I hate when people say that the banana fit perfectly in your hand,what about midgets,what about people like yao ming and oneil, dont people know that there are many kinds of bananas and not all of them fit in your hand, what about those twin bananas? lol have you people seen a twin banana?
I don't understand the terminology: Why is creation by humans (100% natural) using natural processes not a natural explanation for the creation of an image?
I love this guy! Finally a strong, logical voice facing off against these moronic, stupid, fact denying, deity-worshiping dip-shits. He and Bill Maher have balls and brains. Creationists are so stupid it's unimaginable that they can deny, avoid and side-step so much fact that flies in the face of their little fairy tale. Thank you Thunderf00t! Keep posting those videos on behalf of a growing population worldwide increasingly fed up with these dangerous and hate spreading nutbars!
@GrandmasterBBC And what more stupid is that the banana both proves evolution [things can adapt] and is designed [by our agriculture]. I a sense, yes, lions design zebras and cheetahs and gazelles 'make' each other faster. But there is no deciding here, just the fact of common descent and the force of selection on random mutations is INDEED enough to account for all living species. Creationists are to evolutionary biologists as a mosquito is to an air force pilot.
I LOVE this series and this part is so right on the money! Science Vs. believers. Major fail for the believers as usual. They fall flat on their face. I LOVE IT.
If you understand Lithuanian I would send you a very good video, made by one christian school boy who clearly explains Darwin`s theory and comparing it with Bible and conversely - story of the Beginning written in the Bible comparing with Darwin`s theory :D But I suppose you don`t understand. Only this video shows that you are wrong and the information in this video tells why science can not be without religion and religion needs for science. :)
,,The foolishness of God is wiser than man’s wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man’s strength."
They claim that they are clever and smart, but they trust on Wikipedia where information is mostly unreliable :D Very clever :D And event more... They claim that they are so clever, but they even can`t explain how the evolution started, they can`t tell us what was happening before the Planck time (speaking about Big Bang which was). :D
@anoniukas Evolution started with the self-replication ability of DNA. Yes noone at this time can say what happened before the big bang, nor can you. But it does not mean it didn't happen because there's enough evidence to be almost certain that it did, and that's why scientists hold that claim true. Wikipedia is has references which you can look up yourself. It might not be always 100% accurate but it's darn better than creationist websites full of bullshit
@wHisperis001 Where did I say that it wasn`t the Big Bang? And do you know what christianity tells about this now? Of course I can`t say, but I know that some scientists (ps, atheists) tried to do this. And you know what? They started to talk about the divine power, about God even if they didn`t believe to God presence. And about evolution: where from and how DNA got ability of self-replication? And how did DNA start-up and where from?
@anoniukas Well according to christianity everything was created in 6 days so the big bang theory doesn't really fit in with christianity. Self-replication is a purely physical and chemical event. There are thousands if not millions of ways for structures like DNA to form without self-replication, but it takes only 1 time to get it right to kick start it. Lab experiments have showed how similar molecules (RNA) have been produced by purely natural means. How exactly it was we can't say
@wHisperis001 The creation strory in the Bible is an allegory. About self-replication you`re right. A studied it in biology lessons since 6 or 7 class. But my question is how everything started specifically? ,,where from and how DNA got ability of self-replication? And how did DNA start-up and where from?"
And several more questions: Why it takes only 1 time to get it right to kick start it from millions of ways for structures like DNA to form without self-replication?
@wHisperis001 Why everything happened just on right time and in right way (in only one) if everything happens accidentally? Why we can think if we are just consequences of these accidents? Why do we want for some freedom, love, understanding, the light in our lifes? Why do we recognize ourselves as a free creators? (that was a little digression, but I think, these three last questions are important too :) ).
@anoniukas Not sure if you can call it an accident. I'm not actually that sure if there are that many ways something similar to DNA can be structured because I've read about it long ago but anyways yea takes 1 time to kickstart it and it's not really accidental because if you imagine thousands of places where this can happen and give millions of years for it, eventually the small probability of it happening becomes inevitable.
@anoniukas And it's possible that life arose several times if not many many times, but if let's say one arises much sooner than the other 1, the molecules or the already living organisms are more and when competition for energy comes into play it's very possible that previous life forms absorbed the new ones or the new ones quickly died out because couldn't compete with superior life.
@anoniukas "Why do we want for some freedom, love, understanding, the light in our lifes?" What does that have to do with the way we got here? How is love freedom and understanding is somehow explicitly linked to deities? Love is simply a feeling, a very strong one at that, but you don't have to attribute it to gods. Many animals have complex feelings, and as our brains ar the most complex of all, it's natural we have very strong emotions, which for a lack of better word we call love
No, Mr. Comfort. A painting IS ABSOLUTELY NOT proof of a painter.
It is only because the existence of PAINTERS is already proven, and that they are ALREADY PROVEN to produce paintings, that you can attribute paintings to them.
Type into the search bar "Rational response debate with kirk cameron" to watch the whole debate with kirk and ray, and listen to the absolute bullshit they come out with. Your guaranteed to laugh.
Kent Hovind is in jail because he was trying to warn the world that their is a dark agenda out there that aims at destroying the morality of every man woman and child making them into beasts. In fact Darwinism states that we evolved from mere beasts. God says you should hold your head up because you have been given free will by an all powerful all wise and all loving Creator. Jesus answered "Woe to them who worship the Created (Monkeys/Primates) rather then the Creator."
I am so fed up with this utter stupidity of religion. I feel as I am the only one I know with a love and passion for the truth. Something is very wrong with our education system. i feel very lost in this country of dumbasses but I guess I have to remember, it's not their fault. They were indoctrinated as a child and it just shows how reluctant they are to admit the truth of evolution and give up that false comfort. that control over people, just shows the sheer ugliness of religious dogma.
Not entirely sure, but some of these points seemed off:
- shot glasses were designed to hold liquids (unless I'm confused?) so yes, there is a reason it holds liquid so elegantly.
- rocks are an absolute proof of a rock-making force... Cooling magma, volcanic eruptions, etc. .
- and yes, gravity would be the reason for the perfectly spherical mass, but since we know the universe hasn't always existed, we know that something (force, deity, etc) must have created these at some point.
- yes, however, the glass was designed to fit the liquid. Ironically, this is the usual creationist argument flipped (creationist says the Earth was designed to fit us, Atheist says we were designed to fit the Earth.) So then, have scientists drawn the 'bogus' conclusion that we must be designed to fit the Earth?
- the event is the designer- who disagrees?
- I'm suggesting that unless the universe is co-eternal, it must have been created by something. Otherwise it would not exist.
- er, no, scientists don't say we were designed to fit the earth. Scientists say we evolve to fit the earth's conditions.
- meaningless semantics. The creationists imply intend and try to compare it with the unintentional product of an event.
- as long as you don't suggest that the, say, unintentional emergerence of the universe as we know it now from, dunno, electromagnetic waves or whatever has anything to do with a god I don't mind you suggesting that. ;D
- it's the same thing- natural selection is system that designs animals to fit their environment. It might not be a 'sentient designer', but it's products are certainly designed.
- meh, I don't want to delve too deeply into philosophy, but all the same, the event could easily be construed as divine intervention. It's just a very weak argument.
- I wouldn't rule God out, but no, I'm not suggesting that. Just that it's silly to use gravity and mass as a proof against a deity.
- no, not the same thing. Design is done by a designer who as an intent. Evolution simply fits what matches and survives best without a designer intentionally overseeing and producing the whole thing.
- constructed, indeed. Pulled out of thin air, made up, invented, applied to an event like saying the wizzard of Oz made it happen
- not proof against a deity but no proof whatsoever of a deity.
Did Thunderf00t record his voice outside at night or something? I swear I hear crickets in the audio track with his voice. Listen closely at the beginning.
I've always wondered what a creationist would think a non-designed tree looks like.
I have opinions on what a designed tree would be like: it wouldn't be very complex and maybe not even require to shed its leaves 'cos the snow would be designed to slide right off. It would be impervious to disease and all of them would be fruit-bearing (with a money tree thrown in here and there for fun). And it would be naturally talking-snake repellent.
@character654 Ah, another person thinking they know all about thermodynamics. Second law only applies to closed systems, and the Earth happens to be an open system, which is the only way that photosynthesis is possible. But nice try.
@character654 You don't have to "dazzle" anyone. We know the universe isn't a closed system because stars form. If everything gravitates towards disorder then everything should be breaking down. Yet we can see stars forming all over the sky. The death of a star - a supernova - is what sparks the creation of other stars. It's the circle of life and it doesn't only apply to Earthly life.
@character654 You should know by now that you can't just spew crap without evidence. I gave evidence against the second law of thermodynamics working in an open system, which means it's your turn to come up with something to dispute that evidence. If you can't, then I win. If you can, then we move on and keep producing evidence until someone wins. You're new to this, aren't you? Arrogance can only bring you so far. Beyond that you need proof.
@character654 Or you could ignore me and stick your fingers in your ears, which seems to be an overused creationist response to evidence. Take a college class on thermodynamics and then get back to me. EVERYTHING doesn't gravitate to disorder, only things that don't accept outside energy. Energy and matter can't be destroyed in case you didn't know. Energy simply changes states, from mechanical to thermal for example.
@character654 So what you're saying is that the second law violates the first law since the amount of energy in the universe is depleting and everything is gravitating towards disorder?
@wasdare32 What are you talking about? The 1st LoT states that the change in the internal energy of a system = the amount of heat supplied to the system, minus the amount of work performed by the system on its surroundings (dU=δQ-δW). The 2nd LoT says that heat always flows to regions of lower temperature, never to regions of higher temperature without external work being performed on the system. There is no violation here.
@character654 Matter and energy do not get destroyed. The amount of energy and matter that's in the universe is unchanging. Degrading is different from destroyed. Without outside energy to keep it from degrading, most materials will degrade. But life gets energy from the sun, that's how plants make their own food. Thermodynamics doesn't apply to lifeforms.
@character654 You get old and die because of the telomerase at the end of your DNA. It gets damaged with every cell divide and doesn't repair itself. But good try. You're saying that your body doesn't become more orderly as you grow older, until the point that you start going downhill with old age? We get energy from outside sources, meaning that life is perfectly capable of becoming more orderly over time.
@wasdare32 "the telomerase at the end of your DNA. It gets damaged with every cell divide and doesn't repair itself." Here I thought it would evolve into something better.
@character654 Evolution isn't perfect. It doesn't think and has it no idea that the teromerase is flawed. You don't think that God would have fixed it if he had anything to do with making humans? According to religion God is perfect. Why would he make imperfect beings?
@character654 I've come to the conclusion that you must have been dropped as a baby and hit your head on a Bible, and thus are incapable of intelligent thinking. Good day.
@wasdare32 Thermodynamics VERY STRONGLY applies to life. Life constantly elevates itself to higher energy stable metastable-states at the cost of lowering local multiplicity while the total multiplicity in the universe still keeps rising. That is - life in no way violates the laws of thermodynamics and in fact uses them to it's advantage, biochemists typically use binding constants for protein interactions which are completely based on boltzmann's distribution.
I am a sceptic to all that creationist and atheist bullshit because they both fail to answer the so called "Big questions" such as consciousness and why did this universe come into being in the first place.From a scientific and philosophical point of view We fail to find the "truth" regarding the universe. Please correct me if I am wrong :}
I promise you, one day when man has gone to space, developed space travel, gone to other worlds, extends his knowledge of the universe, physics, chemistry, biology and math.THEN WHEN SCIENCE REACHES ITS PINNACLE, IT WILL PROVE WHETHER THERE WAS A CREATOR...
(in other words, you won't be alive when it happens)
@PhysiologicAli Atheism doesn't make a comment about anything about life or anything but the lack of belief in a deity or deities. There are theories, actual theories as opposed to the "general idea" that's used every day, on the consciousness and how the universe come into being. And the things that science can't answer, someone is looking for the answer instead of going "Oh well. I don't know so I'm going to say a higher being created it." Scientists never stop looking for answers.
@PhysiologicAli What do you consider to be a full answer? Define it. Science shows that the universe originated from one origin that 14 billion years ago which was infinitely dense with an extreme range of energy levels available to each particle and it then used that energy to EXPAND. What are we? We are star dust, we are carbon formed in a very well studied process within a star which then is known to explode and spread this matter. What is incomplete about this explanation?
Last year in an argument with a creationist he presented the watchmaker argument. I asked him if his watch is male or female? When he said "male I suppose..." I told him mine is a female, took the watch off my hand asked him to do the same. And then I told him- now let's wait for them to reproduce...
It’s a good anti-creationist video, beside one thing: the experiment with glass and some transparent liquid appers to be a hidden advertisement of alcohol consumption. Anyway, I don’t really care about creationists, who consume alcohol.
A building is 100% scientific proof that there is a building. Anything beyond that is interpreting because of past experience yelling you someone built it. However, you don't have past experience of life being designed and it is only room for interpretation. And a bad comparison at that.
@b33p3rz Wow that doctor really didn't understand Evolution did he? We interpret watches need watchmakers because we see them being made by them. We never see life being created by nothing, ironic Creationists say 'Something can't come from nothing.' when that is exactly what they are implying. Cells evolve because 1.They are actually alive, contrary to inanimate watches and 2. Because the cells back 4 billion years ago were much more primitive.
@TheLordSod 2 years ago I was an atheist and I did believe evolution is true but I was not anywhere near the point of studying and learning it for myself, and I had actually asked my mom's doctor (Now my family doctor) "How can you not think evolution is true if you're a doctor?" and he took off his watch and asked me which is more complex, a single cell, or his watch. I said cell, and he put the watch in a bag, and asked me how long it would take for that to evolve.
@b33p3rz that is such a massive fallacy it hurts to read.
I've read several books about evolution, i reccomend you do the same if you do not believe it to be true.
I highly recomend "The greatest show on earth" by Richard Dawkins. It's aimed at people who aren't biologists, and clearly lays out the proof for evolution
@TheLordSod That is such a massive fail it hurts to read..I see that the continuation of that post doesn't have the reply tag on it but that's still no excuse. I do know The Theory of Evolution is true, that is just a comment regarding how my doctor used such a stupid argument before I even knew about the debate itself in detail. One thing I cannot see though is how you thought I don't understand the science of it through my comment...
Respond to this video... I couldn't think of anything to say back :( It made me feel so bad, and 2 years later I find that exact argument online and see how much bullshit it actually is. If I had just known what he was trying to mean exactly, I could have not looked like such a dumb kid.. :(
There are examples of evolution...to an extent. Selective breeding in dogs is through human intervention but it proves that traits are passed on to future generations. Hence the survival of the fittest. The animals and organisms that have the traits necessary to survive long enough to reproduce.
Topics: WINNING ARGUMENTS FOR CREATIONISM-EVOLUTIONISM DEBATE (See Subchapter 10.2.2, Chapter 10, of Part Two.), The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balancedway.yolasite.com
balancedway1.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
"You say that, If I, Stumbled on a watch I'd assume it had a watchmaker, That a muffin presupposes a baker, So we must agree sooner or later, That this proves there's a creator. So if I put my foot in a stinker, You'd assume the existence of a sphincter, Thus you don't need to be a great thinker, To conclude that God's a bum, Which negates the words of Genesis 1," - Excerpt from '10 Foot Cock and a few Hundred Virgins', by Tim Minchin
Most creationists are fundamentalist protestants. I'm an eastern Orthodox Christian and believe fully in evolution and don't see it as contradicting my faith.
If we believe God is in everything then why can't we also believe that He is also in evolution. That evolution is the way He creates. If God did create earth with all it's beauty then He is an Artist. Artist take their time with their art and let it change, transform and evolve into it's final stage of perfection.
My anthropology teacher tells me that "an object exists, therefore there must be a maker" is a fallacy of the converse. It's like saying "santa leaves presents under the xmas tree, therefore if you find presents under the xmas tree, santa did it"
"oh yeah we don't believe in a sunset making god" the problem with that statement is that creationists DO believe in a sunset making god. this is what makes it so hard to argue with them.
At 3:08 this is really random but it reminded me of something in English when we studied Greek Mythology. If Poseidon is god of water, and Zeus is god of the sky, who the fuck controls the rain?
@pubuman Well Cronos was the King of the Titans. Who imprisoned his mom and dad (Zeus and the other Olympians technical grandparents) because their parents locked them down below. They sort of traded places and Cronos ate all of his babies to prevent a prophecy from becoming true (His children would rise against him). Unwittingly he ate a rock instead of baby Zeus and it was the fact that he tried to prevent the prophecy that made it come true.
@pat5168 OH yeah I remember that story .... silly Cronos! Also ... this sounds far more interesting than the Abrahamic god ... cos there is only one of him .. and he's omnipotent ... :(
@pubuman The best thing to do is to just lay low and slowly but steadily remove religion from clouding any more people's minds. It will work, but a head on struggle? That would last for centuries. Just ask Israel about what happens when two people who know their cause is right and the only way fight each other head on.
@UnchainTheNight1 You kidding me? these numbers are to low, they are are about 0 in a sextillion of a sextillion of a sextillion of a sextillion of a sextillion of a sextillion of a sextillion of a sextillion of a sextillion of a sextillion of a sextillion.
This nimrod Comfort quotes Newton ("This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being") who couldn't figure out how the orbits of our planets stay stable and declared "god did it".
Then Laplace came along, left out the "god did it" crap and actually solved the problem.
Newton would be embarrassed as hell and here's Comfort quoting him.
The whole design requires a designer argument is circular isn't it? It requires you to know that everything is necessarily designed, and under this hypothesis, the designer of nature would be god, taking us back to the beginning. That's how I see it anyway
0:53 - 1:07 you actually made them sound good =0
RottingCorpse100 3 days ago
I hate when people say that the banana fit perfectly in your hand,what about midgets,what about people like yao ming and oneil, dont people know that there are many kinds of bananas and not all of them fit in your hand, what about those twin bananas? lol have you people seen a twin banana?
Smokemalboro 3 days ago
I don't understand the terminology: Why is creation by humans (100% natural) using natural processes not a natural explanation for the creation of an image?
guillatra 4 days ago in playlist Why do people laugh at creationists?
@guillatra Because nature itself didn't create the painting. It's not organic. It is man-made. What's so difficult about that?
ciciomax 3 days ago
@ciciomax so an anthill is not natural eighter?
guillatra 5 hours ago
I love this guy! Finally a strong, logical voice facing off against these moronic, stupid, fact denying, deity-worshiping dip-shits. He and Bill Maher have balls and brains. Creationists are so stupid it's unimaginable that they can deny, avoid and side-step so much fact that flies in the face of their little fairy tale. Thank you Thunderf00t! Keep posting those videos on behalf of a growing population worldwide increasingly fed up with these dangerous and hate spreading nutbars!
MapleBluesBay 1 week ago in playlist More videos from Thunderf00t
So...much...win...
Novac3721 1 week ago
Creationist stupidity aside.... Dude! How you dare pouring a clear liquid in a Jameson glass?
PumoooX 1 week ago
how did you make that bug evolusion thing it looked cool
alexanderhulse 1 week ago
That glass is not designed to hold clear spirits and you know it.
IoEstasCedonta 1 week ago
It is clear that the banana was "designed", because it is the perfect shape to form a nice tight seal in Ray Comfort's rectum.
GrandmasterBBC 1 week ago in playlist Why do people laugh at creationists? 14
@GrandmasterBBC And what more stupid is that the banana both proves evolution [things can adapt] and is designed [by our agriculture]. I a sense, yes, lions design zebras and cheetahs and gazelles 'make' each other faster. But there is no deciding here, just the fact of common descent and the force of selection on random mutations is INDEED enough to account for all living species. Creationists are to evolutionary biologists as a mosquito is to an air force pilot.
aaqucnaona94 5 days ago
I LOVE this series and this part is so right on the money! Science Vs. believers. Major fail for the believers as usual. They fall flat on their face. I LOVE IT.
Tommyr 2 weeks ago
@Thunderf00t While I really love your videos, I think comparing the talking moron to hitler was kind of inappropriate
Davidseljak1 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
If you understand Lithuanian I would send you a very good video, made by one christian school boy who clearly explains Darwin`s theory and comparing it with Bible and conversely - story of the Beginning written in the Bible comparing with Darwin`s theory :D But I suppose you don`t understand. Only this video shows that you are wrong and the information in this video tells why science can not be without religion and religion needs for science. :)
anoniukas 2 weeks ago
Wasn't Albert E a pantheist?
zoidberg96913 3 weeks ago
ray comfort has drank far too much southen comfort
johnjoeba 3 weeks ago
,,The foolishness of God is wiser than man’s wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man’s strength."
They claim that they are clever and smart, but they trust on Wikipedia where information is mostly unreliable :D Very clever :D And event more... They claim that they are so clever, but they even can`t explain how the evolution started, they can`t tell us what was happening before the Planck time (speaking about Big Bang which was). :D
anoniukas 3 weeks ago
@anoniukas Evolution started with the self-replication ability of DNA. Yes noone at this time can say what happened before the big bang, nor can you. But it does not mean it didn't happen because there's enough evidence to be almost certain that it did, and that's why scientists hold that claim true. Wikipedia is has references which you can look up yourself. It might not be always 100% accurate but it's darn better than creationist websites full of bullshit
wHisperis001 3 weeks ago
@wHisperis001 Where did I say that it wasn`t the Big Bang? And do you know what christianity tells about this now? Of course I can`t say, but I know that some scientists (ps, atheists) tried to do this. And you know what? They started to talk about the divine power, about God even if they didn`t believe to God presence. And about evolution: where from and how DNA got ability of self-replication? And how did DNA start-up and where from?
anoniukas 3 weeks ago
@anoniukas Well according to christianity everything was created in 6 days so the big bang theory doesn't really fit in with christianity. Self-replication is a purely physical and chemical event. There are thousands if not millions of ways for structures like DNA to form without self-replication, but it takes only 1 time to get it right to kick start it. Lab experiments have showed how similar molecules (RNA) have been produced by purely natural means. How exactly it was we can't say
wHisperis001 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
anoniukas 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@wHisperis001 The creation strory in the Bible is an allegory. About self-replication you`re right. A studied it in biology lessons since 6 or 7 class. But my question is how everything started specifically? ,,where from and how DNA got ability of self-replication? And how did DNA start-up and where from?"
And several more questions: Why it takes only 1 time to get it right to kick start it from millions of ways for structures like DNA to form without self-replication?
anoniukas 2 weeks ago
@wHisperis001 Why everything happened just on right time and in right way (in only one) if everything happens accidentally? Why we can think if we are just consequences of these accidents? Why do we want for some freedom, love, understanding, the light in our lifes? Why do we recognize ourselves as a free creators? (that was a little digression, but I think, these three last questions are important too :) ).
anoniukas 2 weeks ago
@anoniukas Not sure if you can call it an accident. I'm not actually that sure if there are that many ways something similar to DNA can be structured because I've read about it long ago but anyways yea takes 1 time to kickstart it and it's not really accidental because if you imagine thousands of places where this can happen and give millions of years for it, eventually the small probability of it happening becomes inevitable.
wHisperis001 2 weeks ago
@anoniukas And it's possible that life arose several times if not many many times, but if let's say one arises much sooner than the other 1, the molecules or the already living organisms are more and when competition for energy comes into play it's very possible that previous life forms absorbed the new ones or the new ones quickly died out because couldn't compete with superior life.
wHisperis001 2 weeks ago
@anoniukas "Why do we want for some freedom, love, understanding, the light in our lifes?" What does that have to do with the way we got here? How is love freedom and understanding is somehow explicitly linked to deities? Love is simply a feeling, a very strong one at that, but you don't have to attribute it to gods. Many animals have complex feelings, and as our brains ar the most complex of all, it's natural we have very strong emotions, which for a lack of better word we call love
wHisperis001 2 weeks ago
@anoniukas Neither can you.
falynsoul 2 weeks ago in playlist Why do people laugh at creationists?
@ Anyone. What's the arrow to the knee joke or what does it mean? I'm new to the YouTube world.
paramattic70 3 weeks ago
@paramattic70 its not a youtube thing, its from the new elder scolls game. google it and you'll find it.....
TheStJames23 3 weeks ago
i used to be christian but then i took an arrow in the knee
diegonikki 1 month ago 9
@diegonikki might as well go back to be christian if you pull jokes like that >:[
Snaggbash2000 1 month ago
@diegonikki i used to be a christian and make arrow in the knee jokes but then i took a vagina to the penis and brain cell to the head
edwinm1 1 day ago
BAHAHAHAHAHAH TOOOO FUNNY THE ROCK PART
Red023b 1 month ago
i love these videos >:DD
batista6224 1 month ago
Nooo! You didn't get it at all! Rocks are a 100% absolute scientific proof of rockers!
MidnightSt 1 month ago in playlist Why do people laugh at creationists?
2:16
No, Mr. Comfort. A painting IS ABSOLUTELY NOT proof of a painter.
It is only because the existence of PAINTERS is already proven, and that they are ALREADY PROVEN to produce paintings, that you can attribute paintings to them.
exists(P) ^ causes(P,Q) -> exists(Q)
You CANNOT simply reverse the implication and say
exists(Q) -> exists(P) ^ causes(P,Q)
IMPLICATION DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY.
rkyeun 1 month ago
liquids? lol you must have meant liqours
idealsAREisomorphic 1 month ago
2:34 Hey I was at that rock before when I lived in California! Both before and after it fractured :)
unsf8518 1 month ago in playlist Why do people laugh at creationists?
Type into the search bar "Rational response debate with kirk cameron" to watch the whole debate with kirk and ray, and listen to the absolute bullshit they come out with. Your guaranteed to laugh.
happyinoldtrafford 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Kent Hovind is in jail because he was trying to warn the world that their is a dark agenda out there that aims at destroying the morality of every man woman and child making them into beasts. In fact Darwinism states that we evolved from mere beasts. God says you should hold your head up because you have been given free will by an all powerful all wise and all loving Creator. Jesus answered "Woe to them who worship the Created (Monkeys/Primates) rather then the Creator."
JamesRideout123 1 month ago
I am so fed up with this utter stupidity of religion. I feel as I am the only one I know with a love and passion for the truth. Something is very wrong with our education system. i feel very lost in this country of dumbasses but I guess I have to remember, it's not their fault. They were indoctrinated as a child and it just shows how reluctant they are to admit the truth of evolution and give up that false comfort. that control over people, just shows the sheer ugliness of religious dogma.
FellOnSoundGarden 1 month ago
Not entirely sure, but some of these points seemed off:
- shot glasses were designed to hold liquids (unless I'm confused?) so yes, there is a reason it holds liquid so elegantly.
- rocks are an absolute proof of a rock-making force... Cooling magma, volcanic eruptions, etc. .
- and yes, gravity would be the reason for the perfectly spherical mass, but since we know the universe hasn't always existed, we know that something (force, deity, etc) must have created these at some point.
Cheeso33 2 months ago
@Cheeso33:
- his point was that the LIQUID was not designed to fit perfectly into the glass. ;)
- the point of the creationists about the making force is that it it a designer with an intend. The rocks are just a byproduct of an event.
- are you suggesting that a plant like that would have existed before the universe and gravity came into play? o_O
Trampadoo 2 months ago
@Trampadoo
- yes, however, the glass was designed to fit the liquid. Ironically, this is the usual creationist argument flipped (creationist says the Earth was designed to fit us, Atheist says we were designed to fit the Earth.) So then, have scientists drawn the 'bogus' conclusion that we must be designed to fit the Earth?
- the event is the designer- who disagrees?
- I'm suggesting that unless the universe is co-eternal, it must have been created by something. Otherwise it would not exist.
Cheeso33 2 months ago
@Cheeso33:
- er, no, scientists don't say we were designed to fit the earth. Scientists say we evolve to fit the earth's conditions.
- meaningless semantics. The creationists imply intend and try to compare it with the unintentional product of an event.
- as long as you don't suggest that the, say, unintentional emergerence of the universe as we know it now from, dunno, electromagnetic waves or whatever has anything to do with a god I don't mind you suggesting that. ;D
Trampadoo 2 months ago
@Trampadoo
- it's the same thing- natural selection is system that designs animals to fit their environment. It might not be a 'sentient designer', but it's products are certainly designed.
- meh, I don't want to delve too deeply into philosophy, but all the same, the event could easily be construed as divine intervention. It's just a very weak argument.
- I wouldn't rule God out, but no, I'm not suggesting that. Just that it's silly to use gravity and mass as a proof against a deity.
Cheeso33 2 months ago
@Cheeso33:
- no, not the same thing. Design is done by a designer who as an intent. Evolution simply fits what matches and survives best without a designer intentionally overseeing and producing the whole thing.
- constructed, indeed. Pulled out of thin air, made up, invented, applied to an event like saying the wizzard of Oz made it happen
- not proof against a deity but no proof whatsoever of a deity.
Trampadoo 2 months ago
I found the Mars Maker OAO It's Nestle OwO
Raithial 2 months ago
Bod The Builder ! Im shittin myself hahaha! YOURE A LEGEND
danfucker 2 months ago in playlist Why do people laugh at creationists?
Did Thunderf00t record his voice outside at night or something? I swear I hear crickets in the audio track with his voice. Listen closely at the beginning.
ManDudeYeah 3 months ago
I've always wondered what a creationist would think a non-designed tree looks like.
I have opinions on what a designed tree would be like: it wouldn't be very complex and maybe not even require to shed its leaves 'cos the snow would be designed to slide right off. It would be impervious to disease and all of them would be fruit-bearing (with a money tree thrown in here and there for fun). And it would be naturally talking-snake repellent.
P0weredByPie 3 months ago
Everything gravitates toward disorder.
Proof of evolution: Hack on everyone else.
character654 3 months ago
@character654 Ah, another person thinking they know all about thermodynamics. Second law only applies to closed systems, and the Earth happens to be an open system, which is the only way that photosynthesis is possible. But nice try.
wasdare32 3 months ago
@wasdare32 If you can't dazzle them with brilliance...
character654 3 months ago
@character654 You don't have to "dazzle" anyone. We know the universe isn't a closed system because stars form. If everything gravitates towards disorder then everything should be breaking down. Yet we can see stars forming all over the sky. The death of a star - a supernova - is what sparks the creation of other stars. It's the circle of life and it doesn't only apply to Earthly life.
wasdare32 3 months ago
@wasdare32 Baffling them with BS really helps.
character654 3 months ago
@character654 You should know by now that you can't just spew crap without evidence. I gave evidence against the second law of thermodynamics working in an open system, which means it's your turn to come up with something to dispute that evidence. If you can't, then I win. If you can, then we move on and keep producing evidence until someone wins. You're new to this, aren't you? Arrogance can only bring you so far. Beyond that you need proof.
wasdare32 3 months ago
@wasdare32 The second law of thermodynamics is applicable in any system.
character654 2 months ago
@character654 Or you could ignore me and stick your fingers in your ears, which seems to be an overused creationist response to evidence. Take a college class on thermodynamics and then get back to me. EVERYTHING doesn't gravitate to disorder, only things that don't accept outside energy. Energy and matter can't be destroyed in case you didn't know. Energy simply changes states, from mechanical to thermal for example.
wasdare32 2 months ago
@wasdare32 I'm familiar with the first law of thermodynamics, what of it?
character654 2 months ago
@character654 So what you're saying is that the second law violates the first law since the amount of energy in the universe is depleting and everything is gravitating towards disorder?
wasdare32 2 months ago
@wasdare32 What are you talking about? The 1st LoT states that the change in the internal energy of a system = the amount of heat supplied to the system, minus the amount of work performed by the system on its surroundings (dU=δQ-δW). The 2nd LoT says that heat always flows to regions of lower temperature, never to regions of higher temperature without external work being performed on the system. There is no violation here.
Moshikashitenai 1 month ago in playlist Why do people laugh at creationists?
@wasdare32 I did not say the energy is depleting, the matter is degrading.
character654 1 month ago
@character654 Matter and energy do not get destroyed. The amount of energy and matter that's in the universe is unchanging. Degrading is different from destroyed. Without outside energy to keep it from degrading, most materials will degrade. But life gets energy from the sun, that's how plants make their own food. Thermodynamics doesn't apply to lifeforms.
wasdare32 1 month ago
@wasdare32 So I won't get old and die then?
character654 1 month ago
@character654 You get old and die because of the telomerase at the end of your DNA. It gets damaged with every cell divide and doesn't repair itself. But good try. You're saying that your body doesn't become more orderly as you grow older, until the point that you start going downhill with old age? We get energy from outside sources, meaning that life is perfectly capable of becoming more orderly over time.
wasdare32 1 month ago
@wasdare32 "the telomerase at the end of your DNA. It gets damaged with every cell divide and doesn't repair itself." Here I thought it would evolve into something better.
character654 1 month ago
@character654 Evolution isn't perfect. It doesn't think and has it no idea that the teromerase is flawed. You don't think that God would have fixed it if he had anything to do with making humans? According to religion God is perfect. Why would he make imperfect beings?
wasdare32 1 month ago 2
@wasdare32 Look at what mankind has done to himself, One can't blame that on God.
character654 1 month ago
@character654 What? Mankind has nothing to do with our genetic problems. We're all born with it, so we must have been "created" with it.
wasdare32 1 month ago
@wasdare32 That's a good one LOL.
character654 1 month ago
@character654 I've come to the conclusion that you must have been dropped as a baby and hit your head on a Bible, and thus are incapable of intelligent thinking. Good day.
wasdare32 1 month ago
@wasdare32 Not clever answer :D
anoniukas 3 weeks ago
@wasdare32 Thermodynamics VERY STRONGLY applies to life. Life constantly elevates itself to higher energy stable metastable-states at the cost of lowering local multiplicity while the total multiplicity in the universe still keeps rising. That is - life in no way violates the laws of thermodynamics and in fact uses them to it's advantage, biochemists typically use binding constants for protein interactions which are completely based on boltzmann's distribution.
psychologicalshock 1 month ago
@psychologicalshock i hope that person you are trying to explain understand..... :D great job btw.
kaunghtut 1 month ago
id just love it if one of the builders was there, stood up and said 'yo'
jackelver 3 months ago
I am a sceptic to all that creationist and atheist bullshit because they both fail to answer the so called "Big questions" such as consciousness and why did this universe come into being in the first place.From a scientific and philosophical point of view We fail to find the "truth" regarding the universe. Please correct me if I am wrong :}
PhysiologicAli 3 months ago
@PhysiologicAli
I promise you, one day when man has gone to space, developed space travel, gone to other worlds, extends his knowledge of the universe, physics, chemistry, biology and math.THEN WHEN SCIENCE REACHES ITS PINNACLE, IT WILL PROVE WHETHER THERE WAS A CREATOR...
(in other words, you won't be alive when it happens)
straighter100 3 months ago
@PhysiologicAli Atheism doesn't make a comment about anything about life or anything but the lack of belief in a deity or deities. There are theories, actual theories as opposed to the "general idea" that's used every day, on the consciousness and how the universe come into being. And the things that science can't answer, someone is looking for the answer instead of going "Oh well. I don't know so I'm going to say a higher being created it." Scientists never stop looking for answers.
HimesInu 3 months ago in playlist Why do people laugh at creationists?
@PhysiologicAli What do you consider to be a full answer? Define it. Science shows that the universe originated from one origin that 14 billion years ago which was infinitely dense with an extreme range of energy levels available to each particle and it then used that energy to EXPAND. What are we? We are star dust, we are carbon formed in a very well studied process within a star which then is known to explode and spread this matter. What is incomplete about this explanation?
psychologicalshock 1 month ago
@psychologicalshock A smile face :(
TheRedAzuki 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
... you had to use the comparison to Hitler
whothefuckisereg24 3 months ago
EVOLUTION... not EVILution... gosh.
RishadanPort 3 months ago
Last year in an argument with a creationist he presented the watchmaker argument. I asked him if his watch is male or female? When he said "male I suppose..." I told him mine is a female, took the watch off my hand asked him to do the same. And then I told him- now let's wait for them to reproduce...
ebouchelle 3 months ago
Heh.. I saw that debate.. They lost miserably.
ApatheticOmniscience 3 months ago
I love how at the end of the video he decide's to get shit faced to prove one of his points.
MuffintopWarrior 3 months ago in playlist Why do people laugh at creationists?
It’s a good anti-creationist video, beside one thing: the experiment with glass and some transparent liquid appers to be a hidden advertisement of alcohol consumption. Anyway, I don’t really care about creationists, who consume alcohol.
Scorpionwacom 4 months ago
Twit. How wretched to hear him quote Einstein. I could laugh if not for crying. Einstein would probably find it humorous though.
3000silence 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
At 3:32, what is that?
63nbell 4 months ago
At 3:32, what is that?
63nbell 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
3:44 a starship? That's fucking awesome.
shagoosty 4 months ago
3:44 a starship? That's fucking awesome.
shagoosty 4 months ago
Anybody know the name of the evolution computing algorythm he used in the video ? Or any other similar ones ?
TheUnchainedMind 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
A building is 100% scientific proof that there is a building. Anything beyond that is interpreting because of past experience yelling you someone built it. However, you don't have past experience of life being designed and it is only room for interpretation. And a bad comparison at that.
pat5168 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@FalseProphet501 Yeah no.
pat5168 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@b33p3rz Wow that doctor really didn't understand Evolution did he? We interpret watches need watchmakers because we see them being made by them. We never see life being created by nothing, ironic Creationists say 'Something can't come from nothing.' when that is exactly what they are implying. Cells evolve because 1.They are actually alive, contrary to inanimate watches and 2. Because the cells back 4 billion years ago were much more primitive.
pat5168 4 months ago
Builders building buildings.
FalseProphet501 4 months ago
The stopwatch argument is such bullshit.
TheLordSod 5 months ago in playlist Why do people laugh at creationists?
@TheLordSod 2 years ago I was an atheist and I did believe evolution is true but I was not anywhere near the point of studying and learning it for myself, and I had actually asked my mom's doctor (Now my family doctor) "How can you not think evolution is true if you're a doctor?" and he took off his watch and asked me which is more complex, a single cell, or his watch. I said cell, and he put the watch in a bag, and asked me how long it would take for that to evolve.
b33p3rz 4 months ago
@b33p3rz that is such a massive fallacy it hurts to read.
I've read several books about evolution, i reccomend you do the same if you do not believe it to be true.
I highly recomend "The greatest show on earth" by Richard Dawkins. It's aimed at people who aren't biologists, and clearly lays out the proof for evolution
TheLordSod 4 months ago
@TheLordSod That is such a massive fail it hurts to read..I see that the continuation of that post doesn't have the reply tag on it but that's still no excuse. I do know The Theory of Evolution is true, that is just a comment regarding how my doctor used such a stupid argument before I even knew about the debate itself in detail. One thing I cannot see though is how you thought I don't understand the science of it through my comment...
b33p3rz 4 months ago
Respond to this video... I couldn't think of anything to say back :( It made me feel so bad, and 2 years later I find that exact argument online and see how much bullshit it actually is. If I had just known what he was trying to mean exactly, I could have not looked like such a dumb kid.. :(
b33p3rz 4 months ago
5:20
one tequila, two tequila, three tequila...
gamrgrl312 5 months ago
There are examples of evolution...to an extent. Selective breeding in dogs is through human intervention but it proves that traits are passed on to future generations. Hence the survival of the fittest. The animals and organisms that have the traits necessary to survive long enough to reproduce.
NaivaxWolf 5 months ago
@NaivaxWolf Research "Podarcis Sicular evolution" from 1971 :)
Pod Kopiste and Pod Mcaru are the two islets involved in the experiment, which proved evolution.
TheLordSod 5 months ago in playlist Why do people laugh at creationists?
@TheLordSod Ooo, an even better example! 8D
NaivaxWolf 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NEW BOOK (Donated) For Debates And Governance
Topics: WINNING ARGUMENTS FOR CREATIONISM-EVOLUTIONISM DEBATE (See Subchapter 10.2.2, Chapter 10, of Part Two.), The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balancedway.yolasite.com
balancedway1.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
announcements-balancedway.yolasite.com
TheServiceWeb 5 months ago
You must all accept bob the builder as your lord and saviour.
Deshaies7 5 months ago
I think this one is my absolute favorite, so far.
CaptSeriouspants 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
GrahamChapman 5 months ago
hehehe, he said erected :3
ValugaTheLord 5 months ago
1:03 Good point... Said by kirk kameron itself!
pochopaz7381 5 months ago
chugging whiskey!
DUCKY3654 5 months ago
OMFG Bob the Builder!
17thSHIT 5 months ago
@UvenYakinoff
Yeah...?
That's one of YOUR socks.
Notice the all caps?
odinata 5 months ago
Butter fly in the sky i can fly twice as high just take a look its in a book a reading rainbow
skinlesscougar 5 months ago in playlist Why do people laugh at creationists?
@UvenYakinoff
"@odinata uve been saying that same boring meaningless line for 3 years
u cant beat any argument"
You can't form a sentence, and you formed this account on March 24, 2011.
But you've been watching me for 3 years?
I think we know who the sock account is.
I've never used more than one account.
odinata 5 months ago
@UvenYakinoff
You've been saying nothing for a while.
You can't seem to beat this argument.
odinata 5 months ago
Did anyone else sing along to Bob The Builder?
hughes7520 5 months ago
Well, the liquid fits exactly in the shotglass which means..... pipedown. Shot for evolution. :D
FreeTheenkur 5 months ago
Those religious creeps should be held accountable for crimes against humanity for hindering people's thinking ability. That is a huge crime
ToutCQJM 5 months ago
God may be real,but religion is ridiculously and obviously false.
Enzo2284 5 months ago
Quote mining! Like lying except more underhanded. :)
Ackers555 5 months ago
Bob the builder. Can we fix it? Yes we can!
deadbabyfromspace 5 months ago 6
Most creationists are fundamentalist protestants. I'm an eastern Orthodox Christian and believe fully in evolution and don't see it as contradicting my faith.
If we believe God is in everything then why can't we also believe that He is also in evolution. That evolution is the way He creates. If God did create earth with all it's beauty then He is an Artist. Artist take their time with their art and let it change, transform and evolve into it's final stage of perfection.
God is an evolutionary
eilirudy 5 months ago
dad:who ate the last klondike bar!
Me:god did it.
werewolf873 6 months ago 3
Kirk Cameron is the epitome of a washed-up child actor.
napalmanger 6 months ago 2
2:22 That isn't a painting; it's a print. So I guess there wasn't a painter after all.
IseeRightThrough2you 6 months ago 43
Comment removed
BlackFloyd94 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Clevernessinadvocatingbadcausesoftenliestauntinglyjustbeyond
thebelieverscapacityforrefutationthedialecticofthedisbelieverseldomlendsitself
tospiritualthingsItisnotsimplythatbelieversshouldshrink
automaticallyfromencountersbutthatthenonbelieveroftendoesnot
reallycaretoknowHeseekstohavehissporttoworkupasemanticalsweat
graspingwhtatpleasureshecanfromalifefilledwithforlornnessOtherswhoare
havingtheirfirstwilddoubtsofdoubtsareanxioustoputdownanychallengetotheirdisbelief.
mollymu1 6 months ago
6:21 HAHAHAHA!! YES WE CAN, i enjoy your videos!
K1ll4laughs 6 months ago
So, good old Bob created the universe is what creationists are saying?
CyrusKosloff 6 months ago
YES WE CAN!!!
MeepullStewray 6 months ago in playlist Why do people laugh at creationists?
If I had to watch all these creationist videos, I'd probably need a couple of shots too.
gamingguy90 6 months ago
@gamingguy90
I'll pass you the bong. You're gonna need it.
bobdull420 6 months ago
Ha ha ha! Oh! That part with Hitler... Ohhhh that was so awesome. XD
angelwings1086 6 months ago
Math runs the world, not god
Nixom1334 6 months ago
The comparison videos between Comfort and Hitler is genius.
Draginvry2 7 months ago
bob the builder :D
dopeyafro 7 months ago in playlist Why do people laugh at creationists? 2
My anthropology teacher tells me that "an object exists, therefore there must be a maker" is a fallacy of the converse. It's like saying "santa leaves presents under the xmas tree, therefore if you find presents under the xmas tree, santa did it"
vk45de 7 months ago
WTF?!?! bob the builder? LMFAO! i dont wana taste bob the builder...
camelCaseFTW 7 months ago
"oh yeah we don't believe in a sunset making god" the problem with that statement is that creationists DO believe in a sunset making god. this is what makes it so hard to argue with them.
khajiit92 7 months ago
Did You just... Godwin creationists?
Low blow. Loooow blow! ;)
~Sylv
Sylvine 7 months ago
At 3:08 this is really random but it reminded me of something in English when we studied Greek Mythology. If Poseidon is god of water, and Zeus is god of the sky, who the fuck controls the rain?
pat5168 7 months ago in playlist Why do people laugh at creationists?
@pat5168 Their mommies
pubuman 7 months ago
@pubuman They imprisoned their mommies.
pat5168 7 months ago
@pat5168 Aw .. that wasn't very nice of them :(
pubuman 7 months ago
@pubuman No it's okay, they ate them all except Zeus so Zeus led a rescue mission and then all of them got revenge.
pat5168 7 months ago
@pat5168 Cool! Zeus seems like a pretty cool character ... wait the mommies ate the babies?
pubuman 7 months ago
@pubuman Well Cronos was the King of the Titans. Who imprisoned his mom and dad (Zeus and the other Olympians technical grandparents) because their parents locked them down below. They sort of traded places and Cronos ate all of his babies to prevent a prophecy from becoming true (His children would rise against him). Unwittingly he ate a rock instead of baby Zeus and it was the fact that he tried to prevent the prophecy that made it come true.
pat5168 7 months ago
@pat5168 OH yeah I remember that story .... silly Cronos! Also ... this sounds far more interesting than the Abrahamic god ... cos there is only one of him .. and he's omnipotent ... :(
pubuman 7 months ago
@pubuman Yeah it does, and hopefully in a hundred years it will be called Christian Mythology. >.>
pat5168 7 months ago
@pat5168 Heh .. well, I'll drink to that! But somehow I don't think that's gonna happen ...
pubuman 7 months ago
@pubuman The best thing to do is to just lay low and slowly but steadily remove religion from clouding any more people's minds. It will work, but a head on struggle? That would last for centuries. Just ask Israel about what happens when two people who know their cause is right and the only way fight each other head on.
pat5168 7 months ago
Your glass argument is clever. I shall use it.
Tamizushi 7 months ago in playlist Why do people laugh at creationists?
you wold love to see him hear him touch him taste and smell him now wouldnt you ?
mikerozo 7 months ago
Right, and the chances of a Creationist getting 3 facts correct in a row are about 1 in 10^1000000000
UnchainTheNight1 7 months ago 20
@UnchainTheNight1 You kidding me? these numbers are to low, they are are about 0 in a sextillion of a sextillion of a sextillion of a sextillion of a sextillion of a sextillion of a sextillion of a sextillion of a sextillion of a sextillion of a sextillion.
FlyingSpaghettiMoner 7 months ago
@UnchainTheNight1 I'm finding a creationist and paying him 10 bucks to constantly say basic facts. Wait... they don't know any facts..
RyanKaufman 4 months ago in playlist Why do people laugh at creationists?
This nimrod Comfort quotes Newton ("This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being") who couldn't figure out how the orbits of our planets stay stable and declared "god did it".
Then Laplace came along, left out the "god did it" crap and actually solved the problem.
Newton would be embarrassed as hell and here's Comfort quoting him.
Comfort is a snake oil salesman.
fusedchromosome 7 months ago
The whole design requires a designer argument is circular isn't it? It requires you to know that everything is necessarily designed, and under this hypothesis, the designer of nature would be god, taking us back to the beginning. That's how I see it anyway
GarretsShadow 7 months ago
great explanation.
jakebrigand 7 months ago
My goodness, That Ray Comfort and the Cameron person are certified idiots.
MrJIMMY3009 7 months ago
They are using a basic fallacy:
Basically They say :
If We know (from observation)
Creator -> Creation (We know painters make paintings and factories make coke cans)
Then
Creation-> Creator
A->B does not mean B->A...
GreatThunder1 7 months ago
But can it blend?
nibbers97 7 months ago in playlist Why do people laugh at creationists?
I have yet to find a creationist who actually knows what evolution is
rememberthename33 8 months ago
and when i see God .. i assume there must have been a creator for that too
mbglosser 8 months ago
just look at ray comfort. he IS a salesman. look at his hand movements
JohnF30Music 8 months ago
Ray "dis" Comfort
orangemod 8 months ago
This sucks!
desasterz 8 months ago
@desasterz retard...
MagMag96 8 months ago
@MagMag96 No really, he did a poor job. I respect other anti creatinists work. This was poor.
desasterz 8 months ago
best 1 so far
vk45de 8 months ago