These tests that are in this book are definitely an insult to the intellect. The Coca-Cola Can, the building, the painting, and the rows of oranges are designed but the analogy is flawed. Because these things are not alive and are not susceptible to mutations being carried out to children or natural selection.
The intellect of the test writers needs to be investigated.
If the heaven or hell is exist after death you'll know that you've lived for yourself. If there is no hell or heaven you're wasting your time for a rediculous lie. What would you choose?
I love books like these that give crazy examples of stuff to "prove" god exists. I am a firm believer that god does in fact exist. I am not going to prattle about it. For all the athiests out there. Everything happened by chance? No driving force gives no meaning to anything? Life, yours or anyone's, has no meaning. We are all just zooming around in space with no conclsion exept death. If that is the case I suggest you just kill yourself right now and spare yourself a life of nothingness.
I'm sorry but that tab is not the correct way to open a banana. It is there to keep the banana attached to the bundle. The correct way is pinching the "bottom", look it up, it's how monkeys do it. It's colours change to inform any sort of animal when it's ripe and ready for it's seeds to be passed, it doesn't go black to show it's to late, it goes black due to a chemical process which occurs after the banana going off. Pleasing the taste buds is opinion, I have friends who detest bananas. Idiot.
@LusoAustralian What about the fact that Bananas are the ONLY food that taste the same when you throw them up? Riddle me that. Everyone knows Monkeys are stupid so of course they do it wrong so your argument on that plain is invalid. I like to argue about coconuts.They contain fresh water, Nutmeats, and oils that will protect your skin from the sun. All this goodness in a container that is VERY difficult to get into without a tool (yes a rock is a tool) I have never seen a monkey open a coconut
@TheValthanos That means that bananas taste like puke. I don't really like bananas and I was saying it is a subjective argument which shouldn't be used. Monkeys are more intelligent than you are judging by your argument. Monkeys use the most convenient way of opening bananas as they do it all the time so I'd argue their way is better, look it up if you don't believe me. watch?v=UofRzPul4IU A video of a monkey opening a coconut just for you. Coconuts replace water with meat/air as they mature
Dont get hung up on the "What if i'm wrong" arguement. Don't forget it's not jsut Atheism/Christianity. A christian doesnt believe in Vishnu do they? We aren't that different, we just go one further. Any christian is still screwed if it turns out Allah is the one god, or if Zeus is still around, or if Cthulu is real. Unless the budhists have it right, most of us probably are either going no where, or the wrong place.
Sure they say that we don't have absolute knowledge that god doesn't exist. I agree with that. BUT They don't have absolute knowledge that he does exist. There making it seem like it only goes one way. In that last picture they said that we can't be atheist because we don't have 100% proof he doesn't exist.Thats like me saying oh you can't be christian because you don't know 100% he exists.fuck at lest I'm open minded about what other people think and don't have my mind dead set on it like them
@owenrox509 actually it is one way. You're trying to convince us, the burden of proof IS on you. You can't prove something doesn't exist. By that logic, you have to accept the existence of elves, dragons, unicorns, and the wizard of oz because you CAN'T prove they DON'T exist. No one's saying you cant be atheist for that reason, but until you have any proof at all that can be tested or not explained other ways, we wont change our minds.
@LunarFuror Valid point. Glad to see that not everyone is a complete idiot and can back up what they say. You sir are one of the few people who are smart enough to back up what they say. Thank you for not just saying GOD REAL BECAUSE THE BIBLE SAID SO. I have not compleatly ruled out the fact that he's non existent (to me at lest) but I really strongly put on the side of him not being here. OH and also, I do think dragons are real ;) skyrim ftw
@LunarFuror Nothing is real until proven to exist, not the other way round. It's innocent until proven to have committed the crime, not guilty until proven that they haven't. We don't have to prove that God doesn't exist because God is something with so little evidence he has to be proven to exist to convince anyone scientific. We can't prove elves and dragons exist so we don't believe in them. We can try and find evidence, but if nothing arises we won't believe in them.
@LunarFuror The way you said it because you said it had to be proven that it doesn't exist. Which sounded like you were defending God. Sorry, it's just in the way you made your point. My bad.
@LusoAustralian Actually if you read what I said, I was stating that it HAD to be proven he DOES exist. I was connecting their statement that we should believe because we can't disprove to the fact they don't believe in mythical animals. I will NEVER defend god for as long as there is a breath in my lungs.
Actually if you look at the Darwin "quote" you'll see that only the first line is in quotation. It was quote mined from his book, the passage later goes on to explain why he believes it to be true.
The banana in it's natural state: different shape, loads of annoying seeds, without human-made chemicals eaten by worms...
Humans made the banana like it is massively sold today, the bananas are picked when they're not ready yet. I seriously laugh at the fact that the creationists who use this invalid argument never do any research.
Our eyes are not the most complex around, lots of other animals have better eyes.
almighty power of god, anything is possible. believe and trust that Jesus Christ hung out on the cross and bled for our sins and he is your savior, and you will have everlasting life in the kingdom of God, what more could you ask for. I know when i die, I will be walking down the streets of gold with my almighty lord and savior, Jesus.
if we came from apes, why aren't there people TO THIS DATE still morphing from apes. Read the bible once and really grasp what god's word is telling you. there will be no atheists in hell. God loves every single one of you, even the most Corrupt. You are all his children. If you're a parent and you are reading this, I doubt that you would want them to burn in a lake of fire and torment for eternity. Please listen to me, i know what i'm talking about. I used to be on the same road, but with the
Do you understand that the only difference between humans and the other great apes is one less pair of chromosomes cause by the fusion of two? (proven fact, google it)
Do you understand that your consciousness will cease to exist when your brain decays after death?
Do you understand that our Earth is 4.5 billion years old?
Can you use reason, logic, and critical thinking?
If you answered "yes" to any of these questions, you may be an Atheist.
To correct a false assumption, it is possible to be both agnostic and athiest. I am an agnostic athiest. I dont know if there is a God or not, but do not currently believe in one due to lack of evidence. I dont know and I dont believe. Athiesm is not asserting a godless universe, merely rejecting the proposition that there is a God due to issuficient evidence.
You're still young. After another couple of decades on this planet seeing the stupidity of Christians and how it directly impacts YOUR life, then you'll be bashing them, because you are not an idiot like they are. Why do atheists come to hate the religious? Because the religious are the domineering majority who control elections. Simply put, the majority of people are pretty stupid.
@MrPlanx I am atheist myself but as we have seen Atheist are just as easily manipulated as Christians are. Just take the Atheist that support Obama as an example.
@stupidamericanz - Obama won because the only alternative was McCain. Never forget that. McCain would have started World War 3. He was a lunatic. Obama was the lesser of two evils, which is what American politics always comes down to. A two-party system in which both parties are the lapdogs of corporations is an OLIGARCHY, not a representative democracy. You can't blame the public for voting for the wrong candidate when there are ONLY wrong choices offered.
I'm quite sorry to tell you, but Agnosticism is not "Oh gee I haven't made my mind up". We are not fence straddlers, we are not undecided.
Agnostics believe that the human race does not have the intelligence, the ability, the information - one, some, or all of those - to definitely say "God exists".
Some, permanent Agnostics, think this is a in-stone fact that will never change.
Temporary Agnostics, like myself, think it is knowable and when we can say for sure we will convert.
@PredatorHuntress666 "Temporary Agnostics, like myself, think it is knowable and when we can say for sure we will convert."
So you cant make a decision with the logical ladder based on the information you already have? Getting more information makes this ladder longer and more stable, but you should Always have a ladder of logic. Even tho it's small. Is why Agnosticism doesnt make sense.
@mastela88 Of course I can make a decision with the information I have. I could make a decision whether I had information or not based off my opinion. But is it smart to do so? no.
You see, it makes no sense to say "There definitely is no god" when you cannot prove that statement. Same goes for theists.
Would I convert even if "god" was proved to be real? No. My reasons are moral in nature.
@mastela88 I don't think you understand the flow of the conversation. I'm using facts, not opinion.
Yes, it does. It does right up until the point that you realize there is no proof that he doesn't exist. Theism and Atheism are both personal absolutions... I know it is not absolute, as of right now. Does atheism make more sense than theism? Yes, very much so. Does it make complete sense? no.
I don't see how my moral compass pointing north makes me a retard.
@PredatorHuntress666 Using facts means ure an atheist. The burden of proof lies with the one making the claim. Since there is no proof of god its stupid to believe in it.
"Does it make complete sense? no." It makes perfect sense. We dont need to know with Absolute Certainty, does this mean we can be wrong? Yeah.
But same thing for religious ppl, they cant be Absolutely Certain either. Stop using Absolute Certainty argument plx it's got no praxxis in the real world.
@mastela88 Lol, no... it means you're being rational. You're making a claim, that he doesn't exist.
Nothing is perfect. Nothing.
But it's what you are doing. "I believe god doesn't exist". To you, it's certain. There is no god. Therefore, it's PERSONAL absolution. You can be right or wrong about it and not know, and it doesn't matter, it doesn't change that you are certain.
And I love how you made no comment on the last part...
@PredatorHuntress666 The burden of proof lies with the one making the claim. You know this, come on.
"But it's what you are doing. "I believe god doesn't exist". To you, it's certain. There is no god. Therefore, it's PERSONAL absolution."
I dont Start my day saying there is no god. People make CLAIMS that he exists but show NO evidence of it. The reasonable thing is to disbelief. You know this and you use the same principle EVERY DAY. Do you believe in unicorns? ofc not, there's no proof.
@mastela88 personal absolution might not be your best case to explain your disbelief. personal absolution is more of an "I dont have the necessary knowledge to believe differently at this time", therefore not definitively certain on any level. How much is a beer in Mexico? If you say 5 bucks, because your personally believe that beer in Mexico is $5 doesn't make it so. It could be 1,2, or even 10 for all you know. It is better to say "I don't know" than to make an assumption
@Set2Survive How much a beer is worth in mexico: If I wud GUESS 5$ i'd have to have some knowledge about the subject. There are TONS of unknonwn variables so I cannot do more than Guess what it wud cost. Saying I dont Know is ALSO a good answer.
@mastela88 But on a different level, say you were a believer and died , if there were no God, then oh well at least you led a sound and loving life. But if you an unbeliever, you died and there is a God, then you burn in hellfire for eternity. You cant tell me you'd be chilling out going at least I was a moral atheist. You'd be in agonizing pain forever. I'm a believer and I don't think that I'm wrong but I'd rather be a believer and be wrong than a non believer and be wrong.
I think you meant Pascal's Wager. Occams Razor is a scientific precept, not a logical fallacy. Pascal's Wager states that it's better to believe ridiculous crap if that crap says you will be punished for eternity for disbelieving, rather than being a decent person living in the real world.
@ultramerton Tho the one i Think pascals wager is goes as follows: Why NOT believe in god X, you have nothing to lose but everything to gain.
This is a logical fallacy as it only considers ONE out of an infinite amount of other gods. and there's more fail to it, but this is the one i remember.
Pascal's Wager actually states something like, "without evidence, if the rejection of a claim is potentially harmful, then it is better to accept (believe) that claim." And you're right, the problem is that the soul-damning Abrahamic God spans multiple religions and other deities could certainly promise the same amount of punishment, so it's impossible to adhere to these mutually exclusive beliefs. It's sad that people still use such a horrible argument.
@PredatorHuntress666 To even say the phrase "God exists," even as part of a larger linguistic construction, is to set up a construct called "God" in our human minds. Whether or not it reflects the larger world, as it is said is first and foremost in the mind. To say that this sentence is beyond our human reason is exactly as absurd as to say it cannot be said.
For any construct that can be reasonably called "God," it is vanishingly improbable that it exists. Non-atheist agnosticism is absurd.
All Christian apologetics is about lying, deception, obfuscation, and setting up false arguments. They know they can't win on fact, intelligence, evidence, and rationality. In short, they have to break Commandment 9 to try to prove the existence of their God. You'd think they'd implode or something when they do that.
OH NO THE BANANA ARGUMENT! That's a Ray Comfort fallacy. The banana you've come to know and love was selectively bred by humans. God didn't make it!
Looking at your illustrations, I will say you have a god given talent. That means a whole lot more given that I'm an atheist!
I see this video is 5 years old. What is your view now? Can I just commend you for keeping an open mind, sifting through the bull and using your own (evolution-given) mind, regardless of your conclusion. Good video.
People ALWAYS misunderstand what it means to be agnostic. Agnostic does not mean that you are unsure, although it suggests that you are. To be agnostic is to claim that there is no way of knowing what is true: whether there is a spiritual being or not, an afterlife or not, etc.
@serene430 You missed an "or" in there. Agnosticism is a stance on knowledge, stating that a set of knowledge is unknown OR unknowable. So Agnosticism encompasses two positions towards Atheism; "I don't know" and "No one can know."
One last thing about the banana. Yes, it was designed: by human selection + a random mutation that occurred during the cultivation of plantains (which were the original banana for hundreds of years) by a Jamaican. They want to believe that only an "intelligent" designer exists, while denying the mechanical precision at which the universe works. Gravity can cause material to clump together into planets, no intelligence required. The pamphlet is just full of loaded, biased questions.
Bleh. My last post should have read that I told the "professor" that I was a "humanist". By the way, his response was just as patronizing as anything in the aforementioned pamphlet. "So you think that you are morally superior to everyone else?" Uh, no, that's not what humanism means...
I just got one of these while walking between classes at NIU the other day when I mentioned to a person claiming to be a professor handing out Christian gospel singer cards. You know, I used to have some respect for apologetics, but this pamphlet is filled with such unintelligent, intellectually dishonest drivel that I was about to start making Youtube videos about it. If you are a Christian of any intelligence, please read "The Atheist Test." I guarantee you a genuine face palm moment.
Lol this is sad... so sad... I don't get why people can't just be content that not everyone thinks the same. Some people are content living in a fantasy land, others aren't. I'm an atheist, and my entire family is Christian. They don't accept me for my beliefs but I completely respect their beliefs because I know no matter what they aren't going to understand how I think or what I believe. It's just an endless pointless battle.
At 8:58, you can see how dishonest creationists are. If you read the Charles Darwin quote in its entirety, you see that he is saying the EXACT OPPOSITE. Plucking this part out of context is extremely dishonest.
Sorry, my phone's got a small keyboard. Like I was saying. Being an open atheist, and not fakeing belief or pandering to religion, will get any atheist farther than arguing and name calling.
Unlike any religion, atheism is in a unique place. Polling suggests that people become more ok with atheism when. They think there are more of them. So being an open athiest
Plus the banana argument is retarded. Banana's were cultivated and produced by men, not god. Real wild banana's are disgusting tiny straight and full of seeds.
I've heard this all before from Ray Comfort, i guess the question is did comfort create it and there were actually enough idiots in the world dumb enough and connected enough to spread such nonsense, or is Comfort regurgitating this nonsense as his own? either way anyone with a lick of common sense can see through these ridiculous arguments
To be honest, I never cared about bananas till I'm in north america. When I lived in south east asia, we really think bananas are not that impressive.
Honestly? Biological systems die in old age as tissues begin to fail to perform optimally after so many years of working. It happens to you too, derp.
And yes, there is no proof of any deity's existence, so you should believe in none of them, just as you don't believe in the tooth fairy, flying spaghetti monster, santa, or the easter bunny (Which keep in mind, are all infinitely less complex than an omnipotent & omniscient invisible being)
And your opinion is wrongity wrong wrong. We've already demonstrated that life from non-life (Synthesis of organic molecules from non-organic molecules) can occur naturally, specifically from events such as lightning, when the earth was young. Current models of the universe indicate that no such "creator" is necessary for any of what you see today.
Yes, your argument still stands, and it works against your own opinion, for where did your "creator" come from? Nothing?
In my opinion rational thought and logic points to an obvious intelligent "creator." There is of course no way to prove if the creator is the judeo-christian God or if it is just some sort of intelligent measurable energy. But my point is that an intelligence must be behind the creation of the universe. I think there are very few true atheists and many who claim theyre atheist are agnostic. My argument that has never been proven wrong is that you can't get something from nothing.
This guys being too hesitant and easy on the imbeciles who gave him this book. That book is the dumbest piece of shit i have ever seen, i truly hope no one actually believes this
finally, i really suggest checking out the "Atheist Experience" TV show here or full eps by googling. i just suggest it as you say youre questioning. it's put together by a community group on public access tv and always let's theists call in and present what they think and why and then they debate. very interesting sho.
all paleontology since, including the discovery of hominids, like homo erectus, which stood upright but had a more apelike skull shape and is thought to have been little over 3 feet high as an adult, and all genetic since (DNA was discovered long after Darwin's death) fits well with the theory and provides new evidence for it.
of vision, such as the primitive eyes in flatworms (either just a light sensitive patch or a cup like depressed patch, i forget) to advanced eyes with much better lenses than our in hawks for example.
there was a great documentary, i think PBS that dramatized Darwin's life and showed mechanical models demonstrating stages of primitive improvement in the eye.
3. the forming of a cup shape would be an advantage because it allows only light from some angles to get in, allowing the eye to sense roughly where a light blocking object is
4. then, if a lense develops, the more convex, essentially, the better it is at focusing and sharpening the image
so animals in various branches of life are thought to have gotten first light or dark sensitivity then vague location detection, then focus all gradually
1. Darwin was indeed confused by the eye, as he couldnt figure out how it could have evolved gradually. However, other evidence was strong enough to convince him that evolution had to be the method of changes in life.
2. since then, scientists have learned that the eye is developed from a bit of brain or pre-brain tissue (in the fetus or other young stage) which is sensitive to light this becomes the retina, where light is detected in humans etc
i am going on at length, but in a constructive way i hope.
the idea of believing in god/Christianity etc is known as Pascal's Wager after a famous mathematician who made the claim. like "better believe just in case." but this is silly. for one thing, why don't Christians say, "Oh no! if the Muslims are right, then i'm still going to hell? or the Protestants or Catholics? which one really knows the right rules to follow?"
besides, until there is evidence of hell...the logical bet is
as you probably know, the banana plant would die if animals (including apes and monkeys with hands) did not find it attractive and easy to eat, because then the banana seeds wouldnt be dispersed. therefore, if there is a varying distribution of banana types at any moment and they have inheritable DNA, then the ones likely to get eaten will tend to reproduce and get there DNA reproduced. therefore, over time, bananas will be more and more convenient for eating. plus PEOPLE BREED BANANAS!
Test three: Same applies to God you retard. Infallible is the actual term. If you read Karl Popper Mr know it all you would know this but clearly you do not read you just grab portions of things from the internet.
For an absolute statement to be true, I must have absolute knowledge. Faith is not knowledge it is a belief. Just as I may believe the bus will arrive at 5.55pm dispite the information I am given it does not make it true. It only has to be late/early one and my belief is false.
Test two: if time is endless, or infinite then there are an infinite number of possibilities or events. The big bang therefore could have already happened 50 million times, this arrangement is but one of 50 million big bangs...... The 'infinite' makes the truly impossible, possible by the terms of it's nature. - Easy next please.
"To suppose that the eye, with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest possible degree."
You can't just take the bit stated above and then not finish the quote because it suits you. That would be like me taking a quote from the bible and giving it new meaning.
Evolution is a bit like self design. I.E the most evolved survives. This book is dumb it misquotes darwin for a start.
"the case; if further, the eye ever varies and the variations be inherited, as is likewise certainly the case; and if such variations should be useful to any animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection"
He does not suggest it was designed by inherited dumbasses!
Here is my response to the so-called Atheist's Nightmare. One needn't read the whole thing. It starts off like this,
= = =
Note that the coconut...
= = =
And you can just imagine the rest: does this mean that the coconut was not designed?
Actually, the banana that we find in our stores WAS designed by an intelligent being: Man. These bananas in no way resemble the ones first discovered, but have been GENETICALLY ENGINEERED to suit our needs and desires (so they'd be more commercially viable).
Haha. This atheist test is laughable. Why on earth do the theists think they make any valid point at all with this 'test'? I'm not claiming to be right in saying there is no god. But this booklet does not make it any more likely. If anything, it's making it less likely.
I find most booklets like that highly patronising and poorly thought out. Whether or not someone believes a Coke can is manufactured or just came into existence has no bearing on religious beliefs. It's just someone desperately trying to justify a belief system that has no logic or proof to it. I'm an atheist precisely for that reason. Find concrete proof of the existence of a higher deity and I will listen to your evidence, but until then, not a chance.
@QuestionForAtheists - life is great. I brought them into at the world so that they could enjoy life, not so that they could waste their lives preparing for death.
A question for atheists. In a world where there's no proof of God's existence or of life after death; how will you explain to your children why you brought them into the world and why they should die?
I'm an A-cadillac-ist. Do I have a Cadillac? No. I don't hate them, I don't have a qualm with them, I've just never owned one. And I don't understand what someone means when they claim to not know whether or not they are currently a Cadillac owner. They say things like "I don't know whether or not I own a Cadillac but just in case invisible Cadillac fairies are real, I'd prefer to stay neutral on the subject, you know? I don't want to insult the fairies." *Blink blink.*
The Banana theory is thousand's of years of HUMAN cultivation and domestication, Nuff said. How can people say "how did it get this way?" Do these people think that Cows have been mooing round the farmyard since the word of God? answer Domestication, why would God create a species (Cows) just to be in constant pain for the survival of a more dangerous, careless and destructive species (Humans). I know why because God Hates Cows and Chickens, Horses, Rhino's, Elephants, Seal Pups.
At last I know how the coco cola was formed. Know I need to know how beer was made. Since Beer is > cola. Beer is the only argument for God. It was either A) made by God and therefore holy or B) made by man as an accident, but is fucking awesome, and testifies to mans manipulation of nature. So that is my take on your post.
Any theist that come across me who keeps tellking bananas are Gods fruit etc etc... I say "Explain the coconut" and they walk away all defeated and such.
@CondemnedPatriot treating them that way won't solve the problem. They are people too and to them they are being very rational. Ignoring them isn't the solution. A better way to act is to respect their beliefs and share yours with them in an open and respectful manner. Instead, people like you often try to yell your beliefs at others, thinking that your logic alone should be enough to convince them. Doing that is only doing to them exactly what you don't want them to do to you.
@atheistram And did they ever walk away acknowledging that fact, or do they go on deep in their indoctrination, looking back at you only to pray and consider how exactly the devil got his talons in you. You can win arguments with trolls too, but that doesn't make them stop, so in that sense, he's right. Their big ass trolls that have the mindset of children when it comes to beliefs, and won't walk away acknowledging your rightness.
@CondemnedPatriot The purpose of responding to Christians and Creationists isn't so much to convince them; it is to make sure that their diatribe does not go unanswered, to rope in credulous people into their web of half-truths, lies, and faith. If they are the only ones talking, their side is the only one which will be heard.
@TheGeneralCritic The people of this planet have heard this same recycled load of shit for centuries now and I am pretty sure anyone with half a brain wont even give this crap a second thought.
@CondemnedPatriot Well obviously you've never spent time in the southern states or on a Christian forum. And I'm honestly worried that the population of half-brained people is growing rapidly there. I have observed that it is often the less intelligent that are more outspoken (I think there's also a saying about that) which means their voices get heard. Ignoring them is like ignoring cancer. And that's what Creationism and fundamentalist Christianity is. Just a persistent cancer on society.
@aozf05 I'd have to agree with you that in some cases intelligent people are less outspoken, but there is only so much I can take. And yes, I lived in Fl for 4 years. I have to disagree with you about the cancer remark. Cancer grows whether or not its ignored, however its a fact that in first world countries intelligence is rising, I.Q. levels are rising, and with that rise the downfall of religious beliefs occur. Example, look at the % of people who don't give a shit about god/bible.
Dear Mike, it was a wise move that you began to give it a second thought as to the possibility of a supernatural being responsible for creations, and you wisely said "if hell does exist, i'm screwed". Now, it means you're not very sure of what you believe, but just that you don't want to believe that there's a God. Man, you got nothing to loose in believing that there's God, but you've got everything to regret in enternity should He exist. Why not make the wise choice and accept his call?
@vicjustice This is a thing called Pascal's wager, the question of 'why not believe? What have you got to lose?'
Firstly, you can't choose what you believe. I could go to church and pray twice a day but it wouldn't mean I actually believed it. Secondly, to force yourself into doing those things because there's nothing to lose is intellectually dishonest.
Mike might WANT to believe in God, but since there is no evidence for it, he simply cannot because his belief is based on evidence.
@martinpottsstarship You son of the Devil, you enemy of salvation, would you not stop persuading people against the salvation of God? How could you make this comment as quoted; "Mike might WANT to believe in God, but since there is no evidence for it, he simply cannot because his belief is based on evidence"?
Now, if you would not accept God's free salvation, do not discourage others to accept it. Repent from your deception attitude lest the anger of God decend on you with all its consequences.
@vicjustice You can't be serious. Do people still really speak like this? I'm not persuading anyone of anything. This video is five years old, who knows what Mike believes now? I didn't try to persuade anyone, I was telling you what Mike had already expressed himself. Like I said, you can't choose to believe in something.
I'm not concerned about God's anger because I don't believe in God. I thought that would be obvious.
The banana is designed somewhat. By HUMANS. We hybridized the banana from plantains. Hey Theists. The banana is also shaped and curved for ease of entry into your ass.
The make reproductive organ is shaped like a banana, so I guess it was designed to fit in the human hand and is the correct shape for the human mouth.
There really is only one question to ask yourself. 'Which god am I less afraid to piss off?" There are many gods out there (Yahweh, Krishna, Allah, etc...), and all of them seem to get angry when you worship another one. The monotheistic gods don't even want you to believe anyone but them exist. If they all hate each other, then which one is less apt to strike you down? Pick someone else, lol
And by the way, any 9nth grader knows that Evolution does not happen "by chance". Get your head out of the bible and into the Origin Of The Species plz.
The Earth is not a Coca Cola can. We are a species in wich evolution has led to the hability of design, due to our advanced intellect. It doesn't mean that the world itself has a designer or that the fact that we exist as a species is something more than a strike of luck whatsoever.
The Banana fits great into the hand and into the mouth with ease of acces you know what else does? The penis but Christians dont seem to like it very much so they put a banana there instead.
athiest are right - they have a need to know and not accept anything without evidence - the hypothetical consequences of being wrong about gods existence - doesnt further the truth of his hypothetical existence one bit - dont being fooled by these silly fallacios arguments
The hell fears is just Pascal's Wager. But it's flawed since there are lot's of different religions with different sets of rules and you can't follow all of them since they contradict eachother.
And even if you choose one and follow those rules so that you don't go to hell, you're saying that the "god" won't realise that you don't truly believe him, but are just playing it safe..
I am yet to meet a Creationist who actually even understands the evolutionary theory. Most of them have maybe a 2 minute Wikipedia education on it (at best).
If hell does exist, it could be any number of hells from any number of religions yeah? They all have exactly the same amount of scientific evidence (none), so how are you supposed to know? Not very fair is it? I don't worry about being wrong, because either whatever is out there (IF it's out there that is) either isn't an evil bastard that would torture nonbelievers for enernity, or is an evil bastard that expects far too much from us simple creatures, and I want nothing to do with it anyway.
The absolute knowledge part is just frustrating, you say that since we do not have absolute knowledge we can not say that there is no God. Did you ever stop to think that you don't have absolute knowledge as well? You can't say that there IS a God because you don't have absolute knowledge. Idiots.
Actually, you don't have to pick being an agnostic or an atheist.
theist/atheist refers to your beliefs, gnostic/agnostic refers to what you think you know or don't know. The term agnostic atheist, which sounds like how you should define yourself, means that you don't believe but can't say that you know for sure there is no god. I think that if someone showed you undeniable proof of god then you will believe, as would any rational person. Atheism is NOT gnostic atheism. Hope this helps.
@qsljfsopiucvn I was told the exact same thing from somewhere else. I swear, did you that on the Atheist Experience or something? cause i swear its on something big.
@bleesev2 They do talk about it in The Atheist Experience and I hear it mentioned in debates, though rarely. It's silly how many people argue against atheism without realizing that they're debating the rejection of a claim, and not the claim that there is no god - It is often stressed among atheists for that simple reason.
If I see it mentioned anywhere mainstream I'll post a reply, I apologize but I can't recall it being mentioned anywhere else aside from what I said.
@austynries I'm not sure, you should ask another person, but I think both words can be used as a noun or an adjective - the sentence "I am an agnostic atheist" or "I am an atheist agnostic" seems to me like "I am a tall person", for example, in which 'tall' is the adjective and 'person' is the noun. Again, I'm very unsure about this, but I do know that both 'atheist' and 'agnostic' are SINS HAHAHAHAHA LET'S ASK SATAN : )
@qsljfsopiucvn Yea, I refer to myself as an Agnostic atheist, because I truly do not know what a higher power might even "be", but I must use the atheist section to answer the retards around me pestering me about giving my soul to Jesus >.<
The Coke Can - Made by man, just like the bible. first the earth formed (scientifically proven), then life (scientifically proven) and then man, who millions of years later made the coke can. you dont need a creator for stale bread to form mold, as in bactiria that multiplies....
The banana - does that mean that every other fruit is flawed? religious logic is just pure comedy....
Mikey, the conclusions you come to are well reasoned. Keep thinking.
Preacher 777's comment about atheists always wanting to be right is what's called a strawman argument and actually, if you think about it religious people would also be wasting the only life we know we have, if they are wrong. Most atheists don't worry too much about what will happen when they die because they're too busy trying to have the best life they can - it's all they can be sure they have.
@DeadEyeJack I agree with what you said mostly except that "Atheists always wanting to be right" is not a straw man per se. It is an ad hominem attack. A straw man is when a point is misrepresented so it can easily be destroyed/disproven. That statement doesn't quite fit straw man. Although I do wish theists would spend more time proving their side and less trying to disprove everyone else. not nagging, just informing have a good one mate :)
@soundmindwar I disagree. The reason I consider it a straw man is that it is often put out there, as it's easy to misrepresent: "Atheist argues his position, his position is different from mine = he always wants to be right at all costs." His always wanting to be right at all costs is easy to fault and yet it's not a position he ever took. ergo straw man.
It's similar to atheists being "arrogant" when they don't agree!
@soundmindwar 2. I do agree that they then attempt to turn it into an ad hominem attack: "Atheist wants to be right at all costs = he is a bad person and ALL his arguments are discredited". but given that the premise of always wanting to be right came from the religious person in the first place it's a straw man.
Theists have to try to disprove others because they can't prove the non-provable but I agree it's frustrating, especially when their arguments are so weak.
@DeadEyeJack actually, God is provable (potentially). If God showed up and revealed himself, that would be proof of him. they can't prove god because he's fictional, not because it's impossible to prove his existence.
danielsangeo: do you really want to start poking around in the heads of these nuts?
rabidbilly 6 days ago
...um..shaped? ...for the human mouth??? the banana???? that's just NASTY!
rabidbilly 6 days ago
These tests that are in this book are definitely an insult to the intellect. The Coca-Cola Can, the building, the painting, and the rows of oranges are designed but the analogy is flawed. Because these things are not alive and are not susceptible to mutations being carried out to children or natural selection.
The intellect of the test writers needs to be investigated.
danielsangeo 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
research the new world order and you will undestand why things are the way that they are
pinball281 2 weeks ago
If the heaven or hell is exist after death you'll know that you've lived for yourself. If there is no hell or heaven you're wasting your time for a rediculous lie. What would you choose?
MillyPathology 3 weeks ago
did ray comfort write that book?
terry4144 3 weeks ago
I love books like these that give crazy examples of stuff to "prove" god exists. I am a firm believer that god does in fact exist. I am not going to prattle about it. For all the athiests out there. Everything happened by chance? No driving force gives no meaning to anything? Life, yours or anyone's, has no meaning. We are all just zooming around in space with no conclsion exept death. If that is the case I suggest you just kill yourself right now and spare yourself a life of nothingness.
TheValthanos 3 weeks ago
I'm sorry but that tab is not the correct way to open a banana. It is there to keep the banana attached to the bundle. The correct way is pinching the "bottom", look it up, it's how monkeys do it. It's colours change to inform any sort of animal when it's ripe and ready for it's seeds to be passed, it doesn't go black to show it's to late, it goes black due to a chemical process which occurs after the banana going off. Pleasing the taste buds is opinion, I have friends who detest bananas. Idiot.
LusoAustralian 3 weeks ago
@LusoAustralian What about the fact that Bananas are the ONLY food that taste the same when you throw them up? Riddle me that. Everyone knows Monkeys are stupid so of course they do it wrong so your argument on that plain is invalid. I like to argue about coconuts.They contain fresh water, Nutmeats, and oils that will protect your skin from the sun. All this goodness in a container that is VERY difficult to get into without a tool (yes a rock is a tool) I have never seen a monkey open a coconut
TheValthanos 3 weeks ago
@TheValthanos That means that bananas taste like puke. I don't really like bananas and I was saying it is a subjective argument which shouldn't be used. Monkeys are more intelligent than you are judging by your argument. Monkeys use the most convenient way of opening bananas as they do it all the time so I'd argue their way is better, look it up if you don't believe me. watch?v=UofRzPul4IU A video of a monkey opening a coconut just for you. Coconuts replace water with meat/air as they mature
LusoAustralian 3 weeks ago
Dont get hung up on the "What if i'm wrong" arguement. Don't forget it's not jsut Atheism/Christianity. A christian doesnt believe in Vishnu do they? We aren't that different, we just go one further. Any christian is still screwed if it turns out Allah is the one god, or if Zeus is still around, or if Cthulu is real. Unless the budhists have it right, most of us probably are either going no where, or the wrong place.
LunarFuror 3 weeks ago
ironically
a mormon ad popped up before this video...
Redeemedsinner17 4 weeks ago
Sure they say that we don't have absolute knowledge that god doesn't exist. I agree with that. BUT They don't have absolute knowledge that he does exist. There making it seem like it only goes one way. In that last picture they said that we can't be atheist because we don't have 100% proof he doesn't exist.Thats like me saying oh you can't be christian because you don't know 100% he exists.fuck at lest I'm open minded about what other people think and don't have my mind dead set on it like them
owenrox509 4 weeks ago
@owenrox509 actually it is one way. You're trying to convince us, the burden of proof IS on you. You can't prove something doesn't exist. By that logic, you have to accept the existence of elves, dragons, unicorns, and the wizard of oz because you CAN'T prove they DON'T exist. No one's saying you cant be atheist for that reason, but until you have any proof at all that can be tested or not explained other ways, we wont change our minds.
LunarFuror 3 weeks ago
@LunarFuror Valid point. Glad to see that not everyone is a complete idiot and can back up what they say. You sir are one of the few people who are smart enough to back up what they say. Thank you for not just saying GOD REAL BECAUSE THE BIBLE SAID SO. I have not compleatly ruled out the fact that he's non existent (to me at lest) but I really strongly put on the side of him not being here. OH and also, I do think dragons are real ;) skyrim ftw
owenrox509 3 weeks ago
@owenrox509 I'm atheist lol.
LunarFuror 3 weeks ago
@LunarFuror Oh haha by the way your worded your answer it made it seem like your christian
owenrox509 3 weeks ago
@LunarFuror Nothing is real until proven to exist, not the other way round. It's innocent until proven to have committed the crime, not guilty until proven that they haven't. We don't have to prove that God doesn't exist because God is something with so little evidence he has to be proven to exist to convince anyone scientific. We can't prove elves and dragons exist so we don't believe in them. We can try and find evidence, but if nothing arises we won't believe in them.
LusoAustralian 3 weeks ago
@LusoAustralian yeah... which is the point i was making... Why is everyone having a hard time understanding what i said. I'M AN ATHEIST.
LunarFuror 3 weeks ago
@LunarFuror The way you said it because you said it had to be proven that it doesn't exist. Which sounded like you were defending God. Sorry, it's just in the way you made your point. My bad.
LusoAustralian 3 weeks ago
@LusoAustralian Actually if you read what I said, I was stating that it HAD to be proven he DOES exist. I was connecting their statement that we should believe because we can't disprove to the fact they don't believe in mythical animals. I will NEVER defend god for as long as there is a breath in my lungs.
LunarFuror 3 weeks ago
Actually if you look at the Darwin "quote" you'll see that only the first line is in quotation. It was quote mined from his book, the passage later goes on to explain why he believes it to be true.
shagoosty 4 weeks ago
What's funny about the Banana argument is the bananas you get in stores have been evolved BY MAN. Google wild banana, we can't eat it raw.
shagoosty 4 weeks ago
Wow, a book that quotes Ray Comfort. I'm sure that's the best way to convert people.
shagoosty 4 weeks ago
The banana in it's natural state: different shape, loads of annoying seeds, without human-made chemicals eaten by worms...
Humans made the banana like it is massively sold today, the bananas are picked when they're not ready yet. I seriously laugh at the fact that the creationists who use this invalid argument never do any research.
Our eyes are not the most complex around, lots of other animals have better eyes.
offwithurhead 1 month ago
The Banana: Shaped like Penis so you can insert it in and out of the human asshole.
ffs
2wives1prophet 1 month ago
@2wives1prophet well we see what orifice you prefer your bananas in...lol. just fucking with ya
Set2Survive 1 month ago
almighty power of god, anything is possible. believe and trust that Jesus Christ hung out on the cross and bled for our sins and he is your savior, and you will have everlasting life in the kingdom of God, what more could you ask for. I know when i die, I will be walking down the streets of gold with my almighty lord and savior, Jesus.
linkinparklyrics1 1 month ago
@linkinparklyrics1 yes, you chose the fairytale that is the most pleasing.......pathetic
wearestarstuffsagan 1 month ago
if we came from apes, why aren't there people TO THIS DATE still morphing from apes. Read the bible once and really grasp what god's word is telling you. there will be no atheists in hell. God loves every single one of you, even the most Corrupt. You are all his children. If you're a parent and you are reading this, I doubt that you would want them to burn in a lake of fire and torment for eternity. Please listen to me, i know what i'm talking about. I used to be on the same road, but with the
linkinparklyrics1 1 month ago
@linkinparklyrics1 Because evolution does not happen overnight, and we did not evolve from the apes you see now. Idiot.
PredatorHuntress666 1 month ago
@PredatorHuntress666 Evolution never happen'd.
linkinparklyrics1 1 month ago
they forgot(about the banana) ...it looks like a penis, so the women can practice one of the most important job the blow job.
I love the banana arguement
xmenprince 1 month ago
The REAL Atheist test:
Do you understand that the only difference between humans and the other great apes is one less pair of chromosomes cause by the fusion of two? (proven fact, google it)
Do you understand that your consciousness will cease to exist when your brain decays after death?
Do you understand that our Earth is 4.5 billion years old?
Can you use reason, logic, and critical thinking?
If you answered "yes" to any of these questions, you may be an Atheist.
cavemantiger 1 month ago
To correct a false assumption, it is possible to be both agnostic and athiest. I am an agnostic athiest. I dont know if there is a God or not, but do not currently believe in one due to lack of evidence. I dont know and I dont believe. Athiesm is not asserting a godless universe, merely rejecting the proposition that there is a God due to issuficient evidence.
davidsfriend01 1 month ago
Lol banana mans entire argument.
jesusisahugefaggot 1 month ago
uu if you are gonna prove atheists wrong...then don't talk shit!
limsniff 2 months ago
You're still young. After another couple of decades on this planet seeing the stupidity of Christians and how it directly impacts YOUR life, then you'll be bashing them, because you are not an idiot like they are. Why do atheists come to hate the religious? Because the religious are the domineering majority who control elections. Simply put, the majority of people are pretty stupid.
MrPlanx 3 months ago 17
@MrPlanx I am atheist myself but as we have seen Atheist are just as easily manipulated as Christians are. Just take the Atheist that support Obama as an example.
stupidamericanz 3 weeks ago
@stupidamericanz - Obama won because the only alternative was McCain. Never forget that. McCain would have started World War 3. He was a lunatic. Obama was the lesser of two evils, which is what American politics always comes down to. A two-party system in which both parties are the lapdogs of corporations is an OLIGARCHY, not a representative democracy. You can't blame the public for voting for the wrong candidate when there are ONLY wrong choices offered.
MrPlanx 3 weeks ago
I'm quite sorry to tell you, but Agnosticism is not "Oh gee I haven't made my mind up". We are not fence straddlers, we are not undecided.
Agnostics believe that the human race does not have the intelligence, the ability, the information - one, some, or all of those - to definitely say "God exists".
Some, permanent Agnostics, think this is a in-stone fact that will never change.
Temporary Agnostics, like myself, think it is knowable and when we can say for sure we will convert.
PredatorHuntress666 3 months ago 24
@PredatorHuntress666 "Temporary Agnostics, like myself, think it is knowable and when we can say for sure we will convert."
So you cant make a decision with the logical ladder based on the information you already have? Getting more information makes this ladder longer and more stable, but you should Always have a ladder of logic. Even tho it's small. Is why Agnosticism doesnt make sense.
mastela88 1 month ago
@mastela88 Of course I can make a decision with the information I have. I could make a decision whether I had information or not based off my opinion. But is it smart to do so? no.
You see, it makes no sense to say "There definitely is no god" when you cannot prove that statement. Same goes for theists.
Would I convert even if "god" was proved to be real? No. My reasons are moral in nature.
PredatorHuntress666 1 month ago
@PredatorHuntress666 " I could make a decision whether I had information or not based off my opinion" Based on your Opinion is the fault here.
Opinion has nothing to do with common sense. 1+1 is 2, doesnt matter if u have a different opinion or not.
It absolutely makes sense to Disbelieve something there is NO proof for. You understand this right?
"Would I convert even if "god" was proved to be real? No."
Retard.
mastela88 1 month ago
@mastela88 I don't think you understand the flow of the conversation. I'm using facts, not opinion.
Yes, it does. It does right up until the point that you realize there is no proof that he doesn't exist. Theism and Atheism are both personal absolutions... I know it is not absolute, as of right now. Does atheism make more sense than theism? Yes, very much so. Does it make complete sense? no.
I don't see how my moral compass pointing north makes me a retard.
PredatorHuntress666 1 month ago
@PredatorHuntress666 Using facts means ure an atheist. The burden of proof lies with the one making the claim. Since there is no proof of god its stupid to believe in it.
"Does it make complete sense? no." It makes perfect sense. We dont need to know with Absolute Certainty, does this mean we can be wrong? Yeah.
But same thing for religious ppl, they cant be Absolutely Certain either. Stop using Absolute Certainty argument plx it's got no praxxis in the real world.
mastela88 1 month ago
@mastela88 Lol, no... it means you're being rational. You're making a claim, that he doesn't exist.
Nothing is perfect. Nothing.
But it's what you are doing. "I believe god doesn't exist". To you, it's certain. There is no god. Therefore, it's PERSONAL absolution. You can be right or wrong about it and not know, and it doesn't matter, it doesn't change that you are certain.
And I love how you made no comment on the last part...
PredatorHuntress666 1 month ago
@PredatorHuntress666 The burden of proof lies with the one making the claim. You know this, come on.
"But it's what you are doing. "I believe god doesn't exist". To you, it's certain. There is no god. Therefore, it's PERSONAL absolution."
I dont Start my day saying there is no god. People make CLAIMS that he exists but show NO evidence of it. The reasonable thing is to disbelief. You know this and you use the same principle EVERY DAY. Do you believe in unicorns? ofc not, there's no proof.
mastela88 1 month ago
@mastela88 personal absolution might not be your best case to explain your disbelief. personal absolution is more of an "I dont have the necessary knowledge to believe differently at this time", therefore not definitively certain on any level. How much is a beer in Mexico? If you say 5 bucks, because your personally believe that beer in Mexico is $5 doesn't make it so. It could be 1,2, or even 10 for all you know. It is better to say "I don't know" than to make an assumption
Set2Survive 1 month ago
@Set2Survive How much a beer is worth in mexico: If I wud GUESS 5$ i'd have to have some knowledge about the subject. There are TONS of unknonwn variables so I cannot do more than Guess what it wud cost. Saying I dont Know is ALSO a good answer.
mastela88 1 month ago
@mastela88 But on a different level, say you were a believer and died , if there were no God, then oh well at least you led a sound and loving life. But if you an unbeliever, you died and there is a God, then you burn in hellfire for eternity. You cant tell me you'd be chilling out going at least I was a moral atheist. You'd be in agonizing pain forever. I'm a believer and I don't think that I'm wrong but I'd rather be a believer and be wrong than a non believer and be wrong.
Set2Survive 1 month ago
@Set2Survive What u described is Occams Razor. It's a logical fallacy google it.
Retard.
mastela88 1 month ago
@mastela88
I think you meant Pascal's Wager. Occams Razor is a scientific precept, not a logical fallacy. Pascal's Wager states that it's better to believe ridiculous crap if that crap says you will be punished for eternity for disbelieving, rather than being a decent person living in the real world.
ultramerton 1 month ago
@ultramerton Yeah that one! religious ppl make so many fallacious arguments its hard to keep track of them all lol
mastela88 1 month ago
@ultramerton Tho the one i Think pascals wager is goes as follows: Why NOT believe in god X, you have nothing to lose but everything to gain.
This is a logical fallacy as it only considers ONE out of an infinite amount of other gods. and there's more fail to it, but this is the one i remember.
mastela88 1 month ago
@mastela88
lol... true.
Pascal's Wager actually states something like, "without evidence, if the rejection of a claim is potentially harmful, then it is better to accept (believe) that claim." And you're right, the problem is that the soul-damning Abrahamic God spans multiple religions and other deities could certainly promise the same amount of punishment, so it's impossible to adhere to these mutually exclusive beliefs. It's sad that people still use such a horrible argument.
ultramerton 1 month ago
@PredatorHuntress666 that's negative atheism, agnosticism used as a belief is a basic theoretical misuse of therminology
lusteraliaszero 1 month ago
@PredatorHuntress666 To even say the phrase "God exists," even as part of a larger linguistic construction, is to set up a construct called "God" in our human minds. Whether or not it reflects the larger world, as it is said is first and foremost in the mind. To say that this sentence is beyond our human reason is exactly as absurd as to say it cannot be said.
For any construct that can be reasonably called "God," it is vanishingly improbable that it exists. Non-atheist agnosticism is absurd.
IoEstasCedonta 1 week ago
All Christian apologetics is about lying, deception, obfuscation, and setting up false arguments. They know they can't win on fact, intelligence, evidence, and rationality. In short, they have to break Commandment 9 to try to prove the existence of their God. You'd think they'd implode or something when they do that.
OH NO THE BANANA ARGUMENT! That's a Ray Comfort fallacy. The banana you've come to know and love was selectively bred by humans. God didn't make it!
ChipArgyle 3 months ago 2
I hope Ray Comfort gets hit by a bus.
Protectourbioshpere 3 months ago
read the history of the modern banana...it is fascinating, and definitively proves that a modern banana is intelligently designed...by humans
Plausiblesarge 3 months ago
ray comforts banana argument forgets one thing.. he looks like hes trying to suck a phat one
scorand 4 months ago
Way for that book to knowingly ignore the rest of Darwin's quote...
Full quote here: en.wikiquote(dot)org/wiki/Notable_Charles_Darwin_misquotes
koolanator 4 months ago
Looking at your illustrations, I will say you have a god given talent. That means a whole lot more given that I'm an atheist!
I see this video is 5 years old. What is your view now? Can I just commend you for keeping an open mind, sifting through the bull and using your own (evolution-given) mind, regardless of your conclusion. Good video.
artspooner 4 months ago
People ALWAYS misunderstand what it means to be agnostic. Agnostic does not mean that you are unsure, although it suggests that you are. To be agnostic is to claim that there is no way of knowing what is true: whether there is a spiritual being or not, an afterlife or not, etc.
serene430 4 months ago
@serene430 You missed an "or" in there. Agnosticism is a stance on knowledge, stating that a set of knowledge is unknown OR unknowable. So Agnosticism encompasses two positions towards Atheism; "I don't know" and "No one can know."
koolanator 4 months ago
One last thing about the banana. Yes, it was designed: by human selection + a random mutation that occurred during the cultivation of plantains (which were the original banana for hundreds of years) by a Jamaican. They want to believe that only an "intelligent" designer exists, while denying the mechanical precision at which the universe works. Gravity can cause material to clump together into planets, no intelligence required. The pamphlet is just full of loaded, biased questions.
JabborWacky 4 months ago
Bleh. My last post should have read that I told the "professor" that I was a "humanist". By the way, his response was just as patronizing as anything in the aforementioned pamphlet. "So you think that you are morally superior to everyone else?" Uh, no, that's not what humanism means...
JabborWacky 4 months ago
I just got one of these while walking between classes at NIU the other day when I mentioned to a person claiming to be a professor handing out Christian gospel singer cards. You know, I used to have some respect for apologetics, but this pamphlet is filled with such unintelligent, intellectually dishonest drivel that I was about to start making Youtube videos about it. If you are a Christian of any intelligence, please read "The Atheist Test." I guarantee you a genuine face palm moment.
JabborWacky 4 months ago
Lol this is sad... so sad... I don't get why people can't just be content that not everyone thinks the same. Some people are content living in a fantasy land, others aren't. I'm an atheist, and my entire family is Christian. They don't accept me for my beliefs but I completely respect their beliefs because I know no matter what they aren't going to understand how I think or what I believe. It's just an endless pointless battle.
frogpollen 4 months ago
At 8:58, you can see how dishonest creationists are. If you read the Charles Darwin quote in its entirety, you see that he is saying the EXACT OPPOSITE. Plucking this part out of context is extremely dishonest.
AtheistExplains 4 months ago
Sorry, my phone's got a small keyboard. Like I was saying. Being an open atheist, and not fakeing belief or pandering to religion, will get any atheist farther than arguing and name calling.
joshuaunderwood7 4 months ago
Unlike any religion, atheism is in a unique place. Polling suggests that people become more ok with atheism when. They think there are more of them. So being an open athiest
joshuaunderwood7 4 months ago
Come over to the dark side the atheist side we got some lamps it's much better now and being right never hurt
9kingmax 4 months ago
Plus the banana argument is retarded. Banana's were cultivated and produced by men, not god. Real wild banana's are disgusting tiny straight and full of seeds.
youbetzler 5 months ago
I've heard this all before from Ray Comfort, i guess the question is did comfort create it and there were actually enough idiots in the world dumb enough and connected enough to spread such nonsense, or is Comfort regurgitating this nonsense as his own? either way anyone with a lick of common sense can see through these ridiculous arguments
youbetzler 5 months ago
To be honest, I never cared about bananas till I'm in north america. When I lived in south east asia, we really think bananas are not that impressive.
3dimensionalJoe 5 months ago
@QuestionForAthiests
"why they should die"
Honestly? Biological systems die in old age as tissues begin to fail to perform optimally after so many years of working. It happens to you too, derp.
And yes, there is no proof of any deity's existence, so you should believe in none of them, just as you don't believe in the tooth fairy, flying spaghetti monster, santa, or the easter bunny (Which keep in mind, are all infinitely less complex than an omnipotent & omniscient invisible being)
PurplePeopleEater4 5 months ago
@RedneckRapper10
And your opinion is wrongity wrong wrong. We've already demonstrated that life from non-life (Synthesis of organic molecules from non-organic molecules) can occur naturally, specifically from events such as lightning, when the earth was young. Current models of the universe indicate that no such "creator" is necessary for any of what you see today.
Yes, your argument still stands, and it works against your own opinion, for where did your "creator" come from? Nothing?
PurplePeopleEater4 5 months ago
In my opinion rational thought and logic points to an obvious intelligent "creator." There is of course no way to prove if the creator is the judeo-christian God or if it is just some sort of intelligent measurable energy. But my point is that an intelligence must be behind the creation of the universe. I think there are very few true atheists and many who claim theyre atheist are agnostic. My argument that has never been proven wrong is that you can't get something from nothing.
RedneckRapper10 5 months ago
Test one:
The person who tried to make a scientific statement by comparing a Coca Cola can to planet earth is:
1. A fool
2. Unintelligent
3. A christian
AwesomelyCewl 5 months ago
I love when religious people try to use science to discredit science.
LeLimeLine 5 months ago
My dick is shaped for my hand...so god is pro-masturbation?
EddieFivespeed 5 months ago
What that Preacherman777 was talking about is "Pascal's Wager". You might as well believe because the alternative is worse.
Which is bullshit on a massive scale!
Pascal want to make it sound like there are 1 right out of 2 possible.
But that is not the case, one possibility is atheism= nothing after you die.
And then there is the about 10 000 other religions in which only one can be right.
Or basically, 20-1 billion has the right religion.
Se1ander 5 months ago
This guys being too hesitant and easy on the imbeciles who gave him this book. That book is the dumbest piece of shit i have ever seen, i truly hope no one actually believes this
zodabin 5 months ago
Ray "cumfart" Comfort strikes again...
superwowie111 5 months ago
It seems that most of the people who try to use the Theory Of Evolution against Atheists have no idea how the actual theory works.
Sasori2395 5 months ago 35
@Sasori2395 its more like a fact now
PhotoShopChannel 2 months ago
@Sasori2395 they also think calling it a theory is an insult or belittles it
wearestarstuffsagan 1 month ago
@Sasori2395 I noticed the same. They have only heard people say it is only a theory so they follow their word instead of investigating. Very true
2wives1prophet 1 month ago
finally, i really suggest checking out the "Atheist Experience" TV show here or full eps by googling. i just suggest it as you say youre questioning. it's put together by a community group on public access tv and always let's theists call in and present what they think and why and then they debate. very interesting sho.
Daniel0112358 5 months ago
all paleontology since, including the discovery of hominids, like homo erectus, which stood upright but had a more apelike skull shape and is thought to have been little over 3 feet high as an adult, and all genetic since (DNA was discovered long after Darwin's death) fits well with the theory and provides new evidence for it.
Daniel0112358 5 months ago
of vision, such as the primitive eyes in flatworms (either just a light sensitive patch or a cup like depressed patch, i forget) to advanced eyes with much better lenses than our in hawks for example.
there was a great documentary, i think PBS that dramatized Darwin's life and showed mechanical models demonstrating stages of primitive improvement in the eye.
two great arguments of ev. in general:
the breeding of all dogs from the wolf
& the fact that
Daniel0112358 5 months ago
3. the forming of a cup shape would be an advantage because it allows only light from some angles to get in, allowing the eye to sense roughly where a light blocking object is
4. then, if a lense develops, the more convex, essentially, the better it is at focusing and sharpening the image
so animals in various branches of life are thought to have gotten first light or dark sensitivity then vague location detection, then focus all gradually
there are examples of all of these types
Daniel0112358 5 months ago
on the eye and evolution:
1. Darwin was indeed confused by the eye, as he couldnt figure out how it could have evolved gradually. However, other evidence was strong enough to convince him that evolution had to be the method of changes in life.
2. since then, scientists have learned that the eye is developed from a bit of brain or pre-brain tissue (in the fetus or other young stage) which is sensitive to light this becomes the retina, where light is detected in humans etc
Daniel0112358 5 months ago
that its like telling kids to obey their parents or "Santa will give you coal"
Daniel0112358 5 months ago
i am going on at length, but in a constructive way i hope.
the idea of believing in god/Christianity etc is known as Pascal's Wager after a famous mathematician who made the claim. like "better believe just in case." but this is silly. for one thing, why don't Christians say, "Oh no! if the Muslims are right, then i'm still going to hell? or the Protestants or Catholics? which one really knows the right rules to follow?"
besides, until there is evidence of hell...the logical bet is
Daniel0112358 5 months ago
as you probably know, the banana plant would die if animals (including apes and monkeys with hands) did not find it attractive and easy to eat, because then the banana seeds wouldnt be dispersed. therefore, if there is a varying distribution of banana types at any moment and they have inheritable DNA, then the ones likely to get eaten will tend to reproduce and get there DNA reproduced. therefore, over time, bananas will be more and more convenient for eating. plus PEOPLE BREED BANANAS!
Daniel0112358 5 months ago
coke cans dont have DNA...
Daniel0112358 5 months ago
You should add subtitles so people can turn the terrible audio down.
illuzion30 5 months ago
If anyone wants these explained further I will explain them, philosophy explains all these principles not science.
DeformedSquirrel 5 months ago
Four and five are the same premiss just the writer is too stupid to articulate himself. Yet I did it in 400 characters. Good one.
DeformedSquirrel 5 months ago
Test three: Same applies to God you retard. Infallible is the actual term. If you read Karl Popper Mr know it all you would know this but clearly you do not read you just grab portions of things from the internet.
For an absolute statement to be true, I must have absolute knowledge. Faith is not knowledge it is a belief. Just as I may believe the bus will arrive at 5.55pm dispite the information I am given it does not make it true. It only has to be late/early one and my belief is false.
DeformedSquirrel 5 months ago
Test two: if time is endless, or infinite then there are an infinite number of possibilities or events. The big bang therefore could have already happened 50 million times, this arrangement is but one of 50 million big bangs...... The 'infinite' makes the truly impossible, possible by the terms of it's nature. - Easy next please.
DeformedSquirrel 5 months ago
"To suppose that the eye, with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest possible degree."
You can't just take the bit stated above and then not finish the quote because it suits you. That would be like me taking a quote from the bible and giving it new meaning.
DeformedSquirrel 5 months ago
Evolution is a bit like self design. I.E the most evolved survives. This book is dumb it misquotes darwin for a start.
"the case; if further, the eye ever varies and the variations be inherited, as is likewise certainly the case; and if such variations should be useful to any animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection"
He does not suggest it was designed by inherited dumbasses!
DeformedSquirrel 5 months ago
Here is my response to the so-called Atheist's Nightmare. One needn't read the whole thing. It starts off like this,
= = =
Note that the coconut...
= = =
And you can just imagine the rest: does this mean that the coconut was not designed?
Actually, the banana that we find in our stores WAS designed by an intelligent being: Man. These bananas in no way resemble the ones first discovered, but have been GENETICALLY ENGINEERED to suit our needs and desires (so they'd be more commercially viable).
cliffwalkinfool 5 months ago
It does not make it more likely that there IS a god, that is.
JoshaHoudt 5 months ago
Haha. This atheist test is laughable. Why on earth do the theists think they make any valid point at all with this 'test'? I'm not claiming to be right in saying there is no god. But this booklet does not make it any more likely. If anything, it's making it less likely.
JoshaHoudt 5 months ago
I find most booklets like that highly patronising and poorly thought out. Whether or not someone believes a Coke can is manufactured or just came into existence has no bearing on religious beliefs. It's just someone desperately trying to justify a belief system that has no logic or proof to it. I'm an atheist precisely for that reason. Find concrete proof of the existence of a higher deity and I will listen to your evidence, but until then, not a chance.
JediVulcanTimeLord 5 months ago
@QuestionForAtheists - life is great. I brought them into at the world so that they could enjoy life, not so that they could waste their lives preparing for death.
BoszLightyear 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
A question for atheists. In a world where there's no proof of God's existence or of life after death; how will you explain to your children why you brought them into the world and why they should die?
QuestionForAtheists 6 months ago
Dude I'm not trying to be a prick or anything, but I cannot stand the way you talk!!
Your montone is torture. I think I'll just look up the booklet on google.
Sorry
mattlrkn 6 months ago
I'm an A-cadillac-ist. Do I have a Cadillac? No. I don't hate them, I don't have a qualm with them, I've just never owned one. And I don't understand what someone means when they claim to not know whether or not they are currently a Cadillac owner. They say things like "I don't know whether or not I own a Cadillac but just in case invisible Cadillac fairies are real, I'd prefer to stay neutral on the subject, you know? I don't want to insult the fairies." *Blink blink.*
maikeru01 6 months ago
The Banana theory is thousand's of years of HUMAN cultivation and domestication, Nuff said. How can people say "how did it get this way?" Do these people think that Cows have been mooing round the farmyard since the word of God? answer Domestication, why would God create a species (Cows) just to be in constant pain for the survival of a more dangerous, careless and destructive species (Humans). I know why because God Hates Cows and Chickens, Horses, Rhino's, Elephants, Seal Pups.
Simwillb 6 months ago
Comment removed
sparaticus039 6 months ago
At last I know how the coco cola was formed. Know I need to know how beer was made. Since Beer is > cola. Beer is the only argument for God. It was either A) made by God and therefore holy or B) made by man as an accident, but is fucking awesome, and testifies to mans manipulation of nature. So that is my take on your post.
eatlotacheese 6 months ago
@eatlotacheese Beer was made accidentally, so were doughnuts and many other awesome things that go in your stomach.
TheMilitantWalrus 6 months ago
Any theist that come across me who keeps tellking bananas are Gods fruit etc etc... I say "Explain the coconut" and they walk away all defeated and such.
chrism4n14 6 months ago
TO ALL AGNOSTIC/ ATHEIST/ PEOPLE WITH A 120 IQ OR HIGHER!!! LISTEN UP.
DON'T EVER RESPOND TO CHRISTIANS/ CREATIONISTS. THEY ARE LIKE REAL LIFE TROLLS. YOU CANT WIN AN ARGUMENT AGAINST THEM. THEY ARE ALL STUPIDS.
CondemnedPatriot 6 months ago 35
@CondemnedPatriot treating them that way won't solve the problem. They are people too and to them they are being very rational. Ignoring them isn't the solution. A better way to act is to respect their beliefs and share yours with them in an open and respectful manner. Instead, people like you often try to yell your beliefs at others, thinking that your logic alone should be enough to convince them. Doing that is only doing to them exactly what you don't want them to do to you.
thesourceofx 5 months ago
@CondemnedPatriot I've won MANY arguments against theists. So I don't know what you're talking about.
atheistram 4 months ago
@atheistram And did they ever walk away acknowledging that fact, or do they go on deep in their indoctrination, looking back at you only to pray and consider how exactly the devil got his talons in you. You can win arguments with trolls too, but that doesn't make them stop, so in that sense, he's right. Their big ass trolls that have the mindset of children when it comes to beliefs, and won't walk away acknowledging your rightness.
b33p3rz 4 months ago
@b33p3rz Most of the Theist's I debate in my messages section aren't trolls. So you're assertion is utterly false.
atheistram 4 months ago
@CondemnedPatriot Aint that the truth. It is like telling a rock that it doesnt exist. It doesnt matter how many times you say it it is still there.
Mcquiz91 4 months ago
@CondemnedPatriot A-men :)
TheWOWNinga 3 months ago
@CondemnedPatriot
anyone with a 120 IQ HAS FIGURED THAT OUT FOR THEMSELVES....BUT THX FOR THE RHETORICAL COMMENT
ArticX 3 months ago
@CondemnedPatriot The purpose of responding to Christians and Creationists isn't so much to convince them; it is to make sure that their diatribe does not go unanswered, to rope in credulous people into their web of half-truths, lies, and faith. If they are the only ones talking, their side is the only one which will be heard.
TheGeneralCritic 3 months ago
@TheGeneralCritic The people of this planet have heard this same recycled load of shit for centuries now and I am pretty sure anyone with half a brain wont even give this crap a second thought.
CondemnedPatriot 3 months ago
@CondemnedPatriot Well obviously you've never spent time in the southern states or on a Christian forum. And I'm honestly worried that the population of half-brained people is growing rapidly there. I have observed that it is often the less intelligent that are more outspoken (I think there's also a saying about that) which means their voices get heard. Ignoring them is like ignoring cancer. And that's what Creationism and fundamentalist Christianity is. Just a persistent cancer on society.
aozf05 2 months ago
@aozf05 I'd have to agree with you that in some cases intelligent people are less outspoken, but there is only so much I can take. And yes, I lived in Fl for 4 years. I have to disagree with you about the cancer remark. Cancer grows whether or not its ignored, however its a fact that in first world countries intelligence is rising, I.Q. levels are rising, and with that rise the downfall of religious beliefs occur. Example, look at the % of people who don't give a shit about god/bible.
CondemnedPatriot 2 months ago
Dear Mike, it was a wise move that you began to give it a second thought as to the possibility of a supernatural being responsible for creations, and you wisely said "if hell does exist, i'm screwed". Now, it means you're not very sure of what you believe, but just that you don't want to believe that there's a God. Man, you got nothing to loose in believing that there's God, but you've got everything to regret in enternity should He exist. Why not make the wise choice and accept his call?
vicjustice 6 months ago
@vicjustice
this is why religion is sooo annoying. What if i told you in 10 days, if you didnt give me $100, the sun would explode, killing the earth.
there is no evidence to support my claim (like any supernatural argument) but what if i am right! the cost is so low to avoid this.....
If people would like to mail me $100 to avoid dying, i can give you an address (just like a real church lol).
the entire would KNEW the earth was a disk once, what did religion do to the man who denied that?
Tyler47167yo 6 months ago
@vicjustice This is a thing called Pascal's wager, the question of 'why not believe? What have you got to lose?'
Firstly, you can't choose what you believe. I could go to church and pray twice a day but it wouldn't mean I actually believed it. Secondly, to force yourself into doing those things because there's nothing to lose is intellectually dishonest.
Mike might WANT to believe in God, but since there is no evidence for it, he simply cannot because his belief is based on evidence.
martinpottsstarship 6 months ago
@martinpottsstarship You son of the Devil, you enemy of salvation, would you not stop persuading people against the salvation of God? How could you make this comment as quoted; "Mike might WANT to believe in God, but since there is no evidence for it, he simply cannot because his belief is based on evidence"?
Now, if you would not accept God's free salvation, do not discourage others to accept it. Repent from your deception attitude lest the anger of God decend on you with all its consequences.
vicjustice 6 months ago
@vicjustice You can't be serious. Do people still really speak like this? I'm not persuading anyone of anything. This video is five years old, who knows what Mike believes now? I didn't try to persuade anyone, I was telling you what Mike had already expressed himself. Like I said, you can't choose to believe in something.
I'm not concerned about God's anger because I don't believe in God. I thought that would be obvious.
martinpottsstarship 6 months ago
@vicjustice dammit. I accidentally gave your comment a thumbs up.
thomasw011 6 months ago
penis perfectly fits vagina and asshole, god dosent hate gay people he created them
hellagesoon 6 months ago
The banana is designed somewhat. By HUMANS. We hybridized the banana from plantains. Hey Theists. The banana is also shaped and curved for ease of entry into your ass.
Mstrjedi1852 6 months ago
male, not make >.<
1trilop2 7 months ago
The make reproductive organ is shaped like a banana, so I guess it was designed to fit in the human hand and is the correct shape for the human mouth.
This 'logic' is amusing
1trilop2 7 months ago 3
Too fucking long to get to the point.
DNAunion 7 months ago
There really is only one question to ask yourself. 'Which god am I less afraid to piss off?" There are many gods out there (Yahweh, Krishna, Allah, etc...), and all of them seem to get angry when you worship another one. The monotheistic gods don't even want you to believe anyone but them exist. If they all hate each other, then which one is less apt to strike you down? Pick someone else, lol
skywize 7 months ago
And by the way, any 9nth grader knows that Evolution does not happen "by chance". Get your head out of the bible and into the Origin Of The Species plz.
Anarchist48 7 months ago 2
The Earth is not a Coca Cola can. We are a species in wich evolution has led to the hability of design, due to our advanced intellect. It doesn't mean that the world itself has a designer or that the fact that we exist as a species is something more than a strike of luck whatsoever.
Anarchist48 7 months ago
The Banana fits great into the hand and into the mouth with ease of acces you know what else does? The penis but Christians dont seem to like it very much so they put a banana there instead.
mysticzack7 7 months ago 3
athiest are right - they have a need to know and not accept anything without evidence - the hypothetical consequences of being wrong about gods existence - doesnt further the truth of his hypothetical existence one bit - dont being fooled by these silly fallacios arguments
MrIzzyDizzy 7 months ago
The hell fears is just Pascal's Wager. But it's flawed since there are lot's of different religions with different sets of rules and you can't follow all of them since they contradict eachother.
And even if you choose one and follow those rules so that you don't go to hell, you're saying that the "god" won't realise that you don't truly believe him, but are just playing it safe..
ricardjorg 7 months ago
I am yet to meet a Creationist who actually even understands the evolutionary theory. Most of them have maybe a 2 minute Wikipedia education on it (at best).
OrthodoxDarwinist 7 months ago 4
My entire life I was cursing the sick person who design the banana to curve away from my mouth, darn it.
Also, I spent all night trying to make a can of coke out of zero materials and have not been able to. Maybe I just need to be invisible.
happydudeinthehouse 7 months ago
If hell does exist, it could be any number of hells from any number of religions yeah? They all have exactly the same amount of scientific evidence (none), so how are you supposed to know? Not very fair is it? I don't worry about being wrong, because either whatever is out there (IF it's out there that is) either isn't an evil bastard that would torture nonbelievers for enernity, or is an evil bastard that expects far too much from us simple creatures, and I want nothing to do with it anyway.
Deanbass77 7 months ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Don't Trust Your Money With A Fictitious God which is based on Blind Faith
MagicTellaVision 7 months ago
The absolute knowledge part is just frustrating, you say that since we do not have absolute knowledge we can not say that there is no God. Did you ever stop to think that you don't have absolute knowledge as well? You can't say that there IS a God because you don't have absolute knowledge. Idiots.
starwarsfreakgeek 7 months ago
propaganda from christians? wtf did you expect?
FluggleBubble 8 months ago
Actually, you don't have to pick being an agnostic or an atheist.
theist/atheist refers to your beliefs, gnostic/agnostic refers to what you think you know or don't know. The term agnostic atheist, which sounds like how you should define yourself, means that you don't believe but can't say that you know for sure there is no god. I think that if someone showed you undeniable proof of god then you will believe, as would any rational person. Atheism is NOT gnostic atheism. Hope this helps.
qsljfsopiucvn 8 months ago 39
@qsljfsopiucvn I was told the exact same thing from somewhere else. I swear, did you that on the Atheist Experience or something? cause i swear its on something big.
bleesev2 7 months ago
@bleesev2 They do talk about it in The Atheist Experience and I hear it mentioned in debates, though rarely. It's silly how many people argue against atheism without realizing that they're debating the rejection of a claim, and not the claim that there is no god - It is often stressed among atheists for that simple reason.
If I see it mentioned anywhere mainstream I'll post a reply, I apologize but I can't recall it being mentioned anywhere else aside from what I said.
qsljfsopiucvn 7 months ago
@qsljfsopiucvn sooo is atheist a noun and agnostic an adjective? hope thats not a dumb question...hahaha :) jw
austynries 6 months ago
@austynries I'm not sure, you should ask another person, but I think both words can be used as a noun or an adjective - the sentence "I am an agnostic atheist" or "I am an atheist agnostic" seems to me like "I am a tall person", for example, in which 'tall' is the adjective and 'person' is the noun. Again, I'm very unsure about this, but I do know that both 'atheist' and 'agnostic' are SINS HAHAHAHAHA LET'S ASK SATAN : )
qsljfsopiucvn 6 months ago
@qsljfsopiucvn Yea, I refer to myself as an Agnostic atheist, because I truly do not know what a higher power might even "be", but I must use the atheist section to answer the retards around me pestering me about giving my soul to Jesus >.<
b33p3rz 4 months ago
@qsljfsopiucvn your mistaken theist and athiest are two different animals.. and so is agnostic and athiest..
scorand 4 months ago
BANANA COCK!!
17secret 8 months ago
The Coke Can - Made by man, just like the bible. first the earth formed (scientifically proven), then life (scientifically proven) and then man, who millions of years later made the coke can. you dont need a creator for stale bread to form mold, as in bactiria that multiplies....
The banana - does that mean that every other fruit is flawed? religious logic is just pure comedy....
patriot1320 8 months ago
Mikey, the conclusions you come to are well reasoned. Keep thinking.
Preacher 777's comment about atheists always wanting to be right is what's called a strawman argument and actually, if you think about it religious people would also be wasting the only life we know we have, if they are wrong. Most atheists don't worry too much about what will happen when they die because they're too busy trying to have the best life they can - it's all they can be sure they have.
Peace and clarity.
DeadEyeJack 8 months ago
@DeadEyeJack I agree with what you said mostly except that "Atheists always wanting to be right" is not a straw man per se. It is an ad hominem attack. A straw man is when a point is misrepresented so it can easily be destroyed/disproven. That statement doesn't quite fit straw man. Although I do wish theists would spend more time proving their side and less trying to disprove everyone else. not nagging, just informing have a good one mate :)
soundmindwar 8 months ago
@soundmindwar I disagree. The reason I consider it a straw man is that it is often put out there, as it's easy to misrepresent: "Atheist argues his position, his position is different from mine = he always wants to be right at all costs." His always wanting to be right at all costs is easy to fault and yet it's not a position he ever took. ergo straw man.
It's similar to atheists being "arrogant" when they don't agree!
DeadEyeJack 8 months ago
@soundmindwar 2. I do agree that they then attempt to turn it into an ad hominem attack: "Atheist wants to be right at all costs = he is a bad person and ALL his arguments are discredited". but given that the premise of always wanting to be right came from the religious person in the first place it's a straw man.
Theists have to try to disprove others because they can't prove the non-provable but I agree it's frustrating, especially when their arguments are so weak.
DeadEyeJack 8 months ago
@DeadEyeJack actually, God is provable (potentially). If God showed up and revealed himself, that would be proof of him. they can't prove god because he's fictional, not because it's impossible to prove his existence.
joe1234567890i 7 months ago
Comment removed
christinaavgita 8 months ago
That "test" was the most retarded thing I have ever seen. Ray