Added: 3 years ago
From: dawkinschannel
Views: 62,895
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (541)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • The Bishops eyebrows makes me think of Merlin.

  • Wow, that wasp is a dick!

  • Comment removed

  • The Athiests view on death is bleak but his view on life is expansive, thats the thing atheism has done for me, I appreciate my life so much while Im here

  • that church of England guy is smart and a good conversationalist he knows its bollocks, he has a cushy job because of religion

  • there is no god but Allah (God) and Mohammad is the messenger(prophet) of Allah(God)

    and Jesus the son of Mary is the messenger(prophet) of Allah(God).

  • @papa19801 We already have to deal with the ignorance of Christianity do you really have to give us Allah too?

  • Comment removed

  • @papa19801 Ok, interpret this. Something cannot come from nothing. This is very true. Now given that, If something cannot come from nothing. That means there was no such thing as "nothing" to begin with. If you take all the radiation and particles your you get "dark matter". Literally there's no such thing as "nothing". That means dark matter has always existed. Dark matter + Quantum Fluctuations = Big Bang. And from that, a universe. "Nothing" is non-existent.

  • Comment removed

  • @papa19801 Evolution has been proven.

  • Comment removed

  • @papa19801 I don't understand your comment sorry.

  • richard should try acid just once. he would never see the world the same way.

  • archbishop is actualy for me acceptable guy and his views are good enough for me. god bless

  • That priest dawkins talked to had a gooooooooood voice, he should narrate shit

  • I thought England was more open and accepting to evolution.

    It's a global issue I guess :(

  • While I disagree with the Archbishops supernatural beliefs, he seems like a very decent man. And he has an AMAZING speaking voice. If this whole god thing doesn't work out he should go into radio.

  • Pickpocker checking out his stolen goods at 0:17

  • The more I watch this series, the more I can't fucking stand listening to these theist morons defend their positions. How many here would try and debate Richard Dawkins on matters of Science? Some might perhaps. I can at least admit when I am out-classed on a subject, but watching these complete idiots try and school Dawkins makes me want to punch my screen. Seriously, I wish Dawkins would make videos of him just humiliating creationists assholes. Without mercy or any pretense of class!

  • @XchristianHeathen But then it wouldn't be Dawkins.

  • @thehootz

    Yes I know, that's why I said with no pretense of class. Dawkins is nothing but class, and the patience he shows these theist fools would impress Gandhi. Sometimes I wish he would just snap and put a Dawkinslap down on some of these morons. This is a highly educated Ivy league man of science, and to watch people who probably didn't graduate high school lecture him on Science drives me mad.

  • @XchristianHeathen I'd like to disagree, as I prefer David Attenborough's calmer way.

    But that constant "show me the evidence - show me the evidence" in the face of evidence, wants me kick her repeatedly in the face.

  • that part with the ant was creepy :P better than most horror movies.

  • I gotta admit the archbishop has an awesome voice. No homo

  • @TheHolyphantom Like as white british barry white.

  • sounds like james earl jones

  • @kdosvol284 Hey partner, do you work in Mexico or Peru? Do you use mules as your key transportation for hauling items? Because you just seriously made an ass out of yourself, and on top of that you have shared with the rest of the incoming and persisting viewers what prudishly low intellect you truly possess. Looking forward to not believing in delusions when confronted by death.

  • @unanumus2 Yes, you decoded me. Everything you said is true -I live in Mexico/Peru, using mules for transportation and my IQ is a bit lower than average

    So What?

  • @kdosvol284 there's that good ol' loving Christian forgiveness we hear so much about in action. good for you.

  • @kdosvol284 You're a god damned moron. Fucking faggot (i realized I used god in my sentence, it's called irony). Read a science book bitch ass.

  • @DngerousRadical No HOMO, GODFUCKINGDAMIT hOLY gHOST GODDAMMIT!

  • @DngerousRadical said "You're a god damned moron"

    - well, takes on to know one, doesn't it?

    I don't really recall what triggered that compliment of yours but probably it was something along the lines of, you go to hell, I probably don't

    Anyway, bye bye whatsyourname. Noone will miss'ya anyhow

  • Well as far as virgin birth thing its a well known mistranslation: word meaning "young woman" was translated into "virgin" when translating it into latin (pretty sure it was latin but feel free to fix me if it was some other language).

  • If you believe in God, by default, you must also believe in Father Christmas, the Tooth Fairy, and Unicorns.

  • @progfan71 I understand what you mean, but what you say is false. However, you could say that God, Father Christmas, the Tooth fairy and the Unicorns all have the same amount of believability. There is no reason to believe one more than the other, if you look at it purely logically, as none of the above can be proven right or wrong. However, since it is the religious people making the claim of God's existence, it is their job to provide evidence to support their claim.

  • Fact is "true or not". Theory is not. Fact is. And that's fact. Theory=religion.

  • @ButcherWing Except scientific theories are based on "logic" and "rationality", and given enough time (as seen throughout history) they are also provable. It saddens me that there are people in the world who place "reason" below "faith". It is what holds us back as a species.

  • @iMarduk First they great story/theory/religion and after that they try to prove it's reality. Hah. No need theory=pseudoscience=religion.­ Let's stay in facts of reality.

  • @ButcherWing Yes, they wanted to prove it, and doing so they ended up disproving most of it and exposing it for the bogus that it is. Again, using logic and reason. No stories, no gods; they have worshipers who accept that truth blindly, without questioning it from a rational point of view. Theorists, on the other hand, question everything. That is not a religion, that is common sense. That is a fact of reality.

  • @ButcherWing In science, "theory" means something else than it does in common society. The theory of relativity, anyone? "Theory" in science means something that is backed up my massive amounts of supporting evidence. You have the mind of a little child.

  • Social Darwinism killed 100 000 000 people. Evolutiontheory is a fundamentalist religion/believe/faith system and it's wrong like all religions. Theory is not science. Theory is a religion.

  • to abolish the greatest story ever told was never going to happen over night and was always going to be met with fierce opposition. the change would be gradual, and i have no doubt we are in that transitional period right now. the natural creeping vine of science is slowly suffocating the weed of religion from the world, but the battle is not over and will most likely outlive us, but cheer up, the rapid expanse ad progress is overwhelming.

  • I somehow think the story of the birth of Jesus is a "story" to tell us that if we are all treated as being special even before our birth, and throughout our lives, that by having this attitude we would all be capable of great potential. No child would be turned away because it would be loved by a whole community as each birth of a child was a birth of a great person. What a different world that would create...

  • What is called science by the *science-worshippers* of the present age and regarded by them as equivalent to the sum total of *reality*, is simply a collection of laws applicable to a single dimension of the world. The result of all human effort and experimentation is a body of knowledge concerning a minute bright dot comparable to the dim light of a candle-surrounded by a dark night enveloping a huge desert of indefinite extent.

    All praise is due to ALLAH, the Lord of the Universe.

  • stinkin ass wasp

  • 5:40 for GOD's (?) sake im eating!

  • recent discoveries of science indeed show us it now seems to be true. Universe is doomed to die slowly as stars will scatter apart and run out of fuel. All life will end, there is no salvation, no hope. Even lovecraftian vision of universe is joyful in comparision to reality

  • @szaroki i read that if were lucky another big bang might occur resulting in a never ending cycle. whats your veiw?

  • @MegaGangstaparadise it maybe. As much that there is a possibility that we live in universe that was an outcome of a scientific experiment. But the point is - that would be another universe...and there is no link between the two. What was created within our universe, dies with our universe.

  • @szaroki an experiment...maybe either way I've just been mind fucked xD

  • Atheists are just people who are either angry at God or don't like the idea of having a set of principles to live by and standards of behaviour to uphold. In this part of the documentary Dawkins actually talks about what led to Darwin going away from God, he was angry at God because of the death of one of his children. He failed, or chose not to, understand that it is SIN that causes evil and death in the world, not God.

  • @vcat10 u r one stupid moron,no one is angry at something dat does not exist,god is imaginary,it is a hypothesis wich always failed and theism is absurd and stupid

  • @vcat10... lol. Dumb ass.

  • @rampaginwalrus Lol.... i second that

  • @vcat10 God is evil Lol Sinning ftw

  • @vcat10 technically your "God" is suppose to be omnipotent, so that would mean he creates and causes everything to include killing people and creating the devil and sending people there. Doesn't sound like a nice guy to me. So you think your morals are better than everyone else because you believe in a God.... Get off of your high horse, there are plenty of people that don't believe in a God, and they have morals and uphold standards for humanity. I can't speak for everyone, but neither can you

  • Darwin always fascinated me, he seems to have been far ahead of his time and one of those rare people's who's genuinely and truly nice. Not just nice because they think they're supposed to be or because they want something.

    But that bit with his wife and their daughter also highlights something that really bugs me about religious people. Many of them just can't stand that YOU don't share their views. And I don't like one bit how that tends to make them behave.

  • Ricky D=endboss

  • Why don't they just say that God is nature or some unknown force..?

  • @Robertamissoniluv Einstein did. That's the only God I could ever believe in.

  • @Robertamissoniluv Because God isn't.

  • Religious people are insane, or don't want to face the facts out of insecurity and fear, and this is a horrible thing, which is the product of religion - Insanity and fear. It will only hinder a human being.

    Religion is the only actual living evil on the planet earth, and rational thinking people who have had it drilled into them like rape need to be rescued from that prison viciously. End of story.

  • @wiibot15 yes, a lot of religious people are fearful, how many real genuine Christians do you know who are really full of fear, and if you look at their lifestyle and how successfully and peacefully it seems to run, who is it that has the insecurity really??

  • @vcat10 Being happily ignorant is being a slave; Being submissive , not using your brain at all. The truth about reality is what unsettles them, the truth about the world and who they are unsettles them. Not using your brain is not happiness. It makes me extremely happy to actually know who we are as a species, how big the world around me actually is and what is it actually is.

    Religious people cut off their brain, Reality makes their brains hurt and so they become defensive against fact.

  • @wiibot15 i dont believe its the only source of evil, even in a world without religion I doubt there would be no people without cruel intentions, it is however the biggest form of "Blind" evil, half these people dont even see what they support, or what they do

  • @MArtinezNINux You misunderstand what I was saying. Cruel intentions and wanting to hurt things will always exist. What I meant by religion being the only true evil in the world is that it deludes and brainwashes people, it lies to them and takes advantage of maybe the prominent human weakness! It's a lie in the first place, Faith is evil.

    If people want to have this primate attribute called faith they should have it in things that are real! Not ancient cult garbage from the middle east!!!

  • @wiibot15 I can agree with that, I was raised christian and my family is pretty tolerant of others beliefs, the only thing that bothers me most about my family's faith is how much they think praying does, we've had a drought for 6 months in texas and it finally rains and all the girls say "thank god for answering our prayers" I was like "WTF its been 6 months?"

  • @MArtinezNINux I think it's wrong to raise children in a religion, as to force belief on a newborn. It's not right, it's taking advantage of a child.

  • @wiibot15 yeah but ive known the other side, though i was never seriously into religion, I know they believed that they were doing the right thing,

  • @MArtinezNINux that's pretty funny lol. God didn't answer anything...ever.

    But "GOD" isn't the enemy, it's the thought process that made up "GOD", which is primitive and wrong and has no place in modern society...especially not the 3 great evils that sprouted from the middle east...even in the religious books you can see the violence and brutality from that region of the world and the people who lived their...

  • @wiibot15 EXACTLY ! I dont get it! they just scim scam over that part, deuteronomy is fucking insane, but no one refers to it. its all just "be good, go to heaven" heaven was the only cool part about religion, imagine if the bible had a god that said " hey guys do all these things because i said so, there is no afterlife, but you know, listen to me"

  • @wiibot15 storm the gates!!!

  • The belief of God is sickening nonsense and primitive crap! The human mind has evolved pass that point we can no longer, for our sanity considering the ACTUAL TRUTHS THAT HAVE BEEN DISCOVERED, acknowledge it at all! Any belief of God or any incorporation or inclusion of God is anything anymore is complete and utter BULL CRAP. Face it!

  • @wiibot15 try a bit of humility and you might be able to win people over alot better that way.

  • Is Dawkins' face that bright red naturally or is it makeup?

  • Richard Dawkins "We Love You" People should be taught the truth.  The proven truth.

  • if jesus was a 'clone' of 'god' implanted in marry that would explain the virgin birth

  • @TheBakaslayer

    Maybe God developed "wireless" conception.

  • "you cant have your cake and eat it too" iv never understood that line lol ever...everyone says it but i always think "why the hell not its right in front of me" lol anyways go rd

  • @Killerjosh89 can you explain pl0x, i dont get

  • @Met0llicA how can i explain even if i dont know the meaning of the phrase?...lol...

  • @Met0llicA I always thought it meant that you want to keep the cake intact (because it looks nice) and eat it. You can't have both.

    But that doesn't sound quite as catchy.

  • @NoWitnessesNoRegrets was that mentioned in the video? who said that?

  • @Met0llicA How could you be so confused? you asked a question i answered it, there is nothing complicated or complex here.

    You sound like you have alzheimers.

    What is this?

    Where am I?

    Who said that?

  • the arcebishop's voice is epic

  • Richard Dawkins has said many things except for the one thing we need to hear.

    "Here is the proof for spontaneous generation of life form inorganic matter."

    Everything else is just hot air.

  • @LeavittMusicService Well how about you point me in the direction of the proof of god. In the end both are still just theories and we need more data to form a fact about which is true. Until that time comes, everyone will just pick a theory to go with, and my hope it that they will at least try to learn about both sides so they can make an informed decision.

  • @TSgtWt Theories can also encompass fact. Gravitation is both a theory and a fact. Evolution is both a fact and theory -- evidences are their to show that evolution is a fact. We don't just pick a theory to go with. If you say that gravity is just a theory one can pick, why not invite some students to pick another theory rather than gravity, and jump of their windows from 100 feet high to go to school?

  • @yellowlynx Regardless of if a theory has facts in it, I was stating was that we need more data or facts to get a better understanding of what the truth is. You are correct that the Theory of gravity has facts in it, but can you explain all of gravity? No. It is still an incomplete theory. More data and facts have to be discovered. I in no way stated that because it is a theory that there isn't truth to it. Just that it isn't a complete fact yet, which makes it still just a theory.

  • @TSgtWt Gravitation itself is a fact, which is observable in nature -- you don't need to be able to explain all of gravity to observe it in action. Gravitation Theory models (Newtonian or Einsteinian) are so well supported that people with the right mind will see that it is a fact. The theory in scientific explains how observed facts relate to each other and the force behind it -- theory is there to explain the fact! 

  • @yellowlynx Your argument is that they're facts, when they're actually still classified as theories. You seem to be under the assumtion that I don't believe in gravity. I believe in gravity, but what I'm actually saying is that gravity and other theories are incomplete and we need to continue gathering more data. I'm sure you can't explain to me why gravity is so weak compared to the other forces. Obviously I know gravity works, but you can't completey explain how it works.

  • @TSgtWt In science, you use same words to refer to both the theory and the fact. An object falling from a tree, the planets orbit is a fact which we observed as the effect of gravity. I can explain why gravity is so weak compared to the other forces -- in String Theory, gravity is explained by a special strand which is responsible for its effect, but it escapes from our universe to other universe, making it appeared week. The difference between the 2 forces is in the order of 10^39.

  • @yellowlynx You are wrong sir. I asked you to explain to me why gravity is weaker than the other forces and you provided me with another incomplete theory. You simply regurgitated a theory that someone came up with, that you or that person has no proof of. Funny enough I'm an Atheist and a huge fan of science, but that doesn't mean I don't keep searching for more data and evidence to help complete my understanding of the universe. Theories are always changing, so just learn to keep an open mind.

  • @TSgtWt You are wrong again -- no theory in science is complete at all. What I am trying to say is, gravitation is proven and tested so many times that it is as true as we regard the Earth as a sphere (round) or it revolves around the sun -- the fact that scientists has yet to come up with a satisfying explanation of why gravity is so much weaker than other forces DOES NOT negate (a) gravity is a fact (b) gravitation theory is well proven.

  • @yellowlynx Interesting. I said that theories are incomplete and you tell me I'm wrong because theories are incomplete lol. You don't seem to grasp that just because something is obvious enough to make it a fact doesn't mean that we should just stop looking for more explanations to help complete some of those theories. Your reading comprehension is starting to make what I type, just become a repeat session. BTW gravity is still a theory which hard working people are still trying to prove.

  • @TSgtWt Theories are incomplete does not mean the kind of natural phenomenon is not fact -- I did not say that we should just stop looking for more explanations to help complete some of those theories -- acknowledgment that gravity is a fact is not equivalent to say that the theory of gravitation is complete NOR that we should stop looking for more explanations and If you say that gravity is not proven, show me an instance where an unsupported object does not free fall on Earth.

  • @yellowlynx You are making the same mistakes as anti-evolutionist, assuming theory and fact are contradicting or mutually exclusive. Gravitation is a fact -- you ass is stuck to whatever you are sitting on whilst you are typing your message is the fact that gravity is at work; you don't jump out the window from 21st floor to get to the ground is because of the fact that gravity makes you fall to the ground and kill you -- how can you deny everyday experience like those silly Creationist!!!

  • @yellowlynx My original comment was simply about the pursuit of knowledge, gathering data and evidence. I'm still puzzled about why you continue to bring up gravity, and state stuff like jumping out of a window to test gravity. Your reading comprehension isn't good enough for me to continue this broken debate(I was just stating that things are theories and we need more information to come to a complete conclusion, you were trying to tell me that I don't believe in gravity). Good day to you sir.

  • @TSgtWt why is one being taught as fact then if you acknowledge that both are still just theories? because as i said in a comment above, it is convenient for people to discount being created by an all powerful God because they dont want to be accountable to anyone and want to be 'free' to do what they want to whomever they want, without any guilt or possibility of negative consequences

  • @vcat10 for one, it's not being taught like it's a fact. It's being taught because it has more evidence and data to support it. Therefor it tends to make more sense. I personally discount being created by some God, because there is nothing to support that idea. Everything that you say to try to "prove" to me that your God exists is just nonsense because you have no actual proof. I respect your right to believe in whatever you want, but there's just no data or proof to support your theory.

  • White noise.

  • Something about Dr Rowan Williams that is likeable.

  • Whoa, the archbishop has one epic voice

  • Archbishop Williams could have a career in voice-over work if he wanted it.

  • Richard Dawkins is the Rottweiler of Darwin!! Go Rich!!

  • Reality can be hostile, however creating myths that make one feel nice doesn't tackle the unknown it merely pacifies the uncomfortable feelings you get when faced with it.

  • By saying there is a 'god' religious institutions keep bringing in the money. By saying there is no 'god' scientists will just continue to do what they do, they have nothing to gain from this. The world as a whole would gain by everyone admitting there is no 'god' but scientists do not, they would not get more money, they would not get more fame, nothing. No one believes in a 'god' otherwise they would not live as destructively as they do, it's time to grow up and admit it.

  • The Archbishop has a voice that suggests he missed his calling. He should have been God himself. Too bad for him, science has eliminated the position.

  • @thalordalmighty He'd have been the best god in all of history. He was the first one to actually exist

  • @thalordalmighty I think he's an atheist in disguise...but he probably considers it too late or not worth it to "come out of the closet" as they say.

  • first guy i see in dawkin's documentaries whom i actually like; humble and fair.. i cant help but feel a little sorry for the guy tho

  • @thalordalmighty science did not eliminate the position at all, science and nature demonstrate the reality of it every day

  • Richard does love poetry.

  • Even if there is something out there, there is no proof and the evidence to support Evolution and Selective Mutation is OVERWHELMING

  • Hokey pokey, winky fum,

    How do you like your taters done,

    Hot or cold or underdone,

    King of the Cannibal Islands.

  • He's pretty. :3

  • O_______O

  • Archbishop says "For me God is the power that shapes the whole of the process...as its creator" (Y)! According to standard religious belief, "everything must have a creator" so god created everything, that there must be some powerful entity ----> so if everything needs a creator, then who created god? ...god's god? and then god's god's god? and so forth .....(Y)

  • Comment removed

  • I really just seem to trust the Archbishop of Canterbury. Am i the only one?

  • @awesomemaster1906 Probably

  • @AdrianLechner1000 Richard Dawkins does. read his book.

  • @monkeyman337 You should study physic instead of bible. And the earth being at the right distance from the sun is how nature work, it is random formation which we are the result of the right condition, many planets are either too close or too far from the sun, such as many of the planets in our own solar system. And there are many more planets being at the right distance from their sun in the Universe giving rise to variation of lives.

  • I never have had cake and not ate it. Come on Dawkins!

  • Darwinism is definitely true...

  • @supersmash43 What is darwinism? LOL. Why do you swear to darwin. I believe in evolution too, because its a fact. Not because Darwin happened to be the first one to bring it up. Darwin was lacking so many things in his theory I dont know where to start. Why this huge respect for darwin. Its like saying that Newtonism is the way. Well sure, but il rather call it gravity.

  • Comment removed

  • @gulbirk Well the respect comes from the admiration, that he himself as one man, found the strength not only to question what was believed to be true for few thousand years then, without any support, but he also won this fight in his mind, with no one to trust then, and became the first atheist who culd prove his point of view and base it on something, maybe not so firm then as it is now, but still a proof. He opposed the entire world view much more than other scientists up till his times.

  • @KoNrRiI Well he died not in any way "prove" atheism. Thats redicolous. Evolution doesnt exlude a god, it only exludes creation. Thats not what im talking about. Im talking about the respect for Darwin as the FOUNDER OF ALL EVOLUTION. Which is BS. THere were people experimenting with evolutino before him, his hypothesis had MANY flaws. Dont believe me just read his book, and there are other people that I would say did as much (if not more) then him.

  • @gulbirk Well i know eveolution doesn't exclude a god, i wasn't talking about it either. I think people admire his theory of evolution, as he brought it from the beginning to the end basing only on his own research. Of course it had flaws, but it occured to be the first consistent one, and later on improved, proved itselft to be legitimate. No matter how many happened to had been working on it before him, he brought it to the end, so someone must have been given the credit, why not him? :D

  • @KoNrRiI Because it wasnt just before him most work was done, it was done AFTER him. Most work in the field of evolution has been done AFTER his death. Oh and btw, thats not even my point. My point is that its called evolution. Its silly to call it darwinian evolution. You never hear anyone speaking of Newtonian gravity just because Newton happened to be the first one to get a good understanding of it.

  • @gulbirk I agree it is quite weird to call it "darwinian", but he gets all the credit for opening the way, it's like those guys who improved the theory and stuff, wouldn't have done it, if he hadn't published his work earlier, giving basis to work on and ecouraging people to continue his work. Someone had to start the entire process and it was him that's why he is called the father of evolution. Still I don't get it why one uses the adjective darwinian more often than newtonian....

  • @KoNrRiI Yes, and thats my point, :) Oh and also, when Dawkins says Darwinian evolution that is just weird. It already has a name, evolution. Its not like darwinian evolution is one way of thinking in the field of evolution. At best, he should call it Natural Selection.

  • @gulbirk "Darwinian evolution" defers from some competing (and largely debunked) ideas about evolution.

  • @hack451 Largely debukned? That would be?

  • @gulbirk Theories like if you cut off the right leg of a mouse just after birth, and continue to do so with that mouse's offspring, that eventually you'd get a mouse born without a right leg. Evolution doesn't work that way... but some scientists thoerized it did for a short while.

  • @hack451 Hahaha, thats SO similar to what I thought when I was 8 years old, LOL. No serious scientist can honestly believe that. Biologists KNOWS that animals change because of their genetics, chopping of a leg doesnt change the genetics. But what is possible, is that if you cut of the foot, the animal that is best at surviving with only one foot survives. I dont know if that will have any effect on the gene though.

  • @gulbirk mutations or variations must happen in the sex-chromosomes, X and Y, and then natural slection must take place. cutting off your foot won't be inherited of course, so just clarifying that FYI.

  • @93alvbjo  Of course it wont, but I gues it was reasonable to think that when they didnt know about genetics.

  • @gulbirk They know this now, but they didn't in Darwin's time; and competing theories about precisely how evolution worked abounded back then.

  • God does not exist, get over it. Start contributing to mankind by accepting the science and pursuing the real truth.

  • @monkeyman337 Could you possibly be more homo-centric and archaic than this? No, you could not.

    You honestly expect anyone to believe that you don't have even a primary school understanding of the universe, as if you never graduated from the kindergarten? You may be able to fool yourself into discarding the most basic of knowledge in favor of superstition, but you don't fool anyone else.

  • Booyah! Richard Dawkins uses MacBook Pro!

    My faith in that divine technology is hereby reinforced.

  • can anyone answer why anything exists? why the laws of physics exist? how can the universe just BE? I don't think science will ever be able to give us the answer. That is why we have religion and always will. isn't it easier for there to be nothing than something?

  • @cinderskenney god invented science...now worship thee. just kinding...im an atheist.

    the answer youre looking for is in this question..."what came first, the chicken or the egg"

    i believe the whole universe is just a piece of mould, rotting away. and in our universe are trillions of other universes. where did it all start, and will it ever stop? one will never know, and thats the beauty of it all.

    research a place called "fermilab" in batavia illinois. they are recreating the big bang theory

  • @adrewk We can raise precisely the same objection against the atheists and ask them, "If we follow the chain of causality back, we will ultimately reach the primary cause. Let us say that cause is not God, but matter. Tell us who created primary matter. You who believe in the law of causality, answer us Ws: if matter is the ultimate cause of all things, what is the cause of matter?

    You say that the source of all phenomena is matter-energy; what is the cause and origin of matter-energy?"

  • @1tabligh watch?v=7ImvlS8PLIo

    watch it

  • @chriss061810 How can the atheists delude themselve and believe that hydrogen and oxygen, electrons and protons, should first produce themselves, then be the source for all other beings, and finally decree the laws that regulate themselves and the rest of the material world?

  • @1tabligh : First, the is no atheist docrina, contrarily to religions. Atheists just observe that no intervention of any God has ever been observed under the circumstances of rationality. Then they ask generally why, if there was a God, he would be so indifferent to mankind. Let us just say that if God exists, cannot be the God described by religions "unless he/she has a good excuse", as Woody Allen said. Universes without laws would logically be just unable to produce stable life, that's all.

  • @1tabligh : It is of course ot true that everything has a cause : quantic fluctuations and atomic disintegrations seem to have none, and within the pure GR theory, the Big Bang could have none either, since there would be not time "before" it. But as Linde's hypotheses suggest, there could be a lot of universes in the space of possibles, each with its own beginning. None of them would have a "cause", but each of them would have a "reason" : it would exist because it can. Simply.

  • @Paganel75 ...the Big Bang could have none either, since there would be not time "before" it....

    _____

    If you will still persist in your ignorance at least assure me as to when this *big bang* created itself-whether it did it before it came into existence, or afterwards?

    If you say afterwards, your assertion is absurd. Because it is impossible for a thing to create its own self when it was already created.

    cont..

  • @1tabligh : First, thanks to remind me that people without sound arguments use insults instead of them. Now try to understand that creation needs by definition a BEFORE and an AFTER, so there can be an ORIGIN of time-space, but (in pure GR theory without influence of QM at least) no CREATION of space-time. Is that hard to understand ? Which part of Earth is north of the North Pole ?

  • @1tabligh : Do you UNDERSTAND English ? Because you live in human-scale, environment where everything has a beginning and (at YOUR scale) a cause, you try to decrete that this should be true at all scales; but the universe does not care at all about your desiderata, and both GR and QM should teach it to you. Your concepts are purely LOCAL to your scale, whether you like it or not. The same is true of "deep time" (millions of years) were rock flows, continents drift and species evolve. A lot.