Alert icon
We're changing our privacy policy. This stuff matters.  Learn more  Dismiss

Top Ten (Failed) Proofs for God's Existence: Part 3

Loading...

Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon
Upgrade to the latest Flash Player for improved playback performance. Upgrade now or more info.
13,994
Loading...
Alert icon
Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon

Uploaded by on Mar 21, 2011

Third in a 10-part series examining Christian apologist and radio talkshow host Bob Dutko's "Top 10 Proofs for the Existence of God."

  • likes, 8 dislikes

Link to this comment:

Share to:

Uploader Comments (brettppalmer)

  • @WWIIJuniorjoe3 It wasn't an "accident" that I came into being. I'm the result of some very extremely complex and complicated biology and chemistry. Just because you do not understand the complexity involved in the formation of the first "life," that doesn't give license to say "God did it." "God did it" is just another way of stating your ignorance about the matter.

Top Comments

  • After denying that inference has a place in science, Dutko pleads for an inference of his own and calls it scientific.

    "that means that believing that there is a god IS in fact, scientific."

    Do these people have no shame? I thought they were supposed to.

see all

All Comments (271)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Not only difficult to reproduce the conditions for abiogenesis but actually impossible with current state of our technology. First you need a sun and then a planet in just the right position. Then you need a lot of complex chemical reactions to occur over billions of years. I'm not arguing against abiogenesis, I don't see any other way life could have occurred, just against the idea that it could be done in a test tube in a laboratory.

  • Ask what brought god into existance

  • and god is only possible with imgaination.

  • @nn101198 I'm not trying to cause you trouble, but do you have a source, or researcher to go with that claim?

  • Alien astronauts experimenting with primate DNA sounds a tad bit more logical than a non-material being creating a dude from dirt....

  • Wow... he refuted himself. First he says abiogenesis isn't scientific because science is based upon "observation, testing or the ability to make predictions".

    Them he runs off to say that God is scientific? How is an invisible, transcendent being "based upon observation, testing, or the ability to make predictions"? Nonsense.

  • Sea creatures ect were the product of design.Not not created from nothing but from energy comeing from the designer.Even secular scientists claim energy to be eternal.

  • As Bill Maher said: "Let's keep the science to the scientists, shall we?"

  • I can't believe the hubris of christian apologists thinking that they know better than trained scientists, that they can flip the page open and see the flaw.

  • Artificial life has been created

Loading...

Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more