No one should force beliefs on another just because THEY believe it's the RIGHT answer! The RIGHT answer is what you create... With your mind. The human race is a beautiful thing, stop fighting over such petty things and accept and love your asses of instead!!!
I'd like to know what "Atheist Religion" is. Mainly because we dont have a religion. Atheism requires total disbelief in a god. Without a god, you cannot call it a religion. A lack of belief is not a religion, and if you cant see this, then you truly lack the ability to think for yourself.
You are being thick in quantifying a belief in a totally unsubstantiated fairy story character with scientific research.
An unsubstantiated idea is called a hypothesis, which would include the idea of a giant invsible fairy story character. A hypothesis becomes a theory when evidence backs up the idea. A theory is then tested to destruction to disprove it. A theory becomes a fact when all other causes can be ruled out and when all the evidence proves it correct, as in the case of evolution.
All Christians are Atheists for other Gods. They don't believe in Buddha or Set or Thor or Zeus or Allah. How can they deny those Gods? They deny them the same way an Atheist denies them. They use the many of the same arguments atheists use
Atheism is a religion? Last I checked, theism isn't considered a religion but merely a category in which to place it. Why would it be any different the other way around? You've got to be careful when addressing the incredibly broad category of atheism because when you call out atheism, you're addressing everything ranging from no belief at all to belief systems such as Buddhism and Taoism. Fine-tuned? Then what is my appendix for? Theories aren't instant gap fillers, they're ideas to be tested.
You don't necessarily go to a place of faith for gap fillers, often the gap fillers are arrived at not through observable evidence but through logic and reason. Personally I think you can arrive at God's necessity a priori, but a lot of people would disagree with me.
I don't know whats more laughable the fact that some religious people think evolution is a religion or that they think athesits have something wrong with them because they don't worship an idol that controls every aspect of their life.
parallel universes aren't a theory, it's a hipothesis. it means that it's the best possible explanation, but to be used only until we find a better one.
This guy doesn't understand what he is arguing against. Typical creationist. He would fail an exam on evolution.
Also, the "Seeding of Earth" theory actually has quite a bit of scientific possibility to it. We already have rock from Mars with dead bacteria in it. Not saying that's what happened, just saying it could have happened without any god........that's the point. God isn't needed to explain anything.
Wow, an Oriental despot, only bigger, and invisible, postulated by bands of illiterate, flea-bitten, itinerant goatherds, sitting around a campfire of camel dung, thinking of ways to distract their slaves from the fact that there was no air conditioning.
It's CALLED "the big bang," not so-called, and it's a widely accepted model, not a theory. Again, it's CALLED "punctuated equilibrium," etc. Francis Crick wasn't "blown away" and never said that ANYTHING "popped out of some primordial goo."
Quite a fantastic false dichotomy you present: "you can either believe my fairy tales, or make up your own".
Trouble is, it neglects what most atheists and scientists do, which is simply say "I don't know. And we may never know - but that's no reason to start believing in a conscious omnipotent creator."
And none of the "new atheists" think Panspermia has any merit.
Oh, and presenting a hypothesis isn't equal to having faith.
People confuse coincidence with causation in these matters. Imagine any universe where intelligent life arises. In any such place, it would appear to sentient beings that their existence is improbable - particularly in our case since the rest of our solar system is dead. I'm not saying that there is no god or higher power, but our mere existence is NOT proof that the universe was "fine tuned" for our existence anymore than Mars is proof that the universe was fine tuned for the existence of Mars.
You misrepresented the opposing position. Parallel universe is only a possibility, not a majority belief. I think most people laugh the fine tuning argument away when you posit the universe was fined tuned for humans then we realize humans would instantly die in 99.999999999999999999999927 of the universe. And abiogenesis has been observed in the lab. (self replicating RNA, and early form of DNA.)
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
OMG!! I went to the link posted on the sidebar.. Bwahaha.. Ohh goodness! This guy is so the funniest accidental comedian. Are you ready to don "gods armor"? How about cope with evil godless aliens? What is that you say about demons and witches cramping your christian style? Oh you owe it to yourself and find solutions to these every day fundie problems. PLEASE click on the link for a laugh!
Wow, this guy is taking all sorts or religion explaining how the world started and saying science said so and attributing that to atheist. WOW, check in the dictionnairy to see what an atheist is and check out what is the theory of the big bang without taking other religion and make a new theory claiming that's teh theory of teh big bang and saying that's what sccience says. By the way, go see a true scientist to understand what science actually claims, don't go see Behe.
It's pretty clear this guy didn't actually read the books. The books say the proper answer to questions of the unknown is 'I don't know'. And all explicitly reject punctuated equilibrium and panspermia. They do talk about the multiverse, but the only point with that is not that the multiverse is true, but that it's a second explanation for improbable physical laws. So long as you have a second explanation, then improbable physical laws no more proves God than it proves the second explanation.
Right from the start you show ignorance, atheism is not a religion, you want proof? Look at Buddhism, there is no god in that religion, because a religion is a belief system, atheism merely states that they have no belief in any gods, it is NOT a statement of beliefs. Not all atheists believe in evolution or the big bang, hell some Christians even believe in that, that's strike two. We've seen transitional fossils, not all animals leave behind fossils, strike three, you're ignorant.
Fail: Rationality fills the gaps with 'unknown' until more evidence is available. The problem with your assertion is the idea of science asserting 'philosophical conjecture' as fact, but is is not fact just a guess. I can understand how you cannot see the difference.
yeah the key term is "GAP FILLER", science looks at the evidence, then fills in the gaps with theories. science changes is views. when DNA was found, Darwin's theory, was at a real risk of being dis-proven. But DNA filled in a gap of the theory, explaining how changes in a species can accrue. Science changes, religion doesn't
This is a hard one, I cant figure it out... Is he serious or not? I think he is. Its ridiculous that there is such a blurry line between sarcasm and actual christianity.
The very nature of science is to question things, nothing is (or should be) sacrosanct. But, this does not necessarily mean that just because someone questions a law (or theory) that the law/theory in question is wrong. Was Einstein a detractor of Newton when he showed that the Newtonian "Laws" of mechanics did not explain everything (wasn't that why quantum mechanics came into existence)? Just because Newtonian mechanics is "wrong" in some situations, does not mean it is useless.
You purport that atheists thrive on their faith in science to fill in the "gaps". Maybe so. But, maybe it's human nature to want to know the answers? I think the biggest difference between atheists and theists is the way we go about finding those answers. Atheists tend to have a nagging desire to have their answers backed up by DATA. On the other hand, theists' scientific curiosity is suppressed by their fears of what the presuppose could happen to their "souls" upon death.
Both scientific law and scientific theory are based on tested hypotheses; both are supported by a large body of empirical data; both help unify a particular field; both are widely accepted by the vast majority (if not all) scientists within a discipline. Furthermore, both scientific laws and scientific theories could be shown to be wrong at some time if there are DATA to suggest so. On the other hand, holy scripture isn't backed up by anything but more scripture. Not good enough, for me anyway.
1- Athisisum is NOT a religion. It's the absense of Religion.
2- We have gaps in fossils because we havn't found them. Fossilisation is a ver complex prosses and very few animals/plants are in the right condisions for this prosess.
It's legable so whats the point. This is how I am i don't want everyone thinking that i'm a shapion speller. (I had to take English 3 tiems to pass it with a c)
The fossil record is not an accurate representation of the species because all bones do not become fossils.
The spores from outerspace theory is not widely accepted.
You bring up some stupid theories and don't even refute them. You just say they are wrong. So some atheist have stupid theories no different than your stupid god hypothesis.
I clicked on the link to this video thinking it was going to be a satire. I was sadly mistaken. It took me till the end of the video to figure out that he was actually serious.
lol. Apparently "we don't know the answer, therefore the answer is magical sky man" is exactly the same as "we don't know the answer, therefore we don't know the answer".
Re-defining the meaning of words to mean the opposite of what they mean never gets old. Orwell would be proud. :_)
And punctuated equilibrium was not a gap filler, no more than any other paradigm in evolutionary theory is. Punctuated equilibrium is just the general mechanism of how certain evolutionary lineages progress.
If you want to have that argument you must also say "Well they didn't know what that small stuff was and they called it atoms and the filled the gap...".
Do not mistake the scientific definitions of a hypothesis and a theory with the everyday ones.
the gap-fillers you're talking about are called alternative hypotheses and require no faith whatsoever. The true state of our knowledge of "X" is unknown, therefore we create a number of plausible explanations called hypotheses and we then go on to try to find corroborating evidence for them. If we don't, they remain hypotheses, if we do find convincing evidence, they become theories. That's it, no faith whatsoever.
Acceptance of evolution is not tantamount to atheism. If you don't understand that, then you're fucking stupid.
It's hilarious how Christians think if they can either present a quasi-convincing case for a deistic god or at least cast doubt on evolution, then they've got their foot in the door to introduce their own psychotic, malevolent god.
This video is such a shame... I'm not going to waste too much time using logic to disprove an exsistance of a "God" as faith is illogical by definition.
However, a theory is just a theory, science never says "X happened because of Y and thats it" Anyone can challenge any theory, providing they can prove with logical arguments and evidence.
.... Just remember that 9/11 was done in the name of God, just like the holocaust. Faith is so easily used to justify anything since no prove is needed
now althought ur correct at not even bothering to use logic to explain to these ppl why god is bullshit [lol], pointing to terrorist acts in the name of god does not disprove religion, just like when bill o'rielly says that stalin was an atheist an a mass murdered therefore atheism is not true does not disprove the logic of atheism.
I understand what yousaying. however the terrorist acts were actually done in the name of "God/Allah/etc.." whether that was right or wrong is another discussion lol.
The main problem is the "god wanted me to do XYZ" excuse can be used for anything good or bad. Faith is a powerful thing to mess with regardless if there is a god or not.
Atheists on the other hand don't dont go around killing others beause they dont believe in god etc.. thats just silly :D
Wow, That was pretty much the truth. The athiest just deny God for one reason only. They are wicked and are scared to believe. but if they understood the bible by reading it. they would not fear God being scared of him. they would fear God by reverence. which means respect for an athiest. lol
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
...and suggest possible theories, while a religious person will pounce on the gap as evidence for a supreme being who was invented for the very purpose of filling gaps, a purpose that would be equally served by a flying spaghetti monster.
I hear the term flying spagetti monster so much i cant help but wonder, Are all athiests brainwashed by richard dawkins. Just follow him off the cliff into hellfire. i feel so sorry for you people.
I detect a certain sense of irony in this post. Firstly, it wasn't Dawkins who proposed the spaghetti monster example. Second, I don't 'follow' Dawkins, I merely admire his writings on religion, and will happily disagree with him on some things. Please do not insult me by accusing me of not choosing my own beliefs, if you want an example of someone who formulates all of their beliefs from what they are told in a single text, rather than thinking about them for themselves, look closer to home.
@jasonwkeller76 O yeah the threat of hell. Any system that needs threats to survive isnt worth anything. It's clearly that you don't understand atheists, or even care to understand them. You generalize them with your Richard Dawkins argument, you make them seem like stupid, cause you feel so sorry for them. Because of theists like you, atheism is there in the first place. With simple generalizations like you use you are fine billboard for atheism. Keep up the good work.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I don't think that any of those authors would say they believed in parallel universe theory, I know Dawkins doesn't. He merely poses it as a possible alternative, an example of why God isn't the only solution. We don't know the solution to the so called Goldilocks enigma because we at this time do not have enough evidence, but religious people come to their conclusions despite not having enough evidence. You are wrong, when a scientist reaches a gap they will admit their ignorance...
You are misrepresenting the books and authors you mentioned, there is at least a scrap and at most quite a few tonnes of evidence for the ideas and theories they mention, but not one for god. Not a single micro-gram. I wonder why that is???
why do grown adults think that having imaginary friends makes them competent to pontificate on theoretical physics, mathematics, chemistry, evolutionary biology, paleontology.....WITHOUT doing a stroke of work to gain an actual understanding of these subjects.
You clearly don't know the difference between faith and reason. There is no evidence to support the bronze-age mythologies of the bible. However much scientists want to speculate they still come back to the evidence. Bible thumpers (like you) want to say that since we dont' know everything, the uncertainty means that faith (in the bible) is just as good a standard for truth as evidence-based reasoning. It is not.
Check out the video "Thinking 101" it will explain some of this to you.
get the fuck outta here fag Ive seen ur channel ur a radical iranian muslim so dont go pretendin ur atheist or catholic or shit cuz u aint ur radical muslim extremist
go fuck urself osama i know u feel really secure behind ur radical madrasa in tehran but u dunno who I am u terrorist asshole so dont make any assumptions about being a sick motherfucker cuz teh marines are comin for u
fucking terrorist stop messaging me about how ur not a muslim I know ur some christfag inbred hillbilly assfucker u go support bush now and send more of our boys to iraq jackass
PS thanks for the suggestion of insulting reyy619 I cant wait for his reply :D)
omg i knew it ur just some pussy liberal who hates our freedoms but im tellin u traitor if ur gonna take my guns u can take them from my cold dead hands ur even a traitor to our muslim friends in the middle east who have our oil i bet ur just a socialist like obama u gonna turn america into a communist dictatorship but im on to u i bet those priests at ur madrasa abused u so u became some gay san francisco left wing obama loving gay marriage supporting gun law tree hugger but im on to u good
freedom is shithole camel pilot countries like iran to shut the fuck up and do as we say and give us ur oil oh yea and also let the jews kill u without resisting cuz were america and we pwn all also give up ur culture and values cause only capitalist american society is the best and ur all evil dictators who want to attack us i saw it on fox news did i mention give us ur oil? no? then get the fuck on with it towelhead we want ur iranian muslim oil
3:47 Panspermia is possible just google it and find out more about it they have found meteorites with these "impossible" as this guy puts it bacteria on it.
60 years ago if someone told you that Pluto was 2 planets orbiting each other and not one you would have said whats Pluto?
This is about the intelligence of people, even today some cant even find the place they live on a map. Humans are not evolved enough they can barely think for them self, we are prone to delusions and hallucinations.
Crikey, when I started watching this I was expecting some strong philosophical discussion but he just left off a chain of lies and misrepresentations about the current state of scientific consensus. I more could I expect, he's a christian. Liars to the core.
So you can generalise by saying ALL Christians are "liars to the core"?? How do you come to that conclusion? Actually Christians (in the TRUE sense of the word,ie "born again" Christians) are ANYTHING but liars! They have found the TRUTH and are happy and willing to share the TRUTH with others! So maybe get your facts straight or think outside the box before you go jumping to the wrong conclusions? LOL!
Religion - A religion is a set of tenets and practices, often centered upon specific supernatural and moral claims about reality, the cosmos, and human nature, and often codified as prayer, ritual, or religious law.
Athiesm is none of these things so therefore it is not a religion.
Yes a lack of belief in God - to the atheists detriment unfortunately! Because God is the Creator of the universe and All that is in it. And without Him there is NO WAY to Heaven. So I hope you find the TRUTH of Jesus Christ as your saviour before the day you die.
uh you mean like truth the world is flat or that there is a ocean in the sky or that the world is only 6k years old when we know that the speed of the light from stars takes billions of years to reach us um where is the truth is it right after the ten commandments where it teaches you how to treat your slaves HUH??? where is the truth? is it the part that says to stone bad children WOW LOTS OF TRUTH BUB
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
1. The parallel universe theory is not the scientific consensus - its one of a number of theories. Its not supernatural or magical - its entirely plausible given our understanding of physics. God is not.
2. Did you think that evolution had a 'constant pace'? Wow.
3. Crick said that abiogenesis on earth was possible. He also said that it was possible that earth's life had come (consciously or not) from elsewhere, but that any alien life would need to have come from abiogenesis also. (CONT'D)
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
4. I don't think this guy has read any of these books... If he had he wouldn't be arguing these points like this!
5. 'Spores from outer space' (panspermia, even though its not a terribly popular theory) is still a logical possibility. It requires no magic, and therefore it requires no faith.
6. I blame the credit crunch on this guy. Not sure why, but I get the feeling this guy stuffs sh*t up on an epic scale. Regularly.
Although I don't think you know very well the stuff you're talking about.. especially about fossil records, but I do admit that there are stuff in science that definitely requires a leap of faith to believe in since there's barely any evidence but that's why those aren't accepted as facts.
But still that doesn't mean we should accept some supernatural bullshit instead. I don't need to have an explanation to everything.. mysterious universe is very exciting and we learn little bit more every day.
i have READ THE BIBLE from cover to cover and I just cannot believe how anyone can think it is the word of god!! It is full of god being HUMAN, jealous, petty, spiteful, vengeful and changing his mind. To Quote "I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours"
AND "
Which is it, is man one of God's blunders or is God one of man's?"
And Pascals WAGER states you might as well ACT as if you believe in god, because if he does exist you go to heaven and if he doesn't... well, what have you lost? But this is so stupid! If I pretend to believe in god, won't god see through that? You think I am being wilful or awkward or pretentious saying I don't believe in god, as if I know he is there but choose to ignore him. But actually, everything I see and hear about religion cries out, LIES, HYPOCRACY, DECIET, SELF-DECEPTION....
OK I didn't get the point first time, but he is still a christian trying to pick holes in evolution and science. Admittedly a lot more intelligently and convincingly than Cameron and Comfort, and he has picked up on the slightly lunatic fringe of science (if our planet was seeded with life, where did THAT life come from??) But at the end of it all, he is still saying God Dun It!!!
A house is built by a builder, we know the materials and skills involved. No-one knows how the Universe came into being, but the probabilty of it being created by an entity which exists outside space and time is much less likely than the big bang theory. The ONLY basis for belief in the "big god" theory is the bible, and as source of knowledge it has no credibility given it's contradictions, questionable morals and uncertain origins. Probability is maths based, not faith or philosopy based.
50 Percent God exist, and if you acknowledge him your okay, 50 he isn't, BUT if you lived like he didn't exist, and you find out he was, your screwed.
Another reason why I side with God. Note wordavee the bible has no contradictions, I recommend you reasearch the bible before you attempt to critisize it. Questionable morals?, Western society is built on the morals in the bible. Uncertain origins?, More reasearch can be done in this area.
In military strategem, Sun Tzu puts heavy enphasis on know what your enemy is doing in order to plot your next movement.
Lets say Christianity is your enemy, and yet you know little to none about it (assumption, return to your earlier point about contradictions, origins and morals)
If you debate that Probability is maths based, then I will always refer back to Pascals theory if you want to debate God's existance.
Is it more probable that matter suddenly streamed out of nowhere then he
it being created by an intelligent being. Logic teachs that the Matter has to come from a created being.
Now Science works by proving, as of now 70% of einsteins work and the work on the creation of the universe is theoratical physics, in other words, speculation with little math involved.
I ask a simple question, debating the science behind it requires more then this text box spares.
And you should read your science :-In projective geometry, Pascal's theorem (aka Hexagrammum Mysticum Theorem) states that if an arbitrary hexagon is inscribed in any conic section, and opposite pairs of sides are extended until they meet, the three intersection points will lie on a straight line, the Pascal line of that configuration. In the Euclidean plane, the theorem has exceptions; its natural home is the projective plane. What you are talking about Pascals WAGER..
But if you want to really believe that 1-st century theories, then please do so, get yourself some donkeys, start preaching all day and perform miracles and go live under 1-st century conditions if you need to, and leave the scientific society as soon as you can.
After all, all that SCIENCE stuff is off course completely wrong, there is not one thing science ever got right, and it's of no practical use anyway...
Yeah. Of course. One should of course reject ALL of science, because science has still something left unexplained and can only make some better or lesser hypothesis about it, and replace that with a religious doctrine for which there is obviously NO evidence at all, even worse, all predictions one could make from the bible (a 6000 year old earth) are cateorically wrong.
nothing(something which doesnt exist) CAN create something, EVEN though we never have observed it happening in nature or in the universe.If that isn't vodoo science I don't know what is.mud puddle struck by lightning, created created living organisms. LOL
The fossil record is not an accurate representation of the species because all bones do not become fossils.
The spores from outerspace theory is not widely accepted.
You bring up some stupid theories and don't even refute them. You just say they are wrong. So some atheist have stupid theories no different than your stupid god hypothesis.
"So called" _____ theory... every theory is "so called"
Funny how the "spores from space" theory is NOT accepted as scientific theory. Funny how that was a phony gap filler, that was spewed out from the scientific community.
1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
2. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.
... distort reality to fit your beliefs. That is not how science works. Science use facts to draw conclusions from them, not the opposite. You get a stupid idea of the creation mith and try to bash science based on a single fucking fairy tale book!! how reasonable! It is true because it is in the bible and it is in the bible because it is true. Can't you see the stupidity in here? The redundancy? no, of course not, you've been brainwashed and your IQ is too low to allow you...
Your wrong the parallel universe is now based upon multi-dimensions from the superstring theory. every scientific theory is called theory so as to try to dispel it, often a new or more refined theory evolves out of the old one, ie how can you understand something until you try to understand, the more you learn, the more you test, the better you are at defining it, ie. was it solidification of volcanic rock under extreme pressure that forms Diamonds OR as you would say god did it, a bit 2 simple.
you are the one filling the gaps!! you try to find one piece of fabricated evidence to disprove one rock solid theory. BTW do you know what a theory means? read at wikipedia. And yes, there is a LOT of fossil evidence showing evolution happening. Go study more you tool...
PS what we need to hear now is that you believe the earth is 6000 years old and that adam and eve existed...
You said that it doesn't matter to you if you are a scientist. That only states your ignorance on the subject.
yes we do have a lot of fossil evidence.there were cells...then there were animals..then there were bigger animals.By the way the Earh can't be 6000 years old. by any means.First you have the BC era.The times of Early Biblical figures if you will permit.then you have 33 years for Christ then you have the AD era.And it already 2008 AD. Also How did Adam and eve not exist? you're telling me there were not two initial humans that started the whole race? So who did start it off?
I really didn't understand your logic. your are telling me that you believe in evolution or not? Actually, it is not about believing but understanting. Once you understand it, you know it works. Then you realise that there were no initial humans, it was a smooth and long transition between species. It is a gradual thing. Species don;t just pop. Study eveolution deeper. For real. There is no sense in adam and eve. It is just a mith. a fairy tale, for a time without science.
Stop trying to find holes in science when you clearly have no scientific education.
People a lot smarter than you have been working for a few hundred years now since we got out of the religious dark ages to bring us the lifestyle that modern technology and understanding of science has brought us.
If you want to go live in Jesusland and trade in progress for dogma then be my guest, but leave those of us with the capacity for independent thought alone.
Let me help, Mister Niles a bit: the big difference between filling a gap with a thesis for several years implies an attitude for development and allows change which the bible doesn´t since 150 post christum natae. So i´d rather estimate, dear mister niles that you are not getting the point, do you?
Man, I actually sat through this vid and didn't puke. I guess I have been listening to so much bible babble lately on YT that I am now immune to it's effect on my Sympathetic nervous system.
Anywhooo, "kind" ?? What the hell does that mean? Care to elaborate. I hear bible thumpers using the term. I have never seen this word used in evolutionary context. I would love a definition. Please reference your definition so that I may see where it comes from.
Even if all the arguments in this post hold water (and they don't, but the video response already covered that), you haven't said anything about why "sticking with the God of the Bible" is any better than another "gap filler," whether it's another religion or conjecture. Why not Buddhism? Why not Islam? Why not some cult? By your own arguments Christianity is no more valid than any other belief system.
Btw, I'm an Agnostic who acknowledges the possibility of a god. I just don't like your dogma.
I like the way you express yourself. Reminds me of Kurt Godel's proof of the Incompleteness Theorem -- he basically says "using your rules of logic, such and such must be the case".
Thanks. I write opinion a lot, so I've gotten pretty good at it.
I've actually read some stuff about Godel's Incompleteness Theorem while I was researching the idea of a Theory of Everything (Stephe Hawking used similar arguments to say that any ToE will be incomplete or incosistant), and it blew me away. The idea is incredibly simple, but it's implications are unbelievable.
What strikes me most about the way Godel approached the topic was actually not so much his result (which is striking, as well) but that the argument he makes is inherently defensible against countering, because he *accepts* the rules of any system that his theorem describes. "By your own argument" arguments are some of the most convincing arguments to be made :P
wow, you must have made a lot of spam accounts to get all those votes! LOL! Your message is obviously so full of lies or you wouldn't be so scared of my comments!! LOL
I see you deleted my comment LOL! scared of truth?
So you base your beliefs on a translation of a folk tale passed down by shepherds through spoken word until finally being written down centuries after the central character had died and you believe this to be the word of god, no evidence required, simply because that is what you were told while growing up. But you doubt facts gained through the rigorous scientific method, which has evidence and has completely changed the world in 200 years! LOL!
religion n. 1 the belief in a superhuman controlling power, esp. in a personal God or gods entitiled to obedience and worship. 2 the expression of this worship. 3 a particular system of faith and worship. 4 life under monastic vows (the way of religion). [from Latin religo 'obligation, bond, reverence']
To any educated person atheism is clearly not a religion. And to argue that "science doesn't know everything yet so therefore the bible is true" is absurd.
"The Bible - Because all the works of science cannot equal the wisdom of cattle-sacrificing primitives who thought every animal species in the world lived within walking distance of Noah's House"
Philosophically speaking, everyone does things which require faith in objective reality everyday - it doesn't mean that having faith in one thing (provable reality) is the same as faith in another much less likely thing (religion based on backwards folk tales)
what does this guy have to say about agnostics then, isnt it right that they follow the principles of atheism, but that "gap filler" is what they consider to be the unknown or supernatural.
Dawkins proposed the multiverse theory as one possibility, but he admitted himself that it wasn't very convincing. "Punctuated equilibrium," is not an agreed upon theory, and I don't think it's one that Dawkins agrees with. Panspermia is not taken seriously by many people. You're setting up straw men; none of the authors in the major atheism books support Panspermia. Is this a joke? I can't tell; am I a victim of 'Poe's Law'.
Freedom and love to the people of the world.
No one should force beliefs on another just because THEY believe it's the RIGHT answer! The RIGHT answer is what you create... With your mind. The human race is a beautiful thing, stop fighting over such petty things and accept and love your asses of instead!!!
postalcode900 7 months ago
I'd like to know what "Atheist Religion" is. Mainly because we dont have a religion. Atheism requires total disbelief in a god. Without a god, you cannot call it a religion. A lack of belief is not a religion, and if you cant see this, then you truly lack the ability to think for yourself.
mmmmmarcus 7 months ago
You are being thick in quantifying a belief in a totally unsubstantiated fairy story character with scientific research.
An unsubstantiated idea is called a hypothesis, which would include the idea of a giant invsible fairy story character. A hypothesis becomes a theory when evidence backs up the idea. A theory is then tested to destruction to disprove it. A theory becomes a fact when all other causes can be ruled out and when all the evidence proves it correct, as in the case of evolution.
Valthepixie 8 months ago
fine tuning ? ... yet we somehow managed to get stuck living on a thin skin of a tiny planet in the vast emptiness.
what are the chances eh.
NefariousVirtuoso88 8 months ago
All Christians are Atheists for other Gods. They don't believe in Buddha or Set or Thor or Zeus or Allah. How can they deny those Gods? They deny them the same way an Atheist denies them. They use the many of the same arguments atheists use
AbuBishir 1 year ago
Atheism is a religion? Last I checked, theism isn't considered a religion but merely a category in which to place it. Why would it be any different the other way around? You've got to be careful when addressing the incredibly broad category of atheism because when you call out atheism, you're addressing everything ranging from no belief at all to belief systems such as Buddhism and Taoism. Fine-tuned? Then what is my appendix for? Theories aren't instant gap fillers, they're ideas to be tested.
Mystrymeat 1 year ago
You don't necessarily go to a place of faith for gap fillers, often the gap fillers are arrived at not through observable evidence but through logic and reason. Personally I think you can arrive at God's necessity a priori, but a lot of people would disagree with me.
ikkuj 1 year ago
You, sir, are terribly misinformed.
rockboris666 1 year ago
Are wisdom teeth part of god's intelligent design?
ButterOnCorn 1 year ago
@ButterOnCorn Yeah, because that sick fuck just loves watching us suffer! =P
mmmmmarcus 7 months ago
If by "Atheist Religion" you mean "most retarded video ever" then I agree with you.
pythor2 1 year ago
I don't know whats more laughable the fact that some religious people think evolution is a religion or that they think athesits have something wrong with them because they don't worship an idol that controls every aspect of their life.
Requiemxtoxinnocence 1 year ago
I'm an atheist and I don't follow the parallel universe theory. Why? Because it's just a theory while the Big Bang is a fact now.
P3RF3CTD3ATH 1 year ago
* theories are coherent, falsifiable explanations of facts.
JmkLcAeJsm 1 year ago
parallel universes aren't a theory, it's a hipothesis. it means that it's the best possible explanation, but to be used only until we find a better one.
Frikgeek 1 year ago
This guy doesn't understand what he is arguing against. Typical creationist. He would fail an exam on evolution.
Also, the "Seeding of Earth" theory actually has quite a bit of scientific possibility to it. We already have rock from Mars with dead bacteria in it. Not saying that's what happened, just saying it could have happened without any god........that's the point. God isn't needed to explain anything.
rep300 1 year ago
This guy doesn't understand what he is arguing against. Typical creationist. He would fail an exam on evolution.
rep300 1 year ago
you completely dismiss evolution??
radoa1 1 year ago
Comment removed
MomoTheBellyDancer 1 year ago
Wow, an Oriental despot, only bigger, and invisible, postulated by bands of illiterate, flea-bitten, itinerant goatherds, sitting around a campfire of camel dung, thinking of ways to distract their slaves from the fact that there was no air conditioning.
It's CALLED "the big bang," not so-called, and it's a widely accepted model, not a theory. Again, it's CALLED "punctuated equilibrium," etc. Francis Crick wasn't "blown away" and never said that ANYTHING "popped out of some primordial goo."
cliffwalkinfool 1 year ago
Go back to worship your gods. Better for you.
J0EH3AD 1 year ago
Quite a fantastic false dichotomy you present: "you can either believe my fairy tales, or make up your own".
Trouble is, it neglects what most atheists and scientists do, which is simply say "I don't know. And we may never know - but that's no reason to start believing in a conscious omnipotent creator."
And none of the "new atheists" think Panspermia has any merit.
Oh, and presenting a hypothesis isn't equal to having faith.
How does it feel to be wrong about everything?
aamesxdavid 1 year ago
you believe in an inisible ghost who likes you. okay?
dudeedud7 2 years ago
People confuse coincidence with causation in these matters. Imagine any universe where intelligent life arises. In any such place, it would appear to sentient beings that their existence is improbable - particularly in our case since the rest of our solar system is dead. I'm not saying that there is no god or higher power, but our mere existence is NOT proof that the universe was "fine tuned" for our existence anymore than Mars is proof that the universe was fine tuned for the existence of Mars.
mrw21 2 years ago
You misrepresented the opposing position. Parallel universe is only a possibility, not a majority belief. I think most people laugh the fine tuning argument away when you posit the universe was fined tuned for humans then we realize humans would instantly die in 99.999999999999999999999927 of the universe. And abiogenesis has been observed in the lab. (self replicating RNA, and early form of DNA.)
kyledavidbyron 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
OMG!! I went to the link posted on the sidebar.. Bwahaha.. Ohh goodness! This guy is so the funniest accidental comedian. Are you ready to don "gods armor"? How about cope with evil godless aliens? What is that you say about demons and witches cramping your christian style? Oh you owe it to yourself and find solutions to these every day fundie problems. PLEASE click on the link for a laugh!
x1tekja 2 years ago
This moron never read the books he claimed.. What a joke!
x1tekja 2 years ago
Wow, this guy is taking all sorts or religion explaining how the world started and saying science said so and attributing that to atheist. WOW, check in the dictionnairy to see what an atheist is and check out what is the theory of the big bang without taking other religion and make a new theory claiming that's teh theory of teh big bang and saying that's what sccience says. By the way, go see a true scientist to understand what science actually claims, don't go see Behe.
SpawnINRI 2 years ago
You are a fool who didn't read the books you attempt to debunk.
I, at least, read the bible before I reached the conclusion that it is 99% likely to be complete bollocks.
FerretBob 2 years ago
Lol, you said exactly what I had in mind while watching this misleading hypocrite. Thanks for saving me the effort :D
uncypaolo 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
right your an idiot moron
Turpy7777 2 years ago
In fact, atheism is a religion, and Lord Dawkins is their god.
1carlosf 2 years ago
I love it when Christians try to refute something they don't even understand.
FormicHiveQueen 2 years ago
Wanker!
Ammer23 2 years ago
It's pretty clear this guy didn't actually read the books. The books say the proper answer to questions of the unknown is 'I don't know'. And all explicitly reject punctuated equilibrium and panspermia. They do talk about the multiverse, but the only point with that is not that the multiverse is true, but that it's a second explanation for improbable physical laws. So long as you have a second explanation, then improbable physical laws no more proves God than it proves the second explanation.
sam51092 2 years ago
Hey where did they find the talking monkey...wtf It's the missing link
wolf9264 2 years ago
Right from the start you show ignorance, atheism is not a religion, you want proof? Look at Buddhism, there is no god in that religion, because a religion is a belief system, atheism merely states that they have no belief in any gods, it is NOT a statement of beliefs. Not all atheists believe in evolution or the big bang, hell some Christians even believe in that, that's strike two. We've seen transitional fossils, not all animals leave behind fossils, strike three, you're ignorant.
KetolaKun 2 years ago
Fail: Rationality fills the gaps with 'unknown' until more evidence is available. The problem with your assertion is the idea of science asserting 'philosophical conjecture' as fact, but is is not fact just a guess. I can understand how you cannot see the difference.
TheNewRenaissance 2 years ago
yeah the key term is "GAP FILLER", science looks at the evidence, then fills in the gaps with theories. science changes is views. when DNA was found, Darwin's theory, was at a real risk of being dis-proven. But DNA filled in a gap of the theory, explaining how changes in a species can accrue. Science changes, religion doesn't
unseen2021 2 years ago
you clearly don't understand the first scientific term that you said in the entire video....
amazing.
KingHeathen 2 years ago
This is a hard one, I cant figure it out... Is he serious or not? I think he is. Its ridiculous that there is such a blurry line between sarcasm and actual christianity.
deejayedwards 2 years ago
Why do I even watch apologist videos on youtube?
CamdenBloke 2 years ago
The very nature of science is to question things, nothing is (or should be) sacrosanct. But, this does not necessarily mean that just because someone questions a law (or theory) that the law/theory in question is wrong. Was Einstein a detractor of Newton when he showed that the Newtonian "Laws" of mechanics did not explain everything (wasn't that why quantum mechanics came into existence)? Just because Newtonian mechanics is "wrong" in some situations, does not mean it is useless.
bendertl31 2 years ago
You purport that atheists thrive on their faith in science to fill in the "gaps". Maybe so. But, maybe it's human nature to want to know the answers? I think the biggest difference between atheists and theists is the way we go about finding those answers. Atheists tend to have a nagging desire to have their answers backed up by DATA. On the other hand, theists' scientific curiosity is suppressed by their fears of what the presuppose could happen to their "souls" upon death.
bendertl31 2 years ago
Both scientific law and scientific theory are based on tested hypotheses; both are supported by a large body of empirical data; both help unify a particular field; both are widely accepted by the vast majority (if not all) scientists within a discipline. Furthermore, both scientific laws and scientific theories could be shown to be wrong at some time if there are DATA to suggest so. On the other hand, holy scripture isn't backed up by anything but more scripture. Not good enough, for me anyway.
bendertl31 2 years ago 2
How about read the books reather than quote mine.
1- Athisisum is NOT a religion. It's the absense of Religion.
2- We have gaps in fossils because we havn't found them. Fossilisation is a ver complex prosses and very few animals/plants are in the right condisions for this prosess.
3- They are called Theroys for a reason.
jaws900 2 years ago 2
@jaws900, I don't wish to offend, but a simple spell check would make you look infinitely more intelligent.
diin2live 2 years ago
It's legable so whats the point. This is how I am i don't want everyone thinking that i'm a shapion speller. (I had to take English 3 tiems to pass it with a c)
jaws900 2 years ago
Your ignorance angers me.
Some say that. Others say otherwise.
The fossil record is not an accurate representation of the species because all bones do not become fossils.
The spores from outerspace theory is not widely accepted.
You bring up some stupid theories and don't even refute them. You just say they are wrong. So some atheist have stupid theories no different than your stupid god hypothesis.
Faith is never needed you sir fail the internets.
k3ckakal 2 years ago 2
I clicked on the link to this video thinking it was going to be a satire. I was sadly mistaken. It took me till the end of the video to figure out that he was actually serious.
diin2live 2 years ago
poe's law.
CamdenBloke 2 years ago
I think he's serious. Is he not?
diin2live 2 years ago
I think he is. Poe's law, of course, means that it's often hard to tell.
CamdenBloke 2 years ago
lol. Apparently "we don't know the answer, therefore the answer is magical sky man" is exactly the same as "we don't know the answer, therefore we don't know the answer".
Re-defining the meaning of words to mean the opposite of what they mean never gets old. Orwell would be proud. :_)
Flyborg 2 years ago
And punctuated equilibrium was not a gap filler, no more than any other paradigm in evolutionary theory is. Punctuated equilibrium is just the general mechanism of how certain evolutionary lineages progress.
If you want to have that argument you must also say "Well they didn't know what that small stuff was and they called it atoms and the filled the gap...".
Do not mistake the scientific definitions of a hypothesis and a theory with the everyday ones.
RationalFuture 2 years ago
Ok, for the serious part:
the gap-fillers you're talking about are called alternative hypotheses and require no faith whatsoever. The true state of our knowledge of "X" is unknown, therefore we create a number of plausible explanations called hypotheses and we then go on to try to find corroborating evidence for them. If we don't, they remain hypotheses, if we do find convincing evidence, they become theories. That's it, no faith whatsoever.
RationalFuture 2 years ago
Supernovas filling in the gaps of evolutionary theory ????
Holy fucking crap, dude, you made my day ! :)
RationalFuture 2 years ago
That was the moment when i rated one star :)
niniomigrania 2 years ago
Acceptance of evolution is not tantamount to atheism. If you don't understand that, then you're fucking stupid.
It's hilarious how Christians think if they can either present a quasi-convincing case for a deistic god or at least cast doubt on evolution, then they've got their foot in the door to introduce their own psychotic, malevolent god.
ErikWithBrain 2 years ago
well they fill in shit because they DONT KNOW THEM YET, god dam you suck
oxygenownz 2 years ago
hahahahah
Gravepunishment 2 years ago
Fine-tuning?
Tell that to the dodo...
Tleilaxu0 2 years ago 7
This has been flagged as spam show
@Tleilaxu0
"Tell that to the dodo... "
Or explain all those galaxies smashing together.
MomoTheBellyDancer 1 year ago
This video is such a shame... I'm not going to waste too much time using logic to disprove an exsistance of a "God" as faith is illogical by definition.
However, a theory is just a theory, science never says "X happened because of Y and thats it" Anyone can challenge any theory, providing they can prove with logical arguments and evidence.
.... Just remember that 9/11 was done in the name of God, just like the holocaust. Faith is so easily used to justify anything since no prove is needed
richard2k5 2 years ago
now althought ur correct at not even bothering to use logic to explain to these ppl why god is bullshit [lol], pointing to terrorist acts in the name of god does not disprove religion, just like when bill o'rielly says that stalin was an atheist an a mass murdered therefore atheism is not true does not disprove the logic of atheism.
kittygirl792 2 years ago
@ kittygirl792
I understand what yousaying. however the terrorist acts were actually done in the name of "God/Allah/etc.." whether that was right or wrong is another discussion lol.
The main problem is the "god wanted me to do XYZ" excuse can be used for anything good or bad. Faith is a powerful thing to mess with regardless if there is a god or not.
Atheists on the other hand don't dont go around killing others beause they dont believe in god etc.. thats just silly :D
richard2k5 2 years ago
Wow, That was pretty much the truth. The athiest just deny God for one reason only. They are wicked and are scared to believe. but if they understood the bible by reading it. they would not fear God being scared of him. they would fear God by reverence. which means respect for an athiest. lol
jasonwkeller76 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
...and suggest possible theories, while a religious person will pounce on the gap as evidence for a supreme being who was invented for the very purpose of filling gaps, a purpose that would be equally served by a flying spaghetti monster.
wowsa0 2 years ago
I hear the term flying spagetti monster so much i cant help but wonder, Are all athiests brainwashed by richard dawkins. Just follow him off the cliff into hellfire. i feel so sorry for you people.
jasonwkeller76 2 years ago 7
I detect a certain sense of irony in this post. Firstly, it wasn't Dawkins who proposed the spaghetti monster example. Second, I don't 'follow' Dawkins, I merely admire his writings on religion, and will happily disagree with him on some things. Please do not insult me by accusing me of not choosing my own beliefs, if you want an example of someone who formulates all of their beliefs from what they are told in a single text, rather than thinking about them for themselves, look closer to home.
wowsa0 2 years ago
@jasonwkeller76 O yeah the threat of hell. Any system that needs threats to survive isnt worth anything. It's clearly that you don't understand atheists, or even care to understand them. You generalize them with your Richard Dawkins argument, you make them seem like stupid, cause you feel so sorry for them. Because of theists like you, atheism is there in the first place. With simple generalizations like you use you are fine billboard for atheism. Keep up the good work.
Ranokian 9 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I don't think that any of those authors would say they believed in parallel universe theory, I know Dawkins doesn't. He merely poses it as a possible alternative, an example of why God isn't the only solution. We don't know the solution to the so called Goldilocks enigma because we at this time do not have enough evidence, but religious people come to their conclusions despite not having enough evidence. You are wrong, when a scientist reaches a gap they will admit their ignorance...
wowsa0 2 years ago
You are misrepresenting the books and authors you mentioned, there is at least a scrap and at most quite a few tonnes of evidence for the ideas and theories they mention, but not one for god. Not a single micro-gram. I wonder why that is???
alianchild 3 years ago
why do grown adults think that having imaginary friends makes them competent to pontificate on theoretical physics, mathematics, chemistry, evolutionary biology, paleontology.....WITHOUT doing a stroke of work to gain an actual understanding of these subjects.
this man is a bawling simpleton.
McMonster65 3 years ago 2
Wow, ignorance in video.
laraemeadows 3 years ago
@laraemeadows
You can get it in written form too... the bible
richard2k5 2 years ago
You clearly don't know the difference between faith and reason. There is no evidence to support the bronze-age mythologies of the bible. However much scientists want to speculate they still come back to the evidence. Bible thumpers (like you) want to say that since we dont' know everything, the uncertainty means that faith (in the bible) is just as good a standard for truth as evidence-based reasoning. It is not.
Check out the video "Thinking 101" it will explain some of this to you.
psusac 3 years ago
The fossil records are very robust, and you ramble creationist propoganda like a puppet.
Where is the crocaduck and "Atheist Nightmare", the banana?
Clown.
ByronC900 3 years ago
This deserves its rating. It sucks balls.
french0atheist 3 years ago
so what i got out of that was that atheism is retarded therefore, i am not retarded
isoscelespopsicle 3 years ago
I want my 4 minutes and 50 seconds back!
scoppit 3 years ago
Comment removed
O0oSorousho0O 3 years ago
get the fuck outta here fag Ive seen ur channel ur a radical iranian muslim so dont go pretendin ur atheist or catholic or shit cuz u aint ur radical muslim extremist
manhattanwombat 3 years ago
Comment removed
O0oSorousho0O 3 years ago
go fuck urself osama i know u feel really secure behind ur radical madrasa in tehran but u dunno who I am u terrorist asshole so dont make any assumptions about being a sick motherfucker cuz teh marines are comin for u
manhattanwombat 3 years ago
Comment removed
O0oSorousho0O 3 years ago
fucking terrorist stop messaging me about how ur not a muslim I know ur some christfag inbred hillbilly assfucker u go support bush now and send more of our boys to iraq jackass
PS thanks for the suggestion of insulting reyy619 I cant wait for his reply :D)
manhattanwombat 3 years ago
Comment removed
O0oSorousho0O 3 years ago
omg i knew it ur just some pussy liberal who hates our freedoms but im tellin u traitor if ur gonna take my guns u can take them from my cold dead hands ur even a traitor to our muslim friends in the middle east who have our oil i bet ur just a socialist like obama u gonna turn america into a communist dictatorship but im on to u i bet those priests at ur madrasa abused u so u became some gay san francisco left wing obama loving gay marriage supporting gun law tree hugger but im on to u good
manhattanwombat 3 years ago
Comment removed
O0oSorousho0O 3 years ago
ok so u didnt block me so I can define freedom
freedom is shithole camel pilot countries like iran to shut the fuck up and do as we say and give us ur oil oh yea and also let the jews kill u without resisting cuz were america and we pwn all also give up ur culture and values cause only capitalist american society is the best and ur all evil dictators who want to attack us i saw it on fox news did i mention give us ur oil? no? then get the fuck on with it towelhead we want ur iranian muslim oil
manhattanwombat 3 years ago
Comment removed
O0oSorousho0O 3 years ago
Comment removed
O0oSorousho0O 3 years ago
u block me?
manhattanwombat 3 years ago
3:47 Panspermia is possible just google it and find out more about it they have found meteorites with these "impossible" as this guy puts it bacteria on it.
60 years ago if someone told you that Pluto was 2 planets orbiting each other and not one you would have said whats Pluto?
This is about the intelligence of people, even today some cant even find the place they live on a map. Humans are not evolved enough they can barely think for them self, we are prone to delusions and hallucinations.
GodKillerAtheist 3 years ago
Crikey, when I started watching this I was expecting some strong philosophical discussion but he just left off a chain of lies and misrepresentations about the current state of scientific consensus. I more could I expect, he's a christian. Liars to the core.
artyfarty2 3 years ago
So you can generalise by saying ALL Christians are "liars to the core"?? How do you come to that conclusion? Actually Christians (in the TRUE sense of the word,ie "born again" Christians) are ANYTHING but liars! They have found the TRUTH and are happy and willing to share the TRUTH with others! So maybe get your facts straight or think outside the box before you go jumping to the wrong conclusions? LOL!
Jesus lives!
Peace.
nobodyknowsbutjesus 3 years ago
lol thinking atheism is a religion is just stupidity
DarkTheAthiest 3 years ago
Well what else is atheism if not a "religion"?
And the WRONG one I might add!) LOL!
Jesus lives!
Peace.
nobodyknowsbutjesus 3 years ago
Religion - A religion is a set of tenets and practices, often centered upon specific supernatural and moral claims about reality, the cosmos, and human nature, and often codified as prayer, ritual, or religious law.
Athiesm is none of these things so therefore it is not a religion.
DarkTheAthiest 3 years ago
you offer this conversation nothing.
Kenjihockey 3 years ago
atheism is not a religion, it is more a philosophy!!!
underclassdamnriot 3 years ago
It's not even a philosophy, it is just a lack of belief in gods.
artyfarty2 3 years ago
Yes a lack of belief in God - to the atheists detriment unfortunately! Because God is the Creator of the universe and All that is in it. And without Him there is NO WAY to Heaven. So I hope you find the TRUTH of Jesus Christ as your saviour before the day you die.
Jesus lives!
Peace.
nobodyknowsbutjesus 3 years ago 2
"Jesus Christ as your saviour "
grow up for pity's sake. It's frickin tall story! And obviously so!!
"Because God is the Creator of the universe ". Yawn.
"Jesus lives!"
zzzzzZZZZZzzzz
artyfarty2 3 years ago
"Fine tuning"? Fucktard moron. He's just another retarded christian.:)
winterstellar 3 years ago
Not all Christians are retarded. LOL!
Jesus lives!
Peace.
PS: At least Christians have the TRUTH and not a LIE! LOL!
nobodyknowsbutjesus 3 years ago 2
uh you mean like truth the world is flat or that there is a ocean in the sky or that the world is only 6k years old when we know that the speed of the light from stars takes billions of years to reach us um where is the truth is it right after the ten commandments where it teaches you how to treat your slaves HUH??? where is the truth? is it the part that says to stone bad children WOW LOTS OF TRUTH BUB
GodKillerAtheist 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
What an unimaginable cock-sucker.
FairWarningX1 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
i was laughing until i realised he was being serious.
melbn 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
1. The parallel universe theory is not the scientific consensus - its one of a number of theories. Its not supernatural or magical - its entirely plausible given our understanding of physics. God is not.
2. Did you think that evolution had a 'constant pace'? Wow.
3. Crick said that abiogenesis on earth was possible. He also said that it was possible that earth's life had come (consciously or not) from elsewhere, but that any alien life would need to have come from abiogenesis also. (CONT'D)
Rissoleking 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
4. I don't think this guy has read any of these books... If he had he wouldn't be arguing these points like this!
5. 'Spores from outer space' (panspermia, even though its not a terribly popular theory) is still a logical possibility. It requires no magic, and therefore it requires no faith.
6. I blame the credit crunch on this guy. Not sure why, but I get the feeling this guy stuffs sh*t up on an epic scale. Regularly.
Rissoleking 3 years ago
Although I don't think you know very well the stuff you're talking about.. especially about fossil records, but I do admit that there are stuff in science that definitely requires a leap of faith to believe in since there's barely any evidence but that's why those aren't accepted as facts.
But still that doesn't mean we should accept some supernatural bullshit instead. I don't need to have an explanation to everything.. mysterious universe is very exciting and we learn little bit more every day.
PeXis 3 years ago 3
i have READ THE BIBLE from cover to cover and I just cannot believe how anyone can think it is the word of god!! It is full of god being HUMAN, jealous, petty, spiteful, vengeful and changing his mind. To Quote "I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours"
AND "
Which is it, is man one of God's blunders or is God one of man's?"
wordavee 3 years ago
And Pascals WAGER states you might as well ACT as if you believe in god, because if he does exist you go to heaven and if he doesn't... well, what have you lost? But this is so stupid! If I pretend to believe in god, won't god see through that? You think I am being wilful or awkward or pretentious saying I don't believe in god, as if I know he is there but choose to ignore him. But actually, everything I see and hear about religion cries out, LIES, HYPOCRACY, DECIET, SELF-DECEPTION....
wordavee 3 years ago
wooops, looks like I refered to the wrong one, thanks for the clean up.
What have you lost?
You just lost eternal life after death...
Everything Politics screams is LIES, HYPOCRACY, DECIET, SELF-DECEPTION....
Everything football screams is LIES, HYPOCRACY, DECIET, SELF-DECEPTION....
Your terms apply to everything, if you have truly read the bible cover to cover, there is a seciton dedicated to this, where is it, have you read it?
SwordSaintSlayer 3 years ago
He's wrong. There is a mountain of evidence for changes in the fossil record. Not only in the fossil record but in the skeletal record as well.
He's talking shit.
maglavagna 3 years ago
The usual creationist crap, don't give facts, just look for gaps and fill them with god.
wordavee 3 years ago 2
and you missed his point completely...
*Golf clap*
Watch the video again and pay attention.
SwordSaintSlayer 3 years ago
OK I didn't get the point first time, but he is still a christian trying to pick holes in evolution and science. Admittedly a lot more intelligently and convincingly than Cameron and Comfort, and he has picked up on the slightly lunatic fringe of science (if our planet was seeded with life, where did THAT life come from??) But at the end of it all, he is still saying God Dun It!!!
wordavee 3 years ago
His, and mine, is based on probability.
Its more likely that a house was constructed then built by itself. Philosophy.
SwordSaintSlayer 3 years ago
A house is built by a builder, we know the materials and skills involved. No-one knows how the Universe came into being, but the probabilty of it being created by an entity which exists outside space and time is much less likely than the big bang theory. The ONLY basis for belief in the "big god" theory is the bible, and as source of knowledge it has no credibility given it's contradictions, questionable morals and uncertain origins. Probability is maths based, not faith or philosopy based.
wordavee 3 years ago
Then I refer back to Pascal's Theory
50 Percent God exist, and if you acknowledge him your okay, 50 he isn't, BUT if you lived like he didn't exist, and you find out he was, your screwed.
Another reason why I side with God. Note wordavee the bible has no contradictions, I recommend you reasearch the bible before you attempt to critisize it. Questionable morals?, Western society is built on the morals in the bible. Uncertain origins?, More reasearch can be done in this area.
SwordSaintSlayer 3 years ago
In military strategem, Sun Tzu puts heavy enphasis on know what your enemy is doing in order to plot your next movement.
Lets say Christianity is your enemy, and yet you know little to none about it (assumption, return to your earlier point about contradictions, origins and morals)
If you debate that Probability is maths based, then I will always refer back to Pascals theory if you want to debate God's existance.
Is it more probable that matter suddenly streamed out of nowhere then he
SwordSaintSlayer 3 years ago
it being created by an intelligent being. Logic teachs that the Matter has to come from a created being.
Now Science works by proving, as of now 70% of einsteins work and the work on the creation of the universe is theoratical physics, in other words, speculation with little math involved.
I ask a simple question, debating the science behind it requires more then this text box spares.
Did the house build itself?
or
Did a builder build it?
and lastly, explain to me the big bang.
SwordSaintSlayer 3 years ago
And you should read your science :-In projective geometry, Pascal's theorem (aka Hexagrammum Mysticum Theorem) states that if an arbitrary hexagon is inscribed in any conic section, and opposite pairs of sides are extended until they meet, the three intersection points will lie on a straight line, the Pascal line of that configuration. In the Euclidean plane, the theorem has exceptions; its natural home is the projective plane. What you are talking about Pascals WAGER..
wordavee 3 years ago
Hee.
But if you want to really believe that 1-st century theories, then please do so, get yourself some donkeys, start preaching all day and perform miracles and go live under 1-st century conditions if you need to, and leave the scientific society as soon as you can.
After all, all that SCIENCE stuff is off course completely wrong, there is not one thing science ever got right, and it's of no practical use anyway...
huh!
robheusd 3 years ago
Yeah. Of course. One should of course reject ALL of science, because science has still something left unexplained and can only make some better or lesser hypothesis about it, and replace that with a religious doctrine for which there is obviously NO evidence at all, even worse, all predictions one could make from the bible (a 6000 year old earth) are cateorically wrong.
robheusd 3 years ago 2
nothing(something which doesnt exist) CAN create something, EVEN though we never have observed it happening in nature or in the universe.If that isn't vodoo science I don't know what is.mud puddle struck by lightning, created created living organisms. LOL
ofreshartist 3 years ago
Your ignorance angers me.
Some say that. Others say otherwise.
The fossil record is not an accurate representation of the species because all bones do not become fossils.
The spores from outerspace theory is not widely accepted.
You bring up some stupid theories and don't even refute them. You just say they are wrong. So some atheist have stupid theories no different than your stupid god hypothesis.
Faith is never needed you sir fail the internets.
fatikis 3 years ago 2
Funny how science fills gaps with evidence, while theists continue to back up and away, as gaps are filled.
"Well the sun is a god"... no it's a star
"Well because the Earth is the center of the universe, we're special"... nope
"Well the beginning of life was caused by God, surely" ... no, that was ambiogenesis
"Well surely there's no waylife changed into what it is today but by God" no, that's evolution
"Well surely man is different from beast" no, he evolved just as well
Keep findn new gaps
funincluded 3 years ago
"Ours just so happened to get it right"
what bullshit.
"So called" _____ theory... every theory is "so called"
Funny how the "spores from space" theory is NOT accepted as scientific theory. Funny how that was a phony gap filler, that was spewed out from the scientific community.
You make theists look like fucking idiots.
funincluded 3 years ago
1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
2. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.
arielwollinger 3 years ago
5. the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.
6. something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience: to make a religion of fighting prejudice.
arielwollinger 3 years ago
3. the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.
4. the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion.
arielwollinger 3 years ago
... distort reality to fit your beliefs. That is not how science works. Science use facts to draw conclusions from them, not the opposite. You get a stupid idea of the creation mith and try to bash science based on a single fucking fairy tale book!! how reasonable! It is true because it is in the bible and it is in the bible because it is true. Can't you see the stupidity in here? The redundancy? no, of course not, you've been brainwashed and your IQ is too low to allow you...
arielwollinger 3 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Man you nailed him to a cross on that one.Very valid reasoning. He is brainwashed and will never change. like i said i hope he gets crucified
caleb11583 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
thanks! you are most welcome!
arielwollinger 3 years ago
You sir, are an idiot.
dennist3hmenace 3 years ago
Your wrong the parallel universe is now based upon multi-dimensions from the superstring theory. every scientific theory is called theory so as to try to dispel it, often a new or more refined theory evolves out of the old one, ie how can you understand something until you try to understand, the more you learn, the more you test, the better you are at defining it, ie. was it solidification of volcanic rock under extreme pressure that forms Diamonds OR as you would say god did it, a bit 2 simple.
aZeroGodist 3 years ago
so your point is basically...believe the atheist fairy story..or believe the theist fairy story, dosent really progress much does it?
iouakick 3 years ago
which atheist fairy story?
arielwollinger 3 years ago
you are the one filling the gaps!! you try to find one piece of fabricated evidence to disprove one rock solid theory. BTW do you know what a theory means? read at wikipedia. And yes, there is a LOT of fossil evidence showing evolution happening. Go study more you tool...
PS what we need to hear now is that you believe the earth is 6000 years old and that adam and eve existed...
You said that it doesn't matter to you if you are a scientist. That only states your ignorance on the subject.
arielwollinger 3 years ago
yes we do have a lot of fossil evidence.there were cells...then there were animals..then there were bigger animals.By the way the Earh can't be 6000 years old. by any means.First you have the BC era.The times of Early Biblical figures if you will permit.then you have 33 years for Christ then you have the AD era.And it already 2008 AD. Also How did Adam and eve not exist? you're telling me there were not two initial humans that started the whole race? So who did start it off?
jg4105 3 years ago
I really didn't understand your logic. your are telling me that you believe in evolution or not? Actually, it is not about believing but understanting. Once you understand it, you know it works. Then you realise that there were no initial humans, it was a smooth and long transition between species. It is a gradual thing. Species don;t just pop. Study eveolution deeper. For real. There is no sense in adam and eve. It is just a mith. a fairy tale, for a time without science.
arielwollinger 3 years ago 2
atheism is not a religion you moron!!!
arielwollinger 3 years ago 2
Blah blah blah, BS BS BS.
Stop trying to find holes in science when you clearly have no scientific education.
People a lot smarter than you have been working for a few hundred years now since we got out of the religious dark ages to bring us the lifestyle that modern technology and understanding of science has brought us.
If you want to go live in Jesusland and trade in progress for dogma then be my guest, but leave those of us with the capacity for independent thought alone.
asalmon2112 3 years ago 3
Let me help, Mister Niles a bit: the big difference between filling a gap with a thesis for several years implies an attitude for development and allows change which the bible doesn´t since 150 post christum natae. So i´d rather estimate, dear mister niles that you are not getting the point, do you?
flopoeko 3 years ago
Man, I actually sat through this vid and didn't puke. I guess I have been listening to so much bible babble lately on YT that I am now immune to it's effect on my Sympathetic nervous system.
Anywhooo, "kind" ?? What the hell does that mean? Care to elaborate. I hear bible thumpers using the term. I have never seen this word used in evolutionary context. I would love a definition. Please reference your definition so that I may see where it comes from.
saxmanchiro 3 years ago 2
Even if all the arguments in this post hold water (and they don't, but the video response already covered that), you haven't said anything about why "sticking with the God of the Bible" is any better than another "gap filler," whether it's another religion or conjecture. Why not Buddhism? Why not Islam? Why not some cult? By your own arguments Christianity is no more valid than any other belief system.
Btw, I'm an Agnostic who acknowledges the possibility of a god. I just don't like your dogma.
DeathToHypocrisy 3 years ago 2
I like the way you express yourself. Reminds me of Kurt Godel's proof of the Incompleteness Theorem -- he basically says "using your rules of logic, such and such must be the case".
schmiggen 3 years ago
Thanks. I write opinion a lot, so I've gotten pretty good at it.
I've actually read some stuff about Godel's Incompleteness Theorem while I was researching the idea of a Theory of Everything (Stephe Hawking used similar arguments to say that any ToE will be incomplete or incosistant), and it blew me away. The idea is incredibly simple, but it's implications are unbelievable.
DeathToHypocrisy 3 years ago
What strikes me most about the way Godel approached the topic was actually not so much his result (which is striking, as well) but that the argument he makes is inherently defensible against countering, because he *accepts* the rules of any system that his theorem describes. "By your own argument" arguments are some of the most convincing arguments to be made :P
schmiggen 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Is this clown on Acid?! lol!
Cretins such is these should really stick to what they know best: Sleep.
SteinNYNY 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
wow, you must have made a lot of spam accounts to get all those votes! LOL! Your message is obviously so full of lies or you wouldn't be so scared of my comments!! LOL
IconoclastDCLXVI 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I see you deleted my comment LOL! scared of truth?
So you base your beliefs on a translation of a folk tale passed down by shepherds through spoken word until finally being written down centuries after the central character had died and you believe this to be the word of god, no evidence required, simply because that is what you were told while growing up. But you doubt facts gained through the rigorous scientific method, which has evidence and has completely changed the world in 200 years! LOL!
IconoclastDCLXVI 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Oxford English Dictionary states:
religion n. 1 the belief in a superhuman controlling power, esp. in a personal God or gods entitiled to obedience and worship. 2 the expression of this worship. 3 a particular system of faith and worship. 4 life under monastic vows (the way of religion). [from Latin religo 'obligation, bond, reverence']
To any educated person atheism is clearly not a religion. And to argue that "science doesn't know everything yet so therefore the bible is true" is absurd.
GravityofReality 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Right on man! This dude has obviously got a lot of sock accounts. He's scared of people pointing out the flaws in his argument! LOL!
IconoclastDCLXVI 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Reminds me of a funny thing I read once
"The Bible - Because all the works of science cannot equal the wisdom of cattle-sacrificing primitives who thought every animal species in the world lived within walking distance of Noah's House"
Philosophically speaking, everyone does things which require faith in objective reality everyday - it doesn't mean that having faith in one thing (provable reality) is the same as faith in another much less likely thing (religion based on backwards folk tales)
GravityofReality 3 years ago
ahahah brilliant.
bun182 3 years ago
what does this guy have to say about agnostics then, isnt it right that they follow the principles of atheism, but that "gap filler" is what they consider to be the unknown or supernatural.
bun182 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Stupid fuck :D:D I don't think that it would make to much scence, to make a ő
point.
klodvig 3 years ago
Dawkins proposed the multiverse theory as one possibility, but he admitted himself that it wasn't very convincing. "Punctuated equilibrium," is not an agreed upon theory, and I don't think it's one that Dawkins agrees with. Panspermia is not taken seriously by many people. You're setting up straw men; none of the authors in the major atheism books support Panspermia. Is this a joke? I can't tell; am I a victim of 'Poe's Law'.
rudyhenkel 3 years ago
IDIOT.
nogodscanuck 3 years ago 3