Added: 3 years ago
From: Thunderf00t
Views: 337,122
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (6,653)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • I've just shared the last few minutes with whoever I can, HOWever I can. Brilliant stuff

  • FEAR THE BUNNY

  • The last two minutes are some of Tfoot's best stuff.

  • The creatards chose a fat repulsive CGI character to sell their snake oil?

  • I am offended by this video. I am a strong believer in time ninjas and your flippant disregard for the existence of time ninjas demonstrates ignorance. Time ninjas exist and I have a book to prove it!

  • @thepetman Wow, we share the same thoughts! Should we set up a place where we can gather other sharing our beliefs and maybe later on, when there's enough of them, we can get some money from them?

  • @thepetman I'll sell you a PHD in time ninjas aswell :P

  • Honestly, wouldnt mind a few ethernities.

  • "The first ten million years were the worst, and the second ten million years, they were the worst too. The third ten million I didn't enjoy at all. After that I went into a bit of a decline."

  • loved your message at the end, totally what I live by.

  • Beautiful message.

  • A battle between Space Mushrooms and Time Ninjas... I need to go call Hollywood.

  • Macro-evolution is a great number of micro-evolutions over an extended time period. A lot of small changes constitute to a big change. Or is that too much for creationists to grasp?

  • @icikle Well their usual response is :

    *put fingers in ears*

    LA LA LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU

    *Pull fingers out"

    So as I was saying, you're wrong.

  • Pretty simple folks, macro evolution happens because of micro evolution. It's pretty much an inescapable fact. The statements made in the creationist video are paramount to saying "Centimeters are groovy and all, but I find the belief in meters evil. Evil, I tells ya!" Ammo for you guys, spread the word.

  • whats the film that thunderf00t keeps bashing is called?

  • 05:54 I always thought that religion was made to make you want to be a more virtuous person, not reward you for doing nothing. I would honestly much prefer living a life of doing good and being the best I can be rather than be accepted into eternal life just for believing. Guess it's because people are lazy and don't want to do anything good or change themselves which makes it a selling point.

  • You are epic! Am gonna show this video to the jehovah girl who visits me:) She might open her eyes..

  • How come every - and I mean EVERY - atheist engaged in atheism / religion debates that i know uses that same picture of god from Monty Python ?

    There must be some unspoken agreement about that.

  • @skewCZ What and you don't believe Brian is the messiah?

  • @skewCZ Because it's kindof funny--even to those of us who are not atheist.

  • How about that slide saying "Repent, Turn from sin, DENY YOURSELF, Live for christ, then the lightswitch goes on." That sums it up right there. In order for christianity to become acceptable, you first have to decide that so far your life has been a complete lie, that you are a worthless abomination, that you could never hope to be anything but a worthless abomination, then shut down completely. Then on reboot, the virus will successfully infect your bios.

  • I don't want to die... too many qustions, too much to learn and understand.

    Must find a cure...!!

  • 9:06 and on almost made me cry that was beutiful and you should be a motivational speeker

  • Zero research for that matter. Every university, minus a certain few, rely on hard work, long hours and I could go on and on but creationism relies on nothing. Just like believing in God requires no discipline.

  • Creationism relies solely on Faith and believing someone else's OPINION. there is no discipline, sweat equity, research by different scientific fields or ANY work for that matter to gain any sort of truth. I.e. The Archaeologist spending 3 months in a desert digging -- handing off a fossil to anthropologist-- to a biologist-- to a physicist-- to a chemist-- etc-- society.

  • FEAR THE BUNNY!

    Lol'd at this...why?

  • 4:18 but I thought that's what really happened :O

  • I actually want to hear the story now of how the universe was created by space mushrooms and time ninjas. Am I weird?

  • @arch571332 No. You're awesome.

  • @arch571332

    In the beginning, there were 2 parallel dimensions: The space dimension, inhabited by Space mushrooms armed with toxic spores and steel-hard shroom swords, led by Big Spore, whose toxic spores would cause a time ninja a slow, painful death on contact, and the time ninjas, armed with many envenomed steel weapons and led by Hokage Jikan, master of the Time Ninja-To. Suddenly, Big Spore farted, and his spores wafted over to the time dimension and killed Hokage Jikan's Mahjong buddy.

  • @arch571332

    Sorry, and the time dimension inhabited by time ninjas. Anyway, Hokage Jikan was furious about the death of his Mahjong buddy, so he sent his other 2 Mahjong buddies to shoot Prince Little Shroom, son of Big Spore, with their Yumi Bows and fungicide-tipped arrows for revenge, which they did. They then got a few rounds of sake on Hokage Jikan's yen as a reward. Big Spore was furious. He then declared open war on the time ninjas for murdering his son.

  • @arch571332

    They decided to fight at the midpoint between the space and time dimensions, so nobody would have the homefield advantage. The space mushrooms drew their shroom swords, and the time ninjas drew their time ninja-tos. Both groups were so well-trained that they all attacked in perfect unison with their teammates. When they charged and took a swing at each other, in perfect unison, their blades all clashed together simultaneously in mid-void, releasing threads of space-time fabric.

  • @arch571332

    These space-time threads wove themselves together and formed an impenetrable shield between the space and time dimensions called the space-time continuum. It also spawned Ethl, an immortal 3-legged aardvark. The space mushrooms and time ninjas decided to have a peace treaty, since they couldn't attack each other through the space-time force-field. Ethl was overjoyed, so he did a little happy dance. The happy dance gave him gas, so he farted on a lighter flame.

  • @arch571332

    Ethl's fire-fart spawned the universe and all that inhabits it as it cooled and expanded across the space-time barrier, becoming embedded within it. Since the space mushrooms and time ninjas live in different dimensions from this dimension, there is no way to see them. Ethl also can't be seen because he transcends the space-time continuum.

  • @arch571332

    Ethl decided to change his name to Yahweh, and rule over the humans. Since Ethl was a total dick, he would afflict them with the most terrible curses imaginable, and then promise them a way to escape from it all and have eternal life if they follow the ridiculous and sadistic set of rules he gave them, occasionally interspersed with semi-effective tips on how to elude a few of the many diseases and other scourges he imposed upon them for his own sick amusement.

  • @arch571332

    And so ends the story of how the battle of space mushrooms and time ninjas created the space-time continuum and the aarvark's little happy dance inhabited that space-time continuum with the planets and stars etc. of the universe according to the Book of Genesis.

  • @thegameulost You should write a movie script.

  • Okay, one thing that threw me off in the creationist video within the video...

    ... what the hell does accountability have to do with believing in evolution?

  • It reminds me about: "The last answer", a short story made by Isaac Asimov. Another great video, thunderf00t ;)

  • If Christianity did say that we were created in a battle between space mushrooms and time ninjas, I would be a Christian.

  • Well said friend watching your bids is making my brain swell with info,TY for these bids.

  • Poetic mate! It's not often I come by other so comfortable with their mortality! A couple months ago I was pondering a similar thought; I realised that the energy that makes me solid and real was there, at the "big bang". Sure, my consciousness is limited, but what I what makes me what I am is always part of the story. But for a short glimpse of time, it all came together, to experience my joy, love, my education; the birth of my children! This was truly uplifting vid! Thanks!

  • a good example is the mammalian ear. Reptiles had 2 ear bones and an extra jawbone, and in transitional fossils between, the jawbone gradually, over many millions of years, moves up and becomes our third inner ear bone.

    a developmental history like this can be built for every bone, nerve, and muscle in the body of us or any other form of life, and it perfectly matches the family tree revealed by fossils, DNA, and the geographical distribution of species

  • wow I just finished an awesome doco on the DNA evidence for a family tree and the testable predictions made therein

    "Evolution: Genetic Evidence - Endogenous RetroVirus" or /watch?v=qh7OclPDN_s

  • when has mutation observable by humans ever been benificial. in that case those with down syndrome are more advanced than us. also, why is it the crockodile has stayed relatively the same for "millions of years" while other animals changed dramatically? are crockadiles so advanced they don't need to adapt? are their brains more developed than ours?

  • @chipan9191

    You have misrepresented the things you have brought up to a degree so unfathomably retarded, I can only assume you were a Bible-Belt homeschooled student.

    Ideally, you would attempt to learn more about evolutions basics before opening your mouth a second time.

  • @KajexFiredrake great logic, explains a lot... just what i would expect from a debate from an athiest. you're stupid so i don't need to refute anything or explain anything. great, goes well with the free speach video he posted except that it completely contradicts it but w/e.

  • @chipan9191

    "i don't need to refute anything or explain anything"

    It's amusing that you think you'd be able to.

  • @KajexFiredrake it's amusing that you think i know nothing just because of my religous background. not all those who believe in creation are stupid they just see that evelution is based on the assumption the earth is billions of years old based off of dating methods they know to be inaccurate. and the fact that you think you don't need to explain anything just shows you have no evidence you can explain and your beliefs are just faith

  • @chipan9191 *bigger brains doesn't = more advanced

    *all life currently living has been evolving for the same amount of time

    *Just one example of witnessed beneficial mutations is bacteria becoming resistant to drugs, many more examples exist.

    *life adapts to it's environment through mutation, replication, natural selection.

    *if a population has spread into differing environments, some populations will change rapidly while others stay pretty much the same (like your crocodile, or bacteria)

  • @HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke no no no! you can't say developing immunity to disease is a kind of evelution! that's like saying double checking if you locked the door is improving the security system of your house. yes it helps you not get robbed so easily but it doesn't add anything that isn't already there. when you catch a disease your immuned system basically pays more attention to look and destroy that specific bacteria or virus IT DOESN'T CHANGE YOUR DNA. ignorance is no excuse.

  • @chipan9191 no we aren't talking about human immune systems getting stronger, if you have billions of bacteria and then kill 99.999% of them with chemical X, it's a great way to find those rare ones that happen to have the mutation of immunity to X. These few survivors replenish the population and that's how evolution works, survival of the most adapted to the environment.

  • doesn't add anything? this is a common creationist misconception that the total information content can't grow. The genome can get longer by an accidental copying mutation, so a section gets written twice, so instead of ggtcatc you might get ggtcgtcatc and then a further mutation to the second 'gtc' and bam, brand new information, ready to be tried out as a phenotype.

    "ignorance is no excuse" exactly, you shouldn't declare things impossible just because you don't understand the natural process

  • @HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke well in that matter, it's much easier for bacteria to survive than organisms. reproduce asexually seams to be much easier than finding a mate. they don't need as much energy, they adapt way easier than multicellular organisms in all reality they are better survivors. if evelution were deturmined by natural selection it seams it's been working backwords. why would life adapt to make surviving, eating reproducing etc harder? photosynthesis is easier than hunting.

  • @chipan9191 well dude, we can go over every interesting little detail you don't understand about the history of life, but you could also spend five minutes on google and learn about these things, and you SHOULD, before declaring these things as refuting evolution.

    again, you mustn't declare things impossible just because you don't understand them, it's a fallacy.

    there ARE advantages to the sexual mixing of genes, and to hunting as apposed to photosythesizing

  • @HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke no, what i find impossible is that scientists claim they understand these things when really it's a matter of guesswork. which is how science is, they come up with a hypothesis, try to prove the hypothesis, then the result of experimentation disproves it or makes it a possibility. sense scientists can't do such a grand experiment, they take their most likely theories and say they're fact skipping experimentation. they haven't proven things but drawn conclusion from discovery

  • @chipan9191 yes okay, that was actually pretty good lol, I agree with that. What I don't think you are taking into account is that when multiple discoveries point towards the same conclusion, it reinforces it's certainty. There are many, many ways we think evolution occurred and the earth is 4.5 billion years old etc. because there is loooots of evidence

  • @HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke not many ways*, many reasons. you know what I meant :P

  • @chipan9191 I don't like directing someone away to a video because I think we should make our arguments ourselves to show we understand them, but I can think of a great video on this to recommend, by Donexodus2, called "why every scientist accepts evolution"

    the same family tree we see in the fossil record is found in DNA, and in the geographical distribution of species (which is the method Darwin used to discover it)

  • @chipan9191 science doesn't confirm things to 100% certainty as a basic principle yes, but you underestimate how much we understand. I'm subscribed to New Scientist magazine, and alllll the time I read about things that only make sense if evolution through speciation and adaptation are true. Evolution is the backbone of modern biology, it's a done deal, a known fact through millions of discoveries that point exclusively to evolution.

  • @chipan9191 fourth message now I need to wait for your reply but I need to add, evolution DOES make experimentally testable predictions and has been observed in the lab, but since it happens by selective breeding, only things with very fast life cycles can be measurably changed on human timescales.

    This is how creationists get away with saying we haven't seen one thing change into another.

    we COULD breed a dog to be virtually a mouse given enough generations and a controlled breeding environment

  • @HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke DNA does not contain fossil record. that's total bs. yes lots of science starts that way, but if it's impossible to experiment it's impossible to prove, therfore evelution isn't science, it's making the best guess of how they think the universe came to be since they can't go past the guess stage of the scientific method. we can still make scientific discoveries, but guessing where we came from doesn't further us in science.

  • @chipan9191 yes DNA maps out the family tree! retrovirus's insert their codes into cells' DNA and from which species share which code sections you can see how far back common their common ancestor was. Did you read all four of my messages? it does make testable predictions that have passed the test in the lab, we have witnessed small scale evolution like speciation in things with fast life cycles.

  • @chipan9191 another testable prediction (that I can think of off the top of my head, there's entire scientific fields more) made by the fossil record was that an amphibian transitional form would be found in a certain geographical area at a certain rock depth (the time and place indicated by the gap in the fossil record), which was successfully discovered.

  • @HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke actually a retrovirus is an RNA virus that is duplicated in a host cell using the reverse transcriptase enzyme to produce DNA from its RNA genome. it doesn't insert codes into cells DNA. idk what you're trying to say about the amphibian. and my origonal point, none of this really furthers science so it's unfair to say creationists are trying to hold back science by trying to prove this wrong. all christians i know of are all for advancement, but this does not advance us

  • @chipan9191 to address the end of your message first, it's still worth investigating the universe where we don't expect technological advances in return from out research, for human curiosity, but medicine is one field that brings advancement through a thorough understanding of evolution.

    the start looks like a copypaste job from someone who repeatedly misspelled evolution, seems, and determined earlier, but granting that doesn't clash with the basic principle that they leave genetic markers

  • @chipan9191 flipping the script for a moment, what testable predictions have been made by creationism?

    what are the technological advancements provided by intelligent design research?

  • @HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke neither researching creationism or evolution has nor will ever make technological advances. here's how it works, our understanding of living organisms expands causing more evelutionary theories, not the other way around. they say history is important so we don't repeat mistakes but history before mankind doesn't effect us at all (unless you apply religion). and i don't pay attention when i type so sometimes i hit e instead of o when i type evolution so what?

  • @chipan9191

    I've seriously seen only one other person flail and fail worse than you have.

  • @chipan9191 there is plenty of useful information provided by research into the history of mankind, and life in general. It gives us insights into our psychology, physiology, society, vestigial mutations, into genetic engineering etc.

    As I already said, medicine would be in shambles if we didn't understand why and how we need to limit the use of antibiotics (it's because the bacteria evolve to become resistant)

    Even if learning about evolution doesn't benefit us at all, it still happened.

  • @chipan9191 now, I saw you tell someone else earlier that you reject the 4.5 billion year old earth because you don't trust the dating methods, even though many many dating methods give the same answer.

    okay so you're a young earth creationist, are you aware of how far into the stars we can see? 13 billion light years! There is light travelling towards us from stars that died billions of years ago, yet you place their creation at, what, 6 to 10 thousand years ago?

  • @HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke ok that's a good point you have there and i don't have the answer at this time so i'll look into it. just b/c i don't know doesn't mean the theory is flawed here's an example of something you don't know: when the big bang happened it spanded billions of light years in an instant. how does it defy einstiens theory of reletivity? if energy then could do that why not light during creation? and the only point you have the midicine but that's change that occures in a lifespan

  • @chipan9191 you are asking about the phase of the early universe known as 'inflation' and although cosmology is an interest of mine, I don't know the answer. It's something they predicted for some reason, perhaps with the math, that matches observations in the cosmic microwave background and stuff. Google or wikipedia 'inflation'

    "why not light during creation" well I know that early things were too hot for most particles and the universe was opaque, if that's what you mean.

  • (although I WAS just reading an article in New Scientist about how almost every model of inflation has predicted eternal inflation with a multiverse of spawning universes)

    en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_Big_B­ang#Inflationary_epoch

    here, I'm reading about inflation now too, check it out with me

  • @HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke multiverse? that's science fiction not fact. the theory of a multiverse, multiple universes that contain every possibility, is older than the big bang theory and next time use quotation not parenthises. when i said "why not light during creation" i meant light from stars billions of light years away defying einstiens theory of relativity during creation from the bible

  • @chipan9191 okay, you could say god used his powers on light to make it appear the universe is 13.72 billion years old, but you'd have to do that for every process we understand to take millions of years, and do you really believe in a trickster god?

    I should add that inflation didn't break the speed of light limit because the space in between objects was expanding, in this way objects CAN recede at faster than the speed of light.

  • @HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke well the way i take it God made everything that exists naturally in the world today as put in the bible, not exactly as it is now but every natural thing was made and over time changed in position example: the continents. and distance is relative? i don't think einstien covered that and nor did any other scientist

  • @chipan9191 ya distance can be relative to the motion of the observer, that was about the third most important contribution from Einstein. As you move around close to the speed of light, spacetime shrinks and stretches and morphs.

    Continental drift? that happens over millions of years, yet another example of evidence for a very old earth :)

  • @HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke uh i think you're confused. time is relative to mation not distance. as you're approaching the speed of light time slows down to the traveling object ralative to the observer. if an object goes at the speed of light it is unaffected by time. -einstiens theory of relativity. and the contanents could have split rapidly over some dramatic earth event, such as a global flood.

  • @chipan9191 time and distance are kind of the same thing, another one of Einstein's 'great unifications', Space-time.

    as a train moves at the speed of light down a track, it is compressed wafer thin (people on board wouldn't feel a thing). as it slows down pulling up to the station, it expands to it's real length again

  • (people on board the train see a similar thing happening to the lengths (distances) of things outside the train)

  • @HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke first off v=d/t not v=d/d. if they were the same thing velocity would always be the same since they cannot be measured in different numbers. second, that would mean objects can travel above the speed of light y can photons not do this? and what you describbed is the object itselfe compressing, not the area or distance in front of it. and how could this be concluded since the only thing we have been able to get that fast are particles?

  • @chipan9191 well, again, things can travel faster than light relative to things that are very far away, passed a lot of expanding space. Photons included. They just can't locally move through spacetime faster that the speed of light.

    what I described was the spacetime compressing, the object only compresses relative to the rest of the universe. People inside the train would measure the same dimensions to the train, and morphed dimensions for the rest of the universe

  • @HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke Oh I forgot your question at the end there, how can we measure that space actually warps.

    the first way it was confirmed experimentally was by measuring the light from stars around the sun during an eclipse, and seeing the stars change position, showing that our sun warps the space around it.

    in modern times we have been able to set up a laser triangle around the sun, and witness the angles to add up to less than 180 degrees, demonstrating curved space

  • ooo that still wasn't a perfect answer, you want evidence of the compression or stretching of distances, not just the warping of space. sec, thinking of examples...

  • (I wasn't sure where we moved on to distance being relative, but ya that's a well covered topic)

    If you were still referring to how things can expand faster than the speed of light in the inflation period, the rule is only that things can't move faster than the speed of light through the spacetime around them.

    if the spacetime between two objects is expanding, no rule is broken.

    even now, there are galaxies so far away that they are receding faster than the speed of light and so are unobservable

  • @HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke "if the spacetime between two objects is expanding, no rule is broken" that's a guess as we have not observed a world without space time and the fact that they guess that such a world can exist. we would have to break out of our world of space-time in order to make such a conclution. and that not only makes our theories a guess it makes them a guess built on a guess build on a guess... you cannot conclude the later w/o first proving the first

  • @chipan9191 well, the rule itself is also built on observations of just this universe :P

  • @chipan9191 oooo how about this! staying with the train example, even granting your objection that the train is being compressed and space isn't, someone on the inside of the train measures normal dimensions and distances inside the train, and shrunk distances outside it, and people outside the train measure normal distances outside and measure that the train is shrunk.

    two people measuring the same things but getting different distances, doesn't that plainly qualify for distance being relative?

  • (I expect you can do nothing but agree with that, and will ask for experimental evidence that this effect really occurs?)

  • @chipan9191 Okay, are you familiar with how timewarp works with light so that all observers see light moving at the speed of light, no matter their frame of reference?

    If a train moving at 99% light speed passes a stationary person, and turns on its headlights, the stationary person will see the trains light accelerating away from the train at 1% light speed, but the train will disagree with the DISTANCE of the light from the train (after a given time), having seen it leave at full light speed

  • the passengers will say that 1 second after turning on the headlights, the furthest photons are 1 light second away (the distance), and the stationary observer will disagree with that distance, measuring the light to be only 0.01 light second ahead of the train

  • @HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke even if you're right about the train thing compressing which idk to be true but i'll look into it, you only proved space inside an object can be greater than the space of the object itself, not that an object can move faster than the speed of light distorting distance by moving fast. now as for the headlight thing, true the person on the train would see the headlights moving full speed of light b/c time has slowed down enough that it appears to be moving that fast

  • @chipan9191 ya, and disagreements in time end up as disagreements in distance

  • @HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke nope not distance but the other factor of the equation, velocity. that lights velocity isn't as great as it looks compared to that of the train

  • @chipan9191 but the passengers and the stationary observer disagree on the distance that the photons are from the train 1 second after turning on the light

  • @HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke yes that's b/c time is the same to them and those on board see (i don't know the exact number but lets just say) 1 second is 100 years. therefore they see that the light is going faster b/c there's more time for it to get away from the train

  • @chipan9191 okay okay lol :P I still think I've demonstrated that time dilation will manifest as disagreements in distance, which should match to your comment questioning if distance is relative. lets go back to religioooon this seems irrelevant

  • @chipan9191 ANYWAY this suddenly seems irrelevant, lets go back to religion and belief in god being unjustified (unless you have more to ask on physics)

  • @HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke well physics is my favorite subject but to me it seams more probable that life is designed b/c it looks designed and the second law of thermodynamics states order cannot be created from disorder.

  • @chipan9191 I agree that life is somewhat designed, but by natural forces like the environments and selection pressures (actually as far as knowledge can go, I know this to be a fact, we just need to keep going and get into detail on the evidences to convince you)

    didn't we already deal with the 2nd law of thermodynamics? that may have been my other current debate. The earth is not a closed system, life doesn't disobey thermodynamics

  • @HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke no we didn't talk about it but life does not obey that low b/c it is orderly not b/c it's disorderly which is why forces of nature cannot create it and why we don't observe new life being created by anything other than life itself

  • @chipan9191 Ah okay. the 2nd law "in a close system, entropy (disorder) will always rise"

    the earth is not a closed system, we get our energy/order from the sun

  • closeD*

  • if you put the earth inside a giant impenetrable box, then yes all life would die and we would eventually freeze and all complex structures would slowly degrade to simpler things

  • until the point of 'thermodynamic equilibrium', where no more change at all will happen.

  • @HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke i agree with what you said but i'm stating that the desctructive forces of nature could not possibly construct something as complated as life therefore it must have been a force outside of nature and our known universe and it's laws

  • @chipan9191 well, life didn't start out so complicated, all you need is self replicating molecules and the process of evolution takes hold (which simply would happen in any self replicating, mutating system in a natural selection environment {like robots or programs or memes})

  • Comment removed

  • @HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke even the simplist lifeforms are so complicated we can't replicate them. and self replicating molecules? i would love some of those what are they? how do they form? where are they found in nature? also on another note there's an extreme lack of transition fossels. why? they should be everywhere but we can't find any. charles darwin himself was perplexed by this. instead of showing gradual changes fossel record shows dramatic changes.

  • @chipan9191 wooah slow down lol, before we explore the world of self replicating molecules I need to correct you that a 'lack of transitional fossils' is a creationist lie, to the max. there's literally millions, painting a beautiful picture of the history of life.

    in Darwin's day there weren't many uncovered yet, and he wasn't perplexed by it, he understood that. We now have way more transitional fossils than Darwin said we could reasonably hope to find

  • @HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke well it seams we've reached an impass on that matter which means i'll do some reasurch and get back to you

  • @chipan9191 lol k great :P

    I recommend Donexodus2's video 'why every scientist accepts evolution', an old favorite where I first learned about the inner ear bones example

  • (also AronRa's videos on 'the foundational falsehoods of creationism', he doesn't just debunk creationism, he goes into brilliantly clear details on evolutionary evidences)

  • @chipan9191 physics is also my favorite subject and has been since I was a child, but the last few years I've been focusing more into learning about evolution and religion and unjustified belief too.

  • Comment removed

  • (^this message? no it didn't need quotation marks instead of brackets, it was me talking not a quote)

  • For the most part, I like this. The one part that I have trouble with is the "accept your mortality" speil, which I have heard so many times before. I believe life would be much more enjoyable without the ticking clock that you know is there even though you can't see it. Some work better under that kind of pressure, some don't.

  • @kben0 I agree that it would be much more enjoyable to not worry about death, to be confident you will exist forever no matter what happens to your brain, but it's irrational to base your beliefs off what it would be enjoyable to believe.

    If it were okay to think like that, I would believe I was surrounded by naked women and had won the lotto.

    Beliefs should be based on what has been demonstrated to be true, not what it would be enjoyable to believe; that would be deceiving yourself

  • @A1pha2R3d

    > Religion really ̶d̶o̶e̶s̶ ̶s̶e̶e̶m̶ ̶l̶i̶k̶e̶ is a crazy cult.

    fix'd

  • 6:51 pwnt!

  • FEAR THE BUNNY.

    ... Where did you pick up that creationist video?

  • Brilliant last minute.

  • I've really taken those final words to heart. We don't know what lies on the other side, so we must use our lives to their fullest while we still have them. Death does indeed give our lives urgency and in turn gives it meaning and purpose. Once we realise what we want to do with our lives, we might as well get on with it. We do not know how long we have left to live...so yeah, thank you Thunderf00t for passing on those words of wisdom. :)

  • I highly value science, don't get me wrong, but that does not mean that I think of things like Buddhism or Taoism to be "fantasms and delusions" as you have implied at 9:09. Not all spiritualities or religions go against science, and I personally found a lot of value in Zen Buddhism and philosophical Taoism. I enjoyed all of your videos but I felt for this one, I had to point out that not all things that might fall under the umbrella of "religion" are necessarily bad, harmful, or wrong.

  • I must point out that it is not necessarily true that if you follow a religion that you are going to be devoid of meaning or purpose. I am a Zen Buddhist and I appreciate that this practice has helped me find meaning by being present in the moment. One of my biggest complaints is not that there are flaws in certain religions (there are plenty), but it is that people think that christians, especially extremeist christians, can represent people or the nature of other religions. 

  • I want to dedicate my life to become an immortal space pirate cyborg. That would be kewl.

  • What's with those ninjas, is that a comic or something?

  • ALL HAIL THE TIME NINJAS!!!

    And that bunny.

    great vid, never knew that logic could be so entertaining

  • Yeah, Jesus isn't my savior. Sorry to break that news to you.

  • 0:53 awww a bunny... oh sorry i just find bunnies more interesting than stupid creationists :P

    I still love these videos tho :D

  • @ 3:48

    Shit, Religion really set humanity back a thousand years?

    ...I wonder what might have been if not for that...

  • OMG im so tired of creationist lyng straight up and then asking for people to accept something without evidence. How on earth is that being honest.

  • I'd totally follow a religion about space mushrooms and time ninjas. That is badass!

  • I can't believe you so arrogantly dismissed time ninjas something laughable. I guarantee the time ninjas will have seen this video in the future like 10 years ago, and they aren't going to have been happy about it...

  • Question: Why is an obvious teenager sitting in a classroom with the alphabet printed on the wall? Are we to believe he is in kindergarten, where fairy tales come to life?

    I like this video, because it makes the original video look stupid..... which it is.

  • @nuorangejapan It is quite obvious actually. He is still in elementary school because he never learned basic biology or critical thinking.

  • 1:23 Why is there a cat in a basket on top of the fridge?

  • @DMZ6KG Time out.

  • @fenrirsilverwolf my point exactly, concidering I wouldn't remember if it was old or new I would still be happy.

  • I wouldn't mind immortality if I learned something new each day of it

  • @jesusisahugefaggot That's possible considering brains have a limited memory capacity. Eventually you'll just relearn old things you've forgotten.

  • hahaha space mushrooms and time ninjas, classic.

  • If christianity was about space mushrooms and time ninjas it'd be much more awesome. Give it a few years and they'll conveniently alter their faith to gain more followers ;)

  • I'd give Eve a dirty rib.

  • You have Yin and Yang in your picture as you talk about accepting mortallity as being something that is a good but Budhism is all about the accepting of and even striving for permanent death otherwise known as Nirvana.

  • @mandraxhair

    Yin and Yang is not a Buddhist symbol.

  • @mandraxhair

    You don't understand Buddhism

    Perfect peace is nott he same as saying permanent death, and acording to Buddhism can be acheived while you are still alive

  • Plus I've always wondered when people talk about God & immortality. Are they saying that God through my faith will grant me all I desire/deserve? Or are they just baiting me into following them & then when I die I become endentured to them for my eternal existence in which they can do to me whatever they please & I can't stop them because God has granted THEM & them alone w/ such power & the care-free playing field to on w/ us as the pawns!

  • Kind of odd that creationists use the word "Transitional" in the same context as Metamorphisis.

    Basically what they're asking for is a fossilised wolfman, vampire, mermaid etc. for them to accept evolution. Which is EXTREMELY ironic that this is coming from a group of people who happen to be promoting such myths & tales involving these sorts of fantastical creatures!

    So if I believe in the Wolfman he exist, but if there aren't any fosslised remains the Wolfman doesn't exist! What? o_O

  • Those Time Ninja's look fucking awesome!!

  • @NAMUKPL I know what the problem is, I just spoke my opinion, as an atheist. I would really like to have more time. And more. And more. Somebody to share this "eternal" life would be necessary, not to turn insane. I'm a little bit as Faust. BTW, creationist do in general take bible literally, including haven and hell as real "places", not transcendental state, and "afterlife" in some physical from.

  • @lordplenty let's say in short. Any believe is ok, they try make people better. Any fanatic groups is a big problem because they try change some one view point on "weird" or even some "magical" ways even if they dont have right and they cannot be sure what they saying is true or false ;)

  • @NAMUKPL I can pretty much agree with that. I don't care about who believes in what, as long they wont hurt others by either direct action, or indirect (miss-education can have catastrophic effect).

  • that bunny is just too cute:D

  • Isn't

    Donkey + Horse = Mule

    Macroevolution on a single generation time scale?

  • @whiteowl1415

    Ring species

  • @TheMrgoku1985

    Which is a form of marco evolution.

    It is an alteration from one species to another, the Mule does not have the same number of genes as either parent

  • @whiteowl1415

    I know 

  • @TheMrgoku1985

    Ok, first comment it was hard to tell if you were saying it didn't count because its a ring species or not

  • Not only did I enjoy this video from an intellectual standpoint, but I came out of it feeling happier about myself as a mortal human being. I... I don't think that's ever happened to me before.

  • 4:27

  • 7:16 The best thing is...ITS EXACTLY RIGHT!!!

  • the bunny is so cuteeee