what is ur opinion on ghost but i believe in them from personal expererience as in after life and also christinty started in my opinion to get peoples money in europe cuz they use to get condolences from people who pay them
Thechessstick is a retard, half of the things this idiot is claiming for proof have NOT been proven. I love stupid people.. If there were a single piece of evidence for "god"'s existence, it'd change humanity forever. Bottom line is religion is false, creation is false, and thechessstick is a wishful blissful moron. Enjoy your delusion, pal.
I enjoy AronRa's videos along with DonExodus,Wisemokey and RRS. Pity all you folks don't get grants from the NEA or any other foundation concerned over the public
welfare on issues of education and free speech, Rational thinking is an olympic spory in the US.
Wow, evolutionists will believe anything. What a bunch of dolts they are. Do yourself a favor and read a few of A. E. Wilder-Smith books and also Robert Dick Wilson's book "A Scientific Investigation of the Old Testament". Do you know that Noah's Ark was discovered? Also, Sodom and Gomorrah, the Red Sea crossing site, the real Mount Sinai the Ark of the Covenant? Yes, the proof is there. All one must do is seek.
Thank you Aron for getting back to me on that. I think you are very intelligent, articulate and well-spoken and I find a lot of what you say to be very intriguing and thought-provoking and helping me to seek further knowledge. However, I am a Christian and will always believe in the Lord. I am thus curious to know if you have any Christian friends that you hang out with on occasion and even have friendly debates with? I wish more Christians were open-minded enough to have you as a friend.
@AronRa maybe check out & do a clip on the book / video 'Day After Roswell' (Dr, Philip Corso)...a very powerful testimony from a very credible person
Al-Quran has 1400 years ago and Muslim Scientists has been declared "He (God) makes you (human), in the wombs of your mothers, in stages, one after another, in three veils of darkness".
Al Quran sura Az Zumar;6
".....He (God) makes you, in the wombs of your mothers, in stages, one after another, in three veils of darkness. . . ."
Have the Bible and scientists states "He (God ) makes you (human), in the wombs of your mothers, in stages, one after another, in three veils of darkness"?
Matt, AronRa, me: smart atheists who made an arguably stupid choice to be a slave to a parrot. Are there others? I am wondering if this is some kind of trend. If you are a fan of feathered friends, check out the video I have featured on my channel (it's not mine, I just found it). {Is that spamming, trying to get people to go to your channel? I have no reason to try to get channel hits! It's kind of funny to think that, as I can't even upload a video. Technologically retarded.}
I am someone who does not believe in anything. No god, good in man or a purple spaghetti monster in the sky.
Why do we need a higher reason to exist? A mouse living in a hole doesnt need one. Neither do we. I live a happy life, hafing fun and trying to do a good job, because that makes the ones I love feel good.
These butt crack sniffing creationists always make me laugh. They worship some ancient propaganda and blood ridden book that has been questionably translated into English. They then steal a load of Pagan customs to celebrate it and dont understand they are sinning even by their own religions petty standards. How very pathetic.
First realize your a sinner...Believe in your heart God raised Jesus Christ from the dead, confess him as Lord, ask him to forgive your sins (repent of them), wash you in his blood, and make you his child. Read and obey the Gospel, it has the power to save your soul.
"First, realize you're believing silly claptrap that came about in an age when we thought the ill were possessed by spirits and that the earth was the center of the universe. Then read books other than the bible and learn how to think rationally. Only you have the power to save your mind." - klfly
@HedeenJeff First realize that your spamming, then beg forgiveness from the FSM, ask him to bath you in his sauces, maybe he will save your meat balls.
No, dyingfetus69, I can read. Read your comment again, then read mine. You probably won't get my point but I'll explain it if you can understand that I said the exact opposite of what you said.
"From your perspectives you imply life is meaningless"
No, that is YOUR perspective of our perspective. Each individual constructs internally their own personal meaning of life. I don't need a bible or a concept of God to do so. Meaning is what YOU decide it is based upon your own life experiences. A deity needs not be part of it at all.
Same thing with morality. Just b/c you cannot fathom someone having a moral code without it being dictated to him/her by a god, doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.
@johnnyphoenix74 many atheist perceive nothingness after death. All they can view is the world, they are close-minded and superficial, but they think that gives them the right to be arrogant and conceited as well. Just like you said you can think what you want but it doesn't make it true. Same goes for you. Theist actually have more proof than atheist, so I don't know why atheist are so bitter about everything. Of course religion is flawed, but you can't judge ppl based off religion.
@johnnyphoenix74 IF there is no higher moral authority, then morals are open to perception. People can chose to do whatever they want instead of doing what is RIGHT. Your logic makes no sense whatsoever. Morals should not be based upon perceptions.
Constitution was based on the principle of a higher moral authority, whether you believe it to exist or not. You cannot let man decide morals because they will chose to please himself instead of others.
@xdyingfetusx69: No it wasn't. The Constitution was based on the principle of separating church and state; Jefferson said so explicitly. Monarchy is based on a "higher moral authority"; it's called the Divine Right of Kings, essentially "I'm king because God said so". America was founded as a republic, which is a form of democracy ("Rule by the People", Theocracy means "Rule by the Church"); what you're advocating is the exact opposite of the principle America was founded on.
"Constitution was based on the principle of a higher moral authority..."
No, the constitution is based around giving people the freedom do/say/worship whatever they want as long as it doesn't infringe upon the rights of others. Our entire justice system revolves around that.
Do you find it difficult to believe that men--like the ones who established such a system--can respect one another without the need for any deity to tell them to?
@xdyingfetusx69: So you think there's a difference between letting man decide morals, or men who claim to be inspired by God to decide morals? Of course he'll chose to please himself. You wouldn't want us to please you, would you?
@xdyingfetusx69: Morals originate from the needs of society, which is why we no longer have slavery even though the bible endorses it. The moral code expounded by the so-called "good book" is actually sickening; no honest person tout the Bible as a decent moral guide.
"You cannot let man decide morals because they will chose to please himself instead of others."
Then you can add me to your list of exceptions. My morals are not solely to please my self :P I put the sake of others into consideration, I know, it must be really difficult for you to understand how atheists can still not go around raping and killing despite not being bribed with heaven or blackmailed with hell.
Morals ARE open up to perception. That's why what was okay 300 years ago (slavery for instance) is not okay now.
Hard right Christians like yourself are the real bitter ones. You are so very disgusted with your human nature that you invent a Sky Fairy who threatens to hurt and torture us for it.
LOL, aren't you the one judging all atheists as being bitter?
@xdyingfetusx69 And there IS no higher moral authority, and so the morals have always changed. You yourself will violently deny and be repullsed by the thing your holy book advocates.
The ironic thing is, the idea that there is a higher authroity is what is the root of the issues you're trying to argue against: when the only justification to stand behind any moral value is that it's commanded, unquestiionably, from above, it any atrocity can and has been justified this way.
"God given morals" is a meek and inadequate excuse. At least until you prove without shadow of a doubt that there is a god, your specific version of god, that he has these exact rules... And actually even then god himself will have to justify why exactly are these rules in place.
So right now "god given morals" are about as much an excuse as it was when Church used it to torture and kill innocent people for the sake of fighting "demons".
@xdyingfetusx69: People do do what they want; even Theists. What you're excluding is that there are some who want to do what's right. Even Theists. But you can't except that of some Atheists as well. Morals are based on perceptions, conceptions, abstractions, and emotions. They don't always fit into some peoples ideas of correctness, like your view of Atheists. You might accept we have more in common, when you accept that the writings of the bible came from flawed men.
@xdyingfetusx69:You've used the term "logically" to back up some pretty illogical statements. "Logically it doesn't make sense for God not to exist."
That's a double negative right there; all you're saying is "It makes sense for God to exist."
No it doesn't. Logically, a good God cannot create evil; to do so proves either that the creator is not good or that he is not God. In either case, whence cometh evil?
That's logic; what you were dealing is is semantics.
Aronra, it was the first part of this video from Matt mentioning you that introduced me to your channel... So a big shout out for TAE and, as always, keep the vids coming...:)
We all have free will, but there must be consequences for our negative actions whether it is this lifetime or the next.
Logically it doesn't make any sense for there not to be life after death, or even death after death. Eternal death, not nothingness, in a negative void, the epitome of all evils. Evil extends way beyond the physical realm whether you wish to believe it or not, and can have heavy influences on peoples actions.
You claim there is lack of proof, I claim there is an overabundance of proof, it is in the eye of the beholder. What is the point of arguing over something based on perception? Logically it doesn't make sense for God not to exists.
From your perspectives you imply life is meaningless, and the only thing to life is what we can merely see or prove with science. So what is even the point of living? Some people don't even get to live past their 20s, 20 years is nothing compared to infinity..
@xdyingfetusx69 No I already proved you wrong and if somebody is biased against atheists than it has a direct effect on the argument. So go learn the meaning of ad hominem... I was also brought up a Roman Catholic and had my communion and everything so don't go spouting your shit about closed minds.
@matcotech that would give ray comfort way too much credit. ray comforts audience seems to either contain people who already know he is an idiot, or idiots who believe him. thunderfoots debate with comfort isnt exactly stellar, but still ray shows his idiocy in that, in which he basically says i know what happened at the beginning of time you dont. very difficult and annoying to deal with such logic for an hour or so straight.
@matcotech In order to have a debate with someone, the opposition must have a basic understanding of what it is they're arguing against, Ray and Kirk have zero understanding of science and even their own religion.
"Your DNA determines absolutely everything about you. In fact, the only difference between you and a blade of grass is the DNA. Thats right - if we took out your DNA and changed it, you could become a blade of grass. Or a tree. Or a giraffe. Or the common cold."
This was such an awesome show. I'm a grateful follower of AronRa and the ACA's productions, but Matt and Aron teaming up...the level of combined ownage scares the shit out of me.
Atheism, creationism, they're just labels. I'm an orthodox for instance. I KNOW the world is not 6k y.o. ,evolution is fact and the only way humanity is ever going to reach it's true potential is through intellectual and spiritual growth as well as technological advancement. If we were or created by God or not is in my mind irrelevant. The only thing that really is of interest to me is living a full life, learning all i can about as much as i can, in short fulfilling/surpassing my full potential
You may be the first person to notice my parrot blasting away in the background. I can hear him when I'm still out on the street inside a car before I pull into the driveway.
thanks for your videos, both your videos and thunderf00t's videos have giving me a really good entertaining way to learn the basics about the theories and facts that dispute the bullshit i had been force feed as a student at a christian school. It's sad though for me, as my parents are Pastors of a church, and I love them dearly. I'm sure they believe what they teach. I guess it makes me a closite athiest.
The argument creationists is a distortion of evolution into something opposite what it is, the assertion that one species is supposed to turn into another fundamentally different one. Of course evolution is really all about heredity, so the best way to misrepresent it is to ignore that fact and present a straw man instead.
"The lack of water, really is, in essence, the existence of water."
I'd like to see your ass survive in a desert. Lets see how that works out for you.
Atheism isn't a conviction. No real atheist ever says that anything is 100% percent true. The only thing that we have are observable facts, not whole truthes, or things to believe in.
Right. I'm not surprised that you can't understand atheism, if you can't understand an analogy(NOT the study of anuses).
I am not convinced that there is no, are are no gods. There is simply no proof or evidence that would cause me to believe in one, rather than looking towards perceptible facts for guidance.
Facts are things to be observed, not believed in. If God's existence was suddenly empirically proven I would note it, and put more weight into the validity of religion.
If he did exist believing in him, or being convinced that he existed would be unnecessary, because he would be an observable fact, just as how objects fall towards other objects with gravitational pulls, is a fact.
It's useless to have a contention on the existence of gravity, as opposed to why gravity exists.
No scientific mind believes in the theory of evolution or gravity, but we know that facts point to those things being true. It's not about the burden of proof. It's about what having a belief or apologetic conviction means, and being Atheist means having neither of those.
[creationist] My unsubstantiated assertions (beliefs) are the absolute truth.
[me] Belief does not make truth.
[atheist] My unsubstantiated assertion there is no god is not a belief.
[me] Any unsubstantiated assertion is a belief.
Either way you come at it belief does not make truth. Creationism must be opposed but not on the basis of belief - on the basis of science or substantiated assertions. Traditional atheism goes beyond knowing into believing and places itself on that spectrum.
I would contend that atheists are doing it wrong. They are falling into the trap of belief; thus commiting the same error as theists and placing themselves on the opposite end of the spectrum of belief.
That is why here on youtube we find the atheists and the theists locked in a struggle; or is it an embrace, a dance of belief?
your making semi valid points. the issue is that you cannot generalize the category of "Atheist" in retrospect you can generalize the category "theist" in this sense..
Theist makes an Unsupported Assertion that there is a god(s)..
Atheist makes the supported observation: "there is no substantial proof of one, therefore i have no reason to believe in one"
two negatives dont make a positive outside of Mathematics so what really are you trying to establish besides your perspective.
I accept that an atheist who thinks as you do is not affirming a belief that their is no god, but is stating the fact that they see no proof of a god.
Im glad i could be of assistance. I along with several others, Many others to be honest, on youtube are working to combat misinformation when we see it on the subject of Theism-Atheism. Not only the well known posters such as AronRa, thunderf00t and DPRjones and djarm67 but us smaller guys who havent posted in a while or have yet to post videos..
"I dont believe there exists such a thing as God"
"I believe god doesnt exist"
both are Atheistic Claims.. YES.
One is Atheism by speculation one is Atheism by preference .. I feel THAT is where your coming from. You will find most Scientific Atheist are Atheist by Speculation rather than preference.
its a very common misconception and very commonly swapped when needed to justify a slam against atheism as something that it is not.
Try to answer this with a simple yes or no. Is there any testable, objectively verifiable evidence to positively indicate that any gods ever actually existed?
If I have reason to believe, I will. If I don't, I can't, and my lack of conviction cannot be considered a positive proclamation of any belief system. Dis-belief is not a belief just like sanity cannot be listed as one of many mental disorders.
So far as I can tell there is no good evidence or reasons to believe in the gods of the religions; and personally I dont accept their existence. I regard them as fictions of the priests.
I accept the point that not accepting anothers belief in X is not itself a belief. But the positive unsubstantiated assertion 'there is no X'... I wonder about that.
One could argue there are two categories of disbelief; active disbelief and passive disbelief. The first being the firm belief that deities do not and cannot exist, and the latter being your 'I'll believe it when I see it' standpoint (or even a complete ignorance of God or gods).
The book by George H. Smith entitled 'Atheism: the case against God' covers the terms 'Implicit' and 'Explicit' atheism. If you have not read this book already I thoroughly recommend it.
I have many times argued that if there is a god, or souls, ghosts, or psychic phenomenon, then we should one day be able to detect them via advanced technolog. The reason is that everything that really exists has properites. But these suggestions have always met with great hostility from believers who insist that God can NEVER be traced or measured by any means EVER. So they can say whatever they want about him, and never worry about being proven wrong.
I find this particularly irritating in these debates. Some theists talk about God as though they know every aspect about him. I find it ironic that they claim we could not possibly know anything about God; therefore cannot criticize his ways, yet they somehow have the privilege of a full understanding.
hi aron, i love your videos and i have recently been trying to also convince a particular youtuber about their religious beliefs, the problem is that i cant even move on to debating their evidence with them because this person is not saying that belief in god is someones choice and they wont admit that if god really judges someone based on faith then its unfair and immoral.
i have given examples of people who wont be given the chance to make a choice before they die and so how could god justify sentencing them to hell if they didnt even have the choice, i also explained why faith has nothing to do with morality anyway, and then i also used one of your arguements about if faith really is a choice then it means you had to make yourself believe for it to actually be a choice. This person wont admit any flaws under all these arguements :(
anyway im sure you get loads of comments and messages and so im not asking you to help me with convincing this person i just wanted to thank you for your videos which give me new ideas to help explain to people that are on the fence about these things and im just showing my appreciation. After so strongy proving all this guys arguements wrong he seems to just ignore everything i say and so i dont think he/she will ever accept it and so im just going to probly leave them and move on.
It's sort of ignorant to say that anything is 100% possible or 100% impossible. And that's not just some pseudo humble perspective. It's kind of a necessary skepticism that you must have if you wish to be atheist, and especially scientific.
It is in fact NOT possible that a god exists, since gods are -by definition- supernatural, (meaning they only exist outside the reality of nature) and they rely on miracles which are defined as inexplicable events which defy the laws of physics.
The word supernatural is problematic. I think the spiritual need not be supernatural or unnatural; rather an extension of the natural order that lies beyond the spectrum of material-energy our bodies can physically access.
I do think there is good testimonial evidence from all cultures and historical times that there is a spiritual dimension accessible to human experience under certain conditions.
Shamanism, out of body experiences, near death experiences, have all been widely reported throughout historical times. I accept this is not objectively verifiable evidence, thus far, but it is evidence that deserves scientific examination, in my opinion.
Psychic and psionic practices of all kinds have been tested quite extensively especially in the 1960s. All of them have either been disproved or failed to perform statistically better than random chance.
Rhine, for instance, reported better than chance results. Many others have too. But most labs have closed due to mainstream opposition. The prevailing paradigm is naturalism and it is ideologically opposed to psionics.
So your view is in the ascendent at this time.
BTW you did refer to yourself as a nihilist in one of your replies.
The paradigm you're talking about is that we can't accept magic as an excuse when only the natural answer has ever proved to improve our understanding of anything. I'll still bet you can't produce any data that is positively indicative of anything supernatural. BTW, if anyone could actually demonstrate psionics, it would be natural rather than supernatural.
I accept a naturalism that requires data and proof. I agree that any real psionic effect would be natural, not supernatural. So you are right that I cannot present natural data to prove anything supernatural; natural data only prove natural phenomena.
If there is a real supernatural I dont see how we could ever prove it naturally.
What I dont accept is scientism; and that is how I view much that goes as scientific atheism; it becomes a dogmatic ideology that indescriminately legislates truth.
Then that is the core of your misunderstanding. Both incarnations of VendomFangX said they want to be free to say "Maybe there is a god", and they certainly can. I'll even say it with them, because that is an honest comment -until they drop the word, "maybe". Likewise, it is completely honest to say "There evidently is no god", which is the sole perspective common to all atheists. But it is obviously dishonest to state as fact things which aren't evidently true, and that is what faith requires.
It is possible to detect magic and it still be magical. For instance, picking a wand from a dogwood tree only after midnight, and then using it to transmute a man into a sheepdog.
Another example would be if Kirlian photography actually worked the way they said it was portrayed on Poltergeist. Because then you've got something that appears to exist only at will and not according to any particular physical theory including chemistry or gravity.
If by that, you mean to ask whether I believe that spells and such really work, then the answer is no. That's why I find Leviticus 14 to be so laughable.
However I am alluding to what I believe the 'reality' of such things actually is.
I just read Lev 14 and it is crazy stuff. I dont like that book.
I dont understand what you mean by 'the reality of such things'.
If magical effects are possible, and it's not impossible they are, I would think it was by natural means not yet scientifically understood; so not really magical.
To what extent does magical or supernatural merely mean not encompassed by the current paradigm.
I would hate to think the current paradigm is it; and the rest of reality is just more of the same.
While I would like to say that "all things are possible" -like I've been trained to say my whole life, the fact is that everything which qualifies as "magic" is defined as that which is im-possible according to the laws of nature; not just unexplained, but can never BE explained. If the example I gave happened anyway, it would consequently still be considered magical no matter how many times the stunt was repeated.
That's not be my understanding of magical. If your dogwood wand really did transform a man into a dog it would be by some possible process. Magic just means mysterious and unexplained - not impossible. Although it might only be possible with magical training.
The supernatural of the religionist does mean an unnatural event, but not impossible either, since god can do it; and if it happened it would still be supernatural.
But this does not imply that I think anything is possible - I dont.
If you look up the words, "magic" and "miracle", you'll find they're both the same thing. Both are defined as inexplicable by science, and believers insist that it will always be that way. They want the impossible to happen, so they can "believe the unbelievable" (to quote a hymn). If a wand is actually magic, then by definition there is no possible process at work, because supernatural things are like wispy dream-like things that can neither be quantified nor qualified.
Well looks like we take a different kind of view on most things. That's allowed. Undoubtedly there is infinitely more to reality than is contained in either of our present views. Perhaps we will find out some time; or perhaps we wont.
@AronRa I'm actually a magician with almost 35 years of experience. I've never believed magic is "supernatural". In fact I don't believe ANYTHING is "supernatural". I see it as a very natural thing.
I think that maybe by looking at it this way we're defining the supernatural out of existence. I'm not saying i disagree though :)
First hurdle to pass before an event to be called supernatural, for me, would require breaking the first and/or second laws of thermodynamics.... but as soon as magic energy is discovered - it would just be one of the natural powers and sease to be magic again :P
Atheism is no more than lacking conviction that there must be a god. Being unconvinced about someone else's unsubstantiated assertions cannot be called a belief in itself. As none of the various claims of deity have yet been justified, -and we know they never will be- it is inappropriate to shift the burden away from those asserting mere speculation as though they were a matter of fact, to instead label my already justified suspicion as though it were somehow equivalent to a belief system.
Again you're wrong about what atheism is. Most atheists actually do believe in some element of spirituality or supernatural phenomenon. There are even religions which are atheist -in that they lack deities. Buddhism, Taoism, Chinese traditions, and Shamanic animism can all be interpreted this way. You're complaining about nihilists and empirical rationalists like myself, who lack belief in gods or any other unsupported and indefensible assertions which can neither be indicated nor vindicated.
I guess that makes me some class of atheist too, since I dont believe in the gods of the religions, but I do think there is a spiritual dimension to life.
Yes I do oppose nihilism. Its claims are neither sound nor healthy. They are unsubstantiated assertions, not facts or truths. IMO there is more to life than physics; but that too is an unsubstantiated assertion at this time.
what is ur opinion on ghost but i believe in them from personal expererience as in after life and also christinty started in my opinion to get peoples money in europe cuz they use to get condolences from people who pay them
togood4798798 5 months ago
Thechessstick is a retard, half of the things this idiot is claiming for proof have NOT been proven. I love stupid people.. If there were a single piece of evidence for "god"'s existence, it'd change humanity forever. Bottom line is religion is false, creation is false, and thechessstick is a wishful blissful moron. Enjoy your delusion, pal.
JokerzKard 6 months ago
I enjoy AronRa's videos along with DonExodus,Wisemokey and RRS. Pity all you folks don't get grants from the NEA or any other foundation concerned over the public
welfare on issues of education and free speech, Rational thinking is an olympic spory in the US.
granddad2002 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Wow, evolutionists will believe anything. What a bunch of dolts they are. Do yourself a favor and read a few of A. E. Wilder-Smith books and also Robert Dick Wilson's book "A Scientific Investigation of the Old Testament". Do you know that Noah's Ark was discovered? Also, Sodom and Gomorrah, the Red Sea crossing site, the real Mount Sinai the Ark of the Covenant? Yes, the proof is there. All one must do is seek.
thechessstick 11 months ago
double do's in quick succession will always make me giggle.
roadkill1001 11 months ago
AronRa is freaking awesome.
accent77 1 year ago
Thank you Aron for getting back to me on that. I think you are very intelligent, articulate and well-spoken and I find a lot of what you say to be very intriguing and thought-provoking and helping me to seek further knowledge. However, I am a Christian and will always believe in the Lord. I am thus curious to know if you have any Christian friends that you hang out with on occasion and even have friendly debates with? I wish more Christians were open-minded enough to have you as a friend.
superhornet69 1 year ago
Hey AronRa, I am just curious to know what is your opinion of the whole UFO question, that is, are we being visited by aliens?
superhornet69 1 year ago
@superhornet69 I do not believe that any UFOs are extraterrestrial visitors from other planets.
AronRa 1 year ago 2
@AronRa maybe check out & do a clip on the book / video 'Day After Roswell' (Dr, Philip Corso)...a very powerful testimony from a very credible person
mysterymediacorp 1 year ago
What's the name of the song???
DwayneJKing 1 year ago
I don't know why, but 2:41 was the funniest damn thing I've seen in a long time!
squirreljester2 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Al-Quran has 1400 years ago and Muslim Scientists has been declared "He (God) makes you (human), in the wombs of your mothers, in stages, one after another, in three veils of darkness".
Al Quran sura Az Zumar;6
".....He (God) makes you, in the wombs of your mothers, in stages, one after another, in three veils of darkness. . . ."
Have the Bible and scientists states "He (God ) makes you (human), in the wombs of your mothers, in stages, one after another, in three veils of darkness"?
mollenth 1 year ago
Just curious Aron, do you wear a trenchcoat? I myself love that type of coat, wear one myself when the weather permits.
seanthedonconsidine 1 year ago
is that a harley ?
pleasmarryme 1 year ago
@pleasmarryme 2003 Victory Vegas 1500cc
AronRa 1 year ago 5
@AronRa ive been on the road on my bike with my dad, its the best but the rain hurts a high velocitys, sorry if my inglish is bad im from mexico
pleasmarryme 1 year ago
You said his name wrong :P :P :P
TheOddGoat 1 year ago
whats the name of that song at the beginning?
NeoFreeWorld 1 year ago
Matt, AronRa, me: smart atheists who made an arguably stupid choice to be a slave to a parrot. Are there others? I am wondering if this is some kind of trend. If you are a fan of feathered friends, check out the video I have featured on my channel (it's not mine, I just found it). {Is that spamming, trying to get people to go to your channel? I have no reason to try to get channel hits! It's kind of funny to think that, as I can't even upload a video. Technologically retarded.}
TheSoSoAgnostic 1 year ago 2
I am someone who does not believe in anything. No god, good in man or a purple spaghetti monster in the sky.
Why do we need a higher reason to exist? A mouse living in a hole doesnt need one. Neither do we. I live a happy life, hafing fun and trying to do a good job, because that makes the ones I love feel good.
hallurha 1 year ago
Aron Ra = Hero!
See the song I made about him on my channel - click my name (it's the featured one)
PatRibsey 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
These butt crack sniffing creationists always make me laugh. They worship some ancient propaganda and blood ridden book that has been questionably translated into English. They then steal a load of Pagan customs to celebrate it and dont understand they are sinning even by their own religions petty standards. How very pathetic.
NO1Mensan 1 year ago
First realize your a sinner...Believe in your heart God raised Jesus Christ from the dead, confess him as Lord, ask him to forgive your sins (repent of them), wash you in his blood, and make you his child. Read and obey the Gospel, it has the power to save your soul.
HedeenJeff 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"First, realize you're believing silly claptrap that came about in an age when we thought the ill were possessed by spirits and that the earth was the center of the universe. Then read books other than the bible and learn how to think rationally. Only you have the power to save your mind." - klfly
Webbaren 1 year ago
@HedeenJeff First realize that your spamming, then beg forgiveness from the FSM, ask him to bath you in his sauces, maybe he will save your meat balls.
Cade57 1 year ago 4
Great video.
thevoice32 1 year ago
i think aronra might be smarter than matt but it's pretty close
oggleman 1 year ago
Hi Aron, you are great on the Atheist Experience! Can definitely hold your own beside Matt
MakingTheMetalBand 1 year ago
No, dyingfetus69, I can read. Read your comment again, then read mine. You probably won't get my point but I'll explain it if you can understand that I said the exact opposite of what you said.
JoshwithaJ 1 year ago
@xdyingfetusx69
"From your perspectives you imply life is meaningless"
No, that is YOUR perspective of our perspective. Each individual constructs internally their own personal meaning of life. I don't need a bible or a concept of God to do so. Meaning is what YOU decide it is based upon your own life experiences. A deity needs not be part of it at all.
johnnyphoenix74 1 year ago 29
Same thing with morality. Just b/c you cannot fathom someone having a moral code without it being dictated to him/her by a god, doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.
johnnyphoenix74 1 year ago 3
@johnnyphoenix74 many atheist perceive nothingness after death. All they can view is the world, they are close-minded and superficial, but they think that gives them the right to be arrogant and conceited as well. Just like you said you can think what you want but it doesn't make it true. Same goes for you. Theist actually have more proof than atheist, so I don't know why atheist are so bitter about everything. Of course religion is flawed, but you can't judge ppl based off religion.
xdyingfetusx69 1 year ago
@xdyingfetusx69 A lot of assertions, most laughably and obviously false, but no justification.
You can't do that. Prove it or beat it.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
Comment removed
xdyingfetusx69 1 year ago
@johnnyphoenix74 IF there is no higher moral authority, then morals are open to perception. People can chose to do whatever they want instead of doing what is RIGHT. Your logic makes no sense whatsoever. Morals should not be based upon perceptions.
xdyingfetusx69 1 year ago
Constitution was based on the principle of a higher moral authority, whether you believe it to exist or not. You cannot let man decide morals because they will chose to please himself instead of others.
xdyingfetusx69 1 year ago
@xdyingfetusx69: No it wasn't. The Constitution was based on the principle of separating church and state; Jefferson said so explicitly. Monarchy is based on a "higher moral authority"; it's called the Divine Right of Kings, essentially "I'm king because God said so". America was founded as a republic, which is a form of democracy ("Rule by the People", Theocracy means "Rule by the Church"); what you're advocating is the exact opposite of the principle America was founded on.
JCLeSinge 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Constitution was based on the principle of a higher moral authority..."
No, the constitution is based around giving people the freedom do/say/worship whatever they want as long as it doesn't infringe upon the rights of others. Our entire justice system revolves around that.
Do you find it difficult to believe that men--like the ones who established such a system--can respect one another without the need for any deity to tell them to?
HelplessVictim 1 year ago
@xdyingfetusx69 US constituion was composed by man. Don't be an idiot.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@xdyingfetusx69: So you think there's a difference between letting man decide morals, or men who claim to be inspired by God to decide morals? Of course he'll chose to please himself. You wouldn't want us to please you, would you?
RichardRoy2 1 year ago
@xdyingfetusx69: Morals originate from the needs of society, which is why we no longer have slavery even though the bible endorses it. The moral code expounded by the so-called "good book" is actually sickening; no honest person tout the Bible as a decent moral guide.
JCLeSinge 1 year ago
"You cannot let man decide morals because they will chose to please himself instead of others."
Then you can add me to your list of exceptions. My morals are not solely to please my self :P I put the sake of others into consideration, I know, it must be really difficult for you to understand how atheists can still not go around raping and killing despite not being bribed with heaven or blackmailed with hell.
TurboDally 1 year ago 3
Morals ARE open up to perception. That's why what was okay 300 years ago (slavery for instance) is not okay now.
Hard right Christians like yourself are the real bitter ones. You are so very disgusted with your human nature that you invent a Sky Fairy who threatens to hurt and torture us for it.
LOL, aren't you the one judging all atheists as being bitter?
Savior20061 1 year ago 3
@xdyingfetusx69 And there IS no higher moral authority, and so the morals have always changed. You yourself will violently deny and be repullsed by the thing your holy book advocates.
The ironic thing is, the idea that there is a higher authroity is what is the root of the issues you're trying to argue against: when the only justification to stand behind any moral value is that it's commanded, unquestiionably, from above, it any atrocity can and has been justified this way.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
Morals need to stand up to a test.
"God given morals" is a meek and inadequate excuse. At least until you prove without shadow of a doubt that there is a god, your specific version of god, that he has these exact rules... And actually even then god himself will have to justify why exactly are these rules in place.
So right now "god given morals" are about as much an excuse as it was when Church used it to torture and kill innocent people for the sake of fighting "demons".
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@xdyingfetusx69: People do do what they want; even Theists. What you're excluding is that there are some who want to do what's right. Even Theists. But you can't except that of some Atheists as well. Morals are based on perceptions, conceptions, abstractions, and emotions. They don't always fit into some peoples ideas of correctness, like your view of Atheists. You might accept we have more in common, when you accept that the writings of the bible came from flawed men.
RichardRoy2 1 year ago
Actually, dyingfetus69, infinity is nothing compared to 20 years.
JoshwithaJ 1 year ago
ya that is exactly what i said, good job you can't read.
xdyingfetusx69 1 year ago
@xdyingfetusx69:You've used the term "logically" to back up some pretty illogical statements. "Logically it doesn't make sense for God not to exist."
That's a double negative right there; all you're saying is "It makes sense for God to exist."
No it doesn't. Logically, a good God cannot create evil; to do so proves either that the creator is not good or that he is not God. In either case, whence cometh evil?
That's logic; what you were dealing is is semantics.
JCLeSinge 1 year ago
Aronra, it was the first part of this video from Matt mentioning you that introduced me to your channel... So a big shout out for TAE and, as always, keep the vids coming...:)
samsonl310 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
We all have free will, but there must be consequences for our negative actions whether it is this lifetime or the next.
Logically it doesn't make any sense for there not to be life after death, or even death after death. Eternal death, not nothingness, in a negative void, the epitome of all evils. Evil extends way beyond the physical realm whether you wish to believe it or not, and can have heavy influences on peoples actions.
xdyingfetusx69 1 year ago
You claim there is lack of proof, I claim there is an overabundance of proof, it is in the eye of the beholder. What is the point of arguing over something based on perception? Logically it doesn't make sense for God not to exists.
From your perspectives you imply life is meaningless, and the only thing to life is what we can merely see or prove with science. So what is even the point of living? Some people don't even get to live past their 20s, 20 years is nothing compared to infinity..
xdyingfetusx69 1 year ago
@xdyingfetusx69 You realize that none of that made any sense from a logical perspective right?
2042nicky 1 year ago
Obviously you have never heard of inductive reasoning then.... good job, you deserve a phail.
xdyingfetusx69 1 year ago
@xdyingfetusx69 Yeah and by using inductive reasoning I can claim all clear objects must be cold because they resemble ice. Your an idiot.
2042nicky 1 year ago
@2042nicky Inductive reasoning doesn't prove anything... espeically when used by people like yourself.
2042nicky 1 year ago
now ad hominem nice.... you prove to be close minded like i said thanks
xdyingfetusx69 1 year ago
@xdyingfetusx69 No I already proved you wrong and if somebody is biased against atheists than it has a direct effect on the argument. So go learn the meaning of ad hominem... I was also brought up a Roman Catholic and had my communion and everything so don't go spouting your shit about closed minds.
2042nicky 1 year ago
Your intrepretation of what you see=/=proof.
Savior20061 1 year ago
@Savior20061 my perception is based off proof though, hence it is valid. have you ever heard of inductive reasoning?
xdyingfetusx69 1 year ago
Comment removed
JCLeSinge 1 year ago
Comment removed
JCLeSinge 1 year ago
LOL, what's your inductive reasoning then?
Savior20061 1 year ago
Caught the podcast and enjoyed your interview. I'm a new subscriber now!
wavymavy 1 year ago
Man crush, LUL!
CoolOnRS 1 year ago
18 - 0!!!!
guteo 1 year ago
My scrotum is completely empty and drained dry!
fegu 1 year ago
What are you if you believe that you are God?
MyITRcom 1 year ago
1:02 The Undertaker swag from WWF!
marqwill1124 1 year ago
1:02 The Undertaker swag.
marqwill1124 1 year ago
Aronra is amazing XD
TheReasonWhyGuy 1 year ago 2
What I would give to see Matt and Aron debate Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron on national TV.
matcotech 1 year ago 27
@matcotech I'd chop off my head and eat it.
fegu 1 year ago
@matcotech Me too. A lot I think, maybe my pinky toe.
Korkzor 1 year ago
@matcotech that would give ray comfort way too much credit. ray comforts audience seems to either contain people who already know he is an idiot, or idiots who believe him. thunderfoots debate with comfort isnt exactly stellar, but still ray shows his idiocy in that, in which he basically says i know what happened at the beginning of time you dont. very difficult and annoying to deal with such logic for an hour or so straight.
mistereveready 1 year ago
@matcotech Eww. No. Don't give banana man and the 4th rate child actor any validity by comparing them to rationalists.
CommanderC4 1 year ago
@matcotech
That wouldn't be a debate: that would be a public execution with Comfort and Kirk's heads under the guillotine.
June28July 1 year ago
@matcotech In order to have a debate with someone, the opposition must have a basic understanding of what it is they're arguing against, Ray and Kirk have zero understanding of science and even their own religion.
HybridD91 1 year ago
I saw the 3/14/10 show and it was one of the best, and all I can say is more, more! Matt and Aaron are the first string team.
toucan780 1 year ago
"Your DNA determines absolutely everything about you. In fact, the only difference between you and a blade of grass is the DNA. Thats right - if we took out your DNA and changed it, you could become a blade of grass. Or a tree. Or a giraffe. Or the common cold."
Is the above statement true or false?
KaseyAkira 1 year ago
This was such an awesome show. I'm a grateful follower of AronRa and the ACA's productions, but Matt and Aron teaming up...the level of combined ownage scares the shit out of me.
shawnsonium 1 year ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
you silly atheists you know youre all in denial, silly atheists.
Acuraintegraman1 1 year ago
said the person who believes in bronze age mythology, talking snakes and magical apples.
tieInterceptor 1 year ago 3
Why aren't my comments posting??
CommanderSavage 1 year ago
I've been looking forward to this.
Atheistx82 1 year ago
He's on right now, and he's AWESOME.
FreePlay 1 year ago
Small World!!! Dallas Texas --- Represent!
chrisrhudy02 1 year ago
is it march 14th?
don't forget to mention that it's pi day! do you celebrate it?
FSMGauss 1 year ago
Love the atheist experience and how they bitch slap anyone who asks for it. Looking forward to AronRa bitch slapping some callers.
pilottheshaker 1 year ago
Did Aronra end up on the show? I didn't catch it, did anyone upload the episode?
Lavabug 1 year ago
It hasn't happened yet.;) He's to be on the show March 14th.
traog 1 year ago
The show is this Sunday, March 14th.
AlanCFA 1 year ago
!!
It's like a crossover of 2 awesomes :P
Sarothi 1 year ago
Damn, Aronra; looking good!
I'll be sure to catch that show... as I do every week, but even more-so now that you'll be appearing.
MaiGuiltyGear 1 year ago
I like the guy getting a pummeling from cupid - it's kind of how he rolled sometimes (just ask Apollo & Daphne).
EyeLean5280 1 year ago
Atheism, creationism, they're just labels. I'm an orthodox for instance. I KNOW the world is not 6k y.o. ,evolution is fact and the only way humanity is ever going to reach it's true potential is through intellectual and spiritual growth as well as technological advancement. If we were or created by God or not is in my mind irrelevant. The only thing that really is of interest to me is living a full life, learning all i can about as much as i can, in short fulfilling/surpassing my full potential
LordMalakay 1 year ago
the parrot got the last word eh?
i'll be glad to see you and the atheist experience together
maybe I'll divide by zero
t3rr411 1 year ago
You may be the first person to notice my parrot blasting away in the background. I can hear him when I'm still out on the street inside a car before I pull into the driveway.
AronRa 1 year ago
I love my Atheism. I find it brings me closer to God.
ThePhantomBlacksmith 1 year ago
but 'Ra' stays the true god ^^ amon-ra just a mixedname
haashond 1 year ago
AronRa @ his own show ^^
haashond 1 year ago
Heeyh! You've got a sweet bike there, Aron!
Hedningfaen 1 year ago
thanks for your videos, both your videos and thunderf00t's videos have giving me a really good entertaining way to learn the basics about the theories and facts that dispute the bullshit i had been force feed as a student at a christian school. It's sad though for me, as my parents are Pastors of a church, and I love them dearly. I'm sure they believe what they teach. I guess it makes me a closite athiest.
jdp2234 1 year ago
YAY ARONRA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
BusinessIDBAI 1 year ago
Ooh this is very good news. I hope some creationists phone into the show on that day...
FaerieStories 1 year ago
YEAH!!!!!
wouldn't it be cool if we got some creationists to call the show that sunday? Eric Hovind would be fun to own :D
Ruudsosalsa 1 year ago
2:41
LMAO!!!
garytheagnostic 1 year ago
Aronra, do you think Evolution and Gregor Mendel's Work conflict? Irrelevant I know, just want to get your opinion. :)
Killdozer6006 1 year ago
How could Mendelian genetics conflict with Darwinian selection? These are the two elements which make up the modern synthesis of evolutionary theory.
AronRa 1 year ago
Ohh, alright, I was just asking. I've heard the argument used before, something about heredity disproving mutations?
Killdozer6006 1 year ago
The argument creationists is a distortion of evolution into something opposite what it is, the assertion that one species is supposed to turn into another fundamentally different one. Of course evolution is really all about heredity, so the best way to misrepresent it is to ignore that fact and present a straw man instead.
AronRa 1 year ago
@Killdozer6006
I've heard an argument on this subject before. Why don't you tell us how you think Mendelian genetics WOULD conflict with the TOE.
nolobede 1 year ago
AronRa proving once and for all that smoking is badass.
TingTang1234567 1 year ago
Atheism is the other end of the belief spectrum to theism.
Drastam 1 year ago
...It's a lack of belief, so it's not ON the spectrum.
Nice try, though.
ImprobableDrive 1 year ago 5
Not so.
A conviction that is held without proof is a belief. Atheism is neither proven nor provable, so it is a belief.
You may reply that the burden of proof is on the theist...but theism like atheism is a belief; and beliefs by definition do not have or require proof.
?
Drastam 1 year ago
atheism is to belief as bald is to hair color
woodyallday 1 year ago 3
Yeah, you don't know what you're talking about.
"The lack of water, really is, in essence, the existence of water."
I'd like to see your ass survive in a desert. Lets see how that works out for you.
Atheism isn't a conviction. No real atheist ever says that anything is 100% percent true. The only thing that we have are observable facts, not whole truthes, or things to believe in.
ImprobableDrive 1 year ago
I said nothing about deserts - stick to the point - reply to what i say...please :)
So you are an atheist who does not have the conviction or the belief that there is no god.
So exactly what is your atheism if it is not a conviction or a belief as to the non-existence of a god.
Drastam 1 year ago
Right. I'm not surprised that you can't understand atheism, if you can't understand an analogy(NOT the study of anuses).
I am not convinced that there is no, are are no gods. There is simply no proof or evidence that would cause me to believe in one, rather than looking towards perceptible facts for guidance.
Facts are things to be observed, not believed in. If God's existence was suddenly empirically proven I would note it, and put more weight into the validity of religion.
ImprobableDrive 1 year ago
If he did exist believing in him, or being convinced that he existed would be unnecessary, because he would be an observable fact, just as how objects fall towards other objects with gravitational pulls, is a fact.
It's useless to have a contention on the existence of gravity, as opposed to why gravity exists.
ImprobableDrive 1 year ago
No scientific mind believes in the theory of evolution or gravity, but we know that facts point to those things being true. It's not about the burden of proof. It's about what having a belief or apologetic conviction means, and being Atheist means having neither of those.
Gg. : l
ImprobableDrive 1 year ago
Does that mean you accept that it is possible that there is a god?
Drastam 1 year ago
Actually, most atheists accept the possibility of a god.
They also accept the possibility of a giant invisible omnipotent, omniscient space chicken clucking away at the center of the galaxy.
See, that's where a lot of the misunderstanding of the term "atheist" comes from.
Probable? Of course not!
Likely? Not in the least!
Possible? Sure!
But then, we aren't really talking about "possible" here, are we?
stimpson65 1 year ago
[creationist] Well anything is Possible..
[Atheist] Well yeah sure, but thats why we try not to believe just anything... ohh never mind
555D3M0N666 1 year ago
[creationist] My unsubstantiated assertions (beliefs) are the absolute truth.
[me] Belief does not make truth.
[atheist] My unsubstantiated assertion there is no god is not a belief.
[me] Any unsubstantiated assertion is a belief.
Either way you come at it belief does not make truth. Creationism must be opposed but not on the basis of belief - on the basis of science or substantiated assertions. Traditional atheism goes beyond knowing into believing and places itself on that spectrum.
Drastam 1 year ago
Yeah, but that's NOT what an atheist is.
You're simply DOING it wrong.
ImprobableDrive 1 year ago
I would contend that atheists are doing it wrong. They are falling into the trap of belief; thus commiting the same error as theists and placing themselves on the opposite end of the spectrum of belief.
That is why here on youtube we find the atheists and the theists locked in a struggle; or is it an embrace, a dance of belief?
Drastam 1 year ago
your making semi valid points. the issue is that you cannot generalize the category of "Atheist" in retrospect you can generalize the category "theist" in this sense..
Theist makes an Unsupported Assertion that there is a god(s)..
Atheist makes the supported observation: "there is no substantial proof of one, therefore i have no reason to believe in one"
two negatives dont make a positive outside of Mathematics so what really are you trying to establish besides your perspective.
555D3M0N666 1 year ago
Excellent reply.
I accept that an atheist who thinks as you do is not affirming a belief that their is no god, but is stating the fact that they see no proof of a god.
Thank you.
Drastam 1 year ago
Any time.
Im glad i could be of assistance. I along with several others, Many others to be honest, on youtube are working to combat misinformation when we see it on the subject of Theism-Atheism. Not only the well known posters such as AronRa, thunderf00t and DPRjones and djarm67 but us smaller guys who havent posted in a while or have yet to post videos..
Either way. Have a nice day
555D3M0N666 1 year ago
For example...
"I dont believe there exists such a thing as God"
"I believe god doesnt exist"
both are Atheistic Claims.. YES.
One is Atheism by speculation one is Atheism by preference .. I feel THAT is where your coming from. You will find most Scientific Atheist are Atheist by Speculation rather than preference.
its a very common misconception and very commonly swapped when needed to justify a slam against atheism as something that it is not.
Straw Man Arguments Anyone?
555D3M0N666 1 year ago
Try to answer this with a simple yes or no. Is there any testable, objectively verifiable evidence to positively indicate that any gods ever actually existed?
If I have reason to believe, I will. If I don't, I can't, and my lack of conviction cannot be considered a positive proclamation of any belief system. Dis-belief is not a belief just like sanity cannot be listed as one of many mental disorders.
AronRa 1 year ago
Comment removed
Drastam 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
So far as I can tell there is no good evidence or reasons to believe in the gods of the religions; and personally I dont accept their existence. I regard them as fictions of the priests.
I accept the point that not accepting anothers belief in X is not itself a belief. But the positive unsubstantiated assertion 'there is no X'... I wonder about that.
Drastam 1 year ago
One could argue there are two categories of disbelief; active disbelief and passive disbelief. The first being the firm belief that deities do not and cannot exist, and the latter being your 'I'll believe it when I see it' standpoint (or even a complete ignorance of God or gods).
The book by George H. Smith entitled 'Atheism: the case against God' covers the terms 'Implicit' and 'Explicit' atheism. If you have not read this book already I thoroughly recommend it.
H3PH3STUS 1 year ago
I have many times argued that if there is a god, or souls, ghosts, or psychic phenomenon, then we should one day be able to detect them via advanced technolog. The reason is that everything that really exists has properites. But these suggestions have always met with great hostility from believers who insist that God can NEVER be traced or measured by any means EVER. So they can say whatever they want about him, and never worry about being proven wrong.
AronRa 1 year ago
I find this particularly irritating in these debates. Some theists talk about God as though they know every aspect about him. I find it ironic that they claim we could not possibly know anything about God; therefore cannot criticize his ways, yet they somehow have the privilege of a full understanding.
H3PH3STUS 1 year ago
hi aron, i love your videos and i have recently been trying to also convince a particular youtuber about their religious beliefs, the problem is that i cant even move on to debating their evidence with them because this person is not saying that belief in god is someones choice and they wont admit that if god really judges someone based on faith then its unfair and immoral.
PooeyBum11 1 year ago
i have given examples of people who wont be given the chance to make a choice before they die and so how could god justify sentencing them to hell if they didnt even have the choice, i also explained why faith has nothing to do with morality anyway, and then i also used one of your arguements about if faith really is a choice then it means you had to make yourself believe for it to actually be a choice. This person wont admit any flaws under all these arguements :(
PooeyBum11 1 year ago
anyway im sure you get loads of comments and messages and so im not asking you to help me with convincing this person i just wanted to thank you for your videos which give me new ideas to help explain to people that are on the fence about these things and im just showing my appreciation. After so strongy proving all this guys arguements wrong he seems to just ignore everything i say and so i dont think he/she will ever accept it and so im just going to probly leave them and move on.
PooeyBum11 1 year ago
AronRa,
Sanity is not a mental disorder... Oh man, I like that.
PraktikoolSinik 1 year ago
Atheists generally do.
It's sort of ignorant to say that anything is 100% possible or 100% impossible. And that's not just some pseudo humble perspective. It's kind of a necessary skepticism that you must have if you wish to be atheist, and especially scientific.
ImprobableDrive 1 year ago
It is in fact NOT possible that a god exists, since gods are -by definition- supernatural, (meaning they only exist outside the reality of nature) and they rely on miracles which are defined as inexplicable events which defy the laws of physics.
AronRa 1 year ago
The word supernatural is problematic. I think the spiritual need not be supernatural or unnatural; rather an extension of the natural order that lies beyond the spectrum of material-energy our bodies can physically access.
I do think there is good testimonial evidence from all cultures and historical times that there is a spiritual dimension accessible to human experience under certain conditions.
Contd.
Drastam 1 year ago
Shamanism, out of body experiences, near death experiences, have all been widely reported throughout historical times. I accept this is not objectively verifiable evidence, thus far, but it is evidence that deserves scientific examination, in my opinion.
Drastam 1 year ago
Psychic and psionic practices of all kinds have been tested quite extensively especially in the 1960s. All of them have either been disproved or failed to perform statistically better than random chance.
AronRa 1 year ago
Rhine, for instance, reported better than chance results. Many others have too. But most labs have closed due to mainstream opposition. The prevailing paradigm is naturalism and it is ideologically opposed to psionics.
So your view is in the ascendent at this time.
BTW you did refer to yourself as a nihilist in one of your replies.
Drastam 1 year ago
The paradigm you're talking about is that we can't accept magic as an excuse when only the natural answer has ever proved to improve our understanding of anything. I'll still bet you can't produce any data that is positively indicative of anything supernatural. BTW, if anyone could actually demonstrate psionics, it would be natural rather than supernatural.
AronRa 1 year ago
I accept a naturalism that requires data and proof. I agree that any real psionic effect would be natural, not supernatural. So you are right that I cannot present natural data to prove anything supernatural; natural data only prove natural phenomena.
If there is a real supernatural I dont see how we could ever prove it naturally.
What I dont accept is scientism; and that is how I view much that goes as scientific atheism; it becomes a dogmatic ideology that indescriminately legislates truth.
Drastam 1 year ago
Then that is the core of your misunderstanding. Both incarnations of VendomFangX said they want to be free to say "Maybe there is a god", and they certainly can. I'll even say it with them, because that is an honest comment -until they drop the word, "maybe". Likewise, it is completely honest to say "There evidently is no god", which is the sole perspective common to all atheists. But it is obviously dishonest to state as fact things which aren't evidently true, and that is what faith requires.
AronRa 1 year ago
It is possible to detect magic and it still be magical. For instance, picking a wand from a dogwood tree only after midnight, and then using it to transmute a man into a sheepdog.
Another example would be if Kirlian photography actually worked the way they said it was portrayed on Poltergeist. Because then you've got something that appears to exist only at will and not according to any particular physical theory including chemistry or gravity.
AronRa 1 year ago
Not sure what you mena about wands and such. Are you implying the reality of witchcraft or sorcerery?
Drastam 1 year ago
If by that, you mean to ask whether I believe that spells and such really work, then the answer is no. That's why I find Leviticus 14 to be so laughable.
However I am alluding to what I believe the 'reality' of such things actually is.
AronRa 1 year ago
I just read Lev 14 and it is crazy stuff. I dont like that book.
I dont understand what you mean by 'the reality of such things'.
If magical effects are possible, and it's not impossible they are, I would think it was by natural means not yet scientifically understood; so not really magical.
To what extent does magical or supernatural merely mean not encompassed by the current paradigm.
I would hate to think the current paradigm is it; and the rest of reality is just more of the same.
Drastam 1 year ago
While I would like to say that "all things are possible" -like I've been trained to say my whole life, the fact is that everything which qualifies as "magic" is defined as that which is im-possible according to the laws of nature; not just unexplained, but can never BE explained. If the example I gave happened anyway, it would consequently still be considered magical no matter how many times the stunt was repeated.
AronRa 1 year ago
That's not be my understanding of magical. If your dogwood wand really did transform a man into a dog it would be by some possible process. Magic just means mysterious and unexplained - not impossible. Although it might only be possible with magical training.
The supernatural of the religionist does mean an unnatural event, but not impossible either, since god can do it; and if it happened it would still be supernatural.
But this does not imply that I think anything is possible - I dont.
Drastam 1 year ago
If you look up the words, "magic" and "miracle", you'll find they're both the same thing. Both are defined as inexplicable by science, and believers insist that it will always be that way. They want the impossible to happen, so they can "believe the unbelievable" (to quote a hymn). If a wand is actually magic, then by definition there is no possible process at work, because supernatural things are like wispy dream-like things that can neither be quantified nor qualified.
AronRa 1 year ago 5
Well looks like we take a different kind of view on most things. That's allowed. Undoubtedly there is infinitely more to reality than is contained in either of our present views. Perhaps we will find out some time; or perhaps we wont.
I wish you well in your crusade.
Drastam 1 year ago
@AronRa I'm actually a magician with almost 35 years of experience. I've never believed magic is "supernatural". In fact I don't believe ANYTHING is "supernatural". I see it as a very natural thing.
seeqer66 1 year ago
@seeqer66 "I'm actually a magician with almost 35 years of experience"
"I've never believed magic is "supernatural"."
Why not say your an illusionist? Pretty much the same thing.
HybridD91 1 year ago
@HybridD91 Because I'm not an illusionist. I'm actually a magician. I simply don't believe in the "supernatural". Magic is 100% natural.
seeqer66 1 year ago
I think that maybe by looking at it this way we're defining the supernatural out of existence. I'm not saying i disagree though :)
First hurdle to pass before an event to be called supernatural, for me, would require breaking the first and/or second laws of thermodynamics.... but as soon as magic energy is discovered - it would just be one of the natural powers and sease to be magic again :P
sanechipmunks 1 year ago
Shamanism meaning what exactly? Evidence of the hallucinatory powers of the human mind, Due to medication, sensory depravation etc.
If someone really can witness themselves from the outside, that would be verifiable in laboratory conditions.
sanechipmunks 1 year ago
Atheism is no more than lacking conviction that there must be a god. Being unconvinced about someone else's unsubstantiated assertions cannot be called a belief in itself. As none of the various claims of deity have yet been justified, -and we know they never will be- it is inappropriate to shift the burden away from those asserting mere speculation as though they were a matter of fact, to instead label my already justified suspicion as though it were somehow equivalent to a belief system.
AronRa 1 year ago
Hi. Your Darwin day presentation was excellent.
Opposing the unsubstantiated assertions of religion is valid. Religions are dangerous & creationism is a crime against indoctrinated children IMO.
But atheism is a assertion there is no spiritual dimension to human life; and this is a positive doctrine or conviction that cannot be substantiated.
Your comment "and we know there never will be" is a dogmatic unsubstantiated assertion which can only be a belief IMO.
Drastam 1 year ago
Drastam - "But atheism is a assertion there is no spiritual dimension to human life"
No it isn't, Atheism is simply the lack of belief in Gods. Outside of that, you can have any spiritual beliefs you want, Buddhism?!
MichaelTannock 1 year ago
Well that's alright.
I am only arguing the case that atheism as a positive assertion and conviction is a belief.
Drastam 1 year ago
Comment removed
MichaelTannock 1 year ago
Atheism isnt a positve Assertion.. there in lies the misunderstanding..
Having no ice cream cone is not the same as having a different flavor of ice cream is it? .. Not eating isnt the same as having a different meal.
So where does your assertion that atheist have to belief their is no god.. They simply dont believe that there is.
Theres a MAJOR difference there.
555D3M0N666 1 year ago 3
Again you're wrong about what atheism is. Most atheists actually do believe in some element of spirituality or supernatural phenomenon. There are even religions which are atheist -in that they lack deities. Buddhism, Taoism, Chinese traditions, and Shamanic animism can all be interpreted this way. You're complaining about nihilists and empirical rationalists like myself, who lack belief in gods or any other unsupported and indefensible assertions which can neither be indicated nor vindicated.
AronRa 1 year ago
I guess that makes me some class of atheist too, since I dont believe in the gods of the religions, but I do think there is a spiritual dimension to life.
Yes I do oppose nihilism. Its claims are neither sound nor healthy. They are unsubstantiated assertions, not facts or truths. IMO there is more to life than physics; but that too is an unsubstantiated assertion at this time.
Drastam 1 year ago
Why believe it if there is absolutely nothing indicating it? There is no magic.
sanechipmunks 1 year ago