YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

Cold reading FTW

DariusKnightshade 4 hours ago

What a dumb cunt that deb is. Penn is a story-telling genius!

MisterDrugDude 3 days ago

Can someone please tell me what reference it is at 0:15:51 when Anthony says

"No Sir I don't see your name on the list"

CrackerJack06 2 months ago

I love Penn J.! However, you lame dumbfucks that choose YouTube to debate religion, etc. need to get a life...LOSERS!

gardner90125 3 months ago

am i the only person who thinks coming in and being a cool dude will probably sell more stuff than just plugging your shit over and over?

boothesquirrel 3 months ago

This has been flagged as spam show

ALTHOUGH I'M A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN (Baptist), I no longer believe that the Bible teaches eternal torment or suffering. The Bible teaches eternal punishment, but it's not eternal torment. In my popular Internet article, TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE OF HELL EVOLVED FROM GREEK ROOTS, I explain how and why teaching of eternal torment entered early into Christianity and how Scriptures have been misinterpreted and taken out of context to support that teaching. ~Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology)

Mogley52 5 months ago

This has been flagged as spam show

SCIENCE SHOWS THAT THE UNIVERSE could not have sustained itself eternally because of entropy (even in an open system). Einstein confirmed that space, matter, and time had a beginning! That beginning had to be supernatural because natural laws have no ability to bring the universe into existence from nothing. The supernatural cannot be proved by science but science points to a supernatural intelligence for the origin and order of the universe ~ HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM (Article)

Mogley52 5 months ago

This has been flagged as spam show

EINSTEIN CONFIRMED that space and time are just as physical as matter. That's why space and time can be altered by gravity, and space produces particles. Einstein's equations show that the universe couldn’t be eternal. It had a beginning. Einstein believed, because of science, in the existence of God behind the origin and order of the universe. He didn't believe in a personal God like Christians do, but he did believe science pointed to the existence of an all powerful and intelligent Creator

Mogley52 5 months ago

This has been flagged as spam show

THE SCIENTIFIC CASE AGAINST ATHEISM: Please read this Internet article of mine published in Russia's English Pravda. It will be a real eye-opener for all who think belief in a Creator is merely subjective blind faith. Also read my article, LIFE ON MARS NO SURPRISE (In the Earth's past there was powerful volcanic activity which spewed life-containing dirt and rocks (meteors) into outer space. Mars may literally have millions of tons of Earth soil)

Mogley52 5 months ago

This has been flagged as spam show

NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Only evolution within "kinds" is genetically possible (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). How were species living and reproducing if their vital structures, organs, reproductive systems hadn't evolved yet? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic/biological similarities between species

Mogley52 5 months ago

This has been flagged as spam show

DAWKINS, HITCHENS, AND HAWKING REFUSE TO DEBATE with creationists who are SCIENTISTS, such as the scientists at The Institute for Creation Research. Dawkins and his friends only debate non-scientist creationists. Read articles by scientists supporting creation at The Institute for Creation Research site. Read analysis from creation scientists about the latest news on fossils, genetics, astronomy, etc. that you won't read in the main stream media. Visit the Institute for Creation Research site.

Mogley52 5 months ago

EXPLAINING HOW AN AIRPLANE WORKS doesn't mean no one made the airplane. Explaining how life and the universe works don’t mean there was no Maker behind them. Natural laws explain how the order in the universe works, but mere undirected natural laws can't explain the origin of that order. Once you have a complete and living cell, the genetic code/mechanisms exist to direct the formation of more cells, but how did the cell originate when no directing code or mechanisms existed in nature?

Mogley52 5 months ago

@Mogley52 - The question you ask -- "but how did the cell originate when no directing code or mechanisms existed in nature?" -- is pertinent. The answer: we don't know yet. The answer is NOT: it must be God. That is foolish.

TheFender2010 4 months ago

@Mogley52

It probably existed because the universe is ridiculously large and every possible chemical occurence happens somewhere probably at least once. Explaining how God works doesn't mean there was no maker behind him (possibly a natural one)- you can't be selective about your reasoning.

GodTheHypothesis 3 months ago

This has been flagged as spam show

WHAT IS SCIENCE? Science simply is knowledge based on observation. No one observed the universe coming by chance or by design, by creation or by macro-evolution. These are positions of faith. The issue is which faith the scientific evidence best supports. Natural laws can explain how an airplane or a cell works, but it's irrational to believe that mere undirected natural laws can bring about either. Read my Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM

Mogley52 5 months ago

This has been flagged as spam show

SCIENTISTS HAVE NEVER CREATED LIFE. And, even if they do it won't be by chance but by intelligent design. By genetically engineering already existing forms of life, scientists have produced new forms of life, but they did not produce these new life forms from non-living matter. Even in synthetic life, scientists design and build DNA from scratch, through intelligent design, and then insert their man-made DNA into an already living cell. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM

Mogley52 5 months ago

This has been flagged as spam show

SCIENTISTS HAVE NEVER CREATED LIFE. And, even if they do it won't be by chance but by intelligent design. By genetically engineering already existing forms of life, scientists have produced new forms of life, but they did not produce these new life forms from non-living matter. Even in synthetic life, scientists design and build DNA from scratch, through intelligent design, and then insert their man-made DNA into an already living cell. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM

Mogley52 5 months ago

This has been flagged as spam show

THE ODDS of the sequence of molecules in a cell coming together by chance are similar to the odds of magnetic letters randomly bonding together in a sequence to form all the words and sentences in a dictionary. Without the right sequence, a cell's molecules won't work. Amino acids can come by chance but not proteins. Without DNA there can be no proteins and vice versa. Gradually won't do. It's all at once or not at all for a cell's survival. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM

Mogley52 5 months ago

This has been flagged as spam show

NATURAL SELECTION DOESN'T PRODUCE ANYTHING. It can only "select" from what is produced that has survival value. If a variation occurs that helps a species survive, that survival is called being "selected." That's all it is. There's no conscious selection by nature. It's a passive process. Natural selection is a figure of speech. The term itself is a tautology. Natural selection only operates once there is life and reproduction, not before. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM.

Mogley52 5 months ago

NATURAL SELECTION IS NO BLIND WATCHMAKER because it can only "select," not produce or arrange. If a variation survives, that's called being "selected." Natural selection operates only once there is life and reproduction, not before, so it couldn't have been involved in life's origins. A partially-evolved cell (an oxymoron) would quickly disintegrate. It couldn't wait ("survive") millions of years for chance to complete it and then make it alive! Read: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM

Mogley52 5 months ago

This has been flagged as spam show

ARE FOSSILS REALLY MILLIONS OF YEARS OLD? Popular Internet article examines assumptions concerning fossil deposition as well as built-in assumptions involved in modern radiometric dating (not used for dating fossils but other rocks), and arguments from starlight and time. Discusses lack of true transitional forms in the fossil record and lack of "age" sequence of the fossil layers. Discussion of mixed species (i.e. dinosaur, reptile, mammal fossils in the same stratum).

Mogley52 5 months ago

This has been flagged as spam show

IMAGINE A FISH WITH PART FINS, part feet with the fins evolving (transitioning) into feet. What survival benefit would there be? The fish couldn't use its fins or its feet, and there are no fossils showing such a creature ever existed. They only exist on automobile bumper stickers! There are no true transitional forms, either living or fossilized. Evolutionists realize this fact! Read my Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!

Mogley52 5 months ago

This has been flagged as spam show

APES ARE QUITE COMFORTABLE IN HOW THEY WALK, just as humans are quite comfortable in how they walk. Even a slight change in the position of a muscle or bone, for either, would be excruciatingly painful and would not be an advantage for survival. There's no hard evidence that humans evolved from ape-like creatures anymore than there's hard evidence that apes evolved from four-legged-pawed dog-like creatures. Read Internet article: MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE.

Mogley52 5 months ago

This has been flagged as spam show

GENETIC INFORMATION CANNOT HAPPEN BY CHANCE, so it's more logical to believe that genetic similarities between all forms of life are due to a common Designer who designed similar functions for similar purposes. It doesn't mean all forms of life are biologically related! Also, "Junk DNA" isn't junk. These non-coding segments of DNA have recently been found to be vital in regulating gene expression. Read my popular Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM

Mogley52 5 months ago

This has been flagged as spam show

NEW SPECIES: Although new species have come into existence, they don't carry any new genes. They've become new species only because they can't be crossed back with the original parent stock for various biological reasons. A biological "kind" allows for new species but not new genes. Nature has no ability to invent new genes for new traits. Only limited variations and adaptations are possible in nature, and all strictly within a biological "kind" (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.).

Mogley52 5 months ago

This has been flagged as spam show

ALL REAL EVOLUTION ( i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.) in nature is the expression, over time, of already existing genes. Evolution is possible only if there’s information (genes) directing it. Only variations of already existing genes are possible, which means only limited evolution and adaptations are possible. Nature has no ability to invent new genes via random mutations caused by random environmental forces. That’s evolutionary faith, not science. Read my article, WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!

Mogley52 5 months ago

This has been flagged as spam show

DO EYES CARRY SCARS OF EVOLUTION? Read this fantastic Internet article by biologist and creationist Brian Thomas. Thomas refutes every argument of a "flawed" design for the eye, and explains how and why the so-called flaw is actually the best thing for the eye. Read the article! It's amazing what facts evolutionists will ignore. Numerous times evolutionists have been proven wrong about their interpretation of a structure as being flawed or useless.

Mogley52 5 months ago

This has been flagged as spam show

BURDEN OF PROOF: Anyone who claims the level of complexity and order in life and the universe happened by chance has the burden of proof. Read my Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM

Mogley52 5 months ago

Don't You KNOW...the DUEY DECIMAL SYSTEM????

----Conan the Librarian

Edubbplate 5 months ago

Awesome segment. Penn rules!!

SteelerMan123 5 months ago

I love Penn so much lol.

ShiksaWithChutzpah1 5 months ago

i could listen to him all day....great stuff

LA3226 6 months ago 4

you know who tells great stories?

11825code6 6 months ago

Everyone is right; he is a great story teller.

mth03d 6 months ago

Master story-teller, just like Louis C.K.

MyceliaProductions42 6 months ago 4

What a great fucking guest, man. It must be a privelege to be able to just sit and listen to the guy. He's got a gift when it comes to telling stories. One of the most articulate guys ever... doesn't even need an interviewer to conduct anything, and Opie is a hell of a conductor... so that's saying a lot.

JRuffinelli 6 months ago

@JRuffinelli Uh.

Is this an Inspirational Jimmy spoof?

BNicodemo 6 months ago

wow i didnt even know bobby was there until the end hahaha

ZombyWoof818 6 months ago

I'm only halfway through listening to this and it's already like one of their best interviews ever forever and ever.

jhohcable 6 months ago

thanks for the upload bro

filthyfew77 6 months ago

Penn tells some great stories

caltrof 6 months ago

thanks for the upload

aallppiinnee 6 months ago

Link to this comment:

All Comments (42)