2:28 - I think a better way to phrase this idea (which is how I talk about it) is to say that there are consistent patterns in the world around us, and logic is a description OF those patterns: logic is a DEscriptive (not PREscriptive) idea. The patterns themselves, however, are not ideas, and thus, they don't come from "the mind of God".
Identifying the specific definition of a word (or words) isn't nitpicking, it's good communication with less possibility for misinterpretation. Clear and precise definitions are anathemas to religious fanatics. As long as they can wallow in vague interpretations of words and cliched lines that don't really mean anything, they can continue "interpreting" bible verses to suit their immediate needs.
yeaahhh finally tried to watch the video to which this is a response.. got through about half of it, couldnt stomach anymore. and i spend hours at a time masochistically watching youtube videos of morons spouting bullshit, but could not watch anymore of that!
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
wish i could have a conversation with you Mr.TheoreticalBullshit.this is badgering on youtube .why are you doing this public instead of privately.this video put on a page of you as a rather pompis ass.. your becoming more annoying trying to defend your principles and your beliefs.on the other hand maybe your just having this youtube conversation with an eight year old that just isn't able to keep up with you..we will never know or should we care? your self righteousness is one sided and wrong
@christopher07311968 I wish you were more clear on what, exactly, is your objection to this video. It sounds like you're aim is to be insulting. If you'd like to see the video to which this is a response, the link is on this page, right under "Top comments", so I'm not sure why you claim we'll "never know" if this is a conversation with an 8-year old. If someone you were publicly debating totally mischaracterized your position and arguments, what would you do differently?
@TheoreticalBullshit I'd really like to smoke a joint with you dude, and have some good conversation haha. You say some smart shit man. I thought I was good at busting religion untill I found your videos.
GOOD LORD!!! THIS guy makes awesome videos, the language makes me feel retarded, and yet I still grasp the concept of what the is saying. I'm glad there are people who actually question reality, and then show people their findings.
@AnonymLonen Matt Dillahunty is useless. I have heard people talk about him before so I looked him up, what I found was just another belligerent emotive atheist who claims to value logic but makes one arbitrary subjective claim after the other. Whilst I don't always agree with TB I always enjoy his video's, he and Matt D are not on the same level
Wow, you have so much more patience and tolerance for zkueker88 then I do. After listening to him and watching how he responds, I have simply given up on him being capable of having an intellectually honest opinion.
You have no clear understanding of logic or consciousness at all. If youre an atheist, or if you want to argue against the existence of god, the only satisfactory case you have involves the existence of logic. Therefore you contradict yourself, in and doing destroying your position of arguing at all.
Sabzarek, wth? There were no flaws from tbs in the first 1:36. When he says Logic, he refers to the label logics, which is humans observant "rules" of existance. But not the rules of existance themselves. I can only imagine that your "You have no clear understanding of logic" is founded by you thinking that TBS is talking about the rules of existence instead of the label. But please, go and tell us what it is that demonstrates that TBS has "no clear understanding of logic or consciousness"...thx
The existence of logic is no contradiction; no one claims that there is no such thing as logic. They claim there is no logic outside the minds of man, which does not contradict their arguments seeing as we are humans and can argue from nothing but the mind of man.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
You both have no real clear understanding of logic in and of itself. I did turn off his video after a few short minutes because it was so sloppy. Your video response pulling teeth I turned off after 1:36.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Ok, your first response was fair and asked some good questions. I agree his response was shitty, however your response to his shitty response was shitty
glorification did cause god to exist, in a sense, without millions of people willing to follow and worship and simply believe, god is irrelivent, and has no reason to exist, its only by him being worshipped that he has purpose
One thing I have noticed in my years as an an observer of the atheist/christain argument is that atheists don't seem to lie ever, in fact the whole concept of lying seems to make them (us) sick. Its probably the reason we Are atheists because we can clearly see the bible is all lies and we just cannot swallow, or accept the lies.
Religious people on the other hand CONSTANTLY lie, maybe its because the are so accepting of the lies in the bible that they find it easier to lie? Just an observation
its more of a longing for truth than not wanting to lie, im sure atheists lie but in religious debate, atheists have no reason to lie, thus why would we?
I love his logical view on things. I am a believer and I don't really have evidence. I really think i'm a believer because it really doesnt matter whether i am or not in my opinion. Also, who doesn't like the thought that there's a heaven. I believe people created religion from fear of having nothing after death. That was just a belief though. However, i understand his point of view and respect that. He has a very logical mind and many great points in his vids:).
his video is basically saying " God is god and god is god so deal with god ok ? " .. hes using an illogical strategy to twist your words into an idiotic spiral.
I must tell you all, that I am now your ruler. My logic is this, I am your ruler, because I am. If you call me a liar, I have but one thing to say to you...."Nuh-Uh!"
thats basically how christians argue,alot of times anyway,can never give a straight answer OR not answering at all.if that fails,they refer to biblical quotes,when we ahteists shoot that down by saying the bible is in question which we have all said thousands of times they accuse us of BAD GRAMMAR,NAMECALLING OR FOUL LANGUAGE.
oh,i forgot the argument that just because we cannot see him...fuck off christians...
Negative what you fail to understand was in us there are contradictions and our ability to lie. It is true we discover logic, not created. That is the part you fail or ignore, is more the latter however. Your attitude shows arrogance and the inability to be wrong, that is called the God complex and your full of it.
Get over it deep down you know you are wrong and you are borrowing the Laws of Logic from us. I know is hard to swallow our pride but give it a shot it does wonders.
younhol00 how is it that he's so wrong yet you fail at demonstrating this supposed fact?
You started out with a strawman progressed with an ad hominem and ended with a na na na na boo boo you still borrow laws of logic from us.
I mean where are we here? Kindergarten?
"I know is hard to swallow our pride but give it a shot it does wonders." - Lets see if you can at least take your own advice and realize that your post was a total failure.
You think it was a strwman no no my friend the opposite is true. Who created the Laws of logic ha? Can you create anything out of nothing can you? I bet you can't. Yes unfortunately for you the Laws of Logic were discovered not created by man, because we contradict and lie, remember I used we not you. Therefore we are not responsible for creating it but discovering them period end of story. I never fail at anything I simply point out how bad TS try to rebut ZK88, he didn't do it.
"You think it was a strwman no no my friend the opposite is true."
Until you point out the passage where TBS said in this clip that there are no 'contradictions within us' (whatever that means) and that we 'can't lie' your statement remains a strawman.
"Who created the Laws of logic ha?" - Who is begging the question huh?
"Can you create anything out of nothing can you" - No one has made that assertion. So yeah... another strawman.
Tbs elude it to point in us humans, u and me that men contradict and men lie, ZK88 doesn't he actually admits it and myself. I know I have lied and contradicted myself plenty of times and so are you. You are calling it strawman because you don't like The God that created everything, you don't want to accept it. Therefore you bring the assertion of strawman because u want to feel good and believe there is no God, u can run but you'll never hide from the truth friend.
"Tbs elude it to point in us humans, u and me that men contradict and men lie" - Ah, so you are admitting that he in fact didn't talk about it and that this statement:
"Negative what you fail to understand was in us there are contradictions and our ability to lie" - Was a blatant attempt of you to put words in his mouth he never said.
How can you know he thinks a specific way about something he DIDN'T talk about? And more important how is it even relevant to this video.
"You are calling it strawman because you don't like The God that created everything" - I find it interesting that you're not able to grasp how I could not believe in your god so you make up stories about how I secretly believe in god and that I'm just rebelling. I mean that explanation isn't even satisfying from your perspective. Why would I deliberately choose to go to hell? At least try to be consistent.
The strawman stands. You've mischaracterized TBS' view.
As TBS already said. At least give your opponent the courtesy of understanding his argument as a whole.
The fact that humans lie and contradict each other doesn't have the slightest effect on TBS' philosophy. In fact most atheists know that to be the case and that's why we hold evidence to be so important. Personal testimony and 'alleged' eye witness scribblings from a bronze age desert tribe just won't do it.
Tbs elude it to point in us humans, u and me that men contradict and men lie, ZK88 doesn't he actually admits it and myself. I know I have lied and contradicted myself plenty of times and so are you. You are calling it strawman because you don't like The God that created everything, you don't want to accept it. Therefore you bring the assertion of strawman because u want to feel good and believe there is no God, u can run but you'll never hide from the truth friend.
"Yes unfortunately for you the Laws of Logic were discovered not created by man"
The laws of logic are descriptive of the behavior of existence. They were made by man to understand the nature of this universe. The universe doesn't need them. So it doesn't matter if we 'contradict and lie' because the behavior of existence remains the same.
"I never fail at anything" - You're such a hypocrite for claiming TBS has a god complex.
I was thinking the exact same thing when I saw his reply. The only reason I didn't double-check that he was actually responding to the video to which it was labeled a response was because he used some of the words you used.
I find it very difficult to believe he did it on purpose, though. I think he just wasn't listening at all... presumably because he knew, in the back of his mind, that his argument was based on nothing but mere assumption and not good'ol fashion...
ive just left a coment on zcougars vid asking why he thinks that infinite regress is a logical falasy when an eternal god whos actions are sequential would necesarilly need infinite regress to be logical. Alternativly if his god exists in some timeless realm what is meant by eternal? the term becomes meaningless.
I noticed that nobody had answered your question, and I don't remember what he does to his hair, but I remember that he answers that question in one of his "Q & A" videos.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
To try to find an exlination to God's existance is like searching for the end of the universe. n comparing our wisdom to Gods we dont even stand a chance. on the day of judgement we will give account for every idle word! so repent n believe in THe GOZPEL!!!!!!!!!
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
God exist because He is the "I AM" and on the day of judgement you will give account for every idle word. Its appointed to die n then judgement. Repent while you have a chance. You dont know the time or hour you cease to exist n stand in His Glory.........Jesus loves you!!!!!
P.S. Will I be forced to live with you for eternity as well, or can I ask for a separate room? I... well, forgive me but I'm just not too sure how it all works. I mean... you know, nothing personal, but I do prefer the company of those with respect for the English language... but... yeah, I suppose no language there? Or will you spelling just become perfect ipso facto?
I'm sorry man... new convert (again, thank you!) so I just... well, I'm lost.
When my comments keep getting labeled "poor," it also makes me think those who have subscribed to atheism don't have an open mind. They simply want all nay-sayers, like me, silenced. And that surely isn't being very open minded, is it?
Taking a look at previous comments, most of those that take an opposing stance have become unview-able because of being "thumbs downed" by your crowd. Wow. . . lol
It's a shame that zkueker88 didn't represent himself very well. This could have been a very interesting discussion, and I would have loved to hear it.
I disagree very much with what you argue for, but I appreciate very much how admirably you argue for it.
I agree that Zach didn't respond to your question. But isn't your question an irrelevant one? One doesn't need to know why cats exist in order to claim that they do; likewise, Zach shouldn't need to explain why God exists in order to claim that He does. Am I right?
Loved it! At the end you not only described Zack's video but MOST Christian "arguments"! In my opinion Christians don't reason, they make excuses. They don't think, they rationalize. They're not interested in the truth or valid arguments, just excuses that'll allow them to continue believing the comforting lies they've believed since they were indoctrinated into this fraud. Arguing with them is like punching air.
I agree with you on the fact that logic is a human way of thinking about things. That seems fairly obvious- if only by studying a little aristotle.
That's why I asked you how you can possibly begin to understand a supernatural being with human logic. The basic (rhetorical) questions you ask in your video aren't even worth thinking about, because anyone who understands Christianity understands God doesn't exist inside our human laws (e.g.time, consciousness, logic!).
The arguments about *TAG*, or Zack's argument that God gives us logic, at that point it's either about logic or you're barely asserting. You can't have your cake and eat it too.
Example, if you want to insist that God can't be understood through logic or reason, but just through faithful interpretation of the Bible then you're a hypocrite (as was shown in his vid) for using (also) the TAG argument. In fact by using the mystery argument (as you are now) you are forced to conclude that.
cont... The argument that we can't understand God is another argument, Zack's already tacitly allowed for it's logical interpretation. If you're arguing TAG then you can't argue for mystery, if you're arguing mystery and agreeing with TBS on logic then your argument isn't relevant at all to his video.
cont... And finally, the myterian doctrine in all it's forms is a defensive doctrine rather a smoke screen instead of an intellectually honest argument that relies solely on faith, bare assertion fallacy, and special pleading fallacy. Really what it means to say is that if that's all you have to say you might as well not say it because without priori a faith it's totally meaningless.
Secondly I would argue that it would not be hypocritical at all to say God doesn't need to be logically accounted for AND God created logical human beings in the same sentence.
Lastly, Scott said that just because something's supernatural doesn't mean it can be illogical. On the contrary, look up the definition of supernatural.
It is if you claim that the alternative is illogical, that's my whole point to clarify. In the case that your argument relies on a faith based reasoning, then it's as I said before a meaningless thing to present in an argument, the point I lead up to. I am not claiming you're "default" wrong here, I am saying it's a doctrine *for* the faithful *for* a reason, it's not an argument literally *for* the same reason. People confuse these all too often.
So? There is no evidence that such a being exists. And I would say there is evidence to the contrary. We live in a universe that's particularly hellish towards life. It took time span's that we can't physically (and I'm just talking number of neurons here) to exist (life that is) and has struggled constantly since then to continue to exist. And also why would such a being exists. As TBS points out it's illogical.
So in your opinion what is there evidence for? A big bang and all of a sudden, life! Do you realize this is just as "silly" and unscientific, not to mention an extremely flawed doctrine with more holes than Christianity?
Please get an education on science. I have no doctrine of faith. I don't need one. I understand epistomology and henceforth the dawn of the scientific theory. And why it is important to our modern life. On the other hand, christianity has no evidence. You would not need faith if you did.
There are plenty of folks in the scientific community who think there is more evidence for Christianity than evolution. You can believe what you want, but I think it's naive to say there is "no" evidence for Christianity.
No there isn't. Provide some. And no scientists do not think that. The overwhleming historical evidence is against christianity. Evolution is the currently accepted model of explaining diversity of life on our planet. It has far more support than the theory of gravity or even the theory of germs. Just get an education for christ sake.
Ever heard of a strawman argument? Thats all this is. There are plenty of christians who are scientists. There are plenty of scientists who aren't christian. Both. I said there is no evidence for christianity. Scientists still have faith. Francis Crick is one of the premiere 20ths century biologists and he is definatly a christian.
I doubt that. Saying you have a B.S. is an appeal to authority. Another logical fallacy. Did you fail to learn logic at school or did they just not teach it? I am still in school and Im not sure what I'm going to major in.
I told you I have a degree. Now you're telling me that a Bachelors of Science is a logical fallacy. I guess I'm not sure where you're coming from.
Ok, so you said there is no evidence for Christianity. I misunderstood what you were referring to. I still completely disagree. There is evidence for Christianity.
So would you argue one needs faith to believe in God but not faith to believe in evolution?
No I was saying that your strawman and appeal to authority were logical fallacies. And I meant get an education about evolution because you have demostrated so clearly that you do not understand it.
Absolutely. You absolutely need faith to believe in God and you do not to believe in evolution. Though belief in evolution is an odd thing. It's like gravity. The belief is founding on experience and previous evidence.
And I asked for you to provide evidence for christianity.
You have to search if you want to see evidence for Christianity. Most people just acquire the knowledge fed to them from the media, college professors or people around them. So I'm not suprised you or many others are so ignorant as to say there is NO evidence for Christianity. Why do you think those thousands of scientists believe in it? Sure, faith is needed to believe in certain doctrines of Catholicism, but there is just as much evidence for a Creator than evolution.
I have attended several classes on evolutionary biology taught by 2 die-hard atheist profs. I have read The God Delusion & The Selfish Gene by Dawkins, Letter to a Christian Nation by Sam Harris and listened to lots of broadcasts by Christopher Hitchens. To name a few.
My guess is you've probably never picked up a book or done research on evidence for Christianity. You've never been exposed to works by Thomas Aquinas, C.S. Lewis, or Lee Strobel. Continued. . .
You obviously don't understand evolution I don't believe you. I've read the Selfish Gene, but Dawkins is a boring author. I could care less about that sort of book. I've read Lee Strobel's "the Case for Christ" and I know all about C.S. Lewis and his atheism. All their arguments are so incredibly logically flawed that I don't see how people are convinced by them.
You've probably dismissed Intelligent Design as quick as you're dismissing me now. If you know what the 2nd law of thermodynamics is, you probably don't know how it applies to Creation. And you probably have little knowledge of how accurate the Bible actually is according to many Historians.
I'm not going to give you a one-liner on evidence for Christianity. Just like you couldn't give me a one-liner on evidence for evolution. If you really want to know (doubtful) you'll research it yourself.
Because I understand how evolution works I dismissed Intelligent Design. The evidence for evolution, Genetics, Fossils, Applications, etc...
Well let's start, We share hundreds of Endogenous Retroviruses with chimps. They do absolutely nothing (most of the time but have bad results somtimes). They are a virus that put itself into our genome to survive. They are in the exact same place in the genome in both humans and chimps. There's no reason for this with a designer.
Chimps have 48 chromosomes, we have 46. This would mean in order for evolution to be true one of our chrosomes would have to be two chimp chromosomes linked. This is exactly what we find. Our 2nd chromsome is two chimp chromosomes linked. Chromosomes have end indicators and our 2nd one has end indicators in the middle. Exactly what evolution predicts. Genetics has millions of little things like this confirming evolution. Once again Get an education. You not understanding it doesn't disprove it.
"Intelligent design is based on science. That's exactly what it is. Scientific."
Give me a scientific definition for 'design', how it can be quantitated, which predictions it makes, which experiments you propose, which practial applications could be derived and how it can be falsified.
Last but not least how were things 'designed' and who did the 'designing'?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
A scientific definition for design? lol You give me one.
ID explores the POSSIBILITY that perhaps we humans and our world were created by something. It's a theory that most evolutionists and anti-religious people (like you :D) cannot stand simply because it MIGHT mean you are wrong and religion actually makes sense. And it does this not by using the Bible or Qur'an, but scientifically.
Don't believe me? Research it! Or you can keep trying to overwhelm me with your pointless questions.
"A scientific definition for design? lol You give me one."
Way to dodge a question alexthemuskox. Are you forgetting who is making a claim and who needs to provide the evidence? These questions need to be answered for the 'theory' to be considered scientific.
"It's a theory that most evolutionists and anti-religious people" - This drivel just makes you sound like an idiot. I don't accept ID because 1) Not scientific 2) No evidence. Don't go dragging religion into this discussion.
Why do you need a scientific defintion for the word design? We're talking about Intelligent Design, the theory of. Scientists are the ones who came up with it in the first place, so please stop telling me it's unscientific. The theory itself is scientific, based on observable, measurable facts.
If you don't believe it, that's fine, but to call it something it isn't makes you look like you're trying to downplay ID. And downplaying something usually means you fear what it is, IMO.
"The theory itself is scientific, based on observable, measurable facts."
Palmistry is based on observable, measurable facts (i.e. lines on your hand). Does that make it scientific?
ID proposes that if we don't understand how something works, god did it. That's an argument from ignorance (a logical fallacy), and it's not falsifiable (a requirement in science).
"Why...for the word design?" - Because how can you expect us to apply methodological naturalism to something you can't even give us a definition for?
It is akin to you asking "why do I need a scientific definition for the word entropy?"
"Scientists...in the first place" - To be precise dr. Behe made the 'hypothesis' which he didn't publish, didn't peer review, was unable to defend it in a court of law while still accepting common descent (that we are related to chimps).
"The theory itself is scientific, based on observable, measurable facts."
How can you even measure something you are unable to define? How do I measure design? How can I objectivly observe it (what standard is there)?
"And downplaying...you fear what it is" - Please refrain from stupid armchair psychology. I might as well say that you are going off on a tangient just to change the subject because you know you are wrong.
It's so easy to do while it distracts from the real subject at hand.
How about YOU research it? ID was a stillbirth. They published, what, two papers? Years ago. One of them in an obscure journal, and one published by accident. It was NEVER taken seriously even a speculative hypothesis because it's *not falsifiable*; it's fundamentally unscientific.
If you think ID is making waves in the scientific community, that any part of the biology community does not consider evolution to be fact, it's because you're being *lied* to.
ID does not follow the Scientific Method. It begins with a conclusion ("we were designed") and looks for evidence to support that conclusion, and then either disputes or ignores evidence to the contrary.
ID not only isn't science, it's the opposite of how science works.
@TheoreticalBullshit creationism based ID does not follow the scientific method. Scientifical fact ID does follow the scientific method. Electron to proton mass, perfect for chemical bonding, expansion rate of the universe, if slower, no stars, if faster, no galaxies, strong/weak nuclear = rate smaller only hydrogen, rate higher = berrylium unstable, differrent either way up or down, atomic nuclie unstable.
"If you know what the 2nd law of thermodynamics is, you probably don't know how it applies to Creation."
That states that there is a net increase in entropy in a closed system. The only thing we know that is a closed system is THE UNIVERSE! Earth is NOT a closed system. We get energy from the sun, and convert some of it into the order we perceive as LIFE. YOU are the one who doesn't understand the 2nd law!!!
Because I know EXACTLY how Creationists (you) THINK it applies to "creation". That is: Hovindism. Hovind tries to use the 2nd Law to dispute how information and complexity can increase over time. He and most Creationists claim this is impossible. Did I nail your reasoning? If you have something else in mind, please explain clearly, since what I just described is the common Creationist idea. But if what I described is how you think the 2nd Law applies, please do some research.
No, you didn't "nail my reasoning." I've read and seen a lot of Dr. Hovind's stuff, which is very interesting but that's not what I was talking about. Did you know he is in jail by the way?
Energy had to have been put into a closed system at some point if it's always being lost. That's it.
"Dr" Hovind? The only place that guy is a Dr is in his mind. Yes, I know he's in jail. Energy is not lost. Entropy increases. The entire system (the universe) goes from order to disorder. But, if you want to insert god as the cause of the initial high state of order, you would be treading on thin ice, for god would be even more ordered, and thus the problem would be pushed back, ad infinitum. However, advances in String Theory and inflationary cosmology show small fluctuation causing high order.
BTW, the bible is NOT historically accurate. Don't confuse historical relevance w/ historical accuracy. Archeologists have ruled out things such as a mass Jewish Exodus from Egypt. And Geologists have disproved Noah's flood. If you think this info is wrong, or that the scientists are mistaken, then you are deeply out of touch w/ reality.
"That's why I asked you how you can possibly begin to understand a supernatural being with human logic."
If our feeble human brains cannot comprehend supernatural beings, and if God exists outside the realm of logic, then how do you justify a rigid set of beliefs and requirements based around him in order to reach logical conclusions (ie, "go to heaven")?
If God is beyond logic, then it is impossible to determine anything about him, including what requirements he may have for entering heaven.
The origin of evil is Satan the opposer of God. He temped the first man and woman to dissobey God, by eating from the tree they were told not to eat from. He wanted to be worshiped like God, so they died for thier dissobience, and satan is condemed to be destroyed soon.
Good lad, these people, Keuker88 and his ilk, need common sense and logic rammed down their throats as far as it will go ... without choking them, to bring and encourage them back to reality.
I can only reiterate, millions of people, over thousands of years have appealed to their gods with no identifiable or repeatable result - why would one bother any more. Why ?
Face it, it is a wild goose chase, with no result... !
Far better, study the human mind and be POSITIVE about the results!
You didn't come down on him too hard. In fact, you were quite gracious in your frustration. I know from experience that it is utterly frustrating and damn near impossible to engage Zkueker88 in a real debate. It is as if he has talking points that get repeated in mantra-like fashion pretty much regardless of what the topic is and what his interlocutor has said about the topic. He's a nice guy, but when things get beyond "God exists because it cannot be otherwise," things go off the rails.
OMG, i've subscribed to TBS for i dont know how long. I was just watching tv and eating breakfast, and guess what i saw! one life to live or some dramashow i saw TBS!!! LMFAO I was like wtf??
I would like to formally request a commemorative statue made of this video (somehow) because this is awesome!
Venaloid 3 weeks ago
2:28 - I think a better way to phrase this idea (which is how I talk about it) is to say that there are consistent patterns in the world around us, and logic is a description OF those patterns: logic is a DEscriptive (not PREscriptive) idea. The patterns themselves, however, are not ideas, and thus, they don't come from "the mind of God".
Venaloid 3 weeks ago
Brutally surgical!
Another intellectually dishonest apologetic video put in its proper place, way to go!
I see you even took on W.L. Craig. You are monster, Mr. Scott. Give em hell!!
sammy2trees 5 months ago
I just saw some serious intellectual whoop ass, well done my friend
SageKasai 5 months ago
Comment removed
SaiLodge 6 months ago
Oooooh Zach Zach Zach....your video sucked.
When I saw you open up with that, I knew I was in for a hell of a ride.
BigLundi 7 months ago
Identifying the specific definition of a word (or words) isn't nitpicking, it's good communication with less possibility for misinterpretation. Clear and precise definitions are anathemas to religious fanatics. As long as they can wallow in vague interpretations of words and cliched lines that don't really mean anything, they can continue "interpreting" bible verses to suit their immediate needs.
ev0lv3n0w 7 months ago
sorry but it seems that the guy is just too thick or branswashed by the Bible to even grasp what you are talking about
jokifka 7 months ago
yeaahhh finally tried to watch the video to which this is a response.. got through about half of it, couldnt stomach anymore. and i spend hours at a time masochistically watching youtube videos of morons spouting bullshit, but could not watch anymore of that!
can now see why you were so pissed off now!
xIgniteTheAirwavesx 9 months ago
Wow the T.A.G. again.. I feel sorry for you dude having to refute Zkueker88's video. Hmm remedial.
skeptheist 10 months ago
That shirt is so awesome.
ContentByMe 10 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
wish i could have a conversation with you Mr.TheoreticalBullshit.this is badgering on youtube .why are you doing this public instead of privately.this video put on a page of you as a rather pompis ass.. your becoming more annoying trying to defend your principles and your beliefs.on the other hand maybe your just having this youtube conversation with an eight year old that just isn't able to keep up with you..we will never know or should we care? your self righteousness is one sided and wrong
christopher07311968 10 months ago
@christopher07311968 I wish you were more clear on what, exactly, is your objection to this video. It sounds like you're aim is to be insulting. If you'd like to see the video to which this is a response, the link is on this page, right under "Top comments", so I'm not sure why you claim we'll "never know" if this is a conversation with an 8-year old. If someone you were publicly debating totally mischaracterized your position and arguments, what would you do differently?
TheoreticalBullshit 10 months ago 20
@TheoreticalBullshit I'd really like to smoke a joint with you dude, and have some good conversation haha. You say some smart shit man. I thought I was good at busting religion untill I found your videos.
carny426 4 months ago
GOOD LORD!!! THIS guy makes awesome videos, the language makes me feel retarded, and yet I still grasp the concept of what the is saying. I'm glad there are people who actually question reality, and then show people their findings.
KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK.
Alex11033 11 months ago 3
Scott, you are very talented with your language and presentation. Very good video ;)
HorridDreams 1 year ago
I gave thumbs up in first 4 seconds.
capoman1 1 year ago
Dude...you're like a younger version of Matt Dillahunty. Bravo.
mattdyer0 1 year ago 3
@mattdyer0 Hell fucking yes.
AnonymLonen 1 year ago
@AnonymLonen Matt Dillahunty is useless. I have heard people talk about him before so I looked him up, what I found was just another belligerent emotive atheist who claims to value logic but makes one arbitrary subjective claim after the other. Whilst I don't always agree with TB I always enjoy his video's, he and Matt D are not on the same level
Abu7929 1 year ago
The best he could probably say to this is that it's his leap of faith that determines this.
ROARfatassROAR 1 year ago
Hey Scott don't even try to debate with him.
An Atheist VS. Fundy Christ-Kid is like. . .
A Geographer VS. A Dumbass Flat Earther.
oliverOATH 1 year ago
Excellent patience. I suppose it's 'easy to love folly in a child.'
FlexibleElf 1 year ago
Wow, you have so much more patience and tolerance for zkueker88 then I do. After listening to him and watching how he responds, I have simply given up on him being capable of having an intellectually honest opinion.
Uhlbelk 1 year ago
"For Gods sake stay on topic" hahaha
bananabread119 1 year ago
Holy shit what a wordsmith o.o Athiesm +1
Khordajj 1 year ago 3
after watching zkueker's original response, it's clear that he did not understand the first video's argument AT ALL.
eggertstwart 1 year ago
OMG! This is great! You think EXACTLY like I do! You're awesome! Five stars! Oh wait, there is no five stars anymore. Well thumbs up then. =D
powerinstars6 1 year ago
I found a solution. If Scott has a lobotomy, the fight may be more fair.
Maybe
Way to go TBS
A5Hellcat 1 year ago 10
TB for the FTW
A5Hellcat 2 years ago 6
"Did you really think i'd let you get away with that" lolololololol XD
MATTY360ELITE 2 years ago 7
I kinda feel bad for Zach lol
kersedsaint 2 years ago 24
This has been flagged as spam show
Hope you get my response in its intended readingchronologically, I am not used to this 500 character stipulation
sabzarek 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
You have no clear understanding of logic or consciousness at all. If youre an atheist, or if you want to argue against the existence of god, the only satisfactory case you have involves the existence of logic. Therefore you contradict yourself, in and doing destroying your position of arguing at all.
sabzarek 2 years ago
Sabzarek, wth? There were no flaws from tbs in the first 1:36. When he says Logic, he refers to the label logics, which is humans observant "rules" of existance. But not the rules of existance themselves. I can only imagine that your "You have no clear understanding of logic" is founded by you thinking that TBS is talking about the rules of existence instead of the label. But please, go and tell us what it is that demonstrates that TBS has "no clear understanding of logic or consciousness"...thx
Dvalinor 2 years ago 6
The existence of logic is no contradiction; no one claims that there is no such thing as logic. They claim there is no logic outside the minds of man, which does not contradict their arguments seeing as we are humans and can argue from nothing but the mind of man.
HoldOnNowWhatIsThis 2 years ago
@sabzarek all youre doing is just repeating the same clap trap that logic MUST be reflective of god.
did you even watch this video atall?
Ilikenuman 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
You both have no real clear understanding of logic in and of itself. I did turn off his video after a few short minutes because it was so sloppy. Your video response pulling teeth I turned off after 1:36.
sabzarek 2 years ago
so why exactly are you trashing his video after admitting that you stopped watching after it was less than one fifth of the way through?
It's like if I stop reading a book after the first chapter and then write a review saying the whole thing was shit.
pope6789 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Ok, your first response was fair and asked some good questions. I agree his response was shitty, however your response to his shitty response was shitty
sabzarek 2 years ago
Nice, you owned him. I stopped watching Zac's response after the first minute, it was just so bad, so full of crap.
And I notice he hasn't been able to come up with a response yet. It's been nearly nine months now...
Kiido11 2 years ago 3
God my brain hurts! And I'm out of Asprin. =(
bananabread119 2 years ago
you. are. a. genius.
azndee5 2 years ago 2
Is that a song by them? I don't even know what they sound like. I'm more into underground post-punk type stuff.
albatross1977 2 years ago
Comment removed
Seniortrends 2 years ago
If my penis was a brain I would masturbate to this.
Final137 2 years ago 75
Tell me about it!
Subliminallll 2 years ago
best comment i've ever read to anything. haha
azndee5 2 years ago
Oh wow.
CeruleanFawkes 2 years ago
glorification did cause god to exist, in a sense, without millions of people willing to follow and worship and simply believe, god is irrelivent, and has no reason to exist, its only by him being worshipped that he has purpose
evTom14 2 years ago 5
One thing I have noticed in my years as an an observer of the atheist/christain argument is that atheists don't seem to lie ever, in fact the whole concept of lying seems to make them (us) sick. Its probably the reason we Are atheists because we can clearly see the bible is all lies and we just cannot swallow, or accept the lies.
Religious people on the other hand CONSTANTLY lie, maybe its because the are so accepting of the lies in the bible that they find it easier to lie? Just an observation
aegisgfx 2 years ago 3
its more of a longing for truth than not wanting to lie, im sure atheists lie but in religious debate, atheists have no reason to lie, thus why would we?
evTom14 2 years ago
I love his logical view on things. I am a believer and I don't really have evidence. I really think i'm a believer because it really doesnt matter whether i am or not in my opinion. Also, who doesn't like the thought that there's a heaven. I believe people created religion from fear of having nothing after death. That was just a belief though. However, i understand his point of view and respect that. He has a very logical mind and many great points in his vids:).
This message is a compliment
Hatredman2 2 years ago 7
Thank "God" TBS is on our side!! Great video as usual.
DonCorleoneMafiosi 2 years ago 4
No need to thank anything, he's on our side because we're right.
MrSalamander7 2 years ago 4
He says "for gods sake stay on topic", and as an atheist I do the same thing from time to time.
All that is is evidence that we have not wiped out all our brainwashing yet, it is not evidence that we secretly believe in god..
aegisgfx 2 years ago 2
Yeah i say 'thank God' alot and 'bless you' everytime someone sneezes. It's been embedded into my brain since i was a kid at school.
Subliminallll 2 years ago
TBS is proof that something great can come out of no where. Perhaps his own existence refutes his own argument.
albatross1977 2 years ago
I may be going off on a tangent...about stupid things that shouldn't be an issue...but...you are so hott!
haha it's weird to see "schuyler" talk like this. haha, but...again it's still hott! lol
Hideko42490 2 years ago 4
Zach argues like a disorganized Matt Slick, in almost every way.
InLucidReverie 2 years ago 2
his video is basically saying " God is god and god is god so deal with god ok ? " .. hes using an illogical strategy to twist your words into an idiotic spiral.
ManamoPrime 2 years ago 4
Did you ever get a response to this? I'm staggered at his original reply.. how did he think that was reasonable?
valmorian 2 years ago 8
I must tell you all, that I am now your ruler. My logic is this, I am your ruler, because I am. If you call me a liar, I have but one thing to say to you...."Nuh-Uh!"
skywize 2 years ago 7
Funniest reply yet!
Alisterwolf66 2 years ago
I love science because we don't fill in gaps with "its gods will", or "an invisible wizard did it!"
aegisgfx 2 years ago 5
Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain
skywize 2 years ago 2
thats basically how christians argue,alot of times anyway,can never give a straight answer OR not answering at all.if that fails,they refer to biblical quotes,when we ahteists shoot that down by saying the bible is in question which we have all said thousands of times they accuse us of BAD GRAMMAR,NAMECALLING OR FOUL LANGUAGE.
oh,i forgot the argument that just because we cannot see him...fuck off christians...
TLSlayer 2 years ago 2
Negative what you fail to understand was in us there are contradictions and our ability to lie. It is true we discover logic, not created. That is the part you fail or ignore, is more the latter however. Your attitude shows arrogance and the inability to be wrong, that is called the God complex and your full of it.
Get over it deep down you know you are wrong and you are borrowing the Laws of Logic from us. I know is hard to swallow our pride but give it a shot it does wonders.
younhol00 2 years ago
younhol00 how is it that he's so wrong yet you fail at demonstrating this supposed fact?
You started out with a strawman progressed with an ad hominem and ended with a na na na na boo boo you still borrow laws of logic from us.
I mean where are we here? Kindergarten?
"I know is hard to swallow our pride but give it a shot it does wonders." - Lets see if you can at least take your own advice and realize that your post was a total failure.
infinit888 2 years ago 2
You think it was a strwman no no my friend the opposite is true. Who created the Laws of logic ha? Can you create anything out of nothing can you? I bet you can't. Yes unfortunately for you the Laws of Logic were discovered not created by man, because we contradict and lie, remember I used we not you. Therefore we are not responsible for creating it but discovering them period end of story. I never fail at anything I simply point out how bad TS try to rebut ZK88, he didn't do it.
younhol00 2 years ago
"You think it was a strwman no no my friend the opposite is true."
Until you point out the passage where TBS said in this clip that there are no 'contradictions within us' (whatever that means) and that we 'can't lie' your statement remains a strawman.
"Who created the Laws of logic ha?" - Who is begging the question huh?
"Can you create anything out of nothing can you" - No one has made that assertion. So yeah... another strawman.
infinit888 2 years ago
Tbs elude it to point in us humans, u and me that men contradict and men lie, ZK88 doesn't he actually admits it and myself. I know I have lied and contradicted myself plenty of times and so are you. You are calling it strawman because you don't like The God that created everything, you don't want to accept it. Therefore you bring the assertion of strawman because u want to feel good and believe there is no God, u can run but you'll never hide from the truth friend.
younhol00 2 years ago
"Tbs elude it to point in us humans, u and me that men contradict and men lie" - Ah, so you are admitting that he in fact didn't talk about it and that this statement:
"Negative what you fail to understand was in us there are contradictions and our ability to lie" - Was a blatant attempt of you to put words in his mouth he never said.
How can you know he thinks a specific way about something he DIDN'T talk about? And more important how is it even relevant to this video.
infinit888 2 years ago 3
"You are calling it strawman because you don't like The God that created everything" - I find it interesting that you're not able to grasp how I could not believe in your god so you make up stories about how I secretly believe in god and that I'm just rebelling. I mean that explanation isn't even satisfying from your perspective. Why would I deliberately choose to go to hell? At least try to be consistent.
The strawman stands. You've mischaracterized TBS' view.
infinit888 2 years ago 3
As TBS already said. At least give your opponent the courtesy of understanding his argument as a whole.
The fact that humans lie and contradict each other doesn't have the slightest effect on TBS' philosophy. In fact most atheists know that to be the case and that's why we hold evidence to be so important. Personal testimony and 'alleged' eye witness scribblings from a bronze age desert tribe just won't do it.
infinit888 2 years ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
Tbs elude it to point in us humans, u and me that men contradict and men lie, ZK88 doesn't he actually admits it and myself. I know I have lied and contradicted myself plenty of times and so are you. You are calling it strawman because you don't like The God that created everything, you don't want to accept it. Therefore you bring the assertion of strawman because u want to feel good and believe there is no God, u can run but you'll never hide from the truth friend.
younhol00 2 years ago
"Yes unfortunately for you the Laws of Logic were discovered not created by man"
The laws of logic are descriptive of the behavior of existence. They were made by man to understand the nature of this universe. The universe doesn't need them. So it doesn't matter if we 'contradict and lie' because the behavior of existence remains the same.
"I never fail at anything" - You're such a hypocrite for claiming TBS has a god complex.
infinit888 2 years ago
as he says,youn,logic is within consciousness,so therefore it is all man,unlike christians,atheists dont jump to conclusions and kill over them...
TLSlayer 2 years ago
"Your attitude shows arrogance and the inability to be wrong, that is called the God complex and your full of it."
so explain how hes arrogant and why hes wrong,give the HOW AND WHY,this time,we know the WHO exists.
TLSlayer 2 years ago
I was thinking the exact same thing when I saw his reply. The only reason I didn't double-check that he was actually responding to the video to which it was labeled a response was because he used some of the words you used.
I find it very difficult to believe he did it on purpose, though. I think he just wasn't listening at all... presumably because he knew, in the back of his mind, that his argument was based on nothing but mere assumption and not good'ol fashion...
...motherfucking logic.
helgihg 2 years ago 2
Great stuff, thanks!
Do you thinks it's also fair to say that TAG violates Occam's Razor in positing an extra hypothesis, i.e. god, where none is apparently necessary?
Have you come across the kalam cosmological argument as laid out by William Lane Craig? What do you make of that?
ollypppppppp 2 years ago
ive just left a coment on zcougars vid asking why he thinks that infinite regress is a logical falasy when an eternal god whos actions are sequential would necesarilly need infinite regress to be logical. Alternativly if his god exists in some timeless realm what is meant by eternal? the term becomes meaningless.
ooglebydoogleby 2 years ago
My video was in the back ground, wile you where playing Halo 3, and you just happend to respond to bits and pieces of it. You picked up. ROFL!@!!!
bananabread119 2 years ago
How do you get your hair to do that??
jdt002 2 years ago
I noticed that nobody had answered your question, and I don't remember what he does to his hair, but I remember that he answers that question in one of his "Q & A" videos.
SamTay04 2 years ago
It is way easier to comprehend this video and the Lord Logic video rather than zhueker88's response to Lord Logic.
OnThe246 2 years ago 5
I felt exactly the same way.
I was actually asking myselve if I had missed the points in this debate because I couldn't make any sense of zhueker88's vid.
Weltenweber 2 years ago
He comprehended what you said, but since he is religious, all criticism is ignored and/or misrepresented as to make their imaginary friend plausible.
conman2317 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
To try to find an exlination to God's existance is like searching for the end of the universe. n comparing our wisdom to Gods we dont even stand a chance. on the day of judgement we will give account for every idle word! so repent n believe in THe GOZPEL!!!!!!!!!
underHIZmercy 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
God exist because He is the "I AM" and on the day of judgement you will give account for every idle word. Its appointed to die n then judgement. Repent while you have a chance. You dont know the time or hour you cease to exist n stand in His Glory.........Jesus loves you!!!!!
underHIZmercy 2 years ago
Okay... I'm convinced. Thank you!
P.S. Will I be forced to live with you for eternity as well, or can I ask for a separate room? I... well, forgive me but I'm just not too sure how it all works. I mean... you know, nothing personal, but I do prefer the company of those with respect for the English language... but... yeah, I suppose no language there? Or will you spelling just become perfect ipso facto?
I'm sorry man... new convert (again, thank you!) so I just... well, I'm lost.
Literally.
rationalmuscle 2 years ago 3
!!!
siddacious 2 years ago
I guess in heaven they might all be speaking in toungues.
No chance for misunderstanding each other in that case.
Oh, to be a fly on that wall...;-)
bakedbean37 2 years ago
You were far too kind... :-)
NuyBard 2 years ago
definantly good video. great debate skills
duckdodgers23 2 years ago 2
stephen a cutie pie.
godnlenora 2 years ago
zzzzzzzzzzzz......
Pulling Teeth is a great hardcore band though.
^_^
ForgedAlliance 2 years ago
HaHaHa! youtube debate!
boxersgirlbunny 2 years ago
leave halo 3 out of this, its a cracking game and has no comment on god!!!!
smokingbob34 2 years ago 4
When my comments keep getting labeled "poor," it also makes me think those who have subscribed to atheism don't have an open mind. They simply want all nay-sayers, like me, silenced. And that surely isn't being very open minded, is it?
Taking a look at previous comments, most of those that take an opposing stance have become unview-able because of being "thumbs downed" by your crowd. Wow. . . lol
alexthemuskox 2 years ago
Better than pre-approving comments and disabling ratings.
DickJohnson3434 2 years ago
It's a shame that zkueker88 didn't represent himself very well. This could have been a very interesting discussion, and I would have loved to hear it.
I disagree very much with what you argue for, but I appreciate very much how admirably you argue for it.
Marlowann 2 years ago
I agree that Zach didn't respond to your question. But isn't your question an irrelevant one? One doesn't need to know why cats exist in order to claim that they do; likewise, Zach shouldn't need to explain why God exists in order to claim that He does. Am I right?
bryguy25 2 years ago
Ah nevermind I see your point - It IS an irrelevant one, just as Zach asking you to account for the behavior of existence is irrelevant.
bryguy25 2 years ago
Epic pwnage.
Mjhavok 2 years ago
PWNED....
DIRTYDUNNZ 2 years ago
If this isn't a diatribe, I don't know what one is!
ErikWithBrain 2 years ago
Loved it! At the end you not only described Zack's video but MOST Christian "arguments"! In my opinion Christians don't reason, they make excuses. They don't think, they rationalize. They're not interested in the truth or valid arguments, just excuses that'll allow them to continue believing the comforting lies they've believed since they were indoctrinated into this fraud. Arguing with them is like punching air.
templarart 2 years ago
Watch 3:35 -4:10
ummm?
I agree with you on the fact that logic is a human way of thinking about things. That seems fairly obvious- if only by studying a little aristotle.
That's why I asked you how you can possibly begin to understand a supernatural being with human logic. The basic (rhetorical) questions you ask in your video aren't even worth thinking about, because anyone who understands Christianity understands God doesn't exist inside our human laws (e.g.time, consciousness, logic!).
alexthemuskox 2 years ago
The arguments about *TAG*, or Zack's argument that God gives us logic, at that point it's either about logic or you're barely asserting. You can't have your cake and eat it too.
Example, if you want to insist that God can't be understood through logic or reason, but just through faithful interpretation of the Bible then you're a hypocrite (as was shown in his vid) for using (also) the TAG argument. In fact by using the mystery argument (as you are now) you are forced to conclude that.
OneHariSeldon 2 years ago
cont... The argument that we can't understand God is another argument, Zack's already tacitly allowed for it's logical interpretation. If you're arguing TAG then you can't argue for mystery, if you're arguing mystery and agreeing with TBS on logic then your argument isn't relevant at all to his video.
OneHariSeldon 2 years ago
cont... And finally, the myterian doctrine in all it's forms is a defensive doctrine rather a smoke screen instead of an intellectually honest argument that relies solely on faith, bare assertion fallacy, and special pleading fallacy. Really what it means to say is that if that's all you have to say you might as well not say it because without priori a faith it's totally meaningless.
OneHariSeldon 2 years ago
Yes, and no.
Firstly, I don't use the T.A.G.
Secondly I would argue that it would not be hypocritical at all to say God doesn't need to be logically accounted for AND God created logical human beings in the same sentence.
Lastly, Scott said that just because something's supernatural doesn't mean it can be illogical. On the contrary, look up the definition of supernatural.
alexthemuskox 2 years ago
It is if you claim that the alternative is illogical, that's my whole point to clarify. In the case that your argument relies on a faith based reasoning, then it's as I said before a meaningless thing to present in an argument, the point I lead up to. I am not claiming you're "default" wrong here, I am saying it's a doctrine *for* the faithful *for* a reason, it's not an argument literally *for* the same reason. People confuse these all too often.
bldjie 2 years ago
So? There is no evidence that such a being exists. And I would say there is evidence to the contrary. We live in a universe that's particularly hellish towards life. It took time span's that we can't physically (and I'm just talking number of neurons here) to exist (life that is) and has struggled constantly since then to continue to exist. And also why would such a being exists. As TBS points out it's illogical.
ExSaint1379 2 years ago
No evidence? I beg to differ.
So in your opinion what is there evidence for? A big bang and all of a sudden, life! Do you realize this is just as "silly" and unscientific, not to mention an extremely flawed doctrine with more holes than Christianity?
alexthemuskox 2 years ago
Please get an education on science. I have no doctrine of faith. I don't need one. I understand epistomology and henceforth the dawn of the scientific theory. And why it is important to our modern life. On the other hand, christianity has no evidence. You would not need faith if you did.
ExSaint1379 2 years ago
There are plenty of folks in the scientific community who think there is more evidence for Christianity than evolution. You can believe what you want, but I think it's naive to say there is "no" evidence for Christianity.
alexthemuskox 2 years ago
No there isn't. Provide some. And no scientists do not think that. The overwhleming historical evidence is against christianity. Evolution is the currently accepted model of explaining diversity of life on our planet. It has far more support than the theory of gravity or even the theory of germs. Just get an education for christ sake.
ExSaint1379 2 years ago
Oh wow, are you really arguing this with me?
You're telling me that there is NO ONE in the scientific community that is Christian.
OK, if you want to explore your ignorance google scientists of the christian faith and click the first link.
They actually have an alphabetical index of scientists that are Christians.
I'm sorry you've been so sheltered your whole life as to think that. And thank you, I have a B.S. Where did YOU study?
alexthemuskox 2 years ago
Ever heard of a strawman argument? Thats all this is. There are plenty of christians who are scientists. There are plenty of scientists who aren't christian. Both. I said there is no evidence for christianity. Scientists still have faith. Francis Crick is one of the premiere 20ths century biologists and he is definatly a christian.
ExSaint1379 2 years ago
I doubt that. Saying you have a B.S. is an appeal to authority. Another logical fallacy. Did you fail to learn logic at school or did they just not teach it? I am still in school and Im not sure what I'm going to major in.
ExSaint1379 2 years ago
You told me: "Get an education for christ sake."
I told you I have a degree. Now you're telling me that a Bachelors of Science is a logical fallacy. I guess I'm not sure where you're coming from.
Ok, so you said there is no evidence for Christianity. I misunderstood what you were referring to. I still completely disagree. There is evidence for Christianity.
So would you argue one needs faith to believe in God but not faith to believe in evolution?
alexthemuskox 2 years ago
No I was saying that your strawman and appeal to authority were logical fallacies. And I meant get an education about evolution because you have demostrated so clearly that you do not understand it.
Absolutely. You absolutely need faith to believe in God and you do not to believe in evolution. Though belief in evolution is an odd thing. It's like gravity. The belief is founding on experience and previous evidence.
And I asked for you to provide evidence for christianity.
ExSaint1379 2 years ago
You have to search if you want to see evidence for Christianity. Most people just acquire the knowledge fed to them from the media, college professors or people around them. So I'm not suprised you or many others are so ignorant as to say there is NO evidence for Christianity. Why do you think those thousands of scientists believe in it? Sure, faith is needed to believe in certain doctrines of Catholicism, but there is just as much evidence for a Creator than evolution.
alexthemuskox 2 years ago
I have attended several classes on evolutionary biology taught by 2 die-hard atheist profs. I have read The God Delusion & The Selfish Gene by Dawkins, Letter to a Christian Nation by Sam Harris and listened to lots of broadcasts by Christopher Hitchens. To name a few.
My guess is you've probably never picked up a book or done research on evidence for Christianity. You've never been exposed to works by Thomas Aquinas, C.S. Lewis, or Lee Strobel. Continued. . .
alexthemuskox 2 years ago
You obviously don't understand evolution I don't believe you. I've read the Selfish Gene, but Dawkins is a boring author. I could care less about that sort of book. I've read Lee Strobel's "the Case for Christ" and I know all about C.S. Lewis and his atheism. All their arguments are so incredibly logically flawed that I don't see how people are convinced by them.
ExSaint1379 2 years ago
You've probably dismissed Intelligent Design as quick as you're dismissing me now. If you know what the 2nd law of thermodynamics is, you probably don't know how it applies to Creation. And you probably have little knowledge of how accurate the Bible actually is according to many Historians.
I'm not going to give you a one-liner on evidence for Christianity. Just like you couldn't give me a one-liner on evidence for evolution. If you really want to know (doubtful) you'll research it yourself.
alexthemuskox 2 years ago
Because I understand how evolution works I dismissed Intelligent Design. The evidence for evolution, Genetics, Fossils, Applications, etc...
Well let's start, We share hundreds of Endogenous Retroviruses with chimps. They do absolutely nothing (most of the time but have bad results somtimes). They are a virus that put itself into our genome to survive. They are in the exact same place in the genome in both humans and chimps. There's no reason for this with a designer.
ExSaint1379 2 years ago 2
Chimps have 48 chromosomes, we have 46. This would mean in order for evolution to be true one of our chrosomes would have to be two chimp chromosomes linked. This is exactly what we find. Our 2nd chromsome is two chimp chromosomes linked. Chromosomes have end indicators and our 2nd one has end indicators in the middle. Exactly what evolution predicts. Genetics has millions of little things like this confirming evolution. Once again Get an education. You not understanding it doesn't disprove it.
ExSaint1379 2 years ago 4
Very compelling.
alexthemuskox 2 years ago
"You've probably dismissed Intelligent Design as quick as you're dismissing me now."
The scientific community dismissed intelligen design because it is at it's core not scientific.
Science isn't theology and theology isn't science.
watch?v=JVRsWAjvQSg
infinit888 2 years ago 2
Intelligent design is based on science. That's exactly what it is. Scientific.
alexthemuskox 2 years ago
"Intelligent design is based on science. That's exactly what it is. Scientific."
Give me a scientific definition for 'design', how it can be quantitated, which predictions it makes, which experiments you propose, which practial applications could be derived and how it can be falsified.
Last but not least how were things 'designed' and who did the 'designing'?
infinit888 2 years ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
A scientific definition for design? lol You give me one.
ID explores the POSSIBILITY that perhaps we humans and our world were created by something. It's a theory that most evolutionists and anti-religious people (like you :D) cannot stand simply because it MIGHT mean you are wrong and religion actually makes sense. And it does this not by using the Bible or Qur'an, but scientifically.
Don't believe me? Research it! Or you can keep trying to overwhelm me with your pointless questions.
alexthemuskox 2 years ago
"A scientific definition for design? lol You give me one."
Way to dodge a question alexthemuskox. Are you forgetting who is making a claim and who needs to provide the evidence? These questions need to be answered for the 'theory' to be considered scientific.
"It's a theory that most evolutionists and anti-religious people" - This drivel just makes you sound like an idiot. I don't accept ID because 1) Not scientific 2) No evidence. Don't go dragging religion into this discussion.
infinit888 2 years ago
Why do you need a scientific defintion for the word design? We're talking about Intelligent Design, the theory of. Scientists are the ones who came up with it in the first place, so please stop telling me it's unscientific. The theory itself is scientific, based on observable, measurable facts.
If you don't believe it, that's fine, but to call it something it isn't makes you look like you're trying to downplay ID. And downplaying something usually means you fear what it is, IMO.
alexthemuskox 2 years ago
"We're talking about Intelligent Design, the theory of."
It's not a theory. You just don't know what that word means in science (hint: it doesn't mean 'hunch', as it does in colloquial English).
It's not even a valid speculative hypothesis, because it can't be falsified.
"Scientists are the ones who came up with it in the first place, so please stop telling me it's unscientific."
Comes from scientists = scientific = fallacy. That's like saying a turd is delicious if a pastry chef makes it.
ReductioAdAbsurdum 2 years ago
"The theory itself is scientific, based on observable, measurable facts."
Palmistry is based on observable, measurable facts (i.e. lines on your hand). Does that make it scientific?
ID proposes that if we don't understand how something works, god did it. That's an argument from ignorance (a logical fallacy), and it's not falsifiable (a requirement in science).
ReductioAdAbsurdum 2 years ago 4
Comment removed
infinit888 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Why...for the word design?" - Because how can you expect us to apply methodological naturalism to something you can't even give us a definition for?
It is akin to you asking "why do I need a scientific definition for the word entropy?"
"Scientists...in the first place" - To be precise dr. Behe made the 'hypothesis' which he didn't publish, didn't peer review, was unable to defend it in a court of law while still accepting common descent (that we are related to chimps).
infinit888 2 years ago
"so please stop telling me it's unscientific"
To be able to use the word scientific a hypothesis has to meet certain criteria which ID doesn't.
I'm sorry to inform you but science is a very rigorous process and simply being a scientist doesn't make your ideas scientific.
If that were the case all of my ideas would be scientific and that's just assinine.
infinit888 2 years ago
"The theory itself is scientific, based on observable, measurable facts."
How can you even measure something you are unable to define? How do I measure design? How can I objectivly observe it (what standard is there)?
"And downplaying...you fear what it is" - Please refrain from stupid armchair psychology. I might as well say that you are going off on a tangient just to change the subject because you know you are wrong.
It's so easy to do while it distracts from the real subject at hand.
infinit888 2 years ago
Comment removed
infinit888 2 years ago
"Don't believe me? Research it!"
How about YOU research it? ID was a stillbirth. They published, what, two papers? Years ago. One of them in an obscure journal, and one published by accident. It was NEVER taken seriously even a speculative hypothesis because it's *not falsifiable*; it's fundamentally unscientific.
If you think ID is making waves in the scientific community, that any part of the biology community does not consider evolution to be fact, it's because you're being *lied* to.
ReductioAdAbsurdum 2 years ago 4
Can you tell me what is unscientific about ID please?
alexthemuskox 2 years ago
Sure. I can.
ID does not follow the Scientific Method. It begins with a conclusion ("we were designed") and looks for evidence to support that conclusion, and then either disputes or ignores evidence to the contrary.
ID not only isn't science, it's the opposite of how science works.
TheoreticalBullshit 2 years ago 43
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheoreticalBullshit creationism based ID does not follow the scientific method. Scientifical fact ID does follow the scientific method. Electron to proton mass, perfect for chemical bonding, expansion rate of the universe, if slower, no stars, if faster, no galaxies, strong/weak nuclear = rate smaller only hydrogen, rate higher = berrylium unstable, differrent either way up or down, atomic nuclie unstable.
SupremeAmerican 1 year ago
1. It's creationism with a new name, this has been found in a court of law to be so, read the judge E. Jones ruling.
2. ID is religious canard.
3. ID operates on non falsifiable assumptions.
4. ID's operative assumption is an argument from ignorance.
5. ID has yet to publish anything the working biological community, or geological community.
6. The few things they've published in the philosophical community have be torn to shreds
7.Not only is it not scientific it makes for bad philosophy too.
OneHariSeldon 2 years ago
@alexthemuskox can describe to us the scientific method? no?.................thats what i thought
robertwc82 1 year ago
"If you know what the 2nd law of thermodynamics is, you probably don't know how it applies to Creation."
That states that there is a net increase in entropy in a closed system. The only thing we know that is a closed system is THE UNIVERSE! Earth is NOT a closed system. We get energy from the sun, and convert some of it into the order we perceive as LIFE. YOU are the one who doesn't understand the 2nd law!!!
bu1ckgnx 2 years ago
Why are you telling me what the 2nd law of thermo. dynamics is? lol
Do you know what argument I'm talking about? Because I'm really not sure what your point is.
alexthemuskox 2 years ago
Because I know EXACTLY how Creationists (you) THINK it applies to "creation". That is: Hovindism. Hovind tries to use the 2nd Law to dispute how information and complexity can increase over time. He and most Creationists claim this is impossible. Did I nail your reasoning? If you have something else in mind, please explain clearly, since what I just described is the common Creationist idea. But if what I described is how you think the 2nd Law applies, please do some research.
bu1ckgnx 2 years ago
No, you didn't "nail my reasoning." I've read and seen a lot of Dr. Hovind's stuff, which is very interesting but that's not what I was talking about. Did you know he is in jail by the way?
Energy had to have been put into a closed system at some point if it's always being lost. That's it.
alexthemuskox 2 years ago
"Dr" Hovind? The only place that guy is a Dr is in his mind. Yes, I know he's in jail. Energy is not lost. Entropy increases. The entire system (the universe) goes from order to disorder. But, if you want to insert god as the cause of the initial high state of order, you would be treading on thin ice, for god would be even more ordered, and thus the problem would be pushed back, ad infinitum. However, advances in String Theory and inflationary cosmology show small fluctuation causing high order.
bu1ckgnx 2 years ago
BTW, the bible is NOT historically accurate. Don't confuse historical relevance w/ historical accuracy. Archeologists have ruled out things such as a mass Jewish Exodus from Egypt. And Geologists have disproved Noah's flood. If you think this info is wrong, or that the scientists are mistaken, then you are deeply out of touch w/ reality.
bu1ckgnx 2 years ago
I think you mean to say "certain" geologists. I would be interested in reading about that, could you point me to your source?
alexthemuskox 2 years ago
"There are plenty of folks in the scientific community who think there is more evidence for Christianity than evolution."
Bullshit. Evolution is a fact.
"You can believe what you want, but I think it's naive to say there is "no" evidence for Christianity."
I agree. We all know about the Bible. The Bible is evidence of Christianity. It's just not evidence of anything of historical accuracy, that's all.
787Bisurdaddy 2 years ago 3
"That's why I asked you how you can possibly begin to understand a supernatural being with human logic."
If our feeble human brains cannot comprehend supernatural beings, and if God exists outside the realm of logic, then how do you justify a rigid set of beliefs and requirements based around him in order to reach logical conclusions (ie, "go to heaven")?
If God is beyond logic, then it is impossible to determine anything about him, including what requirements he may have for entering heaven.
787Bisurdaddy 2 years ago
Oo blazin.
BraveNewAtheist 2 years ago
Blah blah blah. You are talking non sense. Get straight to the point.
Dellnvidia 2 years ago
Wow. That's the closest I've seen to you being angry, and that's not really that angry.
BENY0HAMA 3 years ago
damn it your hair looks good and nothing really else matters, lol jk...
Anastasius37 3 years ago
The origin of evil is Satan the opposer of God. He temped the first man and woman to dissobey God, by eating from the tree they were told not to eat from. He wanted to be worshiped like God, so they died for thier dissobience, and satan is condemed to be destroyed soon.
Starlababy 3 years ago
I'd like to think that we've all heard about Adam Eve and the snake. What does that have to do with T.A.G?
TheNeognostic 2 years ago
Good lad, these people, Keuker88 and his ilk, need common sense and logic rammed down their throats as far as it will go ... without choking them, to bring and encourage them back to reality.
I can only reiterate, millions of people, over thousands of years have appealed to their gods with no identifiable or repeatable result - why would one bother any more. Why ?
Face it, it is a wild goose chase, with no result... !
Far better, study the human mind and be POSITIVE about the results!
sanity1001 3 years ago
You didn't come down on him too hard. In fact, you were quite gracious in your frustration. I know from experience that it is utterly frustrating and damn near impossible to engage Zkueker88 in a real debate. It is as if he has talking points that get repeated in mantra-like fashion pretty much regardless of what the topic is and what his interlocutor has said about the topic. He's a nice guy, but when things get beyond "God exists because it cannot be otherwise," things go off the rails.
ProfMTH 3 years ago 7
Boom! Roasted!
Dogstolmychi 3 years ago
OMG, i've subscribed to TBS for i dont know how long. I was just watching tv and eating breakfast, and guess what i saw! one life to live or some dramashow i saw TBS!!! LMFAO I was like wtf??
zombieiscool 3 years ago
You are so intelligent you should be the president, or become one
bbvibrabb 3 years ago