Magic Man: Robin Ince on the history of Creationist Thought

[ma049]

Arrrrgh flipping auto correct

[ma049]

@Ragnarockalypse I can prove prove atheism actually. I can demonstrate that there are people who make theist claims an can demstrate their are people who are not convinced by theists claims. There you go atheism proved.

[lutex442]

Believer:I believe some guy in the sky is watching us right now. I believe I am better then you because I believe in this man in the sky. I believe I am smarter then you because of that belief. Your an asshole if you don't believe in this man in the sky.

Atheist:You need some real help.

Believer:You can't prove that man is not in the sky. Yea he is invisible so ugh take that dumb atheist you can't see him but he is there.

Atheist:Fucking nut.

[ma049]

You can't prove atheism, atheism is just another religion and lots of scientists have been Christian.

3 statements that demonstrate how

Christians have really gone through the bottom of the barrel when it comes to defending their beliefs.

I'm lads if that is all you have left just take a day off for fucks sake.

[Ragnarockalypse]

@ma049 You can't prove atheism, and you can't prove any religion. You can't prove that god does or doesn't exist, just like you can't prove that trolls do or don't exist.

Also: Just because you're ready to die for your beliefs doesn't mean they are factually true.

[shenglongx]

lol @ the idiot atheist below saying buddhism isnt a religion hahaa

[shenglongx]

whats with all these asswholes with fake profiles trying to reply to me ? i bet its just one atheist with major butthurt probably

[Chonoryokusha]

I'm done with the moron called Shenglongx. How do I block him?

[shenglongx]

"we believe the universe existed for 16 billion years..." convenient how he doesnt say what made it come into existence 16 billion years ago haha, i guess it was a magic atheist/comedian/pseudo-scient­ist !

[Chonoryokusha]

@shenglongx

Your phrasing is incorrect. Why are you using a causative verb when you should be using an intransitive verb?

The universe AROSe spontaneously, probably as a result of vibrations at the end of a string in M-Space.

See? Simple!

[shenglongx]

@Chonoryokusha why dont u go vibrate another string n create ur own universe, one where butthurt atheists can get away with their illogical unscientific conclusions

[Chonoryokusha]

@shenglongx

This statement just shows how ignorant you are of science. But why am I not surprised...?

Science is NOT illogical, and certainly NOT "unscientific", because "unscientific science" is a non sequitur. But I bet you don't even know what string theory is, do you...?

[shenglongx]

@Chonoryokusha hmm i think your understanding of english sucks, i said atheists are illogical and unscientific...here i will break it down for you

atheist = unscientific

atheist = illogoical

SeeYa !!!

[Chonoryokusha]

@shenglongx

All you are doing is attacking strawmen. When you actually gain an understanding of what atheism is, let me know. Until then, please obey Wittgenstein's dictum, and be silent.

[shenglongx]

@Chonoryokusha haha understanding of atheism ? there is no such thing as it is not something with any kind of structure or established written down "manual". atheism is the most ridiculous thing ever for those facts alone.

anyway since ur butthurt is getting unbearable i will leave u with the following words "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something"

[Chonoryokusha]

@shenglongx

Atheism is merely a CONCLUSION, dimwit. It's not a dogma. It is merely a recognition of the fact that there are no reasons to believe in a magic man. That's all. That's all it's ever been. Your statement once again shows that you don't understand what atheism is.

[shenglongx]

@Chonoryokusha an ill though conclusion hahaa it basically has no scientific bearing what so ever there is no scientific evidence to prove atheism, there is no "way" of being atheist, its just some ignorant fools who think they know everything doing whatever immoral shit they feel like.

criticise atheism as much as u do religion and report ur findings, u will be suprised how ridiculous it is.

no one understands what atheism is.

[Chonoryokusha]

@shenglongx

Atheism doesn't require "proving" (sic) because it is not a positive assertion. It is the recognition of the fact that there is zero evidence for any magic men or women.

And you are wrong. See the above sentence for a definition of what atheism is.

I'm done with you. Go learn something instead of posting this demonstrably false crap.

[shenglongx]

@Chonoryokusha "Atheism doesn't require "proving""

lmaoooo oh man they should have had u working for the catholic church during the dark ages or even better during ww2 for the nazis, wow atheism doesnt require proving coz its just like magic right ?

[uniteordie1]

@shenglongx He is right. Logically atheist do not have to prove anything. They are not making the positive assertion. See 'Russel's teapot'. However, gnostic atheist do take on the burden of proof that is why agnostic atheism is a much more intellectually honest position. As far as 90% of scientist disagreeing with "atheist nonsense", that is just B.S. 90% of the members of The National Academy of Science are atheists. Scientific knowledge and logic tend to erode religious belief.

[shenglongx]

@uniteordie1 atheism is vague as u said so that percentage doesnt really mean anything, for example some atheists consider themsevles atheists because they dont believe in god, however buddhists also have no concept of god yet they are buddhists (a religion) go figure

[jimmyusee]

@shenglongx, shenglongx said "90% if not more real scientists disagree with atheist nonsense."

uniteordie1 retorted "90% of the members of The National Academy of Science are atheists."

shenglongx replied "that percentage doesnt really mean anything."

You bring up the dishonest statistic of 90%, then when it is debunked by another you somehow end up concluding that the percentages stat. does not matter anyway? A ploy you introduced in the first place?

You sir, are an idiot. Back of the class.

[shenglongx]

@jimmyusee nice use of selective quoting idiot, bravo...take for example einstein who was not religious yet said it would be stupid to assume there was no creator.

dishonest statistic is the 90% national academy of science members one as there dont seem to be any references to this anywhere (varies from 93% to bullshit levels everywhere)

anyway 100% of religious people are religious, so swivell on that statistic

[jimmyusee]

@shenglongx "100% of religious people are" frightened.

[shenglongx]

@jimmyusee 100% of atheists are wrong

[mellowmark1]

@shenglongx

Prove it.

[presidentjamie]

@shenglongx How so? I look forward to your explanation.........

[presidentjamie]

@shenglongx Buddhism is a philosophical system of thought, not a religion.

[theshninja]

@presidentjamie Then why do they have temples?

[shenglongx]

@Chonoryokusha this is not a debate about religion vs science since religion and science are compatible........this is a debate between ATHEISTS and religion

for your information being an atheists doesnt automatically make u a scientist, your more likely to be some bullied spotty teenager who didnt like being forced by mommy n daddy to go to church on sunday bless your heart poor gothemo kid :(

[Chonoryokusha]

@shenglongx

Yet again a strawman. I was never forced to go to church. I'm an atheist because there is zero evidence for a magic beign that can interfere in nature, or does interfere in nature. My atheism is a consequence of rational thinking.

Anyway, I'm done with you until you read Wittgenstein. And Stenger. And Hawking. And Sagan.

Do you have ANY reading recommendations on a par with these luminaries?

[shenglongx]

@Chonoryokusha hahaa rational my ass, believing in half baked theories before they are even proven to be fact, ur kind are a joke to any real scientist....if ur done then leave silly child go play with ur toys

again with ur same logic i can say im done with u until u read the torah, bible, quran etc etc

[Chonoryokusha]

@shenglongx

"... believing in half baked theories before they are even proven to be fact..."

That statement right there shows you don't understand what science is. You don't know what a theory is, you don't know what a fact is, and you don't know what a hypothesis is. You are totally ignorant. When you have some evidence for your assertions, let me know, Until then, pace Wittgenstein, be silent whereof you cannot speak.

[shenglongx]

@Chonoryokusha damn i didnt realise u were such an idiot, as a atheist pseudo scientist wannabe i excpected more from you but u dont even know the fundamentals of science

Big Fail

[purewilderness]

I want just a clip of him saying "magic man done it", I would totally embed it on FB!

[ResiusOnline]

A MAGIC MAN DONE IT!

[shenglongx]

lol wow he used clever scientific words that the average person does not understand to basically say he believes we are

hyper evolved sea monkeys that crawled out of the ocean

haha except there are still monkeys around who didnt get to evolve ?! even tho monkeys are only 1% different to humans in genes yet they are so obviously and vastly different to humans

bless magic scientist never get ur info from a comedian !!!

[elsparx]

@shenglongx Saying "If we evolved from apes, why are there still apes" is like saying "If americans came from europe, why are there still europeans"

[shenglongx]

@elsparx u consider europeans immigrants moving to america as evolution ? wat ? evolutionists say that humans evolved from monkeys, they dont say americans evolved from europeans lol

[elsparx]

@shenglongx You're an idiot. I was comparing the logic of both statements. I wasn't saying that Americans evolved from Europeans, thats just retarded. Nobody has ever said "humans evolved from monkeys" What has been said though is that humans and the great apes share a common ancestor.

[shenglongx]

@elsparx lol what an idiot why use such a stupid example dumshit and yes evolutionists DO SAY we evolved from monkeys

now piss off before my fists evolves into ur face

[elsparx]

@shenglongx Um, I really don't know where you're pulling this bullshit from. If anyone does say we evolved from monkeys then they are a fucking retard. We most certainly did not. And I really don't see how that was a stupid example. It utterly destroyed your moronic little attempt at an argument and showed you for the contemptable little retard you are. Oh and that little threat at the end there, funny, really funny. You cant even have a discussion without resorting to threats. Childish.

[shenglongx]

@elsparx stfu simpleton before i de-evolve u with my laser gun, u came here looking for a fight so dont cry like a little bitchboy when u get one u damn dung hole cow fister haha

[elsparx]

@shenglongx Right.... Ok then. I'm just gonna leave you alone for a while now. You have some serious issues dude.

[shenglongx]

@elsparx yes go now and put kitty kat in blender to make milkshake and bunny wabbit in microwave to make tasty burger.

my anus yawns like a hippo when i poop on ur evolution theory

[purewilderness]

@shenglongx An easier was of saying it is that if you isolate two populations of the same species long enough (not allowing them to breed), with time, there will be two genetically distinct populations, which can result in two different species. Chimps and Humans have a common ancestor about 7mya, this 'common ancestor' does not exist anymore (in a way, it is apart of us). (Ape ancestor population)--isolation--(Ape ancestor population)---->(Chimps)---(hu­mans). No more Ape ancestor.

[purewilderness]

@purewilderness *way

[shenglongx]

@purewilderness ok say that is true (cant know for sure if its true since the evidence doesnt exist in real form anymore) then how would something like that lead one to think god doesnt exist ? even that "common ancestor" was created right ? by the creator...whoever or whatever that may be to you but to religious people the creator is known as god. is it more logical to think we are "uncreated" than to think we are "created" ?

[purewilderness]

@shenglongx I never implied that this disproves a gods existence, nor did the video. But saying 'a magic man done it' doesn't get us anywhere. If the holy texts explained everything (and with accuracy), we would have no need to further knowledge. Most religious texts (like the Bible) have gotten a lot of stuff wrong, how is this the exception.

[shenglongx]

@purewilderness a magic man is the best answer these idiots can give, because they cant disprove god with science. holy texts there are many but the quran is the most accurate and unchanged. u misunderstand the purpose of the quran if u think it explains everything and anything....it is actually more like a manual on how to live life, e.g. manual to operate a vcr haha anyway the quran encourages us to make choices to better ourselves and to learn...

[purewilderness]

@shenglongx ok then, so we agree, but why do so many vehemently detest evolution. What most often is the case is that they have religious reasons to do so. Most holy texts speak to creationism. And I have read several verses in the Qur'an and the Bible that endorse creationism; I have also read several verses in these holy texts that speak to evolution (the Qur'an more than the Bible, honestly). My problem is when people get their science from these holy texts (which many Muslims do).

[Chonoryokusha]

@shenglongx

The Korean accurate? And do you really believe in flying horses too?

[shenglongx]

@Chonoryokusha why would i believe in flying horses ? im not an atheist who read one too many science fiction novels :)

[Chonoryokusha]

@shenglongx

Yet another strawman. FYI, I haven't read any fiction in years (although I am partial to SF movies like Star Trek).

The bottom line is this; you are mischaracterising and misrepresenting both atheism and science (which are not the same, FYI). When you have a science degree, let me know. Until then, please obey Wittgenstein.

[shenglongx]

@Chonoryokusha using ur same logic i can tell u to only talk about religion when you get a degree in all religions, since u are just another dimwit atheist ready to group every religion as "all the same"

im sure theres alot of straw in ur cranium, richard

[Chonoryokusha]

@shenglongx

My name isn't Richard.

And you are wrong, because religions can be studied anthropologically. What I oppose is your mischaracterisation of science.

[shenglongx]

@Chonoryokusha ur name is richard cranium, thats right u can study religion, but u cant study ATHEISM stop talking about science....atheism has nothing to do with science - there is no sub topic of science called atheism fool.

90% if not more real scientists disagree with atheist nonsense, i suggest u read up

[shenglongx]

@purewilderness .......this is the diff between a teacher teaching u or just giving u the answers, which is better?

[Chonoryokusha]

@purewilderness

The so-called "holy" texts explain nothing, and are demonstrably wrong on many points. Of course, the question that immediately regresses is, who created god/allah/zeus/chronos/quetzco­tl?

[purewilderness]

@Chonoryokusha Yes, I took philosophy 101, I think I got that, but that's not the point of this video. please re-read my comments.

[Chonoryokusha]

@shenglongx

Well, you're clearly unevolved.

Put it another way: if you exist, why do you still have cousins...?

[downyclown]

Thi sreminds me of Ricky Gervais' stand up

[blazereef]

creationist thought? isnt that redundent

[laflugantabastardo]

@blazereef

You probably mean oxymoronic. ;-)

What you said would mean that "creationism implies thought ". :-)

[blazereef]

@laflugantabastardo haha yeh, its the creationists playing mind games with me, they know so little about what they are talking about that it wears off on me

[laflugantabastardo]

@blazereef

I understand. It's usually not completely their fault though. Only some of them are ignorant on purpose - it's mostly fear, so I say, let's pity them. :-)

[blazereef]

@laflugantabastardo lol yeh, i do pity the ones who are conned by scumbags like hovind etc

[mmmodafoca]

ahhh fucking genius!

[ozpowermo]

Scientist: "Magic-man-done-it" isn't science...

Creationist: Really?

[mtssvnsn]

Nazipope does NOT approve! 

+<{:^=(

[Hamoct]

love this. Religion is the number one cause of death.

[laflugantabastardo]

@Hamoct

I think life is the number one cause of death.

[AHPMB]

Banana Design, isn't that Ray Comfort's theory?

[eddie23a]

sheer brilliance, I think Richard Dawkins could learn a thing or two about presentation from this. As much as I admire his work I think his delivery can be very condescending at times. This delivers more punch in 3 minutes than than Dawkins could in a 2 hour lecture

[Korberos]

@eddie23a THIS

[ElevenSevenFour]

I think this is my favorite video on Youtube.

[WW3]

Perhaps in the beginning there was a giant mass of infinite probabilities. A cloud, one could say, of possibilities (all simultaneously occurring). Perhaps we're nestled in a petri-dish. The biggest mistake mankind has made is assuming it has the mental capacity to understand the workings of the universe. Fact is little more than consistent speculation.

[samthejokerman]

not "banana" design XD

[lirahlaine]

now my tummy hurts ,that git made me laugh so much,it was all David Copperfield,he made everything cause he can fly.;-)

[jayeshchoudhari]

err..magic man done it...lmao...the end was hilarious

[ThePathologist123]

I love it.

[ModernModr]

the universe would not exist without beings to observe it. That's who "done it"

[JChrist54]

Says who?

[sacredgeometry]

scientists

[Dutchmaster81]

Ah, the wrong use of the "conscious observer"-argument is spreading!

If you're saying: "The universe doesn't exist without someone observing it, therefore there must always have been some consciousness, how else can we be here?" is just a game of words. It's a new version of the medieval "prime mover"-argument. Let's call it the "prime consciousness"-argument.

[ModernModr]

Let's not.

I don't think what I said supports the infinite being theory. Think about Dark Matter. Something is there but we can't see it. Whats that all about?

[Dutchmaster81]

No wait I don't get it. You're saying: "Stuff doesn't exist unless we observe it." Then you say: "There apparently exists a lot of stuff in the universe that we can't observe." These two don't match in my opinion, unless you have a way in which they do. So please explain what you're trying to say, and while you're at it explain what you meant with "that's who done it", if it's not the infinite being?

[ModernModr]

I don't know man, I realize what I'm saying doesn't make sense. I can't really sort it out in my own head let alone through a Youtube thread. Go watch Allen Watts "Leaves are not Green". That's not supposed to be my answer for anything, but that's all I can come up with.

[ralphinio3]

aaah robin!

[Mansionibus]

document your self on intelligent design better before you talk crap

[Giblinono]

Ah, but ask yourself this: just what else is there to document other than "Magic Man done it!"?

[car000333]

"What kind of force?"

"Magic Man Done It" LMAO

[Akolyte01]

When someone comes along and pretentiously spouts self righteous, blatantly WRONG arguments against something they know nothing about, the DESERVED to be ridiculed.

I felt personally insulted by your condescending posts, no matter how much you hide the tone with smiley faces.

[Akolyte01]

I fail to see why you picked scientists over any other group of people. Of course there are condescending scientists, probably at the same rate as there are condescending people in any group of people. Unless you mean that announcing evidence and the most likely explanations for said evidence is somehow condescending....

[Biff947]

What did he say?

He removed the comment.

[Akolyte01]

lol

It's exceedingly clear you don't know the slightest thing about the big bang or evolution.

So, until you do, you can't talk about the mathematical likelihood of it.

[Akolyte01]

Yes my knowledge is superior. Your posts demonstrate such obstinate stupidity I'm actually incredibly surprised that you write quite well (for someone on youtube.)

You have no FUCKING CLUE what a scientific theory is. GRAVITY is a theory.

Evolution has been PROVEN. It has been proven by science that over time new species may arise as a result of natural.

The only debatable point is whether all of the variety of life on earth evolved from a single source.

[Akolyte01]

To compare evolution to say 2 + 2 = 5 is so stupid I don't even know how to refute it. Physics does NOT say that everything tends towards chaos. Life has become so organized because it WORKS you dumb fuck. If you actually UNDERSTOOD evolution you'd know it makes perfect sense. Fact: animals mutate. Fact: animals with desirable traits are more likely to survive. Fact: animals pass on their traits.

Questing things for myself??? ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING? Questioning things is WHY I'm an atheist!

[Akolyte01]

You say it's unlikely that the world "just happened." (Which the big bang theory never says at all.) but you think it's MORE LIKELY that some cosmic creator with IMPOSSIBLE ABILITIES "just happened?" What the FUCK is wrong with you?

[ruin3r]

I think you missed the point.. creationism IS a joke, there is no evidence that a god exists let alone created the universe. its juvenile to dismiss scientific progress and insist that "magic man dun it" is the answer to everything. That's something only children could believe, that's why they start brainwashing you early in life. The video points out how ludicrous it is for the religious to try and re-brand science into their bullshit by copy+pasting it and adding in "magic man done it".

[Cowboy144]

There is no evidence that you exist, let alone that you created the above post.

[ruin3r]

You can see my post with your own two eyes, that's more than you can say for your imaginary god. Strange, I as a mere human can confirm my existence, but a supposed omnipotent being cannot take 5 seconds to announce "I EXIST" to the world in a way that can't be denied? it seems more likely your imaginary friend does not exist. I know if I were a god i'd let the people know; only a wicked and malevolent god would allow people to fight and die over him.

[Cowboy144]

What I can see is a collection of letters and punctuation marks that have come together through natural selection through the course of time come together to form sentances.

[Cowboy144]

There is no proof that you wrote them. In fact, anyone who is actually gullible enough to believe that you even exist, let alone that you wrote the postsin in question, is a delusional, moronic sheep who believes in made up fairy tales. I know you don't exist, in fact ,because if you did exist you would have found a way to prove it to me, namely by physically appearing before me to dispell any doubt that i might have that your posts are merely random smatterings of letters and punctuation.

[IzzyBunneh]

lots of mistakes, but FUNNY XD

[Cola82]

I think he forgot the major different between ID and Neo-Darwinism, that being that in ID God created all those things all at once in a very short period of time. All of the transitional forms existed all at once in the garden of Eden and all went extinct except those that seem to represent the outcome of those other forms. In science, we look at those forms and see millions of years of evolution. The difference in time taken is a big one.

[jdbvids]

No he didn't. He summed it up quite nicely. "A magic man done it."

[BananaHurricane]

Lol, I love that... "Magic man dunnit!" That'd be great on a t-shirt

[Solthiel]

You'll be happy to know that people of all accents mock Theism.

[Cowboy144]

Right. People like Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins....

[Solthiel]

...,Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett, Carl Sagan, Richard Feynman, Albert Einstein.

[Tavis314]

Uh. Isn't he like, a comedian? Yeah...Make fun of what you can.

[spleenblender]

Better being pseudointellectual than anti-intellectual like most theists are.

[Cowboy144]

Not so much better; just the opposite side of the fence.

[spleenblender]

When comparing two things, one is inherently superior to the other in a given category. In all things I use to define "better", pseudo is much more fitting than anti.

So yeah, the grass on your side of the fence is shit brown.

[Cowboy144]

How intriguing that you use the same substance that you're full of to describe the color of the grass on my side of the fence.

[adamjlynch]

Flying Spaghetti Monster is not amused. You all need to invite his noodly appendage into your heart.

RAmen

[rOoNy911]

Yuss!

[proscanone]

No faith is needed. There's no evidence to back the claim that any gods exist, so it's easy to reject.

The only evidence I've heard of fairies existing comes from fictional books and stories of personal experience from individuals with less than complete mental competence. That's about the evidence Mr. God has going for him.

No one is stating that it's 100% impossible no gods can ever exists. Just because something is theoretically possible does not mean it requires faith to disbelieve it.

[McConsumer]

sort of funny. Still, it's not fair to bash creationists. Both sides have evidencefor their position, but neither side has any proof. There is no reason why the two ideas have to be mutually exclusive. IT's when you start adding specifics like the Bible that the creationist position is indefensible.

[proscanone]

no evidence on the creationist side...just the magic man done it!

[McConsumer]

lol, but how do they support their belief that there is no God? There's a difference between not believing in God and believing there is no God. To mock someone for believing suggests to me that the mocker believes the other to be wrong. That faith is based upon what proof?

I'm not saying we have to believe everything everyone says. But if there is supporting evidence, and no proof either way; then it's possible. This video was clever, but still only one faction of faith making fun of another.

[coopermancloz]

yes but one does not require evidence to not believe in something! if this were the case one would be required to believe in absolutely everything that is not specifically disproved. in fact LACK OF evidence is the only reason necessary to not believe in something

[McConsumer]

True. However,there are 2 group one can belong to if they don't believe.

1) This group does not believe in God. They have no proof for or against the existence of that being. Therefore, they (being logical) can arrive to no conclusion.

2)This group believes there is no God. They take the absence of evidence to be evidence of absence. Although they have no proof precluding the existence of God, they choose to believe it anyway.

[ciucinciu]

stupid intelligent design!

[douglasjcox]

Love it. Pretty much cuts to the core of the bullshit that is Intelligent Design.

[lordreefa]

Owns

[Ginnna]

Love it, love it, LOVE IT!!

[nirvaaa]

thanks for one with the audio matched up.

[wing3draw]

that was so stupid.

[seanpb4068]

awesome