Creationists are idiots. Pure and simple. They have to resort to doctoring up videos like some teenager to "prove their point", whatever the hell that is.
Come on, surely creationists have better ways of mocking Richard Dawkins don't they?
Maybe if they have to play sound effects over his dialogue or insert images over the video then their position on finding things to make fun of might be very weak.
"I suppose it's possible you might find a signature" after being asked to speculate is not the same thing as believing in intelligent design idiot. "It could not have just jumped into existence, that is the point". In other words, he was saying God didn't poof life here with magic.
Pay attention folks. Ben Stein set up a hypothetical, and asked Dawkins to respond to it. Dawkins did not say he believed in intelligent design. He was saying that if intelligent design were true, then this would be the most likely way it would come about.
@backwoodsninja Its Dawkins contradicting himself. He writes book after book explaining how science has proven evolution, how organisms evolve and how "apparent design" in nature is a fallacy because its poorly designed. No need for him to even entertain the question with an answer if he doesn't see it as a possibility. He believes in design deep down.
@9pt9 you do realise those noises make it so we can't hear fully what dawkins is saying... and are you saying that the god you believe in, nay the sort of god all religious folk believe in, are some aliens that created us all? well obviously that isnt the case. and even if aliens did create us then who created the aliens? thus dawkins doesnt believe in intelligent design and this quote doesnt mean he does or anything... nonsense.
@1ProudFemaleAtheist Either con artists, or the brainwashed victims of said con artists. I feel dismayed when I encounter people who are intelligent in every other aspect of life, but then cling to young earth creationism. To me, that's even worse than stupid, because they are using their intelligence to defend stupid things. Oh well. *shakes head* Pleased to meet you.
1) The universe is organized - (this already assumes the that it was organized...the universe looks pretty chaotic to me...your notion is no proof)
2) Organization requires an organizer - (no.1 is flawed because the organizer is not yet proven to exist therefore this is invalid to the conclusion)
3) Therefore God is logical - (This simply begs the 5 questions that are yet to be answered, & it does not follow premise 1 & 2 because premise 1 is flawed)
@Abgef I can only see organization in every thing I observe. From the electromagnetic bonds of atoms to the staggering organization of the human brain. Since intelligence must be at the cause of organization God can be inferred. Since God made nature He must transcend it and cannot be proven by the science method. But I feel His attributes are clearly seen by what has been made. If you only see chaos then God is not logical. But I think the evidence speaks to the contrary.
"I can only see organization in every thing I observe. From the electromagnetic bonds of atoms to the staggering organization of the human brain"
Then your so-called evidence is then a subjective notion...you simply assume design...complexity is independent of design...mountain sites & stalactite caves look pretty without inferring a designer & the earth looks flat from the ground perspective...sorry but that's not even evidence, that's just mere speculation.
@Abgef mountains and stalactite caves are not designed but they certainly are arranged by unswerving physical laws that seem to have been enacted. The matter they are made up of is organized and thus the product of intelligence. I could say that your notion of complexity being independent of design is mere speculation. One speculative view no better than the other.
"The matter they are made up of is organized and thus the product of intelligence"
mere speculation yet again.
"I could say that your notion of complexity being independent of design is mere speculation"
Let me give you an example of what I mean:
a mineral rock is certainly more complicated in matter than a designed plastic ball...now we can't infer that the rock is designed because that would beg the question...therefore the one which is a designed plastic ball is more simple.
@Abgef The rock posses characteristics of design on an atomic and molecular level. The shape and size of the rock is due to universal forces acting on the molecules. A plastic ball demonstrates 2 kinds of intelligence. Universal intelligence on the molecular level and human intelligence in the arrangement of the molecules.
"The rock posses characteristics of design on an atomic and molecular level"
again...this statement assumes the conclusion
how do you really know what is designed & what is not if you attribute design to everything?
This isn't a logical conclusion at all...of course it looks designed because you see people that designed objects everyday but then how would you know it's really designed if you assume that everything is designed?
Isn't it based on our human empathy, our compassion, love & understanding of the social contract that we have as a functioning member of society...why would a God be required?
@billybush111I think religion is man-made, but to say that this is all an accident and that intelligence had nothing to do with this design of course will turn a few heads!! Now just because religion is manmade doesnt mean "oh its just a natural unmindful accident out of "what" out of nothing? Of course this universe came from somewhere.Thats the theory of evolution "everything that exists now evolved from something else." The main reason why I'm still not dead set on evolution is because
@billybush111 And where did natural force come from? See,everything came from or "evolved" from something else so to say that "natural force" is an atheists equivalent to a god is ludicrious.
@billybush111 no one has been able to answer just the SIMPLEST questions such as 1. Where,when,how,and why did evolution start.And for that matter, how did the universe and matter come to be?2 Why would a species adapt if it can survive before adaptation.Why adapt if it can already survive? 3.How and why would DNA change scientifically? Give me a scientific answer of how and WHY dna changes form. Those are the main reasons why I'm not deadset on it.If you can answer these questions I'll believe.
@The198519 Evolution started with the first self-replicating molecules, probably about 3.8 billion years ago. Evolution started because the replication was not always perfect and errors which increased the ability or chance of reproduction were favored. Species "adapt" because environments change which favor certain traits or individuals in a population have traits which allow them to outcompete others until those traits are spread throughout the population.
@billybush111 "Evolution started cuz the replication wasnt perfect." O.K. so what came before the first replication.
There are many diverse complex creatures that live in every environment including humans.You can find a tribe or colony in virtually every part of this world if you look deep enough.But again if a species can already survive for millions of years without a certain trait then why adapt and On that note who is the one pulling the strings and deciding what a better trait IS.
@The198519 This is why those of us that accept evolution as fact don't generally bother answering creationists' questions. The questions are almost always insincere. I answered your questions about evolution and you chose to misquote one of my answers and change one of your questions.
Evolution is not about survivability, but about differential reproduction. Those that are more likely to survive AND reproduce are more likely to pass on their genes to the next generation.
@billybush111 You do realize that you didnt answer one of my questions which is why I wont "accept" evolution because noone has been able to do it.They just skirt around my questions instead like you just did."Evolution isnt about surviving" Of course not it has nothing to do with that....uhh yeah keep telling yourself that.lol!!! And either youre an idiot or your just being rude by your self rightous tadpole remark.You know what I meant!! Dont be a smart ass!!
@billybush111 Again, I'm not talking about errors,reproduction variations,or manufactured insertions,I'm asking on a natural level like how does a tadpole eventually turn into this intelligent human? Give me the scientific equation of how and why this happens.
Thats like saying the things that go bump in the night in a childs bedroom is the boggy man. I dont think we as humans are any wehre near answering a ? as big as that.
We don't know how the universe came into existence... we may find out in the future, but as of now, we don't know.
To say that it was god without any evidence is the equivalence of looking at an incredibly complex math problem that you have no idea of how to solve and just saying: "the answer is 4," while any rational person would simply say "I don't know."
I don't understand why people are so insecure that they can't say "I don't know."
@9pt9 If you can imagine non-existance, than you have the answer. But you can't, so there is no "beginning" to it, because existance has no start just like a circle has. Time is an illusion, therefore also what we call "past".
There is also evidence of past and future lifes, meaning the contradiction to heaven/hell. Sure, you won't consider that to be true, and so you won't experience evolution, both spiritual and physical, as you expect it to be. A done deal cleverly engineered by the church.
@Abgef Its an inference to the best explanation. 1) The universe had a cause. 2) organization is the primary manifestation of intelligence 3) the universe and the life in it is organized 4) It must be the product of an organizer.
How does conciousness evolve? Why has no other creature evolved any where near the conciousness of humans? I believe there is a paucity of evidence for it. Mainly conjecture.
since we are the ones who have actually organized things on earth...outside of it is hazardous to human life & may be subjected to chance (infinite monkey theorem)...this then begs the questions:
1) How can God create time without the time to do it?
2) Why does the cause need to be conscious?
3) How can a consciousness be eternal & exist w/out a brain?
4) Where is the proof that magical GOD powers does exist?
5) Where is proof that a non-conscious unexplainable cause cannot possibly be?
inference of best explanation does not apply because the explanation itself requires an explanation since it begs the question & makes too many assumptions & pre-suppositions...
Occam's razor would destroy this argument altogether..
Even Atoms are exquisitely organized and thus require and organizer. To me that conclusion is inescapable. Living systems are even more organized. Since God has no competition in question of the prime reality I feel, personally, it's an inference to the best explanation. As far as 1&3 go, If Gods power is limitless the answer lies within His nature. Proof of God is evident in the order of the universe and life and also in the lack of an alternative theory.
The lack of an alternative theory is NOT equal to evidence for a proposed theory.
Argument from ignorance - It asserts that a proposition is necessarily true because it has not been proven false...it excludes a third option, which is: there is insufficient investigation and therefore insufficient information to "prove" the proposition to be either true or false.
If your logic is correct then God would be subjected to infinite regress, otherwise you simply beg the question.
@Abgef It's not evidence but it is convenient. Again, the universe requires a cause. Given the near impossibility of the universe fine tuning itself, the exquisitely intelligent design in biology, the existence of objective morality, and my personal testimony it's an inference to the best explanation.
There is no infinite regress if God is the prime reality. He does not need to be caused.
That cause need not be conscious...no one knows what was before the big bang, & the unknown is NOT nothing...Where is proof that a non-conscious unexplainable cause cannot possibly be?
To say the universe is fine-tuned already implies a creator, you haven't proven that yet...not to mention brainless minds.
yet you abstain God from the same logic you hold your argument...you can't logically conclude something if the conclusion violates the logic of the premises...it's just begging the question
@Abgef There is no question beg. My conclusion logically flows from the major premise. 1) the universe is organized 2) organization requires an organizer. Therefore God is logical.
If morality is simply based on social contracts then it's not wrong to rape and steal. Clearly some members of society make justification for such actions. So right and wrong become subjective.
You beg the 5 questions I asked since they remain unanswered in your premise.
"If morality is simply based on social contracts then it's not wrong to rape and steal"
I explained to you why we know it is wrong & what makes it wrong...were not just robots following a social contract, we are capable of empathy, sympathy, compassion, understanding & the ability to reflect rationally on our actions...those are the basic ingredients...repeatedly asking the same question wouldn't make sense anymore.
@Abgef In a naturalistic worldview empathy, sympathy, compassion etc are not really good and rape and child abuse are not really wrong. They simply are socially concocted delusions that are deemed acceptable or not. They are not ACTUALLY right or wrong because there is no transcending scale to compare them to. But most would agree rape and child abuse are really wrong and the good virtues you mentions are really good. In order for objective moral values to exist God must exist.
"In a naturalistic worldview empathy, sympathy, compassion etc are not really good"
Im not even a naturalist, & what do you base this statement on? why are they NOT good when they are what makes us special? I would say those are indeed remarkable qualities.
"They are not ACTUALLY right or wrong because there is no transcending scale to compare them to"
why should they be compared to something in the first place? They stand well on their own...why is a God required?
@Abgef I agree they are remarkable qualities because i believe they really are good despite what anybody else believes. Without an author of objective morality right and wrong are delusions. You may think somethings wrong but it isn't actually wrong because there is no such thing as wrong outside of your mind. If there is truly right and wrong, and I believe there is, it must be according to the author of right and wrong. Otherwise morality is purely subjective and hitler wasn't really wrong.
"Without an author of objective morality right and wrong are delusions"
delusions are defined as something of an illusion misleading the mind from what is true...these qualities are not delusions since they certainly do exist...otherwise we wouldn't be able to co-exist with one another...so why can't empathy, etc. be our own objective moral truth?
"Otherwise morality is purely subjective and hitler wasn't really wrong"
again, we can tell he is wrong bec we have a sense of empathy & compassion
@Abgef "delusions are defined as something of an illusion misleading the mind from what is true"
Hitler and his cohorts believed that extermination of certain people was a good thing. We could argue they were deluded from the truth that murdering people is wrong. But that implies they fell away from a moral standard:murder is wrong. Is it really wrong? Or is it just the opinion of the majority since most of us would agree that we wouldn't want to be killed? No, its objectively wrong. Why?
"murder is wrong. Is it really wrong? Or is it just the opinion of the majority since most of us would agree that we wouldn't want to be killed? No, its objectively wrong. Why?"
of course it's morally wrong simply because it goes against our nature as social beings that tend to care & empathize with each other...we are therefore able to reflect on such inhuman actions & label them objectively wrong simply because it dehumanizes us as a species.
@Abgef "it goes against our nature as social beings". The jails are full of people who violate this "nature to care and empathize". The reason we have most laws is to restrain the use of mans immorality. Man is untrustworthy. Objective morality can't be determined by society's members by definition.
And yes I only see design everywhere. Have the last word. Take care.
it goes against our nature as social beings". The jails are full of people who violate this "nature to care and empathize". "The reason we have most laws is to restrain the use of mans immorality"
What does this have to do with the conclusion of a God? why does a God follow? yeah they're in jail because we decided to put them there...whats your point?
"Objective morality can't be determined by society's members by definition"
@defiythelie "believing that aliens seed us here on earth is 100 times more believable then a god, i mean really think about it?" Yes,I agree.I think that might be how we got here but how do we prove it? I s there any link you can give me on this subject?
@foley50 - To expose the stupidity of evo-atheism and get under your skin. Richard Dawkins is a creep and a moron.
What's wrong with 17 yr old virgins? Should everybody be fornicating before then? More teenage abortions and welfare cases for us to pay for with our tax dollars?
The vid didn't get under my skin because it is of such a poor standard, that any message you try to argue is lost in the floundering desperation of a blind fool, whom would glady yell at the top of his lungs, only to drown out those he opposes. A deep rooted fear, grounded in ignorance and poor education. Stay in your bedroom, which is obviously where you are, and never venture out. The world is too scarey for you.
@9pt9 why are evolution and atheism stupid? the theory of evolution has more proof than intelligent design. and if god exists he's an arrogant, self centered, unreasonable, racist and cruel person. read the old testament and replace God and the Lord with the word Steve and Steve will look like a huge jerk.
@JProcks321 - LOL! A+ for humor but F- for understanding the old testament. Replace the word "mankind" in the history books with "juvenile delinquents" and you have an accurate description of the murderous, perverted, theiving, selfish, raping, power thirsty history of mankind. God is infinitely loving in that He has not only decided not to oblterate us like we deserve but instead died for us so we can be redeemed. Amazing grace!
@JProcks321: Where do u get that God is a racist. Adam & Eve were created in the Middle East or Africa (black or people of color), Ham is Noah's son that Egyptians came from and Psalms reference God's affection for Egypt. The richest man ever was black (Solomon), the first world ruler recorded in Bible was black, the "eyes of the people" was a black man. Gold cursed a woman for hatin on Moses for marrying a black woman. Yer arrogant, despite your ignorance dude. Check yerself.
I love how the evos who cry about vote-bot doit and doit. Vote-botters all. This is a great clip and fun additions. I use this quote in my RD: Intelligent Design Believer vid. Classic!
satanrocks668, I think you are confused. This movie was about evolution, not the origin of life OR the origin of the universe. The origin of life is another theory called abiogenesis and the origin of the universe is rooted in cosmology. He doesn't have to explain either as they are talking about evolution.
Funny how we see it different. I thot is was one of the most patently absurd things ever uttered out of a person people revere as an intellect and it was a total joy mocking him. Thanks for watching!
If that was supposed to be a mockery of Dawkins, it was an utter failure. You only succeeded in displaying your own ignorance and immaturity. Not only do you not understand what evolutionary theory states, but you are completely missed the point of Dawkins' hypothetical scenario. Par for the course, really - you're no different than 99% of creationists.
Dawkins had a great point about how even if humans were intelligently designed, they had to have been designed by an ultimately explicable, gradually constructed species- but too bad his point was completely destroyed by your annoying monkey noises and spliced footage from ET. Way to go, dipshit.
It never claims to be a lovely story. It's the story of how sinful fallen man destroys themselves and Gods way of eternal life. You r a sinner and you need forgiveness. Sorry but your r going to hell dude. Repent .
Also its easy to fulfill prophesy when you are the one writing down the fake story to begin with, Hell with a few hours and a computer I could write a story that would fulfill every prophesy too, and if someone picked it up several hundred years from now when any possibility of proof is long gone I bet i could get someone to believe in me as well. Argument on prophesy when man writes both is a weak argument
Both paleontologists, either creation or evo will view evidence thru their respective glasses.There's a gr8 YouTube vid that proves it with artifacts. I have no doubts. I'll find it and u can decide
Not to mention that I would love to see someone try to build an arc with stone age tools and watch it fall apart like a pile of toothpicks. I was raised christian, grew up christian, and educated in a christian highschool for 6 years. We studied the bible every day inside and out. I know the bible. The Old Testement is a horrible book filled with genocide, hate, and torture all in gods name and with his blessing. You worship a horrible God.
Genocide hate torture?? U weren't paying attntion in school then dude, God gave his life to pay for your sins. And you mock him like Hes a fairy tale! I feel bad for ur eternity. Looking bleek. Why would men make up a story in small pieces over 2k yrs and fill it w stories that defy logic if they want to succeed at duping ppl in2 believing it?? How could they do that?? That would b quite an underground group of conspiritors and for what gain?
If you guys truly believe that the Earth is 6000 years old, that man walked with dinosaurs, and that jonah was swallowed by a wale you are beyond ignorant and not even worth arguing with because you will never see the faults in your baseless arguments. there is absolutely no proof of a worldwide flood and there isnt even enough water on the earth to flood anything. No Arc could ever fit 2 of every animal on the earth as well as food for 40days and nights. why not worship mother goose?
There is overwhelming proof of dinos w man. 1000's of artifacts found with detailed pics of stegasaurases and brachiosaurus. You might want to consider dumping ur faith in thunderfoot(who cannot save u) and start putting ur faith in Christ who can give u life.
Over 300 fulfilled prophecies concerning Jesus Christ penned hundreds of years b4 His birth in scripture is proof enuff for me! I have no problem at all chalking what we don't up to God. The contents of the bible r so comprhensive and unique that it would be impossible to fabricate. How and why could they make it up? Then how do u market the lie? The bible itself is divine. 66 books and over 30 diff authors all in different places over several thousand yrs.
And where did they come from you ask? What your really getting at is where did life come from. You ready for the answer? We don't know yet. YET! That is the beauty of science. we can admit that we don't have all the answers, but we are seeking the truth. Religion basks in its love of ignorance. You chock up anything that you cant explain to God and leave it there. If religion was the driver of knowledge we would still blame disease on sins, and people in the millions would die without medicine
Ok he was talking about some possibly highly advanced civilization seeding the Earth and other planets with basic single cell life and us coming from that. That is his form of intelligent design for US. NOT your form of intelligent design by a "God". If this was the way it went, we were created through a natural process by other beings who exist within this universe and are subject to its laws and science. Also THEY would have to have come from some form of Darwinian evolution.
atheists-->no God,but intelligent design , no religion. ..really?.. i say you create your own religion ,with your own believes,e.g. darwinism,and the possibility of I.D. .
and that's something all 3 of us can agree on. Evolution does NOT explain creation. It's not supposed to. That's an entirely different subject and theory. Evolution is not a religion. Religion is based on faith. You must have faith that stories MEN wrote down in books hundreds of years AFTER the supposed events took place, were not crazy, liers, or completely wrong. You have no proof or evidence of a single thing written in your book that is divine. Evolution is based on evidence
U want to just up and deny it ? That's a gamble. The truth is in the bible. Science will never ever b able to explain creation. I used to think it would when I was an athiest. Then Sombody open the bible to me and I knew I needed forgivness right then. God blew me away right there.
You took his words out of context......He was speculating to ALIEN intelligent design, which, regardless of how crazy it sounds, isn't any less plausible than ancient biblical mythology. People believe the bible's myths simply b/c it's popular..........The planet being flat used to be popular at one time as well.
Actually, the Bible describes the earth as being round. The belief of the planet being flat derived from scientists. If they had read the Bible to begn with, they would have known The Truth.
People believe in the Bible because it's popular?? Take a read through this thread and other threads on topics like this and tell us how popular believing in God and Christ really is, bud. There are many ready to pounce on someone who declares their fatih. Just like the Bible said there would be
Which is why it fails - the earth ISN'T round. The ignorant goat herders of the iron-age middle east thought that the world was a round disc - ie. flat. Anyone who's ever been to the top of a mountain would have described the world as "round", but it took science to show us that our world is a actually an oblate spheroid. Ergo, your bible, which claims that the earth is flat, was obviously written by ignorant peasants rather than Magic Man.
Oblate spheroid, huh? interesting to learn the "type of round" the earth qualifies as. The Bible certainly doesn't describe earth as flat. Either way, I respect your faith. No need to name call while defending it though. Science provides NO evidence of a godless universe, but it's entertaining to watch people like yourself pretend it does.
"The Bible certainly doesn't describe earth as flat"
Alright then, numbnuts, let's see your evidence. Just a single quote will do. And no, before you post the usualr response, a "circle" is not the same as a "shpere", as anyone who's taken grade 6 gemotery should know. While you're at it, you may also want to explain why portions of the bible tell us that the earth has pillars, and corners.
It's all in how you interpret it. Those with faith in God will interpret it one way, and those with no faith in God will interpret it another way. It would be fun to have this conversation face to face where I'm SURE you would be more respectful. Since evidence is what you are looking for, surely you must have some evidence of your own to offer? Didn't think so. What other names do you have to throw out from the safety of your basement? Coward.
Bulshit. Only an idiot would think that words on a page which are supposed to be a historical record are open to interpretation. The only way you could justify such a proposterous declaration is by claiming that the bible is simply a piece of fictional literature. In that case, I'd agree with you 100% - you can interpret it any way you like.
As for respect - you'll get some when you earn it. Right now, you have a long way to go.
"ok so it says its round..... so is a plate" Hey dummass do you look at the moon and say anything other than it is round? And don't tell me "spherical" because NOBODY looks at the moon and says hey look it's spherical tonight.
When one of our foremost authorities on Evolution like Mr. Dawkins can only distill down life on Planet Earth to "possible aliens" from another area of the Universe we evolutionists are in trouble. He even says there could be Intelligent Design? What? I thought he was on our side? Well, if he said it then it must be worth my further investigation. I don't want any Christian fanatics going crazy here but the simplicity of Ben's questions seem to stump things here? I will find the truth.
Creationists are idiots. Pure and simple. They have to resort to doctoring up videos like some teenager to "prove their point", whatever the hell that is.
stratovani 1 month ago
Come on, surely creationists have better ways of mocking Richard Dawkins don't they?
Maybe if they have to play sound effects over his dialogue or insert images over the video then their position on finding things to make fun of might be very weak.
Drinapropriatetouch 1 month ago
"I suppose it's possible you might find a signature" after being asked to speculate is not the same thing as believing in intelligent design idiot. "It could not have just jumped into existence, that is the point". In other words, he was saying God didn't poof life here with magic.
foxlake02 2 months ago
you sir, are an IDIOT!!
lahav1 3 months ago
@lahav1 Don't you mean IDiot?
9pt9 3 months ago
The Raelians are atheistic creationists. They believe life was seeded here by a race of superior beings.
k0smon 4 months ago
No he does not, only a retard would believe in intelligent design. Just look at all the facts & ignore all the outdated myths & legends.
ACCSESS247 5 months ago
Pay attention folks. Ben Stein set up a hypothetical, and asked Dawkins to respond to it. Dawkins did not say he believed in intelligent design. He was saying that if intelligent design were true, then this would be the most likely way it would come about.
backwoodsninja 5 months ago
@backwoodsninja Its Dawkins contradicting himself. He writes book after book explaining how science has proven evolution, how organisms evolve and how "apparent design" in nature is a fallacy because its poorly designed. No need for him to even entertain the question with an answer if he doesn't see it as a possibility. He believes in design deep down.
9pt9 5 months ago
@9pt9 I'm gonna take a wild guess and say that you haven't read any of his books.
backwoodsninja 5 months ago
@9pt9 you do realise those noises make it so we can't hear fully what dawkins is saying... and are you saying that the god you believe in, nay the sort of god all religious folk believe in, are some aliens that created us all? well obviously that isnt the case. and even if aliens did create us then who created the aliens? thus dawkins doesnt believe in intelligent design and this quote doesnt mean he does or anything... nonsense.
TheStfu1000 4 months ago
@backwoodsninja
Any intelligent person can see that. Unfortunately, creationists are for the most part, not intelligent. They are con artists.
1ProudFemaleAtheist 3 months ago
@1ProudFemaleAtheist Either con artists, or the brainwashed victims of said con artists. I feel dismayed when I encounter people who are intelligent in every other aspect of life, but then cling to young earth creationism. To me, that's even worse than stupid, because they are using their intelligence to defend stupid things. Oh well. *shakes head* Pleased to meet you.
backwoodsninja 3 months ago
@backwoodsninja
You too.
1ProudFemaleAtheist 3 months ago
misleading!
Bera1989 11 months ago 2
@Bera1989 It was Dawkins own words!
9pt9 11 months ago
Name something that's NOT designed. How can you tell?
You just assume everything is designed & that mere assumption is no proof..it's just assuming everything else is designed & nothing is not designed.
which begs the question...how do you really know?
Abgef 1 year ago
1) The universe is organized - (this already assumes the that it was organized...the universe looks pretty chaotic to me...your notion is no proof)
2) Organization requires an organizer - (no.1 is flawed because the organizer is not yet proven to exist therefore this is invalid to the conclusion)
3) Therefore God is logical - (This simply begs the 5 questions that are yet to be answered, & it does not follow premise 1 & 2 because premise 1 is flawed)
Abgef 1 year ago
@Abgef I can only see organization in every thing I observe. From the electromagnetic bonds of atoms to the staggering organization of the human brain. Since intelligence must be at the cause of organization God can be inferred. Since God made nature He must transcend it and cannot be proven by the science method. But I feel His attributes are clearly seen by what has been made. If you only see chaos then God is not logical. But I think the evidence speaks to the contrary.
9pt9 1 year ago
"I can only see organization in every thing I observe. From the electromagnetic bonds of atoms to the staggering organization of the human brain"
Then your so-called evidence is then a subjective notion...you simply assume design...complexity is independent of design...mountain sites & stalactite caves look pretty without inferring a designer & the earth looks flat from the ground perspective...sorry but that's not even evidence, that's just mere speculation.
Abgef 1 year ago
@Abgef mountains and stalactite caves are not designed but they certainly are arranged by unswerving physical laws that seem to have been enacted. The matter they are made up of is organized and thus the product of intelligence. I could say that your notion of complexity being independent of design is mere speculation. One speculative view no better than the other.
9pt9 1 year ago
"The matter they are made up of is organized and thus the product of intelligence"
mere speculation yet again.
"I could say that your notion of complexity being independent of design is mere speculation"
Let me give you an example of what I mean:
a mineral rock is certainly more complicated in matter than a designed plastic ball...now we can't infer that the rock is designed because that would beg the question...therefore the one which is a designed plastic ball is more simple.
Abgef 1 year ago
@Abgef The rock posses characteristics of design on an atomic and molecular level. The shape and size of the rock is due to universal forces acting on the molecules. A plastic ball demonstrates 2 kinds of intelligence. Universal intelligence on the molecular level and human intelligence in the arrangement of the molecules.
9pt9 1 year ago
"The rock posses characteristics of design on an atomic and molecular level"
again...this statement assumes the conclusion
how do you really know what is designed & what is not if you attribute design to everything?
This isn't a logical conclusion at all...of course it looks designed because you see people that designed objects everyday but then how would you know it's really designed if you assume that everything is designed?
begs the question...how do you really know?
Abgef 1 year ago
"the existence of objective morality"
why should objective reality be based on a God?
Isn't it based on our human empathy, our compassion, love & understanding of the social contract that we have as a functioning member of society...why would a God be required?
Abgef 1 year ago
I guess you miss the point that God, by definition, is actually an extra terrestrial being.
DuTriDu 1 year ago
dawkins is stupid. What can a stupid brain do except to act as stupid as transtrollantic.
odingdongnadaXD 1 year ago
@odingdongnadaXD Isn't amazing how futile in thought a person can become?
9pt9 1 year ago
@9pt9 You miss the point entirely. Intelligent design is such a stupid idea, that that is about the only way you can account for it.
billybush111 1 year ago
@billybush111I think religion is man-made, but to say that this is all an accident and that intelligence had nothing to do with this design of course will turn a few heads!! Now just because religion is manmade doesnt mean "oh its just a natural unmindful accident out of "what" out of nothing? Of course this universe came from somewhere.Thats the theory of evolution "everything that exists now evolved from something else." The main reason why I'm still not dead set on evolution is because
The198519 1 year ago
@The198519 I do not know anyone who believes that evolution happened by accident. Instead, it is a process directed by natural forces.
billybush111 1 year ago
@billybush111 And where did natural force come from? See,everything came from or "evolved" from something else so to say that "natural force" is an atheists equivalent to a god is ludicrious.
The198519 1 year ago
@The198519 No it isn't.
billybush111 1 year ago
@billybush111 ...and you didnt answer my question of how the universe and physical matter came to be.
The198519 1 year ago
@The198519 That is a question about physics and has nothing to do with evolution.
billybush111 1 year ago
@billybush111 no one has been able to answer just the SIMPLEST questions such as 1. Where,when,how,and why did evolution start.And for that matter, how did the universe and matter come to be?2 Why would a species adapt if it can survive before adaptation.Why adapt if it can already survive? 3.How and why would DNA change scientifically? Give me a scientific answer of how and WHY dna changes form. Those are the main reasons why I'm not deadset on it.If you can answer these questions I'll believe.
The198519 1 year ago
@The198519 Evolution started with the first self-replicating molecules, probably about 3.8 billion years ago. Evolution started because the replication was not always perfect and errors which increased the ability or chance of reproduction were favored. Species "adapt" because environments change which favor certain traits or individuals in a population have traits which allow them to outcompete others until those traits are spread throughout the population.
billybush111 1 year ago
@billybush111 "Evolution started cuz the replication wasnt perfect." O.K. so what came before the first replication.
There are many diverse complex creatures that live in every environment including humans.You can find a tribe or colony in virtually every part of this world if you look deep enough.But again if a species can already survive for millions of years without a certain trait then why adapt and On that note who is the one pulling the strings and deciding what a better trait IS.
The198519 1 year ago
@The198519 This is why those of us that accept evolution as fact don't generally bother answering creationists' questions. The questions are almost always insincere. I answered your questions about evolution and you chose to misquote one of my answers and change one of your questions.
Evolution is not about survivability, but about differential reproduction. Those that are more likely to survive AND reproduce are more likely to pass on their genes to the next generation.
billybush111 1 year ago
@billybush111 You do realize that you didnt answer one of my questions which is why I wont "accept" evolution because noone has been able to do it.They just skirt around my questions instead like you just did."Evolution isnt about surviving" Of course not it has nothing to do with that....uhh yeah keep telling yourself that.lol!!! And either youre an idiot or your just being rude by your self rightous tadpole remark.You know what I meant!! Dont be a smart ass!!
The198519 1 year ago
@The198519 DNA can change through transcription errors, gene duplication, inversions, viral insertions, etc.
billybush111 1 year ago
@billybush111 Again, I'm not talking about errors,reproduction variations,or manufactured insertions,I'm asking on a natural level like how does a tadpole eventually turn into this intelligent human? Give me the scientific equation of how and why this happens.
The198519 1 year ago
@The198519 Tadpoles don't turn into humans. They turn into frogs and toads.
billybush111 1 year ago
believing that aliens seed us here on earth is 100 times more believable then a god, i mean really think about it?
defiythelie 1 year ago 2
@defiythelie Where did the universe come from? Where did matter come from? Don't know? Ofc u don't. Perfectly logical to assume God.
9pt9 1 year ago
@9pt9
Thats like saying the things that go bump in the night in a childs bedroom is the boggy man. I dont think we as humans are any wehre near answering a ? as big as that.
defiythelie 1 year ago
@9pt9
god is not a logical answer.
We don't know how the universe came into existence... we may find out in the future, but as of now, we don't know.
To say that it was god without any evidence is the equivalence of looking at an incredibly complex math problem that you have no idea of how to solve and just saying: "the answer is 4," while any rational person would simply say "I don't know."
I don't understand why people are so insecure that they can't say "I don't know."
cofoidh 1 year ago
@cofoidh Right you are but to there are some atheists that claim to know how everything came to be too.
The198519 1 year ago
@9pt9 If you can imagine non-existance, than you have the answer. But you can't, so there is no "beginning" to it, because existance has no start just like a circle has. Time is an illusion, therefore also what we call "past".
There is also evidence of past and future lifes, meaning the contradiction to heaven/hell. Sure, you won't consider that to be true, and so you won't experience evolution, both spiritual and physical, as you expect it to be. A done deal cleverly engineered by the church.
Thesolve 1 year ago
No not perfectly logical to assume God because:
Causes need time to have an effect, therefore:
1) How can God create time without the time to do it? LOGICAL PARADOX
furthermore...
2) Why does the cause need to be conscious?
3) How can a consciousness be eternal & exist w/out a brain?
4) Where is the proof that magical GOD powers does exist?
5) Where is proof that a non-conscious unexplainable cause cannot possibly be?
too many assumptions...occam's razor destroys the God Theory
Abgef 1 year ago
@Abgef what is conciousness and where did it come from?
9pt9 1 year ago
@9pt9
From the brain...going back all the way to evolution...nobody knows what was before that so any speculating would require evidence.
Abgef 1 year ago
@Abgef Its an inference to the best explanation. 1) The universe had a cause. 2) organization is the primary manifestation of intelligence 3) the universe and the life in it is organized 4) It must be the product of an organizer.
How does conciousness evolve? Why has no other creature evolved any where near the conciousness of humans? I believe there is a paucity of evidence for it. Mainly conjecture.
9pt9 1 year ago
since we are the ones who have actually organized things on earth...outside of it is hazardous to human life & may be subjected to chance (infinite monkey theorem)...this then begs the questions:
1) How can God create time without the time to do it?
2) Why does the cause need to be conscious?
3) How can a consciousness be eternal & exist w/out a brain?
4) Where is the proof that magical GOD powers does exist?
5) Where is proof that a non-conscious unexplainable cause cannot possibly be?
Abgef 1 year ago
@9pt9
inference of best explanation does not apply because the explanation itself requires an explanation since it begs the question & makes too many assumptions & pre-suppositions...
Occam's razor would destroy this argument altogether..
Abgef 1 year ago
Even Atoms are exquisitely organized and thus require and organizer. To me that conclusion is inescapable. Living systems are even more organized. Since God has no competition in question of the prime reality I feel, personally, it's an inference to the best explanation. As far as 1&3 go, If Gods power is limitless the answer lies within His nature. Proof of God is evident in the order of the universe and life and also in the lack of an alternative theory.
9pt9 1 year ago
@9pt9
The lack of an alternative theory is NOT equal to evidence for a proposed theory.
Argument from ignorance - It asserts that a proposition is necessarily true because it has not been proven false...it excludes a third option, which is: there is insufficient investigation and therefore insufficient information to "prove" the proposition to be either true or false.
If your logic is correct then God would be subjected to infinite regress, otherwise you simply beg the question.
Abgef 1 year ago
@Abgef It's not evidence but it is convenient. Again, the universe requires a cause. Given the near impossibility of the universe fine tuning itself, the exquisitely intelligent design in biology, the existence of objective morality, and my personal testimony it's an inference to the best explanation.
There is no infinite regress if God is the prime reality. He does not need to be caused.
9pt9 1 year ago
That cause need not be conscious...no one knows what was before the big bang, & the unknown is NOT nothing...Where is proof that a non-conscious unexplainable cause cannot possibly be?
To say the universe is fine-tuned already implies a creator, you haven't proven that yet...not to mention brainless minds.
yet you abstain God from the same logic you hold your argument...you can't logically conclude something if the conclusion violates the logic of the premises...it's just begging the question
Abgef 1 year ago
@Abgef There is no question beg. My conclusion logically flows from the major premise. 1) the universe is organized 2) organization requires an organizer. Therefore God is logical.
If morality is simply based on social contracts then it's not wrong to rape and steal. Clearly some members of society make justification for such actions. So right and wrong become subjective.
9pt9 1 year ago
You beg the 5 questions I asked since they remain unanswered in your premise.
"If morality is simply based on social contracts then it's not wrong to rape and steal"
I explained to you why we know it is wrong & what makes it wrong...were not just robots following a social contract, we are capable of empathy, sympathy, compassion, understanding & the ability to reflect rationally on our actions...those are the basic ingredients...repeatedly asking the same question wouldn't make sense anymore.
Abgef 1 year ago
@Abgef In a naturalistic worldview empathy, sympathy, compassion etc are not really good and rape and child abuse are not really wrong. They simply are socially concocted delusions that are deemed acceptable or not. They are not ACTUALLY right or wrong because there is no transcending scale to compare them to. But most would agree rape and child abuse are really wrong and the good virtues you mentions are really good. In order for objective moral values to exist God must exist.
9pt9 1 year ago
"In a naturalistic worldview empathy, sympathy, compassion etc are not really good"
Im not even a naturalist, & what do you base this statement on? why are they NOT good when they are what makes us special? I would say those are indeed remarkable qualities.
"They are not ACTUALLY right or wrong because there is no transcending scale to compare them to"
why should they be compared to something in the first place? They stand well on their own...why is a God required?
Abgef 1 year ago
@Abgef I agree they are remarkable qualities because i believe they really are good despite what anybody else believes. Without an author of objective morality right and wrong are delusions. You may think somethings wrong but it isn't actually wrong because there is no such thing as wrong outside of your mind. If there is truly right and wrong, and I believe there is, it must be according to the author of right and wrong. Otherwise morality is purely subjective and hitler wasn't really wrong.
9pt9 1 year ago
"Without an author of objective morality right and wrong are delusions"
delusions are defined as something of an illusion misleading the mind from what is true...these qualities are not delusions since they certainly do exist...otherwise we wouldn't be able to co-exist with one another...so why can't empathy, etc. be our own objective moral truth?
"Otherwise morality is purely subjective and hitler wasn't really wrong"
again, we can tell he is wrong bec we have a sense of empathy & compassion
Abgef 1 year ago
@Abgef "delusions are defined as something of an illusion misleading the mind from what is true"
Hitler and his cohorts believed that extermination of certain people was a good thing. We could argue they were deluded from the truth that murdering people is wrong. But that implies they fell away from a moral standard:murder is wrong. Is it really wrong? Or is it just the opinion of the majority since most of us would agree that we wouldn't want to be killed? No, its objectively wrong. Why?
9pt9 1 year ago
"murder is wrong. Is it really wrong? Or is it just the opinion of the majority since most of us would agree that we wouldn't want to be killed? No, its objectively wrong. Why?"
of course it's morally wrong simply because it goes against our nature as social beings that tend to care & empathize with each other...we are therefore able to reflect on such inhuman actions & label them objectively wrong simply because it dehumanizes us as a species.
Abgef 1 year ago
@Abgef "it goes against our nature as social beings". The jails are full of people who violate this "nature to care and empathize". The reason we have most laws is to restrain the use of mans immorality. Man is untrustworthy. Objective morality can't be determined by society's members by definition.
And yes I only see design everywhere. Have the last word. Take care.
9pt9 1 year ago
it goes against our nature as social beings". The jails are full of people who violate this "nature to care and empathize". "The reason we have most laws is to restrain the use of mans immorality"
What does this have to do with the conclusion of a God? why does a God follow? yeah they're in jail because we decided to put them there...whats your point?
"Objective morality can't be determined by society's members by definition"
oh? & what other determinants could there be?
Abgef 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@defiythelie "believing that aliens seed us here on earth is 100 times more believable then a god, i mean really think about it?" Yes,I agree.I think that might be how we got here but how do we prove it? I s there any link you can give me on this subject?
The198519 1 year ago
You're all agnostics. You just don't realize it yet.
chuobio 1 year ago
@foley50 - HA HA Mission accomplished then!
9pt9 2 years ago
The Mission being...?
To be a Troll? Well congrats, another human that wouldn't be worth scraping of the sole of my shoe. Why is YT filled with 17 Y/0 virgins these days?
foley50 2 years ago
@foley50 - To expose the stupidity of evo-atheism and get under your skin. Richard Dawkins is a creep and a moron.
What's wrong with 17 yr old virgins? Should everybody be fornicating before then? More teenage abortions and welfare cases for us to pay for with our tax dollars?
9pt9 2 years ago
The vid didn't get under my skin because it is of such a poor standard, that any message you try to argue is lost in the floundering desperation of a blind fool, whom would glady yell at the top of his lungs, only to drown out those he opposes. A deep rooted fear, grounded in ignorance and poor education. Stay in your bedroom, which is obviously where you are, and never venture out. The world is too scarey for you.
foley50 2 years ago
Ok Simon baker
9pt9 2 years ago
I actually do happen to have been voted as the sexist man on TV, cheers *thumb up*
foley50 2 years ago
@9pt9 why are evolution and atheism stupid? the theory of evolution has more proof than intelligent design. and if god exists he's an arrogant, self centered, unreasonable, racist and cruel person. read the old testament and replace God and the Lord with the word Steve and Steve will look like a huge jerk.
JProcks321 1 year ago
@JProcks321 - LOL! A+ for humor but F- for understanding the old testament. Replace the word "mankind" in the history books with "juvenile delinquents" and you have an accurate description of the murderous, perverted, theiving, selfish, raping, power thirsty history of mankind. God is infinitely loving in that He has not only decided not to oblterate us like we deserve but instead died for us so we can be redeemed. Amazing grace!
9pt9 1 year ago
@JProcks321: Where do u get that God is a racist. Adam & Eve were created in the Middle East or Africa (black or people of color), Ham is Noah's son that Egyptians came from and Psalms reference God's affection for Egypt. The richest man ever was black (Solomon), the first world ruler recorded in Bible was black, the "eyes of the people" was a black man. Gold cursed a woman for hatin on Moses for marrying a black woman. Yer arrogant, despite your ignorance dude. Check yerself.
prosedad1 1 year ago
@9pt9
Ah I see. You are a believer for self-gain. Ofcourse.
supergamwich 1 year ago
Lol, maybe your not so bad after all, For an atheist evolutionaut that is!
9pt9 2 years ago
I love how the evos who cry about vote-bot doit and doit. Vote-botters all. This is a great clip and fun additions. I use this quote in my RD: Intelligent Design Believer vid. Classic!
stevebee92653 2 years ago
Sorry Richie, you said it!
9pt9 2 years ago
this guy never actually e3xplains the question of origins of either life or the physical universe. crazy. what is the use.
satanrocks668 2 years ago
satanrocks668, I think you are confused. This movie was about evolution, not the origin of life OR the origin of the universe. The origin of life is another theory called abiogenesis and the origin of the universe is rooted in cosmology. He doesn't have to explain either as they are talking about evolution.
mafuletrekkie 2 years ago
Love it. Dawkins must be pacing and sweating out another gaffe in a long line of gaffes. He was caught "off guard"! haha
stevebee92653 2 years ago
GREAT VIDEO! HAR HAR HAR HAR
MaximusArurealius 2 years ago
Funny how we see it different. I thot is was one of the most patently absurd things ever uttered out of a person people revere as an intellect and it was a total joy mocking him. Thanks for watching!
9pt9 2 years ago
If that was supposed to be a mockery of Dawkins, it was an utter failure. You only succeeded in displaying your own ignorance and immaturity. Not only do you not understand what evolutionary theory states, but you are completely missed the point of Dawkins' hypothetical scenario. Par for the course, really - you're no different than 99% of creationists.
c6gunner 2 years ago
It was a total mockery and if Dawkins saw it he'd cry!!
9pt9 2 years ago
lol. I get it - you're not really a creationist, are you? You're just parodying their stupiidity. Ok, I'll admit it - you got me. Good one!
c6gunner 2 years ago
Hey don't be reverse psychin me u jive monkey!!
9pt9 2 years ago
;) Your secret is safe with me!
c6gunner 2 years ago
Dawkins had a great point about how even if humans were intelligently designed, they had to have been designed by an ultimately explicable, gradually constructed species- but too bad his point was completely destroyed by your annoying monkey noises and spliced footage from ET. Way to go, dipshit.
JQisAwesome 2 years ago
The book of Job is about a good man that God allows the devil to torture. That is all there is too it. What a lovely lesson for children.
Mr4thdimension 2 years ago
There's no chance the Bible could be fabricated. Think about it. Get saved dude. Ur going to hell.
9pt9 2 years ago
Hahahah that's the dumbest thing ever you dumbass... the bible is just fictional and bullshit.
gatzu86 2 years ago
You made me sad:(
9pt9 2 years ago
It never claims to be a lovely story. It's the story of how sinful fallen man destroys themselves and Gods way of eternal life. You r a sinner and you need forgiveness. Sorry but your r going to hell dude. Repent .
9pt9 2 years ago
if your book is infallible, then how come there are so many places that it contradicts itself?
Mr4thdimension 2 years ago
Also its easy to fulfill prophesy when you are the one writing down the fake story to begin with, Hell with a few hours and a computer I could write a story that would fulfill every prophesy too, and if someone picked it up several hundred years from now when any possibility of proof is long gone I bet i could get someone to believe in me as well. Argument on prophesy when man writes both is a weak argument
Mr4thdimension 2 years ago
Both paleontologists, either creation or evo will view evidence thru their respective glasses.There's a gr8 YouTube vid that proves it with artifacts. I have no doubts. I'll find it and u can decide
9pt9 2 years ago
Not to mention that I would love to see someone try to build an arc with stone age tools and watch it fall apart like a pile of toothpicks. I was raised christian, grew up christian, and educated in a christian highschool for 6 years. We studied the bible every day inside and out. I know the bible. The Old Testement is a horrible book filled with genocide, hate, and torture all in gods name and with his blessing. You worship a horrible God.
Mr4thdimension 2 years ago
Genocide hate torture?? U weren't paying attntion in school then dude, God gave his life to pay for your sins. And you mock him like Hes a fairy tale! I feel bad for ur eternity. Looking bleek. Why would men make up a story in small pieces over 2k yrs and fill it w stories that defy logic if they want to succeed at duping ppl in2 believing it?? How could they do that?? That would b quite an underground group of conspiritors and for what gain?
9pt9 2 years ago
It's called "dinosaurs lived w man? Laughable?". I don't know how it could b interpreted anyother way.
9pt9 2 years ago
If you guys truly believe that the Earth is 6000 years old, that man walked with dinosaurs, and that jonah was swallowed by a wale you are beyond ignorant and not even worth arguing with because you will never see the faults in your baseless arguments. there is absolutely no proof of a worldwide flood and there isnt even enough water on the earth to flood anything. No Arc could ever fit 2 of every animal on the earth as well as food for 40days and nights. why not worship mother goose?
Mr4thdimension 2 years ago
There is overwhelming proof of dinos w man. 1000's of artifacts found with detailed pics of stegasaurases and brachiosaurus. You might want to consider dumping ur faith in thunderfoot(who cannot save u) and start putting ur faith in Christ who can give u life.
9pt9 2 years ago
Over 300 fulfilled prophecies concerning Jesus Christ penned hundreds of years b4 His birth in scripture is proof enuff for me! I have no problem at all chalking what we don't up to God. The contents of the bible r so comprhensive and unique that it would be impossible to fabricate. How and why could they make it up? Then how do u market the lie? The bible itself is divine. 66 books and over 30 diff authors all in different places over several thousand yrs.
9pt9 2 years ago
Where did they come from?
9pt9 2 years ago
And where did they come from you ask? What your really getting at is where did life come from. You ready for the answer? We don't know yet. YET! That is the beauty of science. we can admit that we don't have all the answers, but we are seeking the truth. Religion basks in its love of ignorance. You chock up anything that you cant explain to God and leave it there. If religion was the driver of knowledge we would still blame disease on sins, and people in the millions would die without medicine
Mr4thdimension 2 years ago
Ok he was talking about some possibly highly advanced civilization seeding the Earth and other planets with basic single cell life and us coming from that. That is his form of intelligent design for US. NOT your form of intelligent design by a "God". If this was the way it went, we were created through a natural process by other beings who exist within this universe and are subject to its laws and science. Also THEY would have to have come from some form of Darwinian evolution.
Mr4thdimension 2 years ago
okey,this is how it looks like:
atheists-->no God,but intelligent design , no religion. ..really?.. i say you create your own religion ,with your own believes,e.g. darwinism,and the possibility of I.D. .
evolution does NOT explain creation.
Pua8 2 years ago
and that's something all 3 of us can agree on. Evolution does NOT explain creation. It's not supposed to. That's an entirely different subject and theory. Evolution is not a religion. Religion is based on faith. You must have faith that stories MEN wrote down in books hundreds of years AFTER the supposed events took place, were not crazy, liers, or completely wrong. You have no proof or evidence of a single thing written in your book that is divine. Evolution is based on evidence
Mr4thdimension 2 years ago
U want to just up and deny it ? That's a gamble. The truth is in the bible. Science will never ever b able to explain creation. I used to think it would when I was an athiest. Then Sombody open the bible to me and I knew I needed forgivness right then. God blew me away right there.
9pt9 2 years ago
NO,yep the Quran is written down by men,but revealed from God.proof?here scientists give you proof:
/watch?v=WzdePKItsFk&feature=PlayList&p=10176FCFE4021B23&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=7
Pua8 2 years ago
This is a perfect example of quote mining through editing.......If you don't know what quote mining is, look it up.
snailplow 2 years ago
He actually said it. Didn't have to mine to deep!! Lol
9pt9 2 years ago
You took his words out of context......He was speculating to ALIEN intelligent design, which, regardless of how crazy it sounds, isn't any less plausible than ancient biblical mythology. People believe the bible's myths simply b/c it's popular..........The planet being flat used to be popular at one time as well.
snailplow 2 years ago
Actually, the Bible describes the earth as being round. The belief of the planet being flat derived from scientists. If they had read the Bible to begn with, they would have known The Truth.
People believe in the Bible because it's popular?? Take a read through this thread and other threads on topics like this and tell us how popular believing in God and Christ really is, bud. There are many ready to pounce on someone who declares their fatih. Just like the Bible said there would be
seven12twelve 2 years ago
"the Bible describes the earth as being round"
Which is why it fails - the earth ISN'T round. The ignorant goat herders of the iron-age middle east thought that the world was a round disc - ie. flat. Anyone who's ever been to the top of a mountain would have described the world as "round", but it took science to show us that our world is a actually an oblate spheroid. Ergo, your bible, which claims that the earth is flat, was obviously written by ignorant peasants rather than Magic Man.
c6gunner 2 years ago
Oblate spheroid, huh? interesting to learn the "type of round" the earth qualifies as. The Bible certainly doesn't describe earth as flat. Either way, I respect your faith. No need to name call while defending it though. Science provides NO evidence of a godless universe, but it's entertaining to watch people like yourself pretend it does.
seven12twelve 2 years ago
"The Bible certainly doesn't describe earth as flat"
Alright then, numbnuts, let's see your evidence. Just a single quote will do. And no, before you post the usualr response, a "circle" is not the same as a "shpere", as anyone who's taken grade 6 gemotery should know. While you're at it, you may also want to explain why portions of the bible tell us that the earth has pillars, and corners.
c6gunner 2 years ago
It's all in how you interpret it. Those with faith in God will interpret it one way, and those with no faith in God will interpret it another way. It would be fun to have this conversation face to face where I'm SURE you would be more respectful. Since evidence is what you are looking for, surely you must have some evidence of your own to offer? Didn't think so. What other names do you have to throw out from the safety of your basement? Coward.
seven12twelve 2 years ago
Bulshit. Only an idiot would think that words on a page which are supposed to be a historical record are open to interpretation. The only way you could justify such a proposterous declaration is by claiming that the bible is simply a piece of fictional literature. In that case, I'd agree with you 100% - you can interpret it any way you like.
As for respect - you'll get some when you earn it. Right now, you have a long way to go.
c6gunner 2 years ago
ok so it says its round..... so is a plate... i if remember correctly most of those maps depicted the earth as round BUT NOT SPHERICAL .
Round is 2d
Sphere is 3d
thank you and stfu :)
karalalmighty 2 years ago
Uh, yeah, that's exactly what I said. Why in the world would you repeat the point I was making while responding to me?
c6gunner 2 years ago
"ok so it says its round..... so is a plate" Hey dummass do you look at the moon and say anything other than it is round? And don't tell me "spherical" because NOBODY looks at the moon and says hey look it's spherical tonight.
MaximusArurealius 2 years ago
I do. Funny!!
Jacktoast21 2 years ago
I don't get why you put in all the audio/video clips.
fuckisnotadirtyword 2 years ago
When one of our foremost authorities on Evolution like Mr. Dawkins can only distill down life on Planet Earth to "possible aliens" from another area of the Universe we evolutionists are in trouble. He even says there could be Intelligent Design? What? I thought he was on our side? Well, if he said it then it must be worth my further investigation. I don't want any Christian fanatics going crazy here but the simplicity of Ben's questions seem to stump things here? I will find the truth.
regent77 2 years ago
the truth is out there
mattatood 2 years ago
Second and I rated it. 5 Stars*****
meanmopar426 2 years ago
I agree mean another 5 star for 9pt9
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
First
Perrins123 2 years ago