Wrong .... - Hows this book made? - By papers - where does the paper come from? - a tree - where does the tree come from - this planet - where does this planet come from - the universe - where does the universe come from - GOD....
*Facepalm* ... religious people say God made it like that when they dont know the answer on something...
/watch?v=AZk6nZGH9Xo&feature=channel_video_title watch this video about the complexity of one species the butterfly this is just one and there are 9 million species like this,then imagine the abilities of the intelligent designer!
Blah, blah, blah,... yeah, yeah we've all heard the fucking other tape recorders spouting the atheism is not a religion line. So how come atheists like you are just as sickening, as intolerant, as certain, as the religitards that you consider yourself to be so superior to? Fucking hypocrite.
@pompousprick He preaches his view, you OBVIOUSLY are preaching yours. Don't call atheists sickening or intolerant, do you know him? Do you know me? I think you may be the hypocrite in this conversation.
@TheBoobsBlog First of all, I didn't call atheists sickening or intolerant. I said atheists like him. Do I know him, personally no I don't, though maybe you haven't noticed he has a very large number of videos publicly preaching his generalized hatred of people who don't think like him. I couldn't give a shit if someone is an atheist, a Christian, a Muslim, whatever.. it's bigots that get my goat. And this guy is a text book bigot. And no I don't know you and also didn't say anything about you.
Oh my Athiests are more annoying then relious people shoving their belief down everyones throat! What you guys don't get is your just as closed minded as the religious people because you believe there is no God! There is no proof that there is no God like there is no proof for God! Honestly athiests are the most closed minded arrogant people i have ever met, so annoying! Athiesm is a religion your believeing in something without any evidence you're all hipocrites!
@sonofapitch100 Wow, now that I've read this comment I actually think you are even more mentally challenged then I thought when I read you'r reply to my comment.
Atheism = non-religious, if you say being non-religious is a religion you must be really stupid.
@sonofapitch100 you clearly just don't understand do you? first off, we are not hypocrites, because we believe in common sense, we believe there is an answer to everything, unlike religious people who blame things they cant explain on "god", we don't believe in or worship anyone, nor do we put all of our faith in a single book with these ridiculous fantasy stories. So how can you even sit there and call us hypocrites?
@sonofapitch100 Not really,atheism is pretty much learning towards the truth therefore a misleading truth because we don't see no god up there. Religion on the other hand is a straight out lie when it comes to the existence of god. REJOICE ATHEISTS! We ain't no liars!
As soon as you said "Islam is of peace", I was not interested in listening to any more of your videos. It is not scientifically possible for a population so big to behave the same way and think the same way. NOT possible. If you really believe in science--then you would understand that. Just as everyone on this planet has unique fingerprints, same can be said about their way of thinking. Some may share something in common, but not in its entirety.
@ShooterCinema Does FPS game need to do something with this video? But I did enjoy reach :D... But it has nothing to do with this video :), just liked it is all :D.. I guess I trolled? my bad :D...
@omgiownk But i do disagree on some parts. You said that there "aren't any schools teaching atheism with public money." Directly, you are right. Schools that take federal tax money don't teach creationism, but evolution. Indirectly teaching the children the value of logic and independent thought in the search for knowledge.
JESUS CHRIST, HIS CATHOLIC-UNIVERSAL-APOSTOLIC CHURCH, SACRAMENTS, THE BIBLE, MIRACLES, HEALINGS, ST. MARY APPARITIONS, MESSAGES FROM HEAVEN, SIGNS IN 2011 ARE NOT A MYTHOLOGY BUT THE REALITY !!!
With or without religion, wouldn't people still be the same today? People naturally crave, want, need, and other things. To err is to be human. So instead of blaming religion for humanity's faults, why don't you look deeper? Christians may have done bad things in the past, but they are normal in our modern day, for example. Even if the world was atheist, there would still be hate, violence and other bad things, albeit in a different form.
Christianity defies human nature: from an atheists point of view christianity would simply have been created by a man. But, if you were to make a religion would you make every natural instinct a sin? Also, it defies society, at the time of course the dominent societies were Roman and Jewish, i wont go into what they were like but they were nothing like the Christian philosophy. Jesus, had no education and therefore should have been susceptable to human nature and society
people hate the truth don't they? lolz you religious people are fucking retarded, where's the evidence? "this book" Who wrote the book? "men" How do you know it's true? "we don't, we just have faith" *palms face*
@MrROTD go and made a book just like the Torah, Bible, or Quran if you are so truthful! howcome no one has attempted to make their own "religious book" just as good as the Bible, Torah, or Quran? if an athiest really wants to disprove God, he or she could do it with ease; all he or she has to do is write a book just as good as the 3 books mentioned or write an even better book! yet they cant b/c books dont get better than those 3. one day you will regret athiesm...
yep i quote SHIT right that was proclaimed and ordained by God, ALONE, not apes, that darwin injected in your veins!! just try and do good, follow Gods 10 commendments and see how nice life can be. Jesus did it and succeeded.
@31Godbless how do you know it was proclaimed and ordained by God, ALONE? Do you have any evidence to back up that claim? yup, Jesus did it and he got nailed to a cross XD If you really need a god or divine inspiration to figure out something so basic and simple like don't do to others what you don't want they do to you, you sir have a problem not us. Besides the 3 first commandments are just spooky language to scare ignorant superstitious people and keep them in line, the rest is obvious
you use senses right? are your senses sharp like that of a dog? i dont think you use your both side of the brain. You use the left brain and i use the both!!! and calling me dumbass shows ur maturity
According to the Bible Masturbation is a sin !. So hope to meet you all in the hell. don't forget to accompany the Pope ( the local agent of God )... Amen !
Atheism is a psychological disorder: Atheists are so fearful, threatened, untrusting of their surroundings they are looking to be sure of anything. They would rather 'know' they are going to die and it is all over, than hear a thousand Bible verses that say trust God and you will go to eternal Heaven. They are only willing to acknowledge and know what their five senses tell them, anything else is too uncertain and possibly too painful; too many times the ice has proven to be too thin to walk on.
@theelovelive ... Im sorry? Im atheist and I can honestly say none of that crap that you just made up applies to me. You are ludicrously delusional. I am absolutely not imperialistic (five senses). I use reason and reason tells me that you are the one with the psychological disorder. So you can stop spewing out bullshit to protect yourself. I would rather know that I am going to die then hear fictional verses saying to give "god" unconditional trust. Question your surroundings you hypocrite.
the scene with jesus and the rich tax collector is a good example that free will was inevitable. The rich guy just couldnt imagine it, giving up all his hardlaboured riches, luxuries etc for the poor. Okay science e.g the least people who are experts in engineering science, bank managers, top earners, arent they all 95 % greedy and arrogant? its the fact
@Pedulla88 What is stupid is; at some time in the distant past there was no life in the universe - just elements and chemical compounds. Somehow, these chemicals combined and came to life.
well said indeed you are very smart. The less people know the truth. I dont need no scientifical proofs to believe in the bible. The least things i read as a young kid was proof enough. Now Im a grown man, and God is still with us!!
"well said indeed you are very smart. The less people know the truth. I dont need no scientifical proofs to believe in the bible. The least things i read as a young kid was proof enough. Now Im a grown man, and God is still with us!!"-31Godblss
This is all that has to be said. You read a fictional story made by either a madman or for fun as a "CHILD" and you still beleive it.
We cant prove the existence of god by go and watch him somwhere. But we can prove the existense of the laws of nature. So using the law of logic to prove GOD we could say that if there is a material existense there have to be a imaterial existence to. Becouse the one can't exist without the other. Like: dark-night, male-female etc... So the spirit world exists for 100%
atheism IS a religion. Religion- a set of beleifs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe. Atheism is the BELEIF that there is no god.
Noun: The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, esp. a personal God or gods.
be·lief/biˈlēf/
Noun: 1. An acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists. 2. Something one accepts as true or real; a firmly held opinion or conviction.
this guy 100 percent takes it in d ass!!! the ego on these atheist wow!lol u guys no atheist r super smart & everbody else is dumb they just don't get it you can't understand gods creations 4 2 understand u would have 2 b it's equal since u not & there's only 1 god just look like the dick u r lol
@bolurinc You spell like a retard so you'r probably the dumbest person here and no one claimed that atheists are smarter than religious persons (except for the research done that showed that the average non-religious person have a higher IQ then the average religious person, and you just prooved that to be correct in you'r case)
@eddson11 The fact that you can't spell you're right, and the fact that your grammar is awful suggests to me that athiests aren't that smart after all! Where was this test conducted if it even happened?
This guy is only full of sattire and word plays. He didn't say one thing that is philosophically sound or profound. So, in the end, we are all evil little bastards driven by our own motives. We just employ different ways to justify ourselves.
Well, someone said it best when they said ignorance is bliss. Enjoy your
Godless, ignorant life, then, O atheist. Certainly, you don't know nor care what all the fuss is about regarding religious tension. I'm afraid atheists have trouble seeing the big picture. While you don't have SOMEONE to worship you do have SOMETHING(S) to worship, which is why atheist qualifies as a religion after all; you worship science, a self-ordained (humanly) thing. It is ironic that you also cannot see science.
@bizarreabomination WOW, that plane flew 100,000 feet over your head! Light is an ubiquitous truth. The behaivors of fuel atomization, air flow, torsional forces etc. of an engine are a physical system of forces of nature. The engine is a product of science - a composition, an application - by way of methodologies. Science is a system of knowledge, a methodology. They are related but not synonymous. That is the point.
@9b8 Are all Theists as offensive as you? Science may not be visible (if you discount any method of storing the information either on paper, in the brain etc.), but it can be tested to see if it correct. Turning on a light switch, starting a car or giving blood are all ways of testing if the science behind them is a fact or a work of fiction. If the light comes on when the switch is flicked, there's your proof that physics is real.
@bizarreabomination I don't consider myself remotely as "offensive" as the average Atheist. Absolutely, science is a practice in which we humans develop through observation, based on facts (both of strong and weak forms) and evidence. But it is important to constantly respect that science is one discipline of the human condition, not "everything" or "truth" in itself. There are ways to "test" the Bible to see if it is correct even within the science discipline, and it is being done.
@bizarreabomination I am sure you are all ears! Haha. Unfortunately, even if I had all the answers WITH permutations of facts, your belief (an aspect of knowledge, a human condition) is still dependent. But if you do some research over time, you will begin to find much on this topic! Consider this video, n-syxid39kg, as a novel starting point. That video won't give you THE answers you are hopeing for, but that is the way knowledge seeking goes in all things. There is no magic answer in anything.
@9b8 That video was a disappointment, just someone trying to sell their book, and attempting to make the book of Genesis coincide with scientific opinion. As you say, belief is still dependant, but this opens a can of worms: If there WAS proof of God, there would be no free will. Faith is required.
@bizarreabomination I pretty much knew you would be left disappointed, which is why I warned that it wont in any way give answers. I too am not convinced by his arguments per se. But on another note, the recent "advancements" in physics are much more intriguing to say the least - the dark matter and dark energy they have now discovered and universally accept. The fact that the universe is made up of only 25-30% of traditionally known matter. As for the "dark" stuff, they are currently clueless.
@9b8 "As for the "dark" stuff, they are currently clueless."
Well, there wasn't a wheel until someone invented it. With a bit of luck they'll figure it out eventually. Personally I think they could make better use of their time than trying to figure out the origins of the universe. Medical achievements like advanced prosthetics or cures for diseases would be nice, or maybe better power sources, or perhaps ways to end world hunger. Dark matter research is just an excercise in ego inflation.
HOW and WHY did they invent the wheel? Do consider this carefully and resist the simple and obvious answer for you wouldn't then discover the incredible process! Some of the most profound discoveries have came from unlikely sources. Consider nuclear power and its potential for good OR bad. The medical field would be better off with more "big thinkers." Dark research will have as much impact as did Galileo's research.
Just an example of a technology that did not exist, then did exist later. The same path dark matter research is hoped will follow, rather than becoming a dead end.
"Dark research will have as much impact as did Galileo's research"
@bizarreabomination The wheel invention was not "just an example" of a technology coming into existence; it didn't just happen instantly. Time. It is the most slippery dimension for us to manage. It exists in all things. Some things erode through time while others evolve. Indeed I make a bold claim about dark research, but ah, I have faith in it, for there is much inclination. Suggestively, faith does have substance and isn't as queer as the stereotypical Atheist claims. Science is driven by it.
@9b8 Hang on, that's MY example! :D I meant at one point in time the wheel did not exist, and later on it did. Either dark matter research will follow this path, or it will fall to the scrap heap like Phrenology.
Science is driven by many reasons, not just faith (non-religious). Hope is another good reason, but also shares the floor with war, power and avarice.
@bizarreabomination I'll concede that science isn't driven JUST by faith, good point! But I'll tell you that pure and unperverted faith is a huge driver, as is hope as you mention. I suppose they are all factorable down to one thing: will. But on point, faith too grows and isn't just some arbitrary coinage. And faith often grows through affirmation, something that both science and spirituality, however different, share.
@bizarreabomination Regarding "worship," perhaps it is once again a misunderstanding on semantics. Probably no one worships a light bulb by way of a supernatural practice or in a traditional sense of the word. Worship is not synonymous with religion, only often related. One definition of worship is "to feel adoring reverence or regard for" and its use is not limited to a deity but also a person or object. Science is thus to a degree worshiped by mankind. And it is the essence of Atheism.
@9b8 "you do have SOMETHING(S) to worship, which is why atheist qualifies as a religion"
This is not using "worship" to describe feeling adoring reverence or regard for a person or object, not when you use it to qualify Atheism as a religion.
By that definition, the adoration that some teenage girls have towards Justin Bieber would qualify as a religion, and him as its god. I can't think of anything more scary than that.
@bizarreabomination Haha, I enjoyed your humor in your point! Good point, and that IS scary. Maybe this tends towards a more metaphorical use, but some girls (and boys, eek) actually do "worship" Justin Bieber, in that sense. They have life-sized posters in their rooms, sing and listen his songs every day, and go bonkers over any media material they find. But you do raise some irony about the human condition. Though I'm a spiritual person, I could even say I "worship" science for I respect it.
ALTHOUGH I'M A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN (Baptist), I no longer believe that the Bible teaches eternal torment or suffering. The Bible teaches eternal punishment, but it's not eternal torment. In my popular Internet article, TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE OF HELL EVOLVED FROM GREEK ROOTS, I explain how and why teaching of eternal torment entered early into Christianity and how Scriptures have been misinterpreted and taken out of context to support that teaching. ~Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology)
SCIENCE SHOWS THAT THE UNIVERSE could not have sustained itself eternally because of entropy (even in an open system). Einstein confirmed that space, matter, and time had a beginning! That beginning had to be supernatural because natural laws have no ability to bring the universe into existence from nothing. The supernatural cannot be proved by science but science points to a supernatural intelligence for the origin and order of the universe ~ HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM (Article)
EINSTEIN CONFIRMED that space and time are just as physical as matter. That's why space and time can be altered by gravity, and space produces particles. Einstein's equations show that the universe couldn’t be eternal. It had a beginning. Einstein believed, because of science, in the existence of God behind the origin and order of the universe. He didn't believe in a personal God like Christians do, but he did believe science pointed to the existence of an all powerful and intelligent Creator
THE SCIENTIFIC CASE AGAINST ATHEISM: Please read this Internet article of mine published in Russia's English Pravda. It will be a real eye-opener for all who think belief in a Creator is merely subjective blind faith. Also read my article, LIFE ON MARS NO SURPRISE (In the Earth's past there was powerful volcanic activity which spewed life-containing dirt and rocks (meteors) into outer space. Mars may literally have millions of tons of Earth soil)
NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Only evolution within "kinds" is genetically possible (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). How did species survive if their vital structures, organs, reproductive systems were still evolving? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic and biological similarities between species.
DAWKINS, HITCHENS, AND HAWKING REFUSE TO DEBATE with creationists who are SCIENTISTS, such as the scientists at The Institute for Creation Research. Dawkins and his friends only debate non-scientist creationists. Read articles by scientists supporting creation at The Institute for Creation Research site. Read analysis from creation scientists about the latest news on fossils, genetics, astronomy, etc. that you won't read in the main stream media. Visit the Institute for Creation Research site.
EXPLAINING HOW AN AIRPLANE WORKS doesn't mean no one made the airplane. Explaining how life and the universe work don’t mean there was no Maker behind them. Natural laws explain how the order in the universe works, but mere undirected natural laws can't explain the origin of that order. Once you have a complete and living cell, the genetic code/mechanisms exist to direct the formation of more cells, but how did the cell originate when no directing code or mechanisms existed in nature?
WHAT IS SCIENCE? Science is knowledge based on observation. No one observed the universe coming by chance or by design, by creation or by macro-evolution. These are positions of faith. The issue is which faith science supports. Natural laws explain how an airplane or a cell works, but undirected natural laws cannot bring about either. Once there's a complete cell, the code/mechanisms exist to direct the formation of more cells, but how did the cell originate when there was no directing code.
SCIENTISTS HAVE NEVER CREATED LIFE. And, even if they do it won't be by chance but by intelligent design. By genetically engineering already existing forms of life, scientists have produced new forms of life, but they did not produce these new life forms from non-living matter. Even in synthetic life, scientists design and build DNA from scratch, through intelligent design, and then insert their man-made DNA into an already living cell. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
THE ODDS of the sequence of molecules in a cell coming together by chance are similar to the odds of magnetic letters randomly bonding together in a sequence to form all the words and sentences in a dictionary. Without the right sequence, a cell's molecules won't work. Amino acids can come by chance but not proteins. Without DNA there can be no proteins and vice versa. Gradually won't do. It's all at once or not at all for a cell's survival. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
NATURAL SELECTION DOESN'T PRODUCE ANYTHING. It can only "select" from what is produced that has survival value. If a variation occurs that helps a species survive, that survival is called being "selected." That's all it is. There's no conscious selection by nature. It's a passive process. Natural selection is a figure of speech. The term itself is a tautology. Natural selection only operates once there is life and reproduction, not before. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM.
NATURAL SELECTION IS NO BLIND WATCHMAKER because it can only "select," not produce or arrange. If a variation survives, that's called being "selected." Natural selection operates only once there is life and reproduction, not before, so it couldn't have been involved in life's origins. A partially-evolved cell (an oxymoron) would quickly disintegrate. It couldn't wait ("survive") millions of years for chance to complete it and then make it alive! Read: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
ARE FOSSILS REALLY MILLIONS OF YEARS OLD? Popular Internet article examines assumptions concerning fossil deposition as well as built-in assumptions involved in modern radiometric dating (not used for dating fossils but other rocks), and arguments from starlight and time. Discusses lack of true transitional forms in the fossil record and lack of "age" sequence of the fossil layers. Discussion of mixed species (i.e. dinosaur, reptile, mammal fossils in the same stratum).
IMAGINE A FISH WITH PART FINS, part feet with the fins evolving (transitioning) into feet. What survival benefit would there be? The fish couldn't use its fins or its feet, and there are no fossils showing such a creature ever existed. They only exist on automobile bumper stickers! There are no true transitional forms, either living or fossilized. Evolutionists realize this fact! Read my Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
APES ARE QUITE COMFORTABLE IN HOW THEY WALK, just as humans are quite comfortable in how they walk. Even a slight change in the position of a muscle or bone, for either, would be excruciatingly painful and would not be an advantage for survival. There's no hard evidence that humans evolved from ape-like creatures anymore than there's hard evidence that apes evolved from four-legged-pawed dog-like creatures. Read Internet article: MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE.
GENETIC INFORMATION CANNOT HAPPEN BY CHANCE, so it's more logical to believe that genetic similarities between all forms of life are due to a common Designer who designed similar functions for similar purposes. It doesn't mean all forms of life are biologically related! Also, "Junk DNA" isn't junk. These non-coding segments of DNA have recently been found to be vital in regulating gene expression. Read my popular Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST prevents macro-evolution. Natural selection wouldn't preserve the evolution of new traits because they wouldn't have any survival value. A partially-evolved hand evolving from a previous trait, partially-evolved tissues, organs, biological structures would make a species unfit for survival. There are no fossils of partially-evolved species. All species of plants and animals in the fossil record are complete and fully-formed. They came into existence as complete!
NEW SPECIES: Although new species have come into existence, they don't carry any new genes. They've become new species only because they can't be crossed back with the original parent stock for various biological reasons. A biological "kind" allows for new species but not new genes. Nature has no ability to invent new genes for new traits. Only limited variations and adaptations are possible in nature, and all strictly within a biological "kind" (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.).
ALL REAL EVOLUTION ( i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.) in nature is the expression, over time, of already existing genes. Evolution is possible only if there’s information (genes) directing it. Only variations of already existing genes are possible, which means only limited evolution and adaptations are possible. Nature has no ability to invent new genes via random mutations caused by random environmental forces. That’s evolutionary faith, not science. Read my article, WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
"JUNK DNA" ISN'T JUNK: Recent research shows that these segments of DNA are vital in regulating gene expression (when, where, and how genes are expressed). There's no room for random mutations to operate safely. Random mutations, from radiation, are destructive. Even for every good one there would be hundreds of harmful ones with the net effect, over time, causing harm and even extinction, not upward evolution. Genetic similarities are better explained due to a common design for common purposes.
DO EYES CARRY SCARS OF EVOLUTION? Read this fantastic Internet article by biologist and creationist Brian Thomas. Thomas refutes every argument of a "flawed" design for the eye, and explains how and why the so-called flaw is actually the best thing for the eye. Read the article! It's amazing what facts evolutionists will ignore. Numerous times evolutionists have been proven wrong about their interpretation of a structure as being flawed or useless
DISORDER IN THE UNIVERSE is no argument against God's existence. The disorder is because of chance and entropy, but the order can only be rationally explained due to design. If I discovered a broken watch on the ground, the disorder is no evidence that there wasn't a designer behind the watch. Please read my Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
BURDEN OF PROOF: Anyone who claims the level of complexity and order in life and the universe happened by chance has the burden of proof. Many atheists think they have no burden of proof because they’re not claiming the existence of something. That is not true. Atheists are claiming something. They are claiming that we are here by chance and atheists expect for everyone to accept that claim on faith because they certainly can’t prove it. Read: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
I'm agnostic leaning towards atheism. (not quite there yet) but on morality i tend to lean more towards the Lovecraftian philosophy that ALL morality is contrived and is meaningless in an indifferent universe. Of course this also means that not only is there nothing "wrong" with practicing religion, but that they are actually obligated, biologically, as are we all, to dominate their environment for their own safety. How can anything (including religion) be evil if there is no such thing as evil?
It is a religion indeed! It has its own creed! It utilises laws!
This religion tells us that we cannot bring our Christian faith into public institutions like schools, the work situation, universities, but note, nobody can stop atheists bringing their pathetic god into all these situations to control all those who oppose them!
They are a frightened people and not without good reason.
Still, even the most admirable of atheists is nothing more than a moral parasite, living his life based on borrowed ethics. This is why, when pressed, the atheist will often attempt to hide his lack of conviction in his own beliefs behind some poorly formulated utilitarianism, or argue that he acts out of altruistic self-interest. But this is only post-facto rationalization, not reason or rational behavior.
Atheists are far more moral than their christian counterparts. We take responsiility for our actions, we don't do things that we need to be forgiven for. We are moral because we are intelligent human beings who know right from wrong. We have empathy, and we genuinely care for other human beings. We are not afraid of god, the reason we don't commit terrible acts is because we know and we feel that it is wrong to do so.
This video isn't funny. Furthermore, he comments on things that he is unwilling to back up with evidence. His arguments are shallow, and his support for them not very strong. Lastly, the man needs to take a religious studies course. He comments that atheism to him is not seeing any need to apologize for being human, live the life you want live vs. the religious idea to wish your life away on a heaven by dying. That's not what some religious people believe.
@EdM021 Is it reasonable to tell a muslim why you are not a christian ?
Is it reasonable to argue with a muslim with "supposed" knowledge about his religion ?
I think that any religious person who is not a christian will NOT even google what you asked, because simply it is not interesting, therefore it is not a reasonable argument coming from an atheist.
But even if it is a christian, there has never being a remarkable argument which can say that "atheos" is true.
@EdM021 I debated with many and many atheists so i know how they do not have prior knowledge and how they do not give reasonable arguments. But i can be wrong, no humain is perfect :)
@babkrani Actually I don't think there is. The only way there can be a being who created the universe is if he/she/it created it before it blew up in the "big bang." And if there is such a being, he/she/it simply cannot be the deity of the bible based on that book's internal evidence alone. PS Israeli archaeologists have now confessed that they cannot find any evidence for an exodus or a Hebrew invasion of Canaan.
@EdM021 You just said "a being that created the universe", therefore we do not have to stick to the bible. From a "blew up" we have this perfect harmony and equilibrium in this unvierse. Isn't it enough proof that the big bang is not ordinary, again if you understand the big bang. It is an explosion that do not have a center, this is why evey observer views himself as in the center of the universe. So the big bang tells us that there is intelligence, and a creation from nothing.
@babkrani Well, quantum mechanics have disposed of a need to have a creator to create the universe. Whether there was a creator or not, the mechanics of how the universe came into existence is the same. Which means Ockham's Razor is now officially athiest!
watch?v=sFRKPlZMavE
So.... If there was a creator, then where did the creator come from? For there must have been a time when he had his first thought, and there must have been a time when he first came into existence!
@EdM021 Wrong, the nothingless that were at the time of singularity isn't the nothingless that quantum mechanics suggest, quantum vacuum is a sea of continually forming and dissolving particles, which isn't "nothing".
Space-time was created with the big bang, so it suggests that there is one timeless ( or eternal ) non physical cause because there is no before, unless you want to claim an emergence from nothing by nothing, and hence, time is only a perception, therefore the argument fails.
@babkrani If nothing can come out of nothing, it would be obvious then that a diety would have to use some of his own substance to create a universe.
@kolkrabe19 Well then what kind of time? Time that is measured like the days of our lives, the passage of time, an event, an occasion, an era, etc., etc.?
The idea of god in mainstream Western religions invite atheism because they advocate a literal god. How can a non-indoctrinated educated person believe in such nonsense? Eastern religions don't have this problem.
Religious scholar Karen Armstrong states that cultures used to understand religion vis a vis more ancient concepts of logos (what is evidently/literally true) & mythos (truth on a metaphorical level). Religion, including any concept of gods, are in the realm of myth. It's that simple.
ALTHOUGH I'M A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN (Baptist), I no longer believe that the Bible teaches eternal torment or suffering. The Bible teaches eternal punishment, but it's not eternal torment. In my popular Internet article, TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE OF HELL EVOLVED FROM GREEK ROOTS, I explain how and why teaching of eternal torment entered early into Christianity and how Scriptures have been misinterpreted and taken out of context to support that teaching. ~Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology)
SCIENCE SHOWS THAT THE UNIVERSE could not have sustained itself eternally because of entropy (even in an open system). Einstein confirmed that space, matter, and time had a beginning! That beginning had to be supernatural because natural laws have no ability to bring the universe into existence from nothing. The supernatural cannot be proved by science but science points to a supernatural intelligence for the origin and order of the universe ~ HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM (Article)
EINSTEIN CONFIRMED that space and time are just as physical as matter. That's why space and time can be altered by gravity, and space produces particles. Einstein's equations show that the universe couldn’t be eternal. It had a beginning. Einstein believed, because of science, in the existence of God behind the origin and order of the universe. He didn't believe in a personal God like Christians do, but he did believe science pointed to the existence of an all powerful and intelligent Creator
THE SCIENTIFIC CASE AGAINST ATHEISM: Please read this Internet article of mine published in Russia's English Pravda. It will be a real eye-opener for all who think belief in a Creator is merely subjective blind faith. Also read my article, LIFE ON MARS NO SURPRISE (In the Earth's past there was powerful volcanic activity which spewed life-containing dirt and rocks (meteors) into outer space. Mars may literally have millions tons of Earth soil)
THE SCIENTIFIC CASE AGAINST ATHEISM: Please read this Internet article of mine published in Russia's English Pravda. It will be a real eye-opener for all who think belief in a Creator is merely subjective blind faith. Also read my article, LIFE ON MARS NO SURPRISE (In the Earth's past there was powerful volcanic activity which spewed life-containing dirt and rocks (meteors) into outer space. Mars may literally have millions tons of Earth soil)
NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Only evolution within "kinds" is genetically possible (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). How were species living and reproducing if their vital structures, organs, reproductive systems hadn't evolved yet? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic/biological similarities between species
DAWKINS, HITCHENS, AND HAWKING REFUSE TO DEBATE with creationists who are SCIENTISTS, such as the scientists at The Institute for Creation Research. Dawkins and his friends only debate non-scientist creationists. Read articles by scientists supporting creation at The Institute for Creation Research site. Read analysis from creation scientists about the latest news on fossils, genetics, astronomy, etc. that you won't read in the main stream media. Visit the Institute for Creation Research site.
INTELLIGENT DESIGN ON ANOTHER PLANET? Imagine finding a planet where robots are programmed to make other robots just like themselves from raw materials. Now, imagine an alien scientist visiting the planet and, after studying these robots, comes to the conclusion that because science can explain how these robots work, function, and reproduce there's no reason to believe there was an intelligent designer behind them! Read my Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
WHAT IS SCIENCE? Science simply is knowledge based on observation. No one observed the universe coming by chance or by design, by creation or by macro-evolution. These are positions of faith. The issue is which faith the scientific evidence best supports. Natural laws can explain how an airplane or a cell works, but it's irrational to believe that mere undirected natural laws can bring about either. Read my Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
NOT NATURE MADE! Just because something exists in nature doesn't mean it was invented or made by Nature. If all the chemicals that make-up an earthworm were scattered and left to themselves, "Mother Nature" would have no ability to re-organize them into a worm again. It takes an already existing worm to bring about another worm. The worm exists and reproduces in nature but Nature didn't design or invent the worm! Read my Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
THE ODDS of the sequence of molecules in a cell coming together by chance are similar to the odds of magnetic letters randomly bonding together in a sequence to form all the words and sentences in a dictionary. Without the right sequence, a cell's molecules won't work. Amino acids can come by chance but not proteins. Without DNA there can be no proteins and vice versa. Gradually won't do. It's all at once or not at all for a cell's survival. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Wrong .... - Hows this book made? - By papers - where does the paper come from? - a tree - where does the tree come from - this planet - where does this planet come from - the universe - where does the universe come from - GOD....
*Facepalm* ... religious people say God made it like that when they dont know the answer on something...
2+2 = 4
54363122432 / 3420594523411233 = GOD
seriously....
Jatsun95 11 hours ago in playlist Flere videoer fra patcondell
This has been flagged as spam show
/watch?v=AZk6nZGH9Xo&feature=channel_video_title watch this video about the complexity of one species the butterfly this is just one and there are 9 million species like this,then imagine the abilities of the intelligent designer!
check it out
majorl311 1 week ago
Blah, blah, blah,... yeah, yeah we've all heard the fucking other tape recorders spouting the atheism is not a religion line. So how come atheists like you are just as sickening, as intolerant, as certain, as the religitards that you consider yourself to be so superior to? Fucking hypocrite.
pompousprick 1 week ago
@pompousprick He preaches his view, you OBVIOUSLY are preaching yours. Don't call atheists sickening or intolerant, do you know him? Do you know me? I think you may be the hypocrite in this conversation.
TheBoobsBlog 1 week ago
@TheBoobsBlog First of all, I didn't call atheists sickening or intolerant. I said atheists like him. Do I know him, personally no I don't, though maybe you haven't noticed he has a very large number of videos publicly preaching his generalized hatred of people who don't think like him. I couldn't give a shit if someone is an atheist, a Christian, a Muslim, whatever.. it's bigots that get my goat. And this guy is a text book bigot. And no I don't know you and also didn't say anything about you.
pompousprick 6 days ago
i likes the cut of this mans jib
demondo87 2 weeks ago
Oh my Athiests are more annoying then relious people shoving their belief down everyones throat! What you guys don't get is your just as closed minded as the religious people because you believe there is no God! There is no proof that there is no God like there is no proof for God! Honestly athiests are the most closed minded arrogant people i have ever met, so annoying! Athiesm is a religion your believeing in something without any evidence you're all hipocrites!
sonofapitch100 2 weeks ago 2
@sonofapitch100 Wow, now that I've read this comment I actually think you are even more mentally challenged then I thought when I read you'r reply to my comment.
Atheism = non-religious, if you say being non-religious is a religion you must be really stupid.
eddson11 2 weeks ago
@sonofapitch100 you clearly just don't understand do you? first off, we are not hypocrites, because we believe in common sense, we believe there is an answer to everything, unlike religious people who blame things they cant explain on "god", we don't believe in or worship anyone, nor do we put all of our faith in a single book with these ridiculous fantasy stories. So how can you even sit there and call us hypocrites?
nickjrossi 1 week ago
@sonofapitch100 Not really,atheism is pretty much learning towards the truth therefore a misleading truth because we don't see no god up there. Religion on the other hand is a straight out lie when it comes to the existence of god. REJOICE ATHEISTS! We ain't no liars!
hurerz 2 days ago
You people will regret Atheism one day...
GriiiiiiinD 2 weeks ago
@GriiiiiiinD
yeah, people will regret they chose atheism over islam when they are in hell.
wanna laugh at them with me?
OmfgItsHenu 2 weeks ago
YAY! Someone defending MY side of the Argument!
TheWafflescat 2 weeks ago
Epic! I enjoy listening to people defending reasoning and actually thinking for themselves instead of blindly following someone else's lead
OallytheIllusionist 2 weeks ago
As soon as you said "Islam is of peace", I was not interested in listening to any more of your videos. It is not scientifically possible for a population so big to behave the same way and think the same way. NOT possible. If you really believe in science--then you would understand that. Just as everyone on this planet has unique fingerprints, same can be said about their way of thinking. Some may share something in common, but not in its entirety.
I can see anger in you. :)
ekstravagantee 2 weeks ago
@MrROTD what do you mean regret? Do you mean regretting that we stopped believing in childrens fairy tales and grew up as a species?
Rodentsnipe 2 weeks ago
this guy is my fucking hero
ddduuurrrppp 2 weeks ago
This was hilarious
holycrapjesusman 3 weeks ago
lol at 2:02 I laughed really hard. Idk why XD
Yeah but seriously guys we need to get passed this religion-filled age -_-
Come on guys, I thought humans were more educated than to blind themselves with their very own minds lol
holycrapjesusman 3 weeks ago
I think the Game halo is a good game... :) thanks for your very awesome video :D...
curemymind 3 weeks ago
@curemymind
what does the best fps series ever have to do with this video
(forget reach though xD)
ShooterCinema 3 weeks ago
@ShooterCinema Does FPS game need to do something with this video? But I did enjoy reach :D... But it has nothing to do with this video :), just liked it is all :D.. I guess I trolled? my bad :D...
curemymind 2 weeks ago
Peace to you too, fellow heretic!
zhalfirim 3 weeks ago
great video
omgiownk 3 weeks ago
@omgiownk But i do disagree on some parts. You said that there "aren't any schools teaching atheism with public money." Directly, you are right. Schools that take federal tax money don't teach creationism, but evolution. Indirectly teaching the children the value of logic and independent thought in the search for knowledge.
Overall great video subbed liked and favorited.
omgiownk 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
JESUS CHRIST, HIS CATHOLIC-UNIVERSAL-APOSTOLIC CHURCH, SACRAMENTS, THE BIBLE, MIRACLES, HEALINGS, ST. MARY APPARITIONS, MESSAGES FROM HEAVEN, SIGNS IN 2011 ARE NOT A MYTHOLOGY BUT THE REALITY !!!
GET READY FOR THE GREAT WARNING NOW!!!
thewarningsecondcoming . com
JezusSlave 4 weeks ago
Atheism is believing in nothing to believe but yourself opinion
myseterio 1 month ago
@myseterio or possibly what the best evidence is
Vennificus 3 weeks ago
With or without religion, wouldn't people still be the same today? People naturally crave, want, need, and other things. To err is to be human. So instead of blaming religion for humanity's faults, why don't you look deeper? Christians may have done bad things in the past, but they are normal in our modern day, for example. Even if the world was atheist, there would still be hate, violence and other bad things, albeit in a different form.
chowdaboy7501 1 month ago
My left ear ear really likes your argument.
spartans114s 1 month ago 2
This guy rules !!!
Borat911 1 month ago
Spot on
mitchbjones 1 month ago
Wonderfully said, my friend! Have a great week!
Invaraeden 1 month ago
Pat, This is my favorite rant of yours. Cheers!
foamulator 1 month ago
i agree
701shep 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Christianity defies human nature: from an atheists point of view christianity would simply have been created by a man. But, if you were to make a religion would you make every natural instinct a sin? Also, it defies society, at the time of course the dominent societies were Roman and Jewish, i wont go into what they were like but they were nothing like the Christian philosophy. Jesus, had no education and therefore should have been susceptable to human nature and society
Schism704 1 month ago
people hate the truth don't they? lolz you religious people are fucking retarded, where's the evidence? "this book" Who wrote the book? "men" How do you know it's true? "we don't, we just have faith" *palms face*
MrROTD 1 month ago 13
@MrROTD go and made a book just like the Torah, Bible, or Quran if you are so truthful! howcome no one has attempted to make their own "religious book" just as good as the Bible, Torah, or Quran? if an athiest really wants to disprove God, he or she could do it with ease; all he or she has to do is write a book just as good as the 3 books mentioned or write an even better book! yet they cant b/c books dont get better than those 3. one day you will regret athiesm...
cool08player 3 weeks ago
@pedulla88
yep i quote SHIT right that was proclaimed and ordained by God, ALONE, not apes, that darwin injected in your veins!! just try and do good, follow Gods 10 commendments and see how nice life can be. Jesus did it and succeeded.
31Godbless 2 months ago
@31Godbless how do you know it was proclaimed and ordained by God, ALONE? Do you have any evidence to back up that claim? yup, Jesus did it and he got nailed to a cross XD If you really need a god or divine inspiration to figure out something so basic and simple like don't do to others what you don't want they do to you, you sir have a problem not us. Besides the 3 first commandments are just spooky language to scare ignorant superstitious people and keep them in line, the rest is obvious
DocStrange0123 2 months ago
@pedulla
you use senses right? are your senses sharp like that of a dog? i dont think you use your both side of the brain. You use the left brain and i use the both!!! and calling me dumbass shows ur maturity
31Godbless 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@31Godbless Your response makes no sense. It has nothing to do with my comment and it makes about as much sense as the rest of your comments.
Pedulla88 1 month ago
FUCK GOD...and I'm a Jew by descent?
waragainstchrist666 2 months ago
I'm a Christian but i respect your views on atheism
:)
hunter7754 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
According to the Bible Masturbation is a sin !. So hope to meet you all in the hell. don't forget to accompany the Pope ( the local agent of God )... Amen !
TheLTTEbuster 2 months ago
I think I worship Pat Condell. He is the truth and the way.
TheYellowscorpion 2 months ago
Atheism is a psychological disorder: Atheists are so fearful, threatened, untrusting of their surroundings they are looking to be sure of anything. They would rather 'know' they are going to die and it is all over, than hear a thousand Bible verses that say trust God and you will go to eternal Heaven. They are only willing to acknowledge and know what their five senses tell them, anything else is too uncertain and possibly too painful; too many times the ice has proven to be too thin to walk on.
theelovelive 2 months ago
@theelovelive ... Im sorry? Im atheist and I can honestly say none of that crap that you just made up applies to me. You are ludicrously delusional. I am absolutely not imperialistic (five senses). I use reason and reason tells me that you are the one with the psychological disorder. So you can stop spewing out bullshit to protect yourself. I would rather know that I am going to die then hear fictional verses saying to give "god" unconditional trust. Question your surroundings you hypocrite.
Pedulla88 2 months ago in playlist More videos from patcondell
This has been flagged as spam show
the scene with jesus and the rich tax collector is a good example that free will was inevitable. The rich guy just couldnt imagine it, giving up all his hardlaboured riches, luxuries etc for the poor. Okay science e.g the least people who are experts in engineering science, bank managers, top earners, arent they all 95 % greedy and arrogant? its the fact
31Godbless 2 months ago
Comment removed
31Godbless 2 months ago
Comment removed
31Godbless 2 months ago
@31Godbless Theres nothing to say to this. Just the stupidity is astounding.
Pedulla88 2 months ago in playlist More videos from patcondell
This has been flagged as spam show
@Pedulla88 What is stupid is; at some time in the distant past there was no life in the universe - just elements and chemical compounds. Somehow, these chemicals combined and came to life.
Thechristiancullen 2 months ago
regarding time: God set it apart after creating the sun and the moon. 365 days make year, 30 days make a month and so on...Fear God Hes allknowing.
31Godbless 2 months ago
@31Godbless .... YOUR QUOTING SHIT RIGHT NOW. Just saying it doesnt make it fact. By the way dumbass not all months have 30 days in it.
Pedulla88 2 months ago in playlist More videos from patcondell
Comment removed
31Godbless 2 months ago
@9b8
well said indeed you are very smart. The less people know the truth. I dont need no scientifical proofs to believe in the bible. The least things i read as a young kid was proof enough. Now Im a grown man, and God is still with us!!
31Godbless 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@31Godbless
"well said indeed you are very smart. The less people know the truth. I dont need no scientifical proofs to believe in the bible. The least things i read as a young kid was proof enough. Now Im a grown man, and God is still with us!!"-31Godblss
This is all that has to be said. You read a fictional story made by either a madman or for fun as a "CHILD" and you still beleive it.
Pedulla88 2 months ago
I like this guy!
Xbrainsss 2 months ago
@Xbrainsss Why ?
kolkrabe19 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
We cant prove the existence of god by go and watch him somwhere. But we can prove the existense of the laws of nature. So using the law of logic to prove GOD we could say that if there is a material existense there have to be a imaterial existence to. Becouse the one can't exist without the other. Like: dark-night, male-female etc... So the spirit world exists for 100%
ferry7777 2 months ago
"A theologian is an expert in the unknowable...." Beautiful.
ArtemiaSalina 2 months ago
atheism IS a religion. Religion- a set of beleifs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe. Atheism is the BELEIF that there is no god.
TheFaafia 2 months ago
@TheFaafia re·li·gion/riˈlijən/
Noun: The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, esp. a personal God or gods.
be·lief/biˈlēf/
Noun: 1. An acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists. 2. Something one accepts as true or real; a firmly held opinion or conviction.
Synonyms: faith - trust - confidence - persuasion - credence
There is neither a God nor belief in scripture or doctrine or dogma in atheism. It is a distinct *disbelief* in a bare assertion.
aidanjt 2 months ago in playlist More videos from patcondell
Great vid! Pat Dillahunty :P
Auktoriserad 3 months ago
This came to mind as I watched your video:
Wisdom doesn't necessarily come with age. Sometimes age just shows up all by itself. ~Tom Wilson
inhawaii12 3 months ago
this guy 100 percent takes it in d ass!!! the ego on these atheist wow!lol u guys no atheist r super smart & everbody else is dumb they just don't get it you can't understand gods creations 4 2 understand u would have 2 b it's equal since u not & there's only 1 god just look like the dick u r lol
bolurinc 3 months ago
@bolurinc You spell like a retard so you'r probably the dumbest person here and no one claimed that atheists are smarter than religious persons (except for the research done that showed that the average non-religious person have a higher IQ then the average religious person, and you just prooved that to be correct in you'r case)
eddson11 3 months ago 4
@eddson11 The fact that you can't spell you're right, and the fact that your grammar is awful suggests to me that athiests aren't that smart after all! Where was this test conducted if it even happened?
sonofapitch100 2 weeks ago
@sonofapitch100 Oh dear god I missed the letter "e" on my keyboard what a horrible crime!
& the fact that I live in a country where english is not a spoken/written language basicly suggests that my grammar isn't flawless.
And I said the AVERAGE non-religious and religious person not ALL. Just google "religious people lower iq" or whatever and look it up for yourself.
And lets not forget the fact that you don't even know if I'm an atheist.
eddson11 2 weeks ago
you are a great man! i felt like hugging you thats how happy you made me :) very nice persuasive speech
elkahuru 3 months ago 15
Pat your a criminal. You play speech psychology. Black PR.
/watch?v=-XULkAR5gZk&feature=relmfu
andjelicd70 3 months ago
This guy is only full of sattire and word plays. He didn't say one thing that is philosophically sound or profound. So, in the end, we are all evil little bastards driven by our own motives. We just employ different ways to justify ourselves.
9b8 3 months ago
Well, someone said it best when they said ignorance is bliss. Enjoy your
Godless, ignorant life, then, O atheist. Certainly, you don't know nor care what all the fuss is about regarding religious tension. I'm afraid atheists have trouble seeing the big picture. While you don't have SOMEONE to worship you do have SOMETHING(S) to worship, which is why atheist qualifies as a religion after all; you worship science, a self-ordained (humanly) thing. It is ironic that you also cannot see science.
9b8 3 months ago
@9b8 "you also cannot see science"
Yes you can. Turn on the light switch. You see that? That's science that is (physics).
Yes you can. Start a car. You see that? That's science that is (mechanical engineering).
Yes you can. Give some blood. You see that? That's science that is. (medicine).
Worshiping science? When was the last time you saw someone worshiping a lightbulb? Not being thankful for its existence, but actually WORSHIPING it?
bizarreabomination 3 months ago
@bizarreabomination WOW, that plane flew 100,000 feet over your head! Light is an ubiquitous truth. The behaivors of fuel atomization, air flow, torsional forces etc. of an engine are a physical system of forces of nature. The engine is a product of science - a composition, an application - by way of methodologies. Science is a system of knowledge, a methodology. They are related but not synonymous. That is the point.
9b8 3 months ago
@9b8 Are all Theists as offensive as you? Science may not be visible (if you discount any method of storing the information either on paper, in the brain etc.), but it can be tested to see if it correct. Turning on a light switch, starting a car or giving blood are all ways of testing if the science behind them is a fact or a work of fiction. If the light comes on when the switch is flicked, there's your proof that physics is real.
How do I test the Bible to see if it is correct?
bizarreabomination 3 months ago
@bizarreabomination I don't consider myself remotely as "offensive" as the average Atheist. Absolutely, science is a practice in which we humans develop through observation, based on facts (both of strong and weak forms) and evidence. But it is important to constantly respect that science is one discipline of the human condition, not "everything" or "truth" in itself. There are ways to "test" the Bible to see if it is correct even within the science discipline, and it is being done.
9b8 3 months ago
@9b8 "There are ways to "test" the Bible to see if it is correct even within the science discipline"
I'm all ears. Do tell.
bizarreabomination 3 months ago
@bizarreabomination I am sure you are all ears! Haha. Unfortunately, even if I had all the answers WITH permutations of facts, your belief (an aspect of knowledge, a human condition) is still dependent. But if you do some research over time, you will begin to find much on this topic! Consider this video, n-syxid39kg, as a novel starting point. That video won't give you THE answers you are hopeing for, but that is the way knowledge seeking goes in all things. There is no magic answer in anything.
9b8 3 months ago
@9b8 That video was a disappointment, just someone trying to sell their book, and attempting to make the book of Genesis coincide with scientific opinion. As you say, belief is still dependant, but this opens a can of worms: If there WAS proof of God, there would be no free will. Faith is required.
bizarreabomination 3 months ago
@bizarreabomination I pretty much knew you would be left disappointed, which is why I warned that it wont in any way give answers. I too am not convinced by his arguments per se. But on another note, the recent "advancements" in physics are much more intriguing to say the least - the dark matter and dark energy they have now discovered and universally accept. The fact that the universe is made up of only 25-30% of traditionally known matter. As for the "dark" stuff, they are currently clueless.
9b8 3 months ago
@9b8 "As for the "dark" stuff, they are currently clueless."
Well, there wasn't a wheel until someone invented it. With a bit of luck they'll figure it out eventually. Personally I think they could make better use of their time than trying to figure out the origins of the universe. Medical achievements like advanced prosthetics or cures for diseases would be nice, or maybe better power sources, or perhaps ways to end world hunger. Dark matter research is just an excercise in ego inflation.
bizarreabomination 3 months ago
@bizarreabomination "Well, there wasn't a wheel until someone invented it."
HOW and WHY did they invent the wheel? Do consider this carefully and resist the simple and obvious answer for you wouldn't then discover the incredible process! Some of the most profound discoveries have came from unlikely sources. Consider nuclear power and its potential for good OR bad. The medical field would be better off with more "big thinkers." Dark research will have as much impact as did Galileo's research.
9b8 3 months ago
@9b8 "HOW and WHY did they invent the wheel?"
Just an example of a technology that did not exist, then did exist later. The same path dark matter research is hoped will follow, rather than becoming a dead end.
"Dark research will have as much impact as did Galileo's research"
A bold claim. Only time will tell.
bizarreabomination 3 months ago
@bizarreabomination The wheel invention was not "just an example" of a technology coming into existence; it didn't just happen instantly. Time. It is the most slippery dimension for us to manage. It exists in all things. Some things erode through time while others evolve. Indeed I make a bold claim about dark research, but ah, I have faith in it, for there is much inclination. Suggestively, faith does have substance and isn't as queer as the stereotypical Atheist claims. Science is driven by it.
9b8 3 months ago
@9b8 Hang on, that's MY example! :D I meant at one point in time the wheel did not exist, and later on it did. Either dark matter research will follow this path, or it will fall to the scrap heap like Phrenology.
Science is driven by many reasons, not just faith (non-religious). Hope is another good reason, but also shares the floor with war, power and avarice.
bizarreabomination 3 months ago
@bizarreabomination I'll concede that science isn't driven JUST by faith, good point! But I'll tell you that pure and unperverted faith is a huge driver, as is hope as you mention. I suppose they are all factorable down to one thing: will. But on point, faith too grows and isn't just some arbitrary coinage. And faith often grows through affirmation, something that both science and spirituality, however different, share.
9b8 3 months ago
@bizarreabomination Regarding "worship," perhaps it is once again a misunderstanding on semantics. Probably no one worships a light bulb by way of a supernatural practice or in a traditional sense of the word. Worship is not synonymous with religion, only often related. One definition of worship is "to feel adoring reverence or regard for" and its use is not limited to a deity but also a person or object. Science is thus to a degree worshiped by mankind. And it is the essence of Atheism.
9b8 3 months ago
@9b8 "you do have SOMETHING(S) to worship, which is why atheist qualifies as a religion"
This is not using "worship" to describe feeling adoring reverence or regard for a person or object, not when you use it to qualify Atheism as a religion.
By that definition, the adoration that some teenage girls have towards Justin Bieber would qualify as a religion, and him as its god. I can't think of anything more scary than that.
bizarreabomination 3 months ago
@bizarreabomination Haha, I enjoyed your humor in your point! Good point, and that IS scary. Maybe this tends towards a more metaphorical use, but some girls (and boys, eek) actually do "worship" Justin Bieber, in that sense. They have life-sized posters in their rooms, sing and listen his songs every day, and go bonkers over any media material they find. But you do raise some irony about the human condition. Though I'm a spiritual person, I could even say I "worship" science for I respect it.
9b8 3 months ago
nice post. i like your humor aswell !
MrBabylouise2 3 months ago
What's the difference between a doctor of medicine and a doctor of theology ?
One prescribes drugs and the other might as well be on drugs, lol...
AussieTheOztralian 3 months ago
opening with a self evident contradiction does not support your 'argument'
SmileyGarrish 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ALTHOUGH I'M A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN (Baptist), I no longer believe that the Bible teaches eternal torment or suffering. The Bible teaches eternal punishment, but it's not eternal torment. In my popular Internet article, TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE OF HELL EVOLVED FROM GREEK ROOTS, I explain how and why teaching of eternal torment entered early into Christianity and how Scriptures have been misinterpreted and taken out of context to support that teaching. ~Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology)
Mogley52 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
SCIENCE SHOWS THAT THE UNIVERSE could not have sustained itself eternally because of entropy (even in an open system). Einstein confirmed that space, matter, and time had a beginning! That beginning had to be supernatural because natural laws have no ability to bring the universe into existence from nothing. The supernatural cannot be proved by science but science points to a supernatural intelligence for the origin and order of the universe ~ HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM (Article)
Mogley52 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
EINSTEIN CONFIRMED that space and time are just as physical as matter. That's why space and time can be altered by gravity, and space produces particles. Einstein's equations show that the universe couldn’t be eternal. It had a beginning. Einstein believed, because of science, in the existence of God behind the origin and order of the universe. He didn't believe in a personal God like Christians do, but he did believe science pointed to the existence of an all powerful and intelligent Creator
Mogley52 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
THE SCIENTIFIC CASE AGAINST ATHEISM: Please read this Internet article of mine published in Russia's English Pravda. It will be a real eye-opener for all who think belief in a Creator is merely subjective blind faith. Also read my article, LIFE ON MARS NO SURPRISE (In the Earth's past there was powerful volcanic activity which spewed life-containing dirt and rocks (meteors) into outer space. Mars may literally have millions of tons of Earth soil)
Mogley52 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Only evolution within "kinds" is genetically possible (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). How did species survive if their vital structures, organs, reproductive systems were still evolving? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic and biological similarities between species.
Mogley52 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
DAWKINS, HITCHENS, AND HAWKING REFUSE TO DEBATE with creationists who are SCIENTISTS, such as the scientists at The Institute for Creation Research. Dawkins and his friends only debate non-scientist creationists. Read articles by scientists supporting creation at The Institute for Creation Research site. Read analysis from creation scientists about the latest news on fossils, genetics, astronomy, etc. that you won't read in the main stream media. Visit the Institute for Creation Research site.
Mogley52 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
EXPLAINING HOW AN AIRPLANE WORKS doesn't mean no one made the airplane. Explaining how life and the universe work don’t mean there was no Maker behind them. Natural laws explain how the order in the universe works, but mere undirected natural laws can't explain the origin of that order. Once you have a complete and living cell, the genetic code/mechanisms exist to direct the formation of more cells, but how did the cell originate when no directing code or mechanisms existed in nature?
Mogley52 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
WHAT IS SCIENCE? Science is knowledge based on observation. No one observed the universe coming by chance or by design, by creation or by macro-evolution. These are positions of faith. The issue is which faith science supports. Natural laws explain how an airplane or a cell works, but undirected natural laws cannot bring about either. Once there's a complete cell, the code/mechanisms exist to direct the formation of more cells, but how did the cell originate when there was no directing code.
Mogley52 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
SCIENTISTS HAVE NEVER CREATED LIFE. And, even if they do it won't be by chance but by intelligent design. By genetically engineering already existing forms of life, scientists have produced new forms of life, but they did not produce these new life forms from non-living matter. Even in synthetic life, scientists design and build DNA from scratch, through intelligent design, and then insert their man-made DNA into an already living cell. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
THE ODDS of the sequence of molecules in a cell coming together by chance are similar to the odds of magnetic letters randomly bonding together in a sequence to form all the words and sentences in a dictionary. Without the right sequence, a cell's molecules won't work. Amino acids can come by chance but not proteins. Without DNA there can be no proteins and vice versa. Gradually won't do. It's all at once or not at all for a cell's survival. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NATURAL SELECTION DOESN'T PRODUCE ANYTHING. It can only "select" from what is produced that has survival value. If a variation occurs that helps a species survive, that survival is called being "selected." That's all it is. There's no conscious selection by nature. It's a passive process. Natural selection is a figure of speech. The term itself is a tautology. Natural selection only operates once there is life and reproduction, not before. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM.
Mogley52 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NATURAL SELECTION IS NO BLIND WATCHMAKER because it can only "select," not produce or arrange. If a variation survives, that's called being "selected." Natural selection operates only once there is life and reproduction, not before, so it couldn't have been involved in life's origins. A partially-evolved cell (an oxymoron) would quickly disintegrate. It couldn't wait ("survive") millions of years for chance to complete it and then make it alive! Read: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ARE FOSSILS REALLY MILLIONS OF YEARS OLD? Popular Internet article examines assumptions concerning fossil deposition as well as built-in assumptions involved in modern radiometric dating (not used for dating fossils but other rocks), and arguments from starlight and time. Discusses lack of true transitional forms in the fossil record and lack of "age" sequence of the fossil layers. Discussion of mixed species (i.e. dinosaur, reptile, mammal fossils in the same stratum).
Mogley52 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
IMAGINE A FISH WITH PART FINS, part feet with the fins evolving (transitioning) into feet. What survival benefit would there be? The fish couldn't use its fins or its feet, and there are no fossils showing such a creature ever existed. They only exist on automobile bumper stickers! There are no true transitional forms, either living or fossilized. Evolutionists realize this fact! Read my Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
Mogley52 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
APES ARE QUITE COMFORTABLE IN HOW THEY WALK, just as humans are quite comfortable in how they walk. Even a slight change in the position of a muscle or bone, for either, would be excruciatingly painful and would not be an advantage for survival. There's no hard evidence that humans evolved from ape-like creatures anymore than there's hard evidence that apes evolved from four-legged-pawed dog-like creatures. Read Internet article: MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE.
Mogley52 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
GENETIC INFORMATION CANNOT HAPPEN BY CHANCE, so it's more logical to believe that genetic similarities between all forms of life are due to a common Designer who designed similar functions for similar purposes. It doesn't mean all forms of life are biologically related! Also, "Junk DNA" isn't junk. These non-coding segments of DNA have recently been found to be vital in regulating gene expression. Read my popular Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST prevents macro-evolution. Natural selection wouldn't preserve the evolution of new traits because they wouldn't have any survival value. A partially-evolved hand evolving from a previous trait, partially-evolved tissues, organs, biological structures would make a species unfit for survival. There are no fossils of partially-evolved species. All species of plants and animals in the fossil record are complete and fully-formed. They came into existence as complete!
Mogley52 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NEW SPECIES: Although new species have come into existence, they don't carry any new genes. They've become new species only because they can't be crossed back with the original parent stock for various biological reasons. A biological "kind" allows for new species but not new genes. Nature has no ability to invent new genes for new traits. Only limited variations and adaptations are possible in nature, and all strictly within a biological "kind" (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.).
Mogley52 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ALL REAL EVOLUTION ( i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.) in nature is the expression, over time, of already existing genes. Evolution is possible only if there’s information (genes) directing it. Only variations of already existing genes are possible, which means only limited evolution and adaptations are possible. Nature has no ability to invent new genes via random mutations caused by random environmental forces. That’s evolutionary faith, not science. Read my article, WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
Mogley52 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"JUNK DNA" ISN'T JUNK: Recent research shows that these segments of DNA are vital in regulating gene expression (when, where, and how genes are expressed). There's no room for random mutations to operate safely. Random mutations, from radiation, are destructive. Even for every good one there would be hundreds of harmful ones with the net effect, over time, causing harm and even extinction, not upward evolution. Genetic similarities are better explained due to a common design for common purposes.
Mogley52 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
DO EYES CARRY SCARS OF EVOLUTION? Read this fantastic Internet article by biologist and creationist Brian Thomas. Thomas refutes every argument of a "flawed" design for the eye, and explains how and why the so-called flaw is actually the best thing for the eye. Read the article! It's amazing what facts evolutionists will ignore. Numerous times evolutionists have been proven wrong about their interpretation of a structure as being flawed or useless
Mogley52 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
DISORDER IN THE UNIVERSE is no argument against God's existence. The disorder is because of chance and entropy, but the order can only be rationally explained due to design. If I discovered a broken watch on the ground, the disorder is no evidence that there wasn't a designer behind the watch. Please read my Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
BURDEN OF PROOF: Anyone who claims the level of complexity and order in life and the universe happened by chance has the burden of proof. Many atheists think they have no burden of proof because they’re not claiming the existence of something. That is not true. Atheists are claiming something. They are claiming that we are here by chance and atheists expect for everyone to accept that claim on faith because they certainly can’t prove it. Read: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 3 months ago
I'm agnostic leaning towards atheism. (not quite there yet) but on morality i tend to lean more towards the Lovecraftian philosophy that ALL morality is contrived and is meaningless in an indifferent universe. Of course this also means that not only is there nothing "wrong" with practicing religion, but that they are actually obligated, biologically, as are we all, to dominate their environment for their own safety. How can anything (including religion) be evil if there is no such thing as evil?
HPGWellscraft 3 months ago
It is a religion indeed! It has its own creed! It utilises laws!
This religion tells us that we cannot bring our Christian faith into public institutions like schools, the work situation, universities, but note, nobody can stop atheists bringing their pathetic god into all these situations to control all those who oppose them!
They are a frightened people and not without good reason.
Darkness hates light! Darkness cannot comprehend light!
FindingJesusverytrue 3 months ago
This guy is a preacher.
kolkrabe19 3 months ago
This guy doing the exact thing that he hates religions for
TheSmartspirit 3 months ago
Still, even the most admirable of atheists is nothing more than a moral parasite, living his life based on borrowed ethics. This is why, when pressed, the atheist will often attempt to hide his lack of conviction in his own beliefs behind some poorly formulated utilitarianism, or argue that he acts out of altruistic self-interest. But this is only post-facto rationalization, not reason or rational behavior.
MrWhoisjakfrost 3 months ago
u bitch
TheSaxplaya1 3 months ago
its nice to see an old experienced man on the right side of the barricade :)
frajirek90 3 months ago
Atheists are far more moral than their christian counterparts. We take responsiility for our actions, we don't do things that we need to be forgiven for. We are moral because we are intelligent human beings who know right from wrong. We have empathy, and we genuinely care for other human beings. We are not afraid of god, the reason we don't commit terrible acts is because we know and we feel that it is wrong to do so.
nancy6ify 3 months ago
This video isn't funny. Furthermore, he comments on things that he is unwilling to back up with evidence. His arguments are shallow, and his support for them not very strong. Lastly, the man needs to take a religious studies course. He comments that atheism to him is not seeing any need to apologize for being human, live the life you want live vs. the religious idea to wish your life away on a heaven by dying. That's not what some religious people believe.
cckne223 3 months ago
humm !! Kind of a stupid video as always, atheists never give reasonable arguments.
Anyways, good luck "sinning" xD !!
babkrani 3 months ago
@babkrani Google "Why I Am No Longer A Christian" and you will find very reasonable arguments.
EdM021 3 months ago
@EdM021 Muslims are not christians, but they aren't atheists. And that doesn't mean that there is no God :)
babkrani 3 months ago
@babkrani Huh? That has nothing whatsoever with what I said.
EdM021 3 months ago
@EdM021 Is it reasonable to tell a muslim why you are not a christian ?
Is it reasonable to argue with a muslim with "supposed" knowledge about his religion ?
I think that any religious person who is not a christian will NOT even google what you asked, because simply it is not interesting, therefore it is not a reasonable argument coming from an atheist.
But even if it is a christian, there has never being a remarkable argument which can say that "atheos" is true.
Hope you understand.
babkrani 3 months ago
@babkrani You were a Muslim? I thought you were a Christian.
EdM021 3 months ago
@EdM021 I did not say that i am a Muslim, i just say that its not fair to judg on someone without prior knowledge !!
babkrani 3 months ago
@babkrani And yet you said, "athiets never give reasonable arguments."
EdM021 3 months ago
@EdM021 I debated with many and many atheists so i know how they do not have prior knowledge and how they do not give reasonable arguments. But i can be wrong, no humain is perfect :)
babkrani 3 months ago
@babkrani Do not have prior knowledge of *what* may I ask.
EdM021 3 months ago
@EdM021 For exemple if i am debating about God, i see that no atheist have a clear definition of God or even they don't have any.
babkrani 3 months ago
@babkrani No clear definition of God? How about: "a being who created the universe?"
EdM021 3 months ago
@EdM021 Humm !! Well if so, i think there is enough evidence for this. Don't you think so ?
babkrani 3 months ago
@babkrani Actually I don't think there is. The only way there can be a being who created the universe is if he/she/it created it before it blew up in the "big bang." And if there is such a being, he/she/it simply cannot be the deity of the bible based on that book's internal evidence alone. PS Israeli archaeologists have now confessed that they cannot find any evidence for an exodus or a Hebrew invasion of Canaan.
EdM021 3 months ago
@EdM021 You just said "a being that created the universe", therefore we do not have to stick to the bible. From a "blew up" we have this perfect harmony and equilibrium in this unvierse. Isn't it enough proof that the big bang is not ordinary, again if you understand the big bang. It is an explosion that do not have a center, this is why evey observer views himself as in the center of the universe. So the big bang tells us that there is intelligence, and a creation from nothing.
Not enough ?
babkrani 3 months ago
@babkrani Well, quantum mechanics have disposed of a need to have a creator to create the universe. Whether there was a creator or not, the mechanics of how the universe came into existence is the same. Which means Ockham's Razor is now officially athiest!
watch?v=sFRKPlZMavE
So.... If there was a creator, then where did the creator come from? For there must have been a time when he had his first thought, and there must have been a time when he first came into existence!
EdM021 3 months ago
@EdM021 Wrong, the nothingless that were at the time of singularity isn't the nothingless that quantum mechanics suggest, quantum vacuum is a sea of continually forming and dissolving particles, which isn't "nothing".
Space-time was created with the big bang, so it suggests that there is one timeless ( or eternal ) non physical cause because there is no before, unless you want to claim an emergence from nothing by nothing, and hence, time is only a perception, therefore the argument fails.
babkrani 3 months ago
@babkrani In which case a deity cannot create something out of nothing.
EdM021 3 months ago
@EdM021 Sorry but i didn't understand =/ !!
babkrani 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@babkrani If nothing can come out of nothing, it would be obvious then that a diety would have to use some of his own substance to create a universe.
No?
EdM021 3 months ago
Comment removed
EdM021 3 months ago
@EdM021 Could you define "time" ?
kolkrabe19 3 months ago
@kolkrabe19 You don't know the meaning of "time?"
EdM021 3 months ago
@EdM021 I don´t know what "time" is. Define it for me.
kolkrabe19 3 months ago
@kolkrabe19 time is a tool to make humans sclaves.
terravires2 3 months ago
@kolkrabe19 Well then what kind of time? Time that is measured like the days of our lives, the passage of time, an event, an occasion, an era, etc., etc.?
EdM021 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@EdM021 Well, again, can you define it for me ? Yes or no ?
kolkrabe19 3 months ago
fantastic video, I'm an Atheist too and I'm proud of it!
icetigerist 3 months ago
Fantastic Pat. Thank god I'm an athiest,
tombo242 3 months ago
The idea of god in mainstream Western religions invite atheism because they advocate a literal god. How can a non-indoctrinated educated person believe in such nonsense? Eastern religions don't have this problem.
Religious scholar Karen Armstrong states that cultures used to understand religion vis a vis more ancient concepts of logos (what is evidently/literally true) & mythos (truth on a metaphorical level). Religion, including any concept of gods, are in the realm of myth. It's that simple.
canteluna 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ALTHOUGH I'M A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN (Baptist), I no longer believe that the Bible teaches eternal torment or suffering. The Bible teaches eternal punishment, but it's not eternal torment. In my popular Internet article, TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE OF HELL EVOLVED FROM GREEK ROOTS, I explain how and why teaching of eternal torment entered early into Christianity and how Scriptures have been misinterpreted and taken out of context to support that teaching. ~Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology)
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
SCIENCE SHOWS THAT THE UNIVERSE could not have sustained itself eternally because of entropy (even in an open system). Einstein confirmed that space, matter, and time had a beginning! That beginning had to be supernatural because natural laws have no ability to bring the universe into existence from nothing. The supernatural cannot be proved by science but science points to a supernatural intelligence for the origin and order of the universe ~ HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM (Article)
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
EINSTEIN CONFIRMED that space and time are just as physical as matter. That's why space and time can be altered by gravity, and space produces particles. Einstein's equations show that the universe couldn’t be eternal. It had a beginning. Einstein believed, because of science, in the existence of God behind the origin and order of the universe. He didn't believe in a personal God like Christians do, but he did believe science pointed to the existence of an all powerful and intelligent Creator
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
THE SCIENTIFIC CASE AGAINST ATHEISM: Please read this Internet article of mine published in Russia's English Pravda. It will be a real eye-opener for all who think belief in a Creator is merely subjective blind faith. Also read my article, LIFE ON MARS NO SURPRISE (In the Earth's past there was powerful volcanic activity which spewed life-containing dirt and rocks (meteors) into outer space. Mars may literally have millions tons of Earth soil)
Mogley52 4 months ago
THE SCIENTIFIC CASE AGAINST ATHEISM: Please read this Internet article of mine published in Russia's English Pravda. It will be a real eye-opener for all who think belief in a Creator is merely subjective blind faith. Also read my article, LIFE ON MARS NO SURPRISE (In the Earth's past there was powerful volcanic activity which spewed life-containing dirt and rocks (meteors) into outer space. Mars may literally have millions tons of Earth soil)
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Only evolution within "kinds" is genetically possible (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). How were species living and reproducing if their vital structures, organs, reproductive systems hadn't evolved yet? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic/biological similarities between species
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
DAWKINS, HITCHENS, AND HAWKING REFUSE TO DEBATE with creationists who are SCIENTISTS, such as the scientists at The Institute for Creation Research. Dawkins and his friends only debate non-scientist creationists. Read articles by scientists supporting creation at The Institute for Creation Research site. Read analysis from creation scientists about the latest news on fossils, genetics, astronomy, etc. that you won't read in the main stream media. Visit the Institute for Creation Research site.
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
INTELLIGENT DESIGN ON ANOTHER PLANET? Imagine finding a planet where robots are programmed to make other robots just like themselves from raw materials. Now, imagine an alien scientist visiting the planet and, after studying these robots, comes to the conclusion that because science can explain how these robots work, function, and reproduce there's no reason to believe there was an intelligent designer behind them! Read my Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
WHAT IS SCIENCE? Science simply is knowledge based on observation. No one observed the universe coming by chance or by design, by creation or by macro-evolution. These are positions of faith. The issue is which faith the scientific evidence best supports. Natural laws can explain how an airplane or a cell works, but it's irrational to believe that mere undirected natural laws can bring about either. Read my Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NOT NATURE MADE! Just because something exists in nature doesn't mean it was invented or made by Nature. If all the chemicals that make-up an earthworm were scattered and left to themselves, "Mother Nature" would have no ability to re-organize them into a worm again. It takes an already existing worm to bring about another worm. The worm exists and reproduces in nature but Nature didn't design or invent the worm! Read my Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
THE ODDS of the sequence of molecules in a cell coming together by chance are similar to the odds of magnetic letters randomly bonding together in a sequence to form all the words and sentences in a dictionary. Without the right sequence, a cell's molecules won't work. Amino acids can come by chance but not proteins. Without DNA there can be no proteins and vice versa. Gradually won't do. It's all at once or not at all for a cell's survival. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 4 months ago