@ShadyForce4 Everything we can experience or feel is caused by processes within our brain. When our brain ceases to function properly, or takes damage, we lose pieces of our possible experience for the rest of our lives. Happiness is a state of being in which many, many processes occur in our brain. It isn't completely understood yet quantitatively, but what you are saying is simply fallacious, and completely incongruent with everything we know in biology and neuroscience. It's an assumption th
207 theists are mad and disliked the video because from now on, conscience will tell them how hypocritical, dishonest & repulsive they are when they misrepresent atheists and say lies in order to manipulate others :)
@ubermechazillatron "The theory or belief that God does not exist" Well if that is true (But its not) then im not atheist. It really doesn't matter if you change meaning of the word. Of course You dont have to use name "atheist" if you dont wan't.
@ubermechazillatron so not being religous is being religous? That my friend is a paradox. Atheism is the the rejection of belief in gods, not the belief that there are none. It's simply a matter of intelligent thought that has brought people to seek the awnsers out for themselves instead of relying on a book to hand them over on a sivler platter. both google and the courts have obviously made a mistake that they should have learned in school.
@BoxingTheMonk LOL! Atheism =/= without religion. You can even believe in a god(s) and not be religious (take deism for example). 99% of dictionaries also have the exact same definition. It's only atheists now who don't even understand what the true definition of atheism is. That's pretty pathetic IMO.
@ubermechazillatron well I haven't been taught right then, which is ironic seeing as I went to a religous school and that's what I was taught that (fail school fail) and that what it says on wiki, but i'm not atheist i'm agnostic and my point still stand that not being religous is being religousis sort of a paradox but thanks for correcting me, it was pathetic wasn't it? again thank you for telling me it, it made me realise that there's much I don't know until I research for myself
@BoxingTheMonk No problem. Sorry if my last comment came of as harsh. It's just ridiculous that people like NSC make these videos that are completely false and confuse a lot of people.
@ubermechazillatron don't worry, I'm pretty laid back when it comes to harsh comments and to be honest I find the whole theist vs. atheist thing a bit pointless to begin with because I don't like labels since they limit the enjoyment you can get out of life, but that might just be me.
@TheSeriousSound LOL! Um, no. Just responded to his comment. The two of you and NSC both fail (not to mention all the other atheists who don't understand what the word means).
@ubermechazillatron "The definition of "atheism" found on google: The theory or belief that God does not exist."
I googled Atheism, the first result was a wikipedia article that says in the first line "Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities."
"Atheism has been ruled in courts to be a religion"
@ubermechazillatron "Theory" and "belief" do not necessarily denote faith. That definition has no grounds in this. All religions are beliefs, but not all beliefs are religions.
How many definitions of "religion" are there? And which ones does atheism fit?
Courts have ruled a lot of things. Like legally an eating establishment has to warn a patron that a hot coffee they ordered is hot, or they are liable for a lawsuit and charges. The "courts" can be very stupid.
@ubermechazillatron Google has an inadequate definition. By that definition polytheists are also atheists. It doesn't define which God, so it could be saying Jews are atheists, or Christians are atheists.
In Kaufman v. Mccaughtry atheism was ruled as a religion in the broadest sense possible, only in the sense that "the group wanted to study freedom of thought, religious beliefs, creeds, dogmas, tenets, rituals, and practices, all presumably from an atheistic perspective."
I was born and raised completely free by my non believing parents, with no mention of god at all. And now I'm an "atheist". I guess the only reason I would call myself "atheist" is because people understand what you mean by it. I don't consider atheism to really be anything. In the words of some french chick who lived in 1850 or something; It's an interesting and demonstratable fact that all children are atheists, and that this would remain so were it not for parents teaching them religion.
Atheism is a prophecy in islam. The prophecy says religions will disappear from earth. I'm actually drinking my tea and enjoying my time watching you guys trying to defend something you can't even prove. May God bless you!
@ShadyForce4 What are we proving? What is the claim? Sad atheist is sad. Maybe if you could get out of the dessert and Masterbate you may fell better. :(
@ShadyForce4 Hey, all we are doing is demonstrating that YOU (theists) don't have a case. That's all we need to do. You are the one trying to defend something you cannot prove. You are the one who believes in a god, not we.
@Gilmaris Yeah this is all you need to do, express your rage towards the infinite love to God. You just have nothing else to do but to try to convince the people using SCIENCE for PHILOSOPHICAL questions. You will never be able to tell me how the world was created with science, it's never gonna happen, simply because science has limits 8-) now let me drink my have my supper with my happy religious familly. We'll then have a prayer and a good day. See ya
@ShadyForce4 You can always tell when someone has run out of arguments when THEY have to tell YOU what YOU think. But as for your statement about the world being made with science: no, of course not. The world was made NATURALLY - no one whipped out their chemistry set and got going. If you want the popular scientific theories, go to Wiki. Meanwhile, YOU can't tell ME how the world was created, either, god or no god. You can only tell me what you BELIEVE.
@Gilmaris Can you define happiness with science? After all these years of research all what they found is that it activates something in the frontal globe. Can you describe valors, morals, feelings, faith with science? No, because science has limits. At the end of each branch of science we find philosophy, Ph.D philosophy of the doctor. Science studies only the material world, whereas religion and philosophy bring us answer to what goes beyong our animal nature.
@ShadyForce4 The frontal LOBE, not globe. As for what happiness IS, that's a philosophical question, not scientific. Except to say that the feeling of happiness is caused by endorphines. As for feelings and morals, yes, they are very easily explained scientifically: they are not only useful, but NECESSARY for our survival as a species. Without empathy we would be extinct, because as a social animal, we rely on strength through numbers.
@ShadyForce4 "Can you define happiness with science? After all these years of research all what they found is that it activates something in the frontal globe." I can. Happiness has many forms, but say if one was to "become happy" after resolution of a negative emotional state; his brain would be flooded with a series of neurotransmitters such as norepinephrine and dopamine. Can spirituality and religion explain the mentally ill? Or why some drugs are so addictive?
@justthisstupid noerpinephrine and dopamine provide only pleasure, not happiness, two really distinct concepts. Pleasure can be felt by animals, but not happiness. Pleasure is related to our animal nature, whereas happiness isn't. Spirituality and religion cannot explain illness, because illness materially affects your body :)
@ShadyForce4 "Spirituality and religion cannot explain illness, because illness materially affects your body :)"
Utter poppycock. If illness materially affects your body, so do emotions. There are distinct changes in brain and endocrine gland activity when different emotions are triggered by perceptual cues. The body is a biological machine composed of countless parts that all work together in order to work at all. There is nothing you can feel spiritually without your brain.
@justthisstupid Every emotion is related to our animal nature. Simple lab mice have been shown to have eerily similar brain activity to humans when anxious, in pain, and even content (such as after a meal). It doesn't take much for animals with lower brain functioning than humans to be happy. Do you have a pet? Any pet owner who enjoys bonding with their dog or cat will agree that animals can in deed be happy and even sad. They will come to the door to greet you and morn your departures.
@ShadyForce4 Humans are animals. Humans are mammals. Homo sapien is our species. To say "Pleasure can be felt by animals, but not happiness." is to exclude humans too. You are literally contradicting yourself in the same sentence. Emotions are chemical reactions. The manifestation of these reactions in the brain of any animal varies. Plants don't have a brain and neither do gods.
@splicedenergy I really am not sure of what you're trying to explain, but are you saying we are 100% similar to other animals? I mean, this doesn't even make sense. Have you ever seen an animal being shy of being naked? Have you ever seen an animal wanting to try to understand and explain how the world was created as we are right now? Clearly, there is a HUGE distinction between all animals and humans.
BTW lookup the definition of animal, it is also defined as "all animals other than human" :S
@ShadyForce4 He states very clearly in that paragraph that all animals feel different effects and forms of emotion. Do you think a dog doesn't feel happiness? Or a chimp?
It doesn't make sense because it would appear you do not know how to read very well...And yes, if you shave a wooly dog, some tend to avoid contact...But that is only ONE emotion anyway. Intelligence is the tool we evolved. Humans ARE a type of animal. Fact. If you do not know this i would stay in school.
@itchygonads A dog doesn't feel happiness, just pleasure. Happiness goes far beyond our animal nature. It cannot be provided by any material object, as you, Americans, may think (American Dream). In other words, even if you were the richest guy in the world, it doesn't make you happy. Happiness isn't biological, there's no difference between a happy and unhappy brain biologically, even if you look it up on a microscope. Animals, cannot be happy. Their ultimate goal is to live and reproduce.
@ShadyForce4 For one i am not an American. For two they definitely feel happiness..To claim anything else makes you dishonest, and to claim that somehow even points towards a god is absurd. Actually it would make a lot of people happy...Happiness is biological, i have no interests in debating someone who just denys facts because he wants it to mean something more, good day.
@itchygonads Good i don't need to waste my time, but if you're so smart, then I'd like you to tell me how the brain is affected with happiness, how can you define a "happy brain". Good luck with that :S
@ShadyForce4 Someone has ALREADY explain this to you. OR you could fucking look it up...There is no such thing as a happy brain you fool. Chemicals trigger other chemicals which causes happiness...Anyone with a brain could understand this. And even if we didnt that means your laughable belief system is correct? LOL no. Still completely ridiculous and laughable. Also ":S" lol we are not on facebook chat mate, enough emoticons lol
@itchygonads You're raging lol, but I think I know more about it since I study in medicine. "Chemicals trigger other chemicals" this is pleasure. It's something called Dopamine, which CAN be provided... It will not make you happier in your life "fool", antidepressants won't make you happy "fool", go learn neurology "fool".
@ShadyForce4 Correct, I don't like idiots, they make me rage. You OBVIOUSLY do not study medicine. Lol you know you are an idiot and are wrong when you have to lie! Yes I am aware about Dopamine...HAHA classic. None of the last few sentences is entirely irrelevant And actually makes no sense at all in this conversation..I also like how you ignore that it will not prove your stupid position correct. You are not only a liar, but willfully ignorant. Your parents have failed you.
@ShadyForce4 Correct. People like you lie about being in medicine LOL. They then put forward a completely terrible explination of Dopamine, then ramble on about a "happy brain" hahaha you are a liar, and have been proven wrong by not only me, but the other guy you refused to listen too...Just plain funny. peace. And keep your pseudoscience somewhere else.
@itchygonads You don't have to believe me lol it's the internet but the article we had to read was written by Pascal Bruckner. Feel free to cultivate yourself a little more, I think you need it.
@ShadyForce4 It's not just that I don't believe you, it's that I know you are lying. But hey, lets prove me right...What university do you go to? What year are you in? Two of my closet friends are studying medicine, I will gather some questions for you. Well you have been proven wrong countless times on the video! You are in no position to question anyone's intellect. You are wrong, and you now know it. Peace.
@itchygonads But this isn't even debatable... You can look up Aristotle or Epicurus and their work on happiness.
A wooly dog would avoid contact, not because he is shy, I will not believe that. Might be because it doesn't feel confortable or something like that though.
Humans are classified as animals, which means that we're not plants or a bacteria or any other organism. I know that thanks.
@ShadyForce4 Rejecting faith is the scientific thing to do. Faith has no place in science, because science includes only what is testable. So of course it rejects faith. Atheism basically comes in two flavours. There's hard atheism: "there are no gods". This does indeed go beyond the scientific, as it asserts what cannot be proven. Then there's the so-called "weak" or agnostic atheism: "there is no reason to believe gods exist." This is as scientific as you get.
@ShadyForce4 Science might find a way. It was thought the atom was the smallest possible thing that couldn't be split (atomos meaning "unsplittable"), and now we know they're actually made up of quarks. Science advances. Right now we don't have any definitive proof of what went on with the big bang. But someday, perhaps soon, we might. By experimenting with large particle colliders such as the LHC for example. If they find the Higgs Boson, then.. well, yeah. That'd be big, simply put.
@omgwtfbbqxD Quarks, atoms, and even big bang does not contradict religion. The big bang states how the earth was created, and not how livings were created. Maybe God did the big bang by himself? Who knows, but it doesn't matter. Even evolution doesn't contradict religion. What contradicts religion is the fact that us, humans, evolved into what we are, and that, u can't prove!
For you info, "atomos" is the greek word for atoms invented by Aristotle, one of the most important greek philosopher.
@ShadyForce4 Bible: God created all animals as they are now. Evolution: Animals gradually evolved into the animals we see today. How is that not contradictory? Bible: earth is flat. Obervation: earth is spherical. Another contratiction. And yes, we can prove that. Look at the human genome project, for example. I'll suggest you search for "ken miller on human evolution" on youtube, for a good explanation.
For you info, I allready knew that Aristotle coined the word, I just didn't mention it.
@omgwtfbbqxD Sorry, i'm muslim, and what are saying doesn't apply to me. But for the evolution part, evolution doesn't contradict religion for most it, only for the part where it says human beings evolved into what we are today. And that, you cannot prove by science. Why, between all the animals, have we evolved into something that transcends our animal nature?
@omgwtfbbqxD What if i told you that our ressemblances were all meant to be by God, and that God created us with starting with the same model, and created his worshippers (us) perfecting the imperfections? You can't find any answers to those question in science. All what science does is say: "here there are homologies and analogies, maybe we all evolved from the same thing". Why, if really the first bacteria was created abiotically, can't they create bacteria in labs? PROVE IT. You just cant :)
@ShadyForce4 I never said that. What I said was that science discovered the atom could be split. I merely mentioned that it was thought that it was unsplittable, as is evident by the name for atoms, atomos. I'd argue we have the exact same view on what happiness etc is, and I think we will create life one day soon enough. Psychology is a science by the way. I just know the scientific method is correct, and the best bet we have at figuring out what's what. No evidence for god either, after all.
@ShadyForce4 Though reading back I guess I could see why you took it that way. I did say "science advances", maybe not a very good choice of words. But abiogenesis really has nothing to do with human evolution. We know how we evolved from multiple sciences. There is a ton of evidence on how we evolved into what we are now, and the principles are well understood. There's no real room for debate in this. It's just the facts.
@ShadyForce4 "And what i meant with Aristotle, is that Atomos were first found by philosophy, not science as you mentioned..." Actually, Aristotle believed that all matter was made up of fire, water, earth, and air. And that aether made up the heavens. It was Leucippus and Democritus, fifth century b.c. Greek philosophers, who coined "atomos", meaning indivisible.Aristotle rejected the idea of atoms. Aristotle's incorrect ideas became accepted as fact until John Dalton found atoms with SCIENCE
Big difference is that I don't care if the religious are religious. Funny part is that they're QUITE concerned about my non-belief. They want to impose their beliefs on me and believe I should be punished for not believing. Small minded stupidity...meanwhile...on with taking personal responsibility for my own life and actions. Peace.
atheism is stupid. let me tell you why. If there is no god and no satan...than shut the fuck up what the fuck are you going on about? If there is nothing than let it be nothing...
Atheism, isnt about no god its about arguing why there is no god...well if there is no god to you than shut the fuck up...god
@No1soriginal lol, I don't even understand your low level of intellect. Perhaps you should bring it up to standard human level before making a commentary.
@fedelede2 yeah, ain't arguing on that. It is just that the lake has been "scanned", can't remember what they did 100%. But there are no evidence for a sea creature of that size in Loch Ness:)
@bigglyguy Sure, they're supposed to be one and the same thing, but their characters (and their commandments and actions etc.) became so different over the centuries, it makes more sense to treat them as seperate deities... or, to be precise, two seperate ideas of the same imaginary thing.
@JezusSlave God is Love. Jeffrey Damher is in Heaven and Gandhi is in Hell. Sounds good. I'm gonna go kill a Goat and cut some penis so, see you in bible class. Don't forget To bring 50 silver pieces so we can rape some virgins. I'm going to be late, my child was disobedient so I have to take him to the edge of town and stone him to death. Jesus loves you.
is a religion? Or not liking video games means you actually believe that you like them or something? Or maybe it's a religion as these christian-tards are claiming.
Let me explain this, back when the Greeks had their own religion, there were people that didn't believe in their god. So, they gave those people a name. Which was anti-theist, which at that time was like a racial slur or had a negative meaning to it. The word basically mean, non believer or lack of belief in god. The Greeks would you this to insult and ridicule anyone that didn't believe in their god. Is that simple enough? Go read a fucking book. BTW does that mean that being an Otaku
@luigifanist for ur kind knowledge Tamil(an ancient language)literature has more logical consistency in explaining physical reality and conscious (spiritual) reality than abrahamic holy scriptures. open up ur eyes and they are know mistaken angels and demons.
JESUS CHRIST, HIS CATHOLIC-UNIVERSAL-APOSTOLIC CHURCH, SACRAMENTS, THE BIBLE, MIRACLES, HEALINGS, ST. MARY APPARITIONS, MESSAGES FROM HEAVEN, SIGNS IN 2011 ARE NOT A MYTHOLOGY BUT THE REALITY !!!
with thousands of miracles, apparitions, messages, warnings before wars from Heaven for saints, in-corrupted bodies of saints, the biggest Apostolic Universal Church, healings, miracle like in Fatima, Zeitoun, Naju, saved people in the center of nuke blast in Hiroshima praying Rosary, etc
show me the other "joke" like that and do not compare the reality to mythology without all that above and of course without God Jesus Christ,Bible and Church!!!
@JezusSlave resurrection of damo in zen buddhism, miracles on ayothiya bridge (adam's bridge) y rama and miracles of krishna in mahabharata. and resurrection of every avatar in hindu mythology. miracles of apollo. miracles of paraohs. every religion has healing miracles, saving miracles, warning miracles, creating miracles, destroying miracles and atlast every body has resurrection of their god to their heaven...
so happy i am a polytheistic thinker who is a Witch loves science and still believes because it's a 25000 gradually acquired subjective and instinctively acquired basis of belief that was butchered and lambasted for centuries:); you guys are "ok" by for the reason you hate most of my enemies *hugs* ; if you do not believe thats ok by me we all learn (or unlearn) as long as well all go forward together and not against....greetings
@doltBmB Watch his other videos and see whether or not nonstampcollector has read the Bible. I've read it too. One of the most horrifying times of my life.
And this is precisely the reason why atheism is being labelled a religion, its followers all regurgiate the same tired retarded arguments they learned from their gurus. You are so strong in your belief that you don't believe that you forget to think.
Have you ever read the bible? And I don't mean the kings james crap, I mean what do you know about the issues of translation and the real history behind it? What do you actually know about the thing you reject? What pop culture taught you is what.
@camobeast100 My knowledge on the subject is hardly encyclopedic but I try yes. And maybe there's more evidence for a god than you think. But how would you know if you don't look beyond the shallow surface?
@doltBmB I've looked FAR beyond the surface. I've heard many arguments from christians (and other religious people in case you're not christian), and they weren't very convincing. You want to prove to me that god exists? SHOW ME THE MONEY! And don't come with the theological or cosmological argument, because even if these were valid, they would only prove that there was an intelligent force behind the creation of the universe. It doesn't say WHAT that force was, and it's certainly not your god.
@camobeast100 Which only goes to show that you haven't looked or listened at all, only skimmed over it to be able to tell yourself that you've considered.
@doltBmB Fine, do you have proof that he exists? As I already told you: SHOW ME THE MONEY! I've considered all known arguments for god's existence, and they were simply invalid.
@camobeast100 As far as I can tell it's true there isn't 100% proof of the existence of a god. But the issue isn't as clear cut as you make it out to be, once again you simply display biased ignorance.
@doltBmB What do you mean with ''clear cut''? Unless any of you comes with some evidence for god's existence, some reason to belief that he exists, I won't belief in god.
About what you earlier said: Atheism is lack of belief in a god. Someone who has an undecided stance on the issue also lacks belief in a god, and is therefor an atheist.
@camobeast100 No. Lack of belief/undecided is agnosticism. Atheism is the direct belief that there is no god. Which you so clearly display. You clearly don't simply lack evidence. It is part of your world view. It is a belief in itself.
@doltBmB Agnosticism means that god's existence is unknown, or that god's existence can't be known (most Atheists are also agnosticts). Atheism is lack of belief in a god, not necessary the belief that a god does not exist. I never claimed that there can't some kind of god (it just can't be the god described in christianity), I just don't belief that there is one.
A lack of belief is not a worldview. And since when is lack of belief the same as narcism?
@camobeast100 Try reading a dictionary before commenting. There is no definition of atheism as a "lack of belief" anywhere but in defensive atheist minds. Atheism is the belief that there is no god. Agnosticism is a lack of belief in the case of unknown. And a belief in the case of unknowable.
@doltBmB Here are the definitions of "atheism" and "agnostic" according to dictionarydotcom:
Atheism - disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.
Agnostic - a person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, as God, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable, or that human knowledge is limited to experience.
This is retarded. You can have an undecided stance on something. You can not know whether you like something or not. It can be undecided. A lack of belief. You don't believe it's good or bad.
What "atheism" really means is the belief that there is no theism. Hence the title. So if I ask you is there a god and you say no then that is an expression of a belief that there is no god. If you say "I don't know" then that is an expression of a lack of belief. Get it straight 'tard.
@doltBmB Atheism is the lack of belief in god (Atheism = without theism = without godbelief). Also, most atheists don't claim to be 100% certain that there is no god. They simply don't belief in him because there is not enough evidence for god's existence.
Atheism is not a religion because it doesn't have dogma, traditions, set rules or holy books. The only thing you have to do to be an Atheist is to NOT have belief in a god.
Your videos are very opening, an honestly, you're one of the best people- albeit behind a screen -that i've had the chance to listen too. What you bring up is why i'm not really of any religion to be honest. Yes, i have beliefs in a heaven, i find the idea appealing, but i'm in no way christian, or any other religion. An to those that will completely rack at me calling me a hypocrite, wow. How dull minded lobotomized programmed, an washed to be prefect little Religous person you've become. Yay.
unicorns actually do exist, by definition any animal with a single horn on its head is a unicorn, and we have a few of those,.. and ive seen some pretty small irish men,, maybe not with gold, but they do have red hair and are short.
there is a quote from hinduism that debunks this and makes it look rather silly but I don't care to share Holy knowledge with people who enjoy this video. Rather, you should seek out the answer, I have told you the answer is there, but I will not tell you the answer because a wise man knows not to give that which is Holy to dogs, lest they trample it under their feet,and turn to devour you. One Love, Jah lives.
@dpattiris HOW DOES SAYING "ONE NATION UNDER GOD" IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE VIOLATE THE SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE? IT IS NOT THAT DIFFICULT OF A QUESTION!
The seperation of church and state refers to our country's secularism. Meaning, the USA cannot endorse any religion. By adding "one nation under god" to the pledge in the 1950's, our secular discourse was undercut. All those Americans who are not christian are alienated by this oath that was snuck into our pledge using the fear of communism and confusing patriotism with manifest destiny.
@dpattiris How does saying "one nation under God" in the pledge of allegiance either establish a religion, or prohibit anyone from exercising theirs?
Look, I agree 100% that, technically speaking, atheism isn't a religion. But classifying it as a religion is useful for atheists to accomplish many of their goals. First amendment or otherwise, the appeals court did have to classify atheism as a religion in order to rule in favor of the study group.
@dpattiris First off "separation of church and state" is not a part of any active law document. Jefferson said, "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof'." Theism isn't a religion, and if atheism isn't one either, how does public acknowledgment of God establish a religion, or prohibit the exercise of a religion?
@dpattiris Theists have made their case continuously over the centuries. It's been a constant dialogue between theists and atheists. How is it relevant at this point who said what *first*?
Shifting the burden of proof would be an argument from ignorance-- "You can't prove God doesn't exist, therefore He does." That's not what I'm arguing. I'm saying that if you're going to tell me that the God I believe in doesn't exist, you sure as hell better prove it.
And that is completely incorrect...I am an atheist and I follow laws just like everyone else...I also follow the golden rule of not doing anything I wouldn't want done unto me. By the way, the Bible was written by men so If you follow the moral guidelines in the Bible you're also just following laws created by man.
@Lalalalaloveyoumm english is not my native lenguage,, i follow man's laws cause the bible orders me to do so. that law do on to others as you want on to your selfe, is a rule of behavior, not a way to salvation, read romans, and you'll see how we are not , sumited to the law,
For those of you who mistakenly believe that atheism's a religion; where do atheist go to not worship their nonexistent God? Is there an atheist church or temple, with an atheist ceremonies ? Does atheism have a dogmatic book (Or beliefs) full of nonsensical stories? Ohhh and sorry, science doesn't count. Does atheism use fear of the unknown and guilt to manipulate people into...just about anything? Is there an atheists prayer and do atheist care what happens to soul after death???
Also, atheism is NOT an absence of belief in God, it is a DISbelief in God. An assertion that God does not exist- or even that He *probably* does not exist- carries the same burden of proof as the assertion that God does exist.
@stallion4life your first statement is correct but that doesn't mean what you've said has any significance > 0. It can be said in regard to anything. Derpism is not the absence of belief in herps, but a DISbelief in Herps." Your second statement is equally stupid, "An assertion that Uradumi does not exist holds the same burden of proof as the assertion that Uradumi does not exist." What is sad is that you probably won't understand o.O
@SuperMongoloids Errr.... no. What YOU don't understand is that lacking a belief isn't the same thing as disbelief. A rock *lacks* a belief, but a rock isn't an atheist. A person who has considered both theism and atheism and considers both conclusions valid, but doesn't commit to either, lacks a belief but isn't an atheist.
My last comment is absolutely right. If I believe in God, and you want to prove to me that I am in error, the burden of proof is on you. Do you get it now?
@stallion4life either you ignored everything I said, are incompetent in reading comprehension, or copy and pasted a scripted response. I agreed with both of your statements, if you couldn't notice. I don't believe anyone could disagree with your statements. I simply acknowledged that your statements can be universal to infinite variety of statements and hold nothing other than space in a YouTube comment. I never said I wanted to prove you wrong, either. I don't care which fairy you worship.
@SuperMongoloids Well the "atheism is a lack of belief" and "atheists don't have a burden of proof" memes have a great deal of currency among YouTube atheists, so obviously they aren't as enlightened as you.
Well, there is atheism in an narrower sense, that indeed states that there is no god. But most people are atheists in the broader sense. They simply lack the believe in the existence of a god, and most are agnostic atheists, that are of the opinion that it is probably impossible to actually know if a god exists. I think the burden of prove is with the one who assert there is a god, since the prove of nonexistence is impossible.
@lanzelotz26 You're making the mistake most atheists make, where they think the only alternative to "I am 100% sure there is no God" is "I lack a belief there is no God". The fact is, so-called agnostic atheists DISbelieve in God. The fact that they disbelieve doesn't mean that they know for certain that God doesn't exist, only that the evidence doesn't meet their own thresholds of belief. To say they merely *lack a belief* in God is inaccurate.
I´m not a native English speaker. As far as I can tell the difference between the terms "disbelieve", "non-believe" and "lack of believe" is almost non-existent nor relevant. I can live with the notion that I have a disbelieve in the existence of any god (until proven otherwise), if you want to call it that . It still remains impossible to prove the nonexistence of gods, fairys, unicorns etc. Thus the burden of prove still lies with the one making the claim of their existence.
@lanzelotz26 The burden of proof also lies with the person making the claim of non-existence. I have no idea why atheists think the burden of proof only applies to one side of the argument; possibly because they're confusing the philosophic burden of proof with the legal burden of proof.
1. Most atheists assert, they don´t believe in the existence of any god. They don´t assert to know for sure, that there is no god.
2. You can´t prove the nonexistence of anything. There is only prove for existence, thus the burden lies with the one making the claim of existence (especially if the believer wants to deny others equal rights :)
@stallion4life You can be justified in holding to atheism without having ever disproven a god. I mean, otherwise, you wouldn't be justified in disbelieving in anything at all. But it would be ridiculous to have to prove that there is no Tooth Fairy in order to avoid being labeled a Tooth Fairy agnostic. Agnostic atheism is the epistemologically safe position, i.e. most likely to be correct based on what we have seen in the world, so far.
@Ledwix The burden of proof doesn't mean you have to PROVE your position, it just means you have to show why such a position is warranted. What you think the "epistemologically safe position" is entirely subjective.
You guys are really shooting yourselves in the foot with this "Atheism is not a religion" business. How are you going to say that nondenominational prayers and "one nation under God" violate your first amendment rights if the first amendment guarantees freedom *of* religion? A federal appeals court ruled that atheism is a religion in order to defend a prisoner's right to hold an atheist study group! (But of course, there are no atheists in prison, right? lol)
So that makes NonStampCollector more religious than the most devout believer! Why? Because he doesn't believe in one more god than the believers! I love it! The atheist population are growing by the millions every year and the theists are pretty scared by that. Why? Well, the more people who say religious belief is wrong, the more believers have to question their faith! Because it's built on a very shaky foundation! They need billions of believers to believe it themselves! LOL!
Here's just a few of the gods and godesses I don't believe in /watch?v=zZVRpqm0Cl0. I believe people don't realize there were so many of them. And I think the list is not complete.
ALTHOUGH I'M A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN (Baptist), I no longer believe that the Bible teaches eternal torment or suffering. The Bible teaches eternal punishment, but it's not eternal torment. In my popular Internet article, TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE OF HELL EVOLVED FROM GREEK ROOTS, I explain how and why teaching of eternal torment entered early into Christianity and how Scriptures have been misinterpreted and taken out of context to support that teaching. ~Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology)
SCIENCE SHOWS THAT THE UNIVERSE could not have sustained itself eternally because of entropy (even in an open system). Einstein confirmed that space, matter, and time had a beginning! That beginning had to be supernatural because natural laws have no ability to bring the universe into existence from nothing. The supernatural cannot be proved by science but science points to a supernatural intelligence for the origin and order of the universe ~ HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM (Article)
EINSTEIN CONFIRMED that space and time are just as physical as matter. That's why space and time can be altered by gravity, and space produces particles. Einstein's equations show that the universe couldn’t be eternal. It had a beginning. Einstein believed, because of science, in the existence of God behind the origin and order of the universe. He didn't believe in a personal God like Christians do, but he did believe science pointed to the existence of an all powerful and intelligent Creator
THE SCIENTIFIC CASE AGAINST ATHEISM: Please read this Internet article of mine published in Russia's English Pravda. It will be a real eye-opener for all who think belief in a Creator is merely subjective blind faith. Also read my article, LIFE ON MARS NO SURPRISE (In the Earth's past there was powerful volcanic activity which spewed life-containing dirt and rocks (meteors) into outer space. Mars may literally have millions tons of Earth soil)
NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Only evolution within "kinds" is genetically possible (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). How were species living and reproducing if their vital structures, organs, reproductive systems hadn't evolved yet? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic/biological similarities between species
DAWKINS, HITCHENS, AND HAWKING REFUSE TO DEBATE with creationists who are SCIENTISTS, such as the scientists at The Institute for Creation Research. Dawkins and his friends only debate non-scientist creationists. Read articles by scientists supporting creation at The Institute for Creation Research site. Read analysis from creation scientists about the latest news on fossils, genetics, astronomy, etc. that you won't read in the main stream media. Visit the Institute for Creation Research site.
WHAT IS SCIENCE? Science simply is knowledge based on observation. No one observed the universe coming by chance or by design, by creation or by macro-evolution. These are positions of faith. The issue is which faith the scientific evidence best supports. Natural laws can explain how an airplane or living cell works, but it's irrational to believe that undirected natural laws can bring about an airplane or a living cell. Read my Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
THE ODDS of the sequence of molecules in a cell coming together by chance are similar to the odds of magnetic letters randomly bonding together in a sequence to form all the words and sentences in a dictionary. Without the right sequence, a cell's molecules won't work. Amino acids can come by chance but not proteins. Without DNA there can be no proteins and vice versa. Gradually won't do. It's all at once or not at all for a cell's survival. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
NATURAL SELECTION DOESN'T PRODUCE ANYTHING. It can only "select" from what is produced that has survival value. If a variation occurs that helps a species survive, that survival is called being "selected." That's all it is. There's no conscious selection by nature. It's a passive process. Natural selection is a figure of speech. The term itself is a tautology. Natural selection only operates once there is life and reproduction, not before. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM.
NATURAL SELECTION IS NO BLIND WATCHMAKER because it can only "select," not produce or arrange. If a variation survives, that's called being "selected." Natural selection operates only once there is life and reproduction, not before, so it couldn't have been involved in life's origins. A partially-evolved cell (an oxymoron) would quickly disintegrate. It couldn't wait ("survive") millions of years for chance to complete it and then make it alive! Read: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
ARE FOSSILS REALLY MILLIONS OF YEARS OLD? Popular Internet article examines assumptions concerning fossil deposition as well as built-in assumptions involved in modern radiometric dating (not used for dating fossils but other rocks), and arguments from starlight and time. Discusses lack of true transitional forms in the fossil record and lack of "age" sequence of the fossil layers. Discussion of mixed species (i.e. dinosaur, reptile, mammal fossils in the same stratum).
@ShadyForce4 Everything we can experience or feel is caused by processes within our brain. When our brain ceases to function properly, or takes damage, we lose pieces of our possible experience for the rest of our lives. Happiness is a state of being in which many, many processes occur in our brain. It isn't completely understood yet quantitatively, but what you are saying is simply fallacious, and completely incongruent with everything we know in biology and neuroscience. It's an assumption th
BER2ERKER 17 hours ago
207 theists are mad and disliked the video because from now on, conscience will tell them how hypocritical, dishonest & repulsive they are when they misrepresent atheists and say lies in order to manipulate others :)
cre599 3 days ago
The definition of "atheism" found on google: The theory or belief that God does not exist.
Atheism also fits many definitions of "religion" and has been ruled in courts to be a religion.
This video fails.
ubermechazillatron 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ubermechazillatron "The theory or belief that God does not exist" Well if that is true (But its not) then im not atheist. It really doesn't matter if you change meaning of the word. Of course You dont have to use name "atheist" if you dont wan't.
reddeadfinland 1 week ago
@ubermechazillatron so not being religous is being religous? That my friend is a paradox. Atheism is the the rejection of belief in gods, not the belief that there are none. It's simply a matter of intelligent thought that has brought people to seek the awnsers out for themselves instead of relying on a book to hand them over on a sivler platter. both google and the courts have obviously made a mistake that they should have learned in school.
BoxingTheMonk 1 week ago in playlist More videos from NonStampCollector
@BoxingTheMonk LOL! Atheism =/= without religion. You can even believe in a god(s) and not be religious (take deism for example). 99% of dictionaries also have the exact same definition. It's only atheists now who don't even understand what the true definition of atheism is. That's pretty pathetic IMO.
ubermechazillatron 1 week ago
@ubermechazillatron well I haven't been taught right then, which is ironic seeing as I went to a religous school and that's what I was taught that (fail school fail) and that what it says on wiki, but i'm not atheist i'm agnostic and my point still stand that not being religous is being religousis sort of a paradox but thanks for correcting me, it was pathetic wasn't it? again thank you for telling me it, it made me realise that there's much I don't know until I research for myself
BoxingTheMonk 1 week ago
@BoxingTheMonk No problem. Sorry if my last comment came of as harsh. It's just ridiculous that people like NSC make these videos that are completely false and confuse a lot of people.
ubermechazillatron 1 week ago
@ubermechazillatron don't worry, I'm pretty laid back when it comes to harsh comments and to be honest I find the whole theist vs. atheist thing a bit pointless to begin with because I don't like labels since they limit the enjoyment you can get out of life, but that might just be me.
BoxingTheMonk 1 week ago
@ubermechazillatron nah boi, I'm sorry to say, but you're a fail..."BoxingTheMonk" just made the point.
TheSeriousSound 1 week ago
@TheSeriousSound LOL! Um, no. Just responded to his comment. The two of you and NSC both fail (not to mention all the other atheists who don't understand what the word means).
ubermechazillatron 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ubermechazillatron "The definition of "atheism" found on google: The theory or belief that God does not exist."
I googled Atheism, the first result was a wikipedia article that says in the first line "Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities."
"Atheism has been ruled in courts to be a religion"
I'd love to see where you're getting this from...
mancno1 1 week ago
@ubermechazillatron "Theory" and "belief" do not necessarily denote faith. That definition has no grounds in this. All religions are beliefs, but not all beliefs are religions.
How many definitions of "religion" are there? And which ones does atheism fit?
Courts have ruled a lot of things. Like legally an eating establishment has to warn a patron that a hot coffee they ordered is hot, or they are liable for a lawsuit and charges. The "courts" can be very stupid.
SlitBelly 6 days ago
@ubermechazillatron Google has an inadequate definition. By that definition polytheists are also atheists. It doesn't define which God, so it could be saying Jews are atheists, or Christians are atheists.
In Kaufman v. Mccaughtry atheism was ruled as a religion in the broadest sense possible, only in the sense that "the group wanted to study freedom of thought, religious beliefs, creeds, dogmas, tenets, rituals, and practices, all presumably from an atheistic perspective."
SmallGreenPlanetoid 5 days ago
Here's a selection of Gods I don't believe in:
Shangdi, Dewi Shri, Gurzil, Shiva, Abzu, Quetzalcoatl, Pangu, Ra, Adremmalech, Zurvan, Ankou, Amaterasu, Ereshkigal, Mictlantecuhtli, Cernunnos, Horus, Kali, Eeyeekalduk, Anahit, Winalagalis, Mbaba Mwana Waresa, Cariocecus, Thor, Nizazu, Apollo, Wepwawet, Aeolus, Allah, Taimat, Nut, Odin, Mano, Vayu, Fufluns, Venus, Repun Kamui, Lir, Kamohoalii, Loki, and Rauni.
Clawdragoons 1 week ago
Hey, dragons exist. I've been fighting them for the last 2 months.
every116 1 week ago
i LOVE raw whale blubber... but i don't believe in god.
blackdencc 1 week ago
that's bloody awesome!
roccobaroccoSC 1 week ago
I was born and raised completely free by my non believing parents, with no mention of god at all. And now I'm an "atheist". I guess the only reason I would call myself "atheist" is because people understand what you mean by it. I don't consider atheism to really be anything. In the words of some french chick who lived in 1850 or something; It's an interesting and demonstratable fact that all children are atheists, and that this would remain so were it not for parents teaching them religion.
omgwtfbbqxD 1 week ago
@omgwtfbbqxD Its true, and children will remain ignorant if they don't get taught anything.
ShadyForce4 1 week ago
Atheism is a prophecy in islam. The prophecy says religions will disappear from earth. I'm actually drinking my tea and enjoying my time watching you guys trying to defend something you can't even prove. May God bless you!
ShadyForce4 2 weeks ago
@ShadyForce4 What are we proving? What is the claim? Sad atheist is sad. Maybe if you could get out of the dessert and Masterbate you may fell better. :(
ebilly99 2 weeks ago
@ShadyForce4 Hey, all we are doing is demonstrating that YOU (theists) don't have a case. That's all we need to do. You are the one trying to defend something you cannot prove. You are the one who believes in a god, not we.
Gilmaris 1 week ago
@Gilmaris Yeah this is all you need to do, express your rage towards the infinite love to God. You just have nothing else to do but to try to convince the people using SCIENCE for PHILOSOPHICAL questions. You will never be able to tell me how the world was created with science, it's never gonna happen, simply because science has limits 8-) now let me drink my have my supper with my happy religious familly. We'll then have a prayer and a good day. See ya
ShadyForce4 1 week ago
@ShadyForce4 You can always tell when someone has run out of arguments when THEY have to tell YOU what YOU think. But as for your statement about the world being made with science: no, of course not. The world was made NATURALLY - no one whipped out their chemistry set and got going. If you want the popular scientific theories, go to Wiki. Meanwhile, YOU can't tell ME how the world was created, either, god or no god. You can only tell me what you BELIEVE.
Gilmaris 1 week ago
@Gilmaris Can you define happiness with science? After all these years of research all what they found is that it activates something in the frontal globe. Can you describe valors, morals, feelings, faith with science? No, because science has limits. At the end of each branch of science we find philosophy, Ph.D philosophy of the doctor. Science studies only the material world, whereas religion and philosophy bring us answer to what goes beyong our animal nature.
ShadyForce4 1 week ago
@ShadyForce4 The frontal LOBE, not globe. As for what happiness IS, that's a philosophical question, not scientific. Except to say that the feeling of happiness is caused by endorphines. As for feelings and morals, yes, they are very easily explained scientifically: they are not only useful, but NECESSARY for our survival as a species. Without empathy we would be extinct, because as a social animal, we rely on strength through numbers.
Gilmaris 1 week ago
@ShadyForce4 "Can you define happiness with science? After all these years of research all what they found is that it activates something in the frontal globe." I can. Happiness has many forms, but say if one was to "become happy" after resolution of a negative emotional state; his brain would be flooded with a series of neurotransmitters such as norepinephrine and dopamine. Can spirituality and religion explain the mentally ill? Or why some drugs are so addictive?
justthisstupid 1 week ago
@justthisstupid noerpinephrine and dopamine provide only pleasure, not happiness, two really distinct concepts. Pleasure can be felt by animals, but not happiness. Pleasure is related to our animal nature, whereas happiness isn't. Spirituality and religion cannot explain illness, because illness materially affects your body :)
ShadyForce4 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ShadyForce4 "Spirituality and religion cannot explain illness, because illness materially affects your body :)"
Utter poppycock. If illness materially affects your body, so do emotions. There are distinct changes in brain and endocrine gland activity when different emotions are triggered by perceptual cues. The body is a biological machine composed of countless parts that all work together in order to work at all. There is nothing you can feel spiritually without your brain.
justthisstupid 1 week ago
@justthisstupid Every emotion is related to our animal nature. Simple lab mice have been shown to have eerily similar brain activity to humans when anxious, in pain, and even content (such as after a meal). It doesn't take much for animals with lower brain functioning than humans to be happy. Do you have a pet? Any pet owner who enjoys bonding with their dog or cat will agree that animals can in deed be happy and even sad. They will come to the door to greet you and morn your departures.
justthisstupid 1 week ago
@ShadyForce4 Humans are animals. Humans are mammals. Homo sapien is our species. To say "Pleasure can be felt by animals, but not happiness." is to exclude humans too. You are literally contradicting yourself in the same sentence. Emotions are chemical reactions. The manifestation of these reactions in the brain of any animal varies. Plants don't have a brain and neither do gods.
splicedenergy 2 days ago 2
@splicedenergy I really am not sure of what you're trying to explain, but are you saying we are 100% similar to other animals? I mean, this doesn't even make sense. Have you ever seen an animal being shy of being naked? Have you ever seen an animal wanting to try to understand and explain how the world was created as we are right now? Clearly, there is a HUGE distinction between all animals and humans.
BTW lookup the definition of animal, it is also defined as "all animals other than human" :S
ShadyForce4 1 day ago
@ShadyForce4 He states very clearly in that paragraph that all animals feel different effects and forms of emotion. Do you think a dog doesn't feel happiness? Or a chimp?
It doesn't make sense because it would appear you do not know how to read very well...And yes, if you shave a wooly dog, some tend to avoid contact...But that is only ONE emotion anyway. Intelligence is the tool we evolved. Humans ARE a type of animal. Fact. If you do not know this i would stay in school.
itchygonads 22 hours ago
@itchygonads A dog doesn't feel happiness, just pleasure. Happiness goes far beyond our animal nature. It cannot be provided by any material object, as you, Americans, may think (American Dream). In other words, even if you were the richest guy in the world, it doesn't make you happy. Happiness isn't biological, there's no difference between a happy and unhappy brain biologically, even if you look it up on a microscope. Animals, cannot be happy. Their ultimate goal is to live and reproduce.
ShadyForce4 21 hours ago
@ShadyForce4 For one i am not an American. For two they definitely feel happiness..To claim anything else makes you dishonest, and to claim that somehow even points towards a god is absurd. Actually it would make a lot of people happy...Happiness is biological, i have no interests in debating someone who just denys facts because he wants it to mean something more, good day.
itchygonads 20 hours ago
@itchygonads Good i don't need to waste my time, but if you're so smart, then I'd like you to tell me how the brain is affected with happiness, how can you define a "happy brain". Good luck with that :S
ShadyForce4 19 hours ago
@ShadyForce4 Someone has ALREADY explain this to you. OR you could fucking look it up...There is no such thing as a happy brain you fool. Chemicals trigger other chemicals which causes happiness...Anyone with a brain could understand this. And even if we didnt that means your laughable belief system is correct? LOL no. Still completely ridiculous and laughable. Also ":S" lol we are not on facebook chat mate, enough emoticons lol
itchygonads 18 hours ago
@itchygonads You're raging lol, but I think I know more about it since I study in medicine. "Chemicals trigger other chemicals" this is pleasure. It's something called Dopamine, which CAN be provided... It will not make you happier in your life "fool", antidepressants won't make you happy "fool", go learn neurology "fool".
ShadyForce4 18 hours ago
@ShadyForce4 Correct, I don't like idiots, they make me rage. You OBVIOUSLY do not study medicine. Lol you know you are an idiot and are wrong when you have to lie! Yes I am aware about Dopamine...HAHA classic. None of the last few sentences is entirely irrelevant And actually makes no sense at all in this conversation..I also like how you ignore that it will not prove your stupid position correct. You are not only a liar, but willfully ignorant. Your parents have failed you.
itchygonads 18 hours ago
@itchygonads :O I have nothing else to say
ShadyForce4 18 hours ago
@itchygonads it's just funny how people react when they know they're wrong
ShadyForce4 18 hours ago
@ShadyForce4 Correct. People like you lie about being in medicine LOL. They then put forward a completely terrible explination of Dopamine, then ramble on about a "happy brain" hahaha you are a liar, and have been proven wrong by not only me, but the other guy you refused to listen too...Just plain funny. peace. And keep your pseudoscience somewhere else.
itchygonads 18 hours ago
@itchygonads You don't have to believe me lol it's the internet but the article we had to read was written by Pascal Bruckner. Feel free to cultivate yourself a little more, I think you need it.
See ya
ShadyForce4 18 hours ago
@ShadyForce4 It's not just that I don't believe you, it's that I know you are lying. But hey, lets prove me right...What university do you go to? What year are you in? Two of my closet friends are studying medicine, I will gather some questions for you. Well you have been proven wrong countless times on the video! You are in no position to question anyone's intellect. You are wrong, and you now know it. Peace.
itchygonads 17 hours ago
@itchygonads I go to UdeM (Université de Montréal) in Québec, Canada. It's my first year. Ask me any question :D
ShadyForce4 17 hours ago
@itchygonads But this isn't even debatable... You can look up Aristotle or Epicurus and their work on happiness.
A wooly dog would avoid contact, not because he is shy, I will not believe that. Might be because it doesn't feel confortable or something like that though.
Humans are classified as animals, which means that we're not plants or a bacteria or any other organism. I know that thanks.
ShadyForce4 21 hours ago
@Gilmaris Being atheist is deciding to not believe in anything, basically, that goes past the limits of science. It's deciding to reject faith.
ShadyForce4 1 week ago
@ShadyForce4 Rejecting faith is the scientific thing to do. Faith has no place in science, because science includes only what is testable. So of course it rejects faith. Atheism basically comes in two flavours. There's hard atheism: "there are no gods". This does indeed go beyond the scientific, as it asserts what cannot be proven. Then there's the so-called "weak" or agnostic atheism: "there is no reason to believe gods exist." This is as scientific as you get.
Gilmaris 1 week ago
@ShadyForce4 Science might find a way. It was thought the atom was the smallest possible thing that couldn't be split (atomos meaning "unsplittable"), and now we know they're actually made up of quarks. Science advances. Right now we don't have any definitive proof of what went on with the big bang. But someday, perhaps soon, we might. By experimenting with large particle colliders such as the LHC for example. If they find the Higgs Boson, then.. well, yeah. That'd be big, simply put.
omgwtfbbqxD 1 week ago
@omgwtfbbqxD Quarks, atoms, and even big bang does not contradict religion. The big bang states how the earth was created, and not how livings were created. Maybe God did the big bang by himself? Who knows, but it doesn't matter. Even evolution doesn't contradict religion. What contradicts religion is the fact that us, humans, evolved into what we are, and that, u can't prove!
For you info, "atomos" is the greek word for atoms invented by Aristotle, one of the most important greek philosopher.
ShadyForce4 1 week ago
@ShadyForce4 Bible: God created all animals as they are now. Evolution: Animals gradually evolved into the animals we see today. How is that not contradictory? Bible: earth is flat. Obervation: earth is spherical. Another contratiction. And yes, we can prove that. Look at the human genome project, for example. I'll suggest you search for "ken miller on human evolution" on youtube, for a good explanation.
For you info, I allready knew that Aristotle coined the word, I just didn't mention it.
omgwtfbbqxD 1 week ago
@omgwtfbbqxD Sorry, i'm muslim, and what are saying doesn't apply to me. But for the evolution part, evolution doesn't contradict religion for most it, only for the part where it says human beings evolved into what we are today. And that, you cannot prove by science. Why, between all the animals, have we evolved into something that transcends our animal nature?
ShadyForce4 1 week ago
@omgwtfbbqxD What if i told you that our ressemblances were all meant to be by God, and that God created us with starting with the same model, and created his worshippers (us) perfecting the imperfections? You can't find any answers to those question in science. All what science does is say: "here there are homologies and analogies, maybe we all evolved from the same thing". Why, if really the first bacteria was created abiotically, can't they create bacteria in labs? PROVE IT. You just cant :)
ShadyForce4 1 week ago
@omgwtfbbqxD And what i meant with Aristotle, is that Atomos were first found by philosophy, not science as you mentionned...
ShadyForce4 1 week ago
@ShadyForce4 I never said that. What I said was that science discovered the atom could be split. I merely mentioned that it was thought that it was unsplittable, as is evident by the name for atoms, atomos. I'd argue we have the exact same view on what happiness etc is, and I think we will create life one day soon enough. Psychology is a science by the way. I just know the scientific method is correct, and the best bet we have at figuring out what's what. No evidence for god either, after all.
omgwtfbbqxD 1 week ago
@ShadyForce4 Though reading back I guess I could see why you took it that way. I did say "science advances", maybe not a very good choice of words. But abiogenesis really has nothing to do with human evolution. We know how we evolved from multiple sciences. There is a ton of evidence on how we evolved into what we are now, and the principles are well understood. There's no real room for debate in this. It's just the facts.
omgwtfbbqxD 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ShadyForce4 "And what i meant with Aristotle, is that Atomos were first found by philosophy, not science as you mentioned..." Actually, Aristotle believed that all matter was made up of fire, water, earth, and air. And that aether made up the heavens. It was Leucippus and Democritus, fifth century b.c. Greek philosophers, who coined "atomos", meaning indivisible.Aristotle rejected the idea of atoms. Aristotle's incorrect ideas became accepted as fact until John Dalton found atoms with SCIENCE
justthisstupid 1 week ago
0:54 We proved the Lochness monster is fake...and on the picture, it's just an otter on a tree trunk (and the waves are made by wind.)
Poodleinacan 2 weeks ago
@Poodleinacan And well, the same goes for "god"
JakobiaP 2 weeks ago
simply brilliant
futuramaishot 2 weeks ago
afaerist or however you'd spell it sounds cool :O
cowgirl5155 2 weeks ago
Big difference is that I don't care if the religious are religious. Funny part is that they're QUITE concerned about my non-belief. They want to impose their beliefs on me and believe I should be punished for not believing. Small minded stupidity...meanwhile...on with taking personal responsibility for my own life and actions. Peace.
Geekman333 2 weeks ago
atheism is stupid. let me tell you why. If there is no god and no satan...than shut the fuck up what the fuck are you going on about? If there is nothing than let it be nothing...
Atheism, isnt about no god its about arguing why there is no god...well if there is no god to you than shut the fuck up...god
No1soriginal 2 weeks ago
@No1soriginal Worst comment ever. No thought, no education, no grammar. Why bother?
Geekman333 2 weeks ago
@No1soriginal lol, I don't even understand your low level of intellect. Perhaps you should bring it up to standard human level before making a commentary.
futuramaishot 2 weeks ago
Just one thing, we got proof that the lochness monster don't exist ;)
Norwayflex89 2 weeks ago
@Norwayflex89 You can't proof non-existance. You can only proof existance. Since there's no proof, there's no assurance it exists.
fedelede2 2 weeks ago in playlist Más videos de NonStampCollector
@fedelede2 yeah, ain't arguing on that. It is just that the lake has been "scanned", can't remember what they did 100%. But there are no evidence for a sea creature of that size in Loch Ness:)
Norwayflex89 2 weeks ago
The Christian god and Islamic are the same, ie the Judaic god. Allah is just Arabic for god.
bigglyguy 2 weeks ago
@bigglyguy Sure, they're supposed to be one and the same thing, but their characters (and their commandments and actions etc.) became so different over the centuries, it makes more sense to treat them as seperate deities... or, to be precise, two seperate ideas of the same imaginary thing.
GreyLabyrinthine 2 weeks ago
I'm no longer an atheist, my god is NonStampCollector
SingJew 2 weeks ago
@JezusSlave God is Love. Jeffrey Damher is in Heaven and Gandhi is in Hell. Sounds good. I'm gonna go kill a Goat and cut some penis so, see you in bible class. Don't forget To bring 50 silver pieces so we can rape some virgins. I'm going to be late, my child was disobedient so I have to take him to the edge of town and stone him to death. Jesus loves you.
paramattic70 3 weeks ago
@paramattic70 ROFL
sean32laf 2 weeks ago
counting ancient gods apparently i have thousands of religions :p
taylan637 3 weeks ago
Aetheism is my favorite religion LoLZ
owlflame 4 weeks ago
is a religion? Or not liking video games means you actually believe that you like them or something? Or maybe it's a religion as these christian-tards are claiming.
Pinochimon 4 weeks ago
Let me explain this, back when the Greeks had their own religion, there were people that didn't believe in their god. So, they gave those people a name. Which was anti-theist, which at that time was like a racial slur or had a negative meaning to it. The word basically mean, non believer or lack of belief in god. The Greeks would you this to insult and ridicule anyone that didn't believe in their god. Is that simple enough? Go read a fucking book. BTW does that mean that being an Otaku
Pinochimon 4 weeks ago
awesome video.
FuMysterium 4 weeks ago
i am Catholic and i don't DISBELIEVE in the other gods but i do think they might have been mistaken angels or demons
luigifanist 4 weeks ago
@luigifanist for ur kind knowledge Tamil(an ancient language)literature has more logical consistency in explaining physical reality and conscious (spiritual) reality than abrahamic holy scriptures. open up ur eyes and they are know mistaken angels and demons.
gain some knowledge before commenting
hellobal100 3 weeks ago
Long live VOLTRON, HALLOWED be thy name
TUB83709 1 month ago
ONLY JESUS CHRIST DIED FOR YOU !!!
JESUS CHRIST, HIS CATHOLIC-UNIVERSAL-APOSTOLIC CHURCH, SACRAMENTS, THE BIBLE, MIRACLES, HEALINGS, ST. MARY APPARITIONS, MESSAGES FROM HEAVEN, SIGNS IN 2011 ARE NOT A MYTHOLOGY BUT THE REALITY !!!
GET READY FOR THE GREAT WARNING NOW!!!
thewarningsecondcoming . com
JezusSlave 1 month ago
@JezusSlave ooooookay...
luigifanist 4 weeks ago
@JezusSlave big joke of 2 thousand years
hellobal100 3 weeks ago
@hellobal100 show me the other "joke" like that!
with thousands of miracles, apparitions, messages, warnings before wars from Heaven for saints, in-corrupted bodies of saints, the biggest Apostolic Universal Church, healings, miracle like in Fatima, Zeitoun, Naju, saved people in the center of nuke blast in Hiroshima praying Rosary, etc
show me the other "joke" like that and do not compare the reality to mythology without all that above and of course without God Jesus Christ,Bible and Church!!!
JezusSlave 3 weeks ago
@JezusSlave millions of others in every religion. i feel like laughing at ur idiocy. bcoz ur a big joke....... LOL LOL ROFL
hellobal100 3 weeks ago
@hellobal100 examples?
JezusSlave 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@JezusSlave resurrection of damo in zen buddhism, miracles on ayothiya bridge (adam's bridge) y rama and miracles of krishna in mahabharata. and resurrection of every avatar in hindu mythology. miracles of apollo. miracles of paraohs. every religion has healing miracles, saving miracles, warning miracles, creating miracles, destroying miracles and atlast every body has resurrection of their god to their heaven...
comments welcome
hellobal100 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
hellobal100 3 weeks ago
I have a bad habit of not smoking.
Rind0Man 1 month ago
0:28 If atheism is a belief, then 'off' is a TV channel
chainedtotheworld 1 month ago
Thanks for sharing your clarity of mind and eloquence, it will help me in future debates.
eleonb 1 month ago
Actually there is only one true God. All the others are false idles created by Satan to deceive and to remove the praise God deserves.
GriiiiiiinD 1 month ago
so happy i am a polytheistic thinker who is a Witch loves science and still believes because it's a 25000 gradually acquired subjective and instinctively acquired basis of belief that was butchered and lambasted for centuries:); you guys are "ok" by for the reason you hate most of my enemies *hugs* ; if you do not believe thats ok by me we all learn (or unlearn) as long as well all go forward together and not against....greetings
kahetel13 1 month ago
Your videos are too great, thank you.
buttersdus 1 month ago
Atheism is the only thing that makes sense..nomatter if its described as a religion or not by nonAtheists or whatever you/I is/not
vusgy 1 month ago
@doltBmB Watch his other videos and see whether or not nonstampcollector has read the Bible. I've read it too. One of the most horrifying times of my life.
frabjous79 1 month ago
And this is precisely the reason why atheism is being labelled a religion, its followers all regurgiate the same tired retarded arguments they learned from their gurus. You are so strong in your belief that you don't believe that you forget to think.
Have you ever read the bible? And I don't mean the kings james crap, I mean what do you know about the issues of translation and the real history behind it? What do you actually know about the thing you reject? What pop culture taught you is what.
doltBmB 1 month ago
@doltBmB Also, do YOU know the real history behind the bible? Besides, most christians follow the King James version.
camobeast100 1 month ago
@camobeast100 My knowledge on the subject is hardly encyclopedic but I try yes. And maybe there's more evidence for a god than you think. But how would you know if you don't look beyond the shallow surface?
doltBmB 1 month ago
@doltBmB I've looked FAR beyond the surface. I've heard many arguments from christians (and other religious people in case you're not christian), and they weren't very convincing. You want to prove to me that god exists? SHOW ME THE MONEY! And don't come with the theological or cosmological argument, because even if these were valid, they would only prove that there was an intelligent force behind the creation of the universe. It doesn't say WHAT that force was, and it's certainly not your god.
camobeast100 1 month ago
@camobeast100 Which only goes to show that you haven't looked or listened at all, only skimmed over it to be able to tell yourself that you've considered.
doltBmB 1 month ago
@doltBmB Fine, do you have proof that he exists? As I already told you: SHOW ME THE MONEY! I've considered all known arguments for god's existence, and they were simply invalid.
camobeast100 1 month ago
@camobeast100 As far as I can tell it's true there isn't 100% proof of the existence of a god. But the issue isn't as clear cut as you make it out to be, once again you simply display biased ignorance.
doltBmB 1 month ago
@doltBmB What do you mean with ''clear cut''? Unless any of you comes with some evidence for god's existence, some reason to belief that he exists, I won't belief in god.
About what you earlier said: Atheism is lack of belief in a god. Someone who has an undecided stance on the issue also lacks belief in a god, and is therefor an atheist.
camobeast100 1 month ago
@camobeast100 No. Lack of belief/undecided is agnosticism. Atheism is the direct belief that there is no god. Which you so clearly display. You clearly don't simply lack evidence. It is part of your world view. It is a belief in itself.
doltBmB 1 month ago
@doltBmB Agnosticism means that god's existence is unknown, or that god's existence can't be known (most Atheists are also agnosticts). Atheism is lack of belief in a god, not necessary the belief that a god does not exist. I never claimed that there can't some kind of god (it just can't be the god described in christianity), I just don't belief that there is one.
A lack of belief is not a worldview. And since when is lack of belief the same as narcism?
Do some research before commenting.
camobeast100 1 month ago
@camobeast100 Try reading a dictionary before commenting. There is no definition of atheism as a "lack of belief" anywhere but in defensive atheist minds. Atheism is the belief that there is no god. Agnosticism is a lack of belief in the case of unknown. And a belief in the case of unknowable.
doltBmB 1 month ago
@doltBmB Atheism is a catch-all term for people who are either irreligious, materialists, rationalists, agnostics, humanists, or some combination.
KayBeeEee1983 1 month ago
@KayBeeEee1983 Tell that to a dictionary.
doltBmB 1 month ago
@doltBmB Use your brain for once in your life.
KayBeeEee1983 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@KayBeeEee1983 lol.
doltBmB 1 month ago
@doltBmB Here are the definitions of "atheism" and "agnostic" according to dictionarydotcom:
Atheism - disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.
Agnostic - a person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, as God, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable, or that human knowledge is limited to experience.
KayBeeEee1983 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@doltBmB Forget the narcism part: I thought you said: ''It is a belief in yourself''. My mistake.
camobeast100 1 month ago
This is retarded. You can have an undecided stance on something. You can not know whether you like something or not. It can be undecided. A lack of belief. You don't believe it's good or bad.
What "atheism" really means is the belief that there is no theism. Hence the title. So if I ask you is there a god and you say no then that is an expression of a belief that there is no god. If you say "I don't know" then that is an expression of a lack of belief. Get it straight 'tard.
doltBmB 1 month ago
@doltBmB Atheism is the lack of belief in god (Atheism = without theism = without godbelief). Also, most atheists don't claim to be 100% certain that there is no god. They simply don't belief in him because there is not enough evidence for god's existence.
Atheism is not a religion because it doesn't have dogma, traditions, set rules or holy books. The only thing you have to do to be an Atheist is to NOT have belief in a god.
camobeast100 1 month ago
I like this take on non belief being a religion; it shows the hypocrisy of those who belief in one god.
PerthPete1 1 month ago
Your videos are very opening, an honestly, you're one of the best people- albeit behind a screen -that i've had the chance to listen too. What you bring up is why i'm not really of any religion to be honest. Yes, i have beliefs in a heaven, i find the idea appealing, but i'm in no way christian, or any other religion. An to those that will completely rack at me calling me a hypocrite, wow. How dull minded lobotomized programmed, an washed to be prefect little Religous person you've become. Yay.
Azmond0F 1 month ago in playlist NonStampCollector entire catalogue - in reverse order
unicorns actually do exist, by definition any animal with a single horn on its head is a unicorn, and we have a few of those,.. and ive seen some pretty small irish men,, maybe not with gold, but they do have red hair and are short.
Gods0n1 2 months ago
saying that Atheism is a religion is like saying Islam is the religion of peace ;)
U5011453 2 months ago 19
This has been flagged as spam show
there is a quote from hinduism that debunks this and makes it look rather silly but I don't care to share Holy knowledge with people who enjoy this video. Rather, you should seek out the answer, I have told you the answer is there, but I will not tell you the answer because a wise man knows not to give that which is Holy to dogs, lest they trample it under their feet,and turn to devour you. One Love, Jah lives.
truthseeker010101 3 months ago
great video i çant believe why ppl dont get that dont believe means something else n_n assholes
NEMESISFG 3 months ago in playlist Más vídeos de NonStampCollector
@dpattiris HOW DOES SAYING "ONE NATION UNDER GOD" IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE VIOLATE THE SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE? IT IS NOT THAT DIFFICULT OF A QUESTION!
stallion4life 3 months ago
@stallion4life
The seperation of church and state refers to our country's secularism. Meaning, the USA cannot endorse any religion. By adding "one nation under god" to the pledge in the 1950's, our secular discourse was undercut. All those Americans who are not christian are alienated by this oath that was snuck into our pledge using the fear of communism and confusing patriotism with manifest destiny.
drche420 3 months ago
@dpattiris How does saying "one nation under God" in the pledge of allegiance either establish a religion, or prohibit anyone from exercising theirs?
Look, I agree 100% that, technically speaking, atheism isn't a religion. But classifying it as a religion is useful for atheists to accomplish many of their goals. First amendment or otherwise, the appeals court did have to classify atheism as a religion in order to rule in favor of the study group.
stallion4life 3 months ago
@dpattiris First off "separation of church and state" is not a part of any active law document. Jefferson said, "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof'." Theism isn't a religion, and if atheism isn't one either, how does public acknowledgment of God establish a religion, or prohibit the exercise of a religion?
stallion4life 3 months ago
@dpattiris Theists have made their case continuously over the centuries. It's been a constant dialogue between theists and atheists. How is it relevant at this point who said what *first*?
Shifting the burden of proof would be an argument from ignorance-- "You can't prove God doesn't exist, therefore He does." That's not what I'm arguing. I'm saying that if you're going to tell me that the God I believe in doesn't exist, you sure as hell better prove it.
/watch?v=3LJl1d3f5fM
stallion4life 3 months ago
@dpattiris Atheists assert that God does not exist, therefore, the burden of proof lies with them to demonstrate this claim.
"When debating any issue, there is an implicit burden of proof on the person asserting a claim." - Wikipedia
I admit I don't know much about Krishna. It is not my burden to prove Krishna does not exist, as that is not my position in any argument.
stallion4life 3 months ago
lol the fairy chick is hot
totally not the point of this video but yeah XD
lordtidus12 3 months ago
YHWH and Allah are the same god :)
Aanthanur 3 months ago
atheist sets their own moral standars,, that make them their own God, the lie eve belived from the devil
albusai 3 months ago
@albusai *atheists *set *standards *makes (please learn correct grammar and spelling)
And that is completely incorrect...I am an atheist and I follow laws just like everyone else...I also follow the golden rule of not doing anything I wouldn't want done unto me. By the way, the Bible was written by men so If you follow the moral guidelines in the Bible you're also just following laws created by man.
Lalalalaloveyoumm 3 months ago
@Lalalalaloveyoumm english is not my native lenguage,, i follow man's laws cause the bible orders me to do so. that law do on to others as you want on to your selfe, is a rule of behavior, not a way to salvation, read romans, and you'll see how we are not , sumited to the law,
albusai 3 months ago
For those of you who mistakenly believe that atheism's a religion; where do atheist go to not worship their nonexistent God? Is there an atheist church or temple, with an atheist ceremonies ? Does atheism have a dogmatic book (Or beliefs) full of nonsensical stories? Ohhh and sorry, science doesn't count. Does atheism use fear of the unknown and guilt to manipulate people into...just about anything? Is there an atheists prayer and do atheist care what happens to soul after death???
coyoteself 3 months ago in playlist Spiritual
peace plz check rekkitten on youtube will b shocked
TheAngelofliberty 3 months ago
'Off is a TV channel' .... lolz ... awesome analogy
yudlejoza 3 months ago
osiris is the greatest god ever
osiris3yhn 3 months ago
Also, atheism is NOT an absence of belief in God, it is a DISbelief in God. An assertion that God does not exist- or even that He *probably* does not exist- carries the same burden of proof as the assertion that God does exist.
stallion4life 3 months ago
@stallion4life your first statement is correct but that doesn't mean what you've said has any significance > 0. It can be said in regard to anything. Derpism is not the absence of belief in herps, but a DISbelief in Herps." Your second statement is equally stupid, "An assertion that Uradumi does not exist holds the same burden of proof as the assertion that Uradumi does not exist." What is sad is that you probably won't understand o.O
SuperMongoloids 3 months ago
@SuperMongoloids Errr.... no. What YOU don't understand is that lacking a belief isn't the same thing as disbelief. A rock *lacks* a belief, but a rock isn't an atheist. A person who has considered both theism and atheism and considers both conclusions valid, but doesn't commit to either, lacks a belief but isn't an atheist.
My last comment is absolutely right. If I believe in God, and you want to prove to me that I am in error, the burden of proof is on you. Do you get it now?
stallion4life 3 months ago
@stallion4life either you ignored everything I said, are incompetent in reading comprehension, or copy and pasted a scripted response. I agreed with both of your statements, if you couldn't notice. I don't believe anyone could disagree with your statements. I simply acknowledged that your statements can be universal to infinite variety of statements and hold nothing other than space in a YouTube comment. I never said I wanted to prove you wrong, either. I don't care which fairy you worship.
SuperMongoloids 3 months ago
@SuperMongoloids Well the "atheism is a lack of belief" and "atheists don't have a burden of proof" memes have a great deal of currency among YouTube atheists, so obviously they aren't as enlightened as you.
stallion4life 3 months ago
@stallion4life
Well, there is atheism in an narrower sense, that indeed states that there is no god. But most people are atheists in the broader sense. They simply lack the believe in the existence of a god, and most are agnostic atheists, that are of the opinion that it is probably impossible to actually know if a god exists. I think the burden of prove is with the one who assert there is a god, since the prove of nonexistence is impossible.
lanzelotz26 3 months ago
@lanzelotz26 You're making the mistake most atheists make, where they think the only alternative to "I am 100% sure there is no God" is "I lack a belief there is no God". The fact is, so-called agnostic atheists DISbelieve in God. The fact that they disbelieve doesn't mean that they know for certain that God doesn't exist, only that the evidence doesn't meet their own thresholds of belief. To say they merely *lack a belief* in God is inaccurate.
stallion4life 3 months ago
@stallion4life
I´m not a native English speaker. As far as I can tell the difference between the terms "disbelieve", "non-believe" and "lack of believe" is almost non-existent nor relevant. I can live with the notion that I have a disbelieve in the existence of any god (until proven otherwise), if you want to call it that . It still remains impossible to prove the nonexistence of gods, fairys, unicorns etc. Thus the burden of prove still lies with the one making the claim of their existence.
lanzelotz26 3 months ago
@lanzelotz26 The burden of proof also lies with the person making the claim of non-existence. I have no idea why atheists think the burden of proof only applies to one side of the argument; possibly because they're confusing the philosophic burden of proof with the legal burden of proof.
stallion4life 3 months ago
@stallion4life
1. Most atheists assert, they don´t believe in the existence of any god. They don´t assert to know for sure, that there is no god.
2. You can´t prove the nonexistence of anything. There is only prove for existence, thus the burden lies with the one making the claim of existence (especially if the believer wants to deny others equal rights :)
lanzelotz26 3 months ago
@stallion4life You can be justified in holding to atheism without having ever disproven a god. I mean, otherwise, you wouldn't be justified in disbelieving in anything at all. But it would be ridiculous to have to prove that there is no Tooth Fairy in order to avoid being labeled a Tooth Fairy agnostic. Agnostic atheism is the epistemologically safe position, i.e. most likely to be correct based on what we have seen in the world, so far.
Ledwix 3 months ago
@Ledwix The burden of proof doesn't mean you have to PROVE your position, it just means you have to show why such a position is warranted. What you think the "epistemologically safe position" is entirely subjective.
stallion4life 3 months ago
@stallion4life I disbelieve in God. I have an 18 Wisdom, a 16 Intelligence, and a +5 Hat of Logic. What do I need to roll? :-)
419Films 3 months ago
Ugh. Why are atheists so tiresome?
You guys are really shooting yourselves in the foot with this "Atheism is not a religion" business. How are you going to say that nondenominational prayers and "one nation under God" violate your first amendment rights if the first amendment guarantees freedom *of* religion? A federal appeals court ruled that atheism is a religion in order to defend a prisoner's right to hold an atheist study group! (But of course, there are no atheists in prison, right? lol)
stallion4life 3 months ago
So that makes NonStampCollector more religious than the most devout believer! Why? Because he doesn't believe in one more god than the believers! I love it! The atheist population are growing by the millions every year and the theists are pretty scared by that. Why? Well, the more people who say religious belief is wrong, the more believers have to question their faith! Because it's built on a very shaky foundation! They need billions of believers to believe it themselves! LOL!
boc1953 4 months ago
is it just me or does every fairy in the art world have to be sexy?
WonderfulDenmark 4 months ago in playlist WonderfulDenmark's Favorited Videos
Here's just a few of the gods and godesses I don't believe in /watch?v=zZVRpqm0Cl0. I believe people don't realize there were so many of them. And I think the list is not complete.
Bishop38f8 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ALTHOUGH I'M A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN (Baptist), I no longer believe that the Bible teaches eternal torment or suffering. The Bible teaches eternal punishment, but it's not eternal torment. In my popular Internet article, TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE OF HELL EVOLVED FROM GREEK ROOTS, I explain how and why teaching of eternal torment entered early into Christianity and how Scriptures have been misinterpreted and taken out of context to support that teaching. ~Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology)
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
SCIENCE SHOWS THAT THE UNIVERSE could not have sustained itself eternally because of entropy (even in an open system). Einstein confirmed that space, matter, and time had a beginning! That beginning had to be supernatural because natural laws have no ability to bring the universe into existence from nothing. The supernatural cannot be proved by science but science points to a supernatural intelligence for the origin and order of the universe ~ HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM (Article)
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
EINSTEIN CONFIRMED that space and time are just as physical as matter. That's why space and time can be altered by gravity, and space produces particles. Einstein's equations show that the universe couldn’t be eternal. It had a beginning. Einstein believed, because of science, in the existence of God behind the origin and order of the universe. He didn't believe in a personal God like Christians do, but he did believe science pointed to the existence of an all powerful and intelligent Creator
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
THE SCIENTIFIC CASE AGAINST ATHEISM: Please read this Internet article of mine published in Russia's English Pravda. It will be a real eye-opener for all who think belief in a Creator is merely subjective blind faith. Also read my article, LIFE ON MARS NO SURPRISE (In the Earth's past there was powerful volcanic activity which spewed life-containing dirt and rocks (meteors) into outer space. Mars may literally have millions tons of Earth soil)
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Only evolution within "kinds" is genetically possible (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). How were species living and reproducing if their vital structures, organs, reproductive systems hadn't evolved yet? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic/biological similarities between species
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
DAWKINS, HITCHENS, AND HAWKING REFUSE TO DEBATE with creationists who are SCIENTISTS, such as the scientists at The Institute for Creation Research. Dawkins and his friends only debate non-scientist creationists. Read articles by scientists supporting creation at The Institute for Creation Research site. Read analysis from creation scientists about the latest news on fossils, genetics, astronomy, etc. that you won't read in the main stream media. Visit the Institute for Creation Research site.
Mogley52 4 months ago
WHAT IS SCIENCE? Science simply is knowledge based on observation. No one observed the universe coming by chance or by design, by creation or by macro-evolution. These are positions of faith. The issue is which faith the scientific evidence best supports. Natural laws can explain how an airplane or living cell works, but it's irrational to believe that undirected natural laws can bring about an airplane or a living cell. Read my Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 4 months ago
@Mogley52 We have observed macro-evolution actually. Tons and tons of examples of speciation can be found in nature. =)
Drgamedood 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
THE ODDS of the sequence of molecules in a cell coming together by chance are similar to the odds of magnetic letters randomly bonding together in a sequence to form all the words and sentences in a dictionary. Without the right sequence, a cell's molecules won't work. Amino acids can come by chance but not proteins. Without DNA there can be no proteins and vice versa. Gradually won't do. It's all at once or not at all for a cell's survival. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NATURAL SELECTION DOESN'T PRODUCE ANYTHING. It can only "select" from what is produced that has survival value. If a variation occurs that helps a species survive, that survival is called being "selected." That's all it is. There's no conscious selection by nature. It's a passive process. Natural selection is a figure of speech. The term itself is a tautology. Natural selection only operates once there is life and reproduction, not before. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM.
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NATURAL SELECTION IS NO BLIND WATCHMAKER because it can only "select," not produce or arrange. If a variation survives, that's called being "selected." Natural selection operates only once there is life and reproduction, not before, so it couldn't have been involved in life's origins. A partially-evolved cell (an oxymoron) would quickly disintegrate. It couldn't wait ("survive") millions of years for chance to complete it and then make it alive! Read: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ARE FOSSILS REALLY MILLIONS OF YEARS OLD? Popular Internet article examines assumptions concerning fossil deposition as well as built-in assumptions involved in modern radiometric dating (not used for dating fossils but other rocks), and arguments from starlight and time. Discusses lack of true transitional forms in the fossil record and lack of "age" sequence of the fossil layers. Discussion of mixed species (i.e. dinosaur, reptile, mammal fossils in the same stratum).
Mogley52 4 months ago
This