People who don't understand what exactly a theory is baffle me. Just because it is a theory doesn't mean that it is wrong or that scientists are unsure. In fact, in order to be considered a theory that has to be many facts supporting the hypotheses behind the theory.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
owe no, the retarded real-life troll, Chicken Hawkins.
this guy is brainwashing people with "Thisis" and "Theories" without proving them.
I'm not saying much, but O athiests:
I'd live a life believing in GOD and then I don't see him after it, Rather than living a life as an athiest and then discover the opposite. so I'm a winner in either way. you have 50% chance(athiests).
so I'm going to ask you people nicely, please, wake up, I'm not forcing anyone. you're choice matters. Allahuakbar.
@X3BOOODYX2012 never heard anything more stupid than this. And No, you are not a winner either way, bcs when you waste your life praying and following a 'religion' that is nothing but an invention of some guy 1000s years ago, then you are not a winner, you just wasted your life following another man's rules and talking to a god that doesn't exist, arguing and flipping over things that could simply be ignored and overthrown.
we are quite awake, it's you who needs to wake up, fool.
oh really? for your information, I don't take any considerations about "Pascal's Wager", because it's for weak people.
YES I'm a winner because this "fairy tale" of 1400s you've underistimated which was taken from an educated person, contains hundreds of modern scientific facts about the world, don't say arestotle, arestotle only discovered 2 or 5 of em. where did he get that from? did he have a cable TV? he was in a desert!
@X3BOOODYX2012 idiot! these "scientific facts" are nothing but Bullshit. None of these were proven, but muslims' minds like to twist the words and description to make it fit science. And most of it was proven wrong and misinterpreted. Only a fool like urself would look for science and facts in his holy quran- a book full of silly trivial stories and fairytales- just lke the bible. And you prophet was an ignorant illiterate dolt. right? he didnt know how to read & write.
not proven? OK I'll get to the point, ISLAM doesn't deny science, but encourages it.
yeah he wasn't educated, if you have a brain you would also ask... where did these ideas come from? I want you to give me one verse of a scientific fact that it's not proven!
yeah, they say atheists are scientifical, they look more like EMOTIONAL than rational to me... (idiot! you're ignorant prophet!) and you don't even have a clue about my dogma just from the corrupted media.
@X3BOOODYX2012 Islam encourages science? maybe, but only science that is compatible with your religion. So if a muslim scientist reaches a conclusion that doesn't fit his religious believes, he will consider it wrong and keep searching.
Non of Mo3gezat el Quran was proven. Zaghloul el Nagar and the likes are imposters and only ignorant dolts like you buy his BS.
is quran supposed to be a biology book? and if god wants to talk science, why is he using codes and metaphors? fool.
no you're the fool, I didn't say quran is a biology book, it's a 1400 years old religious book that contains laws of any islamic society, but what has impressed scientists that it contained accurate scientific facts.
"non of mo3jezat al-qura'an were proven" of course any idiot like you would say that while the book itself IS a mo3jeza, an entirely nomad uneducated person comes with words that neither arabs nor GREEKs can even write a verse of it.
oh alright, don't let me laugh, you didn't use bad language, but directly said to me STUPID and IDIOT, I didn't represent Islam in the last comment, it was a purely personal reply JUST like yours.
@X3BOOODYX2012 well, you believe that atheists have no morals, so why not call you idiot, stupid, and bitch?
but you said that scientists all over the world (!!) are amazed by quran's description.. so what about Scientists who support the Evolution theory? you consider them scientists? and were they amazed, or simply say that the whole God and creation theory is bullshit? or do you only hear/read/mention what fits your isalm bullshit?
DID I SAY the evolution is wrong? AGAIN you put all the religions in one basket.
The evolution is a theroy it's partly right, and partly wrong, not because it's a theory as a main reason, but because it's based on accident, and there's no place for chances in science. right because it makes sense about the biological existance, does that make us have shared ancestors with all living beings? well why not? we're ALIVE at last. but that doesn't mean not every race (CONT)
@X3BOOODYX2012 I have 470 characters to explain to u the evolution theory And what the word theory means!! it's tiring to do here on yourtube, and its tiring to convince a religious person that what they have been told since birth is nothing but LIES. takes a very open intelligent mind and brave person to accept that. You are/have non of that.
@X3BOOODYX2012 I doubt it, but, good for you. but then again, what good is 'information' when you have a closed mind and are unable to accept that your unproven religious myths are... myths. If you were born catholic, you d be here now defending the Bible and talking about Jesus (maybe mocking quran) but don't worry, there are millions like you, unable to break free from their believes. which takes us back to your 1st comment here. Mr. Winner. haha. Ba-Bye.
Don't say "IF" please, it's already written, even enstain said that, the space fabric proves that, for example in this hour, all atoms are formed like this(whatever the shape), also it says that the universe is flat(NASA confirmed), about te time, it's a dimension, starts from a small thing, then expands, but now it does the opposite. anyway, if you go forword or backward, nothing chanfes(like an already rendered video).
has his own main ancestor. does that makes our father a bacteria? NO, even modern science didn't verify that. AFTER all evolution is a theory, explains how the CREATURES are connected, the more complex the more similarity.
@X3BOOODYX2012 baby, you need to educate urself a bit more. first, you have a great misunderstanding of the word 'Theory'. it doesn't mean some random unproven thought. Look it up in the dictionary: Scientific Theory. Now some idiot here, talking by religion and superstitious fairy tales that were never proven- is now telling scientists: your theory is half wrong?? and ur understanding of the Evolution theory is another problem. Go read some more (not ur holy book) thn come back.
why would I stop? untill NOW science didn't come with something negates Islam or the quran. if you have a mind you would notice that the quran is written simply with no complication so it can fit into any era, now before, in the future....
@X3BOOODYX2012 the way your silly book describes the fetus and formation of a baby is all wrong. bones are not created first then covered in flesh etc. so many things are twisted to make it fit science, like the 7 skies for exampls. ask any astronomer he will tell you it's bullshit. The Evolution theory defies your stupid book, and that's why ppl like u can't stand it. and renowned scientists support it. Bitch. haha. u think darwin is a fool, only bcs his thoery defies islam
Dead-to-the-spirit deluded "God Delusion" author & blithering fool scientist goon Richard Dawkins another "leader" given 2 the profane masses is another useful idiot 4 Jesuit machinations
Jesuitical; pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuit Order completely altered the education system 2 suit their Evo-Hoax Agenda to discredit the Bible
Papal Rome cant have their Counter Reformation 2nd Dark Age DESPOTISM until Bible is destroyed
Nah TheAmazingAtheist provided an uncensored fuck at exactly 55 seconds in on his F*CK WALLSTREET vid (note, not censored when he said the word 'fuck')
Topics: DEADLY ARGUMENTS NOW ADDED For The Creationism-Evolutionism Debate (See Subchapter 10.2.2.), The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balanceddiet1.yolasite.com
See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
Topics: The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balanceddiet1.yolasite.com etc.
See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc.yolasite.com
or
figure4etc3.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com announcements-balancedway.yolasite.com
@warriorprince1010 Fair enough, I guess every religion says they're god's people. You wouldn't be a good JW if you were open to the possibility that you may have the wrong religion. I say since there's no way of knowing which religion is the right one much less if any religion is the "right" one (and I think they are all creations of the human condition), then the healthiest approach is to doubt anyone who claims to know something based in bad evidence and authority, as religion does.
@warriorprince1010 Well, people do convert to a different religion than the one they were brought up with. That doesn't mean it is the "right one", as people have been converted to every religion on the planet. Of course, JW really is a branch of Christianity so the people who do "convert" already have that christian indoctrination and guilt drilled into them since they were babies. Personally never seen anyone convert, most people are just annoyed at being preached at in their own home.
@warriorprince1010 You missed my point: the only reason people pursue a particular religion is merely because that's how they've been brought up, indoctrinated, and brainwashed. You call yourself a Jehovah's witness, but if you had been born in Iran you would be a muslim. If you had been born in India, probably a Hindu.
All religions have an equal chance of being "right", and if there is one true religion, due to the laws of probability, you're pretty much damned no matter which you choose.
@warriorprince1010 Well, lucky you to have been born into the only true religion on the planet. It's just too bad billions are damned to Hell simply because they were born into the wrong religion. At least Jehovah no longer orders genocide and the slaugthering of anyone of a different religious faith, as he did in the Bible. The Israelites were commanded to murder every man, woman and baby (even thier animals) of any city that professed a different religion.
If a prime archetype, a protector(dad) would be used to memetically derive others: leader, boss, person in charge all the way up to a "God" concept, encapsulating everything at the core of our comprehension or sense of emotional significance apart still from the meaning we give it after adult consideration.
Denouncing it would be like ripping of the roof of your house. Substituting it with nature however would be like taking the car top down and going for a ride!
I was just wondering, if a religious person states that the big bang could not have happened, because the initial matter would need an origin as well, what would that say about the existence of God, who has no origin either?
@benskin79 You're absolutely right. That is an argument for which creationists have no answer. They'll just say, "Well God was just always there." Hmmm, it seems you are willing to make more concessions for an invisible being than you are for the visible universe. Of course, unlike many people's imaginary friends, the big bang does explain origins quite elegantly based in evidence and the way we've actually perceived the universe to operate..
Richard Dawkins was wrong when he said good tunes spread and bad tunes don't. I can name quite a few bad tunes that have dominated the meme pool over the past few years!
@argentinaforever15 Yes thankyou for pointing out the obvious liberties I took with my lighthearted humorous interpretation of Dawkins words. Thankyou Sir Buzz-kill-ington, but I'm quite aware of what Dawkins was trying to say, so no need to kill the joke.
@pje85254 Then how can you delude yourself and believe that hydrogen and oxygen, electrons and protons, should first produce themselves, then be the source for all other beings, and finally decree the laws that regulate themselves and the rest of the material world?
@splicedenergy Should the scientist, who is aware of the natural causes and of the factors determining each step of creation towards perfection, of mankind's evolution, of the minute accuracy and exactitude that rules every change in the nature that surrounds us, come to believe that these wondrous laws and amazing interactions have somehow *fortuitously* emerged out of *mindless* matter?
@pje85254 The univers is fine tuned for life for example if it wasnt for the planets to be in the places they are (the earth being at a certain distance from the sun ) there would not be any life in the first place , so yes the universe is fine tuned for life.The universe with its design proovs that it is created therefore something had to have create it .The universe had a begining and we knouw that universe wil end, universe is creation like any created thing it has a bigining and end.
@sadi606 two corrections here. the universe is not fine tuned for life. if you start with an anthropocentric world view (as you have) then you will end up with an anthropocentric explanation. this needs correcting. life is not here because god created a Goldilocks zone for us, life is MERELY POSSIBLE because in some corner of the universe there exists a solar system from which the right chemical reactions were able to occur. given that there are billions upon billions of solar systems out there-
@sadi606 -it is not too improbable that something like life would arise. besides, what about the massive amounts of imploding stars and destroyed solar systems? that hardly counts for evidence for a finely tuned universe. 2nd point that needs correcting: time and space had a beginning at the big bang - this is not the same as saying "the universe had a beginning". we do not know the nature of the universe (besides the assumed singularity) before the big bang...
@sadi606 ..this does not mean that you can assume that it did not exist. thus, by showing your lack of understanding of the science your attempted application of logic fails.
@pje85254 I gave you proof that it couldn't have been by random events , give it as mutch time as you wish its just not possible .Therefore If God did not exist, the universe would not display the order it does, and it would not be finely-tuned to permit our existence. Professor Roger Penrose states, "There is a certain sense in which I would say the universe has a purpose. It's not there just somehow by chance...I don't think that's a very fruitful or helpful way of looking at the universe.”
@pje85254 I answered in previos posts why it could not be out of random events ,for example : Roger Penrose of Oxford University has calculated that the odds of the Big Bang's low entropy condition existing by chance are on the order of one out of 1010 (123). Penrose comments, "I cannot even recall seeing anything else in physics whose accuracy is known to approach, even remotely, a figure like one part in 1010 (123)."
@pje85254 continue....... They would be completely justified in inferring that these finds were not the result of sedimentation and metamorphosis but products of an unknown civilization. However if some skeptics were to argue that we cannot make such inferences because we do not know anything about this civilization, how they lived and who created them, would that make the archaeologists conclusions untrue? Of course not!
@pje85254 continue...... Anyone with a basic understanding of the philosophy of science will conclude that in the inference to the best explanation, the best explanation does not require an explanation! The following example illustrates this point.Imagine 500 years from now, a group of archaeologists start digging in London’s Hyde Park only to find parts of a car and a bus.
@pje85254 You are confusing god with its creation again , i said in other responses that god has always existed thats his nature . One of criteria for someone to claim he is god is that he is not created, otherwise if he is created then he is not god but creation .We have to distinct between god and its creation these are 2 different things so its a illogical question to ask who created god .Also because god creates complex things this does not mean he's nature is complex .
@pje85254 The existence of a life permitting universe is due to conditions that must have been fined-tuned to a degree that is literally incalculable. Take the following example: The Strength of Gravity & the Atomic Weak Force: Physicist P. C. W. Davies has calculated that a change in the strength of gravity or of the atomic weak force by only one part in 10100 would have prevented a life permitting universe.
@pje85254 The proof is that we "creation" exist therefore someone with a healthy brain would as a matter of course accept the existance of the creator . Someone who does not see the proof then in fact he is demented.
@pje85254 God has always existed there was not a time when god didnt exist .
Everything that is created has a bigining and an end , while the creator or god had no bigining and has no end ,he was always there and will be always there thats one of god's attribute that he is the eternal.
@pje85254 A supernatural designer, in other words God, is one of the simplest concepts understood by all.This opinion is expressed by many Philosophers including the famous atheist turned theist Professor Anthony Flew.Just because God can do complex things does not make him complex.In other words, just because God can do complex things (such as creating the universe) it does not make His nature complex.So it stands to reason that God is the simplest, and therefore the best, explanation.
@pje85254 Offcourse no matter how many times you throw,the result its not gonna be any different than the first time you throw.Gods attribute is that he is not created otherwise if he is created he is creation not creator or god. so its a ilogical question to say who created god . The fact that there is this creation proovs that that god exists .
@pje85254 So according to you killing was ok then but not ok now why this dubble standard ?? Once again there is no fact of evolution its the theory of evolution .What is right for you may not be right for someone else or what is wrong for you may not be wrong for someone else , who defines what is right and wat is wrong ? Everyone with a sharp mind can see the diference between animals and people ,so no we are no animals .
@pje85254 Yes some design can happen by chance , but are you to tell me that by throwing paint in to a picture-frame you can come with Leonardo da vinci's Monalisa?
What about the brain with its 33 billion neurons linked with up to 10,000 synaptic connections each, do you think that such a mindblowing thing can come about by chance ??
@pje85254 There is no way athiests or evolutionists can answer moral questions because according to them we are merely animals who accidentely came to be and now we are trying to survive , the fittest survives by any means killing ,slealing, everything is ok .No evolutionist can say killing is wrong based on sience and evolution.
@pje85254 Offcourse there is no central text of good or evil in athiesm because acording to athiests there is no good or evil ,there is no morality.Thats the danger of athiesm that thretends our society's.
@pje85254 It is not ok to believe thinks without evidence , but then when a siencist tels you that evolution took 4 bilion years , you blindly believe him without evidence and thats the problem .
@pje85254 Thats a common misunderstanding in the western world to think of people who believe that they do it without evidence .The evidence of a creator is very clear in a designfull world , when you see a building you dont have to see the one who build it, to knouw that this building was build by someone. This is common sense ,but it is you athiests who go against common sense and shut your eyes when you see design and say we dont believe in that builder until we see him.
@pje85254 I dont agree that time has proven the theory, its the opposite with the discovery of powerfull microscops we can see how complex and designfull we humans are. As for where he said existence of evil disproovs god ,he didnt say it like that but he said that ,he could not see the work of an omnipotent deity in all the pain and suffering such as the ichneumon wasp paralysing caterpillars as live food for its eggs..
@pje85254 The theory of evolution was started by a amator siencist who lived in england some 180 yers ago . It was based on merely his amatoristic observation and his opinion that existence of evil proofs there is no god witch led him to such extreem claims as evolution .Basicily what this amator claimed was that the world as we see it today came to be by chance .THE FACT is that DESIGN witch we see in this world proofs a DESIGNER.
@pje85254 First of all the theory of evolution is not based on sientific facts since its only a theory . Secondly i said religion opposes evil "even though people might do evil in the name of religion " that doesnt change the fact that religion opposes evil. while the theory of evolution does not oppose evil it sees evil as a natural concequence for animals and people to survive.
These people and this type of hedious ideology will be used to exterminate your free will and thinking and regilious beliefs as nothing more than a virus that has spread, and must be stopped.
I believe monotheistic religions have risen to prominence for a reason. If you are in a polytheistic religion, it's easier to accept the existence of other Gods. Your Gods are not in the habit of insisting on exclusive worship, and therefore you are not in the habit of burning believers in other Gods at the stake as Heretics. So I think there WAS a natural selection of religions--those who did not convert were killed. If you were a Christian or Muslim, you lived to reproduce your religion.
I'm not a big subscriber to the "meme" idea because there's no way of testing that. It may be that we all like certain tunes because the tunes as "ideas" have a kind of mematic survival value, or it may be that we all like certain tunes because we all like certain tunes.
@TharosTheDragon What serves the purpose of religion ??Its only religion that opposes evil . According to the theory of evolution every evil is accepted because its the suvivle of the fittest .Nothing can be considered evil accorind to that creed .Its only the belief in god that stops people from commiting evil.Thats one of many purposses of religion . Now i ask you something ,What serves the purpose of the theory of evolution ??
@sadi606 "Its only the belief in god that stops people from commiting evil."
That is not only tremendously insulting to me, it's insulting to yourself. You're telling me that you'd be commiting evil if you didn't believe in God, making you an evil person. If you wanna think you're an evil person, fine, but I'm better than that.
@sarotran nothing will happen to him. He tries to free people from stupid beliefs in a logical maner. If you don't agree with him but also don't wish to challange his arguments, you probably "deserve to continue being religious."
@MartinJWillett because Alot is a town and nagar panchayat in the Ratlam district of Madhya Pradesh, India. DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY INDIANS COULD BE PISSED ABOUT THIS ? YT didn't risk it.
Perhaps one could argue that spirituality is a meme adopted to overcome more self-destructive memes. Not so much that it is popular but rather enhances survival of the self and in some cases others in society.
My theory is that memes taking the path of least resistance (i.e. those that tend to appeal to primal emotions and other innate sensibilities) tend to be favored. Someone needs to figure out how to rebrand the concept of "rationality = better" into an appealing little mental jpeg.
God is a meme competing against the natural selection meme advocated by Darwinists. So we have a faith based meme and an evidence based meme fighting it out in the meme pool. Because the majority of humans are nasty and stupid, the faith based meme will win out in the end, scientific evidence does not endow power over others but ideology does. The survival of the fittest - everyone knows about God, hardly anyone about natural selection, even less about memes.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I just wasted Euro 12.40 on this book. Shouldn't this man retire? His arguments are so bloody nebulous and his writing style is so bloody sloppy that I think that he should stop writing books to earn more money that he doesn't need. Take a walk and leave us alone.
When a word or saying is "catchy" it gets passed on to other people. If someone accidentally or intentionally changes the saying and makes it more catchy, then it will be passed on even more effectively.<-This is memetics.
Ever wonder why we say 'head over heels', when it should really be 'heels over head'? That is because the "mutation" is more elegant sounding, and therefore a more successful meme! Ta-Da!
A virus is catchy because it is alive and in need of a host. How did the meme start? Either Dawkins knows or we have a convenient infinite regress. Where is the Mother of all Memes? lol
No, memes are ideas that spread in a manner similar to that of a virus. That doesn't make them a virus as well. How did you ever finish high school if you think an analogy is a description?
Religions ARE ideas, and they only spread from people who have it to people they come into contact with "carriers" or with sources like the bible. Create a religious text and put it at the bottom of the ocean, it won't spread.
It's a comparison to simplify for simple-minded idiots like you.
A meme is word of Professor Dawkin's invention to explain things he cannot prove scientifically, and so has as much scientific worth as his own claims that God does not exist. Memes exist? Prove it! Put one in a test tube.
You think that in order to prove that something exists you have to be able to put it in a test tube? Are you really that stupid? Have you ever exercised your weak imagination once in your lifetime?
Memes must exist because there is no mechanism we know of to prevent them from existing.
The concept is this: Ideas are shared amongst people. In doing so sometimes they "mutate" for better or worse (like in the telephone game). Some "mutations" cause ideas to be more successfully passed on. Those ideas are naturally more successful, popular and resilient.
To me it isn't a matter of proving they exist, but trying to find a mechanism that doesn't allow memes to exist.
You argue that memes aren't real and just a made up word, that we can't supply one physically. Well what about the words law and idea. Can you put an idea in a test tube? Can you drop a law and see if it breaks when it hits the ground? Or are these words representative of things and not the things themselves.
Asiablue: A God is word of Asiablue's invention to explain things he cannot prove scientifically, and so has as much scientific worth as his own claims that meme's does not exist. God's exist? Prove it! Put one in a test tube.
If god is omnipresent, he already is in a test tube. He's also in your mouth and anal cavity, under your fingernails and up your nose. That's what omnipresent means.
You're so convinced that you're smarter than everyone else that you aren't even taking half a second to think about what you're saying. Simple-minded is a generous description for you, because it implies you have a mind. Please crawl under a rock and stay there, for everyone's own good.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Dawkins thinks he is smarter than everyone else and has said so. Atheists ride his coat tails to build up their false confidence, hide their ignorance and justify their condesensions (such as the one above) yet shy from the very scientific proof required of their belief in vacuous concepts such as memes.
Show me where he said that. Or is this more of your believer-brand "proof" that doesn't actually exist?
I notice you're still arguing that memes don't exist, despite the fact that memes are just ideas. Things that most of us (apart from bible-humpers) have regularly. If you've ever thought of a joke, told it, and heard the person repeat it elsewhere, it became a meme. Comedians, politicians, even 4chan create memes every day.
Condescension is a response to the willfull ignorance you show
Actually Richard happens to be pretty damn smart. And yes Atheist being the rational educated types do tend to ride the coat tails of those who are indeed very smart. I suppose we have it all mixed up tho right? All our science is wrong, aren't we a bunch of dummies we should believe in your religion.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
The existence of the meme has never been proven and is not accepted by mainstream science. It is a straw-man construction for the purposes of justifying Professor Dawkin's propaganda.
The existence of God has never been proven and is not accepted by mainstream free-thinkers. It is a straw-man construction for the purposes of justifying the religious organizations propaganda.
A meme consists of any idea or behavior that can pass from one person to another by learning or imitation. Examples include thoughts, ideas, theories, gestures, practices, fashions, habits, songs, and dances.
If you think that doesn't exist, you don't live on the same planet the rest of us do.
Where are memes located in the body? How big are they? What colour? How much do they weigh? Don't tell me you believe in something you can't see...
Show me the proof!
And please explain how, if God is just a meme, where is the scientific proof of causation? A finite human being with a concept of infinity is something that must be explained with a lot more than 'we made it up.'
... are you on medication? Memes aren't cells or organs, they are ideas. It's a word for an idea that spreads.
I'm not even going to touch the second part of your comment, because it makes no sense whatsoever and I have better things to do than try to understand the rantings of an insane mind.
Ideas are at least in part, chemically tracable. They physicaly exist and so are scientifically verifiable. The meme is a theoretical construct and nothing more. I believe in memes the way Dawkins belives in munchkins.
And you won't touch the second part of my comment because you can't think of a way to refute it, though you are welcome to try.
Yes, I can't refute the second part of your comment because I don't think you used a language I'm familiar with. It looks like English, but it isn't English.
I also wouldn't ridicule someone by saying "How scientific of you..." when you're calling for ideas to be weighed.
You have no concept of critical thinking and you're laughably trying to prove god by saying memes don't exist, when gods themselves are memes (your own words: "meme as a virus of the mind, religion as a virus of the mind"
How to pronounce 'meme' = Meeeeeeeem.
1sexualninja1 1 month ago
Who the hell cares what shitty viral site brought you here? Just listen to the science and stop circlejerking.
Dezziku 2 months ago 2
Yes I was pronouncing meme right
FlawlessSin11 2 months ago
People who don't understand what exactly a theory is baffle me. Just because it is a theory doesn't mean that it is wrong or that scientists are unsure. In fact, in order to be considered a theory that has to be many facts supporting the hypotheses behind the theory.
rufuguru 2 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
owe no, the retarded real-life troll, Chicken Hawkins.
this guy is brainwashing people with "Thisis" and "Theories" without proving them.
I'm not saying much, but O athiests:
I'd live a life believing in GOD and then I don't see him after it, Rather than living a life as an athiest and then discover the opposite. so I'm a winner in either way. you have 50% chance(athiests).
so I'm going to ask you people nicely, please, wake up, I'm not forcing anyone. you're choice matters. Allahuakbar.
X3BOOODYX2012 3 months ago
@X3BOOODYX2012 never heard anything more stupid than this. And No, you are not a winner either way, bcs when you waste your life praying and following a 'religion' that is nothing but an invention of some guy 1000s years ago, then you are not a winner, you just wasted your life following another man's rules and talking to a god that doesn't exist, arguing and flipping over things that could simply be ignored and overthrown.
we are quite awake, it's you who needs to wake up, fool.
Mr123zazak 1 month ago
@Mr123zazak
oh really? for your information, I don't take any considerations about "Pascal's Wager", because it's for weak people.
YES I'm a winner because this "fairy tale" of 1400s you've underistimated which was taken from an educated person, contains hundreds of modern scientific facts about the world, don't say arestotle, arestotle only discovered 2 or 5 of em. where did he get that from? did he have a cable TV? he was in a desert!
you're the fool who needs to wake up.
X3BOOODYX2012 1 month ago
@X3BOOODYX2012 idiot! these "scientific facts" are nothing but Bullshit. None of these were proven, but muslims' minds like to twist the words and description to make it fit science. And most of it was proven wrong and misinterpreted. Only a fool like urself would look for science and facts in his holy quran- a book full of silly trivial stories and fairytales- just lke the bible. And you prophet was an ignorant illiterate dolt. right? he didnt know how to read & write.
Mr123zazak 1 month ago
@Mr123zazak
not proven? OK I'll get to the point, ISLAM doesn't deny science, but encourages it.
yeah he wasn't educated, if you have a brain you would also ask... where did these ideas come from? I want you to give me one verse of a scientific fact that it's not proven!
yeah, they say atheists are scientifical, they look more like EMOTIONAL than rational to me... (idiot! you're ignorant prophet!) and you don't even have a clue about my dogma just from the corrupted media.
X3BOOODYX2012 1 month ago
@X3BOOODYX2012 Islam encourages science? maybe, but only science that is compatible with your religion. So if a muslim scientist reaches a conclusion that doesn't fit his religious believes, he will consider it wrong and keep searching.
Non of Mo3gezat el Quran was proven. Zaghloul el Nagar and the likes are imposters and only ignorant dolts like you buy his BS.
is quran supposed to be a biology book? and if god wants to talk science, why is he using codes and metaphors? fool.
Mr123zazak 1 month ago
@Mr123zazak
no you're the fool, I didn't say quran is a biology book, it's a 1400 years old religious book that contains laws of any islamic society, but what has impressed scientists that it contained accurate scientific facts.
"non of mo3jezat al-qura'an were proven" of course any idiot like you would say that while the book itself IS a mo3jeza, an entirely nomad uneducated person comes with words that neither arabs nor GREEKs can even write a verse of it.
X3BOOODYX2012 1 month ago
@X3BOOODYX2012 I piss all over your book. it's good for nothing but time-wasting. or for fairy tales before bedtime. I really pity you.
Mr123zazak 1 month ago
@Mr123zazak
and I can piss on your ignorant-topic-escaper face so you can shut your emotional shitty mouth up.
X3BOOODYX2012 1 month ago
@X3BOOODYX2012 topic escaper??? are you stupid? I told you why your book AND religion AND god are all stupid BS.
Be a good muslim and forgive, and avoid using bad language, be a good example. right?
Mr123zazak 1 month ago
@Mr123zazak
oh alright, don't let me laugh, you didn't use bad language, but directly said to me STUPID and IDIOT, I didn't represent Islam in the last comment, it was a purely personal reply JUST like yours.
X3BOOODYX2012 1 month ago
@X3BOOODYX2012 well, you believe that atheists have no morals, so why not call you idiot, stupid, and bitch?
but you said that scientists all over the world (!!) are amazed by quran's description.. so what about Scientists who support the Evolution theory? you consider them scientists? and were they amazed, or simply say that the whole God and creation theory is bullshit? or do you only hear/read/mention what fits your isalm bullshit?
your last comment represents u as a muslim,
Mr123zazak 1 month ago
@Mr123zazak
DID I SAY the evolution is wrong? AGAIN you put all the religions in one basket.
The evolution is a theroy it's partly right, and partly wrong, not because it's a theory as a main reason, but because it's based on accident, and there's no place for chances in science. right because it makes sense about the biological existance, does that make us have shared ancestors with all living beings? well why not? we're ALIVE at last. but that doesn't mean not every race (CONT)
X3BOOODYX2012 1 month ago
@X3BOOODYX2012 I have 470 characters to explain to u the evolution theory And what the word theory means!! it's tiring to do here on yourtube, and its tiring to convince a religious person that what they have been told since birth is nothing but LIES. takes a very open intelligent mind and brave person to accept that. You are/have non of that.
Mr123zazak 1 month ago
@Mr123zazak
I know evolution more than you do, but again, as you said 500 characters aren't enough.
X3BOOODYX2012 1 month ago
@X3BOOODYX2012 I doubt it, but, good for you. but then again, what good is 'information' when you have a closed mind and are unable to accept that your unproven religious myths are... myths. If you were born catholic, you d be here now defending the Bible and talking about Jesus (maybe mocking quran) but don't worry, there are millions like you, unable to break free from their believes. which takes us back to your 1st comment here. Mr. Winner. haha. Ba-Bye.
Mr123zazak 1 month ago
@Mr123zazak
Don't say "IF" please, it's already written, even enstain said that, the space fabric proves that, for example in this hour, all atoms are formed like this(whatever the shape), also it says that the universe is flat(NASA confirmed), about te time, it's a dimension, starts from a small thing, then expands, but now it does the opposite. anyway, if you go forword or backward, nothing chanfes(like an already rendered video).
X3BOOODYX2012 1 month ago
@Mr123zazak
has his own main ancestor. does that makes our father a bacteria? NO, even modern science didn't verify that. AFTER all evolution is a theory, explains how the CREATURES are connected, the more complex the more similarity.
X3BOOODYX2012 1 month ago
@X3BOOODYX2012 baby, you need to educate urself a bit more. first, you have a great misunderstanding of the word 'Theory'. it doesn't mean some random unproven thought. Look it up in the dictionary: Scientific Theory. Now some idiot here, talking by religion and superstitious fairy tales that were never proven- is now telling scientists: your theory is half wrong?? and ur understanding of the Evolution theory is another problem. Go read some more (not ur holy book) thn come back.
Mr123zazak 1 month ago
@Mr123zazak
why would I stop? untill NOW science didn't come with something negates Islam or the quran. if you have a mind you would notice that the quran is written simply with no complication so it can fit into any era, now before, in the future....
X3BOOODYX2012 1 month ago
@X3BOOODYX2012 the way your silly book describes the fetus and formation of a baby is all wrong. bones are not created first then covered in flesh etc. so many things are twisted to make it fit science, like the 7 skies for exampls. ask any astronomer he will tell you it's bullshit. The Evolution theory defies your stupid book, and that's why ppl like u can't stand it. and renowned scientists support it. Bitch. haha. u think darwin is a fool, only bcs his thoery defies islam
fool
Mr123zazak 1 month ago
meeeeeeeeeem = Nonsense
JennaSmith987 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Dead-to-the-spirit deluded "God Delusion" author & blithering fool scientist goon Richard Dawkins another "leader" given 2 the profane masses is another useful idiot 4 Jesuit machinations
Jesuitical; pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuit Order completely altered the education system 2 suit their Evo-Hoax Agenda to discredit the Bible
Papal Rome cant have their Counter Reformation 2nd Dark Age DESPOTISM until Bible is destroyed
SpencerBenedict2nd 4 months ago
fuck
cooljunkproductions 5 months ago
thumbs up if memebase.com brought you here :)
toosmart07 5 months ago 3
@toosmart07
quickmeme bought me here :)
Mikeybetts 2 months ago
I guess you thought this was how to pronounce meme.
NOPE.
Chuck Testa.
MamboSizedByte 5 months ago 5
how to pronounce meme
ewinjo 5 months ago 17
MEME
nekozombie0 5 months ago 4
Nah TheAmazingAtheist provided an uncensored fuck at exactly 55 seconds in on his F*CK WALLSTREET vid (note, not censored when he said the word 'fuck')
Redfingers 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NEW BOOK FOR DEBATES AND GOVERNANCE
Topics: DEADLY ARGUMENTS NOW ADDED For The Creationism-Evolutionism Debate (See Subchapter 10.2.2.), The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balanceddiet1.yolasite.com
See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
etc.
TheServiceWeb 7 months ago
LOL
virtualguitarist 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NEW BOOK FOR DEBATES AND GOVERNANCE
Topics: The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balanceddiet1.yolasite.com etc.
See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc.yolasite.com
or
figure4etc3.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com announcements-balancedway.yolasite.com
TheServiceWeb 7 months ago
@warriorprince1010 Fair enough, I guess every religion says they're god's people. You wouldn't be a good JW if you were open to the possibility that you may have the wrong religion. I say since there's no way of knowing which religion is the right one much less if any religion is the "right" one (and I think they are all creations of the human condition), then the healthiest approach is to doubt anyone who claims to know something based in bad evidence and authority, as religion does.
tjweiler1 8 months ago
@warriorprince1010 Well, people do convert to a different religion than the one they were brought up with. That doesn't mean it is the "right one", as people have been converted to every religion on the planet. Of course, JW really is a branch of Christianity so the people who do "convert" already have that christian indoctrination and guilt drilled into them since they were babies. Personally never seen anyone convert, most people are just annoyed at being preached at in their own home.
tjweiler1 8 months ago
@warriorprince1010 You missed my point: the only reason people pursue a particular religion is merely because that's how they've been brought up, indoctrinated, and brainwashed. You call yourself a Jehovah's witness, but if you had been born in Iran you would be a muslim. If you had been born in India, probably a Hindu.
All religions have an equal chance of being "right", and if there is one true religion, due to the laws of probability, you're pretty much damned no matter which you choose.
tjweiler1 8 months ago
@warriorprince1010 Well, lucky you to have been born into the only true religion on the planet. It's just too bad billions are damned to Hell simply because they were born into the wrong religion. At least Jehovah no longer orders genocide and the slaugthering of anyone of a different religious faith, as he did in the Bible. The Israelites were commanded to murder every man, woman and baby (even thier animals) of any city that professed a different religion.
tjweiler1 8 months ago
Just another silly question:
Could there be any mathematical similarity to the way RNA splices and curls into a helix and a meme is formed.
koenraad72 11 months ago
If a prime archetype, a protector(dad) would be used to memetically derive others: leader, boss, person in charge all the way up to a "God" concept, encapsulating everything at the core of our comprehension or sense of emotional significance apart still from the meaning we give it after adult consideration.
Denouncing it would be like ripping of the roof of your house. Substituting it with nature however would be like taking the car top down and going for a ride!
koenraad72 11 months ago
I was just wondering, if a religious person states that the big bang could not have happened, because the initial matter would need an origin as well, what would that say about the existence of God, who has no origin either?
benskin79 11 months ago
@benskin79 You're absolutely right. That is an argument for which creationists have no answer. They'll just say, "Well God was just always there." Hmmm, it seems you are willing to make more concessions for an invisible being than you are for the visible universe. Of course, unlike many people's imaginary friends, the big bang does explain origins quite elegantly based in evidence and the way we've actually perceived the universe to operate..
tjweiler1 8 months ago
Richard Dawkins was wrong when he said good tunes spread and bad tunes don't. I can name quite a few bad tunes that have dominated the meme pool over the past few years!
Lockjaw95 1 year ago
@Lockjaw95 I Think that was supposed to be more of a generalization. And good and bad tunes are a matter of opinion.
argentinaforever15 9 months ago
@argentinaforever15 Yes thankyou for pointing out the obvious liberties I took with my lighthearted humorous interpretation of Dawkins words. Thankyou Sir Buzz-kill-ington, but I'm quite aware of what Dawkins was trying to say, so no need to kill the joke.
Lockjaw95 9 months ago
wheeler auditorium!! YEA BABYYYYYYY!!!
BlindMansEye 1 year ago
@pje85254 Then how can you delude yourself and believe that hydrogen and oxygen, electrons and protons, should first produce themselves, then be the source for all other beings, and finally decree the laws that regulate themselves and the rest of the material world?
1tabligh 1 year ago
@1tabligh That is what the evidence shows. It's not belief. It's what the evidence shows. What about that do you not understand. Its very simple.
splicedenergy 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@splicedenergy Should the scientist, who is aware of the natural causes and of the factors determining each step of creation towards perfection, of mankind's evolution, of the minute accuracy and exactitude that rules every change in the nature that surrounds us, come to believe that these wondrous laws and amazing interactions have somehow *fortuitously* emerged out of *mindless* matter?
1tabligh 1 year ago
@pje85254 I suggest you hamza tzortzis debates if you want to knouw more about what we have debated here . bye
sadi606 1 year ago
@pje85254 The univers is fine tuned for life for example if it wasnt for the planets to be in the places they are (the earth being at a certain distance from the sun ) there would not be any life in the first place , so yes the universe is fine tuned for life.The universe with its design proovs that it is created therefore something had to have create it .The universe had a begining and we knouw that universe wil end, universe is creation like any created thing it has a bigining and end.
sadi606 1 year ago
@sadi606 two corrections here. the universe is not fine tuned for life. if you start with an anthropocentric world view (as you have) then you will end up with an anthropocentric explanation. this needs correcting. life is not here because god created a Goldilocks zone for us, life is MERELY POSSIBLE because in some corner of the universe there exists a solar system from which the right chemical reactions were able to occur. given that there are billions upon billions of solar systems out there-
CamronJohn 1 year ago
@sadi606 -it is not too improbable that something like life would arise. besides, what about the massive amounts of imploding stars and destroyed solar systems? that hardly counts for evidence for a finely tuned universe. 2nd point that needs correcting: time and space had a beginning at the big bang - this is not the same as saying "the universe had a beginning". we do not know the nature of the universe (besides the assumed singularity) before the big bang...
CamronJohn 1 year ago
@sadi606 ..this does not mean that you can assume that it did not exist. thus, by showing your lack of understanding of the science your attempted application of logic fails.
CamronJohn 1 year ago
@pje85254 I gave you proof that it couldn't have been by random events , give it as mutch time as you wish its just not possible .Therefore If God did not exist, the universe would not display the order it does, and it would not be finely-tuned to permit our existence. Professor Roger Penrose states, "There is a certain sense in which I would say the universe has a purpose. It's not there just somehow by chance...I don't think that's a very fruitful or helpful way of looking at the universe.”
sadi606 1 year ago
@pje85254 I answered in previos posts why it could not be out of random events ,for example : Roger Penrose of Oxford University has calculated that the odds of the Big Bang's low entropy condition existing by chance are on the order of one out of 1010 (123). Penrose comments, "I cannot even recall seeing anything else in physics whose accuracy is known to approach, even remotely, a figure like one part in 1010 (123)."
sadi606 1 year ago
@pje85254 continue....... They would be completely justified in inferring that these finds were not the result of sedimentation and metamorphosis but products of an unknown civilization. However if some skeptics were to argue that we cannot make such inferences because we do not know anything about this civilization, how they lived and who created them, would that make the archaeologists conclusions untrue? Of course not!
sadi606 1 year ago
@pje85254 continue...... Anyone with a basic understanding of the philosophy of science will conclude that in the inference to the best explanation, the best explanation does not require an explanation! The following example illustrates this point.Imagine 500 years from now, a group of archaeologists start digging in London’s Hyde Park only to find parts of a car and a bus.
sadi606 1 year ago
@pje85254 You are confusing god with its creation again , i said in other responses that god has always existed thats his nature . One of criteria for someone to claim he is god is that he is not created, otherwise if he is created then he is not god but creation .We have to distinct between god and its creation these are 2 different things so its a illogical question to ask who created god .Also because god creates complex things this does not mean he's nature is complex .
sadi606 1 year ago
@pje85254 The existence of a life permitting universe is due to conditions that must have been fined-tuned to a degree that is literally incalculable. Take the following example: The Strength of Gravity & the Atomic Weak Force: Physicist P. C. W. Davies has calculated that a change in the strength of gravity or of the atomic weak force by only one part in 10100 would have prevented a life permitting universe.
sadi606 1 year ago
@pje85254 The proof is that we "creation" exist therefore someone with a healthy brain would as a matter of course accept the existance of the creator . Someone who does not see the proof then in fact he is demented.
sadi606 1 year ago
@pje85254 God has always existed there was not a time when god didnt exist .
Everything that is created has a bigining and an end , while the creator or god had no bigining and has no end ,he was always there and will be always there thats one of god's attribute that he is the eternal.
sadi606 1 year ago
@pje85254 So you are saying its simple to have a world coming to be in existence by nothing . something cannot come into being from nothing.
1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause
2. The universe began to exist
3. Therefore the universe has a cause
To start claiming that things come into existence out of nothing is an irrational claim that contradicts our intuition and our human experience.
As for that masturbating thing thats a very cheap argument ,that doesnt disproove the existence of god.
sadi606 1 year ago
@pje85254 A supernatural designer, in other words God, is one of the simplest concepts understood by all.This opinion is expressed by many Philosophers including the famous atheist turned theist Professor Anthony Flew.Just because God can do complex things does not make him complex.In other words, just because God can do complex things (such as creating the universe) it does not make His nature complex.So it stands to reason that God is the simplest, and therefore the best, explanation.
sadi606 1 year ago
@pje85254 Offcourse no matter how many times you throw,the result its not gonna be any different than the first time you throw.Gods attribute is that he is not created otherwise if he is created he is creation not creator or god. so its a ilogical question to say who created god . The fact that there is this creation proovs that that god exists .
sadi606 1 year ago
@pje85254 So according to you killing was ok then but not ok now why this dubble standard ?? Once again there is no fact of evolution its the theory of evolution .What is right for you may not be right for someone else or what is wrong for you may not be wrong for someone else , who defines what is right and wat is wrong ? Everyone with a sharp mind can see the diference between animals and people ,so no we are no animals .
sadi606 1 year ago
@pje85254 Yes some design can happen by chance , but are you to tell me that by throwing paint in to a picture-frame you can come with Leonardo da vinci's Monalisa?
What about the brain with its 33 billion neurons linked with up to 10,000 synaptic connections each, do you think that such a mindblowing thing can come about by chance ??
sadi606 1 year ago
@pje85254 There is no way athiests or evolutionists can answer moral questions because according to them we are merely animals who accidentely came to be and now we are trying to survive , the fittest survives by any means killing ,slealing, everything is ok .No evolutionist can say killing is wrong based on sience and evolution.
sadi606 1 year ago
@pje85254 Offcourse there is no central text of good or evil in athiesm because acording to athiests there is no good or evil ,there is no morality.Thats the danger of athiesm that thretends our society's.
sadi606 1 year ago
@pje85254 It is not ok to believe thinks without evidence , but then when a siencist tels you that evolution took 4 bilion years , you blindly believe him without evidence and thats the problem .
sadi606 1 year ago
@pje85254 Thats a common misunderstanding in the western world to think of people who believe that they do it without evidence .The evidence of a creator is very clear in a designfull world , when you see a building you dont have to see the one who build it, to knouw that this building was build by someone. This is common sense ,but it is you athiests who go against common sense and shut your eyes when you see design and say we dont believe in that builder until we see him.
sadi606 1 year ago
@pje85254 Lets not forget that extreem acts have been executed by people who had no faith also ,like comunist (atheist) russia with stalin .
sadi606 1 year ago
@pje85254 I dont agree that time has proven the theory, its the opposite with the discovery of powerfull microscops we can see how complex and designfull we humans are. As for where he said existence of evil disproovs god ,he didnt say it like that but he said that ,he could not see the work of an omnipotent deity in all the pain and suffering such as the ichneumon wasp paralysing caterpillars as live food for its eggs..
sadi606 1 year ago
@pje85254 The theory of evolution was started by a amator siencist who lived in england some 180 yers ago . It was based on merely his amatoristic observation and his opinion that existence of evil proofs there is no god witch led him to such extreem claims as evolution .Basicily what this amator claimed was that the world as we see it today came to be by chance .THE FACT is that DESIGN witch we see in this world proofs a DESIGNER.
sadi606 1 year ago
@pje85254 First of all the theory of evolution is not based on sientific facts since its only a theory . Secondly i said religion opposes evil "even though people might do evil in the name of religion " that doesnt change the fact that religion opposes evil. while the theory of evolution does not oppose evil it sees evil as a natural concequence for animals and people to survive.
sadi606 1 year ago
These people and this type of hedious ideology will be used to exterminate your free will and thinking and regilious beliefs as nothing more than a virus that has spread, and must be stopped.
Thundralight 1 year ago
@Thundralight NOTE just noticed this:Watch The virus of faith by richard dawkins here on utube>>>
Thundralight 1 year ago
I believe monotheistic religions have risen to prominence for a reason. If you are in a polytheistic religion, it's easier to accept the existence of other Gods. Your Gods are not in the habit of insisting on exclusive worship, and therefore you are not in the habit of burning believers in other Gods at the stake as Heretics. So I think there WAS a natural selection of religions--those who did not convert were killed. If you were a Christian or Muslim, you lived to reproduce your religion.
DandAinTac 1 year ago
I'm not a big subscriber to the "meme" idea because there's no way of testing that. It may be that we all like certain tunes because the tunes as "ideas" have a kind of mematic survival value, or it may be that we all like certain tunes because we all like certain tunes.
standinstann 1 year ago
@standinstann It's not about why we like certain tunes. It's about tunes spreading because we like them.
TharosTheDragon 1 year ago
@standinstann
Meme's are alive and well. Lurk moar.
thatguywiththeegg 1 year ago
Why do religious people threaten atheists with hell? That only works on gullible theists!
Obby16 1 year ago
I think it could of used more Memetics. but that is my opinion.
MasonicEyes 1 year ago
What about hell ?? No bady likes it when it is heard .This dosnt support your myth that people like to spread good thinks ?? You are wrong
sadi606 1 year ago
@sadi606 It's not about what people like. It's about what serves the purpose of the religion.
TharosTheDragon 1 year ago
@TharosTheDragon What serves the purpose of religion ??Its only religion that opposes evil . According to the theory of evolution every evil is accepted because its the suvivle of the fittest .Nothing can be considered evil accorind to that creed .Its only the belief in god that stops people from commiting evil.Thats one of many purposses of religion . Now i ask you something ,What serves the purpose of the theory of evolution ??
sadi606 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@sadi606 "Its only the belief in god that stops people from commiting evil."
That is not only tremendously insulting to me, it's insulting to yourself. You're telling me that you'd be commiting evil if you didn't believe in God, making you an evil person. If you wanna think you're an evil person, fine, but I'm better than that.
TharosTheDragon 1 year ago
@sadi606 They want to remove any belief in God because it foils their evil adgenda
Thundralight 1 year ago
Dawkins you will burn in Hell
sarotran 1 year ago
@sarotran nothing will happen to him. He tries to free people from stupid beliefs in a logical maner. If you don't agree with him but also don't wish to challange his arguments, you probably "deserve to continue being religious."
nomainreason 1 year ago
/b/ iz da shiz
nicha112 2 years ago
ive been noticing alot of *'s lately, is youtube censoring fuck?
dranakan 2 years ago 13
@dranakan Why would anybody write a program to change fuck into %^&*$ and NOT use it to turn alot into a lot?
MartinJWillett 1 year ago
@MartinJWillett because Alot is a town and nagar panchayat in the Ratlam district of Madhya Pradesh, India. DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY INDIANS COULD BE PISSED ABOUT THIS ? YT didn't risk it.
:) I'm joking.
nomainreason 1 year ago
@dranakan fuck no
ps3hater221 7 months ago
@dranakan
I dunno. Let's go check out Terroja's channel.
Redfingers 5 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
wtf is /B/?
winternightsky37 2 years ago
haha
trapsohtraps 2 years ago
/B/
fabsywabsy 2 years ago
Perhaps one could argue that spirituality is a meme adopted to overcome more self-destructive memes. Not so much that it is popular but rather enhances survival of the self and in some cases others in society.
mitchrix31 2 years ago
Well, at least until there are differences of opinion, then suddenly it becomes the most destructive force on the planet!
tjweiler1 2 years ago
very true
mitchrix31 2 years ago
As Jon Stewart put it: "religion. it's given people hope in a world torn apart by religion".
tjweiler1 2 years ago 31
My theory is that memes taking the path of least resistance (i.e. those that tend to appeal to primal emotions and other innate sensibilities) tend to be favored. Someone needs to figure out how to rebrand the concept of "rationality = better" into an appealing little mental jpeg.
CurbYrDogma 2 years ago 2
God is a meme competing against the natural selection meme advocated by Darwinists. So we have a faith based meme and an evidence based meme fighting it out in the meme pool. Because the majority of humans are nasty and stupid, the faith based meme will win out in the end, scientific evidence does not endow power over others but ideology does. The survival of the fittest - everyone knows about God, hardly anyone about natural selection, even less about memes.
podman51 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I just wasted Euro 12.40 on this book. Shouldn't this man retire? His arguments are so bloody nebulous and his writing style is so bloody sloppy that I think that he should stop writing books to earn more money that he doesn't need. Take a walk and leave us alone.
canguro1978 3 years ago
Is this lecture before Dennett wrote "breaking the spell"? Because I'm surprised that Dawkins doesn't mention it here.
inthefade 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
"Maybe...maybe..." Maybe "memes" do not exist!
Asiablue 3 years ago
Memes do exist, for example "what goes around comes around" is a meme. You dumb ass.
xXAkridXx 3 years ago 4
"What goes round comes around" is a culturally determined idiom.
Asiablue 3 years ago
"...is a culturally determined idiom."
exactly!
When a word or saying is "catchy" it gets passed on to other people. If someone accidentally or intentionally changes the saying and makes it more catchy, then it will be passed on even more effectively.<-This is memetics.
Ever wonder why we say 'head over heels', when it should really be 'heels over head'? That is because the "mutation" is more elegant sounding, and therefore a more successful meme! Ta-Da!
Therefore idioms are successful memes.
inthefade 3 years ago 2
A virus is catchy because it is alive and in need of a host. How did the meme start? Either Dawkins knows or we have a convenient infinite regress. Where is the Mother of all Memes? lol
Asiablue 3 years ago
An idiom is a common phrase, a meme is more, it carries an idea with it, and they often inform the actions of those who use them.
Exsamples:
Idiom- "Times are tough"
Meme- "An eye for an eye"
What goes around comes around is not a idiom, it is a meme.
xXAkridXx 3 years ago
You're describing a meme as a virus of the mind, just as Dawkins describes religion as a virus of the mind.
Asiablue 3 years ago
No, memes are ideas that spread in a manner similar to that of a virus. That doesn't make them a virus as well. How did you ever finish high school if you think an analogy is a description?
Religions ARE ideas, and they only spread from people who have it to people they come into contact with "carriers" or with sources like the bible. Create a religious text and put it at the bottom of the ocean, it won't spread.
It's a comparison to simplify for simple-minded idiots like you.
EdwardHowton 3 years ago 5
Sigh... Just read Edward's comment, he explains it.
xXAkridXx 3 years ago
If you claim memes don't exist, you don't understand what a meme is. The word 'meme' is a meme.
inthefade 3 years ago 5
A meme is word of Professor Dawkin's invention to explain things he cannot prove scientifically, and so has as much scientific worth as his own claims that God does not exist. Memes exist? Prove it! Put one in a test tube.
Asiablue 3 years ago
You think that in order to prove that something exists you have to be able to put it in a test tube? Are you really that stupid? Have you ever exercised your weak imagination once in your lifetime?
Memes must exist because there is no mechanism we know of to prevent them from existing.
inthefade 3 years ago 2
The concept is this: Ideas are shared amongst people. In doing so sometimes they "mutate" for better or worse (like in the telephone game). Some "mutations" cause ideas to be more successfully passed on. Those ideas are naturally more successful, popular and resilient.
To me it isn't a matter of proving they exist, but trying to find a mechanism that doesn't allow memes to exist.
inthefade 3 years ago 2
"Memes must exist because there is no mechanism we know of to prevent them from existing."
That is the weakest argument I've heard in a very long time.
Asiablue 3 years ago
Asiablue, Either you are a troll, or you are actually dumb enough to not be able to understand the simple concept of a meme. Either way...
inthefade 3 years ago
I'm just waiting for the science.
Asiablue 3 years ago
You argue that memes aren't real and just a made up word, that we can't supply one physically. Well what about the words law and idea. Can you put an idea in a test tube? Can you drop a law and see if it breaks when it hits the ground? Or are these words representative of things and not the things themselves.
ajsb1986 3 years ago 2
Asiablue: A God is word of Asiablue's invention to explain things he cannot prove scientifically, and so has as much scientific worth as his own claims that meme's does not exist. God's exist? Prove it! Put one in a test tube.
ajsb1986 3 years ago
God is often described at infinite, omnipotent and omnipresent. I'd be happy to put him in a test tube if you can find one big enough. lol
Asiablue 3 years ago
If god is omnipresent, he already is in a test tube. He's also in your mouth and anal cavity, under your fingernails and up your nose. That's what omnipresent means.
You're so convinced that you're smarter than everyone else that you aren't even taking half a second to think about what you're saying. Simple-minded is a generous description for you, because it implies you have a mind. Please crawl under a rock and stay there, for everyone's own good.
EdwardHowton 3 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Dawkins thinks he is smarter than everyone else and has said so. Atheists ride his coat tails to build up their false confidence, hide their ignorance and justify their condesensions (such as the one above) yet shy from the very scientific proof required of their belief in vacuous concepts such as memes.
Atheist condesension masks fear.
Asiablue 3 years ago
Show me where he said that. Or is this more of your believer-brand "proof" that doesn't actually exist?
I notice you're still arguing that memes don't exist, despite the fact that memes are just ideas. Things that most of us (apart from bible-humpers) have regularly. If you've ever thought of a joke, told it, and heard the person repeat it elsewhere, it became a meme. Comedians, politicians, even 4chan create memes every day.
Condescension is a response to the willfull ignorance you show
EdwardHowton 3 years ago 3
Actually Richard happens to be pretty damn smart. And yes Atheist being the rational educated types do tend to ride the coat tails of those who are indeed very smart. I suppose we have it all mixed up tho right? All our science is wrong, aren't we a bunch of dummies we should believe in your religion.
xXAkridXx 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The existence of the meme has never been proven and is not accepted by mainstream science. It is a straw-man construction for the purposes of justifying Professor Dawkin's propaganda.
Asiablue 3 years ago
The existence of God has never been proven and is not accepted by mainstream free-thinkers. It is a straw-man construction for the purposes of justifying the religious organizations propaganda.
relic1076 3 years ago 14
I am a free thinker and I believe in God.
Asiablue 3 years ago
@relic1076 and the non existance of God has never been disproven
Thundralight 1 year ago
A meme consists of any idea or behavior that can pass from one person to another by learning or imitation. Examples include thoughts, ideas, theories, gestures, practices, fashions, habits, songs, and dances.
If you think that doesn't exist, you don't live on the same planet the rest of us do.
EdwardHowton 3 years ago 5
Where are memes located in the body? How big are they? What colour? How much do they weigh? Don't tell me you believe in something you can't see...
Show me the proof!
And please explain how, if God is just a meme, where is the scientific proof of causation? A finite human being with a concept of infinity is something that must be explained with a lot more than 'we made it up.'
Asiablue 3 years ago
... are you on medication? Memes aren't cells or organs, they are ideas. It's a word for an idea that spreads.
I'm not even going to touch the second part of your comment, because it makes no sense whatsoever and I have better things to do than try to understand the rantings of an insane mind.
EdwardHowton 3 years ago 2
Ideas are at least in part, chemically tracable. They physicaly exist and so are scientifically verifiable. The meme is a theoretical construct and nothing more. I believe in memes the way Dawkins belives in munchkins.
And you won't touch the second part of my comment because you can't think of a way to refute it, though you are welcome to try.
Asiablue 3 years ago
Yes, I can't refute the second part of your comment because I don't think you used a language I'm familiar with. It looks like English, but it isn't English.
I also wouldn't ridicule someone by saying "How scientific of you..." when you're calling for ideas to be weighed.
You have no concept of critical thinking and you're laughably trying to prove god by saying memes don't exist, when gods themselves are memes (your own words: "meme as a virus of the mind, religion as a virus of the mind"
EdwardHowton 3 years ago
Shut the fuck up.
Lightningbaron69 3 years ago
How scientific of you...
Asiablue 3 years ago
lol when i saw the word 'meme' i assume he was going to talk about the hamster dance / chocolate rain / 2girls1cup...
how silly do i feel now :p
oilslug 3 years ago 2