For everyone that hates the music don't comment. Its well known and this video has been up for years. So stop complaining if thats all you have time in your life which is to complain about a well known fact.
@jdogg781517 Really. I have seen millions do that to. You seriously need an adjustment and be respectful of others. Treat people how you want to be treated.
Besides I kept this up cause it makes a statement and a cause. I am well aware that the music is not liked by many. So theres the door sir.
According to recorded history there were six well-established cultures or ‘civilizations’ at the time of Noah’s Flood. They were: Mesopotamia (Sumerian), Indus Valley, Egypt, the Minoan, the ‘Holy Land’ area, and China. Archaeological records such as ruins of cities, tools, pottery, skeletal remains, weapons, and other artifacts support the written records that survive. These records all show that humans and civilizations existed in almost all parts of the world from around 3500 BCE No Flood
which he WAS lying, the fruit DIDNT kill them, the snake was telling the truth. so god is the liar and satan is the one telling the truth. wtf?
now some say it DID kill them because they had eternal life til they ate the fruit and god kicked em out...well the FRUIT didnt kill them...GOD killed them (very slowly mind you. it took like 900 years.)
Schizophrenia is hearing actual voices in your head. The line between religion and mental illness is a fixed and resolute barrier that, surprisingly, very few religious people cross. Please leave the diagnosis of mental disorders to..oh...Psychologists!?
Also the music adds to the video in my opinion, and I don't see why all the bitching is about since I can hear the comedians talking just fine, and its during my mates on skype are talking.
Is it just me, or does anybody else find it odd that Jesus seems to have been a whole lot smarter than Bill Maher, Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett and Christopher Hitchens combined. Not that it is all that hard to be smarter than liars who pretend that entire universes magically appear. And you thought belief in the spaghetti monster was weird???
@crabbieappleton Either the universe is a result of deliberate conception, design and creation, or it magically appeared all by itself, just as either my computer is a result of deliberte conception, design and creation, or it magically appeared by itself. There is no 3rd "cosmological" option as you and other atheists pretend. Either someone designs something or they don't. There isn't a third option.
@richardaberdeen It's certainly easier to think that the choice you present is all there is, but there's no compelling reason to think so. Either the universe has been designed or it magically appeared? If this is truly what you think the conversation is, then good luck to you.
@crabbieappleton I've noticed you haven't actually provide a third alternative. This is because there is no third alternative to the rational mind. Either something is conceived of, designed and created or it magically appears all by itself. There is no third alternative to the rational mind, which in itself definitively proves atheists are liars and atheism is irrational. There is no evidence that motion, intelligence, "universal" laws or processes or universes can exist unto themselves.
@richardaberdeen The point is that your dichotomy is false. Atheists don't believe that the universe "magically appeared." Lawrence Krauss (yes, an atheist, but he's also speaking for current cosmological theory) has a great lecture on "A Universe from Nothing" (here on YouTube). I encourage you to watch it.
You're free to believe what you choose: I just think that it's a better conversation if each side engages the other in a spirit of intellectual honesty.
@crabbieappleton Bullshit. God by long held historical human language definition, is Whoever created the universe. Thus, anybody who claims to "disbelieve" in God is proposing instead, that the universe magically appeard all by itself. There is no 3rd option to the rational mind, which is why you continue to spout nonsense rather than providing a logical 3rd option, which you can't, because there isn't any. Atheism = gross superstition
@richardaberdeen You seem so confused as to how someone can believe the universe came from nothing, yet you conveniently ignore that you seem to think it is perfectly reasonable that god came from NOTHING.
By the way, you have absolutely no idea what superstition means!
@MrZeus7 BULLSHIT. God gave us the correct postulate of all science and reason, which is "before Abraham was, I
AM". An ETERNAL Creator doesn't come from nothing; try a dictionary. When you have a better explanation for the observable universal reality, you be sure and let God know how much wiser you are than him. But, be carefully about opening mouth and inserting foot, as you have so far. After all, it's better to be thought poorly educated than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.
@richardaberdeen God is a contingent being. If He wasn't, then there would be no argument about His existence. Don't come the ontological argument. It's a thousand years old, and it was discredited 250 years ago. Theists who go around giving lectures about Anselm's 5 proofs are charlatans. Read Hume before you try to play with the big boys.
@mcnesta80 You don't define God; God defines us and sets boundaries for us. We cannot escape the boundaries set by God and beyond our own tiny window, we have no idea how things work from true universal perspective, nor do we have any comprehension of the mind of God. That is what Einstein said and, that is what any moron who is half-way honest would likewise, say. God defines himself as "Before Abraham was, I AM". YOU DO NOT DEFINE GOD, CASE CLOSED. Who the hell are you to define God?
@richardaberdeen I never tried to define God, you argued He's necessary, I argued He's contingent. They're attributes. Here's a definition; "God is an omniscient, omnipotent, omnibenevolent, omnipresent being who created the universe. God as a philosophical concept was first explicitly defined by the Ancient Greeks and discredited by 19th Century science and philosophy. God persists as a mythological figure for most of the world's religions."...That should really annoy you.:-)
@mcnesta80 God defines himself as "Before Abraham was, I AM". This satisfies origins and provides a rational explanation for the universal reality. When you have a BETTER explanation, then I will bow down to you. Until such time, you are just another bullshitter pretending to know what you don't know, nor could possibly know. There is no evidence whatseover that the universe magically appeared without a designer, the bottom-line gross superstition atheism would have us believe. BULLSHIT !!!
@MrZeus7 SUPERSTITION=Conclusions not based on evidence. Atheism provides zero evidence for intelligence arising from non-intelligence or motion from non-motion. Athesim=the grossest of all know supersititions, clearly violating the known laws of physics, science and evidence. According to modern science, nothing that we can observe is "static". Everything human beings can observe is a "result" of a Higher Cause. You eliminate primary cause and there is no science or reason. BULLSHITTER.
@richardaberdeen There's been this thing called the enlightenment. Your arguments were formulated before the renaissance. Read Kant, there are two options a. a first cause b. never-ending causality. The big bang suggests a, but does not imply that the first cause is intelligent, eternal or necessary. It's a long way from first cause to theism. Oh, and it's only the first cause of four dimensional reality, there is a higher-dimensional causality (string theory).
@mcnesta80 There's no EVIDENCE of "enlightenment". Out of a so-called enlightenment arose British, French, Dutch, Spainish, American, other imperialism, a global slave trade, the American, French, Russian, Chinese and other revolutions, WWI, WWII, Vietnam, Iraq, etc and etc. Science and technology arising out of a so-called "enlightenment" resulted in WMD's and global mass pollution. Historians claim more died from violence in the 20th Century than all previous combined; some enlightenment.
@richardaberdeen the "enlightenment" refers to an historical period. If you prefer, call it the 18th and 19th centuries. I was mainly referring to the work of Voltaire, Hume, Kant, Hegel and Rousseau. There is no doubt that their work led to the evil you mention, kind of like how Christianity led to the Dark Ages.
@richardaberdeen Search youtube for "Ricky Gervais Hitler Nietzsche" for an insight into the connection between enlightenment philosophy and the evil done in its name. Mind you, Nietzsche basically invented post modernism, so I guess he's post enlightenment. He's particularly influenced by Hegel and Kant though.
@mcnesta80 Sorry, I don't believe in magically appearing universes, magically appearing intelligence from non-intelligence, magically appearing laws of physics, magically appearing processes, magically appearing santa clauses, tooth faires, spaghetti monsters and magically appearing little green men from Mars like Hitchens. Sorry, atheism requires way too much blind faith for me to believe. Atheism = Total Bullshit.
@richardaberdeen Why would you think that the people who wrote the Bible were any different from other playwrights / scriptwriters? They wrote their own ideas into the mouth of fictional characters like God, Jesus, angels & demons. If there was a real good god inspiring Genesis 22 then the angel would say, 'Stop, you are entirely mistaken, God never wanted animal or human sacrifice'. Bible writers wrote historical fiction long after the event. Try John W. Loftus, Robert M. Price, Dan Barker
@zytigon How is it that moder science behavior now agrees with Jesus, that what causes greed, hatred, prejudice, murder, rape, theft, false witness, slavery, war and other human oppression, arises from within us all - source, Britannica. How is it that even Richard Dawkins has an article on his website agreeing that what Jesus taught is morally accurate? How is it that Jesus keeps coming up correct every time, while everything you claim has no basis in either historical or scientific evidence?
@richardaberdeen Look at The negative confession on papyrus of Ani 1500BCE& Hammurabi code 1760. See wisdom commons or 'Trusting doubt' by Tarico. The Golden rule was around long before Jesus. God comes into the world but brings no new knowledge? God shouts down in Mark 1v11? but forgets to tell Jesus to wash his hands to remove bacteria & viruses so Mark 7 has Jesus not wash before a meal. The Bible is proto thought. Compare John 20v22 with ancient Egyptian belief that breath = spirit
@zytigon This is no relevance to me. I am not a Christian and I am neither defending Christianity, creationism or so-called "intellgent design" theories. God creates life to adapt and change so that life can survive. That is correctly called "life in transition", not evolution. You can bitch and moan and pretend all you want, but you are pretending that "evolution" is some sort of magically existing process unto itself, which is bullshit and, the term itself is worthless and misleading.
@richardaberdeen Have you read Richard Dawkins 'The greatest show on earth'. In the preface he writes, 'This book is my personal summary of the evidence that the 'theory' of evolution is actually a fact- as incontrovertible a fact as any in science. Elsewhere in the book he admits there is still much to discover about how it happened, how did chemicals become living organisms. Maybe you'd like to explain why your God lets so many suffer so much. Is your God just dark matter energy or something?
@zytigon What Dawkins says means nothing to me. According to Dawkins, the "universe represents nothing but blind pitiless indifference". If this was true, there would be no such thing as people like Jesus, Gandhi, Schweitzer, Keller, MLK, Chavez or Rosa Parks. Dawkins is an obvious liar.
@richardaberdeen The Bible has Jesus say, 'Do not judge / do not condemn others, do not call people nasty names like, 'you fool'. Paul says, 'A spritual man judges all things'. The meaning I take, interpolating, is that you should be specific & judge the individual action/ idea in terms of your emotions/feelings. Neither the Bible writers nor Jesus stuck to this rule. However applying it to your comment about Dawkins, surely you mean that ' you think he is mistaken about an absence of God'.
@zytigon You seem to have a problem with basic English. To "judge" in the sense of the Jesus teaching, is to "condemn". Paul also says in Romans, to "judge" someone else, that is, to condemn someone, is inexcusable and, to do so is to freely admit your own guilt, for all have sinned. In the other instance, to "judge" means to "discern", such as to "judge" that a true teaching is better than a false teaching. As I noted previously, you need to go back to elementary school and start over.
@richardaberdeen U.K government has made judgements about what behaviour is unacceptable in this society & written those decisions as 2011 UK law. The idea that you can't make judgements is nonsense. People who break U.K law are doing things they should not, things which are antisocial, destructive, careless, cruel, abusive. I agree with the laws. To condemn such bad behaviour is a good praiseworthy thing to do, . sin=breaking Bible codes? The current aim now is to comply with U.K regulation
@zytigon You seem to have a significant problem with ego, admitting when you are grossly in error. To "judge" has several DIFFERENT meanings, you can look it up for yourself. As I already explained, according to Jesus, it is very wrong to condemn someone else, for having the same faults that we ourselves have. This is an entirely different meaning than to "judge" between true and false, as to "discern". These are two entirely different meanings, which any moron knows.
@richardaberdeen I don't approve of condemning people. I approve of condemning cruel, abusive behaviour. Nietzsche 'Thus spake Zarathustra' spoke through the imagined prophet Zarathustra ch6 'evermore did he see himself as the doer of one deed, madness, i call this: the exception reversed itself to the rule in him' . U.k law is different from O.T law because UK judges assessed on basis of health & safety & what works for a happy society. No matter what was done, people ought to aim to do good
@zytigon U.K. law, like all modern Western law, traces directly from the New Testament. Key players of the so-called ages of "reason" and "enlightenment" attended universities that required extensive biblical studies. It is crystal clear that the ideas of Rousseau, Voltaire, Marx, Locke, Jefferson and every other key player have their basis in both the Old and especially New Testament. For example, "to each according to need", the foundation of modern socialism, is lifted directly from Acts.
@richardaberdeen I agree that there were good points in the O.T. laws & N.T. I think they don't look like text messages from a supernatural God. Valerie Tarico proposes that the Hebrews probably had contact with prior law codes. Acts 7v22 says Moses was educated in all the wisdom of the Egyptians so he surely knew of their law codes, so why the need to get some up a Mt ? He forgot ? See Gary Greenberg '101myths of Bible'. If Moses had mentioned germ theory then that would've been a miracle.
@zytigon Nonsense. The reason the laws in the Bible are similar is because basic societal laws are historically similar all over the historical map, clearly demonstrating as the modern scientist Francis Collins has pointed out, as well as Jefferson, a shared designed human conscience; which is what the Bible says and where Jefferson got it. Similar laws against murder, adultery, theft and false witness are virtually universal and virtually all other laws are based on these 4 foundation ideas.
@richardaberdeen And, the reason the stories of the great flood, tower of babel and other stories in the Bible are found in other cultures, is because they are obviously varying stories of the same shared events. Abraham came from the city of Ur, not far south of Babylon, thus it is prefectly logical to assume that stories which ended up in the Bible are of the same events as found in other Mesopotamian literature. Anybody who says different has their head up their historical ass.
@richardaberdeen I agree that the Bible flood story could be based on Gilgamesh flood epic, which was only a localised event, not global. You mention Abraham who Gen11v28 says was of Ur of the Chaldeans. However the Chaldeans didn't come into existence until 8th - 6th C. BCE depending who you believe, an anachronism that makes scholars place the writing of Genesis during period of exile in 7th C ish.
@zytigon That is not correct. Nobody disputes that the story of Abraham is plausible, as a city once thought just a myth mentioned in the story in the middle of the desert, where historians assumed no city would be, was recently excavated. Ur was later called "Ur of the Chaldeas", just as today, "America" had inhabitants in it long before it was referred to as "America". No historian disputes that the city of Ur existed prior to Abraham; Ur was one of the oldest cities in ancient Mesopotamia.
@richardaberdeen '101 myths of the Bible' Gary Greenberg writes p 115 'The Mesopotamian city of Ur has a history dating back to at least the third millenium BCE but the association of the city with the Chaldees dates to only about the eighth c. BCE...little is know of Chaldea prior to eighth C...In 587 BC the Chaldeans conquered Judah & transferred Hebrew elite to Babylon... Heb Bible word for Chaldees is Chesdim, an Aramaic term. Aramaic started in ANE in 1st mill bc. Ur not in Gen10v10-12
@zytigon There is nothing in the Bible that is known to be a myth: Sources that agree with this include Britannica, Will Durant and even atheist Isaac Asimov. Many if not most historians believe that the stories in the Bible are based on real events. Most learned historians, including Durant and those who write for the Britannica, consider the Bible to be a more reliable source than other surrounding cultures--see Britannica; history of Mesopotamia and, history of Israel and the Hebrews.
@zytigon And, no historian, geologist or archeologist disputes that there was a great flood in the entire Mesopotamian region, not just a little "localized" flood as you pretend. The Hebrew word translated as "world" in the KJV English, also can refer to greater regional. You seem to have a very limited understanding of ancient history. Based on the known evidence, it is impossible to rationally conclude that the stories in the Bible are "myths", rather than actual events (source Britannica)
@richardaberdeen Returning to topic of judging. You can assess each human activity on many aspects, like the effects / consequencies on health & safety, social harmony. The important thing is to look at all the reasons for and all the reasons against each activity. This method is also used in assessing whether medicines are safe enough, or if pros outweigh cons. The judgement is revisited if new information comes to light. You have to judge if each reason is valid. Was the judgement a good one
@zytigon I don't know why you keep talking in circles around the obvious. Human Rights are obviousl "written on the hearts of humanity", just like the Bible says, just like Jefferson pointed out in the Declaration and, just as Francis Collins, a very educated man and great scientist, has pointed out. Similar and sometimes identical "golden rules" pop up all over the historical map, as well as similar basic laws, clearly demonstrating a shared designed human conscience.
@richardaberdeen It is a puzzling how Moses didn't make a better job of writing the 10 Cs then. Maybe God was using a different text messaging code which Moses mistook. Pity Moses didn't have an enigma machine. I admit it is nice sometimes to think of 'The Golden rule' as a divine message. Suit yourself. The flood 2250BCE? couldn't have covered Egypt cause the Pyramids show no sign of flooding, see talkorigins, Ps Greenberg puts writing Gen 11 in 5th C BC or later
@zytigon There is nothing wrong with the 10 Commandments. There is indisputable evidence that a great flood inunndated the greater Mesopotamian region. Egypt is not considered to be part of Mesopotamia and, there was little to no contact between people of other regions and those of Egypt prior to the flood, as far as is known. You are confusing what is called the Fertile Crescent with Mesopotamia, which is not the same thing. Ancient Mesopotamia included only part of the Fertile Crescent.
@zytigon Consider how smart the 10 Commandments are. Obviously, it is wise to have no other "gods" before the real God, because no other god can help anybody. Obviously, being against Murder, Adultery, Theft and False Witness is part of upholding human rights. Adultery spreads disease, causes major emotional and psychological damage and breaks up families, causing children to lose parents. Anybody who thinks adultery is harmless needs their head examined.
@richardaberdeen I think the Bible paints a false image of divinity that is why I don't worship it. A real good god wouldn't do hell, Yahweh didn't & condemned the cultures where it originated. G. Greenberg points out the Bible has several contradictory accounts of what laws were given it integrates four different law codes, comp. Was Sabbath toDeut 5v15 remember Exodus,Ex20v11 Creation week or Ex23v12just for ox to be refreshed. see also Ex22v29 you must give me the first born of your sons ?
@zytigon There is nobody in the Bible named Yahweh. According to the Bible, God's name is unspeakable and is represented by the letters YHWH, which represents an unknown name; it is not correct to just fill in the vowels, as many scholars do. The Bible is the only original source that provides an accurate description of God that matches the modern knowledge of the universe; "Before Abraham was, I AM" satisfies origins, whereas all science theory falls rather "short".
It just was not to be spoken except once a year in the small room in the back of the Temple where the ark was kept. The actual pronunciation is unknown.
@rhythm61 According to the Bible in several places, the name of God is unspeakable and, the only name given for humanity to be saved is Jesus. The reason that the name Jesus is speakable is because Jesus was both human and God. If God's name was Yahweh, it would not be an unspeakable name. Grow up and stop pretending that human beings know what they are talking about.
@richardaberdeen Just imagine the scene Ex 31v18 with magical supernatural engraving appearing on stone. And Moses smashes the most important artifact proving a real God? But was the writing ever really by God's finger or just Moses own chisel ? compare Ex 24v4 to Ex 24v12 . The authors of the Bible keep changing their minds, too many cooks spoil the broth. As Greenberg notes there were probably several versions of this story which have been combined, as with other Bible passages.
@richardaberdeen I recommend James Frazer's 'The Golden bough' or Exodus & Leviticus to see examples of many barbaric taboos. Ex 35v2 'Put to death anyone who works on Sabbath'?- very O.T.T don't you think? If a real god had inspired the Bible laws then they would be like 2011 U.K law-banning slavery & child abuse instead of Deut 22v20 stoning people for premarital sex & asking people to sacrifice their firstborn offspring of every womb Exodus 34v19 & banning goat from being cooked in milk
@richardaberdeen I know Christians who accept that evolution is a fact. I once heard Andrew Snelling, a creationist geologist, saying he had come up with a proof that speed of light was faster before Noahs flood. A Christian relative of mine who is a physicist said Snellings idea is nonsense. I agree with Charles Darwin that hell is a damnable doctrine. Maybe Jesus never said it, see Tentmaker777. Many of 'Jesus' ideas are unbalanced. Every argument has many sides, acknowledge pros & cons
@zytigon What Christians believe or, what science believes, does not change what is true. ALL of the known evidence demonstrates that God creates life to adapt and change so that life itself can survive. "Species" is an artificial division of life invented by science; "evolution" is an invented term. Whether we call all snakes a "snake" or divide them up into several thousand species, this does not change the reality of life. You need to go back to elementary school and start over.
@crabbieappleton According to science, nothing we can observe is "static". Everything humans can observe is a "result" of a Higher Cause. This is because we are trapped within universal systems already in motion. As such, there is no such thing as random motion, random mutations or random anything else. True randomness cannot be demonstrated within systems in motion. You eliminate primary cause and there is no science or reason. Eternal Creator satisfies origins; KRAUSS=OBVIOUS LIAR.
@richardaberdeen I'm sure you have fascinating reasons for calling Krauss a liar, aside from the drivel you obviously just made up. And we all look forward to you sharing them with the world.
Regardless, though, your unlettered writing and reliance on foul language suggest that you are, in actuality, a TROLL.
So . . . crawl back under the bridge from whence you came and leave the discussion to the adults.
@crabbieappleton I gave you the evidence. Krauss has no evidence that motion can arise without Primary Cause, nor does he have any evidence that life can arise from non-life, intelligence from non-intelligence, conscious awareness from non-conscious particles of "stuff", etc. Krauss has no evidence for a conclusion of atheism and thus, he is an obvious liar.
@crabbieappleton Atheists are like one of the estimated 10 trillion microbes living inside the average adult strutting around pretending that human beings don't exist, except for infinitely more ignorant. If one wants to embrace worthless superstition, that is their choice, after all God gave us freedom of choice, but don't try pretending around the average truck driver or biker that atheists are anything other than liars of the most extreme and perverse kind. Atheism=gross superstition.
@richardaberdeen Funny analogy there, Troll. Without those microbes, the average adult human would die, but the microbes would continue just fine. So, perhaps you're right, Troll. Without human beings, there would be no God. But without God, human beings would be just fine.
@crabbieappleton No, actually it's a very good analogy. According to the Bible, we live and have our breath within God and just as microbes depend on us, we would die without God. You have the same problem all atheists have, pretending that you can know what you no human being can't remotely possibly know. There is no way a human being could remotely know there is no God or possibly no God and thus, atheism by definition is nothing but gross superstition. There is no EVIDENCE for atheism.
this video is retarded... the Bill, George and Ricky are obviously awesome... but seriously man don't make an effing video if it's going to suck this bad... the volume is shyte and the music is pointless... #$@%$#^%$#^
@inaction5446 You know how bout just keep it to yourself im aware about the music as so many comments are on it and I would appreciate it if you wouldnt comment on that anymore. anyways the video is fine and I havent changed it cause I cant remake it without destroying the whole thing without the music.
@inaction5446"this video is retarded... the Bill, George and Ricky are obviously awesome... but seriously man don't make an effing video if it's going to suck this bad... the volume is shyte and the music is pointless..." I agree 100%
what with all the hate in the comments, y is believeing in somthing so bad? i dont understand how you all can insult us for haveing faith? i can try to explain things to you if you like but if you rnt going to listen and simply insult me then dont comment.
Thanks for the compilation, just to echo what others have already said, could have done without the coldplay song (even though I like the song). Thanks.
space being bent and being the force of gravity, this leaves more options then a turtle or an atlas holding the earth up. by more options i mean possibilities for science to question. ie, more questions. answers, leave more queastions. it apears dogma is not bound by subject matter, so use your brains.
You should see this before you make up your mind on God!!! If you want to see if God is real, search Brian "Head" Welch, former guitarist for Korn. You can find him on youtube. This is what God is all about!
Atheism is defined as a LACK of belief... As in "without a positive belief". If you lack belief in Zeus, you're an atheist in regard to that proposition... If you don't positively believe that Yahweh is real - you're an atheist...
@BobRob196 Well, even atheists admit a small amount of agnosticism, but it is so small that it is irrelevant. The teapot "theory" is not a "theory", it is a point. The probability of a teapot holding the universe together might as well be the same as the Abrahamic god existing, because the two are so incalculably low, as to not warrant belief. Being an agnostic you are pointlessly trying to be under-sceptical of something that warrants a full sceptical analysis.
hahahaha! Love Ricky Gervais! Ok, than I guess I could say I believe in god about as much as I believe that Abstinence is only 9.9999999% effective (Virgin mary lol) So technically i could call myself an agnostic or skeptic, but then I feel like i'm giving too much respect to such ludicrous claims.
Are you agnostic when it comes to the belief that a flying teapot created everything? Or would you pretty much say that you would take that on the same ground as you take the gods creating it? And the whole test of faith thing is a load of crap huh? LOL I apologize if i am coming off as con-descending.
@BobRob196 Close, Atheism is lack in of A god. In respect to Zeus and Thor we are both Atheist. I am an Atheist because I don't believe in any Gods I can put my finger on or even know a name of. But I most definitely won't say a god did not 100% create the universe for the same reason I can't say that a one-legged pirate did.
Pure materialism is a much more mystical view of the universe than the concept of a creator God. Things are all causal in the universe. Nothing 'just happens' without primary forces making it happen. Matter doesn't appeared out of nothing. This view is much more 'fantastic' than the concept of God.
as far as im concerned everything is a load of shit and we will never EVER know wut really started it all. evolution is wellfounded, rational, and plausible- making alot more sense than a "magical sky daddy" snapping his fingers
but the start of the universe itself is something we will NEVER know. evry theory we have is shit either a wizard poofed it all up leaving the paradox of what created him, or everything spontaneously poofed itself out of nothing
I hit post comment by mistake. My apologies. Anyways, How by deciding I would no longer believe in a magical sky daddy have I closed my mind? Agnostic atheism is when you will not say for sure that there is not a god, but you disassociate yourself with all religions. If someone is agnostic, and someone asks of their religion, they will undoubtedly say they are an agnostic atheist.
And who created god? this is a silly debate as there will never be an answer to the question if god exists.....in the event we discover that god exists, first we will have someone (with a face) to really complaint to, and second, we will be demanding to see his manager as he is doing a very poor job by being the moral and spiritual guide of many religious lunatics!!
i know these guys are not idiots, i just was getting a rise out of the debate and i went to far, these guys, (except bill mayer (sp.?)) are smart as hell, i think, i know goerge is, ricky has some noteworthy stuff, nice video tormented stature, not really sorry for posting all this, but it's the thought that counts.
most biota's dna changes, it appears that it changes into new spiecies sometimes, (sharks, other niches, etc. excluded), but to say that this is the main cause of all this diversity seems slightly jumping the gun. i say there is a 99.9% chance evolution is this sole mechanism. that's not enough for me to belive in it, like i believe in gravity, or that the pope has nothing to say about hoards of priest sexually violating children. religious heads are evil now but not all preachers and followers.
religous people deny the possability of evolution, that is not what i've said at all. I deny the impossability of unforseen possabilities. but as for the heads of many of these religions, well, that observation has been exhausted more then evolutionary observations have. that observation is getting awful close to gravity... maybe it will prove my assumtions wrong 1/18,000,000,000th of a second before the end of time, who knows, do yall? ha ha
questioning reality and it's many parts and so called facts, laws and theories is not a religious trait in the slightest, it's a scientific one, strickt devout religious folks don't question anything so get off of my cloud with all this religous stuff. life is magical, this is a scientific observation of anyone with the balls to stick their thumb out or back back for a few months or just try to see what being really is. it's only religious if you make it that, it's actually just observational.
to be deeply religious you have to be ignorant....If you ask many priests (educated priests) you will find amazing answers and most of them don't buy the whole bible shit, but obviously religion uses people and there is a lot of money involved so it is a way to get rich and have power doing not too much in life!!! We should treat religions as myths and fairy tales, and then the world will be better!!
i love how idolcruiseifx said y' all i kno its fallacious to think he is an idiot for saying that but from everything else he said im sure he is an idiot (or she i dont really give a shit)
"creationism is bull propagada made by freemasons and members of families that also made the mormon religion and scientology."
WTF?
Do you say things randomly without checking your facts?
Biblical creationism has been the bedrock of Christianity for the best part of the last 2000 years, and that includes ALL Christian sects, not just the recent ones!
@TormentedStatue This is a great video, but the music is VERY distracting... Maybe you can take it out, or change it to something without words (John Williams?) and turn the volume down a bit. It's over powering what they are saying. Thanks...
Your ignorance amuses me. That is all I have to say, as I have grown tired of arguing over such trivial matters. Your religion, it is BULLSHIT. I say this because I care about not you, but humankind as a whole. Stop PLAGUING us with your idiocy, and fucking die. It would save me the trouble of convincing you otherwise about your "invisible man".
@Idolcruisefix you've obviously seen a lot of the world to speak that way to the infidels, would you like to example one of these impossibilities to us all and back up with real evidence and not simply scripture please?
p.s please take note of the correct spelling of IMPOSSIBILITIES!!
@mythinktube, debasing of reality to non-magical things is the falsity within and/or around evolution, while evolution, in and of itself, could still be mostly true. proof of magic?psychic dreams R my best evidence of supernatural happenings, asking for random things and aquiring them for free, all while far from civilization, but others are more simple, like putting people together or knowing they will meet soon. people pass things off as coincedence when it is too statistically far fetched.
@patrickledford420 perception and evolution and time might work together to be considered an aspect of creationism, maybe like a metaphore but one where the truth is even wierder, but somewhat explainable, always leaving more questions (as all answers do). space is bent and is the force of gravity, supposedly... this almost-fact, explaining a round earth, is a good example of something being wierder then orginal thoughts, ie, a flat earth siting on some thing, or being, ie, a turtle, or atlas.
@patrickledford420 Plain and simple magic you mean. Without any facts to support it, calling it logic is stretching the term to Aristotlean proportions.
great video !!! one question in the evolution ideas. Does the theory explain how spiecies that are found fossilized (or recent and living) aren't at least 95% almost always identical to another spiecies found or known of? how in the hell would one spieces quickly transform into another without ever showing slight changes? the missing link illudes us and keeps it a theory, any theories to help it along?
Fossilization is difficult. Not 100% of the intermediates would have been fossilized.
LOL! It's not like they immediately changed.
A metaphor for the way you're describing it is, Someone met your great grandfather, and then they met you without ever meeting your grandparents, and parents. How could you exist in this scenario?
oops...still was not clear, what i'm saying is, much less then 5% of all fossils found are of these intermediates. this would imply that the change happens very quickly, so quick it dosn't seem probable.
Or the change could be so subtle as to not show up as intermediates. Think about it. Of all the characteristics that can change on an animal, the only 1 we can examine in fossils is skeletal structure.
It's a very limiting way of perceiving evolutionary change. Fortunately many other ways have been found which support the theory of evolution.
But they're discoverijng intermediates all the time, Idol. How will you respond when your religion crumbles. will you tell us that god put those intermediates there as a "test"? Like he did with the dinosaur fossils?
why does everyone think they know my religion because i question a theory? that's loony-toons, i say. the truth is i fallow no religion in particular and enjoy the truths and wild stories found in many religions. even if all religious people stopped being religious, evolution whould still be a thoery and not a law. so hhhheemmmm!
yes, you're right anotalreadytakenname (great name) lot's o' intermediates, i just like keep an open mind that's how people discover things, by never ignoring the gray or "dark" areas, where there are questions. this world is mysterious and where it is not it is lying. if evolution is true, the whole base of it's appearance might not be. maybe it is driven by the earth itself or dreams of cretures and molecules designate mutations. keep an open mind or it's not science, it's a religion.
evolution has not yet been explained to me in a way that describes how so many seperate spiecies are found fossilized with such a small amount "intermeiates"... small amounts, as in NONE... right? are there any intermediates found to show a complete gradual shift in bone structure from one spiecies to another, by the way, of the spiecies that have bone, their bone structure is relevant to the experiment. i believe in evolution.. i belive in it because i can't see the infalable truth that it is.
we "humans", share 98% of the DNA structure with chimpansies. Chimpansies have 48 chromosomes and humans 46, scientist discovered recently that there are a pair of chromosomes that fused at one point in time and that's why we developed speech and other cualities that diferenciate us from animals..and it is no more a theory!
eap8317, with that logic, the similarity of a gmo to a non-gmo also prooves evolution to be true. is there a fussion of these two of the 48 chimp chromies creating 46 and thus a human, (which i don't doubt you are mostly right about)... the problem still is no one knows how or why these chromies would suddenly do such a thing, until then, theory theory theory, says I...oh and the rest of the scientific community as well.
For everyone that hates the music don't comment. Its well known and this video has been up for years. So stop complaining if thats all you have time in your life which is to complain about a well known fact.
TormentedStatue 1 month ago
why would u put music in the back round when comedians are trying to make us laugh! fucktard
jdogg781517 1 month ago
@jdogg781517 The only one that is is the one that name calls someone.
TormentedStatue 1 month ago
@TormentedStatue the only one that is is someone who puts music over comedy sketches!
jdogg781517 1 month ago
@jdogg781517 Really. I have seen millions do that to. You seriously need an adjustment and be respectful of others. Treat people how you want to be treated.
Besides I kept this up cause it makes a statement and a cause. I am well aware that the music is not liked by many. So theres the door sir.
TormentedStatue 1 month ago
GOD TURN THE BACKGROUND MUSIC OFF FFS
other then that it was great
Steamsteam 1 month ago 5
@Steamsteam Totally agree. I can't hear most of what the people are saying aside from George Carlin
jakatta70 1 month ago
i actually really liked this it it was well made :)
maluse227 2 months ago
@maluse227 Ha ha!! Now that's what I call intelligent design!
sidDkid87 2 months ago
Nice video , horrible music. Would have been much fun to watch otherwise
MrSatyanveshi 2 months ago
"the ice capades", LMAO, I miss Carlin.
luv4knowledge 3 months ago
can u crank up the volume of the music - the guys talking to loudly...
submariner123 5 months ago
According to recorded history there were six well-established cultures or ‘civilizations’ at the time of Noah’s Flood. They were: Mesopotamia (Sumerian), Indus Valley, Egypt, the Minoan, the ‘Holy Land’ area, and China. Archaeological records such as ruins of cities, tools, pottery, skeletal remains, weapons, and other artifacts support the written records that survive. These records all show that humans and civilizations existed in almost all parts of the world from around 3500 BCE No Flood
TheShasiti 5 months ago 3
which he WAS lying, the fruit DIDNT kill them, the snake was telling the truth. so god is the liar and satan is the one telling the truth. wtf?
now some say it DID kill them because they had eternal life til they ate the fruit and god kicked em out...well the FRUIT didnt kill them...GOD killed them (very slowly mind you. it took like 900 years.)
tuseroni 6 months ago
"im not gonna go at him because he is brilliant but in my humble opinion i think the snake was a mistake" hahaha
AnonymousPolitics5 6 months ago
Good stuff. Intelligent Laughter is a savage weapon against stupidity.
USERNAMEfieldempty 7 months ago 2
Schizophrenia is hearing actual voices in your head. The line between religion and mental illness is a fixed and resolute barrier that, surprisingly, very few religious people cross. Please leave the diagnosis of mental disorders to..oh...Psychologists!?
Darthmas2242 8 months ago
Coldplay is awesome, even David Tennant said so.
Also the music adds to the video in my opinion, and I don't see why all the bitching is about since I can hear the comedians talking just fine, and its during my mates on skype are talking.
RpgdUd3 8 months ago
i like coldplay, but i dont muisc should have been pplayed
crisis101able 8 months ago
Is it just me, or does anybody else find it odd that Jesus seems to have been a whole lot smarter than Bill Maher, Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett and Christopher Hitchens combined. Not that it is all that hard to be smarter than liars who pretend that entire universes magically appear. And you thought belief in the spaghetti monster was weird???
richardaberdeen 9 months ago
@richardaberdeen It may just be you.
Religion is the one with the magically appearing universe, though, isn't it? Current cosmological theory is quite different.
crabbieappleton 8 months ago
@crabbieappleton Either the universe is a result of deliberate conception, design and creation, or it magically appeared all by itself, just as either my computer is a result of deliberte conception, design and creation, or it magically appeared by itself. There is no 3rd "cosmological" option as you and other atheists pretend. Either someone designs something or they don't. There isn't a third option.
richardaberdeen 8 months ago
@richardaberdeen It's certainly easier to think that the choice you present is all there is, but there's no compelling reason to think so. Either the universe has been designed or it magically appeared? If this is truly what you think the conversation is, then good luck to you.
crabbieappleton 8 months ago
@crabbieappleton I've noticed you haven't actually provide a third alternative. This is because there is no third alternative to the rational mind. Either something is conceived of, designed and created or it magically appears all by itself. There is no third alternative to the rational mind, which in itself definitively proves atheists are liars and atheism is irrational. There is no evidence that motion, intelligence, "universal" laws or processes or universes can exist unto themselves.
richardaberdeen 8 months ago
@richardaberdeen The point is that your dichotomy is false. Atheists don't believe that the universe "magically appeared." Lawrence Krauss (yes, an atheist, but he's also speaking for current cosmological theory) has a great lecture on "A Universe from Nothing" (here on YouTube). I encourage you to watch it.
You're free to believe what you choose: I just think that it's a better conversation if each side engages the other in a spirit of intellectual honesty.
crabbieappleton 8 months ago
@crabbieappleton Bullshit. God by long held historical human language definition, is Whoever created the universe. Thus, anybody who claims to "disbelieve" in God is proposing instead, that the universe magically appeard all by itself. There is no 3rd option to the rational mind, which is why you continue to spout nonsense rather than providing a logical 3rd option, which you can't, because there isn't any. Atheism = gross superstition
richardaberdeen 8 months ago
@richardaberdeen Cool story, bro.
crabbieappleton 8 months ago
@richardaberdeen You seem so confused as to how someone can believe the universe came from nothing, yet you conveniently ignore that you seem to think it is perfectly reasonable that god came from NOTHING.
By the way, you have absolutely no idea what superstition means!
MrZeus7 8 months ago
@MrZeus7 BULLSHIT. God gave us the correct postulate of all science and reason, which is "before Abraham was, I
AM". An ETERNAL Creator doesn't come from nothing; try a dictionary. When you have a better explanation for the observable universal reality, you be sure and let God know how much wiser you are than him. But, be carefully about opening mouth and inserting foot, as you have so far. After all, it's better to be thought poorly educated than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.
richardaberdeen 8 months ago
@richardaberdeen Two words: Special pleading.
MrZeus7 8 months ago
@richardaberdeen God is a contingent being. If He wasn't, then there would be no argument about His existence. Don't come the ontological argument. It's a thousand years old, and it was discredited 250 years ago. Theists who go around giving lectures about Anselm's 5 proofs are charlatans. Read Hume before you try to play with the big boys.
mcnesta80 8 months ago
@mcnesta80 You don't define God; God defines us and sets boundaries for us. We cannot escape the boundaries set by God and beyond our own tiny window, we have no idea how things work from true universal perspective, nor do we have any comprehension of the mind of God. That is what Einstein said and, that is what any moron who is half-way honest would likewise, say. God defines himself as "Before Abraham was, I AM". YOU DO NOT DEFINE GOD, CASE CLOSED. Who the hell are you to define God?
richardaberdeen 8 months ago
@richardaberdeen I never tried to define God, you argued He's necessary, I argued He's contingent. They're attributes. Here's a definition; "God is an omniscient, omnipotent, omnibenevolent, omnipresent being who created the universe. God as a philosophical concept was first explicitly defined by the Ancient Greeks and discredited by 19th Century science and philosophy. God persists as a mythological figure for most of the world's religions."...That should really annoy you.:-)
mcnesta80 8 months ago
@mcnesta80 God defines himself as "Before Abraham was, I AM". This satisfies origins and provides a rational explanation for the universal reality. When you have a BETTER explanation, then I will bow down to you. Until such time, you are just another bullshitter pretending to know what you don't know, nor could possibly know. There is no evidence whatseover that the universe magically appeared without a designer, the bottom-line gross superstition atheism would have us believe. BULLSHIT !!!
richardaberdeen 8 months ago
@MrZeus7 SUPERSTITION=Conclusions not based on evidence. Atheism provides zero evidence for intelligence arising from non-intelligence or motion from non-motion. Athesim=the grossest of all know supersititions, clearly violating the known laws of physics, science and evidence. According to modern science, nothing that we can observe is "static". Everything human beings can observe is a "result" of a Higher Cause. You eliminate primary cause and there is no science or reason. BULLSHITTER.
richardaberdeen 8 months ago
@richardaberdeen There's been this thing called the enlightenment. Your arguments were formulated before the renaissance. Read Kant, there are two options a. a first cause b. never-ending causality. The big bang suggests a, but does not imply that the first cause is intelligent, eternal or necessary. It's a long way from first cause to theism. Oh, and it's only the first cause of four dimensional reality, there is a higher-dimensional causality (string theory).
mcnesta80 8 months ago
@mcnesta80 There's no EVIDENCE of "enlightenment". Out of a so-called enlightenment arose British, French, Dutch, Spainish, American, other imperialism, a global slave trade, the American, French, Russian, Chinese and other revolutions, WWI, WWII, Vietnam, Iraq, etc and etc. Science and technology arising out of a so-called "enlightenment" resulted in WMD's and global mass pollution. Historians claim more died from violence in the 20th Century than all previous combined; some enlightenment.
richardaberdeen 8 months ago
@richardaberdeen the "enlightenment" refers to an historical period. If you prefer, call it the 18th and 19th centuries. I was mainly referring to the work of Voltaire, Hume, Kant, Hegel and Rousseau. There is no doubt that their work led to the evil you mention, kind of like how Christianity led to the Dark Ages.
mcnesta80 8 months ago
@richardaberdeen Search youtube for "Ricky Gervais Hitler Nietzsche" for an insight into the connection between enlightenment philosophy and the evil done in its name. Mind you, Nietzsche basically invented post modernism, so I guess he's post enlightenment. He's particularly influenced by Hegel and Kant though.
mcnesta80 8 months ago
@mcnesta80 Sorry, I don't believe in magically appearing universes, magically appearing intelligence from non-intelligence, magically appearing laws of physics, magically appearing processes, magically appearing santa clauses, tooth faires, spaghetti monsters and magically appearing little green men from Mars like Hitchens. Sorry, atheism requires way too much blind faith for me to believe. Atheism = Total Bullshit.
richardaberdeen 8 months ago
@richardaberdeen Why would you think that the people who wrote the Bible were any different from other playwrights / scriptwriters? They wrote their own ideas into the mouth of fictional characters like God, Jesus, angels & demons. If there was a real good god inspiring Genesis 22 then the angel would say, 'Stop, you are entirely mistaken, God never wanted animal or human sacrifice'. Bible writers wrote historical fiction long after the event. Try John W. Loftus, Robert M. Price, Dan Barker
zytigon 6 months ago
@zytigon How is it that moder science behavior now agrees with Jesus, that what causes greed, hatred, prejudice, murder, rape, theft, false witness, slavery, war and other human oppression, arises from within us all - source, Britannica. How is it that even Richard Dawkins has an article on his website agreeing that what Jesus taught is morally accurate? How is it that Jesus keeps coming up correct every time, while everything you claim has no basis in either historical or scientific evidence?
richardaberdeen 6 months ago
@richardaberdeen Look at The negative confession on papyrus of Ani 1500BCE& Hammurabi code 1760. See wisdom commons or 'Trusting doubt' by Tarico. The Golden rule was around long before Jesus. God comes into the world but brings no new knowledge? God shouts down in Mark 1v11? but forgets to tell Jesus to wash his hands to remove bacteria & viruses so Mark 7 has Jesus not wash before a meal. The Bible is proto thought. Compare John 20v22 with ancient Egyptian belief that breath = spirit
zytigon 6 months ago
@zytigon This is no relevance to me. I am not a Christian and I am neither defending Christianity, creationism or so-called "intellgent design" theories. God creates life to adapt and change so that life can survive. That is correctly called "life in transition", not evolution. You can bitch and moan and pretend all you want, but you are pretending that "evolution" is some sort of magically existing process unto itself, which is bullshit and, the term itself is worthless and misleading.
richardaberdeen 6 months ago
@richardaberdeen Have you read Richard Dawkins 'The greatest show on earth'. In the preface he writes, 'This book is my personal summary of the evidence that the 'theory' of evolution is actually a fact- as incontrovertible a fact as any in science. Elsewhere in the book he admits there is still much to discover about how it happened, how did chemicals become living organisms. Maybe you'd like to explain why your God lets so many suffer so much. Is your God just dark matter energy or something?
zytigon 6 months ago
@zytigon What Dawkins says means nothing to me. According to Dawkins, the "universe represents nothing but blind pitiless indifference". If this was true, there would be no such thing as people like Jesus, Gandhi, Schweitzer, Keller, MLK, Chavez or Rosa Parks. Dawkins is an obvious liar.
richardaberdeen 6 months ago
@richardaberdeen The Bible has Jesus say, 'Do not judge / do not condemn others, do not call people nasty names like, 'you fool'. Paul says, 'A spritual man judges all things'. The meaning I take, interpolating, is that you should be specific & judge the individual action/ idea in terms of your emotions/feelings. Neither the Bible writers nor Jesus stuck to this rule. However applying it to your comment about Dawkins, surely you mean that ' you think he is mistaken about an absence of God'.
zytigon 6 months ago
@zytigon You seem to have a problem with basic English. To "judge" in the sense of the Jesus teaching, is to "condemn". Paul also says in Romans, to "judge" someone else, that is, to condemn someone, is inexcusable and, to do so is to freely admit your own guilt, for all have sinned. In the other instance, to "judge" means to "discern", such as to "judge" that a true teaching is better than a false teaching. As I noted previously, you need to go back to elementary school and start over.
richardaberdeen 6 months ago
@richardaberdeen U.K government has made judgements about what behaviour is unacceptable in this society & written those decisions as 2011 UK law. The idea that you can't make judgements is nonsense. People who break U.K law are doing things they should not, things which are antisocial, destructive, careless, cruel, abusive. I agree with the laws. To condemn such bad behaviour is a good praiseworthy thing to do, . sin=breaking Bible codes? The current aim now is to comply with U.K regulation
zytigon 6 months ago
@zytigon You seem to have a significant problem with ego, admitting when you are grossly in error. To "judge" has several DIFFERENT meanings, you can look it up for yourself. As I already explained, according to Jesus, it is very wrong to condemn someone else, for having the same faults that we ourselves have. This is an entirely different meaning than to "judge" between true and false, as to "discern". These are two entirely different meanings, which any moron knows.
richardaberdeen 6 months ago
@richardaberdeen I don't approve of condemning people. I approve of condemning cruel, abusive behaviour. Nietzsche 'Thus spake Zarathustra' spoke through the imagined prophet Zarathustra ch6 'evermore did he see himself as the doer of one deed, madness, i call this: the exception reversed itself to the rule in him' . U.k law is different from O.T law because UK judges assessed on basis of health & safety & what works for a happy society. No matter what was done, people ought to aim to do good
zytigon 6 months ago
@zytigon U.K. law, like all modern Western law, traces directly from the New Testament. Key players of the so-called ages of "reason" and "enlightenment" attended universities that required extensive biblical studies. It is crystal clear that the ideas of Rousseau, Voltaire, Marx, Locke, Jefferson and every other key player have their basis in both the Old and especially New Testament. For example, "to each according to need", the foundation of modern socialism, is lifted directly from Acts.
richardaberdeen 6 months ago
@richardaberdeen I agree that there were good points in the O.T. laws & N.T. I think they don't look like text messages from a supernatural God. Valerie Tarico proposes that the Hebrews probably had contact with prior law codes. Acts 7v22 says Moses was educated in all the wisdom of the Egyptians so he surely knew of their law codes, so why the need to get some up a Mt ? He forgot ? See Gary Greenberg '101myths of Bible'. If Moses had mentioned germ theory then that would've been a miracle.
zytigon 6 months ago
@zytigon Nonsense. The reason the laws in the Bible are similar is because basic societal laws are historically similar all over the historical map, clearly demonstrating as the modern scientist Francis Collins has pointed out, as well as Jefferson, a shared designed human conscience; which is what the Bible says and where Jefferson got it. Similar laws against murder, adultery, theft and false witness are virtually universal and virtually all other laws are based on these 4 foundation ideas.
richardaberdeen 6 months ago
@richardaberdeen And, the reason the stories of the great flood, tower of babel and other stories in the Bible are found in other cultures, is because they are obviously varying stories of the same shared events. Abraham came from the city of Ur, not far south of Babylon, thus it is prefectly logical to assume that stories which ended up in the Bible are of the same events as found in other Mesopotamian literature. Anybody who says different has their head up their historical ass.
richardaberdeen 6 months ago
@richardaberdeen I agree that the Bible flood story could be based on Gilgamesh flood epic, which was only a localised event, not global. You mention Abraham who Gen11v28 says was of Ur of the Chaldeans. However the Chaldeans didn't come into existence until 8th - 6th C. BCE depending who you believe, an anachronism that makes scholars place the writing of Genesis during period of exile in 7th C ish.
zytigon 6 months ago
@zytigon That is not correct. Nobody disputes that the story of Abraham is plausible, as a city once thought just a myth mentioned in the story in the middle of the desert, where historians assumed no city would be, was recently excavated. Ur was later called "Ur of the Chaldeas", just as today, "America" had inhabitants in it long before it was referred to as "America". No historian disputes that the city of Ur existed prior to Abraham; Ur was one of the oldest cities in ancient Mesopotamia.
richardaberdeen 6 months ago
@richardaberdeen '101 myths of the Bible' Gary Greenberg writes p 115 'The Mesopotamian city of Ur has a history dating back to at least the third millenium BCE but the association of the city with the Chaldees dates to only about the eighth c. BCE...little is know of Chaldea prior to eighth C...In 587 BC the Chaldeans conquered Judah & transferred Hebrew elite to Babylon... Heb Bible word for Chaldees is Chesdim, an Aramaic term. Aramaic started in ANE in 1st mill bc. Ur not in Gen10v10-12
zytigon 6 months ago
@zytigon There is nothing in the Bible that is known to be a myth: Sources that agree with this include Britannica, Will Durant and even atheist Isaac Asimov. Many if not most historians believe that the stories in the Bible are based on real events. Most learned historians, including Durant and those who write for the Britannica, consider the Bible to be a more reliable source than other surrounding cultures--see Britannica; history of Mesopotamia and, history of Israel and the Hebrews.
richardaberdeen 6 months ago
@zytigon And, no historian, geologist or archeologist disputes that there was a great flood in the entire Mesopotamian region, not just a little "localized" flood as you pretend. The Hebrew word translated as "world" in the KJV English, also can refer to greater regional. You seem to have a very limited understanding of ancient history. Based on the known evidence, it is impossible to rationally conclude that the stories in the Bible are "myths", rather than actual events (source Britannica)
richardaberdeen 6 months ago
@richardaberdeen Returning to topic of judging. You can assess each human activity on many aspects, like the effects / consequencies on health & safety, social harmony. The important thing is to look at all the reasons for and all the reasons against each activity. This method is also used in assessing whether medicines are safe enough, or if pros outweigh cons. The judgement is revisited if new information comes to light. You have to judge if each reason is valid. Was the judgement a good one
zytigon 6 months ago
@zytigon I don't know why you keep talking in circles around the obvious. Human Rights are obviousl "written on the hearts of humanity", just like the Bible says, just like Jefferson pointed out in the Declaration and, just as Francis Collins, a very educated man and great scientist, has pointed out. Similar and sometimes identical "golden rules" pop up all over the historical map, as well as similar basic laws, clearly demonstrating a shared designed human conscience.
richardaberdeen 6 months ago
@richardaberdeen It is a puzzling how Moses didn't make a better job of writing the 10 Cs then. Maybe God was using a different text messaging code which Moses mistook. Pity Moses didn't have an enigma machine. I admit it is nice sometimes to think of 'The Golden rule' as a divine message. Suit yourself. The flood 2250BCE? couldn't have covered Egypt cause the Pyramids show no sign of flooding, see talkorigins, Ps Greenberg puts writing Gen 11 in 5th C BC or later
zytigon 6 months ago
@zytigon There is nothing wrong with the 10 Commandments. There is indisputable evidence that a great flood inunndated the greater Mesopotamian region. Egypt is not considered to be part of Mesopotamia and, there was little to no contact between people of other regions and those of Egypt prior to the flood, as far as is known. You are confusing what is called the Fertile Crescent with Mesopotamia, which is not the same thing. Ancient Mesopotamia included only part of the Fertile Crescent.
richardaberdeen 6 months ago
@zytigon Consider how smart the 10 Commandments are. Obviously, it is wise to have no other "gods" before the real God, because no other god can help anybody. Obviously, being against Murder, Adultery, Theft and False Witness is part of upholding human rights. Adultery spreads disease, causes major emotional and psychological damage and breaks up families, causing children to lose parents. Anybody who thinks adultery is harmless needs their head examined.
richardaberdeen 6 months ago
@richardaberdeen I think the Bible paints a false image of divinity that is why I don't worship it. A real good god wouldn't do hell, Yahweh didn't & condemned the cultures where it originated. G. Greenberg points out the Bible has several contradictory accounts of what laws were given it integrates four different law codes, comp. Was Sabbath toDeut 5v15 remember Exodus,Ex20v11 Creation week or Ex23v12just for ox to be refreshed. see also Ex22v29 you must give me the first born of your sons ?
zytigon 6 months ago
@zytigon There is nobody in the Bible named Yahweh. According to the Bible, God's name is unspeakable and is represented by the letters YHWH, which represents an unknown name; it is not correct to just fill in the vowels, as many scholars do. The Bible is the only original source that provides an accurate description of God that matches the modern knowledge of the universe; "Before Abraham was, I AM" satisfies origins, whereas all science theory falls rather "short".
richardaberdeen 6 months ago
@richardaberdeen
The name is not unspeakable,
It just was not to be spoken except once a year in the small room in the back of the Temple where the ark was kept. The actual pronunciation is unknown.
rhythm61 5 months ago
@rhythm61 According to the Bible in several places, the name of God is unspeakable and, the only name given for humanity to be saved is Jesus. The reason that the name Jesus is speakable is because Jesus was both human and God. If God's name was Yahweh, it would not be an unspeakable name. Grow up and stop pretending that human beings know what they are talking about.
richardaberdeen 5 months ago
@richardaberdeen Just imagine the scene Ex 31v18 with magical supernatural engraving appearing on stone. And Moses smashes the most important artifact proving a real God? But was the writing ever really by God's finger or just Moses own chisel ? compare Ex 24v4 to Ex 24v12 . The authors of the Bible keep changing their minds, too many cooks spoil the broth. As Greenberg notes there were probably several versions of this story which have been combined, as with other Bible passages.
zytigon 6 months ago
@richardaberdeen I recommend James Frazer's 'The Golden bough' or Exodus & Leviticus to see examples of many barbaric taboos. Ex 35v2 'Put to death anyone who works on Sabbath'?- very O.T.T don't you think? If a real god had inspired the Bible laws then they would be like 2011 U.K law-banning slavery & child abuse instead of Deut 22v20 stoning people for premarital sex & asking people to sacrifice their firstborn offspring of every womb Exodus 34v19 & banning goat from being cooked in milk
zytigon 6 months ago
@richardaberdeen I know Christians who accept that evolution is a fact. I once heard Andrew Snelling, a creationist geologist, saying he had come up with a proof that speed of light was faster before Noahs flood. A Christian relative of mine who is a physicist said Snellings idea is nonsense. I agree with Charles Darwin that hell is a damnable doctrine. Maybe Jesus never said it, see Tentmaker777. Many of 'Jesus' ideas are unbalanced. Every argument has many sides, acknowledge pros & cons
zytigon 6 months ago
@zytigon What Christians believe or, what science believes, does not change what is true. ALL of the known evidence demonstrates that God creates life to adapt and change so that life itself can survive. "Species" is an artificial division of life invented by science; "evolution" is an invented term. Whether we call all snakes a "snake" or divide them up into several thousand species, this does not change the reality of life. You need to go back to elementary school and start over.
richardaberdeen 6 months ago
@crabbieappleton According to science, nothing we can observe is "static". Everything humans can observe is a "result" of a Higher Cause. This is because we are trapped within universal systems already in motion. As such, there is no such thing as random motion, random mutations or random anything else. True randomness cannot be demonstrated within systems in motion. You eliminate primary cause and there is no science or reason. Eternal Creator satisfies origins; KRAUSS=OBVIOUS LIAR.
richardaberdeen 8 months ago
@richardaberdeen I'm sure you have fascinating reasons for calling Krauss a liar, aside from the drivel you obviously just made up. And we all look forward to you sharing them with the world.
Regardless, though, your unlettered writing and reliance on foul language suggest that you are, in actuality, a TROLL.
So . . . crawl back under the bridge from whence you came and leave the discussion to the adults.
crabbieappleton 8 months ago
@crabbieappleton I gave you the evidence. Krauss has no evidence that motion can arise without Primary Cause, nor does he have any evidence that life can arise from non-life, intelligence from non-intelligence, conscious awareness from non-conscious particles of "stuff", etc. Krauss has no evidence for a conclusion of atheism and thus, he is an obvious liar.
richardaberdeen 8 months ago
@crabbieappleton Atheists are like one of the estimated 10 trillion microbes living inside the average adult strutting around pretending that human beings don't exist, except for infinitely more ignorant. If one wants to embrace worthless superstition, that is their choice, after all God gave us freedom of choice, but don't try pretending around the average truck driver or biker that atheists are anything other than liars of the most extreme and perverse kind. Atheism=gross superstition.
richardaberdeen 8 months ago
@richardaberdeen Funny analogy there, Troll. Without those microbes, the average adult human would die, but the microbes would continue just fine. So, perhaps you're right, Troll. Without human beings, there would be no God. But without God, human beings would be just fine.
Good one.
crabbieappleton 8 months ago
@crabbieappleton No, actually it's a very good analogy. According to the Bible, we live and have our breath within God and just as microbes depend on us, we would die without God. You have the same problem all atheists have, pretending that you can know what you no human being can't remotely possibly know. There is no way a human being could remotely know there is no God or possibly no God and thus, atheism by definition is nothing but gross superstition. There is no EVIDENCE for atheism.
richardaberdeen 8 months ago
@richardaberdeen God is an alien. Genetic engineering and splicing. Look at your DNA please...
TormentedStatue 8 months ago
Great content, but there were two problems. First, the background music is too loud. Second, the background music is Coldplay.
TheAlvinealy 9 months ago
i believe in Thor and odin. cause i get to drink, fight, eat, and go whoring its a good religion :) and i can carry an axe.
MrFirestorm102 9 months ago
"We have to make up fairy tales ..." Bill, perhaps you haven't stopped to think about the "fairy tales" you believe. Ridicule that for some fun!
MorganMarvinson 9 months ago
17 CHRISTIANS DISLIKED THIS VIDEO...NO JOKE THIS TIME.
herbertmoon11 10 months ago
this video is retarded... the Bill, George and Ricky are obviously awesome... but seriously man don't make an effing video if it's going to suck this bad... the volume is shyte and the music is pointless... #$@%$#^%$#^
inaction5446 10 months ago 21
@inaction5446 You know how bout just keep it to yourself im aware about the music as so many comments are on it and I would appreciate it if you wouldnt comment on that anymore. anyways the video is fine and I havent changed it cause I cant remake it without destroying the whole thing without the music.
TormentedStatue 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@inaction5446"this video is retarded... the Bill, George and Ricky are obviously awesome... but seriously man don't make an effing video if it's going to suck this bad... the volume is shyte and the music is pointless..." I agree 100%
vjwebster 6 months ago
way too gay music dude, on the other hand the compilation is not bad.
intestinomedicino 10 months ago
I don't have a problem with coldplay, but it is not needed for the video. its like trying to watch tv and listen to music XD
pogibija 10 months ago
Very nice, but the music is quite annoying, it actually drowns out the soundtrack in a couple of places. Still, well done!
kw19193 10 months ago
awesome compilation !
TheCowboySantos 10 months ago
what with all the hate in the comments, y is believeing in somthing so bad? i dont understand how you all can insult us for haveing faith? i can try to explain things to you if you like but if you rnt going to listen and simply insult me then dont comment.
bonedraman 11 months ago
Too loud music :<
kreddde 11 months ago
I could do without the music...
znarf541 11 months ago
It's funny because it's true.
peterpotpie 11 months ago
He loves you and he needs MONEY, Lol
bringonthewrath 1 year ago
@TormentedStatue The song is fucking annoying, get over it and learn to accept criticism.
ihaterobbie123 1 year ago
there is nothing that "viva la vida" cant make better
Dreamerx47 1 year ago
This video was "created" by some christian that is why he is playing music in the background so we can't watch it.
Evolvedprimate 1 year ago 2
@Evolvedprimate Im not christian and im not religious
TormentedStatue 1 year ago 12
@TormentedStatue
My commend explains why there is music in the video and that is THAT
Evolvedprimate 1 year ago
@Evolvedprimate You watch tool much of those propaganda christian videos where they play music in the background.
kotkee 1 year ago
from all the comments I think I am finally going to redo the video lmao
TormentedStatue 1 year ago
STOP THE BACKGROUND MUSIC....!!!!
Maler78 1 year ago
One of the greatest bits George Carlin has ever done.
redwineisfine 1 year ago
nice vid , but music is too loud
upupsteru 1 year ago
Thanks for the compilation, just to echo what others have already said, could have done without the coldplay song (even though I like the song). Thanks.
anthonyhiscox 1 year ago
Intelligent design + unintelligent people.
MrJohnnyrace 1 year ago
It was good, but could have done without the music.
ChaoticSupernova 1 year ago
i could do without the faggy coldplay music.
toolegit2quittttt 1 year ago
Thanks for the upload. As much as I love Coldplay... really could have done without the soundtrack....
kerohime 1 year ago
so sharp and well edited, had a good giggle too!
mmiddl06 1 year ago
space being bent and being the force of gravity, this leaves more options then a turtle or an atlas holding the earth up. by more options i mean possibilities for science to question. ie, more questions. answers, leave more queastions. it apears dogma is not bound by subject matter, so use your brains.
Idolcruisefix 1 year ago
i like the editing on this. just gotta put the volume up when rick speaks. the music is too loud. . .
arsenalskate123 1 year ago
Ricky Gervais was the best
captaindisguise 1 year ago
You should see this before you make up your mind on God!!! If you want to see if God is real, search Brian "Head" Welch, former guitarist for Korn. You can find him on youtube. This is what God is all about!
orderofmelchizedek1 1 year ago
Uh, you don't need 100% certainty...
Atheism is defined as a LACK of belief... As in "without a positive belief". If you lack belief in Zeus, you're an atheist in regard to that proposition... If you don't positively believe that Yahweh is real - you're an atheist...
LuigiPeach 1 year ago
amen brother i have seen and follow bill and george's ideal. disregard the aemn part
yveslong1 1 year ago
If God's real, he's the worst screw-up in the history of the universe.
TheHomelessCripple 1 year ago
thanks for this. got to agree that the coldplay could be a little quieter though.
BoringLovechild 1 year ago
Comment removed
BoringLovechild 1 year ago
Can you turn down the Coldplay in the background? It's distracting from this great material you've consolidated.
h0d3d0 1 year ago
it would be better without the music.
dmbasso 1 year ago 2
@BobRob196 Well, even atheists admit a small amount of agnosticism, but it is so small that it is irrelevant. The teapot "theory" is not a "theory", it is a point. The probability of a teapot holding the universe together might as well be the same as the Abrahamic god existing, because the two are so incalculably low, as to not warrant belief. Being an agnostic you are pointlessly trying to be under-sceptical of something that warrants a full sceptical analysis.
orangefan9 1 year ago
hahahaha! Love Ricky Gervais! Ok, than I guess I could say I believe in god about as much as I believe that Abstinence is only 9.9999999% effective (Virgin mary lol) So technically i could call myself an agnostic or skeptic, but then I feel like i'm giving too much respect to such ludicrous claims.
ChaoticChris5150 2 years ago
Are you agnostic when it comes to the belief that a flying teapot created everything? Or would you pretty much say that you would take that on the same ground as you take the gods creating it? And the whole test of faith thing is a load of crap huh? LOL I apologize if i am coming off as con-descending.
ChaoticChris5150 2 years ago
@BobRob196 Close, Atheism is lack in of A god. In respect to Zeus and Thor we are both Atheist. I am an Atheist because I don't believe in any Gods I can put my finger on or even know a name of. But I most definitely won't say a god did not 100% create the universe for the same reason I can't say that a one-legged pirate did.
ChaoticChris5150 2 years ago 8
Pure materialism is a much more mystical view of the universe than the concept of a creator God. Things are all causal in the universe. Nothing 'just happens' without primary forces making it happen. Matter doesn't appeared out of nothing. This view is much more 'fantastic' than the concept of God.
sophiavbfleury 2 years ago
@sophiavbfleury i agree with you there.
as far as im concerned everything is a load of shit and we will never EVER know wut really started it all. evolution is wellfounded, rational, and plausible- making alot more sense than a "magical sky daddy" snapping his fingers
but the start of the universe itself is something we will NEVER know. evry theory we have is shit either a wizard poofed it all up leaving the paradox of what created him, or everything spontaneously poofed itself out of nothing
JaCkMiChEaLs0n 2 years ago
I hit post comment by mistake. My apologies. Anyways, How by deciding I would no longer believe in a magical sky daddy have I closed my mind? Agnostic atheism is when you will not say for sure that there is not a god, but you disassociate yourself with all religions. If someone is agnostic, and someone asks of their religion, they will undoubtedly say they are an agnostic atheist.
anotalreadytakenname 2 years ago
Because creationists are so open minded.
anotalreadytakenname 2 years ago
And who created god? this is a silly debate as there will never be an answer to the question if god exists.....in the event we discover that god exists, first we will have someone (with a face) to really complaint to, and second, we will be demanding to see his manager as he is doing a very poor job by being the moral and spiritual guide of many religious lunatics!!
eap8317 2 years ago 3
i know these guys are not idiots, i just was getting a rise out of the debate and i went to far, these guys, (except bill mayer (sp.?)) are smart as hell, i think, i know goerge is, ricky has some noteworthy stuff, nice video tormented stature, not really sorry for posting all this, but it's the thought that counts.
Idolcruisefix 2 years ago
most biota's dna changes, it appears that it changes into new spiecies sometimes, (sharks, other niches, etc. excluded), but to say that this is the main cause of all this diversity seems slightly jumping the gun. i say there is a 99.9% chance evolution is this sole mechanism. that's not enough for me to belive in it, like i believe in gravity, or that the pope has nothing to say about hoards of priest sexually violating children. religious heads are evil now but not all preachers and followers.
Idolcruisefix 2 years ago
religous people deny the possability of evolution, that is not what i've said at all. I deny the impossability of unforseen possabilities. but as for the heads of many of these religions, well, that observation has been exhausted more then evolutionary observations have. that observation is getting awful close to gravity... maybe it will prove my assumtions wrong 1/18,000,000,000th of a second before the end of time, who knows, do yall? ha ha
Idolcruisefix 2 years ago
questioning reality and it's many parts and so called facts, laws and theories is not a religious trait in the slightest, it's a scientific one, strickt devout religious folks don't question anything so get off of my cloud with all this religous stuff. life is magical, this is a scientific observation of anyone with the balls to stick their thumb out or back back for a few months or just try to see what being really is. it's only religious if you make it that, it's actually just observational.
Idolcruisefix 2 years ago
to be deeply religious you have to be ignorant....If you ask many priests (educated priests) you will find amazing answers and most of them don't buy the whole bible shit, but obviously religion uses people and there is a lot of money involved so it is a way to get rich and have power doing not too much in life!!! We should treat religions as myths and fairy tales, and then the world will be better!!
eap8317 2 years ago
i love how idolcruiseifx said y' all i kno its fallacious to think he is an idiot for saying that but from everything else he said im sure he is an idiot (or she i dont really give a shit)
TeamShadowNY 2 years ago
"you all" sounds even dumber, and "all the people on this comment page" is too long, so tell me a better word then "yall" and i'll use it.
Idolcruisefix 2 years ago
Comment removed
Idolcruisefix 2 years ago
creationism is bull propagada made by freemasons and members of families that also made the mormon religion and scientology.
TormentedStatue 2 years ago
@TormentedStatue
"creationism is bull propagada made by freemasons and members of families that also made the mormon religion and scientology."
WTF?
Do you say things randomly without checking your facts?
Biblical creationism has been the bedrock of Christianity for the best part of the last 2000 years, and that includes ALL Christian sects, not just the recent ones!
TheGodlessGuitarist 1 year ago
@TormentedStatue This is a great video, but the music is VERY distracting... Maybe you can take it out, or change it to something without words (John Williams?) and turn the volume down a bit. It's over powering what they are saying. Thanks...
FUQRSOUL 1 year ago
@Idolcruisefix
Your ignorance amuses me. That is all I have to say, as I have grown tired of arguing over such trivial matters. Your religion, it is BULLSHIT. I say this because I care about not you, but humankind as a whole. Stop PLAGUING us with your idiocy, and fucking die. It would save me the trouble of convincing you otherwise about your "invisible man".
anotalreadytakenname 2 years ago 2
i'm not religious, why would you think such things? because i question reality? religious people don't do that.
Idolcruisefix 2 years ago
@Idolcruisefix you've obviously seen a lot of the world to speak that way to the infidels, would you like to example one of these impossibilities to us all and back up with real evidence and not simply scripture please?
p.s please take note of the correct spelling of IMPOSSIBILITIES!!
mythinktube 1 year ago
@mythinktube, debasing of reality to non-magical things is the falsity within and/or around evolution, while evolution, in and of itself, could still be mostly true. proof of magic?psychic dreams R my best evidence of supernatural happenings, asking for random things and aquiring them for free, all while far from civilization, but others are more simple, like putting people together or knowing they will meet soon. people pass things off as coincedence when it is too statistically far fetched.
Idolcruisefix 1 year ago
@Idolcruisefix um, creationism isnt impossible but it is backed up with absolutely NO evidence. its just not science at all plain and simple logic.
patrickledford420 1 year ago
@patrickledford420 perception and evolution and time might work together to be considered an aspect of creationism, maybe like a metaphore but one where the truth is even wierder, but somewhat explainable, always leaving more questions (as all answers do). space is bent and is the force of gravity, supposedly... this almost-fact, explaining a round earth, is a good example of something being wierder then orginal thoughts, ie, a flat earth siting on some thing, or being, ie, a turtle, or atlas.
Idolcruisefix 1 year ago
@patrickledford420 Plain and simple magic you mean. Without any facts to support it, calling it logic is stretching the term to Aristotlean proportions.
Silrathi 1 year ago
Awesome...Well done!! Excellent choice of music in the background. Comedians are spot on telling more truth then we know what to do with!
ThirdEyeThoughts 2 years ago 2
great video !!! one question in the evolution ideas. Does the theory explain how spiecies that are found fossilized (or recent and living) aren't at least 95% almost always identical to another spiecies found or known of? how in the hell would one spieces quickly transform into another without ever showing slight changes? the missing link illudes us and keeps it a theory, any theories to help it along?
Idolcruisefix 2 years ago
Fossilization is difficult. Not 100% of the intermediates would have been fossilized.
LOL! It's not like they immediately changed.
A metaphor for the way you're describing it is, Someone met your great grandfather, and then they met you without ever meeting your grandparents, and parents. How could you exist in this scenario?
johnedwards1968 2 years ago
maybe i wasn't clear, i'm saying that even 5% of these "intermediates' (thanks for the term) are not fossilized and that is what makes it strange.
Idolcruisefix 2 years ago
oops...still was not clear, what i'm saying is, much less then 5% of all fossils found are of these intermediates. this would imply that the change happens very quickly, so quick it dosn't seem probable.
Idolcruisefix 2 years ago
Or the change could be so subtle as to not show up as intermediates. Think about it. Of all the characteristics that can change on an animal, the only 1 we can examine in fossils is skeletal structure.
It's a very limiting way of perceiving evolutionary change. Fortunately many other ways have been found which support the theory of evolution.
johnedwards1968 2 years ago
@Idolcruisefix
But they're discoverijng intermediates all the time, Idol. How will you respond when your religion crumbles. will you tell us that god put those intermediates there as a "test"? Like he did with the dinosaur fossils?
anotalreadytakenname 2 years ago 2
why does everyone think they know my religion because i question a theory? that's loony-toons, i say. the truth is i fallow no religion in particular and enjoy the truths and wild stories found in many religions. even if all religious people stopped being religious, evolution whould still be a thoery and not a law. so hhhheemmmm!
Idolcruisefix 2 years ago
yes, you're right anotalreadytakenname (great name) lot's o' intermediates, i just like keep an open mind that's how people discover things, by never ignoring the gray or "dark" areas, where there are questions. this world is mysterious and where it is not it is lying. if evolution is true, the whole base of it's appearance might not be. maybe it is driven by the earth itself or dreams of cretures and molecules designate mutations. keep an open mind or it's not science, it's a religion.
Idolcruisefix 2 years ago
True enough, except I kept an open mind for years. I hate to sound rude, but the idea of a creator isn't out of the question. I'm an agnostic atheist.
What I don't believe in is organized religion, or the bible, or any of the other bullshit propaganda.
anotalreadytakenname 2 years ago
evolution has not yet been explained to me in a way that describes how so many seperate spiecies are found fossilized with such a small amount "intermeiates"... small amounts, as in NONE... right? are there any intermediates found to show a complete gradual shift in bone structure from one spiecies to another, by the way, of the spiecies that have bone, their bone structure is relevant to the experiment. i believe in evolution.. i belive in it because i can't see the infalable truth that it is.
Idolcruisefix 2 years ago
we "humans", share 98% of the DNA structure with chimpansies. Chimpansies have 48 chromosomes and humans 46, scientist discovered recently that there are a pair of chromosomes that fused at one point in time and that's why we developed speech and other cualities that diferenciate us from animals..and it is no more a theory!
eap8317 2 years ago
eap8317, with that logic, the similarity of a gmo to a non-gmo also prooves evolution to be true. is there a fussion of these two of the 48 chimp chromies creating 46 and thus a human, (which i don't doubt you are mostly right about)... the problem still is no one knows how or why these chromies would suddenly do such a thing, until then, theory theory theory, says I...oh and the rest of the scientific community as well.
Idolcruisefix 2 years ago