Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (414)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Man what a leap in production standards!

  • @grahamhg This was episode 600. Chances are something was up with the studio for a few weeks, so this is something temporary. not really budget influenced.

  • I would think that by now, god should be getting immensely tired and frustrated over having to keep moving from knowledge gap to knowledge gap by his followers. Every time science answers or has a better explanation for his magic powers, Zoom off he goes being dragged by the religious nuts. He is like a hunted fox continuously on the run hiding through out the universes dark holes and drainage ditches.

  • You are searching for gold.

    (Religious) Man A tells you the gold is in spot x. Dig there and only there until you hit gold and you will find all the gold there is to be had, and if you dig anywhere else you will find nothing and waste your efforts.

    (Science)Man B tells you how and where to pan and also tells you how to drill corse samples everywhere so that you know where to dig to actually get some gold. Its pretty much impossible to get it all, but lets get all we can.

    Who do you listen to?

  • difference between early religion and more modern religion. Early religoin claims allot of things that were beyond reality (such as the zevs lightning bolt thing). Modern religon claims that god does whats already possible without god.

  • @gulbirk

    Since when are lightning bolts beyond reality? The only difference is that back then the gaps in our knowledge were much greater, so gods were used as explainations for things like lightning bolts and the sun rising in the morning.

    Now that we know that those things are quite possible without gods, the gods have moved on to things like abiogenesis and the cause of the Big Bang.

  • The whole "this is the process god uses to [blank]...." just got put in its place.

  • i want to download this album!! going to check out in downloadmusic .im

  • I hope all of you atheists find the truth. You need to have faith in Zeus, or you will go to hades. Blessed athena will protect you from medussa if you accept her in your heart. You atheists cant explain love so ill do it for you. Cupid is the reason their is love. He shoots you with with heart arrows......

  • The thing that makes me wonder is that the Catholic church has absolutely nothing against reason and science. (As long as the science does include the harming of human life.) But why are there many out there, both Atheists and over-wise that have to go after the church and do their best to disprove everything to do with God. They must feel somewhat threatened if they care enough to do that. Since I would think if faith of just a myth, then why would one care that much? Just do your thing...

  • Science = Lets find out how this works through a rigorous repeatable method of testing via rules designed to eliminate things like bias, chance etc. best as possible.

    Faith = Magicman dun it! And if you don't believe it you will BURN!!!!

  • @FFreeThinker

    Im curious to know if you have seen this video, which talks about the points addressed in this video by Matt and Tracy...I think the priest's view of god is a little ridiculous

  • A miracle is just something unexpected, 2000 years ago computers, airplanes and guns would of been miracles.

  • just as christians are forced to believe that the earth is round and not flat, (and it would be foolish to think other wise) the same will go for evolution and every other question that Religion claims to solve. as science progresses the more religion dwindles. because religion prevails where ever ignorance prevails. and we are seeing a significant shift in how people are walking away from their religious delusions because of ACTUAL knowledge

  • @javonne as science progresses the more religion dwindles. because religion prevails where ever ignorance prevails.

    _______

    Your delusions that science has put out the notion of God is purely *rhetorical* and has nothing to do with logical method, because even thousands of scientific experiments could not possibly suffice to demonstrate that no non-material being or factor exists.

    Your claim is nothing more than a *fanatical* illusion based on unproven theories. ...

  • @1tabligh "Your delusions that science has put out the notion of God is purely *rhetorical* and has nothing to do with logical method, because even thousands of scientific experiments could not possibly suffice to demonstrate that no non-material being or factor exists.

    Your claim is nothing more than a *fanatical* illusion based on unproven theories. .."

    You fail to realize that God is an unproven concept. Due to your own biasness you refuse to achknowledge the trends. Religion is dying

  • @1tabligh the fact is, God has no more credibility than that of fairies, pixies, and unicorns. and since Science cannot prove or disprove that Fairies, Pixies, or Unicorns are real, we then conclude that those things do not exist, however, we do not exclude the possibility that these things exist. it's just that until sufficient enough evidence can be presented, we do not accept it, nor do we accept those who claim it. Faith is not a virtue, Faith is gullibility.

  • @1tabligh , Faith (in religious terms) is believing something BECAUSE you can't otherwise explain it. And that's respectable, it leave many to stop questioning and instea say "I don't know how this happened, therefore God did it"

  • @javonne Before he enters the realm of science and knowledge with all its concerns, man is able to perceive certain truths by means of these innate perceptions. But after entering the sphere of science and philosophy and filling his *brain* with various proofs and deductions, he may forget his natural and innate perceptions or begin to doubt them. It is for this reason that when man moves beyond his innate nature to delineate a belief, differences begin to appear. ...

  • God and Empirical Logic.

    One of the most destructive and misleading factors in thoughts concerning God is to restrict one's thought to the "logic" of the empirical sciences and to *fail* to recognize the *limits* and boundaries of that "logic".

    Is that which is necessary in essence and which is considered the first source of existence matter itself or something else beyond the limits of matter?

  • @1tabligh Can God both exist and not exist simultaneously?

  • @MrFungus420

    Can you both exist and not exist simultaneously?

  • @1tabligh Irrelevant, we're talking about God. So, instead of trying to obfuscate, how about answering the question...

    Can God both exist and not exist simultaneously?

  • @MrFungus420 Irrelevant, we're talking about you. So, instead of trying to obfuscate, how about answering the question...

  • @1tabligh Fine, no.

    Now answer the question.

  • @MrFungus420 Fine, no.

  • @1tabligh Then God is within the limits and boundaries of logic. You have refuted what you said.

    Thank you for playing.

    Have a nice day.

  • @MrFungus420 Then how can you delude yourself and believe that hydrogen and oxygen, electrons and protons, should first produce themselves, then be the source for all other beings, and finally decree the laws that regulate themselves and the rest of the material world?

  • @1tabligh How can you delude yourself into believing in a super-powerful being that magically created everything?

  • @MrFungus420 Belief in the existence of a wise creator is without doubt more logical than faith in the creativity of matter, which has neither perception, consciousness, nor the ability to plan; we cannot attribute to matter all the properties and attributes of intelligence that we see in the world and the ordering will that it displays.

  • Is it logical to say that belief in God is peculiar to those who know nothing about man's composition and creation, and that, by contrast, a scientist who is aware of the natural laws and factors responsible for man's growth and development, who knows that law and precise calculation preside over all stages of man's existence, is bound to believe that matter, lacking all perception and consciousness, is the source of the wondrous laws of nature?

  • @1tabligh Much of your language here assumes the very thing, agency, that you are trying to prove. "man's composition and creation," assumes creative agency. "law and precise calculation preside over all stages of man's existence..." The laws of nature are descriptive, not prescriptive. As Particle Physicist, Victor J. Stenger, puts it, the laws of natural control how scientists talk about nature, not how nature behaves. Matter & energy has exactly the necessary properties to cause all we see.

  • @1tabligh "Is it logical to say that belief in God is peculiar to those who know nothing about man's composition and creation..."

    Who cares if it's logical? It happens to be the case that the leading scientists in the world are almost all atheists. However, if you're asking about a reason for why it is that way, it's because the laws of nature appear to be sufficient to explain everything and we don't know that there can even be any source of nature itself.

  • @1tabligh This apparent lack of a requirement for further explanatory mechanisms lead scientists to draw a line in the sand until such time as evidence requires further mechanisms. I see you want to appeal to perception and consciousness, however, human brains are physical and as far as anyone knows, consciousness is a material information processing phenomenon. Most people studying these phenomena see no reason to introduce supernature to explain them at this point in time.

  • @Gnomefro Your delusions that science has put out the notion of God is purely *rhetorical* and has nothing to do with logical method, because even thousands of scientific experiments could not possibly suffice to demonstrate that no non-material being or factor exists.

    Your claim is nothing more than a *fanatical* illusion based on unproven theories. Views such as these derive directly from a system of thought centered on materialism; within it, ....

  • everything is defined and delimited with reference to materialism.

    To interpret materialism in such a sense is in the final analysis strictly meaningless; it would be a superstitious notion involving the perversion of truth, and to regard it as scientific would, in fact, be *treason* to science.

    Even if the followers of a religious school of thought had no proofs for their claim, ...

  • to conclude firmly and forcibly that non- being reigns beyond the sensory realm would be a non-scientific choice, based on imagination and speculation.

    Some people try to propagate this *fantasy* in the garb of science and to present their choice as having been dictated by scientific thought. In the final analysis, however, the denial involved in such an assertion is unworthy of science and philosophy, and even *contradicts* empirical logic.

  • @MrFungus420 Then God is within the limits and boundaries of logic.

    ______

    And where did you pull that from?

    Was it from YOUR....?

    He is One but not a numerical unity which can be mathematically and ****logically*** subdivided. He is a creator but His act of creation has not caused Him any movement or exertion. He hears but without the help of any bodily organism or any aid.

  • @1tabligh Because admitting that God cannot both exist and not exist simultaneously is admitting that God is subject to the laws of logic, specifically, the law of non-contradiction.

  • Is it not more logical to posit the existence of intelligence, will and planning in the creation of and ordering of the world than to attribute creativity to matter which lacks intelligence, thought, consciousness and the power to innovate?

    Is it at all feasible to regard all the geometry, functioning and movement of the universe as the outcome of matter in its ignorance?

  • How can it be supposed that belief in the existence of God is the acceptance of contradiction, whereas belief in the uncaused nature of an effect such as matter is not contradictory?

    How could it be believed that matter should itself be the origin of millions of attributes and characteristics and thus be the equivalent of the purposeful, wise and all-knowing Creator?

  • Views such as these derive directly from a system of thought centered on materialism; within it, everything is defined and delimited with reference to materialism.

    To interpret materialism in such a sense is in the final analysis strictly meaningless; it would be a superstitious notion involving the perversion of truth, and to regard it as scientific would, in fact, be *treason* to science.

    Even if the followers of a religious school of thought had no proofs for their claim, ...

  • to conclude firmly and forcibly that non- being reigns beyond the sensory realm would be a non-scientific choice, based on imagination and speculation.

    Some people try to propagate this *fantasy* in the garb of science and to present their choice as having been dictated by scientific thought. In the final analysis, however, the denial involved in such an assertion is unworthy of science and philosophy, and even *contradicts* empirical logic.

  • Non-sense, science investigates the natural world, faith looks further.

  • @TheTrashytramp yES BUT IN THE WRONG DIRECTION

  • @Oliper666 Couldn't agree more, sir. I think it's better to simply live your life the best you can and instead of hoping for happy magic afterlifes that aren't even tangible or even verifiable.

  • ‎"If ignorance of nature gave birth to gods, knowledge of nature is made for their destruction", Percy Bysshe Shelley

  • @cisarsilva Knowledge only goes so far. Beyond that is where the gods still exist.

  • @FluffyFeralMarmot If God resides beyond our knowledge, so how could we possible know about his existence?

  • @cisarsilva Here there be dragons.

  • He transcends intellect just as things beyond the visual field cannot be perceived by the eyes. As an example, if you see a piece of stone flying up in the air, the logical conclusion you draw is that someone has hurled it above. The eye may not have seen him/her/it and yet the intellect realises it because of its discerning capacity, in that the piece of stone cannot go up by itself. You see that the eye stopped at a point and could not advance further. Similarly the intellect stops short cont.

  • at its prescribed limit in the matter of the Divine Immanence. It cannot advance further. We say, however, that the intellect which perceives that man possesses mind and soul, notwithstanding the fact that no one has seen the mind with the physical sense, the same intellect should be able to realise and admit the Existence of the Creator, without being able to perceive His Essence. And if they now ask why He laid the obligation on the puny man to acquire cognisance of Him by his

    cont...

  • intellect seeing that he cannot recognise Him fully, the answer will be that the demand to recognise Him is conditioned by the extent to which human intellect can possibly do, by the powers it possesses. It is to believe in His Existence and to obey His Commandments and Prohibitions. They are not required to encompass His Immanence and his Attributes. No ruler requires of his subjects to know the sovereigns stature or completion. All that is required is loyalty and obedience.

  • @Oliper666

    I think everyone decides what to live for or the reason they are alive. Passing the ball to god is an act of an irresponsible, indecisive coward.

  • YOU GO!

  • @Oliper666 they are talking about science or religion,

  • But science does not try to answer, Why are we here?

  • @GabrielFane

    The question might be whether they thought they were acting in the name of Islam. Not whether certain people view their actions as nonIslamic.

  • @GabrielFane 9/11 on youtube and learn more about it

  • @GabrielFane suicid to kill innocent people= going to hell.But more important they were not mulsim and check it by yourself

  • @nemse2005 the reason for that is the Muslim faith (just like Christianity) dictates that if you die as a martyr than you have a free pass to heaven, no matter what.

  • @GabrielFane Where are the scientific discoveries that i'm denying? When you are talking about evolution you are talking more about macro evolution in wich just evolutionists believe,that's why there're some agnostic scientists whom sais of intelligente desiner.and by the way gravity is a theory? didn't know that.If you have a critical thinking you should read both sides and juge by yourself not let someone else do all the work for you.Evolution sais there was energy!where did it came from?

  • @GabrielFane I'm sorry but you are 100% wrong they were not muslims

  • @GabrielFane evolution is a theory,and it needs more faith to believe this world come out of nowhere than believing that is was created

  • @nemse2005

    Evolutionary theory says nothing about where the world came from. It's about, as Darwin aptly titled his book, The origin of species. Merely asserting that something requires more faith does not make it so. Clearly you have no understanding of evolution beyond the vague notion that it's some kind of hobgoblin waiting to posses you, if you let it.This is why you will never understand it as you lay shivering under your bed feverishly praying for it to go away. And yet it doesn't.

  • @0spiker I'll tell you something, scientists agree about the micro evolution,but for the macro evolution you should know that they don't.Also look for the latest ape discovered and what it's skeleton revealed.

    For my knowledge on evolution i'll be glad if you send me a link where i could learn more about it.by the way Evolutionists have hypotheses about the world source since without that they could not explain where the first molecule came from

    Sorry for my bad English.

    Have a wonderful day

  • @GabrielFane You still think that it was muslims behind the 9/11? oh dear i'm sorry to be the one who has to tell you that but they were not muslims whom planified and did the 9/11 attacks.You have a lot to learn,i think you've been really blinded.... i'm serious read about the 9/11 or see videos

  • @nemse2005 If you have proof that Muslims- more precisely people who believed they were acting in its name- were not involved in 9/11, then offer it. Oh yes, you've watched some videos and read some articles. You must be an expert! An expert who can't seem to muster a shred of proof beyond the bare assertion that all who disagree must be blind or stupid. Oh wait SOME complete stranger wrote an article and created a video. So it MUST be true!

  • @0spiker In Islam there are 4 types of non-Muslims,they can be divided on two categories ,the ones whom we should fight and kill(1 type),and the ones whom we absolutely do not have the right to harm in any way(3 ).

    the first one are the ones whom are fighting islam example: Paletine,Afghanistan,Irak, the verses in the Quran saying in the meaning kill them where ever you find them is talking about this one

    If you know any muslim whom says something else,ask him to contact me :)

  • @0spiker For the 9/11, i'm an engineering student, give me one explanation for the 3rd tower collapsing

  • @nemse2005 part 2

    Why do I need to give you an explanation for anything that happened on 9/11. While you may be an engineering STUDENT you must have failed logic miserably and I'm betting you're failing Engineering as well, if you are actually a student at an accredited University. More likely you're curricula consists in you tube videos. It doesn't matter whether your really a student or just play one on You tube since you act as if that role grants you some special knowledge. It doesn't.

  • @0spiker

    I said i'm an engineering student it was an answer to this:" Oh wait SOME complete stranger wrote an article and created a video. So it MUST be true!"

    What you think about me doesn't matter too much.

  • @nemse2005

    What kind of answer is that? Did you make the videos etc? The question of the videos- or more precisely their authors- credibility isn't answered by talking about your status. That you an engineering student is meaningless. Now if you were an actual engineer, you might have something, but so far we haven't discussed anything requiring that kind of knowledge. Aany Engineering student worth his salt would start with peer reviewed science as opposed to you tube videos.

  • @0spiker

    So being an engineering student makes you an expert on Islam?

    None of your recitation of the types of Muslim answers the question about whether the 19 Hijackers were Muslims or at least believed they were acting in its name. It may shock you, but they didn't require your permission to become Muslims. It's interesting, however, that since you know you can't answer the question, you pretend there was some question about what's in the Quaran.

  • @0spiker I told you that the teachings of islam doesn't tell us t9/11 hijackers did.If they've done it on the name of islam,that's because they didn't know much about their own religion.Also we should absolutely not blame Islam for what muslims do.That's the point that i wanted you to understand.

    For the 3rd Tower,if you aint able to explain it ,how comes that you still don't understand what really happened in 9/11.

  • @nemse2005

    Yet as far as I know no one has used verses from the Qua-ran as proof of the hijackers identity. My remarks responded to your assertion "they were not muslims whom planified and did the 9/11 attacks." So were they or weren't they? As to the third tower,I didn't say I couldn't explain it. I asked why I needed to give you an explanation. The mere fact that you fail to grasp something that simple doesn't make me confident in your ability to assess evidence.

  • @GabrielFane Or you don't want to listen or you don't want to listen.I have the Quran, the Sunah( what the prophet said and did) , if a religious leader tell me to do something oposite to Quran and Sunah and absolutly wont do it.

    2/ we were talking about Science,do you thing sicentific facts like the stages of the human creation in the womb can be some how wrong?

    You are talking about something you heared of,did you check it your self? if yes give me your examples

  • @GabrielFane (SANS= without)

    Je n'argumente pas je dis ce qu'il y'a de vrais,donne moi des exemples concrés,ou bien tu va continuer avec tes préjudices?

    I'm not arguing,i'm telling the truth.give me concret examples in sted of your prejudices

  • @GabrielFane the denial of scientific discoveries: here i think you are kidding, or you really have no idea about Islam or Scientific discoveries.

    The Quran contains scientific facts that was not known untill the 20,21rts centuary.

    And just check scientifics miracels in the Quran you'll find what i mean

  • @GabrielFane 2/ Zenah( having sexe with some one else then a wife nowdays): first that need 4 eye withnesses.And using that they'll be no whor's,no childes without father.Also you should read some statistics about the number of childes killed in the mom's womb,the number of women whom can't have husbandes( 3 times women than man).....

  • @GabrielFane Sharia Law: is to preserve human rights,and it is what solves the society problems.I'll give you two examples: 1/ Zakah(a taxe you should pay for the money you don't use for more than a year.than is it given to poor people.using that there was a periode where they found no one to give that money to= no poor people

  • @GabrielFane acts of terrorism: i gave you the example of 9/11, you may check it out by your self,and also read about New World Order.if Islam says to kill nonmuslims wherever they are without condition,they Jizya (taxe for nonmuslims to live in islamic country) shouldn't be there when muslims were governing a huge part of the world.

  • @GabrielFane Conflict in the middle east? if you are talking about palestin, you may have to read a litle bit more than what the press,or news give you; and you'll find that sioniste (not jew) are the cause. NB: Jew are against an ISRAELI country.

    if you are talking about Afganistan or Irak: 1/ you should know that the 9/11 wasn't done by muslims,and it is at 100% not alowed to kill civilians in islam.Also that it's a strategical point.

    2/ Irak is about oeil, and the one who started is USA

  • @GabrielFane I told you to give me proofs, or to give me one problem that islam didn't solve! you did none of them

  • @GabrielFane Reread my last post

  • @GabrielFane if you are talking with proofs show them to me, else.....

    or give me one problem that islam doesn't solve in human society.

    Brother read more learn more befor talking ,and leave the prejudices to the ignorants.peace

  • search this video : Top Scientists Comments on Scientific Miracles in the Quran * # Faith and Science #

    Start there,Learn more and more and please no prejudice

  • Please read a lit about Islam.You'll find that some of the last and current century discoveries was in the Quran ( the Holly book of Muslims ) and that 14 century ago.

    Also Islam does not ask people to have just faith.If God gave people minds it's so they use them.

  • Science is fueled by Imagination -

    Religion advertises Imagination -

    - Master J -

  • whay did she cut off her hair???

  • I don't think it's that the claims that religion make become more vague it's that the same claims are now being attacked by more specific scientific questions. Religion, and I say this in terms of Christianity because I am Christian, is static. Science, however, is ever-changing. Scratch the first remark, I don't mean attacked. As knowledge increases so does the size of the question it's going to provoke, and is therefore going to require a reciprocate answer by the religion in question.

  • to get beyond you must not serve mammon, you cannot serve mammon and God. You can only serve one. thats a quote from jesus.

  • "History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government." - Thomas Jefferson

    "In no instance have . . . the churches been guardians of the liberties of the people." - James Madison

    " The divinity of Jesus is made a convenient cover for absurdity." - John Adams

    "Lighthouses are more helpful than churches." - Benjamin Franklin

    Those are some quotes from people we can prove existed.

  • Look I'm an atheist so I'm not attacking you; but just let them keep their delussions. I've read a few comments you get, they obviously aren't open to reason.

  • Tom Sawyer is such a cool song. These guys got taste.

  • 'A Philosopher and a Theologian were engaged in disputation and the Theologian used the old quip about the a Philosopher being like a blind man, in a dark room, looking for a black cat- which wasn't there. "That may be," said the Philosopher; "but the Theologian would have found it!'- Julian Huxley.

    I love that quote!

  • lol first time I have heard that quote. I like it =D

  • The very primitive view of man made out of mud was shared by a few cultures. In an old Chinese myth the goddess Nuwa made man out of clay. A Native American myth tells of man emerging from the earth itself. The Greeks describe man as shaped from mud by Prometheus. It's also interesting to note how the gods/spirits wanted to deprive knowledge/progress from man in many of these myths.

    New Age Christians, please remember, these separate myths does *not* reassert the validity of the Bible myths.

  • Prometheus and the goddess Nuwa, are below the Creator. The Creator exists higher than the Creation(what exists). These gods and goddesses you are refering to are real in a sence that they exist, in our nature. So if you want to believe that trans-dimensional beings created you go ahead.

  • forget about the questions of what makes us human and ask yourself where does evil come from? why is our planet in such a shit hole. Well the answer to that question is becuase the ruling elite are satanic scumbags who want to run you down to the pits. Its not necessarily their fault but our fault for letting them do this to us. Before you come with an ignorant answer do your research so we can refute logic.

  • what method is science? It is based off the material world. What is yourself? Who are you and what does it mean to be you? Do you really think the scientific method answers such questions? haha i laugh at you

  • HAHAAHA I ask a vague question you cant begin to answer. Ok well how bout you make categories of human behavior! I think one could infer who they are and when it means to be them via their behavior, emotional questionnaires, ect. Thats a crude description born from a idiotic question but at least the results would be objective. haha i laugh at you? really! smug prick!

  • How do you mean? You do understand that its just a method, not a thing?

    And futher more; why do you assume there IS a meaning and a purpose? There is such a thing as "it happens" to. I dont laugh at you, it is to sad to find someone so ignorant as you. Im so sorry.

  • Christ said that the kingdom of heaven is within you and outside of you. What do you think this means. If you know you will truly understand the spiritual knowledge that he gave to us. Stop listening to fools that only bash the religions with no basis at all . Study scripture and your mind will be opened. You government is a satanic empire and you dont even see it because your too buisy with daily pleasures the material world gives you

  • wow that was a whole lot of poop flying from your mouth.. at least wipe the stains off your lips before you kiss your mother. =X

  • @n3nshat1 , do you believe in afterlife, is so, what is the way to insure one gets that as far as you're concerned?

  • O dear, I thought I was living in a world ruled by man. Or doesnt democratic election work any longer? :-?

    Im so sorry for you, I think you've lost contact with reality. Im so so sorry.

  • reptillians are trans-dimensional beings that exist. Notice all the reptillian media you see these days. You probably cant catch it but the new nike football armor comercial is an example. You people simply need to understand that your reality is determined by your subconsious. Tune to that then youll see truth. The u.s government is a satanic empire. Study and watch some videos and tell me what you think. If you cant then you simply dont care enough to even look at diff resources.

  • Okay. I think you are deluded.

  • "reptillians are trans-dimensional beings that exist."

    You are completely nuts.

  • How is the fact that (some) things in nature form spirals proof of a divine creator?

    You don't know what you're talking about.

  • the quran states that the universe is expanding, this theory of the universe exanding has been verifyed in the past 100yrs so please tell me how Mohammed knew that the universe was expanding 2000yrs ago.

  • The quran does not state that the universe is expanding. Rather, the quran can be interpreted to state that the universe is expanding. There is a difference.

  • yea your statement makes no sence nice try though

  • No the Quran does not state that the universe is expanding. Some muslims in these days translate it that way since science teaches us that the universe is expanding. They hope to prove that therefore the Quran is a book inspired by a magical invisible being. But in fact sura 51:47 has never been explained in that way before the scientific discovery of an expanding universe. Most of the time that sura was only believed to express the vastness of the heavens, not the fact that it is expanding.

  • no human mind can even begin to unerstand the complexity of our existance and how fine tuned the universe is for life to exist. The universe was intelligently created and so was your body and the cells there in. We humans have our science that is no where close to explaining anything because its based on human trial and error. Religion is our tool of understanding that there is more to the material world than what meets our 5 senses. If you dont agree with that your a liar.

  • It's not fine tuned. You don't know what the hell you're talking about. The universe could exist without the weak force, for example, in pretty much the same way as it does now (Harnik, Kribs, Perez) and the Earth could be closer or farther away from the sun and still support life.

    And, yes, there are likely plenty of things that constitute more than our material world but that has nothing to do with magic beings who will award you with a perfect afterlife for worshiping them. Grow the fuck up.

  • The universe is NOT fine-tuned for life. That's why we are the only living things we know of thus far. The only way for someone to express that life is very improbable in our universe is to be the improbability of life. Yes, there are numbers you can throw together to make our lives seem very important. The same goes for you taking a shit on a specific toilet in a specific time period. That shit is just as unique as your existence. Does that mean it's ordained by a god? No. It's just a shit.

  • Life is a happy chance.

  • firstly we arnt the only living beings there is a vast life throughout the universe you dont have to wait till your government tells you that there are extra-terrestrials for there to be extra-terresrials. Second yes the universe is fine tuned because if one law of physics is off then it will chain everything to go off course and thus gravity wouldnt work the way it does. Our lives are important its sad to see people think that they arn't.

  • If you take a fish out of water, it will suffocate. If you throw a dog into a furnace, it will burn to death. If you make any small change in the universe, it will drastically change things. That's because the stuff in the universe has become complex based ON those laws. If the laws changed, shit would fall apart and form new designs around the universe. It's not special. It's just specific to the way things have been.

  • Okay, so you have evidence of extraterrestrial life?

    And... do you have absolute knowledge of the entire universe? You know for a fact that if one law of physics were changed (somehow), it would destroy the universe?

    Even if that were true, how does it prove the universe is "fine-tuned" by an intelligence?

  • A filler-killer is a theoretical machine that can fill up every empty space in a living human body that dies because it became a dead piece of solid massive mass. Artists call it the dead and bloated body like in the stone temple pilots song. An extractor-creator is a theoretical machine that does the exact opposite of a filler-killer. Filling with mass is killing and extracting mass that leaves empty spaces is creating. Life and logic can be that simple to start with as it so called evolves.

  • an atheist never can understand the perspective of a believer because faith holds spiritual truth. These two contradict their own arguments.

  • Faith holds what [you] believe is truth based on weak to no evidence.Reasonable people do not buy bridges they have never seen.

  • Not true. There are atheists that were raised in religious households, and were theists for many many years or decades. Eventually naming themselves atheists. They do not forget their past. Or their previous thinking.

  • that's me! lol

  • Actually, that appears to be the rule, rather than the exception, for atheists.

  • I wish these aetheists would stop trying to convert the poor dum theists. Sometimes I don't know who is the real fundamentalist...science confirms creation therefore logically a creator. Religion attempts to define the creator. Lightening analogy is good although I fail to see how it proves anyhting againse theism although I do get it. Any thoughts ?

  • You're wrong about absolutely everything you just said.

  • fantastic. make a comment with absolutely no explanation or logical explanation for why you said it . Gr8! thanks, bye, ok, super... please please someone help me since i am a dum theist. anyone...no? :|) ok

  • Science does [not] confirm ''creation'',least of all [your] creation.

  • again it would help i you could clarify what particular part of science does not suggest creation rather than just making a simple retort to the opposite of what i stated. the most you could probably get away with as an aethiest is say that science does not equivocally rule out the possibility of a creator. you cannot possibly look at the complexity and genus of biological systems and unequivocally say science does not confirm a creator.

  • The branches of science that would apply would be cosmology and physics.Creationism is [not] on the ''same page''.

  • doesn't UNTESTABLE, UNREPEATABLE, UNPROVABLE origins science come into play at all then?

  • It is the math which is testable in the real world which is testable and repeatable.This same math predicted the illogicallity of quantum computing which is now a reality.

  • It would seem from experience that the math does not lie.The idea behind the math can be wrong or the but it appears numbers do not lie.The regression predicts a singularity but nothing about what was before...so far.

  • oh i bow down prostrate before you oh mighty agnostic. you surely have all the answers that i need. honestly mate :) just read what you wrote. i did and now i am laughing my head off thankyou (p.s. be honest you just quoted some of this stuff from star trek right?)

  • 1. Who said I was agnostic?

  • 2. I do not watch television.

  • If you see complexity and genius then you lack knowledge of genetics at the very least. You also lack an imagination.

  • If you see complexity and genius then you lack knowledge of genetics at the very least. You might also lack an imagination with which to concieve something greater than ''this'' and yourself.

  • If our universe was completely filled with mass, not a single empty space in it, one would have to take out bits from this big dead massive piece of mass and replace them with empty spaces to get back to our own universe with the living creatures. And so creating life is adding empty bits to a dead piece of mass and there are a lot of airheads running around here as one can clearly see.

  • wao! Neverbeendead you finally discovered the secret of life!

  • Something to think about in evolutionary terms. While the intellectuals amongst us refrain from breeding beyond our financial means OR refrain entirely to follow long and involved higher education courses. It is the trailer park retards who drop kids by the dozen to increase their state benefit earning potentials. Therefore intellectual Homo sapiens become extinct while the blind faith and ignorant pizza delivery boy Homo creationalensis, multiply and inherit the earth.

  • Sadly you are a 1000% right.

  • Yes, Mike Judge, the creator of Beavis and butthead, made a movie about this called "Idiocracy."

  • lol, yes I had that in mind when i wrote what I did.

    We joke about this but .....

  • I dont know if I believe that faith is searching for the truth at all. Faith only entertains one pre-determined truth against all others. That isnt searching, that is basically staying in one spot.

  • Faith is blindly waiting for the truth, which you pridefully allready claim to know, to come to you.

    Har. Silly faithers.

  • Faith of the atheist (who only lives once and becomes nothing that lasts forever) is the belief that it is always coincidence that only the living become nothing and never things like chairs stairs tables and cables.

    But ofcourse, with their bigger then vegas luck or coincidence that fills their wallets so easy they don't want to swear upon the selective nothingmaker in court. And the selective nothingmaker has the time and the place to teach atheists the long trip the long mile.

  • There is no ''nothing'' in science.Thats the nonsense in your mind control manual.

  • Dawkins himself talks of the blind watchmaker and obviously does not believe in god but at least he admits that there is a obvious "design" to life only he clearly does not equate this to god but to blind chance....

  • I could not care less what Dawkins thinks.We do not have lords or heroes here.

  • Since my style of teaching has you in stitches try ''Where did EVERYTHING come from?'' by AronRa.He does quite well with it.

  • First off: Dawkins does not believe there is a "design" (and it wouldn't matter if he did) and his reference to the blind watchmaker is merely a mock of the idea. Matter didn't come from nothing and it didn't happen by random. You need to get those terms out of your head because science does not use them describing the origins of the universe or life.

    And you're egregiously ignorant if you see life as some sort of genius or perfect design. It's really not even close.

  • e⋅gre⋅gious - extraordinary in some bad way; glaring; flagrant: an egregious mistake; an egregious liar. ignorant - lacking in knowledge or training THANKYOU FOR TEACHING ME SOME NEW WORDS! you obviously thought that by using them it would display your obviously higher understanding of the universe than i do.

  • you quite clearly have no understanding of biological systems and their complexity and obvious design. if you want me to name some then let me know and i promis not to use big words