This is a riot. The caller has no idea that he is being spoofed by drawing a parallel of what theists believe and what they provide as evidence for their beliefs. Without the bible that the caller keeps trying to bring up he has no ground to stand on. What an idiot. He keeps changing the subject which just says like all theists, they do not know what the hell they are talking about.
Interesting. Sandwich<God. Your debate is ruthless and frankly your video makes you look very stupid. Congrats...please comment if you have any other questions. I would love to help you understand.
dear, god, please tell me the name of the song in the beginning of this video, and if you don't know, could you have one of your minions tell me. i think there is a female singer. i can't remember if they are english or american or what. amen.
@tribalstyle138 All else being equal, when two hypothesis are competing, the one requiring the fewer assumption is the most likely and should be privileged. (Occam's razor). Although we don't have an absolute certainly either way, it is a lot more likely that the magic sandwich doesn't exist. And keep in mind, I don't think there is actually such a thing as absolute certainty
Are you happy in the world? Do you feel the world is pure and holy? Do you find peace in the world? If there are people looking for the 'light', then turn to Jesus! He will deliver you from evil, and you will walk in light with Him! He is our Saviour, who sacrificed Himself for our sins, so we are able to have a chance here on earth. Good news? We all have a chance on earth to change! Follow Christ, He will take you out of the evil ways of the world, and you will be set free! AMEN!
2 Peter 2:16 "But Balaam was stopped from his mad course when his donkey rebuked him with a human voice." Someone explain to me how the Bible is NOT as silly as a magic sandwich?
@Yewon2001 It's not as silly as the babble because "as silly" supposes the same level of silliness and contrarily to the holy babble, the holy cookbook doesn't contradict itself.
@Kursinphists Changes in a landscape proves nothing, that can be observed in a short period of time. Dying creatures prove nothing, animals die. Where does the Bible juxtapose the forces of gravity and electromagnetism? Seems rather scientific for a book devoid of scientific value. I would encourage you to provide some excerpts, identify the chapter and verse as well.
@Kursinphists The Bible is true because it states a known and observed fact of that time period: breathing oxygen? How does the ubiquity of fossils, geology, and electricity indicate the veracity of the Bible?
wow........I was offended by the lack of true debate happening.....you didn't prove your point.........at all.....all you did was talk over the person, that's not a debate, you were just being contradictory.....quite a dissapointing video
@UnknownUserName4267 Wow, that's the best atheism has to offer? Some weak British put-down? Pip-pip cheerio gov'ner!! I'm sorry you come from such a stupid country, but where I come from, AMERICA, the greatest country in the world,"
proof /evidence The fact is, there is no proof and evidence that atheism is accurate and correct, so no matter how hard a mental-midget like yourself tries, you can never win that fight.
DarthHater100 2 months ago..now who does that sound like..
@alltiedup217 Who is this shockofgod person you have mistaken me for?DarthHater100.nice try Matt Dillahunty. Why are you scared to debate Shock on your show? He would destroy you DarthHater100
hummm nut you said you didnt know who SOG was???LIES
Wow. All of a sudden he understands logic! There must be infinite cognitive dissonance going on.
Why doesn't this clash with his beliefs? HOW can he, it would seem, easily apply logic to this case but not to religion? Surely something like this would get the point across.
It all just boils down to stubborn wilful ignorance.
There MUST be an internal commentary that he actively ignores.
The easy out could have just been "you had a personal revelation, I have to respect that.".
This video shows how DISHONEST DonExodus2 really is. It's one thing to not get an argument, but TOTALLY DISHONEST to completely show that you DO get it, but deny it anyways. Exodus' little parody here totally shows that he in fact understands what a strong argument and genius question shockofgod came up with. Using the same line of reasoning that Shock used shows he knows how valid and strong The Question really is. This just shows that anti-sandwichism AND atheism are total INSANITY.
Atheists don't believe in irrational things until there is solid empirical evidence to support such cliams; this is the polar opposite of insanity
and to add; no one can debate Shockofgod even if they wanted to since he censors comments to prevent any counter positions from being shown. Anyone who makes controversial arguments publicly but won't allow those views to be challenged is a coward who deserves to me mocked
@LadyAmaltheaUnicorn there IS solid evidence to supportChristianity. Ever hear of Tacitus? Suetonius? The Dead Sea scrolls? 20000 manuscripts. There's a TON more for Christianity too. Ever hear of the Bible? You can see the Bible can't you? The fact is, there is ZERO evidence that atheist is accurate. You say you don't believe in irrational things until there is solid evidence, so where IS the evidence? If you have none for atheism, why do you believe in atheism? It's a contadiction.
that's not solid evidence, it's text, which is as valid for proving its position as theology is for proving the existence of the Greek gods.
Any position that is claiming supernatural occurrences and entities requires a strong supply of evidence that is as extraordinary as its claims are
and to address; atheism is not about being "correct", it's a default position. Unless the claims of gods can be proven without a belief in them, than any requirement to accept them is invalid
@LadyAmaltheaUnn Will you at least admit that there is evidence, only you reject it? And BTW, no where in the Bible does it say Greek gods are true. Nice try.
Supernatural occurrences are not extraordinary. You simply have a bias.
Also, please show me the law that says your personal view is the default. That's only your opinion. America is 99% Christian, so I say that makesChristianity the default position.
And Evolution cannot be proven without belief, so I guess it's invalid too.
*Are you seriously using the Bible to prove the Bible is true and thus all other equally unprovable dogmas are untrue because the Bible says so, really?
*Supernatural occurrences are extraordinary, they're certainly not banal. Whens the last time you saw the dead emerge from the ground, a snake talk or a man walk on water?
*Atheism is a default position since it's devoid of any beliefs, simply basing itself on reality and evidence.
@LadyAmaltheaUnicorn Yes, yes, your beliefs and opinions are all reality and based on evidence. So what IS your evidence?
And you strawmaning me with the talking snake and walking on water stuff can be done to you too. When's the last time you saw a monkey birth a human or lightning striking a mud puddle and then life crawled out? We can both play that game, so let's not misrepresent each others positions.
Evidence is something that is plainly visible. If something lacks evidence, and thus cannot be measured in any tangible way, there is no belief involved, as a belief is a conviction of truth without evidence.
And by "monkey birthing a human baby" are you referring to evolution? If so, that's not evolution, as it does not claim humans came from monkeys or chimps, rather that humans share a common ancestor with other apes, and our genome has vindicated this
*All Christians are indoctrinated into their beliefs, thus it is not a default position. If no one is ever told about the Bible and its stories, no one would know about them. There are still Amazonian tribes that are oblivious to Christianity as they've been untouched by civilization.
*Actually, evolution has been proven and observed, not to mention that it has little to do with the discussion of religion and existence of gods, nor do all atheists accept evolution
@LadyAmaltheaUnicorn Actually NO, if I was indoctrinated into anything, it was Evolutionism. That is what was reinforced all through school and the liberal media I grew up with. I was never taught about Christianity. Even when I later went to a Catholic High school, Christianity was mainly regulated to the Religion Class, where we learned other religions as well. I used to be an atheist because of how I was indoctrinated, but chose to be Christian once I saw the mountain of evidence.
I agree, you must be taught evolution to understand what it is, absolutely. If a human is raised alone on an island it won't know anything and likely revert to primitive behavior. However, they also wouldn't know about gods or religions until they create one themselves. That's why religions contradict each other, as they're all regionally developed by men who didn't know any better
@LadyAmaltheaUnicorn And about evolution having little to do with the discussion, you're wrong. And the fact is I can pretty much take any of your arguments about Christianity (no evidence, needs belief, has extraordinary claims, evidence only in text, is improvable) and turn it around on you and your evolution beliefs in an equally valid way. Both sides make exceptions, make assumptions etc. Evolution is relevant if at least to demonstrate the flaws in your arguments.
okay fine....let's say evolution is complete nonsense, and I agreed. Now, how does that make your claims of a god existing and Christianity being the word of god any more valid?
It sounds as if you believe that if evolution was out of the picture, Christianity would be proven to be true somehow, which is what I don't understand.
There are literally thousands of gods known to men, not to mention other possibilities for our existence that don't involve gods
@LadyAmaltheaUnicorn Also, Shockofgod doesn't censor comments on ALL of his videos, so you're a LIAR. If I were to guess, I would bet that Shock only censors comments on SOME of his videos because of thousands of atheists flock to his videos swearing up a storm leaving lude and vulgar comments. Atheism has no class.
Shock doesn't want a debate on the Atheist experience so he can swear and offensive. The atheists are scared because he makes inconvenient arguments that they cant deal with.
I call nonsense; the chances of every atheists rebuttal containing cursing sounds outlandish. And even if this is the case (which I doubt it is) why disallow valid comments because you don't like potty-mouthing?
If you're going to put a controversial position out there than I think all legitimate arguments should be allowed, after all, the freedoms that allowed you those views should work equally; if this isn't something you can deal with than there's sites like godtube for that
@DarthHater100 You are a complete moron. I would refute all of your bullshit it seems like a pointless endeavor because evidently you are incapable of actually conceding your own misapprehensions. If you honestly revere SoG's arguments as valid then you don't understand the nature of logic. You don't understand what atheism actually is, nor do you understand what evolution actually is. Atheism is a negative position, it asserts nothing, and cannot have evidence by definition.
@buttface112211 You: ""Atheism. . . cannot have evidence"" thank you for conceding you have no evidence.
I left atheist when I tried to find evidence but found none. Christianity however has a TON of evidence. If given the choice of who to believe, man or God, I chose God.
BTW I know the old "backslide to lack of belief when called out on proof for your atheism" trick. Atheism is the assertion that God does not exist. You don't just get to change the meaning of words. Sorry. Nice try.
@DarthHater100 It is logically impossible to prove that a God does not exist, you cannot logically prove a negative. Atheism is a negative stance, you cannot prove atheism, that would be nonsensical. You cannot prove that God does not exist, just like you cannot prove that fairies do not exist. That is what this entire video was illustrating with magic sandwichism. You cannot prove anti-magic sandwichism. If there is a "TON" of evidence for Christianity, present it.
@buttface112211 so you are simply ignoring my point about atheism being the positive claim there is no God. You can`t just change what a word means because you have no evidence.
But two can play that game. I define Christianity as a lack of belief in atheism, therefore I need no evidence either. But there is TONS for Christianity anyways. Just Google "evidence for Christianity" or go to the library and read a book. Try Josh McDowell or Lee Strobel. . .get an education, not just one side.
@DarthHater100 Saying there is no God is still a negative claim. If asserting there is a God is a positive claim, and asserting there is no God is also a positive claim, then there is no such thing as a positive or negative claim in which burden of proof has no value in determining truth. I haven't changed the meaning of the word. Irrespective of whether it is an assertion or lack thereof, negatives and positives still apply. I've seen Strobel's feeble attempts to prove the Bible, they fail.
@buttface112211 No, "there is a God" and "there is no God" are bothpositive claims, therefore BOTH have a burden of proof.
If I say someone is guilty, and you say someone is NOT-guilty, then I have the burden of proof and you don't. But if I say they're guilty and you say they`re INNOCENT, we BOTH have the burden of proof because both make positive claims. See the difference?
@DarthHater100 Your guilty/innocent analogy fails. It entirely depends on where you live in the world. In America a person is innocent until proven guilty, hense due process. In almost every other country a person is guilty until proven innocent. It is entirely dependent on the default position. Theism is not a default position. Atheism is, just as anti-magic sandwichism would be a default position which is what was illustrated in this video.
@buttface112211 Either the person that doesn't make a claim doesn't have the burden of proof, in which case you lose because atheism IS the CLAIM there is no God OR, as you are arguing here, it depends on where you are from. In that case there is no objective rule that says who does or doesn't have the b of proof, whether it be the person making the claim (guilty or innocent), or the one rejecting it (not guilty). Either would have the B of P depending where you are from according to you.
@DarthHater100 I was not saying the burden proof regarding particular positions and claims is dependent on "where you are from", I was saying that your analogy regarding due process is dependent on "where you live in the world" because the court systems vary. If you aren't going to actually read my comments then don't bother responding. I do not believe in theism, by definition, I am an atheist. I am not redefining terms, you are. Prove to me that anti-magic sandwichism is true.
@DarthHater100 Withholding acceptance of a proposition is always default unless that proposition is an axiom in which it isn't even much of a proposition. If I claim to have an invisible box with an invisible and intangible miniature unicorn inside, and you say it isn't there, you don't have to prove that it isn't there because I have not proven that it is there. There would be no way of proving that it isn't there.
@buttface112211 I know there is no way of proving that your unicorn is inside. That is why it is ILLOGICAL to make an absolute claim about it. It would be IRRATIONAL to make CLAIMS about something you can never prove. When asked what evidence I had that there wasnt a unicorn, I would be honest and say I am unicorn-agnostic, but it would be DISHONEST to say that I KNOW for sure, like an atheist says.
I don't BELIEVE in the unicorn, but that's only be my opinion with no evidence, like atheism.
@DarthHater100 Magic Sandwichism is true and there is TON of evidence that proves it. I used to be an anti-magic sandwichist until I realized there is no evidence for anti-magic sandwichism so I converted. Magic Sandwichism asserts that my magic sandwich, which exists beyond our plane of existence and is outside of time and space, is the creator of everything. Prove to me that anti-magic sandwichism is true. Anti-magic sandwichism makes the positive claim that this sandwich does not exist.
@buttface112211 I dont have any evidence that anti-sandwichism is true and your question perfectly illustrates why my anti-sandwichism position is just crap, like atheism. I would be a LIAR if I said I could back up my anti-sandwich position with evidence. It is just my OPINION so I wouldn't go around identifying myself as an anti-sandwichist or doing a show or writing a book about it nor would I attack people who DID believe in the magic sandwich. That would be MADNESS. Atheism is MADNESS.
@buttface112211 You listen to alltiedup217 and think I'm SOG, so you You tuck your tail between your legs and run off and think "uh-oh I'm in WAY over my head with an opponent like Shock."
alltiedup217 is the lowest form of scum on the earth so I wouldn't believe ANYTHING he says. Rest assured, I am NOT shockofgod.
It just bugs atheists that there is more than one Christian who goes against the materialistic-evolution indoctrination worldview of the mainstream and stands up for the truth.
@DarthHater100 I don't give a flying fuck what alltiedup217 said. Every other comment on your page calls you SOG and your only subscriber is SOG, why would he subscribe to an obscure youtube account with no videos like yours. Not to mention your favorited videos are his, which means if you aren't him, then you bought into his psuedo-intellectual and demonstrably fallacious bullshit of redefining terms and misusing logic contingent on his own misnomers and misapprehensions.
@buttface112211 Typical atheist, cant help but be lude and vulgar. If I were to guess why SOG blocks atheist comments on his videos, it`s probably because their posts are full of swearing.
What does who I am have to do with whether what I say or what you say is true or not? It`s just your red herring because you are loosing this argument. If someone proves me wrong I am happy because I have learned, but why get ANGRY? Your best rebuttal is "F*ck and BullSh*t." Well good for you, very mature.
@DarthHater100 Evidently you still refuse to actually read my comments. Maybe you need to go back to third grade to acquire the adequate reading comprehension skills because you repeatedly extrapolate false conclusions from everything I articulate in my comments. I never even insinuated that the veracity of evolution is contingent on popularity, that is a fallacy in most circumstances and I am fully aware of that. My 3 swears are completely irrelevant to the arguments presented.
@DarthHater100 Swears do not reflect anger, anybody with who possessing something called experiencial knowledge would know this. Certainly you have encountered a person who includes swears in their vernacular not to express anger, but to express ideas. I used the word bullshit because it clearly illustrates just what creationism is: bullshit. I used the word bullshit again because it illustrates just what SOG's arguments are: bullshit. These words have definitions, and I utilize them.
@DarthHater100 SOG is so ethically insecure that he blocks comments that contain swear words? How old is he, 9? Swear words have no moral or argumentative implications or utility, they are words with definitions and could be used accordingly. My swear words were not "rebuttals," by your own logic the random isolation of one term plucked from obscurity in one declaration intended to portray an argument is a rebuttal; and that is illogical by nature.
@DarthHater100 I also never even insinuated that conspiracy theories are false by definition, but now that you mention it; I will conjecture that identifying propositions as conspiracy theories or the implication of such certainly does not lend credence to the said proposition and in most cases deprives it of credibility. It's labeling does not explicitly determine its validity. I never said that because I define creationism as a conspiracy that it is therefore false. It wasn't an argument.
@DarthHater100 I could sit here and assert random bullshit like you that supports a conspiracy theory just as you are. In fact, by definition you ARE a conspiracy theorist, and that is just what creationism is. How many accreditted biologists reject evolution? You couldn't name more than 10 or 15 if you tried. If you think there is a global attempt mislead the general population into believing "false science" (which clearly you do) then you are a conspiracy theorist. Demonstrate the conspiracy.
Okay, so the number of biologist that dont reject evolution makes it true? LOL. In that case the number of Christians make Christianity true. You are a fallacy machine. How many teachers in Communist USSR believed Marxism was the best form of government if they were surveyed? That is what they were taught, and disagreeing had dyer consequences.
And another fallacy: calling something a "conspiracy theory" makes it not true. Nice argument.
@DarthHater100 Conversely, I never even suggested that the number of biologists that accept evolution renders it true by default. However, none of the accreditted biologists that dispute evolution (which is somewhat ambiguous because different creationists define evolution differently and accept different aspects of it) have ever actually presented any valid arguments against evolution and are not easily refutable. If that is the case, I encourage you present your best argument.
@buttface112211 does anyone else see the pattern here? First, you say something stupid, then I refute it, then you back peddle.
I refute the atheist claim that atheists don't need evidence because they, like the theist, also make a claim, and you try switching gears to "Oh, oh, oh, the one who has the burden of proof depends on where you're from." Then I turn it around on you and use YOUR own flawed premise to prove Christianity.
@buttface112211 Next, you talk about the growing body of evidence AGAINST evolution, calling it a conspiricy theory. You make NO other point, offer no evidence or argument. Your only card was the "conspiricy theory" card.
Then I point out that is really weak to INSINUATE that alleged CT are untrue.
Then you back peddle again. "I never even INSINUATED that conspiracy theories are false. . ." You DID, I refuted it, now you didn`t say what you said.
@buttface112211 now you back peddle a third time when you use the flawed argument that the number of biologists who accept evolution make it true.
Please enlighten me to what your point was when you said " How many accreditted biologists reject evolution? You couldn't name more than 10 or 15 if you tried".
Then you back peddle.
"I never even suggested the number of biologists that accept evolution renders it true. . ." Yes you did, I refuted it, now you never even suggested it.
@DarthHater100 As you said, you need to go back to elementary school to acquire some reading comprehension skills. Did you graduate highschool? Reading comprehension is an area that is focused on in most state mandated academic tests. If you aren't going to read my comments, then why do you bother typing this bullshit? You haven't refuted anything that I have said, you've only presented your own misconstrusions and extrapolations that aren't explicitly founded in my comments.
@DarthHater100 Dictionary[dot]com definition of atheist: "a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings." Where is this claim? I don't see one. You say there is a growing body of evidence against evolution? Present it.
@buttface112211 I just went to D[dot]com and looked it up. The first definition is: the doctrine or belief that there is no God. That's funny how you went to that website and PURPOSELY omitted the first definition, the one that proves my argument. That is VERY DISHONEST. Obviously you understand that if you listed the first definition, that you lose, so you tried to alter the facts and hoped I wouldn't check. Nice try, but you can't fool me. I used to be atheist so In know all the tricks.
@DarthHater100 You searched atheism, I searched atheist. I didn't omit anything, go back to third grade to acquire basic reading comprehension skills. As for "PURPOSELY omitted the first definition...", I could say the exact same thing about you dismissing the second definition. If you search atheist, you only get one definition. I'm aware of creationist arguments, but they are all easily refutable, that's why I asked you to present the "evidence" but you avoided the question.
@buttface112211 More of this "you need to go to first grade" and "did you graduate high school" stuff. That is your strongest card? Insults?
The true DISHONESTY of atheism is the MAJORITY claim there is no God. The it only becomes a lack of belief when they get called on their lack of evidence. It's a dishonest trick. But I can do it too. Every time I get asked for my evidence for Christianity, I'll just back peddle to lack of belief in atheism. PRESTO, no need to back up what I say.
@DarthHater100 I'm not interested in your semantical games, one side has a burden of proof, and it is always the side making the positive claim. Whether I say there is no God (which I haven't) is completely irrelevant to the burden of proof because it is still a negative position. Proving atheism would be like proving anti-magic sandwichism which is exactly what this video was illustrating. Even if I said there is no God, it is still because I lack belief.
@buttface112211 if we have the burden of proof then what god is it we have to "disprove" if shockofgod aka darthhater100 says their is only one god..again the burden of proof is his.He is typical in that he thinks if he says something it has to be true.
@buttface112211 The only thing this video illustrates is that when one side has a very strong and in my opinion, GENUS argument, the opposing side gets dominated and shown to look stupid. If I was an anti-magic–sandwichist I would have been DEFEATED. Luckily for me, my entire world view doesn't rest on my EASILY DEFEATABLE anti-magic sandwich position. Your world-view however, does rest on an easily defeatable atheism position. Atheism intrinsically loses.
@buttface112211 Let me guess your next reply: "Oh, oh, oh, I never even INSINUATED that you need to go to high school" and "I never even SUGGESTED that I didn't know about the HUGE body of evidence against evolution", yet you wanted me to inform you of it.
If it is going to be the same back peddling that you are now notorious for, stop wasting my time, and don't reply.
You just grasp at straws and switch gears and you are a VERY DISHONEST arguer. I'm sure we can both agree on that.
@DarthHater100 Are you insane? I asked you to present the alleged evidence against evolution. As I said before, I am aware of creationist arguments, but their arguments don't actually conform to reality and they aren't founded in science because the real evidence directly contradicts them. Anything from bullshit like "no new information" to bullshit like "all mutations are bad" are easily refutable, yet you scientific illiterates keep using these as if they haven't been refuted.
@buttface112211 I KNEW it. You are a back-peddling MACHINE. Now all of a sudden you take back that you don't know any of the evidence. You implied you were ignorant of the growing problem for evolution, then I call you on it, then you IMMEDIATLY back peddle and take back your original position. NOW you ARE aware of the evidence. This is the kind of DISHONEST arguing I was talking about. You say it, I refute it or call you on it, you take back your position AKA back peddling.
@DarthHater100 When did I agree that there was evidence against evolution? You have avoided my request for you to actually present the alleged evidence multiple times now and you call me dishonest? You have miscontrued everything that I have stated. You said I am ignorant because I'm not gullible enough to take batshit crazy creationist arguments seriously. Stop diverging, you are blatantly avoiding the question: what is the evidence against evolution?
@buttface112211 Again EXTREME dishonesty! You asked me for the evidence against evolution, and I told you to go look it up. Then you admitted you ARE aware of the arguments against evolution. Now you are pretending I didn't respond. I am calling you out. ADMIT that you knew I responded and you STILL dishonestly pretended I didn't. We BOTH know I already responded. I expect an APOLOGY for you misrepresenting what I said. Bearing false witness is a SIN. I'll be waiting for your apology.
@DarthHater100 false witness is a sin ?like when you said you were from America then Canada?we both know you did,hell people can look it up on this vid. like how you lie about not being shockofgod ,like the way anyone the disagrees with you ,you call gay.like that is that the kind of lying you mean?BTW dip shit evidence against evolution and arguments against it ,are to different things.the only one being dishonest here ..yet again is you.I'll be waiting for your apology.
@DarthHater100 Are you kidding me? As if you have not misrepresented what I have said? You have done it 3 times. I said I am aware of the arguments, but not any evidence. All creationist arguments are either demonstrably false or contingent on scientific misrepresentations. You asked me to look it up, I did. But I didn't find anything that hasn't already been refuted, only the same nonsense that has been circulated around creationst websites. Give me a source at least.
@buttface112211 I will give you all of the EVIDENCE against evolution, right after you apologize for misrepresenting me.
Alright, alright, a sourse. . .there's a video on the side bar called "Earth is 6,000 Years Old" and I can tell from the tumbnail that this guy is LEGIT. I don't have time to watch it though. Gotta go.
@DarthHater100 Funny you suggest that because I actually watched that shortely after posting my last comment. I noticed that he never cites any sources and he is so obscure that only one website actually lists his "resume" which suggests he has a "Bachelor of Science in Chemistry from the University of Wisconin in Madison, U.S.A.". The other websites only attempted to sell his blatantly over-priced DVD seminars.
@DarthHater100 I don't think it is coincidental that Kent Hovind and him both used the number "20 billion" when referring to the age of the universe. Nobody claims the universe is 20 billion years old, only ignorant creationists, if he spent 5 minutes on google he would learned that scientists actually postulate an age of roughly 13.7 billion. It is all too often that creationists plagiarize Kent Hovind, which is ironic because this Pendleton's credentials seem more legitimate than Hovind's
@DarthHater100 But just because he has a seemingly legitimate Bachelor's degree does not implicitly suggest that he has actually conducted adequate research in other scientific disciplines, and his entire video is indicative of just that. He makes demonstrably false statements like, "According to The Big Bang Theory and evolution, about 20 billion years ago there was a big bang, a big explosion..." Evolution says nothing about the origin of the universe, and the big bang was not an explosion.
@DarthHater100 There is no "HUGE body of evidence" against evolution, which is why I asked you to present the alleged evidence rather than assert that it exists. I get information from legitimate sources, evidently you do not. I do not get information from frauds with fake doctorates like Kent Hovind or websites run by conservative Christians with no formal scientific education like AiG. If you actually attended high school, you would have learned how to discern which sources are credible.
@buttface112211 So you wont accept any evidence from anyone who disagrees with what you believe. What a joke.
That's like if I said that I won't listen to any religous arguments unless they come from a Bishop or a Priest. That would be stupid, the arguments and evidence stand or fall on their own merit.
@DarthHater100 hey your right no one should not accept evidence from people that don't agree with them..like shockofgod blocking anyone that does or neph or any christain vid on youtube for that matter.do you ever stop and listen to your own bullshit?or are you just fond of irony ?And ya why won't you answer his question?were you the one just bitching about back petaling?dont fall off your bike.
@DarthHater100 peddles and training wheels, but yet you still think you can ride along with the big boys.Tell ya what just answer the guys question.might be nice for a change,why not try the truth and say you just don't know.Be a nice change for gawd done it.
@DarthHater100 darthhater(shockofgod) like to call people dishonest..but look at this
2Wow, that's the best atheism has to offer? Some weak British put-down?I'm sorry you come from such a stupid country, where I come from, AMERICA, " opps didnt you say you were from Canada?
3boystiedup217 is a DISHONEST TROLL and a LIAR. I have never said I was not from Canada. In fact it says right on my channel that I am FROM Canada.busted..lie lie lie.
@alltiedup217 Excuse me, TROLL, but unless you can prove I said, quote: "I am not from Canada", then you have not proven any dishonesty on my part. You are the one who is the dishonest LIAR. You go around taking what I say OUT OF CONTEXT and the fact is, you can never prove who I am. I am ANONOMOUS. The only thing that you know for a fact is that I am DarthHater100 and I am from Canada. That's it. Everything else is just your unfounded conjecture, which means you haven't exposed ANYONE.
@DarthHater100 LOL i'll post a link to the vid you said it on LOL lies to cover more lies how very christian of you.I can prove you lie under whatever name you hide behind,and have done so time and time again.OUT OF CONTEXT the famous cry of the christain ..LOL You said you were "from america" then when i called you out on it you lied and said you didn't say it ..just like you said you didn't know who shockofgod was put have his vids on your ch.you just got owned yet again..its getting to easy
@DarthHater100 oh anyone that want to see the proof darhthater100 aka shockofgod lied and is still lying go to pg 11 of the comments of this very video.that dip shit is what they call proof and evidence.
@buttface112211 As far as the body of evidence against evolution, I'm not here to do your homework for you. Look it up yourself. I love how you play stupid, that you are COMPLETELY unaware of this growing problem for evolution. Atheists LOVE the god vs evolution thing, and I'm sure you have had more than your share of ID.
You probably know all the arguments and evidence etc, so it is highly DISHONEST to PRETEND to be ignorant. I highly doubt you are UNAWARE of the body of evidence.
@DarthHater100 I have proof and evidence that you are..first you said you didnt know how he was then you use his arguements and re post his vids,then you say your from the U.S. then you say your from Canada,then you say you dont block comments then you say you block comments from atheists ..one thing is for sure tons of proof and evidence your full of shit.And you say not to believe anything i say...owned again dipshit
@DarthHater100 The geologic column is nothing but a concept to illustrate the various geological time periods. Do you expect to see a cliff with labels marking the cambrian era and the fossils in it? That's ridiculous. Your ignorance regarding geology does not surprise me because it is typical of young-Earth creationists. Evolution is not contingent on textbooks. Inform me of these empirical scientific observations that prove the Bible, this should be interesting.
@buttface112211 the geologic column is nothing but a concept to INDOCTRINATE. And NO, I dont expect to see a cliff with labels. That would be RIDICULOUS. But that is EXACTLY what you find in the textbook. That is because evolution is MAKE-BELIEVE. There is no ACTUAL evidence, just stuff constructed by people.
Empirical evidence for a creator: a creation. But it is not just one evidence but a corroboration of evidence, that all points to a God. Specifically the God of the BIBLE.
@DarthHater100 The geologic column is a concept, it is a scientific diagram the represents particular geological era's chronologically. Conceptual diagrams are a fundamental and ubiquitous aspect of science education because they directly analogous to whatever it is intended to illustrate or represent. If your entire objection is contingent on your disapproval of scientific diagrams, then you are ignorant of not only educational techniques but science as well; they are necessities.
@buttface11221 like the evolutionist uses the textbook to prove evolution. "Oh, oh, in my TEXTBOOK there is a colorful DRAWING of the geologic column with all of the fossils perfectly arranged to fit my belief". But the textbook is the only place it exists. If not tell me where to go to see the geologic column in person? There is no such place. In fact ALL of the evidence I have ever heard of only exists in the textbook or if it is empirical, it ACTUALLY proves the Bible. Prove me wrong.
@DarthHater100 Darthhater100 is aka shockofgod this is one of his many troll accounts.He has been asked to provide proof and evidence that he is not but he can't.all he does is say your gay..
@DarthHater100 LEE STROBLE lol the guy with a master in law!!!great guy to get your science from LOL josh mcdowell got his bullshit degree from a jesus horse shit U. LOLOL no wonder your so ignorant about anything scientific.maybe the guys you mentioned should get an education LOL you such a tard shock.
If asked what evidence I had that anti-sandwichism was accurate and correct, I'd be HONEST and admit there isn't any it's just my opinion. Why won't atheists likewise be honest and admit they have no evidence. And talk about DISHONEST. Why didn't he have the GUTS to face shockofgod instead of TruthfulChristian. It's as dishonest as if I recorded a debate between myself and a 2 year old on evolution, then used that to say I out-debated donexodus on his best subject. Typical DISHONEST ATHEIST.
@DarthHater100 you have shown time and time again how dishonest you are.You say your from the U.S.then sometimes you say your from CAnada sometime you use the name shockofgod then you use this darthhater .
Darthhater100 is shockofgod I have asked him for proof and evidence that is accurate and correct that he is not but he can't do typical dishonest christian
@alltiedup217 I have provided proof and evidence a million times but boystiedup217 is a DISHONEST internet TROLL and a LIAR. I have never said I was not from Canada. In fact it says right on my channel that I am DarthHater100 and I am FROM Canada, thus proving yet again that I am not this shockofgod fellow. You haven't exposed ANYONE.
@DarthHater100 proof you lie your quote "@DarthHater100 @UnknownUserName4267 Wow, that's the best atheism has to offer? Some weak British put-down? Pip-pip cheerio gov'ner!! I'm sorry you come from such a stupid country, but where I come from, AMERICA, the greatest country in the world," see you lie again and again you can't hide your lies anyone can look them up.You lose yet again lie for jesus shock.
@DarthHater100 humm moron see where its says you come from america..what does that mean..does it mean your full of shit ?cause it sure as shit does not mean you come from canada...sad more lies to cover your lies.
@alltiedup217 I just meant I wish I was from USA, just like ALL Canucks do. Btw I see on your channel that you are from Canada as well. Maybe we know each other in 'real life' up here in the great white north. Perhaps I pass you on my skidoo on my way to work. I bet you have a dogsled!
@DarthHater100 no what you did was lie then more lies then lies to try to cover up your lies.but that a christian for ya what is in print can mean whatever they want it to.just like your bible.Your not from Canada shock every one knows it.You have no proof or evidence that you are not shockofgood internet bullshit artist.
@alltiedup217 why should anyone believe you, an ATHEIST. You know atheists are statistically the most DISTRUSTED group in all history for a reason. Your supposed quotes of me are simply fabrications made by you, a DISHONEST internet TROLL. Please leave me alone.
@DarthHater100 no in fact most of the prison population is made up of christians they have a much higher divorce rate and .as for fabrications ,yet another lie anyone that wants can go look for themselves and see I have not lied..unlike you shock its all you seam ta do.or go to your ch and see your lies.
@DarthHater100 LOL no its not you moron LOLOL epic fail provide proof and evidence you are not shockofgod why do you keep changing the subject..are you afraid
@alltiedup217 I'm not changing the subject at all. You are calling into question whether I am shockofgod and I have told you over and over that my proof is that on my channel it says I am DarthHater100 and I am from CANADA. Now I've proved ABSOLUTELY this is true by beating you in a Canadian knowledge contest. THis proves that YOU are the liar, not me.
@alltiedup217 Times up I win again proving you being Canadian as a lie once again. The Blue Nose skooner is on the dime. You should know that if you are Canadian, you see dimes every day. You must be a LIAR.
@DarthHater100 Proverbs 13:5 A righteous man hates lying: but a wicked man is loathsome, and comes to shame.opps guess you haven't got to that part yet.
@alltiedup217 Sorry fail again. Yet again, just like in the Atheism vs God argument I am totally destroying you in knowledge only a Canadian would know. This prove's my profile as true and YOURS as a lie. The first primeminister is John A Macdonald dummy. Okay, one more to seal the deal and PROVE for all to see that you are a LIAR about being Canadian. What is on the Canadian Dime. You have one min. to prove yourself as Canadian.
@DarthHater100 ya that sounds just like you shock you can't answer simple questions so you change the subject.I notice more and more people you chat with are waking up to how you really are.Your a bullshitter who will soon have to abandon this nick of your and move to yet another.BTW i never said i was from CANADA you said i was just like you said you were american. your a liar and people know it.prove me wrong provide proof and evidence that you are not shockofgod..still waiting
@DarthHater100 here you lie and say you don't know shockofgod i guess in attempt to hide who you are you quote "@alltiedup217 Who is this shockofgod person you have mistaken me for?" lie lie lie LOL owned again dip shit.
@DarthHater100 "I'd be HONEST and admit there isn't any it's just my opinion."
Wow, you don't sound very honest. I wonder if your agnostic about the magical tea pot, Santa clause or the invisible unicorn. The fact that you took this seriously and thought he doesn't have the balls to take on ShockOfGod is very telling of you.
DonExodus is obviously making fun of Creationist debating tactics. I
@RuinSonic Hahahaaa. . .whoo. . hahaha!! LOL Santa Clause? I think we've found another wittle atheist with Santa Clause syndrome. Did wittle RuinSonic have a bad Christmas?
BTW I know DonExodus is making fun of Creationist debating tactics, in the same way I would make fun of Michael Jordan by me doing 10 perfect slamdunks. In your face Jordan, you score lots of baskets, loser!
Oh know, DonExodus is making fun of how Christians out-debate atheists. Look out.
@DarthHater100 I was actually comparing a magical sandwich to Santa Clause and you are still offended, wow. I don't think Santa is equivalent to God btw.
Are you seriously defending ShockOfGod and comparing him to Michael Jordan? That is asinine. There are way better theistic debaters than ShockOfGod. To everyone but you he's simply a joke and nobody takes him seriously.
@RuinSonic Why are atheist so obsessed with Santa LOL? Did wittle RuinSonic cry when he found out Santa wasn't real? LOL
And ya I guess it's not fair to compare Shock to Jordan. Michael Jordan doesn't have 20,000 subscribers. You say he is a joke, so why is the Atheist Experience afraid to debate him on their show?? Dillahunty would get PWNED!
@DarthHater100 "Why are atheist so obsessed with Santa LOL?"
Stfu, your just parroting your moronic friend ShockOfGod. I use these examples for the same reason lazy ass Christians use the holocaust for every moral argument. How about 9/11 truthers?
Plenty of atheists do debate your top runner WLC, so there's no reason why they would be afraid of Shock. My guess is people don't want to give attention to the mentally handicapped, ShockOfGod.
@DarthHater100 darhthater is shockofgod half or your subs are from your troll accounts like this one.Then you run around calling people dishonest ,then you accuse them of being gay then run off and say you won a debate.your like the bird playing chess with a human .the bird shit all over the brd knocks over all the pieces then flys home to say he won a game of chess.How is the view from the short bus shock?
sounded like two retards arguing about jelly sandwiches, white bois. "my jelly sandwhich cures cancer," retard. the other white boy "no show me evidence of of jelly curing cancer," lolz. he actually ask to see evidence of that, what a retard.
It's an easy question to answer. What historical evidence is there? What are eye witness accounts are there? Are there any conflicting accounts or records of this? Has this stood the test of time? The answer comes from the question. The belief comes from the interpetation of the evidence.
The caller is entertaining in the childish and sophmoric antics, It's nothing more than an ambush of semantics and framing. I am unfamiliar with schlockofgod but if that are his tactics he deserves this
@humanequilibrium- The Christian faith makes it mandatory for you to believe in Jesus Christ as a ransom sacrifice. Define ransom sacrifice, and explain how Jesus equates to such. If you can't do that after trying, will you give up your belief?
Knowing and believing are two totally different things. Out of the 2 which would you rather have? Once you enter the realm of knowing, it's not a belief anymore.
this is a bad argument(the magic sandwich)...really! is this all u have lol! the creationist is right there is a lack of evidence! you can't disregard that a god walked the planet one day that completely changed history "drastically" in Europe .. if Jesus didn't exist... why was there such a drastic influence from a entity that didn't exist ???
@IKillBabyKittensLOL atheist just like there world with no accountability that's what it boils down to....no god there for no accountability.... i can do anything without repercussions yaaaayyy
@IKillBabyKittensLOL no children will be burning, adults that have wasted this gift of life...and adults that have evil in there hearts....you see in order for there to be a heaven there has to be a hell...you cant have a negative electron without a positive proton both give each other meaning and value!
@humanequilibrium- You just said that YHWH couldn"t have been a force of good/positivety until the beautiful cherub changed his motivation to become Satan the Devil. So, until Satan made that decision, YHWH couldn"t have been good, as that's what his nature couldn't have been "from the beginning"., since according to the storybook, Satan never existed "in the beginning". Hmmm. Interesting that you agree with me here.
The biblical story Jesus never existed, but yes, many guys were named Yeshua
@humanequilibrium-Also, in your statement, you implied that YHWH needed to create a being ( Satan) in order for Him ( YHWH) to have a true value and meaning. WOW!!
If Jesus wasn't a ransom sacrifice, then you're wasting time even believing such a story. Explain clearly how the biblical Jesus was a RANSOM & a SACRIFICE. I'll show how the logic is completely flawed. Chrisitian faith hinges on Jesus being a ransom sacrifice, so if he's not, then why believe it any further?
@humanequilibrium -How can ANYONE say the original cherub later called Satan the Devil, was beautiful, if he was supposedly created by YHWH himself? If so, then what was ugly when Satan was supposed to be beautiful, so that it was properly gauged that Satan 1.0 was beautiful?
You expressed the balance ( + or - ) that occurs in the uni/multiverse reality. You proved that your beLIEved in bible stories don't dwell in reality-more like a comic book realm called imagination of goat herders!
@humanequilibrium - In case you want to delete your comment you stated in response to IKillBabyKittensLOL, "no children will be burning, adults that have wasted this gift of life...and adults that have evil in there hearts...you see in order for there to be a heaven there has to be a hell...you can"t have a negative electron without a positive proton both give each other meaning and value!"
Who created Hell- God? OK. Then WHEN did God create Hell?
Does irony mean anything to TC
djnDANdjn7 1 week ago
magic sandwich prediction
2 people would doubt the sandwich
3. no one would provide proof
4. fool in his heart would say their is no sandwich
CapQuacer 1 week ago
This is a riot. The caller has no idea that he is being spoofed by drawing a parallel of what theists believe and what they provide as evidence for their beliefs. Without the bible that the caller keeps trying to bring up he has no ground to stand on. What an idiot. He keeps changing the subject which just says like all theists, they do not know what the hell they are talking about.
nash984954 1 week ago in playlist More videos from DonExodus2
I LOL'd soo hard!
PurpleStorm8 4 weeks ago
Interesting. Sandwich<God. Your debate is ruthless and frankly your video makes you look very stupid. Congrats...please comment if you have any other questions. I would love to help you understand.
matttyler1000 4 weeks ago
dear, god, please tell me the name of the song in the beginning of this video, and if you don't know, could you have one of your minions tell me. i think there is a female singer. i can't remember if they are english or american or what. amen.
emailtheoldies 1 month ago
Wow, you destroyed him.
truesonofdorn 1 month ago
neither of you get it- the default position is neither 100% proof or disproof of the sandwich and its properties....
tribalstyle138 1 month ago
@tribalstyle138 Yes there is no 100% BUT! It is much more practical to default to antisandwichism. lol.
oswade90 1 month ago
@tribalstyle138 i think the English language needs another word to express this phenomena
tribalstyle138 1 month ago
@tribalstyle138 All else being equal, when two hypothesis are competing, the one requiring the fewer assumption is the most likely and should be privileged. (Occam's razor). Although we don't have an absolute certainly either way, it is a lot more likely that the magic sandwich doesn't exist. And keep in mind, I don't think there is actually such a thing as absolute certainty
Tamizushi 4 weeks ago
@Tamizushi yes yes Occam's razor... not one of my favorite yet still a practical tool.
tribalstyle138 4 weeks ago
Are you happy in the world? Do you feel the world is pure and holy? Do you find peace in the world? If there are people looking for the 'light', then turn to Jesus! He will deliver you from evil, and you will walk in light with Him! He is our Saviour, who sacrificed Himself for our sins, so we are able to have a chance here on earth. Good news? We all have a chance on earth to change! Follow Christ, He will take you out of the evil ways of the world, and you will be set free! AMEN!
ItsSoMe2011 1 month ago
Owned. Way to give them a taste of their own medicine.
SacredSoul1990 1 month ago
2 Peter 2:16 "But Balaam was stopped from his mad course when his donkey rebuked him with a human voice." Someone explain to me how the Bible is NOT as silly as a magic sandwich?
Yewon2001 2 months ago in playlist More videos from DonExodus2
@Yewon2001 It's not as silly as the babble because "as silly" supposes the same level of silliness and contrarily to the holy babble, the holy cookbook doesn't contradict itself.
Tamizushi 4 weeks ago
Rofl
hellhammerz666 2 months ago
I actually laughed so hard, win.
TheAsymmetrical 2 months ago
"2 Peter 2:16 violates the law of thermodynamics" BWAHAHAHAHA
TheResidentSkeptic 2 months ago 8
successful troll is successful.
Yankeezcap 2 months ago in playlist More videos from DonExodus2 9
This has been flagged as spam show
@Kursinphists You didn't answer the question.
buttface112211 3 months ago
@Kursinphists Changes in a landscape proves nothing, that can be observed in a short period of time. Dying creatures prove nothing, animals die. Where does the Bible juxtapose the forces of gravity and electromagnetism? Seems rather scientific for a book devoid of scientific value. I would encourage you to provide some excerpts, identify the chapter and verse as well.
buttface112211 3 months ago
@Kursinphists The Bible is true because it states a known and observed fact of that time period: breathing oxygen? How does the ubiquity of fossils, geology, and electricity indicate the veracity of the Bible?
buttface112211 3 months ago
wow........I was offended by the lack of true debate happening.....you didn't prove your point.........at all.....all you did was talk over the person, that's not a debate, you were just being contradictory.....quite a dissapointing video
IsisEarthMother 3 months ago
@IsisEarthMother It was a joke, he was mocking ShockofGod.
buttface112211 3 months ago
@UnknownUserName4267 Wow, that's the best atheism has to offer? Some weak British put-down? Pip-pip cheerio gov'ner!! I'm sorry you come from such a stupid country, but where I come from, AMERICA, the greatest country in the world,"
darthhater100 3 weeks ago
alltiedup217 3 months ago
atheis must be kill because killing the people.
srkkroh791 3 months ago
proof /evidence The fact is, there is no proof and evidence that atheism is accurate and correct, so no matter how hard a mental-midget like yourself tries, you can never win that fight.
DarthHater100 2 months ago..now who does that sound like..
@alltiedup217 Who is this shockofgod person you have mistaken me for?DarthHater100.nice try Matt Dillahunty. Why are you scared to debate Shock on your show? He would destroy you DarthHater100
hummm nut you said you didnt know who SOG was???LIES
alltiedup217 3 months ago
@alltiedup217 It is not the atheists job to prove that God doesn't exist, even though we can do, do so.
Eric101point101 3 months ago
Wow. All of a sudden he understands logic! There must be infinite cognitive dissonance going on.
Why doesn't this clash with his beliefs? HOW can he, it would seem, easily apply logic to this case but not to religion? Surely something like this would get the point across.
It all just boils down to stubborn wilful ignorance.
There MUST be an internal commentary that he actively ignores.
The easy out could have just been "you had a personal revelation, I have to respect that.".
theriggermortis2400 3 months ago
This video shows how DISHONEST DonExodus2 really is. It's one thing to not get an argument, but TOTALLY DISHONEST to completely show that you DO get it, but deny it anyways. Exodus' little parody here totally shows that he in fact understands what a strong argument and genius question shockofgod came up with. Using the same line of reasoning that Shock used shows he knows how valid and strong The Question really is. This just shows that anti-sandwichism AND atheism are total INSANITY.
DarthHater100 4 months ago
@DarthHater100
Atheists don't believe in irrational things until there is solid empirical evidence to support such cliams; this is the polar opposite of insanity
and to add; no one can debate Shockofgod even if they wanted to since he censors comments to prevent any counter positions from being shown. Anyone who makes controversial arguments publicly but won't allow those views to be challenged is a coward who deserves to me mocked
LadyAmaltheaUnicorn 3 months ago
@LadyAmaltheaUnicorn there IS solid evidence to supportChristianity. Ever hear of Tacitus? Suetonius? The Dead Sea scrolls? 20000 manuscripts. There's a TON more for Christianity too. Ever hear of the Bible? You can see the Bible can't you? The fact is, there is ZERO evidence that atheist is accurate. You say you don't believe in irrational things until there is solid evidence, so where IS the evidence? If you have none for atheism, why do you believe in atheism? It's a contadiction.
DarthHater100 3 months ago
@DarthHater100
that's not solid evidence, it's text, which is as valid for proving its position as theology is for proving the existence of the Greek gods.
Any position that is claiming supernatural occurrences and entities requires a strong supply of evidence that is as extraordinary as its claims are
and to address; atheism is not about being "correct", it's a default position. Unless the claims of gods can be proven without a belief in them, than any requirement to accept them is invalid
LadyAmaltheaUnicorn 3 months ago
@LadyAmaltheaUnn Will you at least admit that there is evidence, only you reject it? And BTW, no where in the Bible does it say Greek gods are true. Nice try.
Supernatural occurrences are not extraordinary. You simply have a bias.
Also, please show me the law that says your personal view is the default. That's only your opinion. America is 99% Christian, so I say that makesChristianity the default position.
And Evolution cannot be proven without belief, so I guess it's invalid too.
DarthHater100 3 months ago
@DarthHater100
*Are you seriously using the Bible to prove the Bible is true and thus all other equally unprovable dogmas are untrue because the Bible says so, really?
*Supernatural occurrences are extraordinary, they're certainly not banal. Whens the last time you saw the dead emerge from the ground, a snake talk or a man walk on water?
*Atheism is a default position since it's devoid of any beliefs, simply basing itself on reality and evidence.
LadyAmaltheaUnicorn 3 months ago
@LadyAmaltheaUnicorn Yes, yes, your beliefs and opinions are all reality and based on evidence. So what IS your evidence?
And you strawmaning me with the talking snake and walking on water stuff can be done to you too. When's the last time you saw a monkey birth a human or lightning striking a mud puddle and then life crawled out? We can both play that game, so let's not misrepresent each others positions.
DarthHater100 3 months ago
@DarthHater100
Evidence is something that is plainly visible. If something lacks evidence, and thus cannot be measured in any tangible way, there is no belief involved, as a belief is a conviction of truth without evidence.
And by "monkey birthing a human baby" are you referring to evolution? If so, that's not evolution, as it does not claim humans came from monkeys or chimps, rather that humans share a common ancestor with other apes, and our genome has vindicated this
LadyAmaltheaUnicorn 3 months ago
@DarthHater100
*All Christians are indoctrinated into their beliefs, thus it is not a default position. If no one is ever told about the Bible and its stories, no one would know about them. There are still Amazonian tribes that are oblivious to Christianity as they've been untouched by civilization.
*Actually, evolution has been proven and observed, not to mention that it has little to do with the discussion of religion and existence of gods, nor do all atheists accept evolution
LadyAmaltheaUnicorn 3 months ago
@LadyAmaltheaUnicorn Actually NO, if I was indoctrinated into anything, it was Evolutionism. That is what was reinforced all through school and the liberal media I grew up with. I was never taught about Christianity. Even when I later went to a Catholic High school, Christianity was mainly regulated to the Religion Class, where we learned other religions as well. I used to be an atheist because of how I was indoctrinated, but chose to be Christian once I saw the mountain of evidence.
DarthHater100 3 months ago
@DarthHater100
I agree, you must be taught evolution to understand what it is, absolutely. If a human is raised alone on an island it won't know anything and likely revert to primitive behavior. However, they also wouldn't know about gods or religions until they create one themselves. That's why religions contradict each other, as they're all regionally developed by men who didn't know any better
LadyAmaltheaUnicorn 3 months ago
@LadyAmaltheaUnicorn And about evolution having little to do with the discussion, you're wrong. And the fact is I can pretty much take any of your arguments about Christianity (no evidence, needs belief, has extraordinary claims, evidence only in text, is improvable) and turn it around on you and your evolution beliefs in an equally valid way. Both sides make exceptions, make assumptions etc. Evolution is relevant if at least to demonstrate the flaws in your arguments.
DarthHater100 3 months ago
@DarthHater100
okay fine....let's say evolution is complete nonsense, and I agreed. Now, how does that make your claims of a god existing and Christianity being the word of god any more valid?
It sounds as if you believe that if evolution was out of the picture, Christianity would be proven to be true somehow, which is what I don't understand.
There are literally thousands of gods known to men, not to mention other possibilities for our existence that don't involve gods
LadyAmaltheaUnicorn 3 months ago
@LadyAmaltheaUnicorn Also, Shockofgod doesn't censor comments on ALL of his videos, so you're a LIAR. If I were to guess, I would bet that Shock only censors comments on SOME of his videos because of thousands of atheists flock to his videos swearing up a storm leaving lude and vulgar comments. Atheism has no class.
Shock doesn't want a debate on the Atheist experience so he can swear and offensive. The atheists are scared because he makes inconvenient arguments that they cant deal with.
DarthHater100 3 months ago
@DarthHater100
I call nonsense; the chances of every atheists rebuttal containing cursing sounds outlandish. And even if this is the case (which I doubt it is) why disallow valid comments because you don't like potty-mouthing?
If you're going to put a controversial position out there than I think all legitimate arguments should be allowed, after all, the freedoms that allowed you those views should work equally; if this isn't something you can deal with than there's sites like godtube for that
LadyAmaltheaUnicorn 3 months ago
@DarthHater100 You are a complete moron. I would refute all of your bullshit it seems like a pointless endeavor because evidently you are incapable of actually conceding your own misapprehensions. If you honestly revere SoG's arguments as valid then you don't understand the nature of logic. You don't understand what atheism actually is, nor do you understand what evolution actually is. Atheism is a negative position, it asserts nothing, and cannot have evidence by definition.
buttface112211 3 months ago
@buttface112211 You: ""Atheism. . . cannot have evidence"" thank you for conceding you have no evidence.
I left atheist when I tried to find evidence but found none. Christianity however has a TON of evidence. If given the choice of who to believe, man or God, I chose God.
BTW I know the old "backslide to lack of belief when called out on proof for your atheism" trick. Atheism is the assertion that God does not exist. You don't just get to change the meaning of words. Sorry. Nice try.
DarthHater100 3 months ago
@DarthHater100 It is logically impossible to prove that a God does not exist, you cannot logically prove a negative. Atheism is a negative stance, you cannot prove atheism, that would be nonsensical. You cannot prove that God does not exist, just like you cannot prove that fairies do not exist. That is what this entire video was illustrating with magic sandwichism. You cannot prove anti-magic sandwichism. If there is a "TON" of evidence for Christianity, present it.
buttface112211 3 months ago
@buttface112211 so you are simply ignoring my point about atheism being the positive claim there is no God. You can`t just change what a word means because you have no evidence.
But two can play that game. I define Christianity as a lack of belief in atheism, therefore I need no evidence either. But there is TONS for Christianity anyways. Just Google "evidence for Christianity" or go to the library and read a book. Try Josh McDowell or Lee Strobel. . .get an education, not just one side.
DarthHater100 3 months ago
@DarthHater100 Saying there is no God is still a negative claim. If asserting there is a God is a positive claim, and asserting there is no God is also a positive claim, then there is no such thing as a positive or negative claim in which burden of proof has no value in determining truth. I haven't changed the meaning of the word. Irrespective of whether it is an assertion or lack thereof, negatives and positives still apply. I've seen Strobel's feeble attempts to prove the Bible, they fail.
buttface112211 3 months ago
@buttface112211 No, "there is a God" and "there is no God" are bothpositive claims, therefore BOTH have a burden of proof.
If I say someone is guilty, and you say someone is NOT-guilty, then I have the burden of proof and you don't. But if I say they're guilty and you say they`re INNOCENT, we BOTH have the burden of proof because both make positive claims. See the difference?
DarthHater100 3 months ago
@DarthHater100 Your guilty/innocent analogy fails. It entirely depends on where you live in the world. In America a person is innocent until proven guilty, hense due process. In almost every other country a person is guilty until proven innocent. It is entirely dependent on the default position. Theism is not a default position. Atheism is, just as anti-magic sandwichism would be a default position which is what was illustrated in this video.
buttface112211 3 months ago
@buttface112211 Either the person that doesn't make a claim doesn't have the burden of proof, in which case you lose because atheism IS the CLAIM there is no God OR, as you are arguing here, it depends on where you are from. In that case there is no objective rule that says who does or doesn't have the b of proof, whether it be the person making the claim (guilty or innocent), or the one rejecting it (not guilty). Either would have the B of P depending where you are from according to you.
DarthHater100 3 months ago
@DarthHater100 I was not saying the burden proof regarding particular positions and claims is dependent on "where you are from", I was saying that your analogy regarding due process is dependent on "where you live in the world" because the court systems vary. If you aren't going to actually read my comments then don't bother responding. I do not believe in theism, by definition, I am an atheist. I am not redefining terms, you are. Prove to me that anti-magic sandwichism is true.
buttface112211 3 months ago
@DarthHater100 Withholding acceptance of a proposition is always default unless that proposition is an axiom in which it isn't even much of a proposition. If I claim to have an invisible box with an invisible and intangible miniature unicorn inside, and you say it isn't there, you don't have to prove that it isn't there because I have not proven that it is there. There would be no way of proving that it isn't there.
buttface112211 3 months ago
@buttface112211 I know there is no way of proving that your unicorn is inside. That is why it is ILLOGICAL to make an absolute claim about it. It would be IRRATIONAL to make CLAIMS about something you can never prove. When asked what evidence I had that there wasnt a unicorn, I would be honest and say I am unicorn-agnostic, but it would be DISHONEST to say that I KNOW for sure, like an atheist says.
I don't BELIEVE in the unicorn, but that's only be my opinion with no evidence, like atheism.
DarthHater100 3 months ago
@DarthHater100 Magic Sandwichism is true and there is TON of evidence that proves it. I used to be an anti-magic sandwichist until I realized there is no evidence for anti-magic sandwichism so I converted. Magic Sandwichism asserts that my magic sandwich, which exists beyond our plane of existence and is outside of time and space, is the creator of everything. Prove to me that anti-magic sandwichism is true. Anti-magic sandwichism makes the positive claim that this sandwich does not exist.
buttface112211 3 months ago
@buttface112211 I dont have any evidence that anti-sandwichism is true and your question perfectly illustrates why my anti-sandwichism position is just crap, like atheism. I would be a LIAR if I said I could back up my anti-sandwich position with evidence. It is just my OPINION so I wouldn't go around identifying myself as an anti-sandwichist or doing a show or writing a book about it nor would I attack people who DID believe in the magic sandwich. That would be MADNESS. Atheism is MADNESS.
DarthHater100 3 months ago
@DarthHater100 You are a complete moron ShockofGod. Don't bother responding.
buttface112211 3 months ago
@buttface112211 You listen to alltiedup217 and think I'm SOG, so you You tuck your tail between your legs and run off and think "uh-oh I'm in WAY over my head with an opponent like Shock."
alltiedup217 is the lowest form of scum on the earth so I wouldn't believe ANYTHING he says. Rest assured, I am NOT shockofgod.
It just bugs atheists that there is more than one Christian who goes against the materialistic-evolution indoctrination worldview of the mainstream and stands up for the truth.
DarthHater100 3 months ago
@DarthHater100 I don't give a flying fuck what alltiedup217 said. Every other comment on your page calls you SOG and your only subscriber is SOG, why would he subscribe to an obscure youtube account with no videos like yours. Not to mention your favorited videos are his, which means if you aren't him, then you bought into his psuedo-intellectual and demonstrably fallacious bullshit of redefining terms and misusing logic contingent on his own misnomers and misapprehensions.
buttface112211 3 months ago
@buttface112211 Typical atheist, cant help but be lude and vulgar. If I were to guess why SOG blocks atheist comments on his videos, it`s probably because their posts are full of swearing.
What does who I am have to do with whether what I say or what you say is true or not? It`s just your red herring because you are loosing this argument. If someone proves me wrong I am happy because I have learned, but why get ANGRY? Your best rebuttal is "F*ck and BullSh*t." Well good for you, very mature.
DarthHater100 3 months ago
@DarthHater100 Evidently you still refuse to actually read my comments. Maybe you need to go back to third grade to acquire the adequate reading comprehension skills because you repeatedly extrapolate false conclusions from everything I articulate in my comments. I never even insinuated that the veracity of evolution is contingent on popularity, that is a fallacy in most circumstances and I am fully aware of that. My 3 swears are completely irrelevant to the arguments presented.
buttface112211 3 months ago
@DarthHater100 Swears do not reflect anger, anybody with who possessing something called experiencial knowledge would know this. Certainly you have encountered a person who includes swears in their vernacular not to express anger, but to express ideas. I used the word bullshit because it clearly illustrates just what creationism is: bullshit. I used the word bullshit again because it illustrates just what SOG's arguments are: bullshit. These words have definitions, and I utilize them.
buttface112211 3 months ago
@DarthHater100 SOG is so ethically insecure that he blocks comments that contain swear words? How old is he, 9? Swear words have no moral or argumentative implications or utility, they are words with definitions and could be used accordingly. My swear words were not "rebuttals," by your own logic the random isolation of one term plucked from obscurity in one declaration intended to portray an argument is a rebuttal; and that is illogical by nature.
buttface112211 3 months ago
@DarthHater100 I also never even insinuated that conspiracy theories are false by definition, but now that you mention it; I will conjecture that identifying propositions as conspiracy theories or the implication of such certainly does not lend credence to the said proposition and in most cases deprives it of credibility. It's labeling does not explicitly determine its validity. I never said that because I define creationism as a conspiracy that it is therefore false. It wasn't an argument.
buttface112211 3 months ago
@DarthHater100 I could sit here and assert random bullshit like you that supports a conspiracy theory just as you are. In fact, by definition you ARE a conspiracy theorist, and that is just what creationism is. How many accreditted biologists reject evolution? You couldn't name more than 10 or 15 if you tried. If you think there is a global attempt mislead the general population into believing "false science" (which clearly you do) then you are a conspiracy theorist. Demonstrate the conspiracy.
buttface112211 3 months ago
@buttface112211 More anger and swearing?
Okay, so the number of biologist that dont reject evolution makes it true? LOL. In that case the number of Christians make Christianity true. You are a fallacy machine. How many teachers in Communist USSR believed Marxism was the best form of government if they were surveyed? That is what they were taught, and disagreeing had dyer consequences.
And another fallacy: calling something a "conspiracy theory" makes it not true. Nice argument.
DarthHater100 3 months ago
@DarthHater100 Conversely, I never even suggested that the number of biologists that accept evolution renders it true by default. However, none of the accreditted biologists that dispute evolution (which is somewhat ambiguous because different creationists define evolution differently and accept different aspects of it) have ever actually presented any valid arguments against evolution and are not easily refutable. If that is the case, I encourage you present your best argument.
buttface112211 3 months ago
@buttface112211 does anyone else see the pattern here? First, you say something stupid, then I refute it, then you back peddle.
I refute the atheist claim that atheists don't need evidence because they, like the theist, also make a claim, and you try switching gears to "Oh, oh, oh, the one who has the burden of proof depends on where you're from." Then I turn it around on you and use YOUR own flawed premise to prove Christianity.
DarthHater100 3 months ago
@buttface112211 Next, you talk about the growing body of evidence AGAINST evolution, calling it a conspiricy theory. You make NO other point, offer no evidence or argument. Your only card was the "conspiricy theory" card.
Then I point out that is really weak to INSINUATE that alleged CT are untrue.
Then you back peddle again. "I never even INSINUATED that conspiracy theories are false. . ." You DID, I refuted it, now you didn`t say what you said.
DarthHater100 3 months ago
@buttface112211 now you back peddle a third time when you use the flawed argument that the number of biologists who accept evolution make it true.
Please enlighten me to what your point was when you said " How many accreditted biologists reject evolution? You couldn't name more than 10 or 15 if you tried".
Then you back peddle.
"I never even suggested the number of biologists that accept evolution renders it true. . ." Yes you did, I refuted it, now you never even suggested it.
DarthHater100 3 months ago
@DarthHater100 As you said, you need to go back to elementary school to acquire some reading comprehension skills. Did you graduate highschool? Reading comprehension is an area that is focused on in most state mandated academic tests. If you aren't going to read my comments, then why do you bother typing this bullshit? You haven't refuted anything that I have said, you've only presented your own misconstrusions and extrapolations that aren't explicitly founded in my comments.
buttface112211 3 months ago
@DarthHater100 Dictionary[dot]com definition of atheist: "a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings." Where is this claim? I don't see one. You say there is a growing body of evidence against evolution? Present it.
buttface112211 3 months ago
@buttface112211 I just went to D[dot]com and looked it up. The first definition is: the doctrine or belief that there is no God. That's funny how you went to that website and PURPOSELY omitted the first definition, the one that proves my argument. That is VERY DISHONEST. Obviously you understand that if you listed the first definition, that you lose, so you tried to alter the facts and hoped I wouldn't check. Nice try, but you can't fool me. I used to be atheist so In know all the tricks.
DarthHater100 3 months ago
@DarthHater100 You searched atheism, I searched atheist. I didn't omit anything, go back to third grade to acquire basic reading comprehension skills. As for "PURPOSELY omitted the first definition...", I could say the exact same thing about you dismissing the second definition. If you search atheist, you only get one definition. I'm aware of creationist arguments, but they are all easily refutable, that's why I asked you to present the "evidence" but you avoided the question.
buttface112211 3 months ago
@buttface112211 More of this "you need to go to first grade" and "did you graduate high school" stuff. That is your strongest card? Insults?
The true DISHONESTY of atheism is the MAJORITY claim there is no God. The it only becomes a lack of belief when they get called on their lack of evidence. It's a dishonest trick. But I can do it too. Every time I get asked for my evidence for Christianity, I'll just back peddle to lack of belief in atheism. PRESTO, no need to back up what I say.
DarthHater100 3 months ago
@DarthHater100 I'm not interested in your semantical games, one side has a burden of proof, and it is always the side making the positive claim. Whether I say there is no God (which I haven't) is completely irrelevant to the burden of proof because it is still a negative position. Proving atheism would be like proving anti-magic sandwichism which is exactly what this video was illustrating. Even if I said there is no God, it is still because I lack belief.
buttface112211 3 months ago
@buttface112211 if we have the burden of proof then what god is it we have to "disprove" if shockofgod aka darthhater100 says their is only one god..again the burden of proof is his.He is typical in that he thinks if he says something it has to be true.
alltiedup217 3 months ago
@buttface112211 The only thing this video illustrates is that when one side has a very strong and in my opinion, GENUS argument, the opposing side gets dominated and shown to look stupid. If I was an anti-magic–sandwichist I would have been DEFEATED. Luckily for me, my entire world view doesn't rest on my EASILY DEFEATABLE anti-magic sandwich position. Your world-view however, does rest on an easily defeatable atheism position. Atheism intrinsically loses.
DarthHater100 3 months ago
@buttface112211 Let me guess your next reply: "Oh, oh, oh, I never even INSINUATED that you need to go to high school" and "I never even SUGGESTED that I didn't know about the HUGE body of evidence against evolution", yet you wanted me to inform you of it.
If it is going to be the same back peddling that you are now notorious for, stop wasting my time, and don't reply.
You just grasp at straws and switch gears and you are a VERY DISHONEST arguer. I'm sure we can both agree on that.
DarthHater100 3 months ago
@DarthHater100 Are you insane? I asked you to present the alleged evidence against evolution. As I said before, I am aware of creationist arguments, but their arguments don't actually conform to reality and they aren't founded in science because the real evidence directly contradicts them. Anything from bullshit like "no new information" to bullshit like "all mutations are bad" are easily refutable, yet you scientific illiterates keep using these as if they haven't been refuted.
buttface112211 3 months ago
@buttface112211 I KNEW it. You are a back-peddling MACHINE. Now all of a sudden you take back that you don't know any of the evidence. You implied you were ignorant of the growing problem for evolution, then I call you on it, then you IMMEDIATLY back peddle and take back your original position. NOW you ARE aware of the evidence. This is the kind of DISHONEST arguing I was talking about. You say it, I refute it or call you on it, you take back your position AKA back peddling.
DarthHater100 3 months ago
@DarthHater100 When did I agree that there was evidence against evolution? You have avoided my request for you to actually present the alleged evidence multiple times now and you call me dishonest? You have miscontrued everything that I have stated. You said I am ignorant because I'm not gullible enough to take batshit crazy creationist arguments seriously. Stop diverging, you are blatantly avoiding the question: what is the evidence against evolution?
buttface112211 3 months ago
@buttface112211 Again EXTREME dishonesty! You asked me for the evidence against evolution, and I told you to go look it up. Then you admitted you ARE aware of the arguments against evolution. Now you are pretending I didn't respond. I am calling you out. ADMIT that you knew I responded and you STILL dishonestly pretended I didn't. We BOTH know I already responded. I expect an APOLOGY for you misrepresenting what I said. Bearing false witness is a SIN. I'll be waiting for your apology.
DarthHater100 3 months ago
@DarthHater100 false witness is a sin ?like when you said you were from America then Canada?we both know you did,hell people can look it up on this vid. like how you lie about not being shockofgod ,like the way anyone the disagrees with you ,you call gay.like that is that the kind of lying you mean?BTW dip shit evidence against evolution and arguments against it ,are to different things.the only one being dishonest here ..yet again is you.I'll be waiting for your apology.
alltiedup217 3 months ago
@DarthHater100 Are you kidding me? As if you have not misrepresented what I have said? You have done it 3 times. I said I am aware of the arguments, but not any evidence. All creationist arguments are either demonstrably false or contingent on scientific misrepresentations. You asked me to look it up, I did. But I didn't find anything that hasn't already been refuted, only the same nonsense that has been circulated around creationst websites. Give me a source at least.
buttface112211 3 months ago
@buttface112211 I will give you all of the EVIDENCE against evolution, right after you apologize for misrepresenting me.
Alright, alright, a sourse. . .there's a video on the side bar called "Earth is 6,000 Years Old" and I can tell from the tumbnail that this guy is LEGIT. I don't have time to watch it though. Gotta go.
DarthHater100 3 months ago
@DarthHater100 yes I am joking.
DarthHater100 3 months ago
@DarthHater100 but I'm not joking about the apology, just the guy in the lab coat looking LEGIT.
DarthHater100 3 months ago
@DarthHater100 Funny you suggest that because I actually watched that shortely after posting my last comment. I noticed that he never cites any sources and he is so obscure that only one website actually lists his "resume" which suggests he has a "Bachelor of Science in Chemistry from the University of Wisconin in Madison, U.S.A.". The other websites only attempted to sell his blatantly over-priced DVD seminars.
buttface112211 3 months ago
@DarthHater100 I don't think it is coincidental that Kent Hovind and him both used the number "20 billion" when referring to the age of the universe. Nobody claims the universe is 20 billion years old, only ignorant creationists, if he spent 5 minutes on google he would learned that scientists actually postulate an age of roughly 13.7 billion. It is all too often that creationists plagiarize Kent Hovind, which is ironic because this Pendleton's credentials seem more legitimate than Hovind's
buttface112211 3 months ago
@DarthHater100 But just because he has a seemingly legitimate Bachelor's degree does not implicitly suggest that he has actually conducted adequate research in other scientific disciplines, and his entire video is indicative of just that. He makes demonstrably false statements like, "According to The Big Bang Theory and evolution, about 20 billion years ago there was a big bang, a big explosion..." Evolution says nothing about the origin of the universe, and the big bang was not an explosion.
buttface112211 3 months ago
@DarthHater100 There is no "HUGE body of evidence" against evolution, which is why I asked you to present the alleged evidence rather than assert that it exists. I get information from legitimate sources, evidently you do not. I do not get information from frauds with fake doctorates like Kent Hovind or websites run by conservative Christians with no formal scientific education like AiG. If you actually attended high school, you would have learned how to discern which sources are credible.
buttface112211 3 months ago
@buttface112211 So you wont accept any evidence from anyone who disagrees with what you believe. What a joke.
That's like if I said that I won't listen to any religous arguments unless they come from a Bishop or a Priest. That would be stupid, the arguments and evidence stand or fall on their own merit.
DarthHater100 3 months ago
@DarthHater100 hey your right no one should not accept evidence from people that don't agree with them..like shockofgod blocking anyone that does or neph or any christain vid on youtube for that matter.do you ever stop and listen to your own bullshit?or are you just fond of irony ?And ya why won't you answer his question?were you the one just bitching about back petaling?dont fall off your bike.
alltiedup217 3 months ago
@alltiedup217 Ha ha very funny. We both know my bike doen't have peddles.
DarthHater100 3 months ago
@DarthHater100 peddles and training wheels, but yet you still think you can ride along with the big boys.Tell ya what just answer the guys question.might be nice for a change,why not try the truth and say you just don't know.Be a nice change for gawd done it.
alltiedup217 3 months ago
@DarthHater100 darthhater(shockofgod) like to call people dishonest..but look at this
2Wow, that's the best atheism has to offer? Some weak British put-down?I'm sorry you come from such a stupid country, where I come from, AMERICA, " opps didnt you say you were from Canada?
3boystiedup217 is a DISHONEST TROLL and a LIAR. I have never said I was not from Canada. In fact it says right on my channel that I am FROM Canada.busted..lie lie lie.
alltiedup217 3 months ago
@alltiedup217 Excuse me, TROLL, but unless you can prove I said, quote: "I am not from Canada", then you have not proven any dishonesty on my part. You are the one who is the dishonest LIAR. You go around taking what I say OUT OF CONTEXT and the fact is, you can never prove who I am. I am ANONOMOUS. The only thing that you know for a fact is that I am DarthHater100 and I am from Canada. That's it. Everything else is just your unfounded conjecture, which means you haven't exposed ANYONE.
DarthHater100 3 months ago
@DarthHater100 LOL i'll post a link to the vid you said it on LOL lies to cover more lies how very christian of you.I can prove you lie under whatever name you hide behind,and have done so time and time again.OUT OF CONTEXT the famous cry of the christain ..LOL You said you were "from america" then when i called you out on it you lied and said you didn't say it ..just like you said you didn't know who shockofgod was put have his vids on your ch.you just got owned yet again..its getting to easy
alltiedup217 3 months ago
@DarthHater100 oh anyone that want to see the proof darhthater100 aka shockofgod lied and is still lying go to pg 11 of the comments of this very video.that dip shit is what they call proof and evidence.
alltiedup217 3 months ago
@buttface112211 As far as the body of evidence against evolution, I'm not here to do your homework for you. Look it up yourself. I love how you play stupid, that you are COMPLETELY unaware of this growing problem for evolution. Atheists LOVE the god vs evolution thing, and I'm sure you have had more than your share of ID.
You probably know all the arguments and evidence etc, so it is highly DISHONEST to PRETEND to be ignorant. I highly doubt you are UNAWARE of the body of evidence.
DarthHater100 3 months ago
@DarthHater100 I have proof and evidence that you are..first you said you didnt know how he was then you use his arguements and re post his vids,then you say your from the U.S. then you say your from Canada,then you say you dont block comments then you say you block comments from atheists ..one thing is for sure tons of proof and evidence your full of shit.And you say not to believe anything i say...owned again dipshit
alltiedup217 3 months ago
@DarthHater100 The geologic column is nothing but a concept to illustrate the various geological time periods. Do you expect to see a cliff with labels marking the cambrian era and the fossils in it? That's ridiculous. Your ignorance regarding geology does not surprise me because it is typical of young-Earth creationists. Evolution is not contingent on textbooks. Inform me of these empirical scientific observations that prove the Bible, this should be interesting.
buttface112211 3 months ago 2
@buttface112211 the geologic column is nothing but a concept to INDOCTRINATE. And NO, I dont expect to see a cliff with labels. That would be RIDICULOUS. But that is EXACTLY what you find in the textbook. That is because evolution is MAKE-BELIEVE. There is no ACTUAL evidence, just stuff constructed by people.
Empirical evidence for a creator: a creation. But it is not just one evidence but a corroboration of evidence, that all points to a God. Specifically the God of the BIBLE.
DarthHater100 3 months ago
@DarthHater100 The geologic column is a concept, it is a scientific diagram the represents particular geological era's chronologically. Conceptual diagrams are a fundamental and ubiquitous aspect of science education because they directly analogous to whatever it is intended to illustrate or represent. If your entire objection is contingent on your disapproval of scientific diagrams, then you are ignorant of not only educational techniques but science as well; they are necessities.
buttface112211 3 months ago
@DarthHater100 He uses the Bible to prove the Bible, is that not flawed logic?
buttface112211 3 months ago
@buttface11221 like the evolutionist uses the textbook to prove evolution. "Oh, oh, in my TEXTBOOK there is a colorful DRAWING of the geologic column with all of the fossils perfectly arranged to fit my belief". But the textbook is the only place it exists. If not tell me where to go to see the geologic column in person? There is no such place. In fact ALL of the evidence I have ever heard of only exists in the textbook or if it is empirical, it ACTUALLY proves the Bible. Prove me wrong.
DarthHater100 3 months ago
@DarthHater100 Darthhater100 is aka shockofgod this is one of his many troll accounts.He has been asked to provide proof and evidence that he is not but he can't.all he does is say your gay..
alltiedup217 3 months ago
@DarthHater100 LEE STROBLE lol the guy with a master in law!!!great guy to get your science from LOL josh mcdowell got his bullshit degree from a jesus horse shit U. LOLOL no wonder your so ignorant about anything scientific.maybe the guys you mentioned should get an education LOL you such a tard shock.
alltiedup217 3 months ago
If asked what evidence I had that anti-sandwichism was accurate and correct, I'd be HONEST and admit there isn't any it's just my opinion. Why won't atheists likewise be honest and admit they have no evidence. And talk about DISHONEST. Why didn't he have the GUTS to face shockofgod instead of TruthfulChristian. It's as dishonest as if I recorded a debate between myself and a 2 year old on evolution, then used that to say I out-debated donexodus on his best subject. Typical DISHONEST ATHEIST.
DarthHater100 4 months ago
@DarthHater100 you have shown time and time again how dishonest you are.You say your from the U.S.then sometimes you say your from CAnada sometime you use the name shockofgod then you use this darthhater .
Darthhater100 is shockofgod I have asked him for proof and evidence that is accurate and correct that he is not but he can't do typical dishonest christian
alltiedup217 4 months ago
@alltiedup217 I have provided proof and evidence a million times but boystiedup217 is a DISHONEST internet TROLL and a LIAR. I have never said I was not from Canada. In fact it says right on my channel that I am DarthHater100 and I am FROM Canada, thus proving yet again that I am not this shockofgod fellow. You haven't exposed ANYONE.
DarthHater100 4 months ago
@DarthHater100 proof you lie your quote "@DarthHater100 @UnknownUserName4267 Wow, that's the best atheism has to offer? Some weak British put-down? Pip-pip cheerio gov'ner!! I'm sorry you come from such a stupid country, but where I come from, AMERICA, the greatest country in the world," see you lie again and again you can't hide your lies anyone can look them up.You lose yet again lie for jesus shock.
alltiedup217 4 months ago
@alltiedup217 I still never said I don't come from Canada.
DarthHater100 4 months ago
@DarthHater100 humm moron see where its says you come from america..what does that mean..does it mean your full of shit ?cause it sure as shit does not mean you come from canada...sad more lies to cover your lies.
alltiedup217 4 months ago
@alltiedup217
DarthHater100 4 months ago
@alltiedup217 I just meant I wish I was from USA, just like ALL Canucks do. Btw I see on your channel that you are from Canada as well. Maybe we know each other in 'real life' up here in the great white north. Perhaps I pass you on my skidoo on my way to work. I bet you have a dogsled!
DarthHater100 4 months ago
@DarthHater100 no what you did was lie then more lies then lies to try to cover up your lies.but that a christian for ya what is in print can mean whatever they want it to.just like your bible.Your not from Canada shock every one knows it.You have no proof or evidence that you are not shockofgood internet bullshit artist.
alltiedup217 4 months ago
@alltiedup217 why should anyone believe you, an ATHEIST. You know atheists are statistically the most DISTRUSTED group in all history for a reason. Your supposed quotes of me are simply fabrications made by you, a DISHONEST internet TROLL. Please leave me alone.
DarthHater100 4 months ago
@DarthHater100 no in fact most of the prison population is made up of christians they have a much higher divorce rate and .as for fabrications ,yet another lie anyone that wants can go look for themselves and see I have not lied..unlike you shock its all you seam ta do.or go to your ch and see your lies.
alltiedup217 4 months ago
@alltiedup217 Okay you want proof I'm Canadian, ask me something only a Canadian would know.
DarthHater100 4 months ago
@DarthHater100 more lies keep trying fool
alltiedup217 4 months ago
@alltiedup217 Here I'll start, and see if you are a REAL Canadian. Who started the Red-River rebellion?
DarthHater100 4 months ago
@DarthHater100 why to you always try to change the subject provide proof and evidence you are not shockofgod.still nothing been asking you for weeks.
alltiedup217 4 months ago
@alltiedup217 So I guess your Canadianness is a LIE and mine is is not. The answer's Louis Riel. Sorry FAIL.
DarthHater100 4 months ago
@DarthHater100 LOL no its not you moron LOLOL epic fail provide proof and evidence you are not shockofgod why do you keep changing the subject..are you afraid
alltiedup217 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@alltiedup217 I'm not changing the subject at all. You are calling into question whether I am shockofgod and I have told you over and over that my proof is that on my channel it says I am DarthHater100 and I am from CANADA. Now I've proved ABSOLUTELY this is true by beating you in a Canadian knowledge contest. THis proves that YOU are the liar, not me.
DarthHater100 4 months ago
@DarthHater100 Hudson's Bay Company sold its territorial rights thats what stared it btw dip shit
alltiedup217 4 months ago
@alltiedup217 I said WHO, sorry you already lost that question
DarthHater100 4 months ago
@alltiedup217 Times up I win again proving you being Canadian as a lie once again. The Blue Nose skooner is on the dime. You should know that if you are Canadian, you see dimes every day. You must be a LIAR.
DarthHater100 4 months ago
@DarthHater100 Proverbs 13:5 A righteous man hates lying: but a wicked man is loathsome, and comes to shame.opps guess you haven't got to that part yet.
alltiedup217 4 months ago
@alltiedup217 Okay I'll give you another shot. Who was the first Primeminister of Canada. You have one minute.
DarthHater100 4 months ago
@alltiedup217 Sorry fail again. Yet again, just like in the Atheism vs God argument I am totally destroying you in knowledge only a Canadian would know. This prove's my profile as true and YOURS as a lie. The first primeminister is John A Macdonald dummy. Okay, one more to seal the deal and PROVE for all to see that you are a LIAR about being Canadian. What is on the Canadian Dime. You have one min. to prove yourself as Canadian.
DarthHater100 4 months ago
@DarthHater100 ya that sounds just like you shock you can't answer simple questions so you change the subject.I notice more and more people you chat with are waking up to how you really are.Your a bullshitter who will soon have to abandon this nick of your and move to yet another.BTW i never said i was from CANADA you said i was just like you said you were american. your a liar and people know it.prove me wrong provide proof and evidence that you are not shockofgod..still waiting
alltiedup217 4 months ago
@DarthHater100 here you lie and say you don't know shockofgod i guess in attempt to hide who you are you quote "@alltiedup217 Who is this shockofgod person you have mistaken me for?" lie lie lie LOL owned again dip shit.
alltiedup217 4 months ago
@DarthHater100 "I'd be HONEST and admit there isn't any it's just my opinion."
Wow, you don't sound very honest. I wonder if your agnostic about the magical tea pot, Santa clause or the invisible unicorn. The fact that you took this seriously and thought he doesn't have the balls to take on ShockOfGod is very telling of you.
DonExodus is obviously making fun of Creationist debating tactics. I
RuinSonic 4 months ago
@RuinSonic Hahahaaa. . .whoo. . hahaha!! LOL Santa Clause? I think we've found another wittle atheist with Santa Clause syndrome. Did wittle RuinSonic have a bad Christmas?
BTW I know DonExodus is making fun of Creationist debating tactics, in the same way I would make fun of Michael Jordan by me doing 10 perfect slamdunks. In your face Jordan, you score lots of baskets, loser!
Oh know, DonExodus is making fun of how Christians out-debate atheists. Look out.
DarthHater100 4 months ago
@DarthHater100 I was actually comparing a magical sandwich to Santa Clause and you are still offended, wow. I don't think Santa is equivalent to God btw.
Are you seriously defending ShockOfGod and comparing him to Michael Jordan? That is asinine. There are way better theistic debaters than ShockOfGod. To everyone but you he's simply a joke and nobody takes him seriously.
RuinSonic 4 months ago
@RuinSonic Why are atheist so obsessed with Santa LOL? Did wittle RuinSonic cry when he found out Santa wasn't real? LOL
And ya I guess it's not fair to compare Shock to Jordan. Michael Jordan doesn't have 20,000 subscribers. You say he is a joke, so why is the Atheist Experience afraid to debate him on their show?? Dillahunty would get PWNED!
DarthHater100 4 months ago
@DarthHater100 "Why are atheist so obsessed with Santa LOL?"
Stfu, your just parroting your moronic friend ShockOfGod. I use these examples for the same reason lazy ass Christians use the holocaust for every moral argument. How about 9/11 truthers?
Plenty of atheists do debate your top runner WLC, so there's no reason why they would be afraid of Shock. My guess is people don't want to give attention to the mentally handicapped, ShockOfGod.
RuinSonic 4 months ago
@DarthHater100 darhthater is shockofgod half or your subs are from your troll accounts like this one.Then you run around calling people dishonest ,then you accuse them of being gay then run off and say you won a debate.your like the bird playing chess with a human .the bird shit all over the brd knocks over all the pieces then flys home to say he won a game of chess.How is the view from the short bus shock?
alltiedup217 4 months ago
This is too much fun!!
brmadman4455 4 months ago in playlist More videos from DonExodus2
sounded like two retards arguing about jelly sandwiches, white bois. "my jelly sandwhich cures cancer," retard. the other white boy "no show me evidence of of jelly curing cancer," lolz. he actually ask to see evidence of that, what a retard.
PhainHmoobLee 4 months ago
You are confusing yourself.
watch?v=qZev7hb40uk
JungleJargon 4 months ago
It's an easy question to answer. What historical evidence is there? What are eye witness accounts are there? Are there any conflicting accounts or records of this? Has this stood the test of time? The answer comes from the question. The belief comes from the interpetation of the evidence.
The caller is entertaining in the childish and sophmoric antics, It's nothing more than an ambush of semantics and framing. I am unfamiliar with schlockofgod but if that are his tactics he deserves this
flippyflappy1 4 months ago
@flippyflappy1 replace schlockofgod with truthfulchristian- I did not know who was who being unfamiliar with both caller and the one called.
flippyflappy1 4 months ago
hahahah, THIS IS HILARIOUS.
DeathMetalMorty 4 months ago
@humanequilibrium- The Christian faith makes it mandatory for you to believe in Jesus Christ as a ransom sacrifice. Define ransom sacrifice, and explain how Jesus equates to such. If you can't do that after trying, will you give up your belief?
Knowing and believing are two totally different things. Out of the 2 which would you rather have? Once you enter the realm of knowing, it's not a belief anymore.
RODikUlus 4 months ago
this is a bad argument(the magic sandwich)...really! is this all u have lol! the creationist is right there is a lack of evidence! you can't disregard that a god walked the planet one day that completely changed history "drastically" in Europe .. if Jesus didn't exist... why was there such a drastic influence from a entity that didn't exist ???
humanequilibrium 5 months ago
@humanequilibrium Some people are stupid. That's why.
IKillBabyKittensLOL 5 months ago
@IKillBabyKittensLOL atheist just like there world with no accountability that's what it boils down to....no god there for no accountability.... i can do anything without repercussions yaaaayyy
humanequilibrium 5 months ago
@humanequilibrium If accountability to you is children burning forever in a lake of fire then I rather avoid YOUR idea of accountability. :)
IKillBabyKittensLOL 5 months ago
@IKillBabyKittensLOL no children will be burning, adults that have wasted this gift of life...and adults that have evil in there hearts....you see in order for there to be a heaven there has to be a hell...you cant have a negative electron without a positive proton both give each other meaning and value!
humanequilibrium 5 months ago
@humanequilibrium- You just said that YHWH couldn"t have been a force of good/positivety until the beautiful cherub changed his motivation to become Satan the Devil. So, until Satan made that decision, YHWH couldn"t have been good, as that's what his nature couldn't have been "from the beginning"., since according to the storybook, Satan never existed "in the beginning". Hmmm. Interesting that you agree with me here.
The biblical story Jesus never existed, but yes, many guys were named Yeshua
RODikUlus 5 months ago
@humanequilibrium-Also, in your statement, you implied that YHWH needed to create a being ( Satan) in order for Him ( YHWH) to have a true value and meaning. WOW!!
If Jesus wasn't a ransom sacrifice, then you're wasting time even believing such a story. Explain clearly how the biblical Jesus was a RANSOM & a SACRIFICE. I'll show how the logic is completely flawed. Chrisitian faith hinges on Jesus being a ransom sacrifice, so if he's not, then why believe it any further?
RODikUlus 5 months ago
@humanequilibrium -How can ANYONE say the original cherub later called Satan the Devil, was beautiful, if he was supposedly created by YHWH himself? If so, then what was ugly when Satan was supposed to be beautiful, so that it was properly gauged that Satan 1.0 was beautiful?
You expressed the balance ( + or - ) that occurs in the uni/multiverse reality. You proved that your beLIEved in bible stories don't dwell in reality-more like a comic book realm called imagination of goat herders!
RODikUlus 5 months ago
@humanequilibrium - In case you want to delete your comment you stated in response to IKillBabyKittensLOL, "no children will be burning, adults that have wasted this gift of life...and adults that have evil in there hearts...you see in order for there to be a heaven there has to be a hell...you can"t have a negative electron without a positive proton both give each other meaning and value!"
Who created Hell- God? OK. Then WHEN did God create Hell?
RODikUlus 5 months ago