I'm sure that this has come up before, but the argument of complexity=(intelligent)designer...How does that even work? There are many things that are complex because they lacked a single unifying (or intelligent) designer or design. Take for example city sprawls or bureaucratic systems. These to me are examples of things that exist in a complex fashion because of a lack of a unifying design, but they still "work".
This caller doesn't understand that websites can be out of date? He thinks that when website is out of date that its contents are necessarily still accurate? He doesn't understand that the website may be intentionally incorrect because it has an agenda?
And then he says that the only reason he doesn't do evil things is because his Christianity is holding him back.
He's clearly deranged. If he's allowed to walk among us, someone should ensure he stays in church to keep the rest of us safe.
Wrong. If there is no evidence for the existence of a god, there is no reason to believe in such a god. A god that leaves no testable evidence of his presence is indistinguishable from a non-existent god, but also from a thousand of such gods.
The point is there are countless possible 'gods' against only 1 'none'.
If there is not even evidence for one god, there could be 1 God + 10 Norse gods + 100 Greek gods + 1000 Hindu gods = 1111 gods, but we only pick 1 personal god.
Chance to pick 1 god and be right: 1/1111 = ~0%
Chance to pick 1 god and be wrong: 1110/1111 = ~100%
Chance to pick no god and pick the wrong one: 0/1111 = ~0%
Chance to pick no god and be right: 100% - 0/1111 = ~100% (Atheism FTW!)
@TheAtheistExperience Atheism FTW? lmao.. when i said no evidence there is no God or there is one. i meant "A Creator". this thing is not a person but could be a force. The universe has a Design so some kind of intelligent being could have been behind it.
Now if this "Thing" has a relationship with it's creation is a different Topic.we are discussing the existence of creator (A GOD).. Not Religion.Take Religion out of it.
and my Dictionary doesn't say Atheist is a lack of belief on a deity
Every turd seems to have a design, but that doesn't make it Holy shit. The problem with the idea that this universe is designed is that we don't have an undesigned universe to compare it with.
People call it designed because they can't imagine how this planet could have been suitable for us if it hadn't been designed, but that is flawed thinking. If Earth hadn't been inhabitable for us, we simply wouldn't have been here to be amazed about the fact that it is.
@TheAtheistExperience There is no evidence against the existence of a God either. Atheist Claim to "know" there's no God. yet don't have the evidence to back it up. Religious people claim to "know" there is a God yet don't have the evidence to back it up.
No, atheists don't know anything about any gods. That is why they don't believe in them. Even though some 'strong' atheists may put it like that, atheism is NOT the belief that there is no god, but a lack of belief in any god.
To put it simply: a-theist is just a label for everyone who is not a theist. That is not just "surely not," but that also includes "don't know (yet)" and "don't care".
Topics: WINNING ARGUMENTS FOR CREATIONISM-EVOLUTIONISM DEBATE (See Subchapter 10.2.2, Chapter 10, of Part Two.), The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balancedway.yolasite.com
balancedway1.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
O good lord. These people are so stupid it's sad. The questions that pop into their heads are absoloutely ridiculous sometimes. "Why would they have that on their website then?" LOL
Something christians like to do is tell you that the universe couldn't just have existed, and they tell you "god made it". Then I ask, what made god? They say he always existed.
So what makes it so much more of a valid statement saying that god just existed, and not the statement that the universe just existed?
By the way, I think Dan should be civilly comitted. He says if he found out there were no god, he'd go around and do what he wants to other people. What a dangerous person.
Well the caller just proved that atheist are more moral than him. Where he needs a god to tell him "no don't don that" the atheist doesn't require the god and behaves more morally than him. I mean have you seen the down right LIES christians tell?
@bary1234 Trust me man, for really religious people, evidence means absolutely nothing. The more proof you have, the more they believe you wrong. The less evidence they have to justify their claims, the more they believe them to be true. They gladly replace investigations with "revelation" and evidence with doctrine.
@petion2010 : I know, its so frustrating. I have argued with religious people for some 15 years now, had thousands of stupid debates and I have not woken up single one of them. They are in such a deep denial nothing penetrates it. I think it might be that the "god" feeling they have in their superstitious tiny minds is some kind of evolutionary fluke of brain-structure we cant comprehend. Still its astonishing that childhood indoctrination is so powerfull and lasts for so long.
@bary1234 Childhood indoctrination and a feel-good feeling they have that somehow they'll be rewarded after death, if they maintain faith those superstitions. You know that sometime I wonder that if we didn't die if religion or even the gods would still be around. I think not.
@petion2010 : Religion has held mankind down for centuries. We would have been in space 200 years ago if we had shaken superstition off sooner. Stem cell research could have solved so much of our problems if superstitious fuckers had not hampered it for decades. And they still do that, its insane they get their way still.
@bary1234 so believing that we have a purpose in life and that everything that happens to us is for a reason and that someone loves us no matter what is ruining us? no. Warping it into something it isn't is what ruins lives.
@turtlelackie : Well, that "purpose of life" is a lie. And that "reason for everything" is a lie. So how could that be valuable and good?
That kind of magical thinking causes all sorts of superstitions to develope and prosper. There are still people burned as witches. Baby girls are raped because sex with a virgin cures aids. Hands and legs of living albinos are chopped off for lucky charms. Genitals of little girls are systematically mutilated. These insane "purposes for life" must be stopped.
well since that guy just admits he would like to do bad things for his own satisfaction, I doubt God will let him into heaven since he's only a believer to get into heaven.
The idea of irreducible complexity proves only the limitations in human thinking, but science has a way of helping us get around those limitations, because it is much larger than any individual's findings and opinions. It relies on evidence and continual efforts to disprove theories. If creationism were scientific, it would find evidence for creation and against evolution rather than pointing at a perceived fault in evolution and then crying "See? God did it!"
The idea of irreducible complexity proves only the limitations in human thinking, but science has a way of helping us get around those limitations, because it is much larger than any individual's findings and opinions. It relies on evidence and continual efforts to disprove theories. If creationism were scientific, it would find evidence creation rather than pointing at a perceived fault in evolution and then crying "See? God did it!"
@ehwood99 Neil deGrasse Tyson has an excellent lecture titled "God of the Gaps." It's on youtube, and I think he made a clear case how humans revert to the supernatural whenever we can't explain things. If you haven't seen it, I encourage you to watch it here, it's just 28 minutes long.
@ehwood99 well science tells you the world had a beginning and in science nothing can create itself out of thin air. The world randomly creating itself would be like a tornado going through a junkyard and assembling a flyable aircraft
I don't for a minute actually believe these sorts of people would just go around doing bad things if there was no God. More than likely they'd live their lives exactly as they do now (albeit without the sycophantic worship).
is this boy calling with his mom in the background retarded? or what is wrong with him? obviously something is wrong with him, he also has an understanding of critical thinking equivalent to that of a 10 year old child I cant even imagine what it would be like to talk with retarded kids like this
Seeing quite a few of these episodes (I've lost count)...I've tried and tried and tried, to put my mind in the Creationist view...Tried to see where they are going so I know what they are talking about.
I tried, but all I'm seeing are falsehoods from my childhood. I grew up with them, and I escaped from them. I managed to escape from them only because I thought of them to be false BY MYSELF.
I feel sorry for Creationists because they grew up the way I did, but they never got around...
@Ihatemelee I don't have sympathy for the caller. He clearly said the only thing holding him back from doing things he considers immoral is fear of supernatural punishment. He's at a very low level of moral development and, at heart, is very selfish.
I love irreducible complexity all you need to defeat it is to ask what it means. But in case of mild intelligence apply nothing is irreducibly complex scientists have debunked this thoroughly. And just in case of extra faith shielding ask What is a bacterial flagellum?
@silentpimpsmak So? How does this change the fact that chromosome 2 and 13 are a perfect match with our fused chromosome? How does this change the fact that we share an enormous amount of erv's with the chimp genome (wich can only happen if a common ancestor gets infected with the specific virus that caused the ERV)?
How does this change the fact that we share an enormous amount of DNA markers? You know... the same kind of markers we use to determine family relationships in dna tests...
@silentpimpsmak natural selection is just the selection of what works.
If you live in a pitch black cave, your eyes are useless. This means that there is NO selective pressure on your eyes whatsoever. So if eye-sight is broken through mutation, there won't be any selective pressure for or argainst it - since the eyes are useless anyway.
@silentpimpsmak It's always a good idea to inform yourself about the things you wish to argue against. In context of evolution, there's nothing wrong with mexican tetra. "better adapted for survival" doesn't necessarily mean that you get stronger, bigger, smarter etc. All of that is habitat bound. What is good in one place is not necessarily good in another. And if you live in dark places, eyes don't help you. Like the molerat. Lives underground and is blind.
@silentpimpsmak "What has evolved in your life time please share" A ridiculous amount of virus strains (new flu shots every year among others), insects (pesticide no longer works), bacteria (anti-biotics no longer work; bacteria solely feeding on nylon - a fabric that didn't exist some time ago), humans (+90% of tibetians have unique genes that facilitate living on high altitudes),.........
@HybridD91 where would the first species that could make its own light get the genetics to be able to do that? there is no good answer to this. so jump on google real quick and try to figure it out before you answer
@HybridD91 yes being able to get fatter and not be able to see is an advantage think about what you are saying. this is not an improvement to the species that can see.
@silentpimpsmak The fat is used as energy and I never said it was an improvement for the other fish that can see, only for the blind fish. Thanks for showing how illerate you are and nice job not addressing ANY THING I posted. I don't know where the angler fish would get the genetics to make light but the blind fish can at least detect light. Why don't you take your own advice and search for yourself. Email a marine biologist, I'm not ashamed to say I don't know, unlike you people.
@silentpimpsmak The Earth is 4.5 billion years old, if you say it isn't you should deny Nagasaki and Hiroshima and you still haven't provided me with any evidence that says organisms can't become simplier to better suit their environment. You haven't refuted any thing but you have shown your ignorance at a high level. For your info idiot, I didn't search this on YouTube. So think of another baseless assertion.
@HybridD91 why would i deny nagasaki and hiroshima ? You deny the scientific facts of how old the earth really is but you use science as your basis of you whole belief. So with the whole using the cave tetra you are agreeing that evolution can use irreducible complexity. what can we take away next from this fish to see if it can still survive. lets move it to an environment to where there is no food and see if its stomach will disappear. LOL nice i like this example.
@silentpimpsmak IIf scientists don't know the age of the Earth, they know nothing about atoms therefore N&H shouldn't have happened, in other words, you should deny history because radiometric dating deals with atoms. IC has nothing to do with what we're talking about and fail of an analogy because it's obvious the fish would need an energy source of some kind. You make all of these assertions but fail to address any thing I bring forth, either you address them or fuck off.
1)Human Chromosome 2 and similarites of our genome and a chimp's
2)expansion of our universe(has nothing to do with evolution)
3)nylonase in bacteria
4)evidence that animals can't become simplier to be better suited for their environment
Here's an easier challenge, name one application of creationism. I hope you know what an application is. If you can't address any of these, I'm done wasting my time with you.
@cablepanos i am not the only one in my house that uses this computer. I have a bunch of roomates and when you go to you tube it does not sign me out. Im glad though that you admire me so much that you check my background. i love you to.
@HybridD91 can you prove my belief wrong? so how can it be false? apparently your views are a little shady. Scientist change their theories on you nit wits all the time and you just are like zombies and roll right along with their ignorance. Dont worry when you are on your death bed you will wonder if you were right.
@silentpimpsmak What belief? Which God? Is he all loving and all powerful? The systematic failure of answered prayers and a cruel world disproves your God. Keep pushing pascal's wager, just take into account off all the other Gods you don't believe in. Scientists change theories according to what's currently right while your stupid holy books still say we're made from dirt despite being 70% water. If science didn't change, we wouldn't have computers. Stop using them.
@HybridD91 the truth is there you just live in a bubble and fail horribly to see it. I feel bad that you are a puppet on a string and just believe whatever the common trend calls for. This very time frame in your life is playing out just like the book of revelations said it would.I do feel sorry for you. dont bother to reply because the atheistexperience and all their videos pick on unarmed people. atheist are supposed to be unsure if there is a god or not. these people are preaching against him
@silentpimpsmak You can't counter anything, so you post a lot of crap to say very little? Why am I not surprised. I own the Book of Revelations, it isn't convincing. You call me a puppet but adhere to majority, talk about irony.
@HybridD91 because the majority has a sensible thought process. why do you think that atheist are the manority? because the rest of us see the truth. Do some research as to why evolution is not possible. you have to pro and con both sides. No other theory in science is allowed the impossibilities or the missing proof like evolution. But as long as they can pull your string the minority(you) will be right there clapping your hands like a good little retard.
@silentpimpsmak 4 billion people do not believe in the same God as you, therefore their belief is correct. During the colonial years, majority of whites thought blacks were 3/5 human being, therefore they were correct. Argumentum ad populum, another logical fallacy, have any more? Evolution not possible? Research what? Crap produced by people had done no work involving Evolution? Answersingeneis? Idiot. If you morons had the truth, it wouldn't be varied. Truth isn't subjective dumbass.
@silentpimpsmak And science does not say humans came from chimps so stop lying.You can go with the evolution view of things or with the bible view which is simply ridiculous.
@lewisner okay evolutions view wich makes no sense."EVOLUTION"= some things evolve some dont. we have never really witnessed evolution just adaptations and variations that were probably in the gene pool of this animal since the beggining.
we dont know why the octopus, the praying mantis, the horse shoe crab, the alligator has never evolved.evolution does not know to what benefit a plant would produce a fruit because plants do not care about feeding us.Yeah lets go with this theory it is great!
@keggerous no god created me to have the choice and to choose carefully what i do or the action i decide to take. but you being and evolutionist with your evolved mind, every comment you make was never your thought but evolved thoughts from your monkey ancestors.
@silentpimpsmak can u make any less sense? u didnt even address what i said. god made charles manson into a murdered! u cant tell me otherwise cuz if ur god exists and is all the qualities u describe him as, then he created charles manson to be a murderer.
@keggerous but if you use evolutions veiw. he had no choice it is the brain he was dealt over the millions of years of evolution. so we should not punish him it is not his fault. YOU CANT SEE THAT IF WE GO OFF EVOLUTION THAT WE HAVE EVOLVED BRAINS AND CAN SAY "I am not my fault" evolution handed me this killer brain. God gives us the right to make right from wrong choices not evolution because evolution does not care about right from wrong. chicken or the egg first?
@silentpimpsmak u have a very thick head u know that? i can still just say the same thing u said . . . the murderer had no choice to not murder because he was dealt the brain god gave him over 0 years . . . . so we shouldnt punish him because god will punish him for the brain that he ultimately gave him . . . . retarded thinking on ur part bro.
@keggerous So you dont believe we have a choice between right and wrong. because that comes from god not evolution. Evolution does not have a moral standard. The gut feeling that says this is wrong is shouldnt do it, has nothing to do with evolution. You believe we are souless animals and i feel sorry for you. You shouldnt listen to these people atheist are supposed to be unsure not preaching against God. This so called atheist has become an occult. This dude talking even looks evil. look at him
@silentpimpsmak one last thing . . . the evolution of our minds from more primative forms doesnt mean that we cant hold ppl accountable for what they do. on the other hand i can say that ur bible seems to describe a god which actually doesnt want us to judge others . . . do u believe u have free will? so even if evolution was true, u would still think u had free will correct? so how does ur argument follow that murderers had no choice? this is assuming a few things of course.
@keggerous are you freaking serious. people are getting fatter. ha ha what a joke. look around next time you are in public and realize how many of the people around you could survive like the old days. i guarantee atleast 5 out of 10 people could not handle a manual labor job, let alone hunt their own food down without a gun. you have no idea of the physical fitness of men that actually had to work for a living back then. LOl people are getting stronger at ordering big meals from mcdonalds.
The theory of evolution = I am not my fault, I killed some one because my brain evolved to a killers mentality. Nothing is my choice because this was the brain that was evolved for millions of years. Even if i think it is my choice to do right or wrong it really wasnt because my brain evolved to make the choice it did. Can any one see where this is going??? Evolution in reality takes every thing from you period.
Yes. It's called a "strawman" argument. It's going "I'm a dishonest Christian that can't make a REAL argument, so I'm just going to make fallacious arguments to try to sound like I know what I'm talking about"
irreducible complexity is a valid argument but scientist really do not have a good answer as to why when you take organisms down to a simpler form they would be dead. it was brushed off because they were scared to look. you atheist outsmart your common sense. There are more dead ends in science than there are dead end streets in the world. open your eyes people, even investigate the very laws your scientist base their studies off of and realize we should not exist without a creator.
Look ... it's been 2000 years since the so called jesus episodes and the theists haven't let that go ..... what makes him think the cunts are gonna let the bacterial flagellum go after only 5 years?
That is a rather unfortunate implication on the caller though. Apparently other people don't matter...
He kind of didn't say it but apparently if there is no afterlife, then he won't help the guy down the street who is dying because they "don't matter" and that "nothing matters" to him...
Do they hand pick these callers? It is not known whether the T3SS evolved 1st,or the flagellum,or if they evolved in parallel. The supposed pathway is completely unknown.Homology is claimed as proof of its common ancestry,it can also be proof of common design. Speculation and maybe stories do not "debunk"the concept. Besides,figuring out how the system works is far more beneficial than speculating on it's origin.
@Copsweet There is no reason to suggest design, it would take much more evidence to suggest such a thing to date. Figuring out how the system works is more beneficial, sometimes. If you were to need to recreate it, or prevent it from being created, or fully understand it, or desire highly predictable and logical changes to it then yeah origin is the way to go
@westfalla For me,a nanomachine capable of up to 100,000rpm is highly suggestive of design. Any genetic pathway considered has major stumbling blocks and dead ends. IC is probly not a good descriptive of the concept,it had to be built from the ground up,not top down. There is no conceivable step process.
@Copsweet Okay, where did we get nanomachines from? I've seen this argument 2 ways, one is calling the cell a nanomachine because they don't know how words or biology work; the other was saying that everything in the universe ever is made of nanomachines, because they were insane. There is a conceived step process
@westfalla Bioligists describe the flagellum as a nanomachine,if that's what your'e asking. Microbiloligist Dan Jones wrote in new scientist describing it as "An intricate nanomachine far beyond the craft of any human engineer" But honestly,I don't get hung up on definitions,things are what they are. There are speculated processes,far from conceivable. And as I said,they have big obstacles in the way.
@Copsweet I was more worried that it was the second one. Some biologists use a metaphor, but don't quite get the words. A more accurate comparison would be a microbiological machine. If it is speculated it is conceived, for conceived means to make in the mind. There are obstacles in the way of most things, that doesn't mean we can A.) say I quit and sit down; or B.) say it's pointless to even try, especially when we're already close to the end
@westfalla I think you read too much into the term,nano simply means small,in the context,small biological machine. Your A & B points tell me it does'nt matter what obstacles get in the way,it evolved no matter what. That's up to you,I really don't want to debate,but take a long hard look at this thing and try to draw out in your mind how it could have arisen gradually,through random mutations and natural selection.
@Copsweet Nano is a term that has an actual size, that's why micro fits better. The A and B actually said that even though you think it looks hard that doesn't mean other people have stopped working at it. Notice how I never said, "Let's just assume we're right" I actually kinda said let's not posit an idea without reason and evidence. They keep studying it and have found a plausible origin. It doesn't matter if I could think of a way.
@westfalla Yeah,technically your right,if I remember nano =1000,000th,but I think micro machine kinda sounds like a kids toy,just me. Unless they've made a remakable discovery in the last few weeks,there is no plausible origin,they readily admit they don't know,but yes,they assume it evolved,even without any clue of the pathway. Don't sell yourself short,it does matter if you can't think of a path,your'e not alone,no-one else has. It's beyond hard.
@Copsweet I remember this being a big thing back in the Dover trial, where they gave the theory on it. Looks like they've had the plausible origin for years now. I actually did think of a method for it to have evolved, took all of 3 seconds. The problems are: I don't have much knowledge on the specific DNA, so it could easily not be it; it would take more than 500 characters; and it literally doesn't matter, I thought of a method to make a lightsaber once doesn't make them anymore possible.
@westfalla Read through the research on it,every path considered ended up conflicting with another geneticists thoughts on what's possible. Of course it's easy to visualize or make an animation of it sprouting parts over time,but the reality of that actually happening is far removed from what is possible. Whole point is,you can't "debunk"and ridicule the ic concept by saying maybe these incredibly unlikely scenarios took place. You have more chance of building your light saber than a flagellum.
@Copsweet I actually took a couple of seconds to figure out a hypothetical situation on how it could be possible for them to evolve, again wasn't difficult. Didn't take long either, but like I said I don't know enough specifics to see if something couldn't happen one way or another. Again, my imagination is irrelevant. You know whats more likely than unlikely situations that in this context are really fairly likely? Something many times over more complex just being there.
@westfalla No worries dude,i'll leave it there. If your'e happy with the explanation go for it,and if you do build a light saber,I'll def buy one from you. :-) Cya
@Copsweet Visit talkorigins. org and look for their article on the evolution of the flagellum. Small warning, it's quite a long article as we've found out quite a bit about this! They reference no less than 228 scientific papers and books on the evolution of the flagellum. For you to say that no one has figured out a path in which flagella evolved...you're just plain ignorant!
@83Hammerhead If I was ignorant I would not have researched it. Of course there are peer reviewed papers on it,what I've said to westfella still applies. Again,if your happy with those explanations,go for it.
@Copsweet Ok, sorry about calling you ignorant! I'd like to know though what exactly about our current understanding is it that you don't agree with? Mind you these are the best current explanations we have and we will certainly gain more knowledge in the future. Why is it more probable that some omnipotent, omniscient being outside of space and time decided to design it?
People once had no better explanation for the sun going around the earth then some god pulling it across the sky...
@83Hammerhead They're the best current explanations far as evolution goes,your'e convinced,I'm not. I doubt anything I say will change that. All I'll say is this,it took e.coli over 40,000 generations to enhance it's ability to digest citrate when forced. Equate that to the flagellum,or a quadraped evolving into a whale. How many mutations? How long? None of it adds up to me,not by a long shot. All explanations are convoluted extrapolations beyond observation. But I'll keep reading em.
@Copsweet It took them less than 11 years for those 40'000 generations to go by. That is nothing in evolutionary time. So your problem with evolution is that there isn't enough time. Do you believe that life started about 3.8 billion years ago? I won't go into all the biological detail here, but there is plenty of time for evolution.
@83Hammerhead The LTEE started in 1988, 44,000 generations was reached relatively recently. They averaged 6.5 generations per day. After that many gens,all they could do was digest citrate better. Quadraped to whale? Dino to bird? Ape-like to human in 6million yrs? I'm sure you've heard it all before,like I've heard and read the peer-reviewed explanations before. You're convinced,I'm not,it's that simple.
@Copsweet While I would not say that I am 100% convinced, you would first have to provide a better theory, supported by evidence and observations. The designer argument just does not cut it and certainly isn't a scientific argument. It is, as you've proven here a few times, an argument from ignorance. Just because an explanation seems unconvincing to you (how much do you really know about the subject by the way?) doesn't mean it ain't so...
@83Hammerhead-Right on cue.Someone disagrees or is'nt convinced by the evidence so they're ignorant and know nothing about evolution. Perfectly trained evo. Apparently I knew more about the LTEE than you,but I'm ignorant. Where's it written we have to have an alternative theory if the one we have is hopelessly flawed? If your dog drops a turd in your living room will you leave it there until you've got some lavender to replace it? Cya
@Copsweet You can't conceive that there's enough time for evolution to happen, I'm saying that's an argument from ignorance, doesn't mean I think you're ignorant. My first language isn't english, sorry about that. The 11 years was a typo I meant to say 21 years...oh well. Anyway do you have anything better to back up your claim that the theory is hopelessly flawed other than "it doesn't convince me" and a bad analogy (granted it was funny)? Again, do you believe life started 3.8billion yrs ago?
@83Hammerhead Ok,did'nt pick english was your sec language,it's very good. I'll outline my reasons purely to tell you why I'm not convinced,not to try and convince you,cool? Time is 1,also the mechanism. Mutations causing that kind of species change has never been observed,it can only be extrapolated. A century of mutative experiments has shown only limit,deformity,death or reverting to wildtype.Never increase in genome information.DNA correction protects species every time,without fail. If you
want to count downsyndrome as a win for evolution,go for it. Supposed transitory fossils are sparse and speculative,Ardi-when discovered the headlines blared out missing link found,now it's a lemur,probably not a link,and no world announcement to correct it,as usual.General public still think it's a link. Cambrian evidence,the abrupt appearance and disappearance of phyla generally. This and more tells me I should'nt accept it without scepticism, Too many maybe stories,therefore,unconvinced.
@Copsweet I honestly don'y know how old life is,if it helps,I don't subscribe to the yec line at all. Not neccesary and does not reflect evidence. I know you don't agree with my analogy but I thought it was ok,typing on the fly.
@Copsweet Alright mate, thanks for clarifying, I can respond to every point you made and do think you are missing some important facts that might convince you otherwise. because that would take way too much space i'll personal message you thuogh! talk soon.
I know i'm about to get bashed, but I do believe there is a god. I always get the big bang argument, followed by the underlying question "how." Something can't be created out of nothing, so I get the answer "I don't know." Don't give me that yet act all superior when we don't know the answer to "why does god let people die of starvation?"
@whtballerking13 Why is saying you don't know so bad? The real problem with gods, is that they are automatically thrown into whatever knowledge gap we have for which we don't have an explaination yet. Take lightning, for instance. In ancient empires, it was believed to be caused by angry gods (Thor or Zeus, for example). Now we know what causes it, and saying a god caused it would be considered a joke. The big bang theory is strong because scientists can know what happened FROM that point.
@whtballerking13 However, if there's good evidence for another hypothesis, i'm pretty sure the scientific community would try to stick to whatever is more plausible, to continue it's periodic refinement process. Science can be wrong a bout a lot of things, but it's intellectually honest, and can actually correct itself to fit the current level of evidence about any topic. Religion knows because it knows because it knows, but has NEVER provided decent evidence for it's case, which makes it fake.
@whtballerking13 A good scientist will never claim to absolutely know stuff. He will expose solid evidence to backup his argument without logical fallacies like religion loves to do all the time. That's one of the reasons why religion and science are mutually exclusive, and i would dare saying mutually corrosive. Their very nature is extremely incompatible.
Why is gambling and cursing bad anyway? I'm risking my own EARNED money to make more money and cursing is nothing but audible sounds and pitches the same as every other word known to man. Its all taboos that we place and restrict on our selves...
Wouldn't something that was "created" be so much more simple? Why on Earth would something "created" so complicated, when something much more easy would function just as well or better, like a motor that we put in cars?
How is that more simple? You've just added an additional "link" in the "chain" of events scientists and cosmologists are tracing back. Let's presume it was a God who created the universe. What then created god? You still have that to answer.
The "complexity" of ecoli flagellum is "proof" that "god" "created" ecoli so that it would kill humans and cause death and destruction without being able to see or smell it?
Sorry, doesnt sound good...
as far as them saying they would go on a rampage if it wasnt for their god, says more about THE BELIEVERS who say that then the rational, moral atheists who take the brunt of the argument. I am moral WITHOUT god. That means I WANT to be moral.
I've had the ending discussion before. God believers claim to have absolutely no conscience except those forced on them under threat. It's a fairly transparent claim to authority and validation (after all they speak for god and gods morality) that results in them looking insane. Because they can not evaluate their own behavior honestly (because they do not feel guilt when pushing their agenda) they don't understand how absurd the fruit of their efforts tends to be.
I'm sure that this has come up before, but the argument of complexity=(intelligent)designer...How does that even work? There are many things that are complex because they lacked a single unifying (or intelligent) designer or design. Take for example city sprawls or bureaucratic systems. These to me are examples of things that exist in a complex fashion because of a lack of a unifying design, but they still "work".
AmongButNotOf 2 months ago
"help theres proof of god on my head" lol
sims3loser 3 months ago 3
@sims3loser That cracked me up too. :)
geezerbill 3 months ago in playlist Atheist Experience
This caller doesn't understand that websites can be out of date? He thinks that when website is out of date that its contents are necessarily still accurate? He doesn't understand that the website may be intentionally incorrect because it has an agenda?
And then he says that the only reason he doesn't do evil things is because his Christianity is holding him back.
He's clearly deranged. If he's allowed to walk among us, someone should ensure he stays in church to keep the rest of us safe.
ChipArgyle 4 months ago
There's no Evidence God Exist? There's also No Evidence he Doesn't Exist!
So both side are right down the middle
Jay2300Cee 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Jay2300Cee
There's no Evidence The Flying Spaghetti Monster Exist? There's also No Evidence he Doesn't Exist!
So both side are right down the middle
TheGiantSpaceHamster 5 months ago
@TheGiantSpaceHamster hey if you think the creator is a giant Spaghetti Monster Good for you!.. YOU must of had some fucked up childhood.
Jay2300Cee 5 months ago
@Jay2300Cee
- "So both side are right down the middle"
Wrong. If there is no evidence for the existence of a god, there is no reason to believe in such a god. A god that leaves no testable evidence of his presence is indistinguishable from a non-existent god, but also from a thousand of such gods.
(to be continued)
TheAtheistExperience 5 months ago
@TheAtheistExperience (continued)
The point is there are countless possible 'gods' against only 1 'none'.
If there is not even evidence for one god, there could be 1 God + 10 Norse gods + 100 Greek gods + 1000 Hindu gods = 1111 gods, but we only pick 1 personal god.
Chance to pick 1 god and be right: 1/1111 = ~0%
Chance to pick 1 god and be wrong: 1110/1111 = ~100%
Chance to pick no god and pick the wrong one: 0/1111 = ~0%
Chance to pick no god and be right: 100% - 0/1111 = ~100% (Atheism FTW!)
TheAtheistExperience 5 months ago
@TheAtheistExperience Atheism FTW? lmao.. when i said no evidence there is no God or there is one. i meant "A Creator". this thing is not a person but could be a force. The universe has a Design so some kind of intelligent being could have been behind it.
Now if this "Thing" has a relationship with it's creation is a different Topic.we are discussing the existence of creator (A GOD).. Not Religion.Take Religion out of it.
and my Dictionary doesn't say Atheist is a lack of belief on a deity
Jay2300Cee 5 months ago
@Jay2300Cee
Every turd seems to have a design, but that doesn't make it Holy shit. The problem with the idea that this universe is designed is that we don't have an undesigned universe to compare it with.
People call it designed because they can't imagine how this planet could have been suitable for us if it hadn't been designed, but that is flawed thinking. If Earth hadn't been inhabitable for us, we simply wouldn't have been here to be amazed about the fact that it is.
TheAtheistExperience 5 months ago 2
@TheAtheistExperience There is no evidence against the existence of a God either. Atheist Claim to "know" there's no God. yet don't have the evidence to back it up. Religious people claim to "know" there is a God yet don't have the evidence to back it up.
Jay2300Cee 5 months ago
@Jay2300Cee
- "Atheist Claim to 'know' there's no God."
No, atheists don't know anything about any gods. That is why they don't believe in them. Even though some 'strong' atheists may put it like that, atheism is NOT the belief that there is no god, but a lack of belief in any god.
To put it simply: a-theist is just a label for everyone who is not a theist. That is not just "surely not," but that also includes "don't know (yet)" and "don't care".
TheAtheistExperience 5 months ago
can we make it mandatory to tattoo your IQ to your forehead? It would save me the frustration of giving people the benefit of the doubt.
Johnf85 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NEW BOOK (Donated) For Debates And Governance
Topics: WINNING ARGUMENTS FOR CREATIONISM-EVOLUTIONISM DEBATE (See Subchapter 10.2.2, Chapter 10, of Part Two.), The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balancedway.yolasite.com
balancedway1.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
announcements-balancedway.yolasite.com
TheServiceWeb 6 months ago
Dan's naivety is so cute. He even made feisty fiery Jeff chuckle by his innocent ignorance!
dkdj12 8 months ago
O good lord. These people are so stupid it's sad. The questions that pop into their heads are absoloutely ridiculous sometimes. "Why would they have that on their website then?" LOL
daswann14 8 months ago
god doesn't exist ------> fact
Something christians like to do is tell you that the universe couldn't just have existed, and they tell you "god made it". Then I ask, what made god? They say he always existed.
So what makes it so much more of a valid statement saying that god just existed, and not the statement that the universe just existed?
god doesn't exist ------> fact
DeathLordFhyeg 8 months ago
If we had no organised religion, we would have been in space 300 years ago.
We have to end these embarrassing bronze age superstitions before they end us.
bary1234 9 months ago
"Well if it's been disproven, then why would All About Creation still have it on their website?"
Wow...just...wow. That he could not understand the idiocy of that question...just fucking wow.
BigLundi 9 months ago
@BigLundi Mhmmm. It's awe-inspiring un-intellectual-ness.
BlckSbthMan 9 months ago
By the way, I think Dan should be civilly comitted. He says if he found out there were no god, he'd go around and do what he wants to other people. What a dangerous person.
Newenlightenmentnow 9 months ago
Dan is unbelievably dense. Wow. No wonder they hung up on him the last time
Newenlightenmentnow 9 months ago
Well the caller just proved that atheist are more moral than him. Where he needs a god to tell him "no don't don that" the atheist doesn't require the god and behaves more morally than him. I mean have you seen the down right LIES christians tell?
Boudiga 9 months ago
"you can go around sinning all the time"
You realise that the concept of sin is totally made up in the first place.
omnissient 10 months ago
I've never met a creationist over 5
sirbestnameever 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Heed! Let's take notice of [The END] our time_ Mathew24:36-39
There are real understandings and hope profusely in God's Word, the Bible:
The world is managed_ 1John5:19 Revelation12:7-12
Major +/- occurrences_ Mathew24:7,8,10-14,21,22
Predicted changes in People’s behaviors_ 2Timothy 3:1-5
The True God will act soon_ Revelation16:13,14 Daniel2:44
We too must act so to be saved_ Revelation18:4 Zephaniah2:3 John17:3 Mathew6:9-11,33,34 Mark13:13
A New World, at hand Psalm37:9-11 2Peter3:8-13
plptous 10 months ago
What a douche this caller was. This is what religion does, it rots the brains and ruins lives.
bary1234 11 months ago 22
@bary1234 Trust me man, for really religious people, evidence means absolutely nothing. The more proof you have, the more they believe you wrong. The less evidence they have to justify their claims, the more they believe them to be true. They gladly replace investigations with "revelation" and evidence with doctrine.
petion2010 9 months ago
@petion2010 : I know, its so frustrating. I have argued with religious people for some 15 years now, had thousands of stupid debates and I have not woken up single one of them. They are in such a deep denial nothing penetrates it. I think it might be that the "god" feeling they have in their superstitious tiny minds is some kind of evolutionary fluke of brain-structure we cant comprehend. Still its astonishing that childhood indoctrination is so powerfull and lasts for so long.
bary1234 9 months ago
@bary1234 Childhood indoctrination and a feel-good feeling they have that somehow they'll be rewarded after death, if they maintain faith those superstitions. You know that sometime I wonder that if we didn't die if religion or even the gods would still be around. I think not.
petion2010 9 months ago
@petion2010 : Religion has held mankind down for centuries. We would have been in space 200 years ago if we had shaken superstition off sooner. Stem cell research could have solved so much of our problems if superstitious fuckers had not hampered it for decades. And they still do that, its insane they get their way still.
bary1234 9 months ago
@bary1234 so believing that we have a purpose in life and that everything that happens to us is for a reason and that someone loves us no matter what is ruining us? no. Warping it into something it isn't is what ruins lives.
turtlelackie 9 months ago
@turtlelackie : Well, that "purpose of life" is a lie. And that "reason for everything" is a lie. So how could that be valuable and good?
That kind of magical thinking causes all sorts of superstitions to develope and prosper. There are still people burned as witches. Baby girls are raped because sex with a virgin cures aids. Hands and legs of living albinos are chopped off for lucky charms. Genitals of little girls are systematically mutilated. These insane "purposes for life" must be stopped.
bary1234 9 months ago
@bary1234 christianity is about love and is against unprovoked physical violence, and it's the truth whether you believe it or not
turtlelackie 9 months ago
@turtlelackie : And your evidence for this is...
bary1234 9 months ago
well since that guy just admits he would like to do bad things for his own satisfaction, I doubt God will let him into heaven since he's only a believer to get into heaven.
What an idiot. lol
snowboarderforlyfe 11 months ago 2
@snowboarderforlyfe
Even if he didn't admit it, god would know, which should be terrifying.
CrazyBluePrime 10 months ago
The idea of irreducible complexity proves only the limitations in human thinking, but science has a way of helping us get around those limitations, because it is much larger than any individual's findings and opinions. It relies on evidence and continual efforts to disprove theories. If creationism were scientific, it would find evidence for creation and against evolution rather than pointing at a perceived fault in evolution and then crying "See? God did it!"
ehwood99 1 year ago
The idea of irreducible complexity proves only the limitations in human thinking, but science has a way of helping us get around those limitations, because it is much larger than any individual's findings and opinions. It relies on evidence and continual efforts to disprove theories. If creationism were scientific, it would find evidence creation rather than pointing at a perceived fault in evolution and then crying "See? God did it!"
ehwood99 1 year ago 12
@ehwood99 Neil deGrasse Tyson has an excellent lecture titled "God of the Gaps." It's on youtube, and I think he made a clear case how humans revert to the supernatural whenever we can't explain things. If you haven't seen it, I encourage you to watch it here, it's just 28 minutes long.
petion2010 9 months ago
@ehwood99 well science tells you the world had a beginning and in science nothing can create itself out of thin air. The world randomly creating itself would be like a tornado going through a junkyard and assembling a flyable aircraft
turtlelackie 9 months ago
@turtlelackie Do you mean "the universe" instead of "the world"? If so, when was it proved that the universe had a beginning?
Zemed87 8 months ago
@turtlelackie
Fortunately no scientist ever said we were random chance. Stop listening to Gay Cumfa-I mean Ray Comfort.
NUTCASE71733 5 months ago
I don't for a minute actually believe these sorts of people would just go around doing bad things if there was no God. More than likely they'd live their lives exactly as they do now (albeit without the sycophantic worship).
Pinage 1 year ago
Irreducible complexity holds about as much water as a bible in a bath tub.
MrMetallicMentality 1 year ago
Dan's an idiot.
falcoperegrinus82 1 year ago
is this boy calling with his mom in the background retarded? or what is wrong with him? obviously something is wrong with him, he also has an understanding of critical thinking equivalent to that of a 10 year old child I cant even imagine what it would be like to talk with retarded kids like this
slovakmath 1 year ago
Ha.
1:02
jerkmanthing 1 year ago
Seeing quite a few of these episodes (I've lost count)...I've tried and tried and tried, to put my mind in the Creationist view...Tried to see where they are going so I know what they are talking about.
I tried, but all I'm seeing are falsehoods from my childhood. I grew up with them, and I escaped from them. I managed to escape from them only because I thought of them to be false BY MYSELF.
I feel sorry for Creationists because they grew up the way I did, but they never got around...
pythor2 1 year ago
@pythor2 ive been trying to do this for the past 1.5 years, its like alice in wonderland. full of surprises.
VarykGerai 1 year ago
Irreducible complexity/ Intelligent Design = Religious Right think-tank marketing term for "Creationism"
It was an attempt, that has been unfortunately somewhat successful, to "re-brand" the term "creationism" that was falling out of favor.
Simple.
TheOrcasRule 1 year ago
@TheOrcasRule you heard about kitzmiller vs. dover? if not you may enjoy reading about it :)
Ihatemelee 1 year ago
Comment removed
TheOrcasRule 1 year ago
poor dumb caller. its sad.
Ihatemelee 1 year ago
@Ihatemelee I don't have sympathy for the caller. He clearly said the only thing holding him back from doing things he considers immoral is fear of supernatural punishment. He's at a very low level of moral development and, at heart, is very selfish.
colddrake80 1 year ago
@colddrake80 and he should be put behind bars BEFORE he actualy did something imo.
VarykGerai 1 year ago
@VarykGerai No but he is a fool and tool and deserves every bit of ridicule he gets.
colddrake80 1 year ago
"There's proof of god in my head :O"
haha I love these guys
Murdulo 1 year ago
I love this guy. "It's on the internet, so it must be true." I kind of got the feeling he was just kidding around for a few seconds.
HentaiGaiJin 1 year ago
use the google luke, may the google be with you.
ScotchMonkey08 1 year ago
ID and creationists are the pure face of the devil.
Flem1337 1 year ago
The caller is trying to justify his beliefs but he FAILS. BAD. I kinda feel sorry for him lol but then again why should I?
S8917560G 1 year ago
Some people don't know proper research
ArcyTheFurryArcanine 1 year ago
I love irreducible complexity all you need to defeat it is to ask what it means. But in case of mild intelligence apply nothing is irreducibly complex scientists have debunked this thoroughly. And just in case of extra faith shielding ask What is a bacterial flagellum?
MrReasonFTW 1 year ago
@silentpimpsmak evolution: Mutate, Survive, Reproduce, Repeat.
that's it.
DarwinAwardsInc 1 year ago
@silentpimpsmak So? How does this change the fact that chromosome 2 and 13 are a perfect match with our fused chromosome? How does this change the fact that we share an enormous amount of erv's with the chimp genome (wich can only happen if a common ancestor gets infected with the specific virus that caused the ERV)?
How does this change the fact that we share an enormous amount of DNA markers? You know... the same kind of markers we use to determine family relationships in dna tests...
DarwinAwardsInc 1 year ago
@DarwinAwardsInc "So? How does this change the fact that chromosome 2 and 13 are a perfect match with our fused chromosome?"
BOOM! Head shot
xxxxkimoxxxx 1 year ago
@silentpimpsmak natural selection is just the selection of what works.
If you live in a pitch black cave, your eyes are useless. This means that there is NO selective pressure on your eyes whatsoever. So if eye-sight is broken through mutation, there won't be any selective pressure for or argainst it - since the eyes are useless anyway.
DarwinAwardsInc 1 year ago
@silentpimpsmak It's always a good idea to inform yourself about the things you wish to argue against. In context of evolution, there's nothing wrong with mexican tetra. "better adapted for survival" doesn't necessarily mean that you get stronger, bigger, smarter etc. All of that is habitat bound. What is good in one place is not necessarily good in another. And if you live in dark places, eyes don't help you. Like the molerat. Lives underground and is blind.
DarwinAwardsInc 1 year ago
@silentpimpsmak "What has evolved in your life time please share" A ridiculous amount of virus strains (new flu shots every year among others), insects (pesticide no longer works), bacteria (anti-biotics no longer work; bacteria solely feeding on nylon - a fabric that didn't exist some time ago), humans (+90% of tibetians have unique genes that facilitate living on high altitudes),.........
Also google "observed speciation"
DarwinAwardsInc 1 year ago
@HybridD91 where would the first species that could make its own light get the genetics to be able to do that? there is no good answer to this. so jump on google real quick and try to figure it out before you answer
silentpimpsmak 1 year ago
@HybridD91 where would the angler fish get the genetics to make a light?
silentpimpsmak 1 year ago
@HybridD91 yes being able to get fatter and not be able to see is an advantage think about what you are saying. this is not an improvement to the species that can see.
silentpimpsmak 1 year ago
@silentpimpsmak The fat is used as energy and I never said it was an improvement for the other fish that can see, only for the blind fish. Thanks for showing how illerate you are and nice job not addressing ANY THING I posted. I don't know where the angler fish would get the genetics to make light but the blind fish can at least detect light. Why don't you take your own advice and search for yourself. Email a marine biologist, I'm not ashamed to say I don't know, unlike you people.
HybridD91 1 year ago
@HybridD91 oh and for your big bang theory after we figured out your blind fish was a stupid example of evolution search in your you tube bar ,
How old is the earth? the producer of this video is unpicked1
here are some scientitfic facts you should know.
silentpimpsmak 1 year ago
@silentpimpsmak The Earth is 4.5 billion years old, if you say it isn't you should deny Nagasaki and Hiroshima and you still haven't provided me with any evidence that says organisms can't become simplier to better suit their environment. You haven't refuted any thing but you have shown your ignorance at a high level. For your info idiot, I didn't search this on YouTube. So think of another baseless assertion.
HybridD91 1 year ago
@HybridD91 why would i deny nagasaki and hiroshima ? You deny the scientific facts of how old the earth really is but you use science as your basis of you whole belief. So with the whole using the cave tetra you are agreeing that evolution can use irreducible complexity. what can we take away next from this fish to see if it can still survive. lets move it to an environment to where there is no food and see if its stomach will disappear. LOL nice i like this example.
silentpimpsmak 1 year ago
@silentpimpsmak IIf scientists don't know the age of the Earth, they know nothing about atoms therefore N&H shouldn't have happened, in other words, you should deny history because radiometric dating deals with atoms. IC has nothing to do with what we're talking about and fail of an analogy because it's obvious the fish would need an energy source of some kind. You make all of these assertions but fail to address any thing I bring forth, either you address them or fuck off.
HybridD91 1 year ago
@silentpimpsmak List of things we failed to address
1)Human Chromosome 2 and similarites of our genome and a chimp's
2)expansion of our universe(has nothing to do with evolution)
3)nylonase in bacteria
4)evidence that animals can't become simplier to be better suited for their environment
Here's an easier challenge, name one application of creationism. I hope you know what an application is. If you can't address any of these, I'm done wasting my time with you.
HybridD91 1 year ago
@silentpimpsmak *Your*
HybridD91 1 year ago
@cablepanos i am not the only one in my house that uses this computer. I have a bunch of roomates and when you go to you tube it does not sign me out. Im glad though that you admire me so much that you check my background. i love you to.
silentpimpsmak 1 year ago
@keggerous way to troll this same page all the time.
silentpimpsmak 1 year ago
@silentpimpsmak Someone with a false worldview can't own any one.
HybridD91 1 year ago
@HybridD91 can you prove my belief wrong? so how can it be false? apparently your views are a little shady. Scientist change their theories on you nit wits all the time and you just are like zombies and roll right along with their ignorance. Dont worry when you are on your death bed you will wonder if you were right.
silentpimpsmak 1 year ago
@silentpimpsmak What belief? Which God? Is he all loving and all powerful? The systematic failure of answered prayers and a cruel world disproves your God. Keep pushing pascal's wager, just take into account off all the other Gods you don't believe in. Scientists change theories according to what's currently right while your stupid holy books still say we're made from dirt despite being 70% water. If science didn't change, we wouldn't have computers. Stop using them.
HybridD91 1 year ago
@HybridD91 the truth is there you just live in a bubble and fail horribly to see it. I feel bad that you are a puppet on a string and just believe whatever the common trend calls for. This very time frame in your life is playing out just like the book of revelations said it would.I do feel sorry for you. dont bother to reply because the atheistexperience and all their videos pick on unarmed people. atheist are supposed to be unsure if there is a god or not. these people are preaching against him
silentpimpsmak 1 year ago
@silentpimpsmak You can't counter anything, so you post a lot of crap to say very little? Why am I not surprised. I own the Book of Revelations, it isn't convincing. You call me a puppet but adhere to majority, talk about irony.
HybridD91 1 year ago
@HybridD91 because the majority has a sensible thought process. why do you think that atheist are the manority? because the rest of us see the truth. Do some research as to why evolution is not possible. you have to pro and con both sides. No other theory in science is allowed the impossibilities or the missing proof like evolution. But as long as they can pull your string the minority(you) will be right there clapping your hands like a good little retard.
silentpimpsmak 1 year ago
@silentpimpsmak 4 billion people do not believe in the same God as you, therefore their belief is correct. During the colonial years, majority of whites thought blacks were 3/5 human being, therefore they were correct. Argumentum ad populum, another logical fallacy, have any more? Evolution not possible? Research what? Crap produced by people had done no work involving Evolution? Answersingeneis? Idiot. If you morons had the truth, it wouldn't be varied. Truth isn't subjective dumbass.
HybridD91 1 year ago
@silentpimpsmak Oh yeah, how could I forget this one, how many people thought the Earth was flat?
HybridD91 1 year ago
@silentpimpsmak And science does not say humans came from chimps so stop lying.You can go with the evolution view of things or with the bible view which is simply ridiculous.
lewisner 1 year ago
@lewisner okay evolutions view wich makes no sense."EVOLUTION"= some things evolve some dont. we have never really witnessed evolution just adaptations and variations that were probably in the gene pool of this animal since the beggining.
we dont know why the octopus, the praying mantis, the horse shoe crab, the alligator has never evolved.evolution does not know to what benefit a plant would produce a fruit because plants do not care about feeding us.Yeah lets go with this theory it is great!
silentpimpsmak 1 year ago
@keggerous no god created me to have the choice and to choose carefully what i do or the action i decide to take. but you being and evolutionist with your evolved mind, every comment you make was never your thought but evolved thoughts from your monkey ancestors.
silentpimpsmak 1 year ago
@silentpimpsmak can u make any less sense? u didnt even address what i said. god made charles manson into a murdered! u cant tell me otherwise cuz if ur god exists and is all the qualities u describe him as, then he created charles manson to be a murderer.
keggerous 1 year ago
@keggerous but if you use evolutions veiw. he had no choice it is the brain he was dealt over the millions of years of evolution. so we should not punish him it is not his fault. YOU CANT SEE THAT IF WE GO OFF EVOLUTION THAT WE HAVE EVOLVED BRAINS AND CAN SAY "I am not my fault" evolution handed me this killer brain. God gives us the right to make right from wrong choices not evolution because evolution does not care about right from wrong. chicken or the egg first?
silentpimpsmak 1 year ago
@silentpimpsmak u have a very thick head u know that? i can still just say the same thing u said . . . the murderer had no choice to not murder because he was dealt the brain god gave him over 0 years . . . . so we shouldnt punish him because god will punish him for the brain that he ultimately gave him . . . . retarded thinking on ur part bro.
keggerous 1 year ago
@keggerous So you dont believe we have a choice between right and wrong. because that comes from god not evolution. Evolution does not have a moral standard. The gut feeling that says this is wrong is shouldnt do it, has nothing to do with evolution. You believe we are souless animals and i feel sorry for you. You shouldnt listen to these people atheist are supposed to be unsure not preaching against God. This so called atheist has become an occult. This dude talking even looks evil. look at him
silentpimpsmak 1 year ago
@silentpimpsmak plz stop talking about evolution like u know anything about it . . .
keggerous 1 year ago
@silentpimpsmak one last thing . . . the evolution of our minds from more primative forms doesnt mean that we cant hold ppl accountable for what they do. on the other hand i can say that ur bible seems to describe a god which actually doesnt want us to judge others . . . do u believe u have free will? so even if evolution was true, u would still think u had free will correct? so how does ur argument follow that murderers had no choice? this is assuming a few things of course.
keggerous 1 year ago
@keggerous are you freaking serious. people are getting fatter. ha ha what a joke. look around next time you are in public and realize how many of the people around you could survive like the old days. i guarantee atleast 5 out of 10 people could not handle a manual labor job, let alone hunt their own food down without a gun. you have no idea of the physical fitness of men that actually had to work for a living back then. LOl people are getting stronger at ordering big meals from mcdonalds.
silentpimpsmak 1 year ago
This is indisputable proof that Creationist websites make stupid Creationists even more stupid.
gupsphoo 1 year ago
Do these guys realise the risk they take in inviting these wacko callers back to a bar after the show?
lewisner 1 year ago
The theory of evolution = I am not my fault, I killed some one because my brain evolved to a killers mentality. Nothing is my choice because this was the brain that was evolved for millions of years. Even if i think it is my choice to do right or wrong it really wasnt because my brain evolved to make the choice it did. Can any one see where this is going??? Evolution in reality takes every thing from you period.
silentpimpsmak 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@silentpimpsmak
"Can any one see where this is going??? "
Yes. It's called a "strawman" argument. It's going "I'm a dishonest Christian that can't make a REAL argument, so I'm just going to make fallacious arguments to try to sound like I know what I'm talking about"
SiriusMined 1 year ago
irreducible complexity is a valid argument but scientist really do not have a good answer as to why when you take organisms down to a simpler form they would be dead. it was brushed off because they were scared to look. you atheist outsmart your common sense. There are more dead ends in science than there are dead end streets in the world. open your eyes people, even investigate the very laws your scientist base their studies off of and realize we should not exist without a creator.
silentpimpsmak 1 year ago
Look ... it's been 2000 years since the so called jesus episodes and the theists haven't let that go ..... what makes him think the cunts are gonna let the bacterial flagellum go after only 5 years?
sum1otosh1 1 year ago
That is a rather unfortunate implication on the caller though. Apparently other people don't matter...
He kind of didn't say it but apparently if there is no afterlife, then he won't help the guy down the street who is dying because they "don't matter" and that "nothing matters" to him...
sonic8005 1 year ago
Do they hand pick these callers? It is not known whether the T3SS evolved 1st,or the flagellum,or if they evolved in parallel. The supposed pathway is completely unknown.Homology is claimed as proof of its common ancestry,it can also be proof of common design. Speculation and maybe stories do not "debunk"the concept. Besides,figuring out how the system works is far more beneficial than speculating on it's origin.
Copsweet 1 year ago
@Copsweet There is no reason to suggest design, it would take much more evidence to suggest such a thing to date. Figuring out how the system works is more beneficial, sometimes. If you were to need to recreate it, or prevent it from being created, or fully understand it, or desire highly predictable and logical changes to it then yeah origin is the way to go
westfalla 1 year ago
@westfalla For me,a nanomachine capable of up to 100,000rpm is highly suggestive of design. Any genetic pathway considered has major stumbling blocks and dead ends. IC is probly not a good descriptive of the concept,it had to be built from the ground up,not top down. There is no conceivable step process.
Copsweet 1 year ago
@Copsweet Okay, where did we get nanomachines from? I've seen this argument 2 ways, one is calling the cell a nanomachine because they don't know how words or biology work; the other was saying that everything in the universe ever is made of nanomachines, because they were insane. There is a conceived step process
westfalla 1 year ago
@westfalla Bioligists describe the flagellum as a nanomachine,if that's what your'e asking. Microbiloligist Dan Jones wrote in new scientist describing it as "An intricate nanomachine far beyond the craft of any human engineer" But honestly,I don't get hung up on definitions,things are what they are. There are speculated processes,far from conceivable. And as I said,they have big obstacles in the way.
Copsweet 1 year ago
@Copsweet I was more worried that it was the second one. Some biologists use a metaphor, but don't quite get the words. A more accurate comparison would be a microbiological machine. If it is speculated it is conceived, for conceived means to make in the mind. There are obstacles in the way of most things, that doesn't mean we can A.) say I quit and sit down; or B.) say it's pointless to even try, especially when we're already close to the end
westfalla 1 year ago
@westfalla I think you read too much into the term,nano simply means small,in the context,small biological machine. Your A & B points tell me it does'nt matter what obstacles get in the way,it evolved no matter what. That's up to you,I really don't want to debate,but take a long hard look at this thing and try to draw out in your mind how it could have arisen gradually,through random mutations and natural selection.
Copsweet 1 year ago
@Copsweet Nano is a term that has an actual size, that's why micro fits better. The A and B actually said that even though you think it looks hard that doesn't mean other people have stopped working at it. Notice how I never said, "Let's just assume we're right" I actually kinda said let's not posit an idea without reason and evidence. They keep studying it and have found a plausible origin. It doesn't matter if I could think of a way.
westfalla 1 year ago
@westfalla Yeah,technically your right,if I remember nano =1000,000th,but I think micro machine kinda sounds like a kids toy,just me. Unless they've made a remakable discovery in the last few weeks,there is no plausible origin,they readily admit they don't know,but yes,they assume it evolved,even without any clue of the pathway. Don't sell yourself short,it does matter if you can't think of a path,your'e not alone,no-one else has. It's beyond hard.
Copsweet 1 year ago
@Copsweet I remember this being a big thing back in the Dover trial, where they gave the theory on it. Looks like they've had the plausible origin for years now. I actually did think of a method for it to have evolved, took all of 3 seconds. The problems are: I don't have much knowledge on the specific DNA, so it could easily not be it; it would take more than 500 characters; and it literally doesn't matter, I thought of a method to make a lightsaber once doesn't make them anymore possible.
westfalla 1 year ago
@westfalla Read through the research on it,every path considered ended up conflicting with another geneticists thoughts on what's possible. Of course it's easy to visualize or make an animation of it sprouting parts over time,but the reality of that actually happening is far removed from what is possible. Whole point is,you can't "debunk"and ridicule the ic concept by saying maybe these incredibly unlikely scenarios took place. You have more chance of building your light saber than a flagellum.
Copsweet 1 year ago
@Copsweet I actually took a couple of seconds to figure out a hypothetical situation on how it could be possible for them to evolve, again wasn't difficult. Didn't take long either, but like I said I don't know enough specifics to see if something couldn't happen one way or another. Again, my imagination is irrelevant. You know whats more likely than unlikely situations that in this context are really fairly likely? Something many times over more complex just being there.
westfalla 1 year ago
@westfalla No worries dude,i'll leave it there. If your'e happy with the explanation go for it,and if you do build a light saber,I'll def buy one from you. :-) Cya
Copsweet 1 year ago
@Copsweet You'll be the first I tell
westfalla 1 year ago
@Copsweet Visit talkorigins. org and look for their article on the evolution of the flagellum. Small warning, it's quite a long article as we've found out quite a bit about this! They reference no less than 228 scientific papers and books on the evolution of the flagellum. For you to say that no one has figured out a path in which flagella evolved...you're just plain ignorant!
83Hammerhead 1 year ago
@83Hammerhead If I was ignorant I would not have researched it. Of course there are peer reviewed papers on it,what I've said to westfella still applies. Again,if your happy with those explanations,go for it.
Copsweet 1 year ago
@Copsweet Ok, sorry about calling you ignorant! I'd like to know though what exactly about our current understanding is it that you don't agree with? Mind you these are the best current explanations we have and we will certainly gain more knowledge in the future. Why is it more probable that some omnipotent, omniscient being outside of space and time decided to design it?
People once had no better explanation for the sun going around the earth then some god pulling it across the sky...
83Hammerhead 1 year ago
@83Hammerhead They're the best current explanations far as evolution goes,your'e convinced,I'm not. I doubt anything I say will change that. All I'll say is this,it took e.coli over 40,000 generations to enhance it's ability to digest citrate when forced. Equate that to the flagellum,or a quadraped evolving into a whale. How many mutations? How long? None of it adds up to me,not by a long shot. All explanations are convoluted extrapolations beyond observation. But I'll keep reading em.
Copsweet 1 year ago
@Copsweet It took them less than 11 years for those 40'000 generations to go by. That is nothing in evolutionary time. So your problem with evolution is that there isn't enough time. Do you believe that life started about 3.8 billion years ago? I won't go into all the biological detail here, but there is plenty of time for evolution.
83Hammerhead 1 year ago
@83Hammerhead The LTEE started in 1988, 44,000 generations was reached relatively recently. They averaged 6.5 generations per day. After that many gens,all they could do was digest citrate better. Quadraped to whale? Dino to bird? Ape-like to human in 6million yrs? I'm sure you've heard it all before,like I've heard and read the peer-reviewed explanations before. You're convinced,I'm not,it's that simple.
Copsweet 1 year ago
@Copsweet While I would not say that I am 100% convinced, you would first have to provide a better theory, supported by evidence and observations. The designer argument just does not cut it and certainly isn't a scientific argument. It is, as you've proven here a few times, an argument from ignorance. Just because an explanation seems unconvincing to you (how much do you really know about the subject by the way?) doesn't mean it ain't so...
83Hammerhead 1 year ago
@83Hammerhead-Right on cue.Someone disagrees or is'nt convinced by the evidence so they're ignorant and know nothing about evolution. Perfectly trained evo. Apparently I knew more about the LTEE than you,but I'm ignorant. Where's it written we have to have an alternative theory if the one we have is hopelessly flawed? If your dog drops a turd in your living room will you leave it there until you've got some lavender to replace it? Cya
Copsweet 1 year ago
@Copsweet You can't conceive that there's enough time for evolution to happen, I'm saying that's an argument from ignorance, doesn't mean I think you're ignorant. My first language isn't english, sorry about that. The 11 years was a typo I meant to say 21 years...oh well. Anyway do you have anything better to back up your claim that the theory is hopelessly flawed other than "it doesn't convince me" and a bad analogy (granted it was funny)? Again, do you believe life started 3.8billion yrs ago?
83Hammerhead 1 year ago
@83Hammerhead Ok,did'nt pick english was your sec language,it's very good. I'll outline my reasons purely to tell you why I'm not convinced,not to try and convince you,cool? Time is 1,also the mechanism. Mutations causing that kind of species change has never been observed,it can only be extrapolated. A century of mutative experiments has shown only limit,deformity,death or reverting to wildtype.Never increase in genome information.DNA correction protects species every time,without fail. If you
Copsweet 1 year ago
want to count downsyndrome as a win for evolution,go for it. Supposed transitory fossils are sparse and speculative,Ardi-when discovered the headlines blared out missing link found,now it's a lemur,probably not a link,and no world announcement to correct it,as usual.General public still think it's a link. Cambrian evidence,the abrupt appearance and disappearance of phyla generally. This and more tells me I should'nt accept it without scepticism, Too many maybe stories,therefore,unconvinced.
Copsweet 1 year ago
@Copsweet I honestly don'y know how old life is,if it helps,I don't subscribe to the yec line at all. Not neccesary and does not reflect evidence. I know you don't agree with my analogy but I thought it was ok,typing on the fly.
Copsweet 1 year ago
@Copsweet Alright mate, thanks for clarifying, I can respond to every point you made and do think you are missing some important facts that might convince you otherwise. because that would take way too much space i'll personal message you thuogh! talk soon.
83Hammerhead 1 year ago
This caller is a glutton for punishment.
ArchRascal 1 year ago
I know i'm about to get bashed, but I do believe there is a god. I always get the big bang argument, followed by the underlying question "how." Something can't be created out of nothing, so I get the answer "I don't know." Don't give me that yet act all superior when we don't know the answer to "why does god let people die of starvation?"
whtballerking13 1 year ago
@whtballerking13 Why is saying you don't know so bad? The real problem with gods, is that they are automatically thrown into whatever knowledge gap we have for which we don't have an explaination yet. Take lightning, for instance. In ancient empires, it was believed to be caused by angry gods (Thor or Zeus, for example). Now we know what causes it, and saying a god caused it would be considered a joke. The big bang theory is strong because scientists can know what happened FROM that point.
hellhammerz666 1 year ago
@whtballerking13 However, if there's good evidence for another hypothesis, i'm pretty sure the scientific community would try to stick to whatever is more plausible, to continue it's periodic refinement process. Science can be wrong a bout a lot of things, but it's intellectually honest, and can actually correct itself to fit the current level of evidence about any topic. Religion knows because it knows because it knows, but has NEVER provided decent evidence for it's case, which makes it fake.
hellhammerz666 1 year ago
@whtballerking13 A good scientist will never claim to absolutely know stuff. He will expose solid evidence to backup his argument without logical fallacies like religion loves to do all the time. That's one of the reasons why religion and science are mutually exclusive, and i would dare saying mutually corrosive. Their very nature is extremely incompatible.
hellhammerz666 1 year ago
Ah, the flagellum. I thought that argument died back before I was born.
tipoomaster 1 year ago 16
@tipoomaster
- "Ah, the flagellum. I thought that argument died back before I was born."
Now how could that behe...?
TheAtheistExperience 1 year ago 27
@TheAtheistExperience I love double entendre's that are not of a sexual nature :D
GronTheMighty 1 year ago
this caller wont take facts for what they are.
faithisuneducated 1 year ago
hilarious
01234V43210 1 year ago
So a theist would go aroung gambling, and going nuts rioting all over the place if they did not think there was a god!
PageofLegend 1 year ago
religion is there to keep down exactly the type of violent dumbnut as the caller.
Zralf 1 year ago 4
that argument has not proved to be false yet. i would like to see it please.
i think these guys prey on low educated ignorant people and try make them selves look smart but i think they lie in there facts.
hudfadz 1 year ago
@hudfadz
It was proven false. You should actually LOOK before claiming them liars. It took me 30 seconds to find this: watch?v=K_HVrjKcvrU
Skepnostic 1 year ago 2
@hudfadz
Typical creationist. Just sit there and demand that others do your homework for you without checking for yourself. Can you even define evolution?
smaakjeks 1 year ago
Why is gambling and cursing bad anyway? I'm risking my own EARNED money to make more money and cursing is nothing but audible sounds and pitches the same as every other word known to man. Its all taboos that we place and restrict on our selves...
Bralidiroe 1 year ago 3
Wouldn't something that was "created" be so much more simple? Why on Earth would something "created" so complicated, when something much more easy would function just as well or better, like a motor that we put in cars?
ryandward 1 year ago
@ryandward
How is that more simple? You've just added an additional "link" in the "chain" of events scientists and cosmologists are tracing back. Let's presume it was a God who created the universe. What then created god? You still have that to answer.
MagnumDB 1 year ago
it's like this..
Is there a god?
We're here aren't we..
Yes but that doesn't prove that God exists.
What... THAT IS GOD you FOOL, there's no bearded man...
fucktheothercalmo 1 year ago
The "complexity" of ecoli flagellum is "proof" that "god" "created" ecoli so that it would kill humans and cause death and destruction without being able to see or smell it?
Sorry, doesnt sound good...
as far as them saying they would go on a rampage if it wasnt for their god, says more about THE BELIEVERS who say that then the rational, moral atheists who take the brunt of the argument. I am moral WITHOUT god. That means I WANT to be moral.
cosmicforums 1 year ago 2
this caller is too funny hahha. "well why would they have this on their website if its been proven false so long ago?" hahahahah
thach1ef 1 year ago
I've had the ending discussion before. God believers claim to have absolutely no conscience except those forced on them under threat. It's a fairly transparent claim to authority and validation (after all they speak for god and gods morality) that results in them looking insane. Because they can not evaluate their own behavior honestly (because they do not feel guilt when pushing their agenda) they don't understand how absurd the fruit of their efforts tends to be.
yubarraboo 1 year ago
I LOVE these guys.
thetramp123 1 year ago
congradulations atheist experience. you finally got a dummy on the phone that you can sit back and be proud of yourself for refuting. way to go.
Gods0n1 1 year ago
SQUILLIONS! Obviously I have been hopelessly behind the times, as I was still using "gazillions".
Atheists have the best vocabulary. Thank God I'm one. Now, does anyone here have a good recipe for Bombadier Beetle Souffle?
SighCollette 1 year ago
These guys prove that evolution is nothing more than a tool used by athiests to advance their religion and it is a religion.
dalerob66 1 year ago
you have no idea what you are talking about. Seriously, absolutely no idea at all.
rkdghals 1 year ago 2
@dalerob66 Ahaha... I always love it when people say something like that))
To be fair, your claim is on the same level of thought as the caller in the video.
Somewhere near ground level...