (cont) Personally, I am against all religions, the religions that revolve around deities and the religions that revolve around patents, I am against religion in general, not just deities and Gods. I think science is the only objective constitution that can protect a constitution from the government, and I do not think that Atheism is a disposition that protects the human rights of people, Atheism is essentially a party that can be used for religious purposes.
leadleader2023 1 month ago
@leadleader2023 well that being said how can you say so much on a group of people that only really have one thing in common witch is to simply not beleive in god....after that point we as a people have to make choices on whats best for people atheism is not a religion therefor it cant be used for religious purposes its simply the answer to a claim on god
is there one (the theist asks)
No (says the atheist)
nothing more or less complicated then that after thats said however
Xlivesforever 3 weeks ago
@leadleader2023 (cont) we as atheists still have rights same as everyone else and if a belief in god discriminates atheists because of the difference of opinion your damned right were gonna speak up....if it doesnt theres no problem you can believe whatever you chose a persons right to swing there arm ends at the other persons nose
Xlivesforever 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@leadleader2023 (cont) we as atheists still have rights same as everyone else and if a belief in god discriminates atheists because of the difference of opinion your damned right were gonna speak up....if it doesnt theres no problem you can believe whatever you chose a persons right to swing there arm ends at the other persons nose
Xlivesforever 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@leadleader2023 (cont) we as atheists still have rights same as everyone else and if a belief in god discriminates atheists because of the difference of opinion your damned right were gonna speak up....if it doesnt theres no problem you can believe whatever you chose a persons right to swing there arm ends at the other persons nose
Xlivesforever 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@leadleader2023 (cont) we as atheists still have rights same as everyone else and if a belief in god discriminates atheists because of the difference of opinion your damned right were gonna speak up....if it doesnt theres no problem you can believe whatever you chose a persons right to swing there arm ends at the other persons nose
Xlivesforever 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@leadleader2023 (cont) we as atheists still have rights same as everyone else and if a belief in god discriminates atheists because of the difference of opinion your damned right were gonna speak up....if it doesnt theres no problem you can believe whatever you chose a persons right to swing there arm ends at the other persons nose
Xlivesforever 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@leadleader2023 (cont) we as atheists still have rights same as everyone else and if a belief in god discriminates atheists because of the difference of opinion your damned right were gonna speak up....if it doesnt theres no problem you can believe whatever you chose a persons right to swing there arm ends at the other persons nose
Xlivesforever 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@leadleader2023 (cont) we as atheists still have rights same as everyone else and if a belief in god discriminates atheists because of the difference of opinion your fuckin right were gonna speak up. if it doesnt theres no problem you can believe whatever you chose a persons right to swing there arm ends at the other persons nose
Xlivesforever 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@leadleader2023 (cont) we as atheists still have rights same as everyone else and if a belief in god discriminates atheists because of the difference of opinion your darned right were gonna speak up. if it doesnt theres no problem you can believe whatever you chose a persons right to swing there arm ends at the other persons nose
Xlivesforever 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@leadleader2023 we as atheists still have rights same as everyone else and if a belief in god discriminates atheists because of the difference of opinion your darned right were gonna speak up. if it doesnt theres no problem you can believe whatever you chose a persons right to swing there arm ends at the other persons nose
Xlivesforever 3 weeks ago
Oh boy, this says alot about Americans.
filmtress 1 month ago
it bears repeating....the best way to become an atheist?? read the bible...
freedom1234573 1 month ago
when hearing them speak, i wondered the following: do they actually know the meaning of the term "agnostic"?
nublered 1 month ago
@nublered they use the common meaning for agnostic, they dont know that agnostic means not to know if there is or there is not a god, im a gnostic atheist, i know that there is no god and i dont believe in one
ComAntNeLib 1 month ago
@ComAntNeLib
if you know there is no god, then how can you be agnostic?
and, more interestingly: how do you know?
nublered 1 month ago
@ComAntNeLib i said im a gnostic i didnt say im an agnostic learn to read you fucktard
how do i know? cause fantasy isnt real, god is fantasy, therefore god doesnt exist
ComAntNeLib 1 month ago
@ComAntNeLib wow circular logic from a fellow atheist......pretty disappointing.
slytherinspy1960 1 month ago
@slytherinspy1960 how is it circular logic?
ComAntNeLib 1 month ago
@ComAntNeLib are you kidding me? a christian says: the earth looks like it was created, therefore there is a creator, therefore god exists. that is circular logic is it not? yes it is. what you just said was equally circular logic. fantasy is not real, god is fantasy, therefore god doesn't exist. you didn't provide any evidence. the best argument to use as a gnostic atheist would be that you don't have to provide evidence but to use circular logic is just revolting.
slytherinspy1960 1 month ago
@slytherinspy1960 circular logic is where the conclusion leads to the conclusion. me saying fantasy is not real, god is fantasy, therefore god doesnt exist; isnt circular logic
because im not saying god doesnt exist therefore god doesnt exist
ComAntNeLib 1 month ago
@ComAntNeLib your premise was that god doesn't exist because it is fantasy. you didn't explain WHY it is fantasy. that is circular logic. fantasy isn't real, god is fantasy, god isn't real. your conclusion is the same as your premise. that is circular logic.
slytherinspy1960 1 month ago
@slytherinspy1960 1 fantasy isnt real
2 god is fantasy
3therfore god is not real
now here is another one
1 dogs arent animals
2 cats are dogs
3 therfore cats arent animals, although it is false it is not circular reasoning, and the god silogism i made isnt false and is not circular reasoning
go learn logic to explain why god is fantasy i would need another silogism that goes like this. characters made up by humans are fantasy, god is a character made up by humans, therefore god is fantasy
ComAntNeLib 1 month ago
@ComAntNeLib ok so i used circular reasoning wrong. doesn't change the fact that your logic was faulty even though you came with the right conclusion.
slytherinspy1960 1 month ago
@slytherinspy1960 how is it faulty?
fantasy isnt real (only for crazy people) god is fantasy. show me how god isnt fantasy and i will change it
ComAntNeLib 1 month ago
@ComAntNeLib did you read my comment? i said i agree with your conclusion. i'm saying you did not say the REASON WHY you god is fantasy. that is all i said. that how you got to that conclusion was wrong not the conclusion itself.
slytherinspy1960 1 month ago
@ComAntNeLib dude it wouldnt be your job to prove me wrong if i said i believe the lockness monster exists now would it why ask the same of an atheist your making the claim that god exists its not our job to prove that he doesnt is your job as the claimer to prove that he does
Xlivesforever 1 month ago
@Xlivesforever im not proving that god doesnt exist. im proving that god is the fantasy it is, i can prove that the lake ness monster is fantasy. he thing is because those things are fantasy they are not real.
ComAntNeLib 1 month ago
Not only that but statistics show that atheists are 2-4 IQ points more intelligent than religious people which is significant.
TheJDorian 1 month ago
@TheJDorian Sure, atheists are more intelligent, but 2-4 IQ points really aren't that much of an improvement. Apart from religion, there are other factors that contribute to dampening the intellect.
KazeN0Kami 1 month ago
I also noticed a significant number of bears shitting in the woods recently.
alienisuntverus 1 month ago in playlist Uploaded videos
"Atheists ang agnostics aren't particularly religious" Loved that part.
No one should be suprised. Most atheists or agnostics are not religious because they thought about and studied religion and realized it was all BS.
Religion doesn't preach knowledge. In fact it is not welcome as knowledge and evidence remove the need of faith, the ultimate fake virtue upon which all religions are based.
0122460166 1 month ago 7
The three questions were not relevant questions about religion. They were about the history of judaism, geography and judicial tradition. Relevant questions about religion would have been about the ten commandments, the books in the bible, the number of genocides ordered by god in the old testament.
trakkaton 2 months ago
@trakkaton i'm not trolling you here, but how are questions about the history of judaism not relevant? the history of judaism is intimately tied up with the development of judaism and christianity as cultural entities. i appreciate the suggestions for relevant questions though...so many youtubers just bitch about the negative without putting out ideas of their own.
clutterfish 2 months ago
@clutterfish
You show off a disturbing reading disability.
trakkaton 2 months ago
@trakkaton well, i'm sorry your mind is too stunted to notice the intertwining of various disciplines. if i had known that you were a simpleton, i wouldn't have bothered asking a question. i even tried to be positive with you about asking, and you reply with an asinine comment. i'm guessing you're either a child or you just weren't breastfed long enough in your infancy.
clutterfish 2 months ago
@clutterfish
Hey, IDIOT, last time:
LEARN TO READ!!!
trakkaton 2 months ago
We atheists know the most important part of religion.
It's bullshit.
dave474c 2 months ago
I think it has something to do with your general tendency to be either naive or skeptic.
On the one side, there are the people who don't like to think independently, who don't have a strong desire to gain knowledge, and who just stick to the religion they've been raised with because that is what seems "right" to them.
On the other side, there are the skeptics and scientists who crave to learn new things and to think on a larger scale, and they'll obviously know a lot more about religions, too.
eggroll9000 2 months ago
If this is the same study I'm thinking of, then yes atheists and agnostics did better overall, but I think believers did better when it came to questions about their specific religion.
Golkarian 3 months ago
I'm an Atheist and I'm sorry but I fail to see the relevance of these quiz test questions to determining how well a particular Christian or Muslim knows their own brand of religious texts. I only got 1 out of those 3 questions correctly, the one about Indonesia. Why did I get that one? Because I'm an ex-Muslim! How do you say a Christian doesn't know his Bible well because he doesn't realize that most Indonesians are Muslims? Nonsense.
Mrmoc7 3 months ago
@Mrmoc7 its not that the study is nonsense, its just misleading. Athiest on average have higher IQs, its not that they know more about religion, they just know more period. And the average US citizen has the IQ of 100. Not all that well education. The study just makes connections that are not needed. The average white guy knows more than the average black guy- so of course white protestants > black ones on the quiz by 10 points. Hispanics did the worst.
ikcjjtt 3 months ago
I got into an argument with my ex over religion. She goes to church every Sundays and "loves" Jesus but when I asked her if she has READ the bible on her own, the simple answer was no. Then I asked, if you love your God/Jesus so much and believe He created us then why don't you read the bible so she'd know more about her loving God?
In the ebd I told her NOT to read the bible otherwise she too will become an Atheist like me... ^.^
Nostalgicvideos 3 months ago
if religous people actually stood back and read their "holy books", the shear ridiculous nature of religion might actually get through to them instead of them constantly accepting it as fact because their told to do so from a young age
DarkLight544 3 months ago
@DarkLight544 i was a skeptic im not anymore its not that simple
DeJay17Revolution 3 months ago
Not at all a surprise, faith by definition consists of belief INDEPENDENT of evidence & critical examination, why would the religious need to know about the tenants of their own religion when they've already adopted it as automatic truth? Besides... anyone ever read the bible? It could make the most exciting topics boring as hell.
GMATveteran 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Atheism merely requires a modest level of intellect and cognitive skill; as opposed to being a Theist, which only requires having an anus to stick ones head into. This correlation explains the overwhelming number of Theists.
Pantera4LifeXTX 4 months ago
i certainly know more of the bible than any christians i debate with (i debate, they just tell you what they believe)
shocking figure, 80% of christians have'nt read the bible,
they dont know to stone their unruley chldren to death, to decapitate people for working on sundays, or sleeping with the same sex.
they dont know that its perfectly fine to own and beat slaves.
DemoraX 4 months ago
What atheist know about the bible is bullshit; they do all their "learning" from liberal scholars and whatever "Zeitgiest" has to say. Im in no way impressed with the results of this poll.
RepentAmerica454 4 months ago
Comment removed
RepentAmerica454 4 months ago
Comment removed
RepentAmerica454 4 months ago
Want to become an atheist? go read the bible and not just the good parts :)
Redstick27 4 months ago
@Redstick27 --I have read the Bible, cover to cover, and Im still a believer.
RepentAmerica454 4 months ago
@RepentAmerica454
Well, I sure some doubts have been raised in the parts that talk about how god likes the smell of burning animal flesh. or am i wrong? are you 100% that what's in that book is factual?
Redstick27 4 months ago
@RepentAmerica454 Then you do not possess a properly functioning cerebral cortex.
Kaalec 2 months ago
Im not surprised about that. Last month I thaught my mother who belived that human reincarnate over and over until they become purified that this isn't a christian belief but actually a buddist one. She has never read the bible...
ObTony 4 months ago
"Know your enemy."
DannyJPCW 4 months ago
FUCKING FACT: The more you think about religion. The less religious you become.
FordPerfect 4 months ago
Creationist don't like to have to think.
Khyrid 4 months ago
Creationist don't like to have to think.
Khyrid 4 months ago
Atheists did better on the test because they are more intelligent not because they like to debate. If they are debating, aren't they debating religous people?? Who's this idiot think he is anyway??!
anubis1974 4 months ago
@anubis1974 I agree with you that atheists tend to be more intelligent, there is also some research about the relation between IQ and religiosity that indicated this. I think this guy is just trying to be politically correct by not calling a group of people dumb on national TV.
OhReallyNoWai 4 months ago
@OhReallyNoWai -- Atheist tend to be morally retarded when compared with theist, considering they support abortion and gay perversion.
RepentAmerica454 4 months ago
@RepentAmerica454
"Atheist tend to be morally retarded" you can have your opinion.
Fact is though, that not all atheists support abortion and some Christians do.
As for gays, i guess you think it's moral to deny gays i.e. the right to marry.
Getting your morals from a book makes you without morals, might makes right eh Mr Morals, lol.
and you call atheists morally retarded, gosh doesn't that book of yours tell you not to judge?
Whatever dude....
mindwis3 4 months ago
@RepentAmerica454 You got that backwards.
Nifrayu 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@RepentAmerica454 You wanna talk about moral? Religious people crash planes into buildings, circumcise baby boys and young girls, stone woman for driving a car, priests raping and groping boys and girls. There is no such thing as gay perversions. And who are you to decide for other people if they want to keep their baby or not?
People are different, if you can't wrap your head around this, its your problem!
Mister187um 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
If you were coherent, you should have killed a lot of gays. How many have you killed?
Fangalatic 3 months ago
@RepentAmerica454 The ignorance in this statement is unbelievable.
magxsnyp3r 3 months ago
atheists make informed choices not mythical choices... i.e we don't shove our heads up our asses and say "god done it"...
FUwogs 4 months ago
I enjoyed reading their book, it was like reading a stone age version of the mini series V or Falling skies. ***** Spoiler alert ******
He dies in the end.
Shofoxy 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
PRESS AND HOLD CONTROL and try liking my comment and see what happens ;)
billymotherhen3 4 months ago
Its because one you actually start to read and think about those holy books you realize its bullshit and become an atheist shortly after.
Snarkonymous 4 months ago 14
@Snarkonymous You don't become an atheist. You realize you are one.
ijreilly01 1 month ago
@ijreilly01
whichever
Snarkonymous 1 month 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 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
SCIENCE SHOWS THAT THE UNIVERSE could not have sustained itself eternally because of entropy (even in an open system). 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 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
EINSTEIN CONFIRMED that space and time are just as physical as matter. That's why space and time can be altered by gravity, and space produces particles. Einstein's equations show that the universe couldn’t be eternal. It had a beginning. Einstein believed, because of science, in the existence of God behind the origin and order of the universe. He didn't believe in a personal God like Christians do, but he did believe science pointed to the existence of an all powerful and intelligent Creator
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
THE SCIENTIFIC CASE AGAINST ATHEISM: Please read this Internet article of mine published in Russia's English Pravda. It will be a real eye-opener for all who think belief in a Creator is merely subjective blind faith. Also read my article, LIFE ON MARS NO SURPRISE (In the Earth's past there was powerful volcanic activity which spewed life-containing dirt and rocks (meteors) into outer space. Mars may literally have millions of tons of Earth soil)
Mogley52 4 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 did species survive if their vital structures, organs, reproductive systems were still evolving? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic and biological similarities between species.
Mogley52 4 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 Research. Dawkins and his friends only debate non-scientist creationists. Read articles by scientists supporting creation at The Institute for Creation Research site. Read analysis from creation scientists about the latest news on fossils, genetics, astronomy, etc. that you won't read in the main stream media. Visit the Institute for Creation Research site.
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
EXPLAINING HOW AN AIRPLANE WORKS doesn't mean no one made the airplane. Explaining how life and the universe work don’t mean there was no Maker behind them. Natural laws explain how the order in the universe works, but mere undirected natural laws can't explain the origin of that order. Once you have a complete and living cell, the genetic code/mechanisms exist to direct the formation of more cells, but how did the cell originate when no directing code or mechanisms existed in nature?
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
WHAT IS SCIENCE? Science is knowledge based on observation. No one observed the universe coming by chance or by design, by creation or by macro-evolution. These are positions of faith. The issue is which faith science supports. Natural laws explain how an airplane or a cell works, but undirected natural laws cannot bring about either. Once there's a complete cell, the code/mechanisms exist to direct the formation of more cells, but how did the cell originate when there was no directing code.
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
SCIENTISTS HAVE NEVER CREATED LIFE. And, even if they do it won't be by chance but by intelligent design. By genetically engineering already existing forms of life, scientists have produced new forms of life, but they did not produce these new life forms from non-living matter. Even in synthetic life, scientists design and build DNA from scratch, through intelligent design, and then insert their man-made DNA into an already living cell. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
THE ODDS of the sequence of molecules in a cell coming together by chance are similar to the odds of magnetic letters randomly bonding together in a sequence to form all the words and sentences in a dictionary. Without the right sequence, a cell's molecules won't work. Amino acids can come by chance but not proteins. Without DNA there can be no proteins and vice versa. Gradually won't do. It's all at once or not at all for a cell's survival. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NATURAL SELECTION DOESN'T PRODUCE ANYTHING. It can only "select" from what is produced that has survival value. If a variation occurs that helps a species survive, that survival is called being "selected." That's all it is. There's no conscious selection by nature. It's a passive process. Natural selection is a figure of speech. The term itself is a tautology. Natural selection only operates once there is life and reproduction, not before. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM.
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NATURAL SELECTION IS NO BLIND WATCHMAKER because it can only "select," not produce or arrange. If a variation survives, that's called being "selected." Natural selection operates only once there is life and reproduction, not before, so it couldn't have been 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 alive! Read: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ARE FOSSILS REALLY MILLIONS OF YEARS OLD? Popular Internet article 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 true transitional forms in the fossil record and lack of "age" sequence of the fossil layers. Discussion of mixed species (i.e. dinosaur, reptile, mammal fossils in the same stratum).
Mogley52 4 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 4 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 ape-like creatures anymore than there's hard evidence that apes evolved from four-legged-pawed dog-like creatures. Read Internet article: MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE.
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
GENETIC INFORMATION CANNOT 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! Also, "Junk DNA" isn't junk. These non-coding segments of DNA have recently been found to be vital in regulating gene expression. Read my popular Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST prevents macro-evolution. Natural selection wouldn't preserve the evolution of new traits because they wouldn't have any survival value. A partially-evolved hand evolving from a previous trait, partially-evolved tissues, organs, biological structures would make a species unfit for survival. There are no fossils of partially-evolved species. All species of plants and animals in the fossil record are complete and fully-formed. They came into existence as complete!
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NEW SPECIES: Although new species have come into existence, they don't carry any new genes. They've become new species only because they can't be crossed back with the original parent stock for various biological reasons. A biological "kind" allows for new species but not new genes. Nature has no ability to invent new genes for new traits. Only limited variations and adaptations are possible in nature, and all strictly within a biological "kind" (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.).
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ALL REAL EVOLUTION ( i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.) in nature 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 has no ability to invent new genes via random mutations caused by random environmental forces. That’s evolutionary faith, not science. Read my article, WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"JUNK DNA" ISN'T JUNK: Recent research shows that these segments of DNA are vital in regulating gene expression (when, where, and how genes are expressed). There's no room for random mutations to operate safely. Random mutations, from radiation, are destructive. Even for every good one there would be hundreds of harmful ones with the net effect, over time, causing harm and even extinction, not upward evolution. Genetic similarities are better explained due to a common design for common purposes.
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
DO EYES CARRY SCARS OF EVOLUTION? Read this fantastic Internet article by biologist and creationist Brian Thomas. Thomas refutes every argument of a "flawed" design for the eye, and explains how and why the so-called flaw is actually the best thing for the eye. Read the article! It's amazing what facts evolutionists will ignore. Numerous times evolutionists have been proven wrong about their interpretation of a structure as being flawed or useless
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
DISORDER IN THE UNIVERSE is no argument against God's existence. The disorder is because of chance and entropy, but the order can only be rationally explained due to design. If I discovered a broken watch on the ground, the disorder is no evidence that there wasn't a designer behind the watch. Please read my Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
BURDEN OF PROOF: Anyone who claims the level of complexity and order in life and the universe happened by chance has the burden of proof. Many atheists think they have no burden of proof because they’re not claiming the existence of something. That is not true. Atheists are claiming something. They are claiming that we are here by chance and atheists expect for everyone to accept that claim on faith because they certainly can’t prove it. Read: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 4 months ago
I loved it when the second guy argues that atheists spend a lot of time arguing with religious people, so that is why they know so much. Did he ever consider that, for many people, knowing so much can CAUSE the atheism?
tlaloc2511 4 months ago
These aren't exactly "basic" questions.
CidTheNinja 4 months ago
hmnn, Judaism, most indonesians would consider themselves muslim(Islamic) and reading from the Bible as lit, yeah, as fact, as history, as religion? nah!!!!
pseudosaur 4 months ago
Well, of course. Believers don't want to know what's in their holy books, because they don't want to have to try to defend the really stupid and/or violent parts, which make up most of them. Most believers are also relatively simple people who have neither the education nor the motivation to read and understand their holy book. Obviously.
jerico641 4 months ago 28
it's because in order to live amongst the theists, who are prominent and run the state/how we live, u need to know where theyre coming from. you need to understand the fools and have a defense. cause, like the guys below said, the more you read into the texts, the more obvious and horrendously offensive you realize they are. An enormous shitload of misogyny. Endless crude hints at slavery, even its management! Praises to war, killing infidels. the list goes on. and lord child, incest & pedos.
isabellebile 5 months ago
lol reason is because athiest actually know god and how he's a fraud. uneducated dumbasses pray to god for their next meal.
ervin920 5 months ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important differences between heterosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption and homosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption. Even non-religious people know this.
Homosexual activists, with support from the media, have succeeded at framing themselves as noble victims; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
lightandbeautiful 5 months ago
Well I could have told you that...
aaronzvz 5 months ago
The more you study your religion, the more absurd and insulting it becomes. I don't think atheists know more. I believe that the more you know, the more likely you are to become atheist.
jpmouri 5 months ago 49
@jpmouri actually athiest are correalted with higher IQs. they do generally know more. Its not that one causes the other. Liberatarism is correalted with higher education though.
ikcjjtt 3 months ago
so true religious have no idea
timosh78 5 months ago
So the average athiest is more informed than the average evangelical, catholic or protestant? Shocker.
number1sun 5 months ago
I enjoy learning about religions but i don't buy any of them
finderfinder100 5 months ago
why does that last question matter?----can it be used as literature?---well wtf do you think it is? a better question is if it can be used for scientific or historical verification---which it CANT
TheGreatDeciever55 5 months ago
I am an atheist because I'm very well informed in regards to religion(s).
I'm very well informed in regards to religion(s) because I researched it extensively. However, one can loose their religion in a single day online, all they have to do is cross reference various information given as fact by their religion to see where it has been definitively proven false.
TechGriffin 5 months ago
@TechGriffin You're right.....one hour of hitchslaping (Christopher Hitchens) will do the job!
sablemase 5 months ago
You have to be ignorant about faith to have faith.
MunkyDrag0n 5 months ago
I know more about religion than any person that I have argued with.
thenofxer 5 months ago
Awesome
Nickdiaublow 5 months ago
I read the Bible about eight times in my 30's and some books many more times. In my 50's I Googled the word "god" and became an Atheist in about three months. Ha.
doncourtreporter 5 months ago
I got the first question wrong... =/ Never heard of "Maim"onides.
Q: Why do atheists/agnostics know more about religion?
A: Because they actually care wether or not their beliefs are true.
Zentz29 6 months ago 4
This is the biggest "Crock-A-Shit" I have ever seen, these guys are doing all they can to protect their Bullshit. The biggest reason Atheism is growing is because people are starting to learn how bad religion really is.
stevethul1 6 months ago 3
I've said it before, you don't have to be ignorance to be religious, but it helps.
GuillemotWatcher 6 months ago
The answer to this riddle is, we actually think.
brewerbrian420 6 months ago
These so called christians should really open their holy book to recognize what stupid stuff is written there...
Verrsus 6 months ago
It's quite obvious, really. Atheists are atheists because they have been thinking hard about religion and have come to the conclusion that it doesn't make any sense. Believers just go along with what some authority have told them.
fdkhsdhkskjhvkdf 6 months ago 2
Cogito ergo "atheist" sum!
kenninast 6 months ago
Lets do a survey about general science knowledge and see which sect does better lol. I wont be surprised if the religious ppl do bad on that as well.
ginnidorka 6 months ago
They claim that atheists are a very small group.. I am in my 60's and I know only a hand full of people that actually believe in God. I think that atheists are a much larger group that lacks the courage to stand up and be counted
Larkinchance 6 months ago 3
Wow, I can't wrap my head around this. People on a cable news network having a civilized adult conversation....its insane.
bushbasher85 6 months ago 22
@bushbasher85
This shows how ignorant u are just because they are siding with atheists u say they are having a "civilized adult conversation" just shows how funny people get these days..
TheLastRevelation01 4 months ago
unlike many religious people (you know, like many Creationist) most atheist are not ignorant in what they are trying to refute (ie ancient religious text) whereas many religious people are usually completely ignorant
trueChaos23 6 months ago 23
hm... summary: religious people are dumb.
how is this news?
LOL are most people taking faith on faith... um, it would be impossible not to?
that's like saying "are most people taking water for h2o?"
AssistingHealth 6 months ago
hm... summary: religious people are dumb.
how is this news?
AssistingHealth 6 months ago
I fail. I only knew one of them LOL. I thought the questions would be about stuff in the bible, not Indonesia.
hasteve101 6 months ago
lol the pew guy looks like a baby and the professor looks like a german cologne model
Sabohaque 6 months ago
What a load of bull. Atheist and agnostics for the most part picked up their knowledge not by debating christians but because of their religious upbringing. It's just that they are the more intelligent and clever ones that understood what religion really is truely is: a man made fenomenon that helps explain away the unexplainable and will keep the flock ignorant and obedient.
windmill10 6 months ago 2
One would think that an event of this perceived magnitude, the creator of the Universe who will determine the fate of It's "subjects" and consign them either to eternal pain and damnation or bliss, after they die (?), would leave evidence that is a bit more concise versus vague, conflicting manuscripts plagiarized from competing dogmas.
Bobish3253 6 months ago
It's amazing how many Christians know nothing of the history of Christianity, which, in a nutshell, is based on an hallucination Saul of Tarsus, later calling himself Paul, had allegedly on the road to Damascus. Forty years later, the fab four, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, started writing what we now call the gospels, full of contrast and contradiction and much "hero" embellishments that were coincidentally similar, to nearly identical, to other hero gods of the time.
Bobish3253 6 months ago
The bible is the best tool for making atheists. Just read it.
no2religions 6 months ago
This country is a nation of believers only when it is convenient for them; however, when it is time to cross the road, those "believers" tend to look both ways.
MatthewRider1 6 months ago
@WorldBibleUnion454 Give that test to the average crowd in a church, and I guarantee NO ONE will pass.... except maybe the priest.
MatthewRider1 6 months ago
@WorldBibleUnion454 Lol! I'll be surprised if very many Christians are able to answer all five!
In any case, why not create a more expanded online test for everyone to take, including atheists. We can even keep the religious affiliation stats categorized just like on this other test.
Do it! It'll be a hoot!
RadicalDreamer2121 6 months ago
so when are you guys in america mainstream media really going to take up the marxism paradigm.. i give u one.. why is people so uninformed? what is the media presenting ( in this case debating why people are dumb, hmm whats media part in it) beliving that either religious belive makes one smart is really unintelligent. why is america school so poor in practising the pupiöls?
hansson2000 6 months ago
@hansson2000 Marxism is good.
no2religions 6 months ago
@no2religions its a critical perspectic towards how one can view the society threw class by sociologi,history, socially, psychology, economicly.
hansson2000 6 months ago
@hansson2000 The world is remarkably consistent when seen though those glasses. Capitalist econ and social science has shabby, inconsistent explanations for phenomena and exactly ZERO predictive ability. Have you seen this? /watch?v=qOP2V_np2c0
no2religions 6 months ago
@no2religions that was GREAT critqe ... adam curtis ALL of his documentary are AWSEM none mainstream most of them on here or freedomducmentaries
hansson2000 6 months ago
Skin diseases can heal on their own. I've got psoriasis -- it comes and goes. Believe it or not, the best thing for it is sunlight (or a tanning bed). My brother has a much worse case of it -- he has to take immunosuppressives. Then again, his lifestyle is much more stressful than mine.
OneEyedJack1970 7 months ago
Er... Pharaoh. Anyway...
OneEyedJack1970 7 months ago
Those are softball questions. Maimonides was Jewish. There are a lot of Muslims in Indonesia, and the Bible can be read as literature in the classroom.
Not that any of these things have anything at all to do with any particular religious doctrine. They're simply trivia.
OneEyedJack1970 7 months ago
I wonder WHY the people became atheists?
...because they read the bible, koran etc...
That`s the best way to become sceptic
Packless1 7 months ago 3
"the unbeliever knows his Koran best" - Omar Khayyam
perfecto25 7 months ago
Faith on faith? WTF! If you have Faith you do not need anything else you do not need to prove anything or question anything otherwise is not faith what a fucking redundant and dumb question especially for a journalist.
ArcadianoX 7 months ago
Taking faith on faith. Wow, what trust.
liOVERLOADil 7 months ago
How interesting that the educated and intelligent are atheist and agnostic. Huh. Who saw THAT coming?
samiam9663 7 months ago 4
Do you know that your reactions are predicted in the Bible?In the end times there will be scoffers and mockers of God. They will profess themselves wise,only to remain fools and the fool says in their heart there is no God. Doesen't that sound like today?Do you REALLY think you are no more than just an educated monkey? Or are we wonderfully and fearfully created by a powerful sentient being? Could it be that by saying no to him,you are saying YES to satan?No Hell? Are you sure? May God Bless.
roddy35wv 7 months ago
@roddy35wv wow, a book with outlandish stories predicted that people wouldn't buy it? You don't say. Now go on and cure leprosy with bird blood as the bible says (exodus 14:6). Oh and you should probably go off and kill people that work on Sunday (exodus 35:2)...again as the bible commands. Oh and kill witches too (exodus 22:18). Or better yet, go ahead and and be a good christian; drink poison and handle snakes to prove you are a true disciple of jesus (Mark 16:18).
jvclark2 7 months ago