first of all. energy doesn't disappear. it changes form. and what is more probable, that the universe created itself or that a creator created himself then created the universe?
There are not just TWO choices here... whilst he was saying there were only two choices I personally thought of 4 or 5 other choices....
Next since nobody is stating the universe came from nothing his whole point is useless...
Even if he were right (and he's not) then he's still left trying to explain where this God came from...and if it was created by something else from nothing! Same problem but now a God needs an explanation rather than a universe.
wow DNA, you complicated! God did it!!! So silly. Over time something simple can become complicated. Looking at the end result and gasping in its complexity, and ignoring the billions of steps prior, is just ignorant.
@chirectomy 1 who says plato is correct. and who are you to say what he is saying is disgusting. He is outside nature and he ordered the genocide of a people who desecrated the earth and shamed humanity. it's not objective because he is a the ultimate being who decides because he is supernatural. its not greater than him, he is the greatest. And all things are not possible by God. he can't make the finite infinite, its a contradiction in terms.
@chirectomy He didnt change because he wasn't perfect, he changed because people were evil and had to pay for their sins but he loved them so he sent his son so that we didnt have to sacrifice or other laws. people weee the source not him.
@chirectomy but how can you measure morals. if there is no ultimate standard of morals, it's only an opinion versus another. or a majority of one group vs another. for example, us Vs. Hitler, Hitler believes he was right, and was brought to justice by force from the opinions of many. seriously, morals are based on a moral standard not of humans, because its just opinion then
It's "unlikely" that the universe would arrange itself in this way, granted. But it's just as unlikely as any other way. This is just how it happens to be. And our planet, which could be one of trillions of similar planets for all we know, just happens to have the conditions that've allowed lifeforms to develop to be smart enough to think, "This is unlikely to be an accident". Thankfully, though, that's just what it is. Quote all the maths you want; it means bollocks
Is it just me... or did anyone else have to keep turning down the volume during Turek's speech? The man's a goddam foghorn, and I swear he just kept getting louder.
All he states is that the current universe would be impossible if the past were different! e.g. the comment on gravity refers to the fact that the Earth would be pulled into the sun, a configuration that would not exist if gravity were different in the first place.
I find that Turek and most Christian debaters main arguments lies on: "The universe is much too complicated, therefore someone must have made it". And this is not an Ad hominem, because they even say it themselves.
The logical error is clearly large enough to blow my pants off.
Very small, dense point containing all the energy in the universe is not nothing.
In fact this proves the law of the conservation of energy. The universe has forever, expanded and contracted in periods usually lasting only billionths of a second. Once every now and again the fundmental laws and rules of the universe is altered just enough in the furnace of all energy to allow rapid expansion to take place and energy to form matter and matter, atoms and so on. This is far more beautiful than god
@Dgoosh1000 where did the small dense point come from? and where did the energy in that point come from? at some point, something had to come from nothing.
@sirpercivalblakeney1 That and admittedly my comment also, is just speculative. All the theories of the origin of the universe based on scientific reason and study dont require a god or prime mover. When you add god or say that there must be some sort of super dimensional being all you are doing is shoehorning in an extra factor that doesn't need to be there for the theory to work. And I can't even begin to think what sort of place the universe was ie. that small point, before the big bang.
Nobody is atheist. "atheist" is a misnomer. For example, the Romans used to worship a being known as Ceasar as God. I have yet to hear a so called "atheist" deny that these ceasars, or Antiochus "another deity" existed
@topturkey2 you really believe that??? that's not science my friend, that's a guess. Have you seen nothing have something in it scientifically? Good luck...
There is an answer as to what was before the big bang, since there is a character limit and I don't have enough room here to tell you about it, I can just tell you where I read about it, the book is The Fabric of the Cosmos, by Brian Greene, and towards the end of the book he brings up an interesting solution to the "before the big bang" problem, it involves String/M-theory and is very interesting
@eatingtacos000 really??? by who??? I could say the same about the arguments presented by the atheist side. And again, the atheist resorts to name calling since they don't have any good arguments...yeah, they have arguments alright, good ones?? NOPE
Of the infinite possible Universes, ours was designed to support and propagate black holes. As a condition of these types of Universe, a small, totally insignificant amount of conditions for life are also produced.
A dozen cherry picked quotes, a super annoying acronym, and a couple of terribly faulty analogies is the 'proof' that god exists. Turek is one of the biggest douche bags I've had the extreme misfortune of listening to.
@TheYipedo Well, Frank Turek is quoting US astronomist Robert Jastrow to make his point. Having been unable to find the publication in which Jastrow makes such an assertion, I am somewhat skeptical (no pun intended) of the attribution.
Listening to Turek it sounds to me like he's in the wrong debate. The group he should debate is the Answers in Genesis people. Turek just said that science is right about the big bang, right about the expanding universe, and right about the age of the universe. Does that mean he believes the age of the Earth is 4.5 billion years old? He mentions evolution, does he believe that species evolved over millions of years? If so, he needs to be debating with his biblical literalistic brothers.
@cpqarray Yep, he isn't a literalist, which put him a bit higher on the IQ scale than hardcore evangelicals. Probably around the retardation line above the creationists as Family Guy puts it. He just wants to prove that the Bible confirms scientific discoveries. Pretty much how most Muslims try to prove that the Big Bang is written in the Koran. Funny, huh? They can't all be right, but they can all be wrong. Hell, we can do the same thing for the Greek or the Norse religions if we wanted.
I agree with you, I am a believer. Most Christians just go by blind faith to believe the things that they're taught. but you cant judge the religion from the people. Every group has another group claiming to be them and are not. Most Christians say they're Christian, but that doesn't make you Christian. I wished more people that believed in god could watch these videos and learn more so they could defend what they believe.
"Life as we know it".... We are a product of these situations, of course it looks like it is perfect to make us. IT MADE US! It's like getting a nail and a hammer and thinking that The Great Hammer must have designed the nail.
@SpongeFanGrl Everything is not made just by random chance. Maybe research Darwinian Natural Selection. Intricately designed? Like my wisdom teeth that came in sideways and had to be removed for a cost of $1200. Thanks God, for intricately designing my jaw bone.
Turek is already setting himself up for failure. He says if the universe was changed by the tiniest fraction of a degree, we wouldn't exist. If God is so powerful wouldn't he be able to make us exist in so many different environments and under so many different circumstances?
Turek and Hitchens, reason that I'm a deist with some doubts and not a theist or 'for sure there is no god' atheists. (most atheists are agnostic atheists, meaning they don't know the existence of a god due to lack of evidence.
WHAT IS ALL THIS BOLLOCKS ,...that something came from nothing ,i dont think there is a scientist alive that thinks this ,has this clown every studied quantum psychics ,as far a i know,...the last time i looked the theory was that ,everything came from a singularity ,AMEN
@Nerd042 I assume u mean, "Turdek." To answer your question, he talks to his audience like they are fucking five, and despite talking fast he doesn't impart that much information per minute. He seems inclined to the bells and whistles of body language and examples, and less inclined the basic dictates of valid argument and logic...he creates some rational fallacies in his arguements, but he doesn't understand that.
@saltjunkie77 I think you may honestly have a real point here. Take another one of Hitchens' opponents, for example, Alister McGrath. He talks in a really strange way too, and moves around a lot.
There are no divine messages that can be deduced from nature, certainly not any of the claims of religion, nothing science hasn't already discovered.
If we can think of better (safer) ways to evolve all biotic life in harmonious community (e.g. GMO foods, natural hybridization, medicine, socialism& democracy, animal taming, environmental preservation, humanitarian exploits, natural disaster preparedness, etc.), then we are greater designers than the supposed original designer.
If the beach message had been written in Arabic, he'd have said it was the waves, or more repugnant still, the devil.
the whole "tape; one inch" argument is logically fallacious, hello! we happen to live in this Universe with its figures and laws... that doesn't lead to the jump that it was created for us. it's only evidence for itself, that it happens to have those laws and figures. Creation is an ARTistic perspective caused by Death anxiety.
This guys basic argument can be put down with basic statistic theory. He keeps saying basically that look how complex this is, it has to have predetermination! No dude, you have the same odd to roll 100 random numbers as you do rolling 1,2,3,4,5,6 sequentially 17 times.
One word to describe Mr. Turek: Obfuscatory. Or maybe quote-miner. He deliberately takes the scientific evidence presented and twists it to suit his argument. In other words, every theist ever.
I really tire when second rate apologists use the argument that something cannot come from nothing. Here's a clue: NOBODY IS SAYING THAT. Hope that helps.
@BlankVellum Something cannot come from nothing. That's a scientfic fact. Period. Go buy a white canvass, paint, and paint brush and lock it in a room someplace where nobody can bother it, and see if it paints itself.
@Legend1One First of all, you cannot assert this a priori. Quantum uncertainty entails some very strange inversions of logic. Second, my point was that no reputable cosmologist or physicist is saying that something came from nothing. It's a strawman.
Rofl, this guy is a joke. This guy really thinks that scientist are climbing a mountain on top of which the theologians are. Where they think they are.
Did Bible tell us how to do brain surgery? Did your bible tell you how to build the computer you are reading this text though. I think not. If we would ditch all of this religious beliefs we could feed the hungry. Just by melting the Vatican every one on the world could have a house to live in.
I find Frank Turek's claims incredibly arrogant. He argues that because humans cannot conceive of 'something coming from nothing', that because of the rules of our language with regard to concepts like 'natural' and 'supernatural', god must exist. Since the cosmos is bound by our cognitive limitations.
That a creator must exist because the rules of one language, of one species, on one insignificant little planet, in one galaxy amongst billions in this universe says so, is unbelievably arrogant.
@xincrii it's not just language limitations you are talking about, it's physical law limitations...Frank Turek is arrogant? Did you see who is debating and how Hitchens comes across??? No worst blind than the one that doesn't want to see....
@beto88keys turek is very arrogant like all creationist as they claim to have all the answers to questions science hasn't answered yet,god did it,no evidence no research no testing,just god did it.THAT is extremely arrogant to claim to have the answers to everything.
@Flash13Magic I get that his delivery may be perceived as cocky but the fact that you know the answers does not make you arrogant, it's confidence. If he didn't provide confident answers people would be commenting on how the bible doesn't speak confidently about matters...so darn if you do and darn if you don't, right?
@beto88keys i have no problem with confidence,its admirable,even cocky to an extent is ok without bordering on arrogance.however to claim to have the answers to all life's questions by simply saying ''god'' is ridiculous.its not even simple confidence because he constantly uses arguments that have been refuted time and time again yet he continues to use them,thats idiotic.he isn't humble enough to admit if he is wrong and remove the lies from his argument.
@Flash13Magic well, he continues to use the same arguments because, let's face it, atheists have not gotten better at refuting them. They have been refuted many times, I grant you that. But how many times have they been successful? You claim that this guy is arrogant, however, you calling an argument idiotic IS arrogant. That implies that they are inferior and not worthy to be debating you or your candidate...you will be measured they way you measure others...
@beto88keys but to continue to use arguments that have not only been refuted but that are completely wrong is idiotic.i never said anything about being inferior etc,that is your perception of how you interpreted me calling his argument,not him,idiotic.if you were driving a car and it kept braking down because of the way you were driving it and your mechanic told you how to stop this from happening.would you call that person idiotic if the car broke down again for the same reason?
@beto88keys Wrong. How can Atheists get "better" at refuting Christian claims when the Christians constantly argue the same topics over and over and over and over again? There's no need to get better. You guys can't even comprehend the original refute.
@iz2sicc Atheists argue evolution and the same things over and over, atheists are no smarter or better. actually Atheists have more incomplete thoughts than Theists.
@fromhereon and if you quote a thousand pieces of evidence to justify God's existence, you're still an atheist..................because that's what you want to be.
This man has no understanding of science nor does he understand the definition of atheism. Either that, or he's intellectually dishonest to make money for his shit book.
Almost hipnotic, very persuasive, but I can throw All arguments in Deism (pit)..............So let's say I'm A Deist, but still & very much Anti-Theist
most of yall commenting are so ignorant. for get what you have been taught and come up with your own conclusion. its all been proven one way or another.
1:03 - "Supernatural forces at work is now I think a scientifically proven fact".
... Science: the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment.
We can't witness, observe, or experiment with something supernatural. Am I wrong?
You do realize most religious people (such as Dr. Turek) have social and personality defects right? It doesnt make a great case for religion at any rate. And then of course Mr. Hitchens is calm, witty, smart and logical.
Killing the "fine-tuning" argument in 2 sentences:
Roughly 99.9% of the known universe is incapable of supporting any form of life. If an architect designed 100 homes, and 99 of them were unfit to be lived in, would you describe that architect's designs as "fine-tuned"?
@garethac81 What about explaning thunder, diseases and earthquakes? Oh sorry I forgot, these have already been scientifically explained so religious people have moved on to what is currently unexplained. God has gone from being on Mount Olympus, to being in the sky, to being invisible and soon to be in another dimension or plane of existence to escape the burden of proof. The "fine-tuning" argument is just where they can hide now.
@chikdada Shit comment. Concentrate on substance rather than deliverance, I love Chris too but don't flippantly dismiss academics, otherwise there's no point in watching the debate (as a debate, rather than salivating over Hitch).
I think that most people find it difficult to accept the idea of mankind being alone in the universe. To many, it is probably just too frightening and seems without purpose. I think for those people, being cosseted in religion and a thought of eternal life in a heaven allows them to get through each day. At this point in time however, the price we are all paying for this "la-la-land" mentality is unacceptable and it is long overdue that we all grew up and took some responsibility.
@707BIGGLES747 I agree with you on that my friend...one reason i believe that people tend to look upwards to god is because there is something inside of our mind, something so deep yet so disassociated with our ego-consciousness that it seems like something wholly seperate altogether...something we feel yet cannot understand. Deities, gods, higher beings, etc, undoubtedly are conceived of this.
Sounds like atheists, who insist (without evidence) on the existence of other sentient beings in the universe; the universe couldn't possibly be made solely for humans, oh no - completely inconceivable.
He elaborates on the same points and quotes over and over as if he is creating a solid argument when those arguments are non sequitur; drawing a line between big bang and personal Christian God with arbitrary made-up characteristics.
WHat is this... Something out of nothing bullshit Frank Turek keeps spewing.... Obviously no one was around at the time of the inceptino of the universe... Why does he claim difinitively that it was God. We don't know. Science tells us more and more each and every day. It's the reason we are using Youtube right now. Trust in the truth. Trust in science and reason, and human solidarity.
@thenaj88 Well, whatever the cause is; it can't be a naturalistic explanation, for nature didn't exist yet. So, ruling out naturalistic causes to the origin of the universe; we are forced to go outside the realm of the natural and into the supernatural.
I think turek misses the point its not about the existance of god, from what I have seen atheists dont really care; you can't prove it one way or the other, the atheistic debate seems to be more about whether our theistic bretheren have anything useful to say anymore, and considering the fact that theist spends the entire time quoting atheists so he can prove to an atheist that theisim still has something to say I would say hes losing, badly.
@matt66dc He does that to prove that even atheists who aren't idiots, can't deny certain evidence that points toward God. If he quoted only believers would you then conclude that he presented extremely solid arguments? I don't believe that. It's the content that makes an argument valid. Am I right?
Theists never come up with anything new in these debates. EVER. It's the same thing EVERY TIME. The ONLY argument that might make atheists think is the "fine tuning" argument. The library of congress example? Ridiculous..
I see Turek's point about the point of creation for everything, however, even if it were a god who created everything, it's ignorant to think that he would focus solely on humans and earth when we have an idea of how immense the universe is.
If he's going to argue causality, he could at least face the rather obvious conclusion that life formed after the universe, thus life is adapted to the physical laws of this universe, rather than the reverse causality he is proposing whereby the conditions of the universe are dictated by some inherent need for life.
@robleavy1 DNA is one of the most important peices of evidence for Evolution. DNA is completely imperfect and we have many DNA sequences that contribute nothing to our biology, they are infact fossil DNA sequences.
@kingdomofdalriada With all due respect, it still amazes me how anyone could believe a lifeless, mindless universe (matter) created thinking, talking emotional matter. Of course you have to believe first that the initial lifeless universe came from nothing that was created by no one. 0+0 = 0 not 589 (for example) . However, in essence, that is the logic you have [0+0= 589] when you take God out of the equation.
@robleavy1 Life didnt just appear, it was not 0+0 = 589. It was more like 0 +1 = 1 , 1+1 = 2 etc. You cleaerly have nmot looked at the evidence instead you have just opened you big American, Christian gob and shown your ignorance.
@robleavy1 With all due respect, it still amazes me how anyone could believe a timeless eternal being outside of time and space created thinking, talking emotional matter. Of course you have to believe first that the timeless eternal being outside of time and space came from nothing that was created by no one. 0+0 = 0 not 589 (for example) . However, in essence, that is the logic you have [0+0= 589] when you talk nonsense.
@robleavy1 Alright but how do you then get to religon? how do you get from "A Being must have created this" to "AI can talk to him in my head, he talks back, he doesn't like gays, etc, etc"
this guy does not know about how galaxies collide into other galaxies...and 1 is heading right for us now...we have fact evidence of this...so this guy Frank knows nothing on astology
@mystisme plus...these idiots...if the earth is only 6000 years old....we would not be able to see most of all the stars and galaxies out there....cause the light would not hit us yet,on how many light years they are away
it s not because you do not understand something that the aswer is god,centuries ago we did nt understand infection or some deseas and it was imputable to god ,do we today? ofcourse not bye the way the god answer to somthing we do not yet understand or can t explain is an easy way out and a lazyness to seek the real aswer or may be people cant face their ingnorance on a subject and can t admit it
I always remember asking my mother what is eternity and she said outside time and space. I said I can't imagine that. She said don't worry about it the human brain was not evolved to understand eternity as it is not relevant for survival. She could have so easily said God. I am so glad that there are human brains out there that are really trying to understand it without looking for easy answers.
I am spoiled with my lack of ignorance, because once you hear a non-sensical fallacious argument for "god" then to hear it over and over again I tend to lose interest. Especially if the arguments have been debunked. I love watching these types of debates, but DAMN I want there to be some originality. I think if the same arguments haven't changed anything maybe it is time to rethink the presentation. Just sayin'
I will not state a position either way but in my course of watching this debate why does every "atheist" insult and accuse any "creationist" of being unintelligent? Is that how atheists rebuttal anyone who does not agree with their statements? If you like rock and I like country am I a retarded cunt? Grow up and act as intellectual as you claim to be (atheists) and conduct a dialogue! You are discrediting your belief and yourself personally. I don't see Hitchens acting this way at all.
universe n time hs no begining , even ancient greeks knew this
loly1969 1 week ago
The best source he can find for "DNA isn't chemistry, it's information" is a software designer (Bill Gates)?
Cause yeah, fuck the chemists. What do they know?
whybag 2 weeks ago
Why does this dude speak so loud??
cruzonsax 1 month ago
@cruzonsax He's trying to make up for weak arguments.
rossmetacraft 1 month ago
@chirectomy Boom. Point and case.
bensum9111 1 month ago
This conversation is ridiculous.
bensum9111 1 month ago
all that shit and we just finished c, noooo
sjewitt22 1 month ago
first of all. energy doesn't disappear. it changes form. and what is more probable, that the universe created itself or that a creator created himself then created the universe?
HAWKZTAR 2 months ago
There are not just TWO choices here... whilst he was saying there were only two choices I personally thought of 4 or 5 other choices....
Next since nobody is stating the universe came from nothing his whole point is useless...
Even if he were right (and he's not) then he's still left trying to explain where this God came from...and if it was created by something else from nothing! Same problem but now a God needs an explanation rather than a universe.
He's pandering to the least educated.
MumblingMickey 3 months ago
wow DNA, you complicated! God did it!!! So silly. Over time something simple can become complicated. Looking at the end result and gasping in its complexity, and ignoring the billions of steps prior, is just ignorant.
Johnf85 3 months ago
@chirectomy 1 who says plato is correct. and who are you to say what he is saying is disgusting. He is outside nature and he ordered the genocide of a people who desecrated the earth and shamed humanity. it's not objective because he is a the ultimate being who decides because he is supernatural. its not greater than him, he is the greatest. And all things are not possible by God. he can't make the finite infinite, its a contradiction in terms.
pheonixking52 3 months ago
@chirectomy He didnt change because he wasn't perfect, he changed because people were evil and had to pay for their sins but he loved them so he sent his son so that we didnt have to sacrifice or other laws. people weee the source not him.
pheonixking52 3 months ago
@chirectomy but how can you measure morals. if there is no ultimate standard of morals, it's only an opinion versus another. or a majority of one group vs another. for example, us Vs. Hitler, Hitler believes he was right, and was brought to justice by force from the opinions of many. seriously, morals are based on a moral standard not of humans, because its just opinion then
pheonixking52 3 months ago
It's "unlikely" that the universe would arrange itself in this way, granted. But it's just as unlikely as any other way. This is just how it happens to be. And our planet, which could be one of trillions of similar planets for all we know, just happens to have the conditions that've allowed lifeforms to develop to be smart enough to think, "This is unlikely to be an accident". Thankfully, though, that's just what it is. Quote all the maths you want; it means bollocks
Liffonmelsmork 4 months ago
Is it just me... or did anyone else have to keep turning down the volume during Turek's speech? The man's a goddam foghorn, and I swear he just kept getting louder.
jq747 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Didnt realize how small minded athiests are
mikempb23 5 months ago
Didnt realize how small minded athiests are :(
mikempb23 5 months ago
Oh look... the God of the gaps argument. Haven't heard that one before.
iz2sicc 5 months ago in playlist Theist Atheist Debate 3
@iz2sicc he said it's not, are you stupid?
pheonixking52 3 months ago
All he states is that the current universe would be impossible if the past were different! e.g. the comment on gravity refers to the fact that the Earth would be pulled into the sun, a configuration that would not exist if gravity were different in the first place.
07aku41if3 5 months ago
I find that Turek and most Christian debaters main arguments lies on: "The universe is much too complicated, therefore someone must have made it". And this is not an Ad hominem, because they even say it themselves.
The logical error is clearly large enough to blow my pants off.
blooper631 5 months ago
Very small, dense point containing all the energy in the universe is not nothing.
In fact this proves the law of the conservation of energy. The universe has forever, expanded and contracted in periods usually lasting only billionths of a second. Once every now and again the fundmental laws and rules of the universe is altered just enough in the furnace of all energy to allow rapid expansion to take place and energy to form matter and matter, atoms and so on. This is far more beautiful than god
Dgoosh1000 5 months ago
@Dgoosh1000 where did the small dense point come from? and where did the energy in that point come from? at some point, something had to come from nothing.
sirpercivalblakeney1 5 months ago
@sirpercivalblakeney1 That and admittedly my comment also, is just speculative. All the theories of the origin of the universe based on scientific reason and study dont require a god or prime mover. When you add god or say that there must be some sort of super dimensional being all you are doing is shoehorning in an extra factor that doesn't need to be there for the theory to work. And I can't even begin to think what sort of place the universe was ie. that small point, before the big bang.
Dgoosh1000 5 months ago
@sirpercivalblakeney1 how does something come from nothing. matter cannot be created or destroyed, a proven fact
pheonixking52 3 months ago
Nobody is atheist. "atheist" is a misnomer. For example, the Romans used to worship a being known as Ceasar as God. I have yet to hear a so called "atheist" deny that these ceasars, or Antiochus "another deity" existed
pianokid100 6 months ago
No Hitch here either. Move on
3234718 6 months ago 15
@3234718 lol thanks.
sxysuccubus 2 months ago
@sxysuccubus You're welcome. Or you can stay and listen to Frank's brilliant points
3234718 2 months ago
I know Turek, it's hard for you to understand with your little mind.
Jbear9 6 months ago
Right at the beginning he fails.
"Not even nothing can make nothing"
In quantum mechanics, if you have nothing, you have more energy than everything.
Nothing always has something in it.
topturkey2 6 months ago
@topturkey2 you really believe that??? that's not science my friend, that's a guess. Have you seen nothing have something in it scientifically? Good luck...
beto88keys 6 months ago
There is an answer as to what was before the big bang, since there is a character limit and I don't have enough room here to tell you about it, I can just tell you where I read about it, the book is The Fabric of the Cosmos, by Brian Greene, and towards the end of the book he brings up an interesting solution to the "before the big bang" problem, it involves String/M-theory and is very interesting
chrsbroski 6 months ago
"Gravity is just right for life" You disregard the mass amounts of the universe where life would die instantly.
CodeusaGames 7 months ago
This is exactly the same speech Turek gave at VCU. Same unfunny jokes n' all.
topstep 7 months ago
@topstep It's funny how he quotes bill gates, an atheist.
CodeusaGames 7 months ago
wow this guy is soo patronizing & annoying, He should stick to selling used cars..
paulspydar 7 months ago in playlist Frank Turek vs Christopher Hitchens (complete)1 to 14
so hes just arguing that life/the universe is so complex that is has to be GOD? or is there something more???
PimpMyParadigm 7 months ago
Note how these guys always talk in a loud voice. It is to make up for their lack of logical and empirical arguments.
fidomusic 7 months ago
Thank you for posting this, Aught3.
writersblock26 7 months ago
every single argument this man made here has been debunked OVER AND OVER again. why wont these people fucking listen?
eatingtacos000 7 months ago
@eatingtacos000 really??? by who??? I could say the same about the arguments presented by the atheist side. And again, the atheist resorts to name calling since they don't have any good arguments...yeah, they have arguments alright, good ones?? NOPE
beto88keys 6 months ago
Of the infinite possible Universes, ours was designed to support and propagate black holes. As a condition of these types of Universe, a small, totally insignificant amount of conditions for life are also produced.
D3maine 7 months ago
what an idiot.
why does hitch even 'debate' these morons?
fekinel 7 months ago
Ths guy just makes the same old unsubstantiated clames and quote mines.
AussieAtheist1 7 months ago
A dozen cherry picked quotes, a super annoying acronym, and a couple of terribly faulty analogies is the 'proof' that god exists. Turek is one of the biggest douche bags I've had the extreme misfortune of listening to.
phillnchill 7 months ago
@phillnchill and more name calling from the atheists...when one has no more arguments, resort to insults
beto88keys 6 months ago
0:59 Scientifically-proven supernatural phenomenon? WTF? Best oxymoron ever.
TheYipedo 7 months ago
@TheYipedo Well, Frank Turek is quoting US astronomist Robert Jastrow to make his point. Having been unable to find the publication in which Jastrow makes such an assertion, I am somewhat skeptical (no pun intended) of the attribution.
writersblock26 7 months ago
Listening to Turek it sounds to me like he's in the wrong debate. The group he should debate is the Answers in Genesis people. Turek just said that science is right about the big bang, right about the expanding universe, and right about the age of the universe. Does that mean he believes the age of the Earth is 4.5 billion years old? He mentions evolution, does he believe that species evolved over millions of years? If so, he needs to be debating with his biblical literalistic brothers.
cpqarray 7 months ago
@cpqarray Yep, he isn't a literalist, which put him a bit higher on the IQ scale than hardcore evangelicals. Probably around the retardation line above the creationists as Family Guy puts it. He just wants to prove that the Bible confirms scientific discoveries. Pretty much how most Muslims try to prove that the Big Bang is written in the Koran. Funny, huh? They can't all be right, but they can all be wrong. Hell, we can do the same thing for the Greek or the Norse religions if we wanted.
TheYipedo 7 months ago
@cpqarray
I agree with you, I am a believer. Most Christians just go by blind faith to believe the things that they're taught. but you cant judge the religion from the people. Every group has another group claiming to be them and are not. Most Christians say they're Christian, but that doesn't make you Christian. I wished more people that believed in god could watch these videos and learn more so they could defend what they believe.
TopGun12 7 months ago
"Life as we know it".... We are a product of these situations, of course it looks like it is perfect to make us. IT MADE US! It's like getting a nail and a hammer and thinking that The Great Hammer must have designed the nail.
TheSultan03 8 months ago
@SpongeFanGrl Everything is not made just by random chance. Maybe research Darwinian Natural Selection. Intricately designed? Like my wisdom teeth that came in sideways and had to be removed for a cost of $1200. Thanks God, for intricately designing my jaw bone.
MrBrational 8 months ago
Science can unravel the make believe. It's just that some people won't believe the truth because their ego depends on the make believe to be happy.
chikdada 8 months ago
Turek is already setting himself up for failure. He says if the universe was changed by the tiniest fraction of a degree, we wouldn't exist. If God is so powerful wouldn't he be able to make us exist in so many different environments and under so many different circumstances?
MrBrational 8 months ago
@MrBrational Damn fine point. Never heard that before. Smart.
TheSultan03 8 months ago
Why is Turek screaming the whole time?
Does he think that more volume makes his argument more valid?
TaoPiet 8 months ago
The supernatural, aka God, is only that which has not yet been unravelled by science.
chikdada 8 months ago
@chikdada science can't unravel make believe.
usukatlifegodiekthx 8 months ago
please SHUT UP turek you just know how to read statistics
He is just a speaker not a inteligent debater
Johnandvanessa 8 months ago
Turek and Hitchens, reason that I'm a deist with some doubts and not a theist or 'for sure there is no god' atheists. (most atheists are agnostic atheists, meaning they don't know the existence of a god due to lack of evidence.
espakor 8 months ago
WHAT IS ALL THIS BOLLOCKS ,...that something came from nothing ,i dont think there is a scientist alive that thinks this ,has this clown every studied quantum psychics ,as far a i know,...the last time i looked the theory was that ,everything came from a singularity ,AMEN
badslabber 8 months ago
Only the ultranatural can explain the supernatural. If you're satisfied with that answer, it's because you don't recognise that it's a non-answer
thealchemist1111 8 months ago
this guy is like the rainman. he just loves statistics.
cirosuperiore 8 months ago
"Cloud evolution". WHAT an idiot.
Traceoffate 8 months ago
How does this guy mannage to be both unreasonably enthusiastic and unbelievably boring?
Nerd042 8 months ago
@Nerd042 I assume u mean, "Turdek." To answer your question, he talks to his audience like they are fucking five, and despite talking fast he doesn't impart that much information per minute. He seems inclined to the bells and whistles of body language and examples, and less inclined the basic dictates of valid argument and logic...he creates some rational fallacies in his arguements, but he doesn't understand that.
saltjunkie77 8 months ago
@saltjunkie77 I think you may honestly have a real point here. Take another one of Hitchens' opponents, for example, Alister McGrath. He talks in a really strange way too, and moves around a lot.
(''TURDek'' haha!)
Nerd042 8 months ago
I this dude serious? WTF? Someone should put him out of his misery....
Nerd042 8 months ago
The day we stop attacking the people themselves and start respecting the arguments, maybe we could actually make progress.
landonavary 8 months ago
HURR DURR IT CANT BE SPLAINED BY THE NATURAL IT MUS BE SUPER NATURAL
FrothySoda 8 months ago
@FrothySoda HERPITY DERP, GAWD DIDDED IT
Corneilius5188 8 months ago
Same old arguments offered by Turek which have been refuted time and time again
squeezycheeseypeas 8 months ago
There are no divine messages that can be deduced from nature, certainly not any of the claims of religion, nothing science hasn't already discovered.
If we can think of better (safer) ways to evolve all biotic life in harmonious community (e.g. GMO foods, natural hybridization, medicine, socialism& democracy, animal taming, environmental preservation, humanitarian exploits, natural disaster preparedness, etc.), then we are greater designers than the supposed original designer.
elitevestigator 8 months ago
Messages only come from minds, not natural laws
elitevestigator 8 months ago
He may be making good points - however he sounds so whiny and is shouting so much that I am not interested...
jagara1 9 months ago
If the beach message had been written in Arabic, he'd have said it was the waves, or more repugnant still, the devil.
the whole "tape; one inch" argument is logically fallacious, hello! we happen to live in this Universe with its figures and laws... that doesn't lead to the jump that it was created for us. it's only evidence for itself, that it happens to have those laws and figures. Creation is an ARTistic perspective caused by Death anxiety.
LuminousTruth 9 months ago
Skip to 8.59 if you don't want to listen to the ramblings of a delusional, illogical history denier
jjb123321 9 months ago
This guys basic argument can be put down with basic statistic theory. He keeps saying basically that look how complex this is, it has to have predetermination! No dude, you have the same odd to roll 100 random numbers as you do rolling 1,2,3,4,5,6 sequentially 17 times.
Ostego938 9 months ago
One word to describe Mr. Turek: Obfuscatory. Or maybe quote-miner. He deliberately takes the scientific evidence presented and twists it to suit his argument. In other words, every theist ever.
davethehostage 9 months ago 2
I really tire when second rate apologists use the argument that something cannot come from nothing. Here's a clue: NOBODY IS SAYING THAT. Hope that helps.
BlankVellum 9 months ago
@BlankVellum Something cannot come from nothing. That's a scientfic fact. Period. Go buy a white canvass, paint, and paint brush and lock it in a room someplace where nobody can bother it, and see if it paints itself.
Legend1One 9 months ago
@Legend1One First of all, you cannot assert this a priori. Quantum uncertainty entails some very strange inversions of logic. Second, my point was that no reputable cosmologist or physicist is saying that something came from nothing. It's a strawman.
BlankVellum 9 months ago
If mental illness is identified as a handicap, Frank Turek would have a handicap license plate and be able to park in front of Wal-Mart.
Hornadayfan 9 months ago 2
Rofl, this guy is a joke. This guy really thinks that scientist are climbing a mountain on top of which the theologians are. Where they think they are.
Did Bible tell us how to do brain surgery? Did your bible tell you how to build the computer you are reading this text though. I think not. If we would ditch all of this religious beliefs we could feed the hungry. Just by melting the Vatican every one on the world could have a house to live in.
DonnZ0r 9 months ago
I find Frank Turek's claims incredibly arrogant. He argues that because humans cannot conceive of 'something coming from nothing', that because of the rules of our language with regard to concepts like 'natural' and 'supernatural', god must exist. Since the cosmos is bound by our cognitive limitations.
That a creator must exist because the rules of one language, of one species, on one insignificant little planet, in one galaxy amongst billions in this universe says so, is unbelievably arrogant.
xincrii 10 months ago 12
@xincrii Not just arrogant, but ignorant.
jrwilson98 9 months ago
@xincrii it's not just language limitations you are talking about, it's physical law limitations...Frank Turek is arrogant? Did you see who is debating and how Hitchens comes across??? No worst blind than the one that doesn't want to see....
beto88keys 6 months ago
@beto88keys turek is very arrogant like all creationist as they claim to have all the answers to questions science hasn't answered yet,god did it,no evidence no research no testing,just god did it.THAT is extremely arrogant to claim to have the answers to everything.
Flash13Magic 6 months ago
@Flash13Magic I get that his delivery may be perceived as cocky but the fact that you know the answers does not make you arrogant, it's confidence. If he didn't provide confident answers people would be commenting on how the bible doesn't speak confidently about matters...so darn if you do and darn if you don't, right?
beto88keys 6 months ago
@beto88keys i have no problem with confidence,its admirable,even cocky to an extent is ok without bordering on arrogance.however to claim to have the answers to all life's questions by simply saying ''god'' is ridiculous.its not even simple confidence because he constantly uses arguments that have been refuted time and time again yet he continues to use them,thats idiotic.he isn't humble enough to admit if he is wrong and remove the lies from his argument.
Flash13Magic 6 months ago
@Flash13Magic well, he continues to use the same arguments because, let's face it, atheists have not gotten better at refuting them. They have been refuted many times, I grant you that. But how many times have they been successful? You claim that this guy is arrogant, however, you calling an argument idiotic IS arrogant. That implies that they are inferior and not worthy to be debating you or your candidate...you will be measured they way you measure others...
beto88keys 6 months ago
@beto88keys but to continue to use arguments that have not only been refuted but that are completely wrong is idiotic.i never said anything about being inferior etc,that is your perception of how you interpreted me calling his argument,not him,idiotic.if you were driving a car and it kept braking down because of the way you were driving it and your mechanic told you how to stop this from happening.would you call that person idiotic if the car broke down again for the same reason?
Flash13Magic 6 months ago
@beto88keys Wrong. How can Atheists get "better" at refuting Christian claims when the Christians constantly argue the same topics over and over and over and over again? There's no need to get better. You guys can't even comprehend the original refute.
iz2sicc 5 months ago in playlist Theist Atheist Debate
@iz2sicc Atheists argue evolution and the same things over and over, atheists are no smarter or better. actually Atheists have more incomplete thoughts than Theists.
pheonixking52 3 months ago
If you quote a thousand theories as evidence to justify god, you're still an idiot.
fromhereon 10 months ago 2
@fromhereon and if you quote a thousand pieces of evidence to justify God's existence, you're still an atheist..................because that's what you want to be.
334286 9 months ago
This man has no understanding of science nor does he understand the definition of atheism. Either that, or he's intellectually dishonest to make money for his shit book.
Shawnzy 10 months ago
@Shawnzy What is the definition of Atheism? And my second question is: can Atheism be disproven?
Legend1One 9 months ago
This guy is full of Babble.
BetoTheButcher 10 months ago
@BetoTheButcher But he's not nearly as big a babbler as Hitchens, as I'm sure you would agree.
Legend1One 9 months ago
"Cloud evolution"?!?! This guy's a joke.
jordaniac89 10 months ago
His argument might be valid if we found a sequence of prime numbers or a "hey guys it was me" in our DNA structure
lockandkeynes 10 months ago
i don't know whether to dislike this because Turek is just that annoying or like it for its ability to show just how flawed Tureks arguments are
Neall07 10 months ago 8
@Neall07 Point out the flaws.
trrose9485 6 months ago
All he did was promote his book to launder money out of some gullible members of the audience. How typically Christian.
Zolio6 10 months ago
Almost hipnotic, very persuasive, but I can throw All arguments in Deism (pit)..............So let's say I'm A Deist, but still & very much Anti-Theist
Aleksamson 10 months ago
This Frank guy is annoying.
SyKmGl 11 months ago
i thought the big bang happened because like black holes it reached it's capacity then exploded.
mikecappa 11 months ago
most of yall commenting are so ignorant. for get what you have been taught and come up with your own conclusion. its all been proven one way or another.
jzboykin 11 months ago
7:04 - Ok, he may be silly, but he made me burst my gut laughing so hard. That was funny.
Mimi2591 11 months ago
6:00 - That is the stupidest example I have ever heard. I can't believe he said that.
Mimi2591 11 months ago
Comment removed
Mimi2591 11 months ago
1:03 - "Supernatural forces at work is now I think a scientifically proven fact".
... Science: the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment.
We can't witness, observe, or experiment with something supernatural. Am I wrong?
Mimi2591 11 months ago
the most turek does is provide an explanation for agnosticism. but not christian insanity!!!
halflifeproductionz 11 months ago
"It's CLOUD EVOLUTION!"
Hrrothgar 11 months ago
@Hrrothgar i love how he makes ~10 jokes and 1-2 people laugh each time
mauroprovatos 11 months ago
You do realize most religious people (such as Dr. Turek) have social and personality defects right? It doesnt make a great case for religion at any rate. And then of course Mr. Hitchens is calm, witty, smart and logical.
shortfuse41 11 months ago
Killing the "fine-tuning" argument in 2 sentences:
Roughly 99.9% of the known universe is incapable of supporting any form of life. If an architect designed 100 homes, and 99 of them were unfit to be lived in, would you describe that architect's designs as "fine-tuned"?
garethac81 11 months ago
@garethac81 What about explaning thunder, diseases and earthquakes? Oh sorry I forgot, these have already been scientifically explained so religious people have moved on to what is currently unexplained. God has gone from being on Mount Olympus, to being in the sky, to being invisible and soon to be in another dimension or plane of existence to escape the burden of proof. The "fine-tuning" argument is just where they can hide now.
2CSST2 11 months ago
you can see hitchens in the background taking notes in preparation for countering this man's absurdities.
clamantuanguyan 1 year ago
OH MY SWEET ******!!!! How logical and plausible! Who let this guy in?!?
Kadathian 1 year ago
I can't wait to get to Hitchens. This guy sounds like a cheap lawyer.
chikdada 1 year ago 65
@chikdada Shit comment. Concentrate on substance rather than deliverance, I love Chris too but don't flippantly dismiss academics, otherwise there's no point in watching the debate (as a debate, rather than salivating over Hitch).
Feargface 11 months ago
@chikdada
While Hitchens is little more than a comedian; a joke.
AtheistTower 9 months ago
@chikdada Always the same old tactics, destroying the messenger to avoid the message.
raponte1955 9 months ago
@chikdada says the God-hating tool. You represent the idiocy of today.
Seigu007 8 months ago
@chikdada used car (stereotype) man
FUwogs 7 months ago
I think that most people find it difficult to accept the idea of mankind being alone in the universe. To many, it is probably just too frightening and seems without purpose. I think for those people, being cosseted in religion and a thought of eternal life in a heaven allows them to get through each day. At this point in time however, the price we are all paying for this "la-la-land" mentality is unacceptable and it is long overdue that we all grew up and took some responsibility.
707BIGGLES747 1 year ago 23
@707BIGGLES747 I agree with you on that my friend...one reason i believe that people tend to look upwards to god is because there is something inside of our mind, something so deep yet so disassociated with our ego-consciousness that it seems like something wholly seperate altogether...something we feel yet cannot understand. Deities, gods, higher beings, etc, undoubtedly are conceived of this.
ZenShroud1 1 year ago
@707BIGGLES747 Too true.
Mimi2591 11 months ago
@707BIGGLES747 Don't believe in extraterrestrial life? It's mathematically impossible for us to be the only life in the universe.
p.s. I might've misinterpreted your comment....Lol. :P
RockAustinDXtakerRk0 10 months ago
@707BIGGLES747
Sounds like atheists, who insist (without evidence) on the existence of other sentient beings in the universe; the universe couldn't possibly be made solely for humans, oh no - completely inconceivable.
AtheistTower 9 months ago
He makes himself look very insecure by shouting and gesturing like this. It may be that he is very insecure.
zissumanter 1 year ago
He elaborates on the same points and quotes over and over as if he is creating a solid argument when those arguments are non sequitur; drawing a line between big bang and personal Christian God with arbitrary made-up characteristics.
parquar 1 year ago
WHat is this... Something out of nothing bullshit Frank Turek keeps spewing.... Obviously no one was around at the time of the inceptino of the universe... Why does he claim difinitively that it was God. We don't know. Science tells us more and more each and every day. It's the reason we are using Youtube right now. Trust in the truth. Trust in science and reason, and human solidarity.
thenaj88 1 year ago
@thenaj88 Well, whatever the cause is; it can't be a naturalistic explanation, for nature didn't exist yet. So, ruling out naturalistic causes to the origin of the universe; we are forced to go outside the realm of the natural and into the supernatural.
seantaylor1334 1 year ago
I think turek misses the point its not about the existance of god, from what I have seen atheists dont really care; you can't prove it one way or the other, the atheistic debate seems to be more about whether our theistic bretheren have anything useful to say anymore, and considering the fact that theist spends the entire time quoting atheists so he can prove to an atheist that theisim still has something to say I would say hes losing, badly.
oddball111 1 year ago
If you actually research it you will find that the real evidence for evolution is hopeful at best.
123451417 1 year ago
I love how Turek qoutes all atheists for the evidence in his arguement. Huh? Gotta say Chris won this one and I'm not even a fan of his.
matt66dc 1 year ago
@matt66dc He does that to prove that even atheists who aren't idiots, can't deny certain evidence that points toward God. If he quoted only believers would you then conclude that he presented extremely solid arguments? I don't believe that. It's the content that makes an argument valid. Am I right?
123451417 1 year ago
Theists never come up with anything new in these debates. EVER. It's the same thing EVERY TIME. The ONLY argument that might make atheists think is the "fine tuning" argument. The library of congress example? Ridiculous..
bwconklin 1 year ago
I see Turek's point about the point of creation for everything, however, even if it were a god who created everything, it's ignorant to think that he would focus solely on humans and earth when we have an idea of how immense the universe is.
jimmihshs 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The universe didn't come from nothing. Turek hasn't a clue.
sjgibby14 1 year ago
If he's going to argue causality, he could at least face the rather obvious conclusion that life formed after the universe, thus life is adapted to the physical laws of this universe, rather than the reverse causality he is proposing whereby the conditions of the universe are dictated by some inherent need for life.
Of course, that requires a certain rationality.
blue1085 1 year ago
when does he shut up?
paranoidandroid97 1 year ago
if you want to know who created god we can discuss during question time!!!!!!!!!
Why not START there and win the debate. no, i'll just smooth over the missing foundation stone upon which everything else i say depends
adam1885282 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Frank Turek seems very angry all the time. He can't get a point across without shouting. He just makes himself look like a cunt.
kingdomofdalriada 1 year ago
DNA is great evidence for a Creator. It's a language and language comes from an intelligent mind. Certainly NOT from a dead mindless universe!
robleavy1 1 year ago
@robleavy1 DNA is one of the most important peices of evidence for Evolution. DNA is completely imperfect and we have many DNA sequences that contribute nothing to our biology, they are infact fossil DNA sequences.
kingdomofdalriada 1 year ago
@kingdomofdalriada With all due respect, it still amazes me how anyone could believe a lifeless, mindless universe (matter) created thinking, talking emotional matter. Of course you have to believe first that the initial lifeless universe came from nothing that was created by no one. 0+0 = 0 not 589 (for example) . However, in essence, that is the logic you have [0+0= 589] when you take God out of the equation.
robleavy1 1 year ago
@robleavy1 Life didnt just appear, it was not 0+0 = 589. It was more like 0 +1 = 1 , 1+1 = 2 etc. You cleaerly have nmot looked at the evidence instead you have just opened you big American, Christian gob and shown your ignorance.
kingdomofdalriada 1 year ago
@robleavy1 With all due respect, it still amazes me how anyone could believe a timeless eternal being outside of time and space created thinking, talking emotional matter. Of course you have to believe first that the timeless eternal being outside of time and space came from nothing that was created by no one. 0+0 = 0 not 589 (for example) . However, in essence, that is the logic you have [0+0= 589] when you talk nonsense.
TheTomtompiper 1 year ago
@robleavy1 Alright but how do you then get to religon? how do you get from "A Being must have created this" to "AI can talk to him in my head, he talks back, he doesn't like gays, etc, etc"
shandcunt 1 year ago
@robleavy1
False, your unintelligent mind just produced some mind numbing language.
atombond 8 months ago
Comment removed
TheBeardedJeffersons 1 year ago
this guy does not know about how galaxies collide into other galaxies...and 1 is heading right for us now...we have fact evidence of this...so this guy Frank knows nothing on astology
chucka59 1 year ago
@chucka59 or pretend to not know to make is point but some one who knows astronomie like me he is just a clown to my eyes
mystisme 1 year ago
@mystisme exactly...more morons with no knowledge talking out his ass
and i ment astronomy..:P
chucka59 1 year ago
@chucka59 thanks to ecknowleg my say
mystisme 1 year ago
@mystisme no problem...peace...and keep thinking,and watching the sky....:o)
chucka59 1 year ago
@mystisme plus...these idiots...if the earth is only 6000 years old....we would not be able to see most of all the stars and galaxies out there....cause the light would not hit us yet,on how many light years they are away
chucka59 1 year ago
it s not because you do not understand something that the aswer is god,centuries ago we did nt understand infection or some deseas and it was imputable to god ,do we today? ofcourse not bye the way the god answer to somthing we do not yet understand or can t explain is an easy way out and a lazyness to seek the real aswer or may be people cant face their ingnorance on a subject and can t admit it
mystisme 1 year ago
I always remember asking my mother what is eternity and she said outside time and space. I said I can't imagine that. She said don't worry about it the human brain was not evolved to understand eternity as it is not relevant for survival. She could have so easily said God. I am so glad that there are human brains out there that are really trying to understand it without looking for easy answers.
Wiselady16 1 year ago
This Turek nothing is a prime example of nothing coming from nothing.
arktiro 1 year ago
I am spoiled with my lack of ignorance, because once you hear a non-sensical fallacious argument for "god" then to hear it over and over again I tend to lose interest. Especially if the arguments have been debunked. I love watching these types of debates, but DAMN I want there to be some originality. I think if the same arguments haven't changed anything maybe it is time to rethink the presentation. Just sayin'
Thayer79 1 year ago
I will not state a position either way but in my course of watching this debate why does every "atheist" insult and accuse any "creationist" of being unintelligent? Is that how atheists rebuttal anyone who does not agree with their statements? If you like rock and I like country am I a retarded cunt? Grow up and act as intellectual as you claim to be (atheists) and conduct a dialogue! You are discrediting your belief and yourself personally. I don't see Hitchens acting this way at all.
phunksound 1 year ago