God's ''To do'' list - 1. Make universe in 7days at the most 2. Make humans with belly buttons 3. Place fossils everywhere to give impression of evolution (hehehe that will confuse them) 4. Drown nearly everyone 5. Transform myself into my own son. Die for 3 days to impress myself. 6. Tell everyone I will return shortly 7. Don't return. Hide. Yep, makes perfect sense.
MrJohndl The thing is....there actually *_IS_* a "Mrs. God." See, Yahweh the Mesopotamian god of war, actually _did_ have a wife/consort. Her name was *Asherah.* But...apparently Yahweh divorced her....or killed her. Something fishy going on there.... What did you do to your wife Mr. Yahweh?? Why does she have bruises all over her? Care to explain?
@PARTH Asha Jabal al Lawz is Mt.Sinai. They've been hiding it and lying about the Exodus route. There is an incredible amount of archaeological evidence of the events as described in Exodus at that site. The Saudi government put a MASSIVE fence around the whole thing, and they're not letting anyone in to study it... Losers.
@PARTH Asha No no no don't get me wrong, I'm specifically talking about the Exodus event, and even then, only the parts in it that can be archaeologically proven to have happened. I'm not saying it makes the whole Bible true lol chill :P I'm a skeptic as well. I'm just saying don't throw the baby out with the bath water, most skeptics write the WHOLE Bible off as myth. I think the claims should be proven true or false before assuming they're all false or all true. Don't be like the extremist religious nuts. Don't be an extremist Atheist.
The very beautiful point that Visnu Das was making that Hindu Vedic Scriptures doesn't go against Science but goes hand in hand with Science but the anchor didn't gave him enough time to make his point clear in details ... Vedas is full of science Astronomy , Cosmology , Biology , Quantum Physics , Quantum Mechanics , Medicine , Yoga , Meditation .... Scientific atheists need to go through Vedas , Srimad Bhagawatam , Puranas to know & learn about Vedic literatures in details ...I am sure they won't find it illogical like Quran & Bible The Dashaavatars of Lord Maha Vishnu fits with the human evolution theory .....It has description about milky way , our universe & multiverse theory of innumerable universes . We have our temple of 9 planets with Sun at the centre known as Navagraha from 1000 BC unlike the Christian theory of Sun & Planets revolving around Earth for which Galileo Galilei was punished death sentence by Church The 3rd Vishnu avatar Varaha or the giant boar had saved the earth from get sunk in the galaxy & he hold the earth on his giant tusks ...Which explains very clearly that Earth is spherical as per Vedic Scriptures unlike the Christian or the Islamic theories of flat earth
@@Gniicer00lz ....Sun along with all other planets revolve around the earth which is fixed & static at the same point of the galaxy ....Geocentric theory of Christianity Foolish Christians 😁😂
Yes 👍 true absolutely 💯 right U are, There christian n Islam doesn't make sense of religion n not spiritually connected,juz they are making fun of their religion n their Jesus n prophet The anchor n they all are not allowing our Hindu pandit Iskcon temple poojari ji n made him feel very emotional n traumatized,bcoz they are not like our sanatan dharma religiously follows like us, for us 9 planets are Navagrahas n Sun n Moon are bagwaan n earth is dharti maa n each every things are Devatha. Y did this channel anchor invite to their show our Hari Krishna Das poojari ,when they are not interested to listen n hear about our Hindu sanatani. All christian n Islam people where chit chatting n not believing that there is no God. What a Foolish people, that's why now in 2024 christian n Islamic religions countries and people are fighting each other ending themselves,decreasing population by killing n loosing their lives in the war against😮 each other in their own religion
Science: We always look objectively to find the truth. Accepting our faults and changing our views when provided with other evidence. Religion: We are allways right in everything we believe and no amount of evidence will ever change our views.
Religion doesn’t have to change. If you don’t like the believes if one denomination, feel free to switch, there is another with the exact opposite doctrine.
1-it's so refreshing that ur not belligerent and spewing vitriol. sorry for the inverted compliment, but cannot assume someone who does not believe will not behave as such. 8}. 2-you ask an EXCELLENT question!!! one that MANY ask - even us believers [yes, "there's a little atheism in everyone"]. 3-BRIEF: the simple answer is - for me, to inherit eternal life and explore this wonderful Universe. DETAIL: we all live in "neutral ground"; that is, we all have the same evidence, or lack thereof. this is our common starting point. this is also why i have concluded at this time, with only - oh, 30 years or so, collectively, of directly or indirectly pondering this same question, that "will, and desire are the bridge to any possible hope of eternal life." the catch is that we must activate our will towards believing. some say God activates our will, but truth is we wouldn't really know the difference. for all intents and purposes we simply need to start believing. the point of believing is that if one cannot truly prove that there is no God, then it is possible there is a God. then you go from there. why seek to find out if there is a God? there must be a goal in mind. my goal is pretty self-seeking. when i was a "wee lad of 34" i "cleared the table" and started over. i asked myself - "do i want to crawl out of my grave [or whatever happens] and live forever?" my answer was "yes". question 2 was, "who can help me do that?" trying to not be biased towards Christianity, still from what i knew, Jesus was the answer. i went from there. i am human and sin like everyone else, but as the song says, "i get knocked down, i get up again, nothing's gonna keep me down". so in short, my answer to your question is, "for eternal life." there is no need for rubbish religious practices, but embracing what Christ says is critical. do not conflate religion - especially the horrors of ridiculous religiosity, with who Christ really is. get a bible, read it with interest, get with Christians and ask them what's in their heart, and to help you learn what to read and how to read it. the gospel of John is a great book to start reading. get a version like American Standard Version[ASV], or even the New International Version [NIV]. 4-the whole of proving God is difficult, because the whole of everything emanates from God. God is the singularity of Infinite Regress, who can prove that with tools of science that emanate from point 0?
to seek the Living God, designer of all that is, and in whose power is eternity. to know the one who created all. if that does not intrigue you, or if you cannot imagine something metaphysical existing like the Infinite Regress creator, then there is no point in pursuing it. you have to want to; and you are free to do what you want.
You making a bias comment that there "is" absence of evidence for God. Does absent of evidence for naturalism undermine most atheist? The answer is yes, though many still believe in that idea.
@@kimdanielsen4368 All the evidence we have supports naturalism, but even if there was no evidence to support naturalism, there still would be no evidence for anything supernatural.
@@jmg94j Right this will be interesting! Can you give me positive scientific evidence to prove that naturalism is true?? I agree that the absence of evidence for naturalism doesn't prove the supernatural, but then again it those suggest fundamentally that naturalism is faith based not science based.
Look the whole purpose of faith, is to believe in something there is no evidence for. Faith is a blind belief. Religion was created to control people. Even the concept of free will is a joke. If it is free will, than why do you need the threat of hell. It is like someone holding a gun and saying, if you turn right you will live the best life ever, but if you turn left I will put a bullet in your head. That is not true free will. The Bible is an awesome work of fiction. It’s purpose has suited our leaders well. What better way to control people, than create the fear of hell.
The dismissal of Francesca Stavrakapolou's knowledge of the subject and the constant interruptions during her points was intensely frustrating. The man on the far right end is insufferable.
Her arrogance is really offputting. Rather than just tell the man she thinks hes wrong, she instead patronised him by saying hes "clearly been led on a merry dance" Hes a chartered Engineer and metallurgist whos a member of the Egyptian Exploration Society AND the Historical Metallurgy Society...so the way she speaks to him as if hes a poor little man whos been led astray is really quite grim.
They bring on a total crank to spout some unsubstantiated nonsense, then bring in a peer reviewed respected academic to answer them - but present it as if both of them have equally valid opinions. It's misleading and dishonest.
It's because you can't find a peer reviewed, respected academic who believes in that religious batshittery. They are like the christian god...one doesn't exist in reality.
@@ericdellinger6260 Fascinates me that atheists are obsessed with christianity but seldom any other religion Almost as if they're very poorly read and only know the Dawkins soundbites for that one religion
@@InhabitantOfOddworld Wrong, atheists mainly go for Christianity AND Islam, mainly because those are by far the two most dominant religions not just in Britain and America but on the planet.
One of the saddest lessons of history. If we’ve been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We’re no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It’s simply too painful to acknowledge, even to ourselves, that we’ve been taken. Once you give a charlatan power over you, you almost never get it back.” -Carl Sagan, astronomer and writer (1934-1996) .
What we know about dna is limited that why we don't understand how the dna select the codes. And most of the dna 99.999999999999% we don't go and learn don't be a fool
Someone should take that arrogant ass in the gray suit and beat him bloody. Just a third-world BS artist in the form of Dinesh D'Souza and the late Ravi Zac (good riddance). What a waste of lot of hot air this whole thing.
@@bonnluedkie2717 if that's what you think evolutionary scientists believe, then it shows that you have never even thought of doing the slightest research on the topic
@@gaganaggarwal7599, The first law of thermodynamics, also known as Law of Conservation of Energy, states that energy can neither be created nor destroyed; energy can only be transferred or changed from one form to another.
@@gaganaggarwal7599 , i also don't like any organised religion but here i mean to say that universe is still a mystery, I don't like to use the term 'God' as general people think of, it creates lots of chaos among different beliefs and resort to violence. I am an agnostic and i agree that inexplicable things do exist which human intellect will never be comprehend. In a nutshell, I can only say 'we know more about we don't know'.
Exactly! Islam is the worse offender here as they deny all the descrepancies in their so called holy books. Muslims can not grasp evolution, in fact they refuse to listen to this strongly proven scientific theory.
@M I Conciousness can't be explained without an external influence and quantum entanglement fixes these problems. If you have ever heard of the double slit experiment it proves that observation affects how particles react. You are just angry because someone pushed their form of Christless Christianity on you in the past.
These debates are an introduction to skepticism and detachment. I watch these debates so I can learn my adversary's arguments and show how wrong they are. It's fun.
@@niviamaeva It's the wilful ignorance, twisting of facts or plain lies that irk me so. The internet wasn't made yesterday, but it seems like a lot of these religious folk were =/
Wayfaerer lol lol Very well pointed out. It is funny not to say absurdly tragic! Some things said in this debate aches me to the core. “biblical point of view” for instance...
@@JamesRichardWiley I'm not totally clear on what you said. You think the sceptics are wrong. Because creationists are in my opinion are 1000% delusional from man created beliefs, no evidence no likely
On the subject of demons which came up in the discussion,isn't it strange that at no point in history has a single atheist been possessed or even bothered by one.Amazing !!!!
It surprises me how people who use science to justify their non-religious beliefs are ignorant of a basic understanding of the science. Have you not heard of multiple personality disorder also called Dissociative Identity Disorder? That is the concept of demons, other spirits inhabiting a person with distinct personalities and manifesting through that person. While in Engineering School I encountered such a person. A perfect stranger who started describing to me people that I knew and things I had done in my life. And at one point, the spirit in the person referred to himself as "we" saying "we are leaving him alone, we are going to someone else." This happened when I called upon the name of Jesus Christ. Now in the Bible, it is described how one person was possessed by thousands of demons. So the fact that the medical profession knows about this fact of multiple personalities which is quite prevalent and uses a scientific term such as "disorder" is an indication of the evidence that demons do exist. I also had a friend who started hearing voices that were telling him that he was spiritually lost. He would close his eyes and be guided without hitting any objects. And while I was conversing with him the voices were replying to him. Or what about occasions in which I told a coworker precisely what he did and was planning to do as a result of an immediate download of knowledge I received? I have many more examples. What about near-death experiences in which tens of thousands of patients die during the operating procedure and their souls leave their bodies and many are able to describe in great detail a visual view of the actions in the operating room? But it does not end there. Two neurosurgeons who did not believe in God gave up on a patient who was bleeding profusely and expecting death as nothing they did could stop the rapid flow of blood. Then all of a sudden an amazing presence entered the operating room visibly surrounding the surgeons and an amazing peace and all of a sudden the blood stopped flowing. After the incidence one of them said that God does exist as he was visibly shaken by the experience. What about a person whose spirit rose above the hospital building and they saw a locked shed with its contents and vivid colors. After it as immediately investigated it was exactly as described. There are many such accounts. We discard these things when they go contrary to our belief system. Or do you want me to get into the story of how the Big Bang Theory in Astrophysics is now being undermined by the discovery of dark energy and dark matter? Scientists had believed (yes, faith again) that the expanding universe from the Big Bang would slow down from its rate of expansion (based upon Newton's Law of Gravitation) and eventually stop its expansion and start collapsing on itself. But in reality, recent observations (in the early 1980s) proved that the expansion is accelerating. The fact is that science is a work in progress and many theories are just plain wrong. Another example of that is Natural Selection which is part of the Theory of Evolution. It makes absolutely no sense that a natural unguided process can design the human body with its amazing complexity and machinery which is orders of magnitude more sophisticated than the most advanced technologies ever devised by man. And how do the Biologists support their bogus theory? Just throw in billions of years. By the time many of these children leave high school, they have already been indoctrinated into believing this theory. How do they sell this fraud? By indoctrinating children from a very young age. But worst yet, anyone who goes against it is ostracized from the scientific community by the gatekeepers. As they say, no one is allowed to rock the boat. What does the phrase mean, "To do or say something that might endanger a stable situation or upset the status quo." As regards to your statement on atheism, it is a religion whose primary objective is to challenge the existence of God. And yes, those demons you speak about would be happy that they have quite a large following. An objective scientific observer who has not had a personal experiential encounter with God would be at the most, an agnostic though common sense informs us that it is impossible for a human being to have come about through any means other than being created. But to profess atheism is to undermine science as nothing in science supports such a belief system. A theory that cannot be tested, proved, or disproved should not be regarded as a scientific theory in the first place. At best, Natural Selection and evolution as it relates to our Origin should be described as a belief or what some would call faith. Since I did not have a religious upbringing, by the time I entered Engineering School, I acknowledged to myself that I did not know whether God existed or not. Now I not only believe in the existence of God, I know that God exists! You need to spend some time at the library and read the accumulated knowledge in Biology on the human body, DNA, genes, cells, nervous system, eyes, brain, viruses, and so on. And before you go about promulgating your views on religion, you should take the time to read the Bible, the Gospel of John (King James Version - just do an online search) about the life of Jesus Christ. This version of the Bible was translated by top scholars in England. But if you spend your time reading the views and opinions of those that do not believe in God as opposed to examining the Bible for yourself, then that would be a total disregard of the scientific method or process. If you read the Bible, then God is obligated to encounter you and reveal himself to you. So stop doubting and see for yourself ;-)
ShellacScrubber dont be ridiculous. How much more influence do you want the demon to have on an atheist. It already made him think there's no God. Nothing can be worse than that
The man asked how we can trust our scientific reasoning when it's designed for purpose of survival (by theory of evolution). Yet he's willing to trust a book written by the same species 2,000 years ago. Great logic.
Yeah but the bronze age men who wrote that book were some of gods chosen and they CLAIM it's the word of god. Plus it says our god is the best god, oh and the only god. He is goodness, mercy, and love (even when he's giving babies cancer) and he wants to save you if you just submit to him for eternity. Cause if you dont become his servant you suffer endlessly. Just think, when he isnt causing (or ignoring) some famine, he may be listening to your prayer. So join us this Sunday!! And bring money. Give us lots of money. He needs your money. -The church
@@abdourjawara022 The quran was and still is written by men, who SAY it's the divine word of allah. I can write a book, says its divinely inspired and call myself a prophet too, that doesnt make it true.
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is a malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able or willing? Then why call him God?" -Epicurus (Greek philosopher, BC 341-270)
gaurav shetty. The point is are you willing to prevent evil but not able ? To God, evil serves a purpose. Then whence cometh evil? He created it to test you. It's that simple.
@@zipodipo7923 How could making little children suffer from cancer and die from it possibly be a test to those children or even to their parents?!! How could creating a disabled and needy person for life a test ?!!!! Just 2 stupid examples among millions. On the other hand, a secular army had to defeat a conservative army in order to get rid of slavery. WHO HAS MORE MORALS???
@@inicheck2697 It's not a test for those children or their parents. The test is for you and fools like you. Those are the children of moses. They are already in paradise. If you had any sense you would give anything to be one of them. Instead here you are blaspheming your way into hell. You're the one who has problems, not those kids. With an ignorant mind and a stupid mouth you compound your problems. You should talk less and listen more. It's possible you might learn something. Oh and your manners are deplorable. That's the reason why you ask stupid questions. I can't even begin to teach you about morals. You lack the IQ.
@@zipodipo7923 Hi Mr High IQ man!! So for the very intelligent person that you are, your great God is making some people suffer (too much) in order for other people to learn something, hopefully to avoid going to 'hell' ?! Well if God thinks that's the way a teacher should behave, he must be a weirdo teacher! Secondly, the great big MAJORITY of those sufferers are NOT 'the children of Moses': Buddhists, Muslims, tribes from Africa and America thousands of years before 1492 etc etc etc. How would they even think the way your BRAINWASHED mind does?? How would anybody around them learn the lesson you are SO confident and proud to convey !!? You need to be terribly narrow-minded or pathologically stupid to believe that LOL
Guys, I have to share a shocking secret with you: There really is a Kings Cross Station, and there's even a sign which says Platform 9 3/4, just like it's described in the book! That must mean it's real, right?!
The problem here is that everyone is given a equal say and they believe that their opinions have equal weight. When discussing scientific discoveries and theories, your holy book and religious beliefs are not required. The edjit who said we don’t understand DNA needs to go back to school. It is so sad that in 2019, there are still people who think we require religious thought to help explain the origins of life and our position in our solar system. We don’t.
It wasnt meant to be taken literally, I think science created the world and religion (if you choose to believe) is there to help us make sense and run the world with morals and values. I dont believe in a God but I think thats where Religion sits.
@@anthonytrose the life is in the blood lead us away from the treatment of bad humers ritual purification being the reason the dr who got fired for tell people to wash their hands between the morgue and the maternity ward that is now the medical standard I'm sure there are more I don't know of the top off head
A 3500 year old text preserved to the letter on nothing more than sheep skin and tree pulp isn't extraordinary at all I suppose. I'd hazard to say it takes just as much "faith" to believe in evolution as it does creation. And yet the scientists STILL HAVE NO CLUE.
@@Finn-McCool Where tf are you getting "3500" years old (earliest estimate of book of Job is what, 600 bc?) and why do you think we have original copies, "preserved to the letter" on their original sheep skin and tree pulp (actually earliest forms of many bible myths are in clay tablets, recorded by Sumerian civilization). Scientists have plenty of clues to support the TOE, it is one of the strongest, most fundamental theories in science.
@@SavageHenry777 After reading my comment it does seem my grammar could use some work. The book is roughly 3500 years old. The original pages are indeed not preserved. I think some of the oldest are from the first century BCE. After the Dead Sea Scrolls were found there were only slight changes in spelling compared to the then oldest known available copies. Very well preserved indeed. Genesis Exodus and Job were all penned Circa 1657 BCE.
@@SavageHenry777 no matter how strong any theory is, it is still only a theory. And simply finds itself full of holes. Believe what you want to believe. After studying the Bible and looking out my door everyday I'm thoroughly convinced in creation as the means of creation.
@@Finn-McCool Eric you don't understand the difference between "theory" in the colloquial sense and scientifoc theory. Something like "it's my theory the news anchors are lizard people," is really just hypothesis, postulation, opinion. A scientific theory, examples of which include the Theory of Gravity, Germ Theory, hell Music Theory, quantum mechanical theory, and many others, are highly tested and supported by evidence, thouroughly fleshed out models describing observed facts to put it very crudely. So, no, saying the theory of evolution is "just a theory" is a highly ignorant argument to make for your position. No big deal: now you know, once you confirm what I've told you. You can do that quickly on the internet: "scientific theory definition" highlight, right click and search for it. Take care.
The problem is that "God" is such a loaded word. No two people can agree on precisely who/what God is. Everyone has their own subjective interpretation.
So many people, so sure that THEY have reason, that THEY aren't ignorant. Those who support evolutionism and/or atheism too often try to paint a stereotype of creationists as being low I.Q. science illiterates. Such people are smugly sure that THEY ain't religious. (Like me in the past when I called myself an atheist.) But they are. Profoundly so. Why? Because they have great...faith...in what is never seen and is even what is impossible. Yet they flatter themselves that they are way smart, and all about science, while feeling sure that creationists have nothing but an Imaginary Friend. . Let's look at just a few of the imaginary friends and myths from evolutionism and atheism. . First there is the belief in the imaginary time fairy friend. Evolutionists promote the idea that life can come from inorganic matter. (And don't say they do not. It's easily found all over Google and on YT. Who came up with the mythical primal pond theory? Creationists?) When it is pointed out that life only comes from life and life of the same kind they respond "Well, with enough tiiiiime, anything can happen. We have...faith...therefore, that things happened differently in the conveniently unverifiable past." . They have faith, too, in their imaginary crystal ball friend that sees into that unverifiable past. For ex. they will pick up a fossil from a rock and tell you what happened to its invisible and evidenceless descendants for over 100 million Darwin years. They also talk about "missing" links, more of their imaginary friends. Don't bother to ask how you tell missing links from never existed links. They have...faith...that they are just "missing." . Next we see the imaginary Geologic Column friend that "supports" evolution. The real evidence shows the fossils are jumbled. There really are no such things as Jurassic, Triassic etc. periods. Giant shark fossils are found with dino fossils in Montana, for ex. Whales' fossils are found in wildly improbable places like the Andes mountains, the Sahara and a desert in Chili. Deep sea "Cambrian" fossils are found at every level on the planet, including on most mountain tops, as with the world's highest, the Himalayans. . Take a look. www.bing.com/images/search?q=trilobites+on+mountain+tops&qpvt=trilobites+on+mountain+tops&qpvt=trilobites+on+mountain+tops&qpvt=trilobites+on+mountain+tops&FORM=IGRE . Those are the fossils of extinct, ocean bottom dwelling, trilobites. They, and other marine fossils found with them, are often in stunningly well preserved, and beautifully detailed, condition. We are told "plate tectonics" moved those deep sea creatures, for a millions of years trek, all over the world, in unbroken, vast sheets of concrete in the billions onto the world's mountain heights in such great shape. That's fine.... If you don't believe in erosion and admit you believe in miracles! . "Cambrian" fossils, like those trilobites, are found in the hills of mid America and countless other places on the planet, high and far, inland. Now why do we see evidence of sea life all over the planet at every level? And, how did all that sea water get everywhere? 90% of fossils on land are marine, too. Hmmmm.... . Next, there is the imaginary family changing fairy friend. Put a species of any genus of fish, bird, lizard, tree, bacteria, whatever, under your Darwinian pillow. Voila! Over an evolutionary "night" it will change into the next step up in the Animal or Plant Kingdom, i.e. a different family. However, in the real world of trillions of life forms, and throughout recorded history, eagles stay eagles, bullfrogs stay bullfrogs, tulips stay tulips, eboli bacteria stay eboli bacteria, chimps stay chimps, fish stay fish, and of course people stay people, no matter how much they change. . We never, ever, see any evidence of a life form transitioning from one family to another. Since all the evidence shows that never happens all around us with life forms, you just have to have... faith ... that it somehow happened differently in the unverifiable realm of the ancient and conveniently invisible past. With no evidence of any family transitioning to be another kind of family, there is no evidence for evolution. (Not to mention never seeing any transitions from any order, class, phylum or Kingdom.) It's just that simple. . Then there is the supremely imaginary god-friend of nothingness. Richard Dawkins and others tell us that everything came from nothing. This defies unniversal experience and common sense, not to mention the laws of thermodynamics and physics. But their imaginary friend, the nothingness god, sells big time to those who want to believe they can be their own, puny, little gods. . Are you willing to take a serious and open minded look outside the box? If nothing else you can hear what the creationists are really saying, not the spin about what they are saying. . On this webpage you can see Nobel Prize winning scientists, other secular scientists - including some world famous evolutionists - admitting there is no evidence for evolution. You can see them calling evolution a kind of religion, something that leads to "anti knowledge", etc. Notice how many of these secular scientists acknowledge evidence for a Creator. freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1435562/posts . . Are you aware that more and more blood cells, blood vessels and soft stretchy materials are being found in dino bones? Forensic science and common sense tell us such things could not last for more than a few thousand years. Go to Genesispark to see ancient art depictions of dinos from around the world. My fave is the stegosaurus carved on a 1,000 year old Cambodian temple. That site has lots of info on soft tissues and blood cells being found in dino bones, and historical reports of dino type creatures, including some from the famous historian Herodotus and from Alexander the Great. All information is gleaned from secular sources. www.genesispark.com/exhibits/evidence/historical/ancient/dinosaur/ . . See Don Patton's The Fossil Record and many others. In this link he uses the fossil record to place evolutionary and creation predictions side by side. You can see for yourself what the real record of the rocks shows: ua-cam.com/video/gSof6z_Noqs/v-deo.html . . Thomas Kindell's vids are great, especially Thermodynamic Evidence For Creation where in the first 10 min. you hear quotes from well known evolutionists like "Evolution is unproven and unprovable. We believe it because the only alternative is special creation and that is unthinkable." ua-cam.com/video/I1yto0-z2bQ/v-deo.html . . Wazooloo vids, particularly The Mathematical Impossibility of Evolution and So Ya Think Yer A Chimp, and the DNA ones, are full of scientific fact presented in an often humorous way. ua-cam.com/video/mjQtqg3yyjk/v-deo.htmlua-cam.com/video/9ZHrcy8l9cU/v-deo.html ua-cam.com/video/QyRiqOFiOH8/v-deo.html . . Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed shows the politics of Neo Darwinism which harasses and expels those in academia and the media who even hint that there MIGHT be evidence for a Creator. ua-cam.com/video/4HErmp5Pzqw/v-deo.html . .Physicist Dr. Russell Humphreys gives scientific evidences for why people believe in a young, yes young, earth. Check it out and see: ua-cam.com/video/tX9eDTNfQHY/v-deo.html Part 1 And regarding the speed of light "problem", there are many unproven assumptions about light. It was always assumed, for instance, that the speed of light was constant. Since last century, various secular scientists have been saying it seems to be slowing down. However, here is another perspective. We have found that space, as in outer space, is stretchy. Several times in the Bible we are told that the Almighty stretched out the Heavens. This would mean the light from stars got stretched out, too, thus creating a false impression of distant time for light travel. . Answersingenesis.org covers just about everything . You are not a goo through the zoo ape update. You were created in the image and likeness of the Almighty Creator Who loves you. Why are you trading in those astounding truths of who you are for pseudoscience fairy tales and imaginary friends?
Notice something missing from your reply: Science. You not only offered no observable scientific data to refute anything in my post, you said nothing based on science whatsoever. Therefore you have followed a very typical pattern of YT evolution supporters. . You also have followed their other typical pattern in that you feel free to insult people. I have discovered over and over that such posters never do say anything based on observable scientific data. However, their verbal abuse escalates with any future comments. Therefore you will shortly go on mute. I wish you well, and have prayed for you, but can see that any further exchanges between us will not be fruitful. Bye!
Psalm1Tree Richard Dawkins (there's a man who knows science - you do not) is on record as saying that he doesn't debate creationists partly because there isn't a debate in the first place (evolution by natural selection is a reality, an observable and observed fact) and partly because to do so gives the stupidity of creationism/creationists the oxygen of the attention they crave. It makes them feel like they're occupying a level playing field with actual scientists, and that they are not. It's a sound principle and one which I too follow. If your intention was to refute the stereotype of creationists as low IQ scientific illiterates, you've not only failed to do so but actually bolstered it.
ChaingunCassidy Wow you are a fool, we have pictures of times square. We have places far far away from NY that serve NY style pizza. Ever heard of the news paper. Stop denying the proof open your eyes spider man is real. Teach the controversy
Enjoy this truth, better than evolutionary fake news. Basilio Uchuya whom evolutionists passionately want to believe carved dinosaurs, surgical operations and other animals upon andesite river rocks and sold them to tourists in order to make a living did in fact copy from the original authentic stones of antiquity. He would not sell genuine stones to tourists because this would carry a long jail sentence if caught, for he had his wife and family to support. He got the idea of carving for a means of making money from the original ICA stones from seeing them. He was part of the huaqueros’ or tomb looters who operated in the desert. The fake and genuine artifact is easily distinguished under microscope. Basilio used a hacksaw blade to carve on andesite stones which left metal fragments in the grooves and scratches around the edges, not like the original sophisticated carving done by the indigenous Indians one thousand to two thousand years ago. The evidence continues to stack up and evolutionary scientists see the artifacts as hazardous to their evolutionary belief system. Paleontologists’ have suggested out of desperation that the artifacts were the product of drug-induced mind-altered states. This is typical of these evolutionary fanatics not able to come to the knowledge of the truth. In the spring of 2001 Basilio took Dr Dennis Swift to the tombs outside Ocucaje where Luz Pre-Incan tombs were located. On the journey they crossed a wooden rickery bridge over a small meandering stream. As Dr Dennis Swift glanced out there were thousands of gray round andesite stones along the stream. He suddenly thought that is why archaeologists have not found engraved stones at other sites because there was no andesite river rock. They eventually stopped and climbed 50 meters up the hillside to the “tombas” tombs where there were hundreds of looted tombs. As they made their way around the looted tombs they saw a gray andesite stone partially sticking out. Basilio went over and dug around the stone and lifted it out. We photographed the stone in “situ” with Basilio holding it up. It was elaborately carved but not by Basilio. Finding carved stones in the walls of tombs of dinosaurs and other depicts is enough said in relation to their antiquity. Basilio also looked for trinkets in the looted tombs. Dr Dennis Swift roughly estimated that there were more than two thousand unexcavated tombs in the Tiahuanacan and ICA cemetery dating from about 100 B.C. TO 1500 A.D. He noted there was an abundance of gray andesite river rock surrounding this ancient cemetery. The Ica and Tiahuanacan Indian ruins were built nearby next to the stream that is the source of life in the desert. On return to Nazca Dr, Swift met up with some huaqueros who he had previous known. They informed him of some recent discoveries at a Nazcan cemetery near ancient irrigation canals. In April 2001 farmers had been expanding their cotton fields and by chance made a discovery of a tomb with a barbocoa roof which collapsed revealing a corpse staring back at them. The mummy had tilted to one side resting its cranium on an engraved stone as a pillow through eons of its burial. This was identified as a Nazcan tomb. The stone had small amounts of hair and scalp tissue clinging to the surface. Samples were taken along with the blood on the stone which was engraved with a dinosaur; these were sent to Paragon Genetics Laboratory in Dallas Texas. The laboratory was unable to get a DNA sequence from the hair blood and tissue which further enhances the antiquity of the dinosaur stone. Fresh blood, hair and tissue would have yielded a DNA sequence. The burial shroud wrapped around the mummy was examined by Intermountain Forensic Laboratories in Portland Oregon. The tests were inconclusive but this is common place for objects hundreds or thousands of years old. Forensic scientist Ray Grimsvo testified: In my expert opinion of over twenty-five years of forensic investigations, criminal, archaeological, paleontological, having seen thousands of blood stains, there is no question in my mind. I will go on record those are blood stains on the stone and burial shroud and are undoubtedly of ancient origin. End of quote. Conclusion: Dinosaurs and humans were contemporary with each other.
I’m glad I found these, and I’m honestly impressed something like this even exists, I had no idea. I really wish there were more, and this type of intellectual content was more popular
gabe What if God were an electrical/magnetic energy field vibrational being? Like we are? And the physicist Barbara Brennan confirms this in her book "Hands of Light"? I received this email recently from the site called "Ask a Mathematician, Ask a Physicist": What are "actual pictures" of atoms actually pictures of?. Physicist: Actual pictures of atoms aren’t actually pictures at all. There are a few good rules of thumb in physics. Among the best is: light acts like you’d expect on scales well above its wavelength and acts weird on scales below. In order to take a picture of a thing you need light to bounce … The only thing physicists have actually seen is basically a computer image, not the real image, and second, they observe electric fields, not the particle itself. They do not observe particles themselves; they are able to observe only the field. However this alone does not prove anything, but that the electric energy field exists and that’s about it---no atoms, no photons, no electrons, no quarks. no nothing. So no, particles do not exist. Particles exist only inside mathematical abstractions and nothing more and nothing else. We don’t know what actually exists in the real world, except that there are energy fields---electric, magnetic and all other forms and all other kinds of energy fields. I forgot to add what exactly is visualized with all these microscopes including STM--the scanning tunneling microscope. What is visualized is the charge density of the electric field. Basically you observe vibrations---electric vibrations. You haven’t seen an atom either. You’ve seen an image you assume to be an atom, but it is simply an instrument’s representation of the atom. It is not the atom itself. These techniques aren’t actually “visual” like microscopes we work with in biology classes. Microscopes use lenses and light to help zoom and focus on small objects. Electron microscopes, on the other hand, use quantum scattering theory to construct the shape of small objects, then the data is transferred to a computer to create a model. The wavelengths of visible light ranges on the order of ~370nm to 750nm. These are all MUCH larger than many particles of interest (and way too large to view atoms, which are on the order of Angstroms-0.1nm). Scientists need to be creative to be able to “see” atoms. So, no, scanning tunneling microscopes and atomic force microscopes did not prove the existence of atoms.
The Biblical stories from Genesis through the flood are not historical but rather, mythical even though some Christian fundamentalists still try to locate Noah’s Ark on Mount Ararat.
Have you read the Epic of Gilgamesh? It was the story of the flood written long before the biblical recount of a flood. It was not a global flood, it was localized to around the Black Sea. In a thousand years different people will recall Hurricane Katrina in different ways, and some may claim it was the hand of god and it wiped out all of the USA. Literature is written and twisted to fit the author's goal, if the goal is to create fear some unseen force in order to control people, the natural disaster becomes a supernatural phenomenon. Ask any fisherman the tale of his biggest catch, and ask him again in a few years, that bass will have grown into a whale if asked often enough, and eventually the whale swallowed him and spat him out....
@@motrwithmary6531 Yes I've read the story of the Epic of Gilgamesh and know of its legends and myths and what it's poetic literature imparts. You touched on the mechanism of magnification, whereby the stories are given a grandeur that is apparent in its setting. But there is also the mechanism of symbol correlation, by which elements of the story come to represent certain attitudes, and are elaborated in cultic rites so that this symbolism emerges more clearly.
Knock knock... Who's there? It's Jesus... let me in! Why? So I can save you! Save me from what? From what I'm going to do to you if you don't let me in!
People keep talking down at Francesca, but...she's literally the expert in her field (at least, for people who come to this show, as there are others, obviously). She went into her studies with a neutral mindset, with no bias and no confirmation bias to look for.
That’s not true. She is very biased and anti-religious in her rhetoric. She is also incredibly condescending at times about believers, implying they are stupid,
You obviously don't know much about Francesca she has said that with Richard Dawkins she doesn't agree with him and how he talks to religious people that religious people need to be respected so you're way off base
@@Dismal-futureSaying one thing doesn’t mean that you are consistent with that statement. There are plenty of statements that she has made showing she looks down on believers. Talk is cheap when talk can be contradicted.
@keatsiannightingale9256 I've noticed how people of Faith don't like what she says because she's unbiased and she quite simply lays it out in an unbiased way and people don't like having their religion so easily simplified. Nor do they like it's many contradictions or how Yahweh comes from a Pantheon of Canaanite gods... her knowledge just infuriates people and makes them feel like they're being attacked even though they're not
+singalexsong I was quoting what the idiot in the video said, followed by my conclusion that he has zero grasp of logic, as evidenced by the preceding quote. It's not my statement. He's the one who would need to prove that to be logically correct.
What destroys religious beliefs is... Religion starts off with "This is the way it is " then cherry picks known knowledge to make it work. Science is the opposite it uses all knowledge to come to a conclusion and can change if it gains new knowledge.
William Strumfels actually.. there literally thousands of religions. isnt it absurd to think God or Gods came down and give each culture a different set of laws to follow?
religion is just a word to describe how we think about God. God, his truth, the science behind his creation - all that simply is. we then go and discover it all. stop being distracted about what other people do. be truly independent and strike a course to seek the living God. you can doooo iiiiiiiit.
Never have i seen or heard anything about a god in nature, only through human speech because they heard it from someone else. So i'm going to stop being distracted from simple claims and be independent. Thanks :)
You don't need a scientist to prove evaporation, just a pot of boiling water, from which evaporation is clearly visible. No citation of sonoluminescence claim, so i'll ignore that like a scientist would. But let's play by your rules, a few things are correct, never mention the wrong things and use the right things to prove EVERYTHING that is both right, wrong and unknown. The books of Harry potter mention Ford Anglia. Ford Anglia's do exist. Therefore Harry potter, flying cars and wizards exist. Wait...
Monk.......This is not a controlled panel. Lots of them are interrupting each other, as well as talking at the same time. Therefore it would not be conducive for Mr. Hitchens to speak with this panel.
GTR What if God were an electrical/magnetic energy field vibrational being? Like we are? And the physicist Barbara Brennan conforms this in her book "Hands of Light"? I received this email recently from the site called "Ask a Mathematician, Ask a Physicist": What are "actual pictures" of atoms actually pictures of?. Physicist: Actual pictures of atoms aren’t actually pictures at all. There are a few good rules of thumb in physics. Among the best is: light acts like you’d expect on scales well above its wavelength and acts weird on scales below. In order to take a picture of a thing you need light to bounce … The only thing physicists have actually seen is basically a computer image, not the real image, and second, they observe electric fields, not the particle itself. They do not observe particles themselves; they are able to observe only the field. However this alone does not prove anything, but that the electric energy field exists and that’s about it---no atoms, no photons, no electrons, no quarks. no nothing. So no, particles do not exist. Particles exist only inside mathematical abstractions and nothing more and nothing else. We don’t know what actually exists in the real world, except that there are energy fields---electric, magnetic and all other forms and all other kinds of energy fields. I forgot to add what exactly is visualized with all these microscopes including STM--the scanning tunneling microscope. What is visualized is the charge density of the electric field. Basically you observe vibrations---electric vibrations. You haven’t seen an atom either. You’ve seen an image you assume to be an atom, but it is simply an instrument’s representation of the atom. It is not the atom itself. These techniques aren’t actually “visual” like microscopes we work with in biology classes. Microscopes use lenses and light to help zoom and focus on small objects. Electron microscopes, on the other hand, use quantum scattering theory to construct the shape of small objects, then the data is transferred to a computer to create a model. The wavelengths of visible light ranges on the order of ~370nm to 750nm. These are all MUCH larger than many particles of interest (and way too large to view atoms, which are on the order of Angstroms-0.1nm). Scientists need to be creative to be able to “see” atoms. So, no, scanning tunneling microscopes and atomic force microscopes did not prove the existence of atoms.
I'm an atheist because of critical thinking, studying the bible 8 or 10 hours a day for about 10 years, and reading the bible from cover to cover over a dozen times. The bible reading I did was not directed to studying pet scriptures as the religions want us to focus on. By me doing this I came to the conclusion that none of it is real. If you take the stories as some are true and some as fiction, then as far as I'm concerned All of it is unbelievable.
I’m a Christian for the exact same reasons, but in a shorter timeline than yours. I realized how philosophically bankrupt materialism is and how ethically vacuous secular morality is, as well as the way in which Christian theology does accurately and adequately present the world as it is, and I reconstructed my faith after five years of being a raving, desperate and quite intellectually motivated anti-theist.
nah, no love of talking about that stuff. it is true though that true humility begins when we stand in awe of the living God; and the mind expansion that begins when we embark on a life of praise and worship of the true greatness of God. part of all of that is Science. i friggin love Science, and i am in awe of what God created. it all works together, silly rabbit ;}.
Religion will always retain a certain tattered prestige because it was our first attempt as a species to make sense of the cosmos and of our own nature, and because it continues to ask “why”. Its incurable disability, however, lies in its insistence that the answer to that question can be determined with certainty on the basis of revelation and faith.-Christopher Hitchens
It's very easy to dismiss the wonderful stories in the Bible. "And when he saw a shop in the way, he found it was closed so he cursed the shop and presently there was a sign, "We have moved". And the disciples were amazed at his power" By the way, it was Sunday at 6 pm.
It's cool they gathered this many intellectuals from different faiths, but i don't think an hour is nearly enough. In a debate between two people, an hour is hardly enough for any major topic, how can an hour be enough for 10+ discussions. I'd love to see a long running series with episodes maybe or something like that which has the capacity to accommodate all perspectives. Edit: nvm, there seems to be other episodes
How to turn a debate about god into a slaughterhouse? Add Matt. He would eat that religious prick in the morning and shit him out as pure logic in the evening.
@A Christian Scientist Good for you. Maybe he was just bored of your preassumtions, ad hominem arguments and trying to talk about God, where you should provide evidence for him. But thats just my idea how it went down.
@A Christian Scientist "I have debated Dillahunty and his cultists" sounds a bit like ad hominem to me. I say nothing about God doesn't exists, God just needs to make clear he does exists. Until now this evidence is still missing.
@A Christian Scientist Well it has nothing to do with "admitting". Until evidence is provided, everything is regarded as "non-existent". But i'm not an afairist or an a-second-sunist because no evidence is provided for fairies or a second sun in our solar system. Something not existing is the starting point. You can't disproof anything directly, that's simply impossible. But i'm pretty sure, that the God shown in the Bible will have some problems with existence. Or to make it clearer: He cannot have the attributes given to him (like mercyfull or loving) while his actions are clearly considered as evil, by most human moral standards. So to make an argument: I cannot disproof every God, and i cannot disproof the God of Abraham, but the records shows even if he exists, he wouldn't be the loving as everyone who believes in him want's him to see. By the way: You should know what ad hominem means, and insulting is one method used by it. It basically goes with the try, to not argue the point but rather attack the messenger. Insulting is one kind of this method.
Heywood Yabloome Wtf are you talking about? HumanInBeta, and most non-religious people, already know what you just said. He was simply stating science can be wrong but will push it's knowledge as fact. Are you suggesting science is never wrong? Do you know what Lynn Margulis, Ignaz Semmelweis, Georg Cantor, and Henry Ford all have in common? They all made huge discoveries. And you know what? The scientist of their time laughed and ridiculed them for speaking nonsense. They had FAITH that the science they already had was correct, and rejected the discoveries that we now consider common sense. And that will continue to happen because many scientist are arrogant and have complete faith in what they "know".
+jacob mcgill It is the only way dumb people can comprehend things. They see a thunderstorm or an earthquake and simply cannot understand, from a scientific stand point, how these things happen. They also discount the explanations for these things that we do have since they just can't comprehend them.
“Faith consists in believing what reason cannot.” ― Voltaire “No amount of evidence will ever convince an idiot” ― Mark Twain “The human brain is a complex organ with the wonderful power of enabling man to find reasons for continuing to believe whatever it is that he wants to believe.”― Voltaire " Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience". Twain.
Fantastic host. This discussion made me furious, but I'm so glad it exists and that people are being forced to ask these questions and answer these questions. Humanity's survival may-well depend on leaving our religious superstitions in the dust.
Really science makes stuff up all the time seriously dude .why you think they are changing their theories all the time . Example is Pluto a planet or not .? They don't know
Geovanni Quintanilla Theories do change. Science changes all the time. This is not a bad thing. It changes when new information is discovered. That’s not making things up. Scientist are simply gaining more knowledge and revising theories. If science didn't change we would still follow the geocentric universe. The more we learn the more science will change. Pluto is now classified as a dwarf planet because it does not fit the criteria for a planet.
Geovanni Quintanilla That is the most stupid thing I have ever read. Whether Pluto is a planet or not was on the account of labeling, it has nothing to do with science or logic. It's barely even debate. Science is willing to change with evidence. Religion stupidly retains its stupidity.
Geovanni Quintanilla - you must be a theist with that really dumb post. Firstly it is not a theory whether Pluto is a planet or not. It is a matter of classification. Name one scientific theory that has changed in the last 100 years.
god says all the animals are here for us to rule and do with what we see fit. why dont the animals seem to know this? snakes, lions, tigers and bears wont hesitate to kill their human overlords. its as if they dont know about what gods purpose for them was.
@@John-gn5dm And the creator of that god, would then be god, as would the creator, of the creator, of the creator, of the creator, of the creator, of the creator, of the creator, of Allah.
When science doesn't know something, scientists don't just make up a story to explain it. This is what religion is. Stories made up to explain things that humans didn't understand yet.
That’s an objectively false statement. If you were mature and thoughtful enough, you would see religion is primarily concerned with the things we humans can conceive of, not floating cities in the sky or alien-like beings from other dimensions. Most religious teaching is incredibly practical, and it is religion, not science, that serves as a better foundation for morality than secular and/or individual moral trends from one time to another.
truly ignorant statement. Moses was hardly just a mere goat herder. Kings, princes, priests, prophets that had a relationship with God communicated His words to us
That people in the 21st Century still believe in a magical sky daddy and refuse to even consider the overwhelming evidence and still trot out half baked and ignorant arguments that hold serious examination
T Toughtask Yet in the 21st century with all the intelligence and technology we come to conclusions that nothing created the universe!!! Even a comedian has better joke then that! Scientists are going nuts
+Ouzo 9 I think you've created a false dichotomy, it does not follow that the only two options are 'nothing created the universe' and 'god did it'. Also, I think you are misrepresenting the position of many Cosmologists. By the term 'nothing' they are referring to the absence of matter. We actually have never found a 'nothing' to examine and so we do not even know whether a 'nothing' is within the realms of possibility, beyond the mathematical concept of nothing i.e 0. What they do know is that the laws of physics break down seconds before the big bang, and so it is not reasonable to assume that something can not come from nothing under conditions where the laws of physics do not apply.
I've seen many of these shows now, and I must say, the guests are quite nuts, but the presenter really knows how to cut through the bullshit and ask sharp questions. I'm impressed!
That guy honestly believes that an old wooden boat carried two of every animal in the world for about a month at sea. That is crazy. Why won't people just stop believing in fairy tales and use their minds?
SaSdUde What if God were an electrical/magnetic energy field vibrational being? Like we are? And the physicist Barbara Brennan conforms this in her book "Hands of Light"? I received this email recently from the site called "Ask a Mathematician, Ask a Physicist": What are "actual pictures" of atoms actually pictures of?. Physicist: Actual pictures of atoms aren’t actually pictures at all. There are a few good rules of thumb in physics. Among the best is: light acts like you’d expect on scales well above its wavelength and acts weird on scales below. In order to take a picture of a thing you need light to bounce … The only thing physicists have actually seen is basically a computer image, not the real image, and second, they observe electric fields, not the particle itself. They do not observe particles themselves; they are able to observe only the field. However this alone does not prove anything, but that the electric energy field exists and that’s about it---no atoms, no photons, no electrons, no quarks. no nothing. So no, particles do not exist. Particles exist only inside mathematical abstractions and nothing more and nothing else. We don’t know what actually exists in the real world, except that there are energy fields---electric, magnetic and all other forms and all other kinds of energy fields. I forgot to add what exactly is visualized with all these microscopes including STM--the scanning tunneling microscope. What is visualized is the charge density of the electric field. Basically you observe vibrations---electric vibrations. You haven’t seen an atom either. You’ve seen an image you assume to be an atom, but it is simply an instrument’s representation of the atom. It is not the atom itself. These techniques aren’t actually “visual” like microscopes we work with in biology classes. Microscopes use lenses and light to help zoom and focus on small objects. Electron microscopes, on the other hand, use quantum scattering theory to construct the shape of small objects, then the data is transferred to a computer to create a model. The wavelengths of visible light ranges on the order of ~370nm to 750nm. These are all MUCH larger than many particles of interest (and way too large to view atoms, which are on the order of Angstroms-0.1nm). Scientists need to be creative to be able to “see” atoms. So, no, scanning tunneling microscopes and atomic force microscopes did not prove the existence of atoms.
Actually, you’ll find that it was NINE of every single animal on the planet, not two. 7 unclean animal of every species to be sacrificed, and 2 clean animal of opposite sex for procreation. These religious fucktards where, are, and always will be the most dangerous inbred species on this planet.
Actually, Kent Ham (bible con artist) inadvertently proved the story bullshit. According to the Bible, Noah and his sons built the ark in 60 years. Now, Kent did build an ark. It took him 1000 expert carpenters, modern power tools, pre-fabricated beams and planks, power cranes and trucks and two years to build something that might resemble an Ark but is most likely not seaworthy. He wanted to put live animals in, only to notice that even with modern ventilation and machinery this would make not only a miserable but a suffocating experience. Now, try to explain how 8 people could complete in 60 years with bronze age equipment what obviously and demonstrably took 2000 man years with modern power tools and pre-fab materials. And if "God" is your answer, I have to ask why he didn't simply build the fucking boat himself instead of making Noah go through the busywork. The whole story holds not a drop of water.
0x777 Funny thing about that "Ark" is, only the front of it is actually a "boat". The backside is three buildings supporting the front facade. It's an embarrassment to anyone in the U.S.
SaSdUde123 Out on the water in the boat for about a month? It is even stranger,the ark was supposedly out on the waters for not only a month, it was longer than a year. It rained for a bit longer than a month and then it took some time for the water to subsided. Like you said, how a grown person can even begin to believe and argue the damn ark story is beyond comprehension.
weskal What if God were an electrical/magnetic energy field vibrational being? Like we are? And the physicist Barbara Brennan confirms this in her book "Hands of Light"? I received this email recently from the site called "Ask a Mathematician, Ask a Physicist": What are "actual pictures" of atoms actually pictures of?. Physicist: Actual pictures of atoms aren’t actually pictures at all. There are a few good rules of thumb in physics. Among the best is: light acts like you’d expect on scales well above its wavelength and acts weird on scales below. In order to take a picture of a thing you need light to bounce … The only thing physicists have actually seen is basically a computer image, not the real image, and second, they observe electric fields, not the particle itself. They do not observe particles themselves; they are able to observe only the field. However this alone does not prove anything, but that the electric energy field exists and that’s about it---no atoms, no photons, no electrons, no quarks. no nothing. So no, particles do not exist. Particles exist only inside mathematical abstractions and nothing more and nothing else. We don’t know what actually exists in the real world, except that there are energy fields---electric, magnetic and all other forms and all other kinds of energy fields. I forgot to add what exactly is visualized with all these microscopes including STM--the scanning tunneling microscope. What is visualized is the charge density of the electric field. Basically you observe vibrations---electric vibrations. You haven’t seen an atom either. You’ve seen an image you assume to be an atom, but it is simply an instrument’s representation of the atom. It is not the atom itself. These techniques aren’t actually “visual” like microscopes we work with in biology classes. Microscopes use lenses and light to help zoom and focus on small objects. Electron microscopes, on the other hand, use quantum scattering theory to construct the shape of small objects, then the data is transferred to a computer to create a model. The wavelengths of visible light ranges on the order of ~370nm to 750nm. These are all MUCH larger than many particles of interest (and way too large to view atoms, which are on the order of Angstroms-0.1nm). Scientists need to be creative to be able to “see” atoms. So, no, scanning tunneling microscopes and atomic force microscopes did not prove the existence of atoms.
A great being once said, "If sacred places are spared the ravages of war, then make all places sacred. And if the holy people are to be kept harmless from war, then make all peoples holy." Silver Surfer is an amazing character. He's also stated, "Obviously my best strategy is to wait, listen, and learn." Something we should take to heart, maybe, to figure out the real truth (which is not that God exists, quite the opposite). If evidence proves that something is what others perceive it to be, then we are to use such evidence until further evidence proves otherwise; simply written in a book of stories does not make this book of stories valid.
This debate is pointless. If you are a religious person you have BELIEF. It does not matter to the person whether those beliefs confine to logic or reason. As an atheist and cynical and sceptical person in general, I need to have empirical evidence to back up material claims. The amount of logical fallacies used by the religious side was staggering. That's the problem with this debate. God as a concept is an illogical one when comparing it to what one already knows about the physical world. Yet people are trying to use logic to try and advance an illogical concept. Just be honest and say you have faith.
unfortuantely, he didnt keep coming back to the Cambridge Professor who had a number of really tuned-in points that were a bit too difficult for the assembled guests.
nytolstoy What if God were an electrical/magnetic energy field vibrational being? Like we are? And the physicist Barbara Brennan conforms this in her book "Hands of Light"? I received this email recently from the site called "Ask a Mathematician, Ask a Physicist": What are "actual pictures" of atoms actually pictures of?. Physicist: Actual pictures of atoms aren’t actually pictures at all. There are a few good rules of thumb in physics. Among the best is: light acts like you’d expect on scales well above its wavelength and acts weird on scales below. In order to take a picture of a thing you need light to bounce … The only thing physicists have actually seen is basically a computer image, not the real image, and second, they observe electric fields, not the particle itself. They do not observe particles themselves; they are able to observe only the field. However this alone does not prove anything, but that the electric energy field exists and that’s about it---no atoms, no photons, no electrons, no quarks. no nothing. So no, particles do not exist. Particles exist only inside mathematical abstractions and nothing more and nothing else. We don’t know what actually exists in the real world, except that there are energy fields---electric, magnetic and all other forms and all other kinds of energy fields. I forgot to add what exactly is visualized with all these microscopes including STM--the scanning tunneling microscope. What is visualized is the charge density of the electric field. Basically you observe vibrations---electric vibrations. You haven’t seen an atom either. You’ve seen an image you assume to be an atom, but it is simply an instrument’s representation of the atom. It is not the atom itself. These techniques aren’t actually “visual” like microscopes we work with in biology classes. Microscopes use lenses and light to help zoom and focus on small objects. Electron microscopes, on the other hand, use quantum scattering theory to construct the shape of small objects, then the data is transferred to a computer to create a model. The wavelengths of visible light ranges on the order of ~370nm to 750nm. These are all MUCH larger than many particles of interest (and way too large to view atoms, which are on the order of Angstroms-0.1nm). Scientists need to be creative to be able to “see” atoms. So, no, scanning tunneling microscopes and atomic force microscopes did not prove the existence of atoms.
Those religious ignoramuses should not be invited unless they agree to have a rational discussion. Those people here are only trying to rationalize their lack of knowledge and they are proud of their ignorance.
I'm rational enough to dismiss irrational claims that have no proof whatsoever . I have enough knowledge to differentiate fiction from reality. Ignorance is believing that a God created the Universe. And then believing that this God that created this vast Universe came to a random planet , in a random Galaxy and told humans to not eat shrimps, or not eat pigs, or not eat cows (depending on which book/god you happened to chose), but forgetting to tell them that the Earth is not flat and that it goes around the Sun , not the other way around. Ignorance is believing that the god that created the universe is really concerned with whom you have sex and when, but doesn't even mention why he created billions of other galaxys, stars and planets.
Humans are self important. We (they) think we're special, that we somehow have a gateway to eternity through thoughts. Nature is so much more magical than primitive human thoughts. I hate humans, but love nature.
Thank you for sharing that. I found "that we somehow have a gateway to eternity through thoughts" to be a very succinct way of displaying the arrogance of our species.
We actually are special. We have the capability of imagination, we are curious. We have the intelligence and ability to understand the universe, to a certain degree but nonetheless. We are the product of a journey that started 13.8 billion years ago. Of circumstances who allow raw energy do condence into matter. Of stars fusing this matter into other kind of matter. The gold in my computer is the product of one of the most violent and yet beautiful events in the cosmos: A supernova. A dying star spitting it's remains through vaste amounts of nothingness, so new stars, planets and trabants can be born. In a vast ocean of galaxies there is a georgeous spiral galaxy, and in one of it's spiral arms there is a small star, surrounded by a tiny piece of stone and dust we call Earth. On this small fraction of space, there is a small ape-like race running around. Mankind. People. You and me. Your left hand is made of the matter of one star, your right hand is made of the matter from another one. You are stardust. The elements you are made of will stand the test of time, in one form or another. And still, here we are, living our ridiculous short lifes compared to the almost infinite time the cosmos has to offer. What is the meaning of your life, what is your purpose? Maybe there is none, maybe you are here just because, and to give yourself meaning and purpose. If you love nature, you have to love humans, because we are nature by any strech of imagination. Maybe we don't behave like this, but the fact still remains unchallenged. So go one you little great ape, enjoy your life, enjoy it to the fullest. And when the end is near be assured: You may die and you will go the same nothingness you came from. But you were here as a monument to this universe who has gained another capability: To understand itself through you.
@@lusti6511 blah blah blah. Why do you feel the need to lecture self evident knowledge? Everything you listed makes no difference when we as a species is the sole cause of the 6th mass extinction. Humans are garbage. Literally. Must be nice to live in illusion and think everything will work out. I'm way past having a romanticized picture of humans. We're a walking disaster and if you disagree, keep living in that beautiful illusion. I envy you.
@@theuniversewithin74 Well i thought it would be helpful to show you the world from another point of view. I wasn't aware that you are so pessimistic about the whole thing, that you regard my words as a personal insult. It's not that i don't see the problems we're the root of. But anyways, got the point, so have a good time.
@@lusti6511 no worries, but eveything you wrote is almost childhood knowledge to me. I'm not pessimistic. I'm realistic. The coming generations are *fucked* and there is more or less nothing we can do about it. The 6th mass extinction is well underway. And what do most people do? Carry on as usual. They're up for a rude awakening. Let's do everything we can to counter what's coming, but if you knew enough about it, you'd understand the scope of everything and how utterly screwed we are. I've had it with people living in illusion.
@C K Pari My point being that referencing real life locations does not provide validity to your otherwordly claims. Just because Jerusalem is a real place, does not mean someone died and got ressurected there.
The Quran also reference a lot of places and their prophet. So the muslims must be right? Its a lot of factual stuff mixed in with their mumbo-jumbo. Or what about the jews? Quite sure the Torah references a lot of real life places and people. The jews must be right! No wait... The hindus! They definitely reference a lot of real life places and people. Yes. The hindus are correct. Thank you for this eye opener. Swapping faith to hinduism asap.
The religious people are NOT in a quest for the ultimate truth. No matter how much evidence they hear they have to ignore it, or they would be questioning the god they believe in.
Eddie What if God were an electrical/magnetic energy field vibrational being? Like we are? And the physicist Barbara Brennan confirms this in her book "Hands of Light"? I received this email recently from the site called "Ask a Mathematician, Ask a Physicist": What are "actual pictures" of atoms actually pictures of?. Physicist: Actual pictures of atoms aren’t actually pictures at all. There are a few good rules of thumb in physics. Among the best is: light acts like you’d expect on scales well above its wavelength and acts weird on scales below. In order to take a picture of a thing you need light to bounce … The only thing physicists have actually seen is basically a computer image, not the real image, and second, they observe electric fields, not the particle itself. They do not observe particles themselves; they are able to observe only the field. However this alone does not prove anything, but that the electric energy field exists and that’s about it---no atoms, no photons, no electrons, no quarks. no nothing. So no, particles do not exist. Particles exist only inside mathematical abstractions and nothing more and nothing else. We don’t know what actually exists in the real world, except that there are energy fields---electric, magnetic and all other forms and all other kinds of energy fields. I forgot to add what exactly is visualized with all these microscopes including STM--the scanning tunneling microscope. What is visualized is the charge density of the electric field. Basically you observe vibrations---electric vibrations. You haven’t seen an atom either. You’ve seen an image you assume to be an atom, but it is simply an instrument’s representation of the atom. It is not the atom itself. These techniques aren’t actually “visual” like microscopes we work with in biology classes. Microscopes use lenses and light to help zoom and focus on small objects. Electron microscopes, on the other hand, use quantum scattering theory to construct the shape of small objects, then the data is transferred to a computer to create a model. The wavelengths of visible light ranges on the order of ~370nm to 750nm. These are all MUCH larger than many particles of interest (and way too large to view atoms, which are on the order of Angstroms-0.1nm). Scientists need to be creative to be able to “see” atoms. So, no, scanning tunneling microscopes and atomic force microscopes did not prove the existence of atoms.
@@nicholaswalter8135 they have been brainwashed and indoctrinated to believe what they believe, i know i was one of them, unfortunately i didnt realise it for nearly half my life it was just everyday living in our community
What evidence are Christians ignoring? Fossils don’t prove rocks evolve into people but you don’t understand that. Hell testimony is evidence that you ignore. You ignore it because God makes you ignore it and he makes you ignore it because you are an evil piece of filth.
Humble What if God were an electrical/magnetic energy field vibrational being? Like we are? And the physicist Barbara Brennan conforms this in her book "Hands of Light"? I received this email recently from the site called "Ask a Mathematician, Ask a Physicist": What are "actual pictures" of atoms actually pictures of?. Physicist: Actual pictures of atoms aren’t actually pictures at all. There are a few good rules of thumb in physics. Among the best is: light acts like you’d expect on scales well above its wavelength and acts weird on scales below. In order to take a picture of a thing you need light to bounce … The only thing physicists have actually seen is basically a computer image, not the real image, and second, they observe electric fields, not the particle itself. They do not observe particles themselves; they are able to observe only the field. However this alone does not prove anything, but that the electric energy field exists and that’s about it---no atoms, no photons, no electrons, no quarks. no nothing. So no, particles do not exist. Particles exist only inside mathematical abstractions and nothing more and nothing else. We don’t know what actually exists in the real world, except that there are energy fields---electric, magnetic and all other forms and all other kinds of energy fields. I forgot to add what exactly is visualized with all these microscopes including STM--the scanning tunneling microscope. What is visualized is the charge density of the electric field. Basically you observe vibrations---electric vibrations. You haven’t seen an atom either. You’ve seen an image you assume to be an atom, but it is simply an instrument’s representation of the atom. It is not the atom itself. These techniques aren’t actually “visual” like microscopes we work with in biology classes. Microscopes use lenses and light to help zoom and focus on small objects. Electron microscopes, on the other hand, use quantum scattering theory to construct the shape of small objects, then the data is transferred to a computer to create a model. The wavelengths of visible light ranges on the order of ~370nm to 750nm. These are all MUCH larger than many particles of interest (and way too large to view atoms, which are on the order of Angstroms-0.1nm). Scientists need to be creative to be able to “see” atoms. So, no, scanning tunneling microscopes and atomic force microscopes did not prove the existence of atoms.
Strange thing: 25% of Jesus' own disciples (Simon, Judas, Thomas) were more unsure about Jesus' divinity than many of the Christians today, 2000 years later.
Science: "We know very little and we should rely on EVIDENCE and RESEARCH in order to improve our knowing of those things, step by step." Religion: "We know everything and we have the answer for everything! We need NOT ask or research, everything is as we say it is, because we say it is so!" Which of these statements is honest and which one is not?
![Does God Exist? William Lane Craig vs. Christopher Hitchens - Full Debate [HD]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/0tYm41hb48o/mqdefault.jpg)
God's ''To do'' list -
1. Make universe in 7days at the most
2. Make humans with belly buttons
3. Place fossils everywhere to give impression of evolution (hehehe that will confuse them)
4. Drown nearly everyone
5. Transform myself into my own son. Die for 3 days to impress myself.
6. Tell everyone I will return shortly
7. Don't return. Hide.
Yep, makes perfect sense.
You forgot to add that his omnibenevolent ass had to take a nap. We all know that infinitely intelligent beings have to build in some nap time.
He would have napped for eternity, but Mrs God kicked him off the couch!
MrJohndl The thing is....there actually *_IS_* a "Mrs. God." See, Yahweh the Mesopotamian god of war, actually _did_ have a wife/consort. Her name was *Asherah.* But...apparently Yahweh divorced her....or killed her. Something fishy going on there.... What did you do to your wife Mr. Yahweh?? Why does she have bruises all over her? Care to explain?
MrJohndl Mrs. God had a 'honey dew' list she needed lookin' after. "No nap time for you 'Mr. All Knowing'. The sink leaks.'
You forgot, Destroy the world a second and final time.
If Atheism is a religion, not collecting stamps is a hobby.
Very good. Mind if I use that line myself?
Would that be aphilatelism?
Atheism is a religion like abstinence is a sex position, or like baldness is a hair style.
anton.............well put,and very funny at the same time.
anton1949 did you get that from drunken peasants
It is not just evidence that undermines religion, it is reality and (critical) thinking.
Check out Jabal Al Lawz in Saudi Arabia.
You haven't heard of it because you're brainwashed.
@PARTH Asha Jabal al Lawz is Mt.Sinai. They've been hiding it and lying about the Exodus route. There is an incredible amount of archaeological evidence of the events as described in Exodus at that site. The Saudi government put a MASSIVE fence around the whole thing, and they're not letting anyone in to study it... Losers.
@PARTH Asha No no no don't get me wrong, I'm specifically talking about the Exodus event, and even then, only the parts in it that can be archaeologically proven to have happened.
I'm not saying it makes the whole Bible true lol chill :P I'm a skeptic as well.
I'm just saying don't throw the baby out with the bath water, most skeptics write the WHOLE Bible off as myth. I think the claims should be proven true or false before assuming they're all false or all true. Don't be like the extremist religious nuts. Don't be an extremist Atheist.
I like militant atheism as Dawkins mentioned years ago.
@@arthurhunt642 You must like Communism than I presume?
The very beautiful point that Visnu Das was making that Hindu Vedic Scriptures doesn't go against Science but goes hand in hand with Science but the anchor didn't gave him enough time to make his point clear in details ...
Vedas is full of science Astronomy , Cosmology , Biology , Quantum Physics , Quantum Mechanics , Medicine , Yoga , Meditation ....
Scientific atheists need to go through Vedas , Srimad Bhagawatam , Puranas to know & learn about Vedic literatures in details ...I am sure they won't find it illogical like Quran & Bible
The Dashaavatars of Lord Maha Vishnu fits with the human evolution theory .....It has description about milky way , our universe & multiverse theory of innumerable universes .
We have our temple of 9 planets with Sun at the centre known as Navagraha from 1000 BC unlike the Christian theory of Sun & Planets revolving around Earth for which Galileo Galilei was punished death sentence by Church
The 3rd Vishnu avatar Varaha or the giant boar had saved the earth from get sunk in the galaxy & he hold the earth on his giant tusks ...Which explains very clearly that Earth is spherical as per Vedic Scriptures unlike the Christian or the Islamic theories of flat earth
I feel like same anchor doesnot give time to hindu relegion only 2 minutes he put more beautiful points then all other religion under 2 min ❤
U lost me at “giant boar saving earth from sinking in the galaxy and he hold the earth on his giant tusks” 😂😂😂
@@Gniicer00lz ....Sun along with all other planets revolve around the earth which is fixed & static at the same point
of the galaxy ....Geocentric theory of Christianity
Foolish Christians 😁😂
Yes 👍 true absolutely 💯 right U are, There christian n Islam doesn't make sense of religion n not spiritually connected,juz they are making fun of their religion n their Jesus n prophet
The anchor n they all are not allowing our Hindu pandit Iskcon temple poojari ji n made him feel very emotional n traumatized,bcoz they are not like our sanatan dharma religiously follows like us, for us 9 planets are Navagrahas n Sun n Moon are bagwaan n earth is dharti maa n each every things are Devatha.
Y did this channel anchor invite to their show our Hari Krishna Das poojari ,when they are not interested to listen n hear about our Hindu sanatani.
All christian n Islam people where chit chatting n not believing that there is no God. What a Foolish people, that's why now in 2024 christian n Islamic religions countries and people are fighting each other ending themselves,decreasing population by killing n loosing their lives in the war against😮 each other in their own religion
Jai mata di, Har Har Mahadev 🌹🙏bhagwan Shiva Shakti🔱🚩Shankar ji🔱😇♈💫🌟🌺 Jai Shree Ram♈ ji ki Jai🚩🚩Jai Hind 🇮🇳Bharat Mata ki Jai 🇮🇳🇮🇳Vande Mataram 🇮🇳🇮🇳🇮🇳
Science: We always look objectively to find the truth. Accepting our faults and changing our views when provided with other evidence.
Religion: We are allways right in everything we believe and no amount of evidence will ever change our views.
To be fair, when the tithing slows down they're quick to change.
@@harrycooper5231 Lol That is true.
Religion doesn’t have to change. If you don’t like the believes if one denomination, feel free to switch, there is another with the exact opposite doctrine.
You have clearly not studied the history of theology
@@jrgen7261 In the context of this discussion, afollows
All religions can't be right. But all can be wrong.
and yet, one explanation of the path of truth to God, can be right.
+david parham
But with no way to know or demonstrate that this God even exists, what's the point of believing in it?
1-it's so refreshing that ur not belligerent and spewing vitriol. sorry for the inverted compliment, but cannot assume someone who does not believe will not behave as such. 8}. 2-you ask an EXCELLENT question!!! one that MANY ask - even us believers [yes, "there's a little atheism in everyone"]. 3-BRIEF: the simple answer is - for me, to inherit eternal life and explore this wonderful Universe. DETAIL: we all live in "neutral ground"; that is, we all have the same evidence, or lack thereof. this is our common starting point. this is also why i have concluded at this time, with only - oh, 30 years or so, collectively, of directly or indirectly pondering this same question, that "will, and desire are the bridge to any possible hope of eternal life." the catch is that we must activate our will towards believing. some say God activates our will, but truth is we wouldn't really know the difference. for all intents and purposes we simply need to start believing. the point of believing is that if one cannot truly prove that there is no God, then it is possible there is a God. then you go from there. why seek to find out if there is a God? there must be a goal in mind. my goal is pretty self-seeking. when i was a "wee lad of 34" i "cleared the table" and started over. i asked myself - "do i want to crawl out of my grave [or whatever happens] and live forever?" my answer was "yes". question 2 was, "who can help me do that?" trying to not be biased towards Christianity, still from what i knew, Jesus was the answer. i went from there. i am human and sin like everyone else, but as the song says, "i get knocked down, i get up again, nothing's gonna keep me down". so in short, my answer to your question is, "for eternal life." there is no need for rubbish religious practices, but embracing what Christ says is critical. do not conflate religion - especially the horrors of ridiculous religiosity, with who Christ really is. get a bible, read it with interest, get with Christians and ask them what's in their heart, and to help you learn what to read and how to read it. the gospel of John is a great book to start reading. get a version like American Standard Version[ASV], or even the New International Version [NIV]. 4-the whole of proving God is difficult, because the whole of everything emanates from God. God is the singularity of Infinite Regress, who can prove that with tools of science that emanate from point 0?
to seek the Living God, designer of all that is, and in whose power is eternity. to know the one who created all. if that does not intrigue you, or if you cannot imagine something metaphysical existing like the Infinite Regress creator, then there is no point in pursuing it. you have to want to; and you are free to do what you want.
There are many millions of people around the globe who would love to know what that is.
The question should be, "Does the absence of evidence for any god undermine religion?" The answer is Yes.
no
@@danielbisson8032 Does the absence of evidence of unicorns undermine the claim that unicorns exist?
You making a bias comment that there "is" absence of evidence for God. Does absent of evidence for naturalism undermine most atheist? The answer is yes, though many still believe in that idea.
@@kimdanielsen4368 All the evidence we have supports naturalism, but even if there was no evidence to support naturalism, there still would be no evidence for anything supernatural.
@@jmg94j Right this will be interesting! Can you give me positive scientific evidence to prove that naturalism is true?? I agree that the absence of evidence for naturalism doesn't prove the supernatural, but then again it those suggest fundamentally that naturalism is faith based not science based.
Francesca Stavrakapolou dropping some knowledge. Nice work.
I'll save you 58 mins. The answer is yes.
Look the whole purpose of faith, is to believe in something there is no evidence for. Faith is a blind belief. Religion was created to control people. Even the concept of free will is a joke. If it is free will, than why do you need the threat of hell. It is like someone holding a gun and saying, if you turn right you will live the best life ever, but if you turn left I will put a bullet in your head. That is not true free will. The Bible is an awesome work of fiction. It’s purpose has suited our leaders well. What better way to control people, than create the fear of hell.
@@lakehouse1074 I'llsave you 57 minutes and 50 seconds the Bible is bullshit
@@stephanhirons3454 I noticed that there werent any scientists of any sort.. I left
@@stephanhirons3454 but that's only ONE religious fable. There are many others.
the answer is yes -- your religion is just as made up as every other religion. Heck, it wasn't even first.
The dismissal of Francesca Stavrakapolou's knowledge of the subject and the constant interruptions during her points was intensely frustrating.
The man on the far right end is insufferable.
Christ doesn't say he's God in all the the new testaments earlier than John,
Yeah, he annoyed the hell out of me lol. "Please! You should humble yourself!"
maybe cause she is nasty and arrogant
Her arrogance is really offputting. Rather than just tell the man she thinks hes wrong, she instead patronised him by saying hes "clearly been led on a merry dance"
Hes a chartered Engineer and metallurgist whos a member of the Egyptian Exploration Society AND the Historical Metallurgy Society...so the way she speaks to him as if hes a poor little man whos been led astray is really quite grim.
@@ThepPixel Whatever and whoever he is, doesn't change the fact that he's wrong ....
They bring on a total crank to spout some unsubstantiated nonsense, then bring in a peer reviewed respected academic to answer them - but present it as if both of them have equally valid opinions. It's misleading and dishonest.
An insult to reason and logic!!!
One might say they unfairly picked the academic to argue against a turnip
It's because you can't find a peer reviewed, respected academic who believes in that religious batshittery. They are like the christian god...one doesn't exist in reality.
@@ericdellinger6260
Fascinates me that atheists are obsessed with christianity but seldom any other religion
Almost as if they're very poorly read and only know the Dawkins soundbites for that one religion
@@InhabitantOfOddworld Wrong, atheists mainly go for Christianity AND Islam, mainly because those are by far the two most dominant religions not just in Britain and America but on the planet.
I love how Francesca just laughs at the absurdity lol.
She’s cute.
It is amusing, they are picking straws.
She makes me hawny!!!
Not worth taking this guy seriously
@@PittsburghSonido
No, she is arrogant and in love with herself.
"Can I be on the show please?"
"First you have to sign something that says you'll refuse to let anyone finish a sing---"
"DONE!!!"
Fecking truth!! Aaaarh!!
One of the saddest lessons of history.
If we’ve been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We’re no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us.
It’s simply too painful to acknowledge, even to ourselves, that we’ve been taken.
Once you give a charlatan power over you, you almost never get it back.”
-Carl Sagan, astronomer and writer (1934-1996) .
“In all debates, let truth be thy aim, not victory, or an unjust interest.”
― William Penn.
Watch the confidence n calmness of Vishnu Das ji....sanatan dharma ❤
Professor Francesca can educate me anytime. I love the passion she has for studying the bible especially from the atheistic point of view.
She doesn't seem very happy or the chap sitting next to her...
@@LennyCooke636neither do any of the people believing in the sky wizard....
the guy in the grey suit on the right might be the most brainwashed person i have ever seen
He said to a scientist who has spent his life studying nature "do you know dna" shocking
What we know about dna is limited that why we don't understand how the dna select the codes. And most of the dna 99.999999999999% we don't go and learn don't be a fool
Someone should take that arrogant ass in the gray suit and beat him bloody. Just a third-world BS artist in the form of Dinesh D'Souza and the late Ravi Zac (good riddance). What a waste of lot of hot air this whole thing.
Yes indeed
@@mohamedismail2766 you talk shit mate
Religion,the purposeful suspension of critical thinking.
What is energy? Can it be created or destroyed?
@@bonnluedkie2717 if that's what you think evolutionary scientists believe, then it shows that you have never even thought of doing the slightest research on the topic
@@simpleguy38 yes, mass gives rise to exyra energy and vice versa.
@@gaganaggarwal7599, The first law of thermodynamics, also known as Law of Conservation of Energy, states that energy can neither be created nor destroyed; energy can only be transferred or changed from one form to another.
@@gaganaggarwal7599 , i also don't like any organised religion but here i mean to say that universe is still a mystery, I don't like to use the term 'God' as general people think of, it creates lots of chaos among different beliefs and resort to violence. I am an agnostic and i agree that inexplicable things do exist which human intellect will never be comprehend. In a nutshell, I can only say 'we know more about we don't know'.
They ought to give this a 2 hour slot. Some of the discourse is fascinating and there's loads to learn.
Learn what? That religious believers delusional? That take about 5 minutes, at most.
"Needs more evidence to believe in evolution but needs absolutely no evidence to believe in God" lol.
What? are you serious? Evolution = fact. God= The magic faraway tree.
Exactly! Islam is the worse offender here as they deny all the descrepancies in their so called holy books. Muslims can not grasp evolution, in fact they refuse to listen to this strongly proven scientific theory.
Actually the idea of God is backed by quantum physics and the fact that other dimensions exist.
@M I Conciousness can't be explained without an external influence and quantum entanglement fixes these problems. If you have ever heard of the double slit experiment it proves that observation affects how particles react. You are just angry because someone pushed their form of Christless Christianity on you in the past.
@@ethanezrahite1800 something that can not be explained >> does not mean there is god.
Why why why why Do I keep torturing (no pun intended) my self watching these insane debates about lobotomized people trying to make a point?
These debates are an introduction to skepticism and detachment.
I watch these debates so I can learn my adversary's arguments and show how wrong they are.
It's fun.
James Richard Wiley Sure. But it quite makes one angry tho.
@@niviamaeva It's the wilful ignorance, twisting of facts or plain lies that irk me so. The internet wasn't made yesterday, but it seems like a lot of these religious folk were =/
Wayfaerer lol lol
Very well pointed out. It is funny not to say absurdly tragic! Some things said in this debate aches me to the core.
“biblical point of view”
for instance...
@@JamesRichardWiley I'm not totally clear on what you said. You think the sceptics are wrong. Because creationists are in my opinion are 1000% delusional from man created beliefs, no evidence no likely
On the subject of demons which came up in the discussion,isn't it strange that at no point in history has a single atheist been possessed or even bothered by one.Amazing !!!!
ShellacScrubber How would you know?
Shellac
How do you know?
It surprises me how people who use science to justify their non-religious beliefs are ignorant of a basic understanding of the science. Have you not heard of multiple personality disorder also called Dissociative Identity Disorder? That is the concept of demons, other spirits inhabiting a person with distinct personalities and manifesting through that person. While in Engineering School I encountered such a person. A perfect stranger who started describing to me people that I knew and things I had done in my life. And at one point, the spirit in the person referred to himself as "we" saying "we are leaving him alone, we are going to someone else." This happened when I called upon the name of Jesus Christ. Now in the Bible, it is described how one person was possessed by thousands of demons. So the fact that the medical profession knows about this fact of multiple personalities which is quite prevalent and uses a scientific term such as "disorder" is an indication of the evidence that demons do exist.
I also had a friend who started hearing voices that were telling him that he was spiritually lost. He would close his eyes and be guided without hitting any objects. And while I was conversing with him the voices were replying to him. Or what about occasions in which I told a coworker precisely what he did and was planning to do as a result of an immediate download of knowledge I received? I have many more examples. What about near-death experiences in which tens of thousands of patients die during the operating procedure and their souls leave their bodies and many are able to describe in great detail a visual view of the actions in the operating room? But it does not end there. Two neurosurgeons who did not believe in God gave up on a patient who was bleeding profusely and expecting death as nothing they did could stop the rapid flow of blood. Then all of a sudden an amazing presence entered the operating room visibly surrounding the surgeons and an amazing peace and all of a sudden the blood stopped flowing. After the incidence one of them said that God does exist as he was visibly shaken by the experience. What about a person whose spirit rose above the hospital building and they saw a locked shed with its contents and vivid colors. After it as immediately investigated it was exactly as described. There are many such accounts.
We discard these things when they go contrary to our belief system. Or do you want me to get into the story of how the Big Bang Theory in Astrophysics is now being undermined by the discovery of dark energy and dark matter? Scientists had believed (yes, faith again) that the expanding universe from the Big Bang would slow down from its rate of expansion (based upon Newton's Law of Gravitation) and eventually stop its expansion and start collapsing on itself. But in reality, recent observations (in the early 1980s) proved that the expansion is accelerating. The fact is that science is a work in progress and many theories are just plain wrong. Another example of that is Natural Selection which is part of the Theory of Evolution. It makes absolutely no sense that a natural unguided process can design the human body with its amazing complexity and machinery which is orders of magnitude more sophisticated than the most advanced technologies ever devised by man. And how do the Biologists support their bogus theory? Just throw in billions of years. By the time many of these children leave high school, they have already been indoctrinated into believing this theory. How do they sell this fraud? By indoctrinating children from a very young age. But worst yet, anyone who goes against it is ostracized from the scientific community by the gatekeepers. As they say, no one is allowed to rock the boat. What does the phrase mean, "To do or say something that might endanger a stable situation or upset the status quo."
As regards to your statement on atheism, it is a religion whose primary objective is to challenge the existence of God. And yes, those demons you speak about would be happy that they have quite a large following. An objective scientific observer who has not had a personal experiential encounter with God would be at the most, an agnostic though common sense informs us that it is impossible for a human being to have come about through any means other than being created. But to profess atheism is to undermine science as nothing in science supports such a belief system. A theory that cannot be tested, proved, or disproved should not be regarded as a scientific theory in the first place. At best, Natural Selection and evolution as it relates to our Origin should be described as a belief or what some would call faith.
Since I did not have a religious upbringing, by the time I entered Engineering School, I acknowledged to myself that I did not know whether God existed or not. Now I not only believe in the existence of God, I know that God exists! You need to spend some time at the library and read the accumulated knowledge in Biology on the human body, DNA, genes, cells, nervous system, eyes, brain, viruses, and so on. And before you go about promulgating your views on religion, you should take the time to read the Bible, the Gospel of John (King James Version - just do an online search) about the life of Jesus Christ. This version of the Bible was translated by top scholars in England. But if you spend your time reading the views and opinions of those that do not believe in God as opposed to examining the Bible for yourself, then that would be a total disregard of the scientific method or process. If you read the Bible, then God is obligated to encounter you and reveal himself to you. So stop doubting and see for yourself ;-)
ShellacScrubber dont be ridiculous. How much more influence do you want the demon to have on an atheist. It already made him think there's no God. Nothing can be worse than that
IB Daramy that's interesting what did that spirit point out about your life exactly?
The man asked how we can trust our scientific reasoning when it's designed for purpose of survival (by theory of evolution). Yet he's willing to trust a book written by the same species 2,000 years ago. Great logic.
Yeah but the bronze age men who wrote that book were some of gods chosen and they CLAIM it's the word of god. Plus it says our god is the best god, oh and the only god. He is goodness, mercy, and love (even when he's giving babies cancer) and he wants to save you if you just submit to him for eternity. Cause if you dont become his servant you suffer endlessly. Just think, when he isnt causing (or ignoring) some famine, he may be listening to your prayer. So join us this Sunday!! And bring money. Give us lots of money. He needs your money.
-The church
Expecting logic from Christians is like expecting miracles.
Watch again you got his question wrong.. he didn't say that. He has a valid point, the Quran is from the creator of the universe not a man
@@abdourjawara022 The quran was and still is written by men, who SAY it's the divine word of allah. I can write a book, says its divinely inspired and call myself a prophet too, that doesnt make it true.
The thing is, we can't trust our minds. That's why we came up with the scientific method, statistics, etc.
It’s amazing he found all those things at this mountain that no one has noticed before him. Amazing..
Sad, poor man
It's amazing what you'll find when you already know what you want to find.
In only 4 years too
It's in a museum
Finds a pair of old torn levi jeans: "These where jesus's denim jeans"
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is a malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able or willing?
Then why call him God?"
-Epicurus (Greek philosopher, BC 341-270)
gaurav shetty. The point is are you willing to prevent evil but not able ? To God, evil serves a purpose.
Then whence cometh evil?
He created it to test you. It's that simple.
@@zipodipo7923
How could making little children suffer from cancer and die from it possibly be a test to those children or even to their parents?!! How could creating a disabled and needy person for life a test ?!!!!
Just 2 stupid examples among millions.
On the other hand, a secular army had to defeat a conservative army in order to get rid of slavery. WHO HAS MORE MORALS???
Maybe he is not a real thing. Think about that!
@@inicheck2697 It's not a test for those children or their parents. The test is for you and fools like you. Those are the children of moses. They are already in paradise. If you had any sense you would give anything to be one of them. Instead here you are blaspheming your way into hell. You're the one who has problems, not those kids. With an ignorant mind and a stupid mouth you compound your problems. You should talk less and listen more. It's possible you might learn something. Oh and your manners are deplorable. That's the reason why you ask stupid questions. I can't even begin to teach you about morals. You lack the IQ.
@@zipodipo7923
Hi Mr High IQ man!! So for the very intelligent person that you are, your great God is making some people suffer (too much) in order for other people to learn something, hopefully to avoid going to 'hell' ?! Well if God thinks that's the way a teacher should behave, he must be a weirdo teacher! Secondly, the great big MAJORITY of those sufferers are NOT 'the children of Moses': Buddhists, Muslims, tribes from Africa and America thousands of years before 1492 etc etc etc. How would they even think the way your BRAINWASHED mind does?? How would anybody around them learn the lesson you are SO confident and proud to convey !!? You need to be terribly narrow-minded or pathologically stupid to believe that LOL
Guys, I have to share a shocking secret with you: There really is a Kings Cross Station, and there's even a sign which says Platform 9 3/4, just like it's described in the book! That must mean it's real, right?!
@C K Pari Your punctuation and spelling are appalling! Perhaps it's you who needs to take his pills.
Perfect 😂
There's also video documentation.
How can an articulate person in this modern time can't figure out that magic is impossible
Maybe because the articulate person knows/understands more than you do.
And evolutionism is not magic 😁😁😁
The problem here is that everyone is given a equal say and they believe that their opinions have equal weight.
When discussing scientific discoveries and theories, your holy book and religious beliefs are not required.
The edjit who said we don’t understand DNA needs to go back to school.
It is so sad that in 2019, there are still people who think we require religious thought to help explain the origins of life and our position in our solar system. We don’t.
Science to explain and Religion to enhance...
Mat Watson Not quite. Name one enhancement that religion has brought to science?
It wasnt meant to be taken literally, I think science created the world and religion (if you choose to believe) is there to help us make sense and run the world with morals and values.
I dont believe in a God but I think thats where Religion sits.
WHY WOULD SOME ONE WHO AS STUDIED THE BIBLE WHAT TO BE A NONE BELIVER THIS WOMAN SEEMS TO AV THE EVIDENCE FOR EVRYTHING SHE IS VERY CONDISENIING
@@anthonytrose the life is in the blood lead us away from the treatment of bad humers
ritual purification being the reason the dr who got fired for tell people to wash their hands between the morgue and the maternity ward that is now the medical standard
I'm sure there are more I don't know of the top off head
Short answer: Yes. Long answer: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
A 3500 year old text preserved to the letter on nothing more than sheep skin and tree pulp isn't extraordinary at all I suppose.
I'd hazard to say it takes just as much "faith" to believe in evolution as it does creation. And yet the scientists STILL HAVE NO CLUE.
@@Finn-McCool Where tf are you getting "3500" years old (earliest estimate of book of Job is what, 600 bc?) and why do you think we have original copies, "preserved to the letter" on their original sheep skin and tree pulp (actually earliest forms of many bible myths are in clay tablets, recorded by Sumerian civilization). Scientists have plenty of clues to support the TOE, it is one of the strongest, most fundamental theories in science.
@@SavageHenry777 After reading my comment it does seem my grammar could use some work. The book is roughly 3500 years old. The original pages are indeed not preserved. I think some of the oldest are from the first century BCE. After the Dead Sea Scrolls were found there were only slight changes in spelling compared to the then oldest known available copies. Very well preserved indeed.
Genesis Exodus and Job were all penned Circa 1657 BCE.
@@SavageHenry777 no matter how strong any theory is, it is still only a theory. And simply finds itself full of holes. Believe what you want to believe. After studying the Bible and looking out my door everyday I'm thoroughly convinced in creation as the means of creation.
@@Finn-McCool Eric you don't understand the difference between "theory" in the colloquial sense and scientifoc theory. Something like "it's my theory the news anchors are lizard people," is really just hypothesis, postulation, opinion.
A scientific theory, examples of which include the Theory of Gravity, Germ Theory, hell Music Theory, quantum mechanical theory, and many others, are highly tested and supported by evidence, thouroughly fleshed out models describing observed facts to put it very crudely.
So, no, saying the theory of evolution is "just a theory" is a highly ignorant argument to make for your position. No big deal: now you know, once you confirm what I've told you. You can do that quickly on the internet: "scientific theory definition" highlight, right click and search for it. Take care.
The problem is that "God" is such a loaded word. No two people can agree on precisely who/what God is. Everyone has their own subjective interpretation.
What is the point of speaking directly. Life is a test
'' Does evidence undermine religion '' ? Well, that's one thing, along with facts, logic, proof...
Complete waffle
As Thomas Paine once said; Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it.
RedRiverChannel That's a superb quote.
So many people, so sure that THEY have reason, that THEY aren't ignorant.
Those who support evolutionism and/or atheism too often try to paint a stereotype of creationists as being low I.Q. science illiterates. Such people are smugly sure that THEY ain't religious. (Like me in the past when I called myself an atheist.) But they are. Profoundly so. Why? Because they have great...faith...in what is never seen and is even what is impossible. Yet they flatter themselves that they are way smart, and all about science, while feeling sure that creationists have nothing but an Imaginary Friend.
.
Let's look at just a few of the imaginary friends and myths from evolutionism and atheism.
.
First there is the belief in the imaginary time fairy friend. Evolutionists promote the idea that life can come from inorganic matter. (And don't say they do not. It's easily found all over Google and on YT. Who came up with the mythical primal pond theory? Creationists?) When it is pointed out that life only comes from life and life of the same kind they respond "Well, with enough tiiiiime, anything can happen. We have...faith...therefore, that things happened differently in the conveniently unverifiable past."
.
They have faith, too, in their imaginary crystal ball friend that sees into that unverifiable past. For ex. they will pick up a fossil from a rock and tell you what happened to its invisible and evidenceless descendants for over 100 million Darwin years. They also talk about "missing" links, more of their imaginary friends. Don't bother to ask how you tell missing links from never existed links. They have...faith...that they are just "missing."
.
Next we see the imaginary Geologic Column friend that "supports" evolution. The real evidence shows the fossils are jumbled. There really are no such things as Jurassic, Triassic etc. periods. Giant shark fossils are found with dino fossils in Montana, for ex. Whales' fossils are found in wildly improbable places like the Andes mountains, the Sahara and a desert in Chili. Deep sea "Cambrian" fossils are found at every level on the planet, including on most mountain tops, as with the world's highest, the Himalayans.
.
Take a look. www.bing.com/images/search?q=trilobites+on+mountain+tops&qpvt=trilobites+on+mountain+tops&qpvt=trilobites+on+mountain+tops&qpvt=trilobites+on+mountain+tops&FORM=IGRE . Those are the fossils of extinct, ocean bottom dwelling, trilobites. They, and other marine fossils found with them, are often in stunningly well preserved, and beautifully detailed, condition. We are told "plate tectonics" moved those deep sea creatures, for a millions of years trek, all over the world, in unbroken, vast sheets of concrete in the billions onto the world's mountain heights in such great shape. That's fine.... If you don't believe in erosion and admit you believe in miracles!
.
"Cambrian" fossils, like those trilobites, are found in the hills of mid America and countless other places on the planet, high and far, inland. Now why do we see evidence of sea life all over the planet at every level? And, how did all that sea water get everywhere? 90% of fossils on land are marine, too. Hmmmm....
.
Next, there is the imaginary family changing fairy friend. Put a species of any genus of fish, bird, lizard, tree, bacteria, whatever, under your Darwinian pillow. Voila! Over an evolutionary "night" it will change into the next step up in the Animal or Plant Kingdom, i.e. a different family. However, in the real world of trillions of life forms, and throughout recorded history, eagles stay eagles, bullfrogs stay bullfrogs, tulips stay tulips, eboli bacteria stay eboli bacteria, chimps stay chimps, fish stay fish, and of course people stay people, no matter how much they change.
.
We never, ever, see any evidence of a life form transitioning from one family to another. Since all the evidence shows that never happens all around us with life forms, you just have to have... faith ... that it somehow happened differently in the unverifiable realm of the ancient and conveniently invisible past. With no evidence of any family transitioning to be another kind of family, there is no evidence for evolution. (Not to mention never seeing any transitions from any order, class, phylum or Kingdom.) It's just that simple.
.
Then there is the supremely imaginary god-friend of nothingness. Richard Dawkins and others tell us that everything came from nothing. This defies unniversal experience and common sense, not to mention the laws of thermodynamics and physics. But their imaginary friend, the nothingness god, sells big time to those who want to believe they can be their own, puny, little gods.
.
Are you willing to take a serious and open minded look outside the box? If nothing else you can hear what the creationists are really saying, not the spin about what they are saying. . On this webpage you can see Nobel Prize winning scientists, other secular scientists - including some world famous evolutionists - admitting there is no evidence for evolution. You can see them calling evolution a kind of religion, something that leads to "anti knowledge", etc. Notice how many of these secular scientists acknowledge evidence for a Creator. freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1435562/posts .
.
Are you aware that more and more blood cells, blood vessels and soft stretchy materials are being found in dino bones? Forensic science and common sense tell us such things could not last for more than a few thousand years. Go to Genesispark to see ancient art depictions of dinos from around the world. My fave is the stegosaurus carved on a 1,000 year old Cambodian temple. That site has lots of info on soft tissues and blood cells being found in dino bones, and historical reports of dino type creatures, including some from the famous historian Herodotus and from Alexander the Great. All information is gleaned from secular sources. www.genesispark.com/exhibits/evidence/historical/ancient/dinosaur/ .
.
See Don Patton's The Fossil Record and many others. In this link he uses the fossil record to place evolutionary and creation predictions side by side. You can see for yourself what the real record of the rocks shows: ua-cam.com/video/gSof6z_Noqs/v-deo.html .
.
Thomas Kindell's vids are great, especially Thermodynamic Evidence For Creation where in the first 10 min. you hear quotes from well known evolutionists like "Evolution is unproven and unprovable. We believe it because the only alternative is special creation and that is unthinkable." ua-cam.com/video/I1yto0-z2bQ/v-deo.html .
.
Wazooloo vids, particularly The Mathematical Impossibility of Evolution and So Ya Think Yer A Chimp, and the DNA ones, are full of scientific fact presented in an often humorous way. ua-cam.com/video/mjQtqg3yyjk/v-deo.htmlua-cam.com/video/9ZHrcy8l9cU/v-deo.html ua-cam.com/video/QyRiqOFiOH8/v-deo.html .
.
Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed shows the politics of Neo Darwinism which harasses and expels those in academia and the media who even hint that there MIGHT be evidence for a Creator. ua-cam.com/video/4HErmp5Pzqw/v-deo.html
.
.Physicist Dr. Russell Humphreys gives scientific evidences for why people believe in a young, yes young, earth. Check it out and see: ua-cam.com/video/tX9eDTNfQHY/v-deo.html Part 1 And regarding the speed of light "problem", there are many unproven assumptions about light. It was always assumed, for instance, that the speed of light was constant. Since last century, various secular scientists have been saying it seems to be slowing down. However, here is another perspective. We have found that space, as in outer space, is stretchy. Several times in the Bible we are told that the Almighty stretched out the Heavens. This would mean the light from stars got stretched out, too, thus creating a false impression of distant time for light travel.
.
Answersingenesis.org covers just about everything . You are not a goo through the zoo ape update. You were created in the image and likeness of the Almighty Creator Who loves you. Why are you trading in those astounding truths of who you are for pseudoscience fairy tales and imaginary friends?
Psalm1Tree Well there's the biggest dose of stupid I'll see all day.
Notice something missing from your reply: Science. You not only offered no observable scientific data to refute anything in my post, you said nothing based on science whatsoever. Therefore you have followed a very typical pattern of YT evolution supporters.
.
You also have followed their other typical pattern in that you feel free to insult people. I have discovered over and over that such posters never do say anything based on observable scientific data. However, their verbal abuse escalates with any future comments. Therefore you will shortly go on mute. I wish you well, and have prayed for you, but can see that any further exchanges between us will not be fruitful. Bye!
Psalm1Tree Richard Dawkins (there's a man who knows science - you do not) is on record as saying that he doesn't debate creationists partly because there isn't a debate in the first place (evolution by natural selection is a reality, an observable and observed fact) and partly because to do so gives the stupidity of creationism/creationists the oxygen of the attention they crave. It makes them feel like they're occupying a level playing field with actual scientists, and that they are not. It's a sound principle and one which I too follow.
If your intention was to refute the stereotype of creationists as low IQ scientific illiterates, you've not only failed to do so but actually bolstered it.
The first guy was ridiculous, that's like saying New York exists therefore Spider-Man exists.
There is more evidence for Spider-Man than god
There is evidence for an uncaused causer that can be referred to as God
The Salty Spittoon Name one.
Alexander Høst Already 2 weeks, still no answer.
ChaingunCassidy Wow you are a fool, we have pictures of times square. We have places far far away from NY that serve NY style pizza. Ever heard of the news paper. Stop denying the proof open your eyes spider man is real. Teach the controversy
"Probably the exact mountain"??
why are these debates so good? they're much more meaningful than watching the evening news that's for sure.
Enjoy this truth, better than evolutionary fake news. Basilio Uchuya whom evolutionists passionately want to believe carved dinosaurs, surgical operations and other animals upon andesite river rocks and sold them to tourists in order to make a living did in fact copy from the original authentic stones of antiquity. He would not sell genuine stones to tourists because this would carry a long jail sentence if caught, for he had his wife and family to support. He got the idea of carving for a means of making money from the original ICA stones from seeing them. He was part of the huaqueros’ or tomb looters who operated in the desert. The fake and genuine artifact is easily distinguished under microscope. Basilio used a hacksaw blade to carve on andesite stones which left metal fragments in the grooves and scratches around the edges, not like the original sophisticated carving done by the indigenous Indians one thousand to two thousand years ago. The evidence continues to stack up and evolutionary scientists see the artifacts as hazardous to their evolutionary belief system. Paleontologists’ have suggested out of desperation that the artifacts were the product of drug-induced mind-altered states. This is typical of these evolutionary fanatics not able to come to the knowledge of the truth.
In the spring of 2001 Basilio took Dr Dennis Swift to the tombs outside Ocucaje where Luz Pre-Incan tombs were located. On the journey they crossed a wooden rickery bridge over a small meandering stream. As Dr Dennis Swift glanced out there were thousands of gray round andesite stones along the stream. He suddenly thought that is why archaeologists have not found engraved stones at other sites because there was no andesite river rock. They eventually stopped and climbed 50 meters up the hillside to the “tombas” tombs where there were hundreds of looted tombs. As they made their way around the looted tombs they saw a gray andesite stone partially sticking out. Basilio went over and dug around the stone and lifted it out. We photographed the stone in “situ” with Basilio holding it up. It was elaborately carved but not by Basilio. Finding carved stones in the walls of tombs of dinosaurs and other depicts is enough said in relation to their antiquity. Basilio also looked for trinkets in the looted tombs.
Dr Dennis Swift roughly estimated that there were more than two thousand unexcavated tombs in the Tiahuanacan and ICA cemetery dating from about 100 B.C. TO 1500 A.D. He noted there was an abundance of gray andesite river rock surrounding this ancient cemetery. The Ica and Tiahuanacan Indian ruins were built nearby next to the stream that is the source of life in the desert.
On return to Nazca Dr, Swift met up with some huaqueros who he had previous known. They informed him of some recent discoveries at a Nazcan cemetery near ancient irrigation canals. In April 2001 farmers had been expanding their cotton fields and by chance made a discovery of a tomb with a barbocoa roof which collapsed revealing a corpse staring back at them. The mummy had tilted to one side resting its cranium on an engraved stone as a pillow through eons of its burial. This was identified as a Nazcan tomb. The stone had small amounts of hair and scalp tissue clinging to the surface. Samples were taken along with the blood on the stone which was engraved with a dinosaur; these were sent to Paragon Genetics Laboratory in Dallas Texas. The laboratory was unable to get a DNA sequence from the hair blood and tissue which further enhances the antiquity of the dinosaur stone. Fresh blood, hair and tissue would have yielded a DNA sequence. The burial shroud wrapped around the mummy was examined by Intermountain Forensic Laboratories in Portland Oregon. The tests were inconclusive but this is common place for objects hundreds or thousands of years old.
Forensic scientist Ray Grimsvo testified: In my expert opinion of over twenty-five years of forensic investigations, criminal, archaeological, paleontological, having seen thousands of blood stains, there is no question in my mind. I will go on record those are blood stains on the stone and burial shroud and are undoubtedly of ancient origin. End of quote.
Conclusion: Dinosaurs and humans were contemporary with each other.
Would you like to fart in my mouth?
I’m glad I found these, and I’m honestly impressed something like this even exists, I had no idea. I really wish there were more, and this type of intellectual content was more popular
@@M3Busssinthese shows only really exist in Britain/Europe because we value intelligence and are very respectful towards one another.
@@rahatahmed6188 okay Mr Ahmed 🕌 💣
Yes, evidence undermines fiction.
Too irritating to watch. I can't believe I live amongst people who can still posit that Noah's Ark actually existed. I can't deal with this delusion.
gabe
What if God were an electrical/magnetic energy field vibrational being? Like we are?
And the physicist Barbara Brennan confirms this in her book "Hands of Light"?
I received this email recently from the site called "Ask a Mathematician, Ask a Physicist":
What are "actual pictures" of atoms actually pictures of?.
Physicist:
Actual pictures of atoms aren’t actually pictures at all.
There are a few good rules of thumb in physics. Among the best is:
light acts like you’d expect on scales well above its wavelength and
acts weird on scales below. In order to take a picture of a thing you
need light to bounce …
The only thing physicists have actually seen is basically a computer
image, not the real image, and second, they observe electric fields,
not the particle itself. They do not observe particles themselves;
they are able to observe only the field. However this alone does not
prove anything, but that the electric energy field exists and that’s
about it---no atoms, no photons, no electrons, no quarks. no nothing.
So no, particles do not exist. Particles exist only inside
mathematical abstractions and nothing more and nothing else. We don’t
know what actually exists in the real world, except that there are
energy fields---electric, magnetic and all other forms and all other
kinds of energy fields.
I forgot to add what exactly is visualized with all these microscopes
including STM--the scanning tunneling microscope. What is visualized
is the charge density of the electric field.
Basically you observe vibrations---electric vibrations.
You haven’t seen an atom either. You’ve seen an image you assume to be
an atom, but it is simply an instrument’s representation of the atom.
It is not the atom itself.
These techniques aren’t actually “visual” like microscopes we work
with in biology classes. Microscopes use lenses and light to help zoom
and focus on small objects. Electron microscopes, on the other hand,
use quantum scattering theory to construct the shape of small objects,
then the data is transferred to a computer to create a model. The
wavelengths of visible light ranges on the order of ~370nm to 750nm.
These are all MUCH larger than many particles of interest (and way too
large to view atoms, which are on the order of Angstroms-0.1nm).
Scientists need to be creative to be able to “see” atoms.
So, no, scanning tunneling microscopes and atomic force microscopes
did not prove the existence of atoms.
Science PROVES the flood you dingbat, AND they found the actual ark. Pull yoour head out of your as, er the sand and do some research.
The Biblical stories from Genesis through the flood are not historical but rather, mythical even though some Christian fundamentalists still try to locate Noah’s Ark on Mount Ararat.
Have you read the Epic of Gilgamesh? It was the story of the flood written long before the biblical recount of a flood. It was not a global flood, it was localized to around the Black Sea. In a thousand years different people will recall Hurricane Katrina in different ways, and some may claim it was the hand of god and it wiped out all of the USA. Literature is written and twisted to fit the author's goal, if the goal is to create fear some unseen force in order to control people, the natural disaster becomes a supernatural phenomenon. Ask any fisherman the tale of his biggest catch, and ask him again in a few years, that bass will have grown into a whale if asked often enough, and eventually the whale swallowed him and spat him out....
@@motrwithmary6531 Yes I've read the story of the Epic of Gilgamesh and know of its legends and myths and what it's poetic literature imparts. You touched on the mechanism of magnification, whereby the stories are given a grandeur that is apparent in its setting. But there is also the mechanism of symbol correlation, by which elements of the story come to represent certain attitudes, and are elaborated in cultic rites so that this symbolism emerges more clearly.
Knock knock...
Who's there?
It's Jesus... let me in!
Why?
So I can save you!
Save me from what?
From what I'm going to do to you if you don't let me in!
Jesus loves his men..
I think it would be best to just "let him in," .....or "it" is not "going in" easy.
~Jesus uses No-Lube
This is purely genius
@William Solia Who created the universe? are we here by random? is it logical to think that something came from nothing?
lol and i can give u immortal life if u let me in,lol
@William Solia Why do you think well know soon?
People keep talking down at Francesca, but...she's literally the expert in her field (at least, for people who come to this show, as there are others, obviously). She went into her studies with a neutral mindset, with no bias and no confirmation bias to look for.
That’s not true. She is very biased and anti-religious in her rhetoric. She is also incredibly condescending at times about believers, implying they are stupid,
She’s bias though
You obviously don't know much about Francesca she has said that with Richard Dawkins she doesn't agree with him and how he talks to religious people that religious people need to be respected so you're way off base
@@Dismal-futureSaying one thing doesn’t mean that you are consistent with that statement. There are plenty of statements that she has made showing she looks down on believers. Talk is cheap when talk can be contradicted.
@keatsiannightingale9256 I've noticed how people of Faith don't like what she says because she's unbiased and she quite simply lays it out in an unbiased way and people don't like having their religion so easily simplified. Nor do they like it's many contradictions or how Yahweh comes from a Pantheon of Canaanite gods... her knowledge just infuriates people and makes them feel like they're being attacked even though they're not
"I'd lose my faith if it was disproved" (paraphrased) -Shows a total disdain for facts.
That old dude who actually thought he found the remnants of the exodus was in some shit.
Just trying to sell his book and make money...
"If there is god, then he speaks, and he speaks in the bible, so that answers all your questions."
This man has exactly zero grasp of logic.
prove it please.
+singalexsong Prove what?
Sledzeppelin prove "If there is God, then he speaks, and he speaks in the Bible". Thanks.
+singalexsong I was quoting what the idiot in the video said, followed by my conclusion that he has zero grasp of logic, as evidenced by the preceding quote. It's not my statement. He's the one who would need to prove that to be logically correct.
Sledzeppelin oh, sorry for the misunderstanding, I totally agree with what you've concluded.
Whoever decided to invite Francesca, needs a standing ovation
What destroys religious beliefs is... Religion starts off with "This is the way it is " then cherry picks known knowledge to make it work. Science is the opposite it uses all knowledge to come to a conclusion and can change if it gains new knowledge.
William Strumfels
actually.. there literally thousands of religions.
isnt it absurd to think God or Gods came down and give each culture a different set of laws to follow?
Kenji Teh
yes
religion is just a word to describe how we think about God. God, his truth, the science behind his creation - all that simply is. we then go and discover it all. stop being distracted about what other people do. be truly independent and strike a course to seek the living God. you can doooo iiiiiiiit.
Never have i seen or heard anything about a god in nature, only through human speech because they heard it from someone else. So i'm going to stop being distracted from simple claims and be independent.
Thanks :)
You don't need a scientist to prove evaporation, just a pot of boiling water, from which evaporation is clearly visible. No citation of sonoluminescence claim, so i'll ignore that like a scientist would.
But let's play by your rules, a few things are correct, never mention the wrong things and use the right things to prove EVERYTHING that is both right, wrong and unknown.
The books of Harry potter mention Ford Anglia. Ford Anglia's do exist. Therefore Harry potter, flying cars and wizards exist.
Wait...
I wish christopher Hitchens was here,there would be hitch slaps every where
quite doubtful. right about now.....he knows he was wrong...........Jesus was right!
You mean Christopher Hitches which debated William Lane Craig and lost ROFL.
@@johnreed4159 No good reason to believe that at all. You're just making blind assertions.
His chestnuts and hairs are roasting on an open fire
Monk.......This is not a controlled panel. Lots of them are interrupting each other, as well as talking at the same time. Therefore it would not be conducive for Mr. Hitchens to speak with this panel.
When I go to a book shop,I put The Bible in the fiction section,where it belongs.
Whereas I would put it in the trash can where it belongs
GTR
What if God were an electrical/magnetic energy field vibrational being? Like we are?
And the physicist Barbara Brennan conforms this in her book "Hands of Light"?
I received this email recently from the site called "Ask a Mathematician, Ask a Physicist":
What are "actual pictures" of atoms actually pictures of?.
Physicist:
Actual pictures of atoms aren’t actually pictures at all.
There are a few good rules of thumb in physics. Among the best is:
light acts like you’d expect on scales well above its wavelength and
acts weird on scales below. In order to take a picture of a thing you
need light to bounce …
The only thing physicists have actually seen is basically a computer
image, not the real image, and second, they observe electric fields,
not the particle itself. They do not observe particles themselves;
they are able to observe only the field. However this alone does not
prove anything, but that the electric energy field exists and that’s
about it---no atoms, no photons, no electrons, no quarks. no nothing.
So no, particles do not exist. Particles exist only inside
mathematical abstractions and nothing more and nothing else. We don’t
know what actually exists in the real world, except that there are
energy fields---electric, magnetic and all other forms and all other
kinds of energy fields.
I forgot to add what exactly is visualized with all these microscopes
including STM--the scanning tunneling microscope. What is visualized
is the charge density of the electric field.
Basically you observe vibrations---electric vibrations.
You haven’t seen an atom either. You’ve seen an image you assume to be
an atom, but it is simply an instrument’s representation of the atom.
It is not the atom itself.
These techniques aren’t actually “visual” like microscopes we work
with in biology classes. Microscopes use lenses and light to help zoom
and focus on small objects. Electron microscopes, on the other hand,
use quantum scattering theory to construct the shape of small objects,
then the data is transferred to a computer to create a model. The
wavelengths of visible light ranges on the order of ~370nm to 750nm.
These are all MUCH larger than many particles of interest (and way too
large to view atoms, which are on the order of Angstroms-0.1nm).
Scientists need to be creative to be able to “see” atoms.
So, no, scanning tunneling microscopes and atomic force microscopes
did not prove the existence of atoms.
Pure Energy stop with your copy and paste no one is reading it lmao
haha, cognitive bias much. Believe what you want, stay away from science though cuz you don't do it well at all. :D
Why do you care enough to seek it out?
The thing that undermines religion is intelligence.👑👑👑👑
'Be more humble' aka close your eyes and stick your fingers in your ears while yelling 'lah lah lah lah'
Don't forget the stampy feets!
Fkn idiots; wilfully ignorant adult sized children.
He actually means stick your head up his ass.
Next week's questions,
Do fairies have free will? and
Does your dog join you in heaven?
Iain Rae - brilliant
Lol lol lol lol lol lol
@Steve all except one.
Not sure on the first question but a solid yes on the second question.
I like how he said "religions", in the U.S. it is always "religion", meaning "Christianity"...
I'm an atheist because of critical thinking, studying the bible 8 or 10 hours a day for about 10 years, and reading the bible from cover to cover over a dozen times. The bible reading I did was not directed to studying pet scriptures as the religions want us to focus on. By me doing this I came to the conclusion that none of it is real. If you take the stories as some are true and some as fiction, then as far as I'm concerned All of it is unbelievable.
I’m a Christian for the exact same reasons, but in a shorter timeline than yours. I realized how philosophically bankrupt materialism is and how ethically vacuous secular morality is, as well as the way in which Christian theology does accurately and adequately present the world as it is, and I reconstructed my faith after five years of being a raving, desperate and quite intellectually motivated anti-theist.
@@ManoverSuperman
Theology adequately present 1k years old humans, talking donkeys, Noah's ark 🤦
True, that's why invite you to read the quran
You are saying this since you haven't read Vedas and Bhagwad Geeta from sanatan religion which is the oldest religion on this planet.
oh religious people, they love to talk about humility and being open-minded.
nah, no love of talking about that stuff. it is true though that true humility begins when we stand in awe of the living God; and the mind expansion that begins when we embark on a life of praise and worship of the true greatness of God. part of all of that is Science. i friggin love Science, and i am in awe of what God created. it all works together, silly rabbit ;}.
God or Nature which is yeilds the grestest benefits to humanity?
Is 2005 Asian Tsunami in the Indian Ocean good ?
LOL prove it. religion and science don't go together.
Religion will always retain a certain tattered prestige because it was our first attempt as a species to make sense of the cosmos and of our own nature, and because it continues to ask “why”. Its incurable disability, however, lies in its insistence that the answer to that question can be determined with certainty on the basis of revelation and faith.-Christopher Hitchens
"Does evidence undermine religion?"
No, lack of evidence undermines religion.
+Peter Metcalfe
Evidence also undermines it
+Peter Metcalfe
I think it's both evidence that undermine religion and the lack of evidence that undermine religion!
+moody +Peter Metcalfe I think bacon tastes good.
+Peter Metcalfe ingenous answer, but 'lack of evidence' is what religions are based on.
porculizador But the problem is they think there is overwhelming evidence. If that was true there would be no atheists and only one religion.
I love how in all these debates the religious people start arguing amongst each other by the end of it 😂
@C K Pari Hmm, I wonder why the rational and logical thinking atheists were the "best orators" compared to the "lousy nerds" theists?
It's very easy to dismiss the wonderful stories in the Bible.
"And when he saw a shop in the way, he found it was closed so he cursed the shop and presently there was a sign, "We have moved". And the disciples were amazed at his power"
By the way, it was Sunday at 6 pm.
What is wrong with people's thinking? To have some historical details in the Bible....does not in any way confirm any issues of deity.
It's cool they gathered this many intellectuals from different faiths, but i don't think an hour is nearly enough. In a debate between two people, an hour is hardly enough for any major topic, how can an hour be enough for 10+ discussions. I'd love to see a long running series with episodes maybe or something like that which has the capacity to accommodate all perspectives.
Edit: nvm, there seems to be other episodes
My hypothetical of dropping Matt Dillahunty into these audiences does rather entertain me.
How to turn a debate about god into a slaughterhouse? Add Matt. He would eat that religious prick in the morning and shit him out as pure logic in the evening.
No no no you're done.
@A Christian Scientist Good for you. Maybe he was just bored of your preassumtions, ad hominem arguments and trying to talk about God, where you should provide evidence for him. But thats just my idea how it went down.
@A Christian Scientist "I have debated Dillahunty and his cultists" sounds a bit like ad hominem to me. I say nothing about God doesn't exists, God just needs to make clear he does exists. Until now this evidence is still missing.
@A Christian Scientist Well it has nothing to do with "admitting". Until evidence is provided, everything is regarded as "non-existent". But i'm not an afairist or an a-second-sunist because no evidence is provided for fairies or a second sun in our solar system. Something not existing is the starting point. You can't disproof anything directly, that's simply impossible.
But i'm pretty sure, that the God shown in the Bible will have some problems with existence. Or to make it clearer: He cannot have the attributes given to him (like mercyfull or loving) while his actions are clearly considered as evil, by most human moral standards. So to make an argument: I cannot disproof every God, and i cannot disproof the God of Abraham, but the records shows even if he exists, he wouldn't be the loving as everyone who believes in him want's him to see.
By the way: You should know what ad hominem means, and insulting is one method used by it. It basically goes with the try, to not argue the point but rather attack the messenger. Insulting is one kind of this method.
The arrogance of the religious is suffocating.
+jacob mcgill To be fair, everyone seems arrogant here lol
Heywood Yabloome Wtf are you talking about? HumanInBeta, and most non-religious people, already know what you just said. He was simply stating science can be wrong but will push it's knowledge as fact. Are you suggesting science is never wrong? Do you know what Lynn Margulis, Ignaz Semmelweis, Georg Cantor, and Henry Ford all have in common? They all made huge discoveries. And you know what? The scientist of their time laughed and ridiculed them for speaking nonsense. They had FAITH that the science they already had was correct, and rejected the discoveries that we now consider common sense. And that will continue to happen because many scientist are arrogant and have complete faith in what they "know".
+jacob mcgill It is the only way dumb people can comprehend things. They see a thunderstorm or an earthquake and simply cannot understand, from a scientific stand point, how these things happen. They also discount the explanations for these things that we do have since they just can't comprehend them.
+HumanInBeta Science beats religion any day. Care to give any examples?
+Daren Colby Yes, Science can be wrong, but with more Science it corrects itself. Religion....uh not so much. Religion is wrong forever.
So, there is a cloth of red linen in an Egyptian museum, therefore the bible is true? Holy crap..
Imagine if I had stood up and said I believed in Zeus. They would have absolutely no leg to stand on to refute it. Idiots abound.
That'sislam for you!
Pol Fartin can I get some lightning? My neighbor need a good bolt up the ass hahah
reputations suggest Zoroaster may be a less fickle choice.
“Faith consists in believing what reason cannot.” ― Voltaire “No amount of evidence will ever convince an idiot” ― Mark Twain “The human brain is a complex organ with the wonderful power of enabling man to find reasons for continuing to believe whatever it is that he wants to believe.”― Voltaire " Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience". Twain.
Fantastic host. This discussion made me furious, but I'm so glad it exists and that people are being forced to ask these questions and answer these questions. Humanity's survival may-well depend on leaving our religious superstitions in the dust.
He did a terrible job! Gave way too much time to those deluded morons!
The difference between science and religion is that science doesn't make shit up.
Really science makes stuff up all the time seriously dude .why you think they are changing their theories all the time . Example is Pluto a planet or not .? They don't know
Geovanni Quintanilla Theories do change. Science changes all the time. This is not a bad thing. It changes when new information is discovered. That’s not making things up. Scientist are simply gaining more knowledge and revising theories. If science didn't change we would still follow the geocentric universe. The more we learn the more science will change. Pluto is now classified as a dwarf planet because it does not fit the criteria for a planet.
Geovanni Quintanilla That is the most stupid thing I have ever read. Whether Pluto is a planet or not was on the account of labeling, it has nothing to do with science or logic. It's barely even debate. Science is willing to change with evidence. Religion stupidly retains its stupidity.
AstronomyGuru84 the best explanation I've heard yet...You hit the nail on the head!
Geovanni Quintanilla - you must be a theist with that really dumb post. Firstly it is not a theory whether Pluto is a planet or not. It is a matter of classification. Name one scientific theory that has changed in the last 100 years.
god says all the animals are here for us to rule and do with what we see fit. why dont the animals seem to know this? snakes, lions, tigers and bears wont hesitate to kill their human overlords. its as if they dont know about what gods purpose for them was.
13:20 "They're telling us that something comes from nothing."
Religion is telling us the same thing.
Religion's oldest and favorite straw man
Hahahaha thats were youre wrong(the quran says allah made it (bigbang)
@@rabbr2sdsd799 And who made Allah?
@@BedsitBob he wouldnt be god then if someone created Allah.. the creator of Allah would be god
@@John-gn5dm And the creator of that god, would then be god, as would the creator, of the creator, of the creator, of the creator, of the creator, of the creator, of the creator, of Allah.
When science doesn't know something, scientists don't just make up a story to explain it. This is what religion is. Stories made up to explain things that humans didn't understand yet.
give one example where science made anything up without a shred of evidence
That’s an objectively false statement. If you were mature and thoughtful enough, you would see religion is primarily concerned with the things we humans can conceive of, not floating cities in the sky or alien-like beings from other dimensions. Most religious teaching is incredibly practical, and it is religion, not science, that serves as a better foundation for morality than secular and/or individual moral trends from one time to another.
Goat-Herders Guide to the Galaxy
truly ignorant statement. Moses was hardly just a mere goat herder. Kings, princes, priests, prophets that had a relationship with God communicated His words to us
John Reed god is fake news
You forgot camel fiddlers !
@@johnreed4159 Really ? of course your not prepared to make the case its not all just made up ?
@F Knight Blessed are the cheesemakers, and all that jazz.
That people in the 21st Century still believe in a magical sky daddy and refuse to even consider the overwhelming evidence and still trot out half baked and ignorant arguments that hold serious examination
lol, the Creator created all and science simply attempts to describe it. sky daddy, lol.
You were taught that so you believe it , you have been well indoctrinated .
T Toughtask Yet in the 21st century with all the intelligence and technology we come to conclusions that nothing created the universe!!! Even a comedian has better joke then that! Scientists are going nuts
+Ouzo 9
I think you've created a false dichotomy, it does not follow that the only two options are 'nothing created the universe' and 'god did it'.
Also, I think you are misrepresenting the position of many Cosmologists. By the term 'nothing' they are referring to the absence of matter. We actually have never found a 'nothing' to examine and so we do not even know whether a 'nothing' is within the realms of possibility, beyond the mathematical concept of nothing i.e 0.
What they do know is that the laws of physics break down seconds before the big bang, and so it is not reasonable to assume that something can not come from nothing under conditions where the laws of physics do not apply.
I've seen many of these shows now, and I must say, the guests are quite nuts, but the presenter really knows how to cut through the bullshit and ask sharp questions. I'm impressed!
Francesca >>>>>>>>>> everyone else
leeloy91 I would love to Big Bang that...
That's how simps say things. Oh wait it's 7 years too late.
That guy honestly believes that an old wooden boat carried two of every animal in the world for about a month at sea. That is crazy. Why won't people just stop believing in fairy tales and use their minds?
SaSdUde
What if God were an electrical/magnetic energy field vibrational being? Like we are?
And the physicist Barbara Brennan conforms this in her book "Hands of Light"?
I received this email recently from the site called "Ask a Mathematician, Ask a Physicist":
What are "actual pictures" of atoms actually pictures of?.
Physicist:
Actual pictures of atoms aren’t actually pictures at all.
There are a few good rules of thumb in physics. Among the best is:
light acts like you’d expect on scales well above its wavelength and
acts weird on scales below. In order to take a picture of a thing you
need light to bounce …
The only thing physicists have actually seen is basically a computer
image, not the real image, and second, they observe electric fields,
not the particle itself. They do not observe particles themselves;
they are able to observe only the field. However this alone does not
prove anything, but that the electric energy field exists and that’s
about it---no atoms, no photons, no electrons, no quarks. no nothing.
So no, particles do not exist. Particles exist only inside
mathematical abstractions and nothing more and nothing else. We don’t
know what actually exists in the real world, except that there are
energy fields---electric, magnetic and all other forms and all other
kinds of energy fields.
I forgot to add what exactly is visualized with all these microscopes
including STM--the scanning tunneling microscope. What is visualized
is the charge density of the electric field.
Basically you observe vibrations---electric vibrations.
You haven’t seen an atom either. You’ve seen an image you assume to be
an atom, but it is simply an instrument’s representation of the atom.
It is not the atom itself.
These techniques aren’t actually “visual” like microscopes we work
with in biology classes. Microscopes use lenses and light to help zoom
and focus on small objects. Electron microscopes, on the other hand,
use quantum scattering theory to construct the shape of small objects,
then the data is transferred to a computer to create a model. The
wavelengths of visible light ranges on the order of ~370nm to 750nm.
These are all MUCH larger than many particles of interest (and way too
large to view atoms, which are on the order of Angstroms-0.1nm).
Scientists need to be creative to be able to “see” atoms.
So, no, scanning tunneling microscopes and atomic force microscopes
did not prove the existence of atoms.
Actually, you’ll find that it was NINE of every single animal on the planet, not two. 7 unclean animal of every species to be sacrificed, and 2 clean animal of opposite sex for procreation. These religious fucktards where, are, and always will be the most dangerous inbred species on this planet.
Actually, Kent Ham (bible con artist) inadvertently proved the story bullshit. According to the Bible, Noah and his sons built the ark in 60 years. Now, Kent did build an ark. It took him 1000 expert carpenters, modern power tools, pre-fabricated beams and planks, power cranes and trucks and two years to build something that might resemble an Ark but is most likely not seaworthy. He wanted to put live animals in, only to notice that even with modern ventilation and machinery this would make not only a miserable but a suffocating experience.
Now, try to explain how 8 people could complete in 60 years with bronze age equipment what obviously and demonstrably took 2000 man years with modern power tools and pre-fab materials. And if "God" is your answer, I have to ask why he didn't simply build the fucking boat himself instead of making Noah go through the busywork.
The whole story holds not a drop of water.
0x777 Funny thing about that "Ark" is, only the front of it is actually a "boat". The backside is three buildings supporting the front facade. It's an embarrassment to anyone in the U.S.
SaSdUde123
Out on the water in the boat for about a month? It is even stranger,the ark was supposedly out on the waters for not only a month, it was longer than a year. It rained for a bit longer than a month and then it took some time for the water to subsided. Like you said, how a grown person can even begin to believe and argue the damn ark story is beyond comprehension.
Apologists: They want 'their' version of facts....anything that contradicts them, they accuse of conspiracy and bias...(bereft of logic and reason).
2:27 Francesca Stavrakapolou's facial expressions in reaction to Robert Feather's claims are hysterical.
If anyone actually believes Noahs arc is factual, they are in need of mental care immediately.
Or Ark
When your only argument is pointing out a misspelled word, you’ve admitted defeat. Hope I spelled all this correctly.
Noah's ark and it's problems
ua-cam.com/video/I225Vcs3X0g/v-deo.html
No, no, they are in need of an exorcism.
Oh, there is a stone in Isreal with a writing that says "Mine"? Well, that proves it all.
There will always be discontent there because that's not been proven or true.
It's a shame you've never seen this:
ua-cam.com/video/2hFJBXsMcgQ/v-deo.html
nicky campbell is more faithful to that 80's hairstyle than all of them put together ... #true faith
"Microbiology and meteorology now explain what only a few centuries ago was considered sufficient cause to burn women to death." - Carl Sagan
“Quest for the ultimate truth?” Noooooo.... everyone is only there to justify their own beliefs.
I can’t believe I’d ever say this, but I agree with the guy in the pink jacket and multicoloured bow tie.
bow ties are cool
@@timq6224 Some people wear a fez now
@@FahadAyaz "bow ties and fezzes are cool". - 11th doctor
Religion undermines itself; science just shows how.
weskal
What if God were an electrical/magnetic energy field vibrational being? Like we are?
And the physicist Barbara Brennan confirms this in her book "Hands of Light"?
I received this email recently from the site called "Ask a Mathematician, Ask a Physicist":
What are "actual pictures" of atoms actually pictures of?.
Physicist:
Actual pictures of atoms aren’t actually pictures at all.
There are a few good rules of thumb in physics. Among the best is:
light acts like you’d expect on scales well above its wavelength and
acts weird on scales below. In order to take a picture of a thing you
need light to bounce …
The only thing physicists have actually seen is basically a computer
image, not the real image, and second, they observe electric fields,
not the particle itself. They do not observe particles themselves;
they are able to observe only the field. However this alone does not
prove anything, but that the electric energy field exists and that’s
about it---no atoms, no photons, no electrons, no quarks. no nothing.
So no, particles do not exist. Particles exist only inside
mathematical abstractions and nothing more and nothing else. We don’t
know what actually exists in the real world, except that there are
energy fields---electric, magnetic and all other forms and all other
kinds of energy fields.
I forgot to add what exactly is visualized with all these microscopes
including STM--the scanning tunneling microscope. What is visualized
is the charge density of the electric field.
Basically you observe vibrations---electric vibrations.
You haven’t seen an atom either. You’ve seen an image you assume to be
an atom, but it is simply an instrument’s representation of the atom.
It is not the atom itself.
These techniques aren’t actually “visual” like microscopes we work
with in biology classes. Microscopes use lenses and light to help zoom
and focus on small objects. Electron microscopes, on the other hand,
use quantum scattering theory to construct the shape of small objects,
then the data is transferred to a computer to create a model. The
wavelengths of visible light ranges on the order of ~370nm to 750nm.
These are all MUCH larger than many particles of interest (and way too
large to view atoms, which are on the order of Angstroms-0.1nm).
Scientists need to be creative to be able to “see” atoms.
So, no, scanning tunneling microscopes and atomic force microscopes
did not prove the existence of atoms.
Francesca is so hot, her intelligence and personality makes her an absolute 10!
Virgin.
@@baaldiablo8459 LOL, you called it!
A great being once said, "If sacred places are spared the ravages of war, then make all places sacred. And if the holy people are to be kept harmless from war, then make all peoples holy." Silver Surfer is an amazing character. He's also stated, "Obviously my best strategy is to wait, listen, and learn." Something we should take to heart, maybe, to figure out the real truth (which is not that God exists, quite the opposite). If evidence proves that something is what others perceive it to be, then we are to use such evidence until further evidence proves otherwise; simply written in a book of stories does not make this book of stories valid.
The opening comment 'exact location, probably'. Sums it all up right there and then
This debate is pointless. If you are a religious person you have BELIEF. It does not matter to the person whether those beliefs confine to logic or reason. As an atheist and cynical and sceptical person in general, I need to have empirical evidence to back up material claims.
The amount of logical fallacies used by the religious side was staggering. That's the problem with this debate. God as a concept is an illogical one when comparing it to what one already knows about the physical world. Yet people are trying to use logic to try and advance an illogical concept. Just be honest and say you have faith.
Mia Nanor Thank you
Nicky Campbell keeps this debate on point. Good work.
unfortuantely, he didnt keep coming back to the Cambridge Professor who had a number of really tuned-in points that were a bit too difficult for the assembled guests.
Asking for more humbleness and claims to knie absolute truth.. man..these religious people never fails to make me lol..
I can't believe a guy is actually arguing about the mountain being proof of god. Biblical evidence is not real evidence
nytolstoy
What if God were an electrical/magnetic energy field vibrational being? Like we are?
And the physicist Barbara Brennan conforms this in her book "Hands of Light"?
I received this email recently from the site called "Ask a Mathematician, Ask a Physicist":
What are "actual pictures" of atoms actually pictures of?.
Physicist:
Actual pictures of atoms aren’t actually pictures at all.
There are a few good rules of thumb in physics. Among the best is:
light acts like you’d expect on scales well above its wavelength and
acts weird on scales below. In order to take a picture of a thing you
need light to bounce …
The only thing physicists have actually seen is basically a computer
image, not the real image, and second, they observe electric fields,
not the particle itself. They do not observe particles themselves;
they are able to observe only the field. However this alone does not
prove anything, but that the electric energy field exists and that’s
about it---no atoms, no photons, no electrons, no quarks. no nothing.
So no, particles do not exist. Particles exist only inside
mathematical abstractions and nothing more and nothing else. We don’t
know what actually exists in the real world, except that there are
energy fields---electric, magnetic and all other forms and all other
kinds of energy fields.
I forgot to add what exactly is visualized with all these microscopes
including STM--the scanning tunneling microscope. What is visualized
is the charge density of the electric field.
Basically you observe vibrations---electric vibrations.
You haven’t seen an atom either. You’ve seen an image you assume to be
an atom, but it is simply an instrument’s representation of the atom.
It is not the atom itself.
These techniques aren’t actually “visual” like microscopes we work
with in biology classes. Microscopes use lenses and light to help zoom
and focus on small objects. Electron microscopes, on the other hand,
use quantum scattering theory to construct the shape of small objects,
then the data is transferred to a computer to create a model. The
wavelengths of visible light ranges on the order of ~370nm to 750nm.
These are all MUCH larger than many particles of interest (and way too
large to view atoms, which are on the order of Angstroms-0.1nm).
Scientists need to be creative to be able to “see” atoms.
So, no, scanning tunneling microscopes and atomic force microscopes
did not prove the existence of atoms.
If the bible is proof for god then Harry Potter is proof for magic.
Its not science in any way, shape, or form!
Those religious ignoramuses should not be invited unless they agree to have a rational discussion. Those people here are only trying to rationalize their lack of knowledge and they are proud of their ignorance.
+Paweł Wróbel
How rational are you?
how much knowledge have you accumulated to say you know?
what is ignorance?
I'm rational enough to dismiss irrational claims that have no proof whatsoever .
I have enough knowledge to differentiate fiction from reality.
Ignorance is believing that a God created the Universe. And then believing that this God that created this vast Universe came to a random planet , in a random Galaxy and told humans to not eat shrimps, or not eat pigs, or not eat cows (depending on which book/god you happened to chose), but forgetting to tell them that the Earth is not flat and that it goes around the Sun , not the other way around.
Ignorance is believing that the god that created the universe is really concerned with whom you have sex and when, but doesn't even mention why he created billions of other galaxys, stars and planets.
WolfEyesatNight rational enough to differentiate arguments from bullshit
LOL impossible to have a rational discussion with people who believe in the irrational. That's quite naive to expect that from religious people.
So why give them a chance to preach on tv?
That guy in khaki color robe was not given any time to explain the question . Thats injustice to him.
Does evidence undermine religion? Yes. Closing credits
Humans are self important. We (they) think we're special, that we somehow have a gateway to eternity through thoughts. Nature is so much more magical than primitive human thoughts. I hate humans, but love nature.
Thank you for sharing that. I found "that we somehow have a gateway to eternity through thoughts" to be a very succinct way of displaying the arrogance of our species.
We actually are special. We have the capability of imagination, we are curious. We have the intelligence and ability to understand the universe, to a certain degree but nonetheless. We are the product of a journey that started 13.8 billion years ago. Of circumstances who allow raw energy do condence into matter. Of stars fusing this matter into other kind of matter. The gold in my computer is the product of one of the most violent and yet beautiful events in the cosmos: A supernova. A dying star spitting it's remains through vaste amounts of nothingness, so new stars, planets and trabants can be born. In a vast ocean of galaxies there is a georgeous spiral galaxy, and in one of it's spiral arms there is a small star, surrounded by a tiny piece of stone and dust we call Earth.
On this small fraction of space, there is a small ape-like race running around. Mankind. People. You and me. Your left hand is made of the matter of one star, your right hand is made of the matter from another one. You are stardust. The elements you are made of will stand the test of time, in one form or another. And still, here we are, living our ridiculous short lifes compared to the almost infinite time the cosmos has to offer.
What is the meaning of your life, what is your purpose? Maybe there is none, maybe you are here just because, and to give yourself meaning and purpose. If you love nature, you have to love humans, because we are nature by any strech of imagination. Maybe we don't behave like this, but the fact still remains unchallenged. So go one you little great ape, enjoy your life, enjoy it to the fullest. And when the end is near be assured: You may die and you will go the same nothingness you came from. But you were here as a monument to this universe who has gained another capability: To understand itself through you.
@@lusti6511 blah blah blah. Why do you feel the need to lecture self evident knowledge? Everything you listed makes no difference when we as a species is the sole cause of the 6th mass extinction.
Humans are garbage. Literally. Must be nice to live in illusion and think everything will work out.
I'm way past having a romanticized picture of humans. We're a walking disaster and if you disagree, keep living in that beautiful illusion. I envy you.
@@theuniversewithin74 Well i thought it would be helpful to show you the world from another point of view. I wasn't aware that you are so pessimistic about the whole thing, that you regard my words as a personal insult. It's not that i don't see the problems we're the root of. But anyways, got the point, so have a good time.
@@lusti6511 no worries, but eveything you wrote is almost childhood knowledge to me.
I'm not pessimistic. I'm realistic. The coming generations are *fucked* and there is more or less nothing we can do about it.
The 6th mass extinction is well underway. And what do most people do? Carry on as usual. They're up for a rude awakening.
Let's do everything we can to counter what's coming, but if you knew enough about it, you'd understand the scope of everything and how utterly screwed we are.
I've had it with people living in illusion.
According to this first guys logic any book that describes real life locations must be factual.
@C K Pari Sure. So because the caribbean is a real place, jack sparrow most certainly existed? :P That is exactly the same conclusion he came to.
@C K Pari My point being that referencing real life locations does not provide validity to your otherwordly claims. Just because Jerusalem is a real place, does not mean someone died and got ressurected there.
The Quran also reference a lot of places and their prophet. So the muslims must be right? Its a lot of factual stuff mixed in with their mumbo-jumbo. Or what about the jews? Quite sure the Torah references a lot of real life places and people. The jews must be right!
No wait... The hindus! They definitely reference a lot of real life places and people. Yes. The hindus are correct. Thank you for this eye opener. Swapping faith to hinduism asap.
I've got proof that Bible is true, because it says so in the Bible... now replace the word *Bible* with *Lord of the Rings*
The religious people are NOT in a quest for the ultimate truth. No matter how much evidence they hear they have to ignore it, or they would be questioning the god they believe in.
Eddie
What if God were an electrical/magnetic energy field vibrational being? Like we are?
And the physicist Barbara Brennan confirms this in her book "Hands of Light"?
I received this email recently from the site called "Ask a Mathematician, Ask a Physicist":
What are "actual pictures" of atoms actually pictures of?.
Physicist:
Actual pictures of atoms aren’t actually pictures at all.
There are a few good rules of thumb in physics. Among the best is:
light acts like you’d expect on scales well above its wavelength and
acts weird on scales below. In order to take a picture of a thing you
need light to bounce …
The only thing physicists have actually seen is basically a computer
image, not the real image, and second, they observe electric fields,
not the particle itself. They do not observe particles themselves;
they are able to observe only the field. However this alone does not
prove anything, but that the electric energy field exists and that’s
about it---no atoms, no photons, no electrons, no quarks. no nothing.
So no, particles do not exist. Particles exist only inside
mathematical abstractions and nothing more and nothing else. We don’t
know what actually exists in the real world, except that there are
energy fields---electric, magnetic and all other forms and all other
kinds of energy fields.
I forgot to add what exactly is visualized with all these microscopes
including STM--the scanning tunneling microscope. What is visualized
is the charge density of the electric field.
Basically you observe vibrations---electric vibrations.
You haven’t seen an atom either. You’ve seen an image you assume to be
an atom, but it is simply an instrument’s representation of the atom.
It is not the atom itself.
These techniques aren’t actually “visual” like microscopes we work
with in biology classes. Microscopes use lenses and light to help zoom
and focus on small objects. Electron microscopes, on the other hand,
use quantum scattering theory to construct the shape of small objects,
then the data is transferred to a computer to create a model. The
wavelengths of visible light ranges on the order of ~370nm to 750nm.
These are all MUCH larger than many particles of interest (and way too
large to view atoms, which are on the order of Angstroms-0.1nm).
Scientists need to be creative to be able to “see” atoms.
So, no, scanning tunneling microscopes and atomic force microscopes
did not prove the existence of atoms.
If so called religious people wanted the truth, they would not be voting repub.
If an Angel landing on Eddie's porch he wouldn't believe it.
@@nicholaswalter8135 they have been brainwashed and indoctrinated to believe what they believe,
i know i was one of them, unfortunately i didnt realise it for nearly half my life
it was just everyday living in our community
What evidence are Christians ignoring? Fossils don’t prove rocks evolve into people but you don’t understand that. Hell testimony is evidence that you ignore. You ignore it because God makes you ignore it and he makes you ignore it because you are an evil piece of filth.
"Does evidence undermine religion?" It sure as hell doesn't support it.
Humble
What if God were an electrical/magnetic energy field vibrational being? Like we are?
And the physicist Barbara Brennan conforms this in her book "Hands of Light"?
I received this email recently from the site called "Ask a Mathematician, Ask a Physicist":
What are "actual pictures" of atoms actually pictures of?.
Physicist:
Actual pictures of atoms aren’t actually pictures at all.
There are a few good rules of thumb in physics. Among the best is:
light acts like you’d expect on scales well above its wavelength and
acts weird on scales below. In order to take a picture of a thing you
need light to bounce …
The only thing physicists have actually seen is basically a computer
image, not the real image, and second, they observe electric fields,
not the particle itself. They do not observe particles themselves;
they are able to observe only the field. However this alone does not
prove anything, but that the electric energy field exists and that’s
about it---no atoms, no photons, no electrons, no quarks. no nothing.
So no, particles do not exist. Particles exist only inside
mathematical abstractions and nothing more and nothing else. We don’t
know what actually exists in the real world, except that there are
energy fields---electric, magnetic and all other forms and all other
kinds of energy fields.
I forgot to add what exactly is visualized with all these microscopes
including STM--the scanning tunneling microscope. What is visualized
is the charge density of the electric field.
Basically you observe vibrations---electric vibrations.
You haven’t seen an atom either. You’ve seen an image you assume to be
an atom, but it is simply an instrument’s representation of the atom.
It is not the atom itself.
These techniques aren’t actually “visual” like microscopes we work
with in biology classes. Microscopes use lenses and light to help zoom
and focus on small objects. Electron microscopes, on the other hand,
use quantum scattering theory to construct the shape of small objects,
then the data is transferred to a computer to create a model. The
wavelengths of visible light ranges on the order of ~370nm to 750nm.
These are all MUCH larger than many particles of interest (and way too
large to view atoms, which are on the order of Angstroms-0.1nm).
Scientists need to be creative to be able to “see” atoms.
So, no, scanning tunneling microscopes and atomic force microscopes
did not prove the existence of atoms.
Strange thing: 25% of Jesus' own disciples (Simon, Judas, Thomas) were more unsure about Jesus' divinity than many of the Christians today, 2000 years later.
Science: "We know very little and we should rely on EVIDENCE and RESEARCH in order to improve our knowing of those things, step by step."
Religion: "We know everything and we have the answer for everything! We need NOT ask or research, everything is as we say it is, because we say it is so!"
Which of these statements is honest and which one is not?