You objectified yourselves in a pin-up calendar for a good cause... wtf? You claim to be a feminist but you just want to be famous for blabbing poorly constructed and supported ideas. You say nothing of substance :( So sad more women don't call you on your bullshit. I realize this is not Rebecca's channel but you are just perpetuating her stupidity so you are also to blame my friend!
@blastedgoat You seem to not understand what skepticism is. Rebecca is advocating critical thinking. She is not in the business of making positive claims. The notion that you should critically evaluate all claims based on evidence on the back of reason and logic requires no further support, it is self-evident. Your accusations of her having said nothing of substance and being 'stupid' are unfounded and shamefully ignorant. And what about harmless vanity marketing is anti-feminist?
@ianman6 What about "harmless vanity marketing" ISN'T anti-feminist? Have you been to her website? She can't write. She does not present good arguments for feminism or atheism and yet she is invited to speak (usually incoherently) at length about things she does not fully understand. Skepticism sounds like bullshit to me if you are meaning you can just refute anything you disagree with without proof or even good reasoning. Video after video prove to me at least that she is, in fact, a moron.
@blastedgoat She writes rather well in my opinion, as well as the opinion of many bloggers and writers. That asside, I don't care about her feminism, but she is a good skeptical rogue for Steve Novella and is a very grounded skeptic. And for your information, skepticism is not dismissal out of hand (well, maybe for claims which are completely unsupported by evidence), but a careful and critical approach to all claims, especially extraordinary ones. Anything other than skepticism is stupid.
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important differences between heterosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption and homosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption. Even non-religious people know this.
Homosexual activists, with support from the media, have succeeded at framing themselves as noble victims; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
@KillTheStranger Your viscous verbal threat has been reported to the authorities. Once the police apprehend you, women will be able to use elevators safely again! ;)
She goes from babbling about questioning beliefs to spewing a stream of her own personal philosophy.
Feel meaning? WTF? Whats particularly beautiful about that? WTF? Find joy? WTF? I think theres some strength to that? WTF? Makes life sweeter? more worth living???? WTF?
What a load of non critical philosophical bullshit. she's preaching.
"Making the world a better place" subjective imaginary bullshit all based in belief
You stupid bitch, scepticism is the exact opposite of being 'open minded and willing to accept other evidence', and how arrogant to claim that you have an 'ability' to question evidence where normal people just take it for granted. No one cares what you have to say, your whole feminism and 'moral crusader' bit is just bogus. It's clear you've never been subject to real sexism, your just so self righteous and pretentious that you feel you need to argue on other people's behalves. FUCK YOU!
@lozzag13 - You ignorant shmuck : you got it all wrong , again ! Read your dictionary - read any book at all .... Shes gotten over a million views so far. A lot of people care what she has to say.
@lozzag13 Wow, such resentment! You appear to be having a few issues. I suspect it probably has something to do with the fact that there are in fact plenty of people who are interested in what RKW has to say and appreciate her efforts to communicate issues that are relevant. This is of course in direct conflict with the fact that no-one gives a flying rat fuck what you think. It must seriously bruise your fevered little ego.
Unfortunately no-one cares, so fuck you more. And have a nice day.
So how does she apply the first line of her statement to the new facts brought to her attention about her episode in the elevator? This girl is a pure opportunist, if you notice she always starts talks with where she has been and what she is doing. Like many societal socialists, athiest, feminists she is riding the gravy train just like all public sector workers/females- job inventions I would add to this! If you note she attacks Richard DORKINS on his wealth, they are all greedy little mizers!
Wait so this is the chick that got offended when a guy asked her out?!?!?! WOW JUST WOW! >_>
I mean if she were at least cute I could understand, but damn even non-hot chicks got so much attitude these days. She should've accepted because that dude would be doing this chick a FAVOR asking her out.
Remember that saying ugly chicks need love too? Yeah that applies to her.
@JDubs878 She just mentioned it in passing, she wasn't "offended" that someone asked her out, stop lying and creating stupid strawmen.
All your hateful, nasty comments directed at Rebecca you all prove that misogyny and sexism are rampant in the skeptic/atheist movement. You are hypocrites because you claim religion is sexist when you assholes are just as bad. You just point out misogyny when it serves your purpose and exploit women in muslim countries for selfish reasons. That is sick.
Why don't you mention all the misandry by women these days? Not only that, why don't you mention that women NEVER WANT TRUE EQUALITY and that they only want equality WHEN IT SUITS THEM?
You want men to do special things for women and for you to retain all the perks that come with being a woman, but then demand equality everywhere else? Who's the hypocrites now?
Also if you truly believe that Islam isn't horrible for women, then why don't you live in Saudi Arabia for a few years?
@JDubs878 More strawmen. I never said Islam isn't horrible for women, it IS horrible for women. I don't like when the suffering of Muslim women is used to push an agenda that is pretty much anti-women's rights at it's core. Every woman I know wants true equality, misandry is all in your head. The worst "misandry" I ever hear comes from men against other men. Where did I say I want "special" things for women (another strawman). Human rights aren't "special rights."
@drakionx problem with mankind is we think ourselves the masters of the universe yet earth is only a tiny,little micro dot in the fabric of time & space, the question shouldn't be whether 'God exists or not'?... but " What is man kind true history"???????
@drakionx There is enough evidence of God in His creation. Psalms 14 say: The fool has said in his heart there Is no God. So, Why would u want to be a fool. Simple answer, Ur full of conceit and arrogance ur looking at it from a man's point of view. Not spiritual.The bible says that in order for us to come to Him we need to come in spirit (being born again of the spirit). U NEED TO PROVE to GOD that u are worthy. B/c my friend God is not subject to higher authority.
@drakionx Could u please provide a way in which the big bang could have occurred without an Intelligent Designer? Or how DNA could have come without an Intelligent Designer? Or how the cell could have come to be without an Intelligent Designer?""
@endauthority Yeah, probably not to someone who's never had sex before. If you ever have sex with someone other than yourself, you might understand. But probably not.
@endauthority Ok, I'll bite...because you asked. I was implying that she would need to verify, by consulting a double-blind study, what the constituents of an orgasm was, how it felt and if it even was a legitimate phenomenon instead of trusting her own instincts and feelings. Apparently, this required a bit of imagination as well as extrapolation on a main idea that, for whatever reason, you are not capable of. I'm guessing you suffer from arrested development. You da fool! lol
@jvaish a double blind study wouldnt work in this case. Only she can know if she did or didnt, and a double blind study has two experimental groups, and an administrator who are all unaware of critical aspects of the study. this seeks to remove bias.
In other words, im getting at the fact that you apparently dont know what double blind studies are.
Here's a message Rebecca Watson sent me after banning me from her channel for daring to post a comment she didn't like:
"I'm the best-known skeptic out there, and I have millions of fans. The skeptic movement IS Rebecca Watson. What have you accomplished? No one knows who the fuck you are, so shut your fucking mouth."
@xxOTAKUxxKING Seriously? This cunt really think she is some sort of Sceptic guru while 80% of the people only know here as that feminist elevator bitch.
@philateliceun Everytime some dipshit like you makes a comment like that, you prove her fucking point.
You consider her asking people to "Don't do that" as a totally over-the-top reaction that makes her a "bitch". Fine. Now imagine it was your mother, or sister, or wife. Now imagine someone else calling her "that cunt who totally overreacted to someone propositioning her in an elevator at 4am by asking me not to do that, the feminist bitch". You fucking cool with that? I didn't think so.
@rabidsi Thats not what I said. I said she thinks she is some Sceptic guru while most people only know here from elevatorgate. Sorry that I inserted the word cunt in it. Excuse me for my rampant mysoginy, please.
@philateliceun Yes, that's right. The guy who came on here to call RKW a "cunt who thinks she is some sort of skeptic guru" because apparently "80% of the people only know her as that feminist elevator bitch" is calling me a hysterical oversensitive asshole.
Fuck me, I've been schooled.
Oh... wait.
Crawl back under your rock and continue hating on your betters, kid. Your prejudice is showing and it's fucking ugly.
@philateliceun Your fucking prejudice. Referring to her as a cunt and bringing up other peoples ugly opinions about her has no purpose in the context of your original comment unless you are attempting to perpetuate that portrait of her, since it sure as fuck contains no salient point otherwise.
So we have two optiions.
1.) You're a bigoted, misogynistic fuckwit.
2.) You're just fucking stupid. Or trolling. Or both.
@rabidsi LOL first you commit the fallacy of false dichotomy. And second calling someone a cunt is not mysoginy, especially if she really is a cunt. Is calling someone a dick mysandry? You got a massive chip on your shoulder, wouldn't suprise me if you were a feminist, wouldn't suprise me at all.
@rabidsi No need for further elaboration? Well maybe not for the people who understand your weird codes and secret language but normal people would like more elaboration. What the fuck do you mean? Can you atleast TRY to make a coherent point.
someone who is always open to new evidence can never say 'a thing does or does not exist' since that would be jumping to a conclusion knowing that new evidence may just be around the corner. as a premise to the skeptics argument, they should all be 'agnostic' or 'indifferent' to all topics.
you dont think that 'alot of people come to the conclusion that there is no such thing as a god' they DO come to that conclusion...
cant you even make 1 sensical argument? come on skeptics/disbelivers!!
@daenumen even tought you can't say 100% sure, you could say 99,99999999999% sure in many cases, I can't prove that there isn't a copy of all the human knowledge inside a secret cavern in mars, but I can say with 99,99999999% accuracy that there isn't, and if someone says that there is, I would say that that it does not exist, the simple improbabilty and lack of evidence is almost a proof that there such a thing.
@gilberto201 99.9...% isnt the same as 100%, its the difference between an educated/informed(?) guess and knowing the absolute truth wrt cave actually being on mars. you cannot discuss an accuracy, you do not know the true answer,or going by 'accepted' answer, well the sun revolved around the earth not long ago...
you cannot justify except by ignorance that it doesnt exist. probability theory & lack of evidence do not prove anything. without the evidence probabilities are not accurate.
@gilberto201 furthermore without the ability to determine the results this becomes an unworkable example.
we can not necessarily comprehend the data eg scan of mars etc, to reveal what could be an alien computer for example, we could just see rocks or crystals like on superman?
this example leads only to ungrounded conjecture. and certainly you cannot state absolutes about existence.
""With all the available evidence to date, we can conclude X. If new, wildly contradictory evidence comes to light we could instead conclude Y or possibly Z, however we believe such evidence is unlikely to be forthcoming."
@rabidsi you dont have all the information. it isn't acceptable to conclude X Y or Z on the belief that you will never obtain the information to verify X Y Z or even 'P'.
@daenumen Then you agree it isn't acceptable to conclude their aren't invisible, intangible fairies living in your garden/garage/small intestine (delete as applicable)?
Being open to new evidence does not mean you cannot make a conclusion close enough to 100% probability that you can take it as certain. You have to factor in plausability. A complete lack of ANY evidence in favour of something vs a wealth of evidence against is a pretty damning sign for any hypothesis.
@rabidsi lol invisible intangible (immaterial/undetectable) fairies (down the bottom of the garden).
well why even form a hypothesis. the statement is that they do exist (according to the author) and are otherwise undetectable/impercieveable...how did the author come to realise these things were even fairies?.
there is no wealth of evidence against these things. there is evidence from the author suggesting there are such things & we and the author can 'not-detect them'.
Wow, trying too hard to sound smart, she did what most atheists do when talking out loud. She missed the basics.
"a skeptic is someone willing to examine their beliefs and change their beliefs if new evidence comes along."
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that the exact opposite of what a belief is? Before you answer "no", check every single dictionary ever published. Because to say no is a REAL belief. Holding something to be true without proof or in spite of evidence.
Belief is accepting something to be true. It could be evidence that leads you to accept it, or faith. How you get to the acceptance "that X is true" (by either evidence or faith) is irrelevant to your actual stance, 'belief'.
@brono25 : your comment as read kinda makes sense, but then there's the dictionary which throws it all out of whack. There's a different word used to describe something you "Know" rather than "believe". If you know something to be true b/c it can be proven, its not a belief.
Belief is, holding something personally to be true which isn't proven.
Believe -> Believed -> Belief
Know -> Known -> Knowledge
Knowing/knowledge doesn't even use faith. Only beliefs do.
@brono25 : Stop arguing with actual the definition of the word based on your personal preference of what you "think" it means. Its really annoying.
Knowledge is NOT a form of belief, since that would oppose the very definition of the word. Knowledge is knowledge. You're trying to win by technicality rather than actuality. Get off it.
@AClRCLEOFLlGHT Given that just about anyone not trying to score points would interpret the way she worded her statement just as she intended and many would word it pretty much identically, it seems more like you're the one trying too hard to sound smart.
Belief, in context, can be synonomous with confidence or trust or conviction. You either have a very abridged dictionary, or you just don't know how to read it properly.
@Ramshobraja isn't the thing? Scientific knowledge and critical thinking are the tools of a Skeptic. Why you say "it isn't the thing", i don't know what you mean to say. Skepticism, Scientific knowledge and Critical thinking are Nuts, Fudge covered in Chocolate which make for a tasty treat.
2:20 "Nothing but Older WHite Men" So true. Being that I am African American and a proud skeptic, its seems very hard to find others like myself. Or at least in my community. None the less a women with the same views. Most of the skeptics that I have met, were completely thrown off once I began talking to them. I guess my boyish and somewhat hip hoppish look that I have, no matter how cloaked in business attire I am in, leaves an opening for classifying me as not your typical skeptic.
Go ahead... Nice anecdote you gave to Rebecca on her video which specifically asked people to stop giving her anecdotes. She put a video up about it if you don't know already.
If your logical fallacy on top of a logical fallacy wrapped in an anecdote you gave her was any indication of your critical prowess, I don't think we need to worry about you 'debunking' anything, any times soon.
But since you said it could you point to one thing she said and tell us all why it was "bullshit"?
Does the atheist faith of "believe in nothing" teach you to not treat others as you want to be treated? Because I said what she SAID was bullshit. You started in insulting my intelligence, which by the way is clearly above average because of FACTS, including that I'm a nationally published author and graduated college with honors.
Being logical and rational isn't the same as being intelligent, I made fun of your illogical thinking.
Atheism is not a faith nor does it teach anything, let alone "believ[ing] in nothing". It's the lack of belief in god(s). Which is the default position when there is no evidence, like not believing leprechauns because there is no evidence.
True to an existent. But you instead of not believing in a god or gods have the belief that there is not a god and then villify those who do believe there is a god or gods just as some who are theists villify atheists. Really the only difference between the two groups extremes is the belief. The manner each one treats the other seems to be the same. Each thinks not only that their own belief is better but that the other is "stupid" for the opposite belief.
You don't know me or what my exact beliefs are. No I don't believe there is no god, I lack the belief as I said earlier. Nor do I vilify anyone based on their belief in one. No one is stupid just for believing in god(s), that would be as ridiculous as saying one is intelligent based almost solely on their education level ;). Maybe you're just dealing with too many youtube flamers who leave social convention behind at the keyboard and vent frustration. Hope about dealing with me as an individual.
I can agree with you on all those points. Flamers have hit me extremely hard. I had come to youtube a couple of years ago thinking I'd find a nice community. The nice ones aren't the loud ones it seems. You should see the stuff people say about me, not even cause I disagree with them. People call me fat, stupid, gay, retarded etc even on my paint shop pro videos. :( lol
We have a running joke (by we I mean the skeptical community not the atheist community) "I dared to read the dreaded comment section" We say this because internet comment sections are known for their idiocy and needless hatred. Just don't sink to that level and have a thick skin is all I say, there's no point.
FYI rkwatson (Rebecca Watson) put up a video about your comment, which is why I recognized you. Just letting you know.
You may very well be intelligent but still hold illogical beliefs, like say... that being a published author and a college graduate means you must be intelligent. Is there a correlation between education and intelligence? Sure.
I'll watch the video again soon and respond. I will say my initial comment wasn't tactful enough. I just get frustrated when I hear some atheists assume that all Christians are a certain way. I'm a VERY tolerant Christian. I don't believe atheists are going to hell or that God wants to or even did show his "wrath" to anyone. I believe God is a very loving God.:) I'll tell you what I think Jesus's death was all about later if you really want to hear it. lol
One thing an atheist who debates Christians all the time learns quickly if they didn't already know it is that no Christian seems to hold the exact same beliefs. From the most new age flowery love thy neighbor to Westboro Baptist Church (google them if you don't know). You have to understand though that sometimes when we say Christians we obviously don't mean all Christians everywhere. But also be aware that there isn't a Christianity I could believe based on the evidence.
I haven't seen any evidence of that being the case, so no I don't. But I don't really see how that would mean there isn't a point to discussing it. If you know of evidence of that being the case then please provide it.
The problem is, if you start believing that historical figures (even men) didn't exist, then you can't really believe that anyone existed in ancient times....There's no "real" proof anyone existed during those times.
Yes there is. Multiple contemporary historical accounts. This is the basis for believing in any historical figure. There are no contemporary historical accounts for the existence of Jesus other the the bible claiming that it's accounts are such. Problem is we don't know who those authors were, and internally they are inconsistent accounts.
Julius Caesar for example. Look at the references in his wikipedia entry and you'll see the names of the multiple contemporary historians.
I would tell you the same think. Look at the references in Jesus's wikipedia entry. Every person with sense knows that there's as much proof of Jesus as a real human being as anyone else from around his time. To deny that he even existed as a man is beyond bewildering.
I think you need to look at Jesus' wiki again. There aren't any contemporary accounts. Contemporary means written when the figure in question was alive. Even the gospels (whose authorship are unknown) weren't written until 50-100 years after the supposed death of Jesus. That's longer than most people could live. Best case scenario we are listening to the account of a child of someone who claims to have been there.
But all of that aside what would you argue if I agree that Jesus was a person?
Like I was trying to say point out to Rebecca, not all Christians hold the exact same beliefs. While she apparently has only encountered those Christians who believe that atheists will burn in hell, there are many of us who find that laughable. I believe that Jesus (the man, not the God, because that's a bit too complex to get into) was killed not "for" our sins. I think that's where the Bible has it worng. I think he was killed, brutalized, whatever you want to call it BY our sin. See next...
She is well aware of the different kind of Christians. I listen to her on podcasts all the time.
What evidence do you have for any of these claims? Provide evidence for sin. Not just bad deeds but this sin which can somehow transcend both time a space and effect a person 2000 years ago. Where did sin originate? Why was it necessary that a sacrifice be made? Especially if we aren't taking the old testament literally.
Those who lived during his time and even believed he was God turned on him and had him killed. This is a sin. He didn't die to make up for my (Illusionistdave) sins. He died because of the fact that we sinned and killed him. How can people who BELIEVED that he was God actually turn on him like that? Messed up huh? So that's one HUGE difference between me and most Christians.
Also, I don't believe this wrathful bs or Adam and Eve bs. The first testament is a way of explaining why
You may have a different view than most Christians but you have just about as much evidence for any of it. There are a lot of claims you're throwing out there without much evidence to back it up. Why do you believe all these things to be true?
bad things happen. It was the best they could come up with at the time.
As for Adam and Eve, I would be very hardpressed to believe that someone named Adam and someone named Eve existed. Again, the old testament writers were merely trying to find an explanation for creation, which they obviously got wrong, but it was the best they could do at the time.
I'm a believer in evolution. Why? Well, 1 cause it's fact, but two because it makes sense...to an extent...
First, i need to digress to creation. I think it's incredibly silly (and ultimately impossible) for something to come from nothing. If I pull a rabbit out of an examined hat, there has to be "something" to it. it's not possible for something to come from nothing. So, that part of the big bang theory I disagree with. That said, something had to come from something to make the Universe. The only explanation I have at this time is that the something that existed before
Big bang theory doesn't claim that something came from nothing. I'd suggest you go to that wiki page as well for quick brush up on what it says.
"something that existed before"
"before" doesn't really make sense since time and space is encompassed in the BB model. Beyond that The claim will either be that this "something that existed before" either came from nothing (contradicting your prior statement) or that it has always been, to which I ask why can't the universe have always been?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
must have been far more of an intelligent "thing" than us ie. God.
As for evolution. Of course it existed and exists. But, what is the mechanics of it? What triggers the changes and actually makes them take place. What process is it? Well no one can explain the mechanics of it. Something has to make the changes ie: God.
@illusionistdave You clearly don't understand what the theory of evolution is. It's obvious by what you just sad. Evolution in and of itself is the process! Those who live to reproduce, over periods of time you cannot even comprehend, are what influence change. You know what crocodiles haven't changed much? Because they're perfect for what they do! Other animals lower on the food chain are more likely to change over time because only those who survive to reproduce can effect the outcome.
It's obvious by what I "sad?" I also asked to explain the mechanics. No one seems to be able to do that. What EXACTLY causes the mutation? What EXACTLY ensures it?
There is something making the changes required for evolution, the Environment. Pressures imposed by the environment can "reward" species for evolving to exploit a new resource. Of course quoting science won't sway you since you can always imply gods hands in such processes (something unprovable).
Her perspective isn't skeptical. More a promoter of her beliefs,and skeptisizes only alternatives that contradict her 'scientificly acceptable' ideas. Ever hear the "White Swan Theory?" Why shoot down alternatives to chemotherapy when well researched people know it's destructive to the body? A true skeptic would say there may be better treatments,we have to keep an open, intelligent mind to. Skeptics seems to tackle things that perplex them,leave that which they feel comfortable with. Irony?
This entire statement was incorrect. A skeptic doesn't accept anything until the evidence for it is provided. That evidence is evaluated for reliability and only then may something be accepted. Chemo works. This is supported by the evidence. Being open means testing alternatives and when that happens they fail under scientific conditions. When they don't then they can be accepted. We are only comfortable with that which we have evidence for, and if new evidence comes in, we change our minds.
Rebecca looks like a cool lady I would like to have coffee with. I have to say, though, that I have looked at the evidence for atheism skeptically and found the evidence for it scant and faulty. Therefore, after examining the evidence, I devoted my life to Jesus Christ, and have not regretted my life in Him for one second since. God bless you, Rebecca!
I call BS here. Atheism isn't a claim and therefor there can't be evidence for it. It's the default position. Like *not* believing in leprechauns or homeopathy. One who is an atheist is someone who doesn't believe in god(s). Asking for evidence is illogical because you'd be asking to prove a negative, which one cannot do. Prove there aren't any fairies. You can't, you can only find that there is a lack of evidence for them. And that's the atheist position. There is a lack of evidence for god(s).
You use the word skeptic as "denial" .. notice? I didn't "skeptisize" the skeptics - that is not even a word btw- I flat out said he is not a skeptic. You are not a skeptic either it appears
Actually I am. With a degree in engineering. Me questioning the validity of another person's 'word,' itself shows a 'skeptical nature?' I actually do a lot of ponderance, research,mathematical evaluation and calculation of many things around me. Why fear the word "denial?" I deny a lot of mystic bull,that's what a skeptic does. Skepticize is a word, I misspelled it (oooh). And hey,twit. I was defending you! Why was your comment recieved so poorly? But now I see it's because you're an idot.
Dude shut-up haha religionhead?? your one of those people who find any reason they can to make people who love god look bad... and ur actually right i have no business calling anyone ugly i just get pissed when people act like thier so sure God doesnt exist... SORRY REBECCA.... BUT GOD STILL EXISTS
Yeeeesss you know the feeling:D?? LOL na...i mean faith Yes but fuzzy feeling?? At first thats all i thought it was just some dumb feelings but if you put that faith in god and show him a real faith in him then he reveals himself to you in more ways then just some fuzzy feelings seriously He is awesome Praise God
Faith is nothing more than ignorance and wishful thinking disguised as a virtue. All you are saying is "If you decide to believe in god for no good reason at all, you will believe in god." It may be good enough for you , but for people that are intellectually honest, it is not.
Its good enough because he's real... pff ha dude faith is believing in something you dont see but in my case i see what god does in my life and in the lives of many people... even those who dont carry much faith in him.. Intellectual honesty is bieng straight up and blunt to a situation or an idea and i understand that... I came to the point where i thought exactly like you but god changed my mind, not people, not church, and not a religion... but God himself
I'm sorry but as long as you can't prove something exists then it generally doesn't.
I still don't get why religious people don't see how god is just the biggest scam ever. I mean seriously, as much as it might be nice to think that after you die you will go to a magical place in the sky and meet a big man on a throne who is the everlasting lord of the universe. It's still a load of crap and if you can't accept that, well seriously dude you need to get a grip with life. BTW i'm only 13
@runewow generaly i can explain many ways in wich god exists... well at least my belief and opinion on why he exists but im 16... still young but been here 3 years longer than you so i have a better idea of what its like to "get a grip with life" ive been athiest even throughout my walk with god but hey im not there anymore and im going to assume youve believed in him before... if not try it out.. maybe you will get a better grip on this life
Hmm... you haven't actually explained exactly what these "many ways" are, in fact that seems to be the case with many theists. Me being 13 has nothing to do with the truth. Some people have the impression that the older someone is, the wiser they are. Unfortunately that argument is a bit old TBH.
I dont have to explain because your prob just as stubborn as all the other athiest believing this crap i didnt say anything nor did i give the impression that im wiser than you but i know i have more experience thats a fact. Yea i know bieng 13 has nothing to do with the truth because theres on only one truth and thats that GOD EXIST No matter how many thumbs down or stupid comments i get back haha
I don't have to prove anything to anyone other than myself.
For all I know, the universe, as we know it, is a speck in a drop of water and God is looking at it through a cosmic microscope, same as I might look at a paramecium. The paramecium cannot prove I am there. looking at it. But I am there, just the same. At the same time, just like my existence, its is not dependent on proof, nor law. I prefer proof, but accept faith where I haven't the time to "prove".
HEy becca... big HEY from engineer from from norway and russia so... yeah big fance of you guys!!!.... take care fuckers is every where RIGHT NOW RIGHT NOW :d :p
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
hey Ms Watson, go just behind that building just behind you, find the second largest library in the world, check out some Wittgenstein and Heideggar, Simone Weil, refine your "beliefs", including the modern history and use of the term "rationality". Antiquity also. Be open to mystery.Get some theological sophistication, use God -language correctly sans sarcasm ("power of the Lord")before you start this campaigning. Right now your mind is cruder than a Baptist bible thumper. Best wishes!
Religion is a good thing. It keeps the masses of uneducated, illiterate, blind, unquestioning sheep tucked away in the farm house of self deception, and gives them ridiculous comfort stories to keep them from just offing themselves.
Meh, if only it was just that... The thing about religion (especially Christianity and Islam) is that they just can't keep it to themselves. So, until the concept of the Lord's/Sharia Law is abolished, religion will never be a good thing.
There are definitely some people who will never stop believing, because if they did, they probably would "off" themselves. Whatever floats your boat is what I say, just LEAVE ME OUT.
You know I think it's funny that just because a person uses a little crude humor it's automatically assumed that he/she must posses a limited amout of intellegence. Seriously, shove your superiority complex UP your ASS. This isn't your girlfriend. Doubtfully even a colleague... She's just some chick expressing her opinion & points of view on a youtube video. And I'm just some guy doing the same. So, put some ice on your pussy and RELAX. Go ahead & thumb this down too.
Somebody tried to pick her up on an elevator ? Really ? That dude must have been hard up as Hell. Sheesh.
MrRedPajamas 2 weeks ago
Imagine being stuck in an elevator with that?! Bleh...
B0ombastix 2 weeks ago
You objectified yourselves in a pin-up calendar for a good cause... wtf? You claim to be a feminist but you just want to be famous for blabbing poorly constructed and supported ideas. You say nothing of substance :( So sad more women don't call you on your bullshit. I realize this is not Rebecca's channel but you are just perpetuating her stupidity so you are also to blame my friend!
blastedgoat 3 months ago 2
@blastedgoat You seem to not understand what skepticism is. Rebecca is advocating critical thinking. She is not in the business of making positive claims. The notion that you should critically evaluate all claims based on evidence on the back of reason and logic requires no further support, it is self-evident. Your accusations of her having said nothing of substance and being 'stupid' are unfounded and shamefully ignorant. And what about harmless vanity marketing is anti-feminist?
ianman6 3 months ago in playlist Skeptoid
@ianman6 What about "harmless vanity marketing" ISN'T anti-feminist? Have you been to her website? She can't write. She does not present good arguments for feminism or atheism and yet she is invited to speak (usually incoherently) at length about things she does not fully understand. Skepticism sounds like bullshit to me if you are meaning you can just refute anything you disagree with without proof or even good reasoning. Video after video prove to me at least that she is, in fact, a moron.
blastedgoat 3 months ago
@blastedgoat She writes rather well in my opinion, as well as the opinion of many bloggers and writers. That asside, I don't care about her feminism, but she is a good skeptical rogue for Steve Novella and is a very grounded skeptic. And for your information, skepticism is not dismissal out of hand (well, maybe for claims which are completely unsupported by evidence), but a careful and critical approach to all claims, especially extraordinary ones. Anything other than skepticism is stupid.
ianman6 3 months ago
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important differences between heterosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption and homosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption. Even non-religious people know this.
Homosexual activists, with support from the media, have succeeded at framing themselves as noble victims; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
lightandbeautiful 3 months ago
Fancy a coffee?
KillTheStranger 4 months ago 24
@KillTheStranger You're asking for trouble! lol
urantivirus 4 months ago
@KillTheStranger YOU SEXIST RAPPPIIIIIISSSSSST PIG MAN!!!
sooperfukker 2 months ago
@KillTheStranger Your viscous verbal threat has been reported to the authorities. Once the police apprehend you, women will be able to use elevators safely again! ;)
AtheismKills 2 months ago
@KillTheStranger Misogynist cannibal religious fascist rapist...... PENIS OWNER!
morpheusxnyc 3 weeks ago
She goes from babbling about questioning beliefs to spewing a stream of her own personal philosophy.
Feel meaning? WTF? Whats particularly beautiful about that? WTF? Find joy? WTF? I think theres some strength to that? WTF? Makes life sweeter? more worth living???? WTF?
What a load of non critical philosophical bullshit. she's preaching.
"Making the world a better place" subjective imaginary bullshit all based in belief
Twicebakedtaters 4 months ago
There is no such thing as good. She is delusional.. Good is a subjective perception that does not actually exists. Good of the gaps.
Ms watson it is important to question your beliefs.
Twicebakedtaters 4 months ago
I thought the guy that walked in from the left at 1:43 was a guy in a bear suit. I really need new contacts.
Reviresco 5 months ago
much ado about nothing
jwalky1 5 months ago
She looks like an ugly version of Chelsea Clinton.
VonManavis 6 months ago
@VonManavis LOL, that's cold! Damn cold!
fomiz 5 months ago
Who are all of those people passing through her outdoor kitchen?
KrfNYC2 6 months ago
You stupid bitch, scepticism is the exact opposite of being 'open minded and willing to accept other evidence', and how arrogant to claim that you have an 'ability' to question evidence where normal people just take it for granted. No one cares what you have to say, your whole feminism and 'moral crusader' bit is just bogus. It's clear you've never been subject to real sexism, your just so self righteous and pretentious that you feel you need to argue on other people's behalves. FUCK YOU!
lozzag13 6 months ago
@lozzag13 - You ignorant shmuck : you got it all wrong , again ! Read your dictionary - read any book at all .... Shes gotten over a million views so far. A lot of people care what she has to say.
curiousgeorge1940 6 months ago
@lozzag13 Wow, such resentment! You appear to be having a few issues. I suspect it probably has something to do with the fact that there are in fact plenty of people who are interested in what RKW has to say and appreciate her efforts to communicate issues that are relevant. This is of course in direct conflict with the fact that no-one gives a flying rat fuck what you think. It must seriously bruise your fevered little ego.
Unfortunately no-one cares, so fuck you more. And have a nice day.
rabidsi 5 months ago
her simian countenance suggests a heritage unusually rich in species diversity.
117gotmilk 6 months ago
So how does she apply the first line of her statement to the new facts brought to her attention about her episode in the elevator? This girl is a pure opportunist, if you notice she always starts talks with where she has been and what she is doing. Like many societal socialists, athiest, feminists she is riding the gravy train just like all public sector workers/females- job inventions I would add to this! If you note she attacks Richard DORKINS on his wealth, they are all greedy little mizers!
apekillssnake 6 months ago
Fun fact: watson met her ex husband by hitting on him at a convention. she is a shrill whining hypocrite.
tooyjfwn 6 months ago
Wait so this is the chick that got offended when a guy asked her out?!?!?! WOW JUST WOW! >_>
I mean if she were at least cute I could understand, but damn even non-hot chicks got so much attitude these days. She should've accepted because that dude would be doing this chick a FAVOR asking her out.
Remember that saying ugly chicks need love too? Yeah that applies to her.
JDubs878 6 months ago
@JDubs878 She just mentioned it in passing, she wasn't "offended" that someone asked her out, stop lying and creating stupid strawmen.
All your hateful, nasty comments directed at Rebecca you all prove that misogyny and sexism are rampant in the skeptic/atheist movement. You are hypocrites because you claim religion is sexist when you assholes are just as bad. You just point out misogyny when it serves your purpose and exploit women in muslim countries for selfish reasons. That is sick.
selinakyle 5 months ago
@selinakyle
Why don't you mention all the misandry by women these days? Not only that, why don't you mention that women NEVER WANT TRUE EQUALITY and that they only want equality WHEN IT SUITS THEM?
You want men to do special things for women and for you to retain all the perks that come with being a woman, but then demand equality everywhere else? Who's the hypocrites now?
Also if you truly believe that Islam isn't horrible for women, then why don't you live in Saudi Arabia for a few years?
JDubs878 5 months ago
@JDubs878 More strawmen. I never said Islam isn't horrible for women, it IS horrible for women. I don't like when the suffering of Muslim women is used to push an agenda that is pretty much anti-women's rights at it's core. Every woman I know wants true equality, misandry is all in your head. The worst "misandry" I ever hear comes from men against other men. Where did I say I want "special" things for women (another strawman). Human rights aren't "special rights."
selinakyle 5 months ago
Dumb bitch got pwned by the Amazing atheist and Richard Dawkins.
harpyfridge 6 months ago
"...come to the conclusion that the probability of god existing is extremely low"
fnanfne 8 months ago
Little girl u have no idea what u are talking about.
Godbtheglory1 9 months ago
@Godbtheglory1 Perhaps you wish to enlighten us with some evidence?
drakionx 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@drakionx problem with mankind is we think ourselves the masters of the universe yet earth is only a tiny,little micro dot in the fabric of time & space, the question shouldn't be whether 'God exists or not'?... but " What is man kind true history"???????
Godbtheglory1 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@drakionx There is enough evidence of God in His creation. Psalms 14 say: The fool has said in his heart there Is no God. So, Why would u want to be a fool. Simple answer, Ur full of conceit and arrogance ur looking at it from a man's point of view. Not spiritual.The bible says that in order for us to come to Him we need to come in spirit (being born again of the spirit). U NEED TO PROVE to GOD that u are worthy. B/c my friend God is not subject to higher authority.
Godbtheglory1 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@drakionx Could u please provide a way in which the big bang could have occurred without an Intelligent Designer? Or how DNA could have come without an Intelligent Designer? Or how the cell could have come to be without an Intelligent Designer?""
Godbtheglory1 8 months ago
She seems like the type who has to read a double-blind study to find out if she's had an orgasm or not.
jvaish 10 months ago
@jvaish I would be more than happy to be part of that study.
drakionx 8 months ago
@jvaish that doesnt even make sense, idiot
endauthority 6 months ago
@endauthority Yeah, probably not to someone who's never had sex before. If you ever have sex with someone other than yourself, you might understand. But probably not.
jvaish 6 months ago
@jvaish On the contrary, how could one even conduct a double blind study to find out if THEY orgasmed?
Thats like saying, I need a double blind study to tell if I was happy.
HUR DURR YOU'VE NEVER BEEN HAPPY BECAUSE OF THIS LOGICAL MESS I MADE HURR HURR HURR
Yeah, thats you, you fool.
endauthority 6 months ago
@endauthority Ok, I'll bite...because you asked. I was implying that she would need to verify, by consulting a double-blind study, what the constituents of an orgasm was, how it felt and if it even was a legitimate phenomenon instead of trusting her own instincts and feelings. Apparently, this required a bit of imagination as well as extrapolation on a main idea that, for whatever reason, you are not capable of. I'm guessing you suffer from arrested development. You da fool! lol
jvaish 6 months ago
@jvaish a double blind study wouldnt work in this case. Only she can know if she did or didnt, and a double blind study has two experimental groups, and an administrator who are all unaware of critical aspects of the study. this seeks to remove bias.
In other words, im getting at the fact that you apparently dont know what double blind studies are.
endauthority 6 months ago
Here's a message Rebecca Watson sent me after banning me from her channel for daring to post a comment she didn't like:
"I'm the best-known skeptic out there, and I have millions of fans. The skeptic movement IS Rebecca Watson. What have you accomplished? No one knows who the fuck you are, so shut your fucking mouth."
What a classy woman.
xxOTAKUxxKING 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xxOTAKUxxKING Shut your fucking mouth.
beerathon 1 year ago
@xxOTAKUxxKING That sound very un-like RW. And if it is true, that she actually wrote that, what the F did you say first in your comment?
nirakh 1 year ago
@xxOTAKUxxKING What was your comment ?
DeceptiveSoul 9 months ago
@xxOTAKUxxKING Seriously? This cunt really think she is some sort of Sceptic guru while 80% of the people only know here as that feminist elevator bitch.
philateliceun 5 months ago
@philateliceun Everytime some dipshit like you makes a comment like that, you prove her fucking point.
You consider her asking people to "Don't do that" as a totally over-the-top reaction that makes her a "bitch". Fine. Now imagine it was your mother, or sister, or wife. Now imagine someone else calling her "that cunt who totally overreacted to someone propositioning her in an elevator at 4am by asking me not to do that, the feminist bitch". You fucking cool with that? I didn't think so.
rabidsi 5 months ago
@rabidsi Thats not what I said. I said she thinks she is some Sceptic guru while most people only know here from elevatorgate. Sorry that I inserted the word cunt in it. Excuse me for my rampant mysoginy, please.
philateliceun 5 months ago
@philateliceun "she think". Really? Are you a psychic? You must be right? Because she says nothing of the kind.
So whether or not [NumberPulledOutOfYourAss]% people "only know her from elevatorgate" is completely fucking irrelevant.
It's an interview FFS. She's asked questions. She answers them. What is your fucking issue? Do you have one besides rampant fucking stupidity?
You do yourself, nor any other self-identifying male skeptic, any favours with this bullshit. Think hard and quit it.
rabidsi 5 months ago
@rabidsi lol you ask me whats my problem while you look like a hysterical oversensative asshole. Stop trying to project your own problems onto me.
philateliceun 5 months ago
@philateliceun Yes, that's right. The guy who came on here to call RKW a "cunt who thinks she is some sort of skeptic guru" because apparently "80% of the people only know her as that feminist elevator bitch" is calling me a hysterical oversensitive asshole.
Fuck me, I've been schooled.
Oh... wait.
Crawl back under your rock and continue hating on your betters, kid. Your prejudice is showing and it's fucking ugly.
rabidsi 5 months ago
@rabidsi What prejudice? Just get over yourself already. Good fucking god.
philateliceun 5 months ago
@philateliceun Your fucking prejudice. Referring to her as a cunt and bringing up other peoples ugly opinions about her has no purpose in the context of your original comment unless you are attempting to perpetuate that portrait of her, since it sure as fuck contains no salient point otherwise.
So we have two optiions.
1.) You're a bigoted, misogynistic fuckwit.
2.) You're just fucking stupid. Or trolling. Or both.
Which is it, cupcake?
rabidsi 5 months ago
@rabidsi LOL first you commit the fallacy of false dichotomy. And second calling someone a cunt is not mysoginy, especially if she really is a cunt. Is calling someone a dick mysandry? You got a massive chip on your shoulder, wouldn't suprise me if you were a feminist, wouldn't suprise me at all.
philateliceun 5 months ago
@philateliceun Thinking calling someone a cunt isn't misogynistic.
Thinking calling someone a feminist is an insult.
No need for further elaboration. Have a nice day.
rabidsi 5 months ago
@rabidsi Thinking calling some a cunt isn't misogynistic?
And now in English please?
philateliceun 5 months ago
@rabidsi No need for further elaboration? Well maybe not for the people who understand your weird codes and secret language but normal people would like more elaboration. What the fuck do you mean? Can you atleast TRY to make a coherent point.
philateliceun 5 months ago
someone who is always open to new evidence can never say 'a thing does or does not exist' since that would be jumping to a conclusion knowing that new evidence may just be around the corner. as a premise to the skeptics argument, they should all be 'agnostic' or 'indifferent' to all topics.
you dont think that 'alot of people come to the conclusion that there is no such thing as a god' they DO come to that conclusion...
cant you even make 1 sensical argument? come on skeptics/disbelivers!!
daenumen 1 year ago
@daenumen even tought you can't say 100% sure, you could say 99,99999999999% sure in many cases, I can't prove that there isn't a copy of all the human knowledge inside a secret cavern in mars, but I can say with 99,99999999% accuracy that there isn't, and if someone says that there is, I would say that that it does not exist, the simple improbabilty and lack of evidence is almost a proof that there such a thing.
gilberto201 1 year ago
@gilberto201 99.9...% isnt the same as 100%, its the difference between an educated/informed(?) guess and knowing the absolute truth wrt cave actually being on mars. you cannot discuss an accuracy, you do not know the true answer,or going by 'accepted' answer, well the sun revolved around the earth not long ago...
you cannot justify except by ignorance that it doesnt exist. probability theory & lack of evidence do not prove anything. without the evidence probabilities are not accurate.
daenumen 1 year ago
@gilberto201 furthermore without the ability to determine the results this becomes an unworkable example.
we can not necessarily comprehend the data eg scan of mars etc, to reveal what could be an alien computer for example, we could just see rocks or crystals like on superman?
this example leads only to ungrounded conjecture. and certainly you cannot state absolutes about existence.
so my point here is this:
daenumen 1 year ago
@daenumen Of course you can.
""With all the available evidence to date, we can conclude X. If new, wildly contradictory evidence comes to light we could instead conclude Y or possibly Z, however we believe such evidence is unlikely to be forthcoming."
What is so hard to understand?
rabidsi 5 months ago
@rabidsi you dont have all the information. it isn't acceptable to conclude X Y or Z on the belief that you will never obtain the information to verify X Y Z or even 'P'.
daenumen 5 months ago
@daenumen Then you agree it isn't acceptable to conclude their aren't invisible, intangible fairies living in your garden/garage/small intestine (delete as applicable)?
Being open to new evidence does not mean you cannot make a conclusion close enough to 100% probability that you can take it as certain. You have to factor in plausability. A complete lack of ANY evidence in favour of something vs a wealth of evidence against is a pretty damning sign for any hypothesis.
rabidsi 5 months ago
@rabidsi lol invisible intangible (immaterial/undetectable) fairies (down the bottom of the garden).
well why even form a hypothesis. the statement is that they do exist (according to the author) and are otherwise undetectable/impercieveable...how did the author come to realise these things were even fairies?.
there is no wealth of evidence against these things. there is evidence from the author suggesting there are such things & we and the author can 'not-detect them'.
daenumen 5 months ago
@rabidsi the problem here is the same problem as the invisible pink unicorn and flying spaghetti monster, that is;
the invisible intangible (immaterial/undetectable) fairies, are something that can ONLY BE extant within fantasy or folklore.
daenumen 5 months ago
00:09 she looks like Lois Griffin (lol)
SuperBeanson 1 year ago
Wow, trying too hard to sound smart, she did what most atheists do when talking out loud. She missed the basics.
"a skeptic is someone willing to examine their beliefs and change their beliefs if new evidence comes along."
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that the exact opposite of what a belief is? Before you answer "no", check every single dictionary ever published. Because to say no is a REAL belief. Holding something to be true without proof or in spite of evidence.
AClRCLEOFLlGHT 1 year ago
@AClRCLEOFLlGHT
I think you're confusing belief with faith.
Belief is accepting something to be true. It could be evidence that leads you to accept it, or faith. How you get to the acceptance "that X is true" (by either evidence or faith) is irrelevant to your actual stance, 'belief'.
brono25 1 year ago
@brono25 : your comment as read kinda makes sense, but then there's the dictionary which throws it all out of whack. There's a different word used to describe something you "Know" rather than "believe". If you know something to be true b/c it can be proven, its not a belief.
Belief is, holding something personally to be true which isn't proven.
Believe -> Believed -> Belief
Know -> Known -> Knowledge
Knowing/knowledge doesn't even use faith. Only beliefs do.
AClRCLEOFLlGHT 1 year ago
@AClRCLEOFLlGHT
Knowledge is a form of belief. Knowledge is a justified belief (i.e having evidence that leads you to accept something is true).
Im taking my definitions from the built in mac dictionary btw.
brono25 1 year ago
@brono25 : Stop arguing with actual the definition of the word based on your personal preference of what you "think" it means. Its really annoying.
Knowledge is NOT a form of belief, since that would oppose the very definition of the word. Knowledge is knowledge. You're trying to win by technicality rather than actuality. Get off it.
AClRCLEOFLlGHT 1 year ago
@AClRCLEOFLlGHT
Like i said, i am referring to the mac dictionary, so your problem is not with me. the 3rd point under definition of knowledge:
"• Philosophy true, justified belief; certain understanding, as opposed to opinion."
Belief:
"an acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists"
copy and pasted from the dictionary....
brono25 1 year ago
@AClRCLEOFLlGHT Given that just about anyone not trying to score points would interpret the way she worded her statement just as she intended and many would word it pretty much identically, it seems more like you're the one trying too hard to sound smart.
Belief, in context, can be synonomous with confidence or trust or conviction. You either have a very abridged dictionary, or you just don't know how to read it properly.
rabidsi 5 months ago
Rebecca's lost lots of weight since this video
anonymoose222 1 year ago
thank you for all that you do....
dewgy32 1 year ago
Skepticism isnt the thing. It is scientific knowledge and critical thinking that are important.
Ramshobraja 1 year ago 6
@Ramshobraja isnt that what skepticism is ?
tekhiun 1 year ago
@Ramshobraja isn't the thing? Scientific knowledge and critical thinking are the tools of a Skeptic. Why you say "it isn't the thing", i don't know what you mean to say. Skepticism, Scientific knowledge and Critical thinking are Nuts, Fudge covered in Chocolate which make for a tasty treat.
MsTonkal 1 year ago
@Ramshobraja Aint that the same thang?
Pantheist1 1 year ago
@Ramshobraja Whats important is knowing God loves us and will protect us from the lake of fire.
smurfboywv 10 months ago
@Ramshobraja Skepticism IS critical thinking.
rabidsi 5 months ago
@Ramshobraja What is the difference between skepticism and critical thinking/scientific investigation?
acr08807 3 months ago
2:20 "Nothing but Older WHite Men" So true. Being that I am African American and a proud skeptic, its seems very hard to find others like myself. Or at least in my community. None the less a women with the same views. Most of the skeptics that I have met, were completely thrown off once I began talking to them. I guess my boyish and somewhat hip hoppish look that I have, no matter how cloaked in business attire I am in, leaves an opening for classifying me as not your typical skeptic.
marcuelcajon 1 year ago
I love you Rebecca Watson
jvcanote 1 year ago 2
so do it ...
elambass 1 year ago
I'd love to debunk this woman POINT BY POINT because 99% of what she says is total bullshit.
illusionistdave 1 year ago
Go ahead... Nice anecdote you gave to Rebecca on her video which specifically asked people to stop giving her anecdotes. She put a video up about it if you don't know already.
If your logical fallacy on top of a logical fallacy wrapped in an anecdote you gave her was any indication of your critical prowess, I don't think we need to worry about you 'debunking' anything, any times soon.
But since you said it could you point to one thing she said and tell us all why it was "bullshit"?
CriticalAtheist 1 year ago
Does the atheist faith of "believe in nothing" teach you to not treat others as you want to be treated? Because I said what she SAID was bullshit. You started in insulting my intelligence, which by the way is clearly above average because of FACTS, including that I'm a nationally published author and graduated college with honors.
illusionistdave 1 year ago
Being logical and rational isn't the same as being intelligent, I made fun of your illogical thinking.
Atheism is not a faith nor does it teach anything, let alone "believ[ing] in nothing". It's the lack of belief in god(s). Which is the default position when there is no evidence, like not believing leprechauns because there is no evidence.
continued....
CriticalAtheist 1 year ago
True to an existent. But you instead of not believing in a god or gods have the belief that there is not a god and then villify those who do believe there is a god or gods just as some who are theists villify atheists. Really the only difference between the two groups extremes is the belief. The manner each one treats the other seems to be the same. Each thinks not only that their own belief is better but that the other is "stupid" for the opposite belief.
illusionistdave 1 year ago
You don't know me or what my exact beliefs are. No I don't believe there is no god, I lack the belief as I said earlier. Nor do I vilify anyone based on their belief in one. No one is stupid just for believing in god(s), that would be as ridiculous as saying one is intelligent based almost solely on their education level ;). Maybe you're just dealing with too many youtube flamers who leave social convention behind at the keyboard and vent frustration. Hope about dealing with me as an individual.
CriticalAtheist 1 year ago
I can agree with you on all those points. Flamers have hit me extremely hard. I had come to youtube a couple of years ago thinking I'd find a nice community. The nice ones aren't the loud ones it seems. You should see the stuff people say about me, not even cause I disagree with them. People call me fat, stupid, gay, retarded etc even on my paint shop pro videos. :( lol
illusionistdave 1 year ago
We have a running joke (by we I mean the skeptical community not the atheist community) "I dared to read the dreaded comment section" We say this because internet comment sections are known for their idiocy and needless hatred. Just don't sink to that level and have a thick skin is all I say, there's no point.
FYI rkwatson (Rebecca Watson) put up a video about your comment, which is why I recognized you. Just letting you know.
CriticalAtheist 1 year ago
continued....
You may very well be intelligent but still hold illogical beliefs, like say... that being a published author and a college graduate means you must be intelligent. Is there a correlation between education and intelligence? Sure.
CriticalAtheist 1 year ago
Thank you for the clarification.:)
illusionistdave 1 year ago
Does that mean you're agreeing with me or are you being facetious?
CriticalAtheist 1 year ago
Continued again, sorry but I almost forgot, what exactly were you going to debunk?
CriticalAtheist 1 year ago
I'll watch the video again soon and respond. I will say my initial comment wasn't tactful enough. I just get frustrated when I hear some atheists assume that all Christians are a certain way. I'm a VERY tolerant Christian. I don't believe atheists are going to hell or that God wants to or even did show his "wrath" to anyone. I believe God is a very loving God.:) I'll tell you what I think Jesus's death was all about later if you really want to hear it. lol
illusionistdave 1 year ago
One thing an atheist who debates Christians all the time learns quickly if they didn't already know it is that no Christian seems to hold the exact same beliefs. From the most new age flowery love thy neighbor to Westboro Baptist Church (google them if you don't know). You have to understand though that sometimes when we say Christians we obviously don't mean all Christians everywhere. But also be aware that there isn't a Christianity I could believe based on the evidence.
CriticalAtheist 1 year ago
Well before I talk further, to see if there's even a point, do you believe that Jesus Christ (the man) as a man existed?
illusionistdave 1 year ago
I haven't seen any evidence of that being the case, so no I don't. But I don't really see how that would mean there isn't a point to discussing it. If you know of evidence of that being the case then please provide it.
CriticalAtheist 1 year ago
The problem is, if you start believing that historical figures (even men) didn't exist, then you can't really believe that anyone existed in ancient times....There's no "real" proof anyone existed during those times.
illusionistdave 1 year ago
Yes there is. Multiple contemporary historical accounts. This is the basis for believing in any historical figure. There are no contemporary historical accounts for the existence of Jesus other the the bible claiming that it's accounts are such. Problem is we don't know who those authors were, and internally they are inconsistent accounts.
Julius Caesar for example. Look at the references in his wikipedia entry and you'll see the names of the multiple contemporary historians.
CriticalAtheist 1 year ago
I would tell you the same think. Look at the references in Jesus's wikipedia entry. Every person with sense knows that there's as much proof of Jesus as a real human being as anyone else from around his time. To deny that he even existed as a man is beyond bewildering.
illusionistdave 1 year ago
I think you need to look at Jesus' wiki again. There aren't any contemporary accounts. Contemporary means written when the figure in question was alive. Even the gospels (whose authorship are unknown) weren't written until 50-100 years after the supposed death of Jesus. That's longer than most people could live. Best case scenario we are listening to the account of a child of someone who claims to have been there.
But all of that aside what would you argue if I agree that Jesus was a person?
CriticalAtheist 1 year ago
Like I was trying to say point out to Rebecca, not all Christians hold the exact same beliefs. While she apparently has only encountered those Christians who believe that atheists will burn in hell, there are many of us who find that laughable. I believe that Jesus (the man, not the God, because that's a bit too complex to get into) was killed not "for" our sins. I think that's where the Bible has it worng. I think he was killed, brutalized, whatever you want to call it BY our sin. See next...
illusionistdave 1 year ago
She is well aware of the different kind of Christians. I listen to her on podcasts all the time.
What evidence do you have for any of these claims? Provide evidence for sin. Not just bad deeds but this sin which can somehow transcend both time a space and effect a person 2000 years ago. Where did sin originate? Why was it necessary that a sacrifice be made? Especially if we aren't taking the old testament literally.
CriticalAtheist 1 year ago
I never said sin that can transcend both time and space and afffect a person 2000 years ago.
illusionistdave 1 year ago
Those who lived during his time and even believed he was God turned on him and had him killed. This is a sin. He didn't die to make up for my (Illusionistdave) sins. He died because of the fact that we sinned and killed him. How can people who BELIEVED that he was God actually turn on him like that? Messed up huh? So that's one HUGE difference between me and most Christians.
Also, I don't believe this wrathful bs or Adam and Eve bs. The first testament is a way of explaining why
See Next.
illusionistdave 1 year ago
You may have a different view than most Christians but you have just about as much evidence for any of it. There are a lot of claims you're throwing out there without much evidence to back it up. Why do you believe all these things to be true?
CriticalAtheist 1 year ago
Why do you believe there isn't a God? You have no evidence he doesn't exist. You can't prove your belief.
illusionistdave 1 year ago
bad things happen. It was the best they could come up with at the time.
As for Adam and Eve, I would be very hardpressed to believe that someone named Adam and someone named Eve existed. Again, the old testament writers were merely trying to find an explanation for creation, which they obviously got wrong, but it was the best they could do at the time.
I'm a believer in evolution. Why? Well, 1 cause it's fact, but two because it makes sense...to an extent...
See next.
illusionistdave 1 year ago
Without Adam and Eve how do you explain sin in the first place? What would humanity need redeeming from?
CriticalAtheist 1 year ago
Did you even read what i wrote? I never said sin affects us today. I never said humanity needed redeeming. I said the exact opposite.
illusionistdave 1 year ago
First, i need to digress to creation. I think it's incredibly silly (and ultimately impossible) for something to come from nothing. If I pull a rabbit out of an examined hat, there has to be "something" to it. it's not possible for something to come from nothing. So, that part of the big bang theory I disagree with. That said, something had to come from something to make the Universe. The only explanation I have at this time is that the something that existed before
See next
illusionistdave 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Big bang theory doesn't claim that something came from nothing. I'd suggest you go to that wiki page as well for quick brush up on what it says.
"something that existed before"
"before" doesn't really make sense since time and space is encompassed in the BB model. Beyond that The claim will either be that this "something that existed before" either came from nothing (contradicting your prior statement) or that it has always been, to which I ask why can't the universe have always been?
CriticalAtheist 1 year ago
How could the universe have always been is my question? Explain to me the mechanics of it.
illusionistdave 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
must have been far more of an intelligent "thing" than us ie. God.
As for evolution. Of course it existed and exists. But, what is the mechanics of it? What triggers the changes and actually makes them take place. What process is it? Well no one can explain the mechanics of it. Something has to make the changes ie: God.
illusionistdave 1 year ago
Dave I'm sending you a PM to respond to all of this, because this comment thing is too disorganized.
CriticalAtheist 1 year ago
@illusionistdave You clearly don't understand what the theory of evolution is. It's obvious by what you just sad. Evolution in and of itself is the process! Those who live to reproduce, over periods of time you cannot even comprehend, are what influence change. You know what crocodiles haven't changed much? Because they're perfect for what they do! Other animals lower on the food chain are more likely to change over time because only those who survive to reproduce can effect the outcome.
Toji43 1 year ago
It's obvious by what I "sad?" I also asked to explain the mechanics. No one seems to be able to do that. What EXACTLY causes the mutation? What EXACTLY ensures it?
illusionistdave 1 year ago
There is something making the changes required for evolution, the Environment. Pressures imposed by the environment can "reward" species for evolving to exploit a new resource. Of course quoting science won't sway you since you can always imply gods hands in such processes (something unprovable).
Nigelius 1 year ago
As a scientist you know that nothing is "provable." You can only provide more evidence for something.
illusionistdave 1 year ago
Very true but can you provide evidence for the existence of a god (other than anecdotes)?
Nigelius 1 year ago
You obviously do not understand genomes.
GraphicAbility 1 year ago
Her perspective isn't skeptical. More a promoter of her beliefs,and skeptisizes only alternatives that contradict her 'scientificly acceptable' ideas. Ever hear the "White Swan Theory?" Why shoot down alternatives to chemotherapy when well researched people know it's destructive to the body? A true skeptic would say there may be better treatments,we have to keep an open, intelligent mind to. Skeptics seems to tackle things that perplex them,leave that which they feel comfortable with. Irony?
TruthinessDotCom 2 years ago
This entire statement was incorrect. A skeptic doesn't accept anything until the evidence for it is provided. That evidence is evaluated for reliability and only then may something be accepted. Chemo works. This is supported by the evidence. Being open means testing alternatives and when that happens they fail under scientific conditions. When they don't then they can be accepted. We are only comfortable with that which we have evidence for, and if new evidence comes in, we change our minds.
CriticalAtheist 1 year ago
Rebecca looks like a cool lady I would like to have coffee with. I have to say, though, that I have looked at the evidence for atheism skeptically and found the evidence for it scant and faulty. Therefore, after examining the evidence, I devoted my life to Jesus Christ, and have not regretted my life in Him for one second since. God bless you, Rebecca!
Sweet92Sue 2 years ago
AMEN thats wat im sayin! Praise God
BenLukeMartinez 2 years ago
I call BS here. Atheism isn't a claim and therefor there can't be evidence for it. It's the default position. Like *not* believing in leprechauns or homeopathy. One who is an atheist is someone who doesn't believe in god(s). Asking for evidence is illogical because you'd be asking to prove a negative, which one cannot do. Prove there aren't any fairies. You can't, you can only find that there is a lack of evidence for them. And that's the atheist position. There is a lack of evidence for god(s).
CriticalAtheist 1 year ago
god loves you
mutemenot 2 years ago
oops i meant i lost faith throughout my walk
BenLukeMartinez 2 years ago
Comment removed
TheOriginalEntz 2 years ago
A response to TheOriginalEntz:
I like to read the comments that are so off the wall or unrelated,they get ratings so bad,they are not shown.
And the irony of his getting such a bad rating is that he simply skeptisezes the skeptics,and he gets his comment destroyed.
Didn't Rebecca say : "...question,to know that NOTHING is off limits. You can always question."
But yet if you question a skeptic,well you're just ignorant. Hypocracy at it's height. No doubt this comment too will be ripped apart.
TruthinessDotCom 2 years ago
You use the word skeptic as "denial" .. notice? I didn't "skeptisize" the skeptics - that is not even a word btw- I flat out said he is not a skeptic. You are not a skeptic either it appears
TheOriginalEntz 2 years ago
Actually I am. With a degree in engineering. Me questioning the validity of another person's 'word,' itself shows a 'skeptical nature?' I actually do a lot of ponderance, research,mathematical evaluation and calculation of many things around me. Why fear the word "denial?" I deny a lot of mystic bull,that's what a skeptic does. Skepticize is a word, I misspelled it (oooh). And hey,twit. I was defending you! Why was your comment recieved so poorly? But now I see it's because you're an idot.
TruthinessDotCom 2 years ago
If there was no devine higher power. The Universe wouldn't exist, neither would life.
talo757 2 years ago
Comment removed
BenLukeMartinez 2 years ago
@BenLukeMartinez Which religion are you? Calling a woman ugly like you did doesn't seem to fit in the standards expected by most religionheads.
LewisLane33 2 years ago
Dude shut-up haha religionhead?? your one of those people who find any reason they can to make people who love god look bad... and ur actually right i have no business calling anyone ugly i just get pissed when people act like thier so sure God doesnt exist... SORRY REBECCA.... BUT GOD STILL EXISTS
BenLukeMartinez 2 years ago
really ? and you know that how ? because of faith ? because of a fuzzy feeling you get now and then ?
tekhiun 2 years ago
Yeeeesss you know the feeling:D?? LOL na...i mean faith Yes but fuzzy feeling?? At first thats all i thought it was just some dumb feelings but if you put that faith in god and show him a real faith in him then he reveals himself to you in more ways then just some fuzzy feelings seriously He is awesome Praise God
BenLukeMartinez 2 years ago
Faith is nothing more than ignorance and wishful thinking disguised as a virtue. All you are saying is "If you decide to believe in god for no good reason at all, you will believe in god." It may be good enough for you , but for people that are intellectually honest, it is not.
tekhiun 2 years ago
Its good enough because he's real... pff ha dude faith is believing in something you dont see but in my case i see what god does in my life and in the lives of many people... even those who dont carry much faith in him.. Intellectual honesty is bieng straight up and blunt to a situation or an idea and i understand that... I came to the point where i thought exactly like you but god changed my mind, not people, not church, and not a religion... but God himself
BenLukeMartinez 2 years ago
I'm sorry but as long as you can't prove something exists then it generally doesn't.
I still don't get why religious people don't see how god is just the biggest scam ever. I mean seriously, as much as it might be nice to think that after you die you will go to a magical place in the sky and meet a big man on a throne who is the everlasting lord of the universe. It's still a load of crap and if you can't accept that, well seriously dude you need to get a grip with life. BTW i'm only 13
runewow 2 years ago
@runewow generaly i can explain many ways in wich god exists... well at least my belief and opinion on why he exists but im 16... still young but been here 3 years longer than you so i have a better idea of what its like to "get a grip with life" ive been athiest even throughout my walk with god but hey im not there anymore and im going to assume youve believed in him before... if not try it out.. maybe you will get a better grip on this life
BenLukeMartinez 2 years ago
Hmm... you haven't actually explained exactly what these "many ways" are, in fact that seems to be the case with many theists. Me being 13 has nothing to do with the truth. Some people have the impression that the older someone is, the wiser they are. Unfortunately that argument is a bit old TBH.
runewow 2 years ago
I dont have to explain because your prob just as stubborn as all the other athiest believing this crap i didnt say anything nor did i give the impression that im wiser than you but i know i have more experience thats a fact. Yea i know bieng 13 has nothing to do with the truth because theres on only one truth and thats that GOD EXIST No matter how many thumbs down or stupid comments i get back haha
BenLukeMartinez 2 years ago
Congrats Rebecca! Just watched your wedding! Keep up the good work you do. ;)
VimisiDigitalMedia 2 years ago
There is no such thing as no God
SavageShootsSweet 2 years ago
show your evidence in such a bold claim.
LucaEnzo 2 years ago
I have faith. I do not need "evidence."
Rebecca should show me the evidence there is not.
SavageShootsSweet 2 years ago
The burden of proof is on one who claims facts.
You show me that there is no 19ft rat running around New York, oh you can't? Then that means there is.
You prove that all the other gods are not true then. Maybe then people will look into your claim
LucaEnzo 2 years ago 2
I don't have to prove anything to anyone other than myself.
For all I know, the universe, as we know it, is a speck in a drop of water and God is looking at it through a cosmic microscope, same as I might look at a paramecium. The paramecium cannot prove I am there. looking at it. But I am there, just the same. At the same time, just like my existence, its is not dependent on proof, nor law. I prefer proof, but accept faith where I haven't the time to "prove".
SavageShootsSweet 2 years ago
You can't prove a negative.
rotcafarg 2 years ago
Sure I can. +5 -6 = -1
SavageShootsSweet 2 years ago
Now lets see -1 apples, and shoow me the difference between -1 apples and -1 oranges. Either will do.
VimisiDigitalMedia 2 years ago
true
1imax111 2 years ago
HEy becca... big HEY from engineer from from norway and russia so... yeah big fance of you guys!!!.... take care fuckers is every where RIGHT NOW RIGHT NOW :d :p
kingfker 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
hey Ms Watson, go just behind that building just behind you, find the second largest library in the world, check out some Wittgenstein and Heideggar, Simone Weil, refine your "beliefs", including the modern history and use of the term "rationality". Antiquity also. Be open to mystery.Get some theological sophistication, use God -language correctly sans sarcasm ("power of the Lord")before you start this campaigning. Right now your mind is cruder than a Baptist bible thumper. Best wishes!
carolingianguy 2 years ago
Religion is a good thing. It keeps the masses of uneducated, illiterate, blind, unquestioning sheep tucked away in the farm house of self deception, and gives them ridiculous comfort stories to keep them from just offing themselves.
SensesRox 2 years ago
Meh, if only it was just that... The thing about religion (especially Christianity and Islam) is that they just can't keep it to themselves. So, until the concept of the Lord's/Sharia Law is abolished, religion will never be a good thing.
There are definitely some people who will never stop believing, because if they did, they probably would "off" themselves. Whatever floats your boat is what I say, just LEAVE ME OUT.
averagehomosapien 2 years ago 2
Can it be the priest or the psychiatrist that keeps one from actually doing it though?
Which one? One or the other, both, maybe working as a team?
I think it would more likely be the poor Atheist to rid the world of his/her empty soul.
SavageShootsSweet 2 years ago
becca you are the best.
crazyworld05 2 years ago 9
This has been flagged as spam show
This wallflower needs 12 inches of Black COCK. =^_^=
LovelornGraduate 2 years ago
"This wallflower needs 12 inches of Black COCK. =^_^= "
You need an IQ above 85.
whovian1971 2 years ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Spoiled sport.
LovelornGraduate 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
You know I think it's funny that just because a person uses a little crude humor it's automatically assumed that he/she must posses a limited amout of intellegence. Seriously, shove your superiority complex UP your ASS. This isn't your girlfriend. Doubtfully even a colleague... She's just some chick expressing her opinion & points of view on a youtube video. And I'm just some guy doing the same. So, put some ice on your pussy and RELAX. Go ahead & thumb this down too.
LovelornGraduate 2 years ago