Refuting Conservapedia's "Atheism" Page - HD version

Conservapedia.com says they're more impartial than Wikipedia. Yeah, right! This is a high-definition version of my video which debunks their bogus arguments against atheism.

The page: http://www.conservapedia.com/Atheism

My earlier video I referenced: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AO3oFNsQnRw

The guy doing the mind-reading trick is Banachek: http://www.banachek.org/nonflash/index.htm

The TAM3 DVD: http://www.randi.org/joom/jref-store/44.html

My original (non-HD) video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E9oh-_lU2yk

Category:

Education

Tags:

• conservapedia
• conservative
• atheist
• atheism
• arguments
• refuted

[shanedk]

CaptainRidley, THIRD AND FINAL WARNING.

If you have a refutation of the points in the video, present them. If you have support for your invisible sky daddy, present it. But you WILL desist in levying these FALSE accusations of atheists--including that we will "demolish all those who have faith"--or YOU WILL BE BLOCKED.

You can be a reasonable person and post here, or you can continue to be an asshole and be barred. Your choice.

[JungleJargon]

@RYjet911 You have not even begun to prove evolution is the cause of anything. You admit that evolution did not cause life. It is another fantasy called abiogenesis that you believe started the fantasy of evolution. You want your fantasy cake and eat it too!

You can't have your fantasy cake and eat it because there are no orderly changes taking place other than what is reorganized by the limited possibilities that the genome offers. You need over 50,000 entire morphological changes.

[RYjet911]

@JungleJargon You're absolutely right. Biology does have a cause! Evolution. Random changes in DNA during cell replication processes. Natural selection for those creatures that get superior changes in DNA, and against those with weaker changes.

You have asserted that everything has a cause. I hope you realise this means asking 'how', now 'why', right? Saying "God did it" for answering a how is poor science, and also breaks pretty much every rule and law in science textbooks.

[JungleJargon]

@johnrainrules Yeshua has not had the last word yet. That is to your benefit.

[JungleJargon]

@johnrainrules

[JungleJargon]

@RYjet911 You are the one saying that objects made or refined what you are, prove it.

I am the one saying that everything has a cause, all functions, working parts and mechanisms always have a maker equal to or greater than the function that was made.

Biology is not exempt from the rules of science. It has a cause too.

[johnrainrules]

@JungleJargon I could prove you wrong with empirical data. Jesus promised an end to human wickedness. Odin promised an end to giants. I don't see any giants around.

Who is the real God?

[RYjet911]

@JungleJargon Wrong. You have made an assertion. You must prove your point. All MAN-MADE functions, working parts and mechanisms have a maker. It's why they're man-made. Biological functions and mechanisms have been shown, repeatedly, to develop on their own. It doesn't take a designer to make a baby develop in a womb.

[JungleJargon]

@RYjet911 All functions, working parts and mechanisms always have a maker that is equal to or greater than the function, working parts or mechanisms that are made.

If you really want to prove me wrong, all you have to do is to show me a mechanism that does not have a maker.

[RYjet911]

@JungleJargon Like I said, man-made mechanisms are not comparable to biological ones. They formed under entirely different means with entirely different systems. You'll have to try better than that, troll.

[evilkillerpenguin]

161 are Conservapedians