Dead-to-the-spirit deluded "God Delusion" author & blithering fool scientist goon Richard Dawkins another "leader" given 2 the profane masses is another useful idiot 4 Jesuit machinations
Jesuitical; pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuit Order completely altered the education system 2 suit their Evo-Hoax Agenda to discredit the Bible
Papacy cant have their Counter Reformation 2nd Dark Age DESPOTISM til Bible's destroyed folks
Phenomenally well put together video and entertaining. However, the video has an issue with education and inquiry, not the scientists in the video. It suggests that being an expert in science makes you arrogant... when, in fact, it just makes you an expert. Ironically, the video is a product of scientific application...which is exactly what the video criticizes these scientists of...USING science.
I think the comical point is that Atheists 'believe' in some sort of Atheism - as an ism it is an ideological position like all other religions that seek to say every one is wrong but me. I find atheists to be more religious than any other believers of any particular creed. Femenists and Chauvinists included. Do zoologists believe in zoologism? Of course not -they are open minded scientists that can come from any creed. Science and philosophy belong together not separated by false dichotomies.
I think the comical point is that Atheists 'believe' in some sort of Atheism - as an ism it is an ideological position like all other religions that seek to say every one is wrong but me. I find atheists to be more religious than any other believers of any particular creed. Femenists and Chauvinists included. Do zoologists believe in zoologism? Of course not -they are open minded scientists that can come from any creed. Science and philosophy belong together not separated by false dichotomies.
@kurstonnicholson except the only ones that say that are religious people, I garee with Harris when he says the word "atheism" doesn;t make sence, just like "Afarirysm" or "Ateopotism". I simply say non believer, the ones that use the word "atheism" are usually religious people. MOst atheists would agree that "atheism" is not a belief system!!! It's like saying that not believing in fairies is a belief system ("afairyism"). We don;t gather every sunday to share our disbilief or anything...
@rcguy69 if you don't realise that theists are more than fairly represented among The Fathers of various fields of science then it is you that shoud be embarrassed.
What god, the Watchmaker? What you discribe as "entropy and expansion" is CONJECTURE. We do NOT fully understand how our universe is constantly changing. But one thing we do know, is that there is NO almighty hand guiding along everything. You idiots seem to misunderstand the Goldilocks Principle, an archaic misappropriation for SEEING THAT WE ARE THE 1/10000000000 BILLION, PROVING THAT IT CAN HAPPEN ON ITS OWN!
@R18111983 Of course evolution is true. gas->nebula->star->galaxy = amoeba->fish->primate->human. It is also huge implication for evidence, it is a singularity with a purpose, driven forward, the biological filter that drives it forward? Natural selection. The cosmic and atomic filter that drives it forward? Entropy and expansion via gravitational and nuclear constants. I find it is a huge argument for God and not against.
@SupremeAmerican Well, science itself has nothing to say about a god or gods. Neither Cosmology nor evolution are arguments for or against such beings.
It's just that we don't need supernatural causes anymore to explain natural phenomena.
If you infer a god as an explanation, you ultimately have to explain that god. 'God is eternal' is not a valid explanation.
@SupremeAmerican If the best your God can do is fart some gas into existence (the big bang), he's not much of a God. A far superior God is the one that created the entire Universe and me and you last Thursday. (LastThursdayism - look it up)
I still don't see how this is supposed to offend our side of the argument. To me, it's just awesome and a failed attempt to ruffle the feathers of anyone who thinks intelligent design is stupid. So again, I thought it was a great parody that just failed to make the point they were trying to make and actually makes our side look good.
Dead-to-the-spirit deluded "God Delusion" author & blithering fool scientist goon Richard Dawkins another "leader" given 2 the profane masses is another useful idiot 4 Jesuit machinations
Jesuitical; pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuit Order completely altered the education system 2 suit their Evo-Hoax Agenda to discredit the Bible
Papal Rome cant have their Counter Reformation 2nd Dark Age DESPOTISM until Bible is destroyed
RICHARD DAWKINS - "OUR COLLECTIVE FREE TIME NEEDS TO SHIFT AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE TO EDUCATION. WHETHER YOU'RE A YOUNG STUDENT OR FINISHED SCHOOL LONG AGO, GET OUT TO THE LIBRARY WHENEVER YOU CAN AND WORK HARD TO LEARN EVERYTHING YOU CAN ABOUT THIS WORLD. EACH INDIVIDUAL AND SOCIETY WILL BENEFIT FROM BEING ABLE TO SOLVE MORE PROBLEMS AND MAKE BETTER DECISIONS. EDUCATION IS AN AMAZING DISCOVERY PROCESS THAT REPAYS US ENDLESSLY."
@hotelmario510 I think it makes fun of everyone who takes either side too seriously ;)
Looking at the comments we have both creationists and scientists taking offence to it and others claiming it supports them over the other. I see parody at it's best ;p - so, I'm gonna roll with that.
Dead-to-the-spirit deluded "God Delusion" author & blithering fool scientist goon Richard Dawkins another "leader" given 2 the profane masses is another useful idiot 4 Jesuit machinations
Jesuitical; pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuit Order completely altered the education system 2 suit their Evo-Hoax Agenda to discredit the Bible
Papal Rome cant have their Counter Reformation Despotism 2nd Dark Age until Bible is destroyed
The part about philosophy is wrong, because that one is not Democritus and the one you call "Aristotle" is instead Plato. Anyway this video is amazing.
This is funny. But ultimately it's not correct. A message like "your concerns are stupid because we're smarter than you" implies that being a scientist means elitism.
This is the equivalent of saying "I think I can become an internationally acclaimed musician although I never played any instrument. If you think otherwise, you're an elitist!!!"
@jaxomy Your history seems to forget about a 4 hundred year span before the Enlightenment in which the West had access to Greek and Islamic philosophy - Scholasticism. The loss of access to these works has nothing to do with fundamentalism. Western Europe lost access to these works once the Roman Empire receded to the East and the West was left in shambles from barbaric invasions.
And, how many scientists were burned (literally) by the church? Science has strived despite the church's best efforts, yet even physics can't touch any concept beyond the absolute space of phenomena. Consciousness studies are beyond biology, beyond psychology and philosophy. ALL are valuable to get us there. Keep studying.
What do you know about science little man? Scientific method was developed by a scientist, who was Christian. Evolution fails the scientific method because it is Not observable or repeatable. As a matter fact nothing it claims is observable or repeatable. They tried to prove the minimum gene set concept but in doing so it disproved evolution. And all those evolutionary frauds are helping your claim. Do yourself a favor, educate yourself before you bloviate your ignorance, idiot!
@FREEDOM14U Check out some history. Islamic countries were far ahead of Europe during the "dark ages", because they preserved the knowledge of the Romans. Fundamentalism in Europe wiped out our knowledge. Then there was a fundamentalist turn in Islamic countries where such scientific knowledge was destroyed. What remained survived in Spain and spread through Europe. The rediscovery of Roman knowledge sparked the enlightenment. We owe just as much to Islam as to Christianity.
No, it makes fun of Dawkins. It's parodizing him because supposedly he rejects anything that isn't evolution and that you can't know anything without science. I'm not sure what the problem here is. I've never seen him reject other theories hands down. I wish the creator would tell us why he made it.
"I see...ATTENTION! All religious people who think science is bullshit, get the fuck out of the internet - the internet was created by science and you should be thankful".
It's posts like yours that refresh my confidence in how stupid youtubers are. Modern science was created by Christians. Google it. There's a lot of truth to this video. Dawkins thinks he represents science, he doesn't.
He thinks he's smarter than other ppl, he's not. His origin of the eye is a joke!
And Newton was an alchemist, but that doesnt invalidate the demonstrable claims he made. The particular beliefs of people dont matter if they're doing good science; did you know that the big bang was originally hypothesized by a catholic priest? The fact that he was christian doesnt invalidate the idea, data would be the thing to do that. Thats what science rests on, data.
You demonstrate a basic ignorance of what science is. Educate yourself before looking foolish again.
@FREEDOM14U modern science was created by the greeks (protip: not christian). but the scientific method is just the basic way we live life, making reasoned choices based on evidence. Most religious people live that way except when faced with a gap in their knowledge they replace "i don't know, but let's find out" with "god did it".
If the accepted origin of the eye is a joke, what is your superior explanation? (and I mean explanation, not assertion)
You are dead wrong on modern science being developed by the Greeks, why should I listen to any thing you have to say. Google it, modern science was developed by Christians. Do I have to give their names and what they did or are you going to do your homework?
Evolution disproves itself, but what do you claim as fact, give it your best shot. Write it all down, and then research the truth.
@FREEDOM14U Actually, modern science is based heavily on Newton's method of science. If anything, we should thank Newton and not religion for today's science.
Actually most if not all of the modern disciplines of science were started by Christians. It's a fact. Do you want me to link you up or is this necessary?
@FREEDOM14U By disciplines, do you mean the different fields of science? There is only one method of science. That is the scientific method that Newton used.
Modern physics started with the works of Einstein, who simply wanted to know more about the universe and did not do his work for a church or a religion. Classical physics before that started with the works of Kepler, Galileo and Newton, none of which were done for a church nor for a religion. Some of them were Christians.
Kepler, Galileo and Newton, were all Christians. My point being in the original post was atheists love to claim that science was separate and exclusive, and it was not. Modern science was Not developed by atheists, but Christians. The scientific method was developed by a Christian. Christians developed modern science. The stupid comments with all the thumbs up that some how Christians are against science is bogus!
@FREEDOM14U Umm... Sure, I do think Galileo was christian however it was not considered to be normal if you were not at his time. Galileo's heliocentrism (the Earth and planets rotate around the sun) contradicted the church's geocentrism(the Earth is the center of the universe and the Sun and the Moon rotate around it) so christians at his time sued him for not obeying the church's teachings. They were given enough proof to believe Galileo, but they didn't!
@FREEDOM14U Galileo gave up publicly his theory to otherwise he would be sentenced to death, but personally he didn't. Scientists struggled constantly the dogmas of religion. The censorship actually originate from the medieval Europe, where churches tried to censor university's studies which occasionally contradicted their own teachings. A lot of scientists/mathematicians/philosophers back in the days were christians, but some of them were more skeptical about religion than others.
@FREEDOM14U By the way, it's hard to believe that the scientific method was developed by "a Christian" to me... don't you think it take a lot of people and time? According to some books I read it originates from medieval Middle East.
@FREEDOM14U "Limitless Stars and a World Hanging on Nothing [...]"
You do realize that these are just metaphors from primitiv people basically saying 'I can't fucking count all those stars!' and 'I can't fucking find the ropes the earth should be hanging from!'
Retrospektively you can vaguely find almost anything in any holy book.
This is like muslims claiming 'ropes in the sky' is gods way of telling us about string-theory.. it's just ridiculus.
You do realize you can't spell retrospectively and there is nothing vague about the passages that motivated the Father of Oceanography, and many other scientists that turned to the bible and knew what was considered a metaphor, song, poetry, etc. Please educate yourself before you bloviate what you don't know.
@FREEDOM14U Allright.. if you want to be a grammar nazi then we can continue in my native language and I will point out every single mistake you make.
I ask you again to provide a scientific source that cites the bible.
@FREEDOM14U " [...] passages that motivated [...]"
So, you accuse me of being uneducated but you don't even know the difference between being inspired by something and using something as evidence for a discovery?
You religious nuts always come in AFTER a discovery is made and point to a verse that could vaguely be associated with it, of course, leaving out all the other ways the verse could be interpreted.
Come back when you find Maxwells equations in the bible or something..
Natural philosophy, or natural science as it was sometimes called, was one of the key subjects taught at medieval universities and also something that exercised the minds of such esteemed doctors of theology as Thomas Aquinas, Albert the Great and Nicole Oresme who all wrote commentaries on Aristotle that excluded religious ideas. It is common mistake of the uninformed to trust the writings of John Draper and Andrew Dickson White as a factual account.
History revisionists are not reality. The universities, professors, modern science all came from Christianity. Obviously the "dark ages" were greatly exaggerated. It is not despite the Church but because of the Church science and philosophy advanced and are what they are today. And your point again?
@FREEDOM14U Ehm.. yeah.. you mean like the church supported and promoted people like Galileo or Darwin?
What you don't understand is: just because someone making a discovery is christian doesn't mean christianity is the cause for that discovery. This is a huge logical fallacy.
That is like saying Einstein discovered Relativity because he was german.. HUGE fallacy.
Umm, yeah, because what you seem to fail to grasp is the Church was responsible for reason & education right from the beginning. This is a historical fact. They're the ones that created the first Universities, professors, and libraries etc. & yeah, Galileo was a Catholic. He never lost his faith. He signed a legal contract to teach it as theory, and agreed to stay in a lavish villa under house arrest for breaking his contract, big deal.Darwin's theory was never proven true.
@FREEDOM14U Galileo was tortured by the church and threatened with the death penalty if he didn't publicly retract his scienftific work. Every scientific discovery that only slightly made ist possible to suggest that the bible might be full of shit (which it is) was HEAVILY oppsosed with censureship, torture and death penatly. HOW ON EARTH is that a basis for scientific advance?!
Evolution has been proven to be true beyond any sane reasonable doubt. Period.
You are factually challenged on what happened to Galileo and why every biologist teacher is required to teach evolution as an unproven theory. Don't take my word for it, Google it. You just can't stand being wrong, can you? You owe every thing to Christianity.
Minimum Gene Concept of the Mycoplasma Gentilium, ha!
@FREEDOM14U Uhm, that looks and reads a lot like the old 'irreducibly complex'-argument, which has been debunked, refuted and shred into peaces a million times over. Try reading a science book for a change..
My god man, you've just revealed how truly ignorant you are on theory of evolution. This has nothing to do with irreducibly complexity. It was an experiment done by evolutionists that totally failed. Now please go and read up on evolution experiments before you attempt to correct someone on your own flawed logic. Note, I am not trying to embarrass you.
@FREEDOM14U And how did it fail? What part exactly is a failure to you? I have just read the paper and I can't, by any means, find anything that would even begin to contradict evolution on any level.
@FREEDOM14U The paper is available to anyone. Please cite the part that contradicts evolution in your opinion, I can't seem to find it. Although you would have to study evolution first, since you seem to know next to nothing about how it works. You kind of have to know stuff first to refute it, you know? I know, it's inconvinient.. but that's how it works.. ;)
So what you are really saying is, you admit you know diddly squat about your fairy tale theory and you want me to spoon feed you.
They took the smallest known organism Mycoplasma Genitalium w/ 480 genes (amino acids which could be a 1,000 to 10,000) and tried to reduce them on paper. They couldn't do it, they could only reduce them to 397. If you believe in evolution this should have been achievable but it wasn't. Evolutionaunts did this experiment & had to admit failure.
Your fallacy is you can't prove either one.If it doesn't work with the smallest organism,it sure as hell ain't going to work with the rest of the animals and plants.There is no reductionist ability to go from 0 to 397 genes in one shot.This experiment spelled disaster for evolution, but victory for intelligent design. Abiogenesis is another one of those theories that evolutionaunts are now distancing themselves from. It was disproven so they run & hide. Vestigial organs, lol
@FREEDOM14U "There is no reductionist ability to go from 0 to 397 genes in one shot."
You earlier denied that this was similar to the 'irreducible complexity'-argument and now you turn around and confirm it. I can't explain in detail why you are dead wrong in your argumentation in only 500 letters.
Just know that you cannot compare complex organisms that have evolved over billions of years with the first SIMPLE self replicating molecules.
@FREEDOM14U Who is running and hiding? I want names. Which evolutionary biologist tries to hide anything about evolution? Who has come around and said evolution wasn't true? Where are the peer-reviewed articles disproving evolution?
You are copying creationist propaganda bullshit without checking sources, my friend.
Nice no answer to anything that I wrote Mr. Soc account. I am copying evolutionaunts failed experiments. Btw, how many b.s. missing links has peer reviewed brought the world? Google Evolutionary Frauds.You know nothing about your theory and are boring to talk to, this conversation is extinct!
@FREEDOM14U In other words: your checklist of creationist bullshit has run out of long refuted arguments? Wow, that was not all predictable..
Funny (once again) that you bring up those frauds.. we only discovered these hoaxes BECAUSE EVOLUTION IS TRUE. Way to shoot yourself in the foot (once again).
@FREEDOM14U What mankind calls evolution, is in fact a key component and extremely robust facet of intelligent design. The whole against ID concept is a farce made by radicals on both sides. In the book of genesis, it does not use 24 hour days untill after adam and eve have fallen. It uses a term literally translated to complete phase. Also, adam literally means mankind, garden of eden literally means animal kingdom. It's a jewish book, all of genesis is. Their native hebrew is paramount for it.
Evolution is an unproven theory that grew out of communism. Every time it tries to prove itself it implodes.
And I am completely aware that what is written in the bible has to be read with a discerning mind, what did it mean at the time it was written, not always the literal meaning of the text.
Intelligent design is not reading passages from the bible or a religious class. It is pure science in how it relates to the world we live in.
@FREEDOM14U No, you anti-intellectual scum bag. Evolution did not stem from communism, Evolution is not an unproven theory, the bible is total bull shit with no facts what-so-ever, and Darwin was not a god damned christian.
You prove that your mom was a monkey and your dad was a pig, there you feel better punk! You are historically challenge, mentally ill, and intellectually inferior. Do you have a point to prove your theory? I don't think so. Bring it boy or fade away like a fart in the wind. I smell fart
Why do you run and hide behind a closed account? Are you afraid to have equal footing with other Youtubers? This is a typical cowardly tactic of trolls. If you are so knowledgeable on evolution, open up a real account. Put up a profile, and favorites, and your posts. You lose all credibility in hiding.
I see...ATTENTION! All religious people who think science is bullshit, get the fuck out of the internet - the internet was created by science and you should be thankful.
@Sansoots Pshhh! Are you crazy?? The internet was OBVIOUSLY created by God in order for the Westboro Baptist Church to spread their message to the entire world...(Yes that's what the actually believe).
@Sansoots There is however people with half baked ideas that which they will run with CLAIMING to be true. Tell me how the reaction of decay can exist out of nothing? you cant say the big bang because the elements to the molecular cloud are also part of that reaction. "God is known by nature in his works, and by doctrine in his revealed word."-- Galieo Galilei. Scientist who were at the foundation of science knew who to thank. Kepler: the Heavens Declare God's Glory. god bless
The fact we live in a flat universe (look for information about the curbature of the universe), with a total energy equal to zero, means that it might have come from, well, zero. Splitting 0 into its positive and negative counterparts.
If god there was, its power was minute at best. Belief in a minute, almost powerless god... Is the worship worth it?
Galileo, the man the religious institutions wanted to burn at the stake for saying science went against established religion?
@Xgya2000 all of that is an assumption which consist of three scenarios not just the one you suggest (flat, positive, and negative). you are LITERALY trying to make somthing out of nothing. Galileo was against religion, not against relationships with god. the catholic church very much so wanted him dead. the catholic church killed ACTUAL christians that took a stand against them, go look it up... in a book.
Quantum fluctuations create things out of nothing all the time. But in quantum space, nothing isn't nothing at all.
We can actually prove we live in a flat universe. There is a nice lecture called "A universe from nothing" by Lawrence Krauss where the reason for this is explained in detail.
Belief in god was common when no other explanation was available.
Newton was a christian. Does this fact have more or less value than his science? What about the fact he was an alchemist?
@Xgya2000 he said that dark matter is what births these galaxies in cycles, right? so how is dark matter BROUGHT into the equation? does the order between matter to energy, and energy to matter not apply here? i guess thats the next step we take in finding the evidence that "proves" "nothing". faith is what you believe not what you see. faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
The same way the rest of the matter was: through the Big Bang.
The fact the total energy in this universe is equal to zero helps a lot to prove it came from nothing. There are other facts. And the fact nothing isn't nothing is already proven. Quantum particles come into existence from nothing all the time
Faith is belief without evidence, not evidence of the unseen
Matter to energy, energy to matter applies to all fields of science. Matter from nothing applies only in quantum physics
@hotelmario510 Dude, I studied computer science in college, that doesn't make me a scientist. Back when the internet was invented, computer science wasn't even a class in college, try again.
@bigun89 Oh, so it was designed generals and soldiers, or by monkeys on typewriters?
No. It was designed by ARPA, the "Advanced Research Projects Agency" of America. Even if they didn't all have the TITLE of "Scientist" it was still using science to build the ARPANET, which would later become the INTERNET. Your statement of "LOL! So it wasn't created by the military?" is completely moronic. That can be said about anything. SCIENCE doesn't make things. People who PRACTICE it do.
@randomslice Oh, what you're saying I "disproved" @sansoots' argument by saying that "science doesn't make things"?
What a lot of bollocks. I disproved nothing. Sansoots said that it was created BY science, yes. Now, as I've said, science DOESN'T make things, as it is not a living thing, it is a concept. HOWEVER, that DOES NOT change the fact that the Internet WAS made by scientists! You're putting up strawmen. How pathetic.
And no, I don't care if you're the uploader, either! You fail.
I liked the video - funny. I'm not a religious persons and really appreciate the job the new atheist do. They don't lack intelligence and they don't lack courage. Prove them wrong and paste the link to Jehova's facebook profile :).
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
To all the idiots who don't get this video, go read feyerabend and post modernist deconstructionists to understand why science is, in itself, a dogma.
@RDV333 Uhh, no, actually. Dogma is unchanging. Held to be unquestionably true already. Science morphs and improves every time a new discovery is made. Wanna know the best part? If a better system is discovered, the scientific method will tell us....science is no longer needed!
@MJFAN666 Science did. ^_^ You see, unlike religious dogma, science can actually comprehend a hypothesis that it could be wrong, otherwise known as rationality. Science is a rational system for the rational minded. This is why devout and uncompromising religious people make poor scientists. Check out the story of a man named Kurt Wise, its rather sad.
@IvanAndreevich lol religion is NOT the same as dogma. One can be dogmatic, and not religious. Hitler, was not religious. He was dogmatic. He was an asshole. He was NOT christian (he just played one on TV, to get votes). Look 123, I'm sure you mean well, but ur an oversimplifying moron. :P
you can be an atheistic asshole, just as you can be a religious prick.
@dchris1990 Religion is a subset of dogma. "One can be dogmatic, and not religious" - yes, indeed that is exactly what I said. Communism is a dogma, and so is religion. In Russia, the usual dumb one (religion) was replaced by another stupid one (communism).
@IvanAndreevich like it or not, eventually you're gonna have to base some of your society's ethical code on illogic and ritual...utter amorality is not the same as modern Western Civilization's ethical code of tolerance. Just as nihilism does not beget democracy, atheism does not automatically beget an enlightened, tolerant society. We, the modern intelligentsia of the West (and increasingly, of the world), may be more enlightened, but we certainly haven't surpassed past dogmas all that much
@dchris1990 "like it or not, eventually you're gonna have to base some of your society's ethical code on illogic and ritual" - why? We are moving away from that slowly, but steadily.
Of course not. You have to be an atheist for the right reasons. An enlightened society begets atheism but not the other way around.
What do you mean by not having surpassed past dogmas? What dogma do I subscribe to?
I like how this video doesn't actually mount any arguments against any of the characters. Instead it seems to mock them for "being smart" and "having a science degree", lol.
"Cos science is the only way to know y'all"
Indeed it is, there is no better method of determining truth than experiment and observation.
It's so true. He is smarter than your liberal arts degree. He has a science degree.
redmonke255 9 hours ago
Wow, this clip is so fun, I love it!
Of course, the idea behind it is completely wrong, but oh well...
Dan Dennett looks awesome! :P
DracaOxians 2 weeks ago 2
creationists are retards
dopeasfuckk 2 weeks ago
@randomslice Well, whatever your real intentions were.. big thumbs up for awesome art from an atheist.. :D
R18111983 3 weeks ago
I loved the Cat :3
Can i expect more brilliance from the makers of this vid ? :D
YamiYami17 3 weeks ago
DAMMIT! the creationist figured out jibjab...are they evolving?
kapwar28 4 weeks ago 2
@kapwar28 No... they paid an atheist to make it.
randomslice 3 weeks ago 2
I can't tell if this is mocking or advocating Atheism
ImJustFelix 4 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Dead-to-the-spirit deluded "God Delusion" author & blithering fool scientist goon Richard Dawkins another "leader" given 2 the profane masses is another useful idiot 4 Jesuit machinations
Jesuitical; pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuit Order completely altered the education system 2 suit their Evo-Hoax Agenda to discredit the Bible
Papacy cant have their Counter Reformation 2nd Dark Age DESPOTISM til Bible's destroyed folks
SpencerBenedict2nd 1 month ago
Phenomenally well put together video and entertaining. However, the video has an issue with education and inquiry, not the scientists in the video. It suggests that being an expert in science makes you arrogant... when, in fact, it just makes you an expert. Ironically, the video is a product of scientific application...which is exactly what the video criticizes these scientists of...USING science.
blaisingm 1 month ago
@blaisingm " [...] which is exactly what the video criticizes these scientists of..."
Nah, this is too good to have such a straight forward message.. :)
I think it's more like a dissing the other side with self-irony kinda thing.. :D
R18111983 3 weeks ago
I think the comical point is that Atheists 'believe' in some sort of Atheism - as an ism it is an ideological position like all other religions that seek to say every one is wrong but me. I find atheists to be more religious than any other believers of any particular creed. Femenists and Chauvinists included. Do zoologists believe in zoologism? Of course not -they are open minded scientists that can come from any creed. Science and philosophy belong together not separated by false dichotomies.
kurstonnicholson 2 months ago
@kurstonnicholson "Atheism is a religion like not collecting stamps is a hobby."
AstrumAeternum 1 month ago 3
@AstrumAeternum Funny, not a lot of people hold debates, write books or incessantly whine about how shitty collecting stamps is.
DarthExecutor 1 month ago
@DarthExecutor no one (to my knowledge) has ever killed anyone else or oppressed entire nations based on stamp collecting.
Hektor88 3 weeks ago
@DarthExecutor I'm glad you think that whining about something makes one religious.
AstrumAeternum 2 weeks ago
I think the comical point is that Atheists 'believe' in some sort of Atheism - as an ism it is an ideological position like all other religions that seek to say every one is wrong but me. I find atheists to be more religious than any other believers of any particular creed. Femenists and Chauvinists included. Do zoologists believe in zoologism? Of course not -they are open minded scientists that can come from any creed. Science and philosophy belong together not separated by false dichotomies.
kurstonnicholson 2 months ago
@kurstonnicholson except the only ones that say that are religious people, I garee with Harris when he says the word "atheism" doesn;t make sence, just like "Afarirysm" or "Ateopotism". I simply say non believer, the ones that use the word "atheism" are usually religious people. MOst atheists would agree that "atheism" is not a belief system!!! It's like saying that not believing in fairies is a belief system ("afairyism"). We don;t gather every sunday to share our disbilief or anything...
andresdohko 2 months ago 9
Huh?
ClickTapClick 2 months ago
Amazing how they created this video without using electricity, computers, software, monitors, ethernet and TCP/IP. What? You mean THEY USED SCIENCE?
If you can't mock science without using the fruits of hundreds of years of scientific achievement you're just embarrassing yourself.
rcguy69 2 months ago 10
@rcguy69 if you don't realise that theists are more than fairly represented among The Fathers of various fields of science then it is you that shoud be embarrassed.
allan3141 2 months ago
@rcguy69 We used a couple Macs... But they were special "god-made" ones.
randomslice 1 month ago 11
@randomslice lol
Olsonic 1 month ago
@rcguy69 I don't think it's mocking science, I think it's a tribute to Dawkins
cricketjam 1 month ago
@rcguy69 It's not science that it's mocking.
DarthExecutor 1 month ago
I fucking lold
yearsofindignity5 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
What god, the Watchmaker? What you discribe as "entropy and expansion" is CONJECTURE. We do NOT fully understand how our universe is constantly changing. But one thing we do know, is that there is NO almighty hand guiding along everything. You idiots seem to misunderstand the Goldilocks Principle, an archaic misappropriation for SEEING THAT WE ARE THE 1/10000000000 BILLION, PROVING THAT IT CAN HAPPEN ON ITS OWN!
MuchContractForYou 2 months ago
you should see how mad dawkins fans get when you tell them darwin was a christian who didnt care for petty religious practice
SupremeAmerican 2 months ago
@SupremeAmerican Who cares? You might even make Darwin a fundamentalist creationist. That doesn't change the fact that evolution ist true.
R18111983 2 months ago
@R18111983 Of course evolution is true. gas->nebula->star->galaxy = amoeba->fish->primate->human. It is also huge implication for evidence, it is a singularity with a purpose, driven forward, the biological filter that drives it forward? Natural selection. The cosmic and atomic filter that drives it forward? Entropy and expansion via gravitational and nuclear constants. I find it is a huge argument for God and not against.
SupremeAmerican 2 months ago
Comment removed
MuchContractForYou 2 months ago
@SupremeAmerican Well, science itself has nothing to say about a god or gods. Neither Cosmology nor evolution are arguments for or against such beings.
It's just that we don't need supernatural causes anymore to explain natural phenomena.
If you infer a god as an explanation, you ultimately have to explain that god. 'God is eternal' is not a valid explanation.
R18111983 2 months ago
@SupremeAmerican If the best your God can do is fart some gas into existence (the big bang), he's not much of a God. A far superior God is the one that created the entire Universe and me and you last Thursday. (LastThursdayism - look it up)
rcguy69 2 months ago
@rcguy69 Yes sir, I too, am a member of the dangerous, yet sexy cult, of LastThursday'ism.
SupremeAmerican 2 months ago
I can't recognize all the charachters... can somebody help me out?
(Except for Dawkins and Darwin, you can leave them out)
Ipporules 2 months ago
@Ipporules P.Z. Myers, Sam Harris, Eugene Scott and Christopher Hitchens..
R18111983 2 months ago
@R18111983 Thank you :)
Ipporules 2 months ago
Comment removed
R18111983 2 months ago
@Ipporules Oh, and I forgot Daniel Dennett..
R18111983 2 months ago 2
I still don't see how this is supposed to offend our side of the argument. To me, it's just awesome and a failed attempt to ruffle the feathers of anyone who thinks intelligent design is stupid. So again, I thought it was a great parody that just failed to make the point they were trying to make and actually makes our side look good.
PaleoSteno 3 months ago 18
@PaleoSteno It does. Awesome huh?
randomslice 3 months ago
@PaleoSteno Umm. Not it doesn't. lol
Tamee40 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Dead-to-the-spirit deluded "God Delusion" author & blithering fool scientist goon Richard Dawkins another "leader" given 2 the profane masses is another useful idiot 4 Jesuit machinations
Jesuitical; pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuit Order completely altered the education system 2 suit their Evo-Hoax Agenda to discredit the Bible
Papal Rome cant have their Counter Reformation 2nd Dark Age DESPOTISM until Bible is destroyed
SpencerBenedict2nd 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
RICHARD DAWKINS - "OUR COLLECTIVE FREE TIME NEEDS TO SHIFT AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE TO EDUCATION. WHETHER YOU'RE A YOUNG STUDENT OR FINISHED SCHOOL LONG AGO, GET OUT TO THE LIBRARY WHENEVER YOU CAN AND WORK HARD TO LEARN EVERYTHING YOU CAN ABOUT THIS WORLD. EACH INDIVIDUAL AND SOCIETY WILL BENEFIT FROM BEING ABLE TO SOLVE MORE PROBLEMS AND MAKE BETTER DECISIONS. EDUCATION IS AN AMAZING DISCOVERY PROCESS THAT REPAYS US ENDLESSLY."
TheLogicalBrain 3 months ago
Dick Dawkins, lol!
Aphrocraft 3 months ago
This was made for the shit and awful film Expelled, so it's on the side of shrieking ignorance. Just for the record.
Applemask 3 months ago
This is obviously supposed to make fun of atheists, but I don't give a toss, it's fantastic.
hotelmario510 3 months ago
@hotelmario510 I think it makes fun of everyone who takes either side too seriously ;)
Looking at the comments we have both creationists and scientists taking offence to it and others claiming it supports them over the other. I see parody at it's best ;p - so, I'm gonna roll with that.
TheOriginalRyuujin 3 months ago
Really well made vid and great song excellent!!
mrrain123 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Dead-to-the-spirit deluded "God Delusion" author & blithering fool scientist goon Richard Dawkins another "leader" given 2 the profane masses is another useful idiot 4 Jesuit machinations
Jesuitical; pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuit Order completely altered the education system 2 suit their Evo-Hoax Agenda to discredit the Bible
Papal Rome cant have their Counter Reformation Despotism 2nd Dark Age until Bible is destroyed
SpencerBenedict2nd 3 months ago
The part about philosophy is wrong, because that one is not Democritus and the one you call "Aristotle" is instead Plato. Anyway this video is amazing.
Efilzeo 3 months ago in playlist Preferiti di Efilzeo 15
@Efilzeo Yup... sorry about that.
randomslice 3 months ago
Comment removed
andresdohko 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
" the fool has said in his heart there is no god" and thats where fools belong on a stage
truth2350 4 months ago
Cool! Lets celebrate ignorance as development!
jomen112 4 months ago
Science is best served by orchestral music, i.e., music made by intelligent, educated people.
maugustyniak 4 months ago
I know this was written off as parody, but it's still true.
Had I not known better, I'd have been another victim of Poe's Law.
Xgya2000 4 months ago
I'm no religious guy but I have to admit this is really good. the mutating jesus fish with the leggies protruding out... GENIUS!
congrats
ernanisava 4 months ago
uff, i don't understand almost anything :(
Efilzeo 4 months ago
This is a parody stop getting worked up!
severuslupus1 5 months ago
This is funny. But ultimately it's not correct. A message like "your concerns are stupid because we're smarter than you" implies that being a scientist means elitism.
This is the equivalent of saying "I think I can become an internationally acclaimed musician although I never played any instrument. If you think otherwise, you're an elitist!!!"
AtheismTV 5 months ago
@AtheismTV
I believe he's just making fun of the football field-sized ego many scientists have.
ernanisava 4 months ago
@ernanisava I believe he mainly wants to protect his faith.
AtheismTV 4 months ago
@AtheismTV
maybe so, but he did it with so much class that even people who find themselves cool about being an atheist felt kind of cheesy while watching this.
ernanisava 4 months ago
@jaxomy Your history seems to forget about a 4 hundred year span before the Enlightenment in which the West had access to Greek and Islamic philosophy - Scholasticism. The loss of access to these works has nothing to do with fundamentalism. Western Europe lost access to these works once the Roman Empire receded to the East and the West was left in shambles from barbaric invasions.
kerplunk288 5 months ago
And, how many scientists were burned (literally) by the church? Science has strived despite the church's best efforts, yet even physics can't touch any concept beyond the absolute space of phenomena. Consciousness studies are beyond biology, beyond psychology and philosophy. ALL are valuable to get us there. Keep studying.
vekunde 5 months ago
Something to do with the Olympics and one-eyed monsters?
geminigemini 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
watch?v=o9ktS2U53Qg Write "Logical Evidences for Islam" and watch it...
Why is there A Cretaor? Why is there a religion? Why Islam is the true religion?
shncsr 5 months ago
This video is awesome, but not for the reasons the creationists think. "Don't you know this Dick is unblockable?"
hochmeistergrenzer 5 months ago 3
this video is awesome
nicklaue 6 months ago
@argo984
This is your empirical failure!
This video is hilarious and so true.
FREEDOM14U 6 months ago
@sakar181
What do you know about science little man? Scientific method was developed by a scientist, who was Christian. Evolution fails the scientific method because it is Not observable or repeatable. As a matter fact nothing it claims is observable or repeatable. They tried to prove the minimum gene set concept but in doing so it disproved evolution. And all those evolutionary frauds are helping your claim. Do yourself a favor, educate yourself before you bloviate your ignorance, idiot!
FREEDOM14U 6 months ago
@FREEDOM14U Check out some history. Islamic countries were far ahead of Europe during the "dark ages", because they preserved the knowledge of the Romans. Fundamentalism in Europe wiped out our knowledge. Then there was a fundamentalist turn in Islamic countries where such scientific knowledge was destroyed. What remained survived in Spain and spread through Europe. The rediscovery of Roman knowledge sparked the enlightenment. We owe just as much to Islam as to Christianity.
Jaxomy 5 months ago
Wait, this was supposed to make fun of atheists? It only made them look ballin'!
PaleoSteno 6 months ago 5
@PaleoSteno
No, it makes fun of Dawkins. It's parodizing him because supposedly he rejects anything that isn't evolution and that you can't know anything without science. I'm not sure what the problem here is. I've never seen him reject other theories hands down. I wish the creator would tell us why he made it.
PokeyMeansBusiness 5 months ago
@PokeyMeansBusiness... It's complicated.
randomslice 5 months ago
@randomslice You kicked ass.
Arkanj3l 5 months ago
@Arkanj3l And I can't even tell whose.
Arkanj3l 5 months ago
@PokeyMeansBusiness I'm pretty sure promotional content for Expelled ... which was ... just so stupid.
eXpriest 5 months ago
evidence? lol
Kindertautenleider 6 months ago
I love this. This is so funny. added to my playlist.
AtheistCanada 6 months ago
@Sansoots
"I see...ATTENTION! All religious people who think science is bullshit, get the fuck out of the internet - the internet was created by science and you should be thankful".
It's posts like yours that refresh my confidence in how stupid youtubers are. Modern science was created by Christians. Google it. There's a lot of truth to this video. Dawkins thinks he represents science, he doesn't.
He thinks he's smarter than other ppl, he's not. His origin of the eye is a joke!
FREEDOM14U 6 months ago
@FREEDOM14U lulz. Muslims created algebra too... whats your point?
Olsonic 6 months ago
@FREEDOM14U
And Newton was an alchemist, but that doesnt invalidate the demonstrable claims he made. The particular beliefs of people dont matter if they're doing good science; did you know that the big bang was originally hypothesized by a catholic priest? The fact that he was christian doesnt invalidate the idea, data would be the thing to do that. Thats what science rests on, data.
You demonstrate a basic ignorance of what science is. Educate yourself before looking foolish again.
sakar181 6 months ago 4
@FREEDOM14U modern science was created by the greeks (protip: not christian). but the scientific method is just the basic way we live life, making reasoned choices based on evidence. Most religious people live that way except when faced with a gap in their knowledge they replace "i don't know, but let's find out" with "god did it".
If the accepted origin of the eye is a joke, what is your superior explanation? (and I mean explanation, not assertion)
emikochan13 6 months ago 2
@emikochan13
You are dead wrong on modern science being developed by the Greeks, why should I listen to any thing you have to say. Google it, modern science was developed by Christians. Do I have to give their names and what they did or are you going to do your homework?
Evolution disproves itself, but what do you claim as fact, give it your best shot. Write it all down, and then research the truth.
FREEDOM14U 6 months ago
@FREEDOM14U Like anyone had much of a choice to be Christian or not during the Renaissance.
argo984 6 months ago
@FREEDOM14U Actually, modern science is based heavily on Newton's method of science. If anything, we should thank Newton and not religion for today's science.
sexyloser 5 months ago
@sexyloser
Actually most if not all of the modern disciplines of science were started by Christians. It's a fact. Do you want me to link you up or is this necessary?
FREEDOM14U 5 months ago
@FREEDOM14U By disciplines, do you mean the different fields of science? There is only one method of science. That is the scientific method that Newton used.
Modern physics started with the works of Einstein, who simply wanted to know more about the universe and did not do his work for a church or a religion. Classical physics before that started with the works of Kepler, Galileo and Newton, none of which were done for a church nor for a religion. Some of them were Christians.
sexyloser 5 months ago
@sexyloser
Kepler, Galileo and Newton, were all Christians. My point being in the original post was atheists love to claim that science was separate and exclusive, and it was not. Modern science was Not developed by atheists, but Christians. The scientific method was developed by a Christian. Christians developed modern science. The stupid comments with all the thumbs up that some how Christians are against science is bogus!
FREEDOM14U 5 months ago
@FREEDOM14U Umm... Sure, I do think Galileo was christian however it was not considered to be normal if you were not at his time. Galileo's heliocentrism (the Earth and planets rotate around the sun) contradicted the church's geocentrism(the Earth is the center of the universe and the Sun and the Moon rotate around it) so christians at his time sued him for not obeying the church's teachings. They were given enough proof to believe Galileo, but they didn't!
elenpop2 5 months ago
@FREEDOM14U Galileo gave up publicly his theory to otherwise he would be sentenced to death, but personally he didn't. Scientists struggled constantly the dogmas of religion. The censorship actually originate from the medieval Europe, where churches tried to censor university's studies which occasionally contradicted their own teachings. A lot of scientists/mathematicians/philosophers back in the days were christians, but some of them were more skeptical about religion than others.
elenpop2 5 months ago
@FREEDOM14U By the way, it's hard to believe that the scientific method was developed by "a Christian" to me... don't you think it take a lot of people and time? According to some books I read it originates from medieval Middle East.
elenpop2 5 months ago
@FREEDOM14U "The scientific method was developed by a Christian."
Name a single scientific discovery that was based on the bible.
People didn't discover science because of but DESPITE religion.
R18111983 2 months ago
@R18111983
Limitless Stars and a World Hanging on Nothing are just 2. Why don't you Google the rest!
While you're at it, Google modern science and Christianity. Sorry, you're wrong!
FREEDOM14U 2 months ago
@FREEDOM14U Could you provide the scientific papers that cite the bible as evidence/source for astronomic discoveries?
If I am wrong, there should be one peer-reviewed article in astronomy that sources the bible.
R18111983 2 months ago
@FREEDOM14U "Limitless Stars and a World Hanging on Nothing [...]"
You do realize that these are just metaphors from primitiv people basically saying 'I can't fucking count all those stars!' and 'I can't fucking find the ropes the earth should be hanging from!'
Retrospektively you can vaguely find almost anything in any holy book.
This is like muslims claiming 'ropes in the sky' is gods way of telling us about string-theory.. it's just ridiculus.
R18111983 2 months ago
@R18111983
You do realize you can't spell retrospectively and there is nothing vague about the passages that motivated the Father of Oceanography, and many other scientists that turned to the bible and knew what was considered a metaphor, song, poetry, etc. Please educate yourself before you bloviate what you don't know.
FREEDOM14U 2 months ago
@FREEDOM14U Allright.. if you want to be a grammar nazi then we can continue in my native language and I will point out every single mistake you make.
I ask you again to provide a scientific source that cites the bible.
R18111983 2 months ago
@FREEDOM14U " [...] passages that motivated [...]"
So, you accuse me of being uneducated but you don't even know the difference between being inspired by something and using something as evidence for a discovery?
You religious nuts always come in AFTER a discovery is made and point to a verse that could vaguely be associated with it, of course, leaving out all the other ways the verse could be interpreted.
Come back when you find Maxwells equations in the bible or something..
R18111983 2 months ago
@FREEDOM14U Oh, and (How did I forget to mention this in the firstplace?) did I mention the Dark Ages?
Here's a good demotivational summing it up perfectly: files.plomlompom[DOT]de/futurplom/2127/DarkAges.jpg
R18111983 2 months ago
@R18111983
Eat it & Weep!
Natural philosophy, or natural science as it was sometimes called, was one of the key subjects taught at medieval universities and also something that exercised the minds of such esteemed doctors of theology as Thomas Aquinas, Albert the Great and Nicole Oresme who all wrote commentaries on Aristotle that excluded religious ideas. It is common mistake of the uninformed to trust the writings of John Draper and Andrew Dickson White as a factual account.
FREEDOM14U 2 months ago
@FREEDOM14U And that supports your point how?
R18111983 2 months ago
@R18111983
History revisionists are not reality. The universities, professors, modern science all came from Christianity. Obviously the "dark ages" were greatly exaggerated. It is not despite the Church but because of the Church science and philosophy advanced and are what they are today. And your point again?
FREEDOM14U 2 months ago
@FREEDOM14U Ehm.. yeah.. you mean like the church supported and promoted people like Galileo or Darwin?
What you don't understand is: just because someone making a discovery is christian doesn't mean christianity is the cause for that discovery. This is a huge logical fallacy.
That is like saying Einstein discovered Relativity because he was german.. HUGE fallacy.
R18111983 2 months ago
@R18111983 Well said, and I'm starting to think that FREEDOM14U is a troll, nobody can be that stupid...
andresdohko 2 months ago
@R18111983
Umm, yeah, because what you seem to fail to grasp is the Church was responsible for reason & education right from the beginning. This is a historical fact. They're the ones that created the first Universities, professors, and libraries etc. & yeah, Galileo was a Catholic. He never lost his faith. He signed a legal contract to teach it as theory, and agreed to stay in a lavish villa under house arrest for breaking his contract, big deal.Darwin's theory was never proven true.
FREEDOM14U 2 months ago
@FREEDOM14U Galileo was tortured by the church and threatened with the death penalty if he didn't publicly retract his scienftific work. Every scientific discovery that only slightly made ist possible to suggest that the bible might be full of shit (which it is) was HEAVILY oppsosed with censureship, torture and death penatly. HOW ON EARTH is that a basis for scientific advance?!
Evolution has been proven to be true beyond any sane reasonable doubt. Period.
R18111983 2 months ago
@R18111983
You are factually challenged on what happened to Galileo and why every biologist teacher is required to teach evolution as an unproven theory. Don't take my word for it, Google it. You just can't stand being wrong, can you? You owe every thing to Christianity.
Minimum Gene Concept of the Mycoplasma Gentilium, ha!
FREEDOM14U 2 months ago
@FREEDOM14U Uhm, that looks and reads a lot like the old 'irreducibly complex'-argument, which has been debunked, refuted and shred into peaces a million times over. Try reading a science book for a change..
R18111983 2 months ago
@R18111983
My god man, you've just revealed how truly ignorant you are on theory of evolution. This has nothing to do with irreducibly complexity. It was an experiment done by evolutionists that totally failed. Now please go and read up on evolution experiments before you attempt to correct someone on your own flawed logic. Note, I am not trying to embarrass you.
FREEDOM14U 2 months ago
@FREEDOM14U And how did it fail? What part exactly is a failure to you? I have just read the paper and I can't, by any means, find anything that would even begin to contradict evolution on any level.
R18111983 2 months ago
@R18111983
You've just proven that pride is more important than the truth. Liar!
FREEDOM14U 2 months ago
@FREEDOM14U The paper is available to anyone. Please cite the part that contradicts evolution in your opinion, I can't seem to find it. Although you would have to study evolution first, since you seem to know next to nothing about how it works. You kind of have to know stuff first to refute it, you know? I know, it's inconvinient.. but that's how it works.. ;)
R18111983 2 months ago
@R18111983
So what you are really saying is, you admit you know diddly squat about your fairy tale theory and you want me to spoon feed you.
They took the smallest known organism Mycoplasma Genitalium w/ 480 genes (amino acids which could be a 1,000 to 10,000) and tried to reduce them on paper. They couldn't do it, they could only reduce them to 397. If you believe in evolution this should have been achievable but it wasn't. Evolutionaunts did this experiment & had to admit failure.
FREEDOM14U 2 months ago
@FREEDOM14U Your fallacy here is to assume that 'smallest known organism' in any way relates to 'smallest possible self replicating entity'.
R18111983 2 months ago
@R1811
Your fallacy is you can't prove either one.If it doesn't work with the smallest organism,it sure as hell ain't going to work with the rest of the animals and plants.There is no reductionist ability to go from 0 to 397 genes in one shot.This experiment spelled disaster for evolution, but victory for intelligent design. Abiogenesis is another one of those theories that evolutionaunts are now distancing themselves from. It was disproven so they run & hide. Vestigial organs, lol
FREEDOM14U 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@FREEDOM14U "There is no reductionist ability to go from 0 to 397 genes in one shot."
You earlier denied that this was similar to the 'irreducible complexity'-argument and now you turn around and confirm it. I can't explain in detail why you are dead wrong in your argumentation in only 500 letters.
Just know that you cannot compare complex organisms that have evolved over billions of years with the first SIMPLE self replicating molecules.
R18111983 2 months ago
@FREEDOM14U Who is running and hiding? I want names. Which evolutionary biologist tries to hide anything about evolution? Who has come around and said evolution wasn't true? Where are the peer-reviewed articles disproving evolution?
You are copying creationist propaganda bullshit without checking sources, my friend.
R18111983 2 months ago 2
@R18111983
Nice no answer to anything that I wrote Mr. Soc account. I am copying evolutionaunts failed experiments. Btw, how many b.s. missing links has peer reviewed brought the world? Google Evolutionary Frauds.You know nothing about your theory and are boring to talk to, this conversation is extinct!
FREEDOM14U 2 months ago
@FREEDOM14U In other words: your checklist of creationist bullshit has run out of long refuted arguments? Wow, that was not all predictable..
Funny (once again) that you bring up those frauds.. we only discovered these hoaxes BECAUSE EVOLUTION IS TRUE. Way to shoot yourself in the foot (once again).
R18111983 2 months ago
@FREEDOM14U What mankind calls evolution, is in fact a key component and extremely robust facet of intelligent design. The whole against ID concept is a farce made by radicals on both sides. In the book of genesis, it does not use 24 hour days untill after adam and eve have fallen. It uses a term literally translated to complete phase. Also, adam literally means mankind, garden of eden literally means animal kingdom. It's a jewish book, all of genesis is. Their native hebrew is paramount for it.
SupremeAmerican 2 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@SupremeAmerican
Evolution is an unproven theory that grew out of communism. Every time it tries to prove itself it implodes.
And I am completely aware that what is written in the bible has to be read with a discerning mind, what did it mean at the time it was written, not always the literal meaning of the text.
Intelligent design is not reading passages from the bible or a religious class. It is pure science in how it relates to the world we live in.
FREEDOM14U 2 months ago
@FREEDOM14U No, you anti-intellectual scum bag. Evolution did not stem from communism, Evolution is not an unproven theory, the bible is total bull shit with no facts what-so-ever, and Darwin was not a god damned christian.
MuchContractForYou 2 months ago 7
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@MuchContractForYou
You prove that your mom was a monkey and your dad was a pig, there you feel better punk! You are historically challenge, mentally ill, and intellectually inferior. Do you have a point to prove your theory? I don't think so. Bring it boy or fade away like a fart in the wind. I smell fart
FREEDOM14U 2 months ago
@R18111983
Why do you run and hide behind a closed account? Are you afraid to have equal footing with other Youtubers? This is a typical cowardly tactic of trolls. If you are so knowledgeable on evolution, open up a real account. Put up a profile, and favorites, and your posts. You lose all credibility in hiding.
FREEDOM14U 2 months ago
@FREEDOM14U Big words for someone who hasn't made one valid argument yet.
R18111983 2 months ago
I see...ATTENTION! All religious people who think science is bullshit, get the fuck out of the internet - the internet was created by science and you should be thankful.
Sansoots 6 months ago 28
@Sansoots uhm im religious and i definitely believe science is not bullshit
sk8erfreak9242 5 months ago
@Sansoots Pshhh! Are you crazy?? The internet was OBVIOUSLY created by God in order for the Westboro Baptist Church to spread their message to the entire world...(Yes that's what the actually believe).
Kevstar19 4 months ago
@Sansoots There is however people with half baked ideas that which they will run with CLAIMING to be true. Tell me how the reaction of decay can exist out of nothing? you cant say the big bang because the elements to the molecular cloud are also part of that reaction. "God is known by nature in his works, and by doctrine in his revealed word."-- Galieo Galilei. Scientist who were at the foundation of science knew who to thank. Kepler: the Heavens Declare God's Glory. god bless
truth2350 4 months ago
@truth2350
The fact we live in a flat universe (look for information about the curbature of the universe), with a total energy equal to zero, means that it might have come from, well, zero. Splitting 0 into its positive and negative counterparts.
If god there was, its power was minute at best. Belief in a minute, almost powerless god... Is the worship worth it?
Galileo, the man the religious institutions wanted to burn at the stake for saying science went against established religion?
Xgya2000 3 months ago
@Xgya2000 all of that is an assumption which consist of three scenarios not just the one you suggest (flat, positive, and negative). you are LITERALY trying to make somthing out of nothing. Galileo was against religion, not against relationships with god. the catholic church very much so wanted him dead. the catholic church killed ACTUAL christians that took a stand against them, go look it up... in a book.
truth2350 3 months ago
@truth2350
Quantum fluctuations create things out of nothing all the time. But in quantum space, nothing isn't nothing at all.
We can actually prove we live in a flat universe. There is a nice lecture called "A universe from nothing" by Lawrence Krauss where the reason for this is explained in detail.
Belief in god was common when no other explanation was available.
Newton was a christian. Does this fact have more or less value than his science? What about the fact he was an alchemist?
Xgya2000 3 months ago
@Xgya2000 he said that dark matter is what births these galaxies in cycles, right? so how is dark matter BROUGHT into the equation? does the order between matter to energy, and energy to matter not apply here? i guess thats the next step we take in finding the evidence that "proves" "nothing". faith is what you believe not what you see. faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
truth2350 3 months ago
@truth2350
The same way the rest of the matter was: through the Big Bang.
The fact the total energy in this universe is equal to zero helps a lot to prove it came from nothing. There are other facts. And the fact nothing isn't nothing is already proven. Quantum particles come into existence from nothing all the time
Faith is belief without evidence, not evidence of the unseen
Matter to energy, energy to matter applies to all fields of science. Matter from nothing applies only in quantum physics
Xgya2000 3 months ago 17
@Sansoots
LOL! So it wasn't created by the military?
bigun89 3 months ago
@bigun89 Military computer scientists, yes.
hotelmario510 3 months ago
@hotelmario510 Dude, I studied computer science in college, that doesn't make me a scientist. Back when the internet was invented, computer science wasn't even a class in college, try again.
bigun89 3 months ago
@bigun89 Oh, so it was designed generals and soldiers, or by monkeys on typewriters?
No. It was designed by ARPA, the "Advanced Research Projects Agency" of America. Even if they didn't all have the TITLE of "Scientist" it was still using science to build the ARPANET, which would later become the INTERNET. Your statement of "LOL! So it wasn't created by the military?" is completely moronic. That can be said about anything. SCIENCE doesn't make things. People who PRACTICE it do.
hotelmario510 3 months ago
@hotelmario510 "bigun89 wins"
randomslice 3 months ago
Comment removed
hotelmario510 3 months ago
@randomslice Oh, what you're saying I "disproved" @sansoots' argument by saying that "science doesn't make things"?
What a lot of bollocks. I disproved nothing. Sansoots said that it was created BY science, yes. Now, as I've said, science DOESN'T make things, as it is not a living thing, it is a concept. HOWEVER, that DOES NOT change the fact that the Internet WAS made by scientists! You're putting up strawmen. How pathetic.
And no, I don't care if you're the uploader, either! You fail.
hotelmario510 3 months ago
Loved it and I'm atheist as well
MrDimond34 6 months ago 3
I am an Atheist and I love this. LOLLL
MJFAN666 7 months ago
This is awesome. I love how this is an example of Strawman has a Point on TV Tropes.
Fake!Dawkins is amazing!
TacticusPrime 7 months ago
ROFLCOPTER
MartyrofCake 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@randomslice
I liked the video - funny. I'm not a religious persons and really appreciate the job the new atheist do. They don't lack intelligence and they don't lack courage. Prove them wrong and paste the link to Jehova's facebook profile :).
rastablast3r 7 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
To all the idiots who don't get this video, go read feyerabend and post modernist deconstructionists to understand why science is, in itself, a dogma.
RDV333 7 months ago
@RDV333 Uhh, no, actually. Dogma is unchanging. Held to be unquestionably true already. Science morphs and improves every time a new discovery is made. Wanna know the best part? If a better system is discovered, the scientific method will tell us....science is no longer needed!
jonea16 7 months ago 39
@jonea16 Science is no longer needed? lol?!! Who said that?!
MJFAN666 4 months ago
@MJFAN666 Science did. ^_^ You see, unlike religious dogma, science can actually comprehend a hypothesis that it could be wrong, otherwise known as rationality. Science is a rational system for the rational minded. This is why devout and uncompromising religious people make poor scientists. Check out the story of a man named Kurt Wise, its rather sad.
jonea16 4 months ago
Comment removed
RDV333 7 months ago
Comment removed
RDV333 7 months ago
Comment removed
thetuckman1 7 months ago
THE FOUR HORSEMEN
TheInsanetoker420 7 months ago
Who are you who are so wise in the ways of science?
TheRoyalAquamaster 7 months ago
PR
fashklash 7 months ago
A dream of all intellegent people....a world without religion :) someday...someday
Davehuddy123 7 months ago 2
@Davehuddy123 I dream of Soviet Russia too :P
dchris1990 7 months ago
@dchris1990 Soviet union replaced one dogma (religion) with another dumb one (communism). So, not a valid example.
IvanAndreevich 7 months ago
@IvanAndreevich lol religion is NOT the same as dogma. One can be dogmatic, and not religious. Hitler, was not religious. He was dogmatic. He was an asshole. He was NOT christian (he just played one on TV, to get votes). Look 123, I'm sure you mean well, but ur an oversimplifying moron. :P
you can be an atheistic asshole, just as you can be a religious prick.
dchris1990 7 months ago
@dchris1990 Religion is a subset of dogma. "One can be dogmatic, and not religious" - yes, indeed that is exactly what I said. Communism is a dogma, and so is religion. In Russia, the usual dumb one (religion) was replaced by another stupid one (communism).
IvanAndreevich 7 months ago
@IvanAndreevich like it or not, eventually you're gonna have to base some of your society's ethical code on illogic and ritual...utter amorality is not the same as modern Western Civilization's ethical code of tolerance. Just as nihilism does not beget democracy, atheism does not automatically beget an enlightened, tolerant society. We, the modern intelligentsia of the West (and increasingly, of the world), may be more enlightened, but we certainly haven't surpassed past dogmas all that much
dchris1990 7 months ago
@dchris1990 "like it or not, eventually you're gonna have to base some of your society's ethical code on illogic and ritual" - why? We are moving away from that slowly, but steadily.
Of course not. You have to be an atheist for the right reasons. An enlightened society begets atheism but not the other way around.
What do you mean by not having surpassed past dogmas? What dogma do I subscribe to?
IvanAndreevich 7 months ago
I like how this video doesn't actually mount any arguments against any of the characters. Instead it seems to mock them for "being smart" and "having a science degree", lol.
"Cos science is the only way to know y'all"
Indeed it is, there is no better method of determining truth than experiment and observation.
sonicBlue00 7 months ago 2
3:44 - 3:50 never gets old ^_^
WheelLock 7 months ago
fuckin hilarious. ID is still a joke though
CambridgeHeights 7 months ago
Funny. When I first saw this video, I was a Christian. now I'm an atheist
Abena20 7 months ago 6
@Abena20 Uh-huh...
CarlosMarti123 7 months ago