Does the company require your ad show you eating the product? Seems like that’s a consistent aspect of Magic Spoon ads from content creators. To be candid, I really hate watching people eat. It’s a “me” problem, but it makes me want to forward through the ad as fast as possible. Others may feel the same way, so please consider this as constructive feedback for the sponsor. 😊
Him ignoring the 60 second timer is very indicative of theists in general. They set a bunch of rules for everyone to follow and then proceed to immediately break them.
My favorite one: "Follow the evidence wherever it leads". The clips I have seen (which I have to admit have a strong selection bias) they drop that one withing less than a minute
I’ve seen people on all sides of debates do this. Then again, I’m in the US. Our presidential candidates frequently don’t follow the rules of debate. That said, I’d probably struggle with a 60-second timer. I get the need for limits, but my neurodivergent thought processes don’t work optimally at speed. Maybe I’m just not cut out for debate?
It's a variation on the Politician's Fallacy. 1. We need an explanation. 2. God is an explanation. 3. Therefore God is the explanation. As you can see, the conclusion does not follow from the previous two points.
i really hate their attacking darwin, not because of the man, but because of the millions of people that have proven and expanded his original theory. we only honor him as being the first to get a good approximation in writing and the process tha lead him there. the man could have been anyone
Because Darwin comes with something contradicts there fundamental beliefs of Allah created Adam and Eve!! When science contradicts there beliefs, they reject science and goes with there unproven man tale!!
That is because creationists treat Darwin as the "Jesus of atheists". Either because that is the only way their brain can work, or because it paints atheists as hypocrites. Which one probably depends if the creationist is arguing of good faith or not.
Individuals who view the world through such an extreme Great Man Of History framework as to follow literal messianic figures, contextualise literally everything else through the same lens.
As pointed out by smart commenters, it's because the world view they ascribe to needs this messianic founder and if they can discredit him, that is an equivalent effort as proving evolution wrong overall. Since they have no hope at all to overcome the gargantuan pile of evidence for evolution, they have to attack a man who lived over 150 years ago and point out that he wasn't perfect.
You know what's pretty amazing? There will be bi people, or other LGBT+ folks who are unsure of themselves, worried about how people will react to them, how to deal with the hate and the discrimination... and this wonderful "stimky lil guy" Emma Thorne rocks up, takes everything the world throws, chews it up, spits it out and keeps on going with empathy and positivity. Emma's space here on YT is supportive and welcoming and safe; I'd hazard a guess that someone, somewhere in the world in a tough spot, saw one of Emma's videos and literally had their lives saved. I don't know how she'd react to being viewed as a role-model, but she is. Absolutely wonderful person.
iMemory, coming with iPhone29, enables your phone to last longer with insufficient storage by just fudging photos. Have one image to represent 6 events. You want it because we told you to want it.
not to that extent of course, but that's somewhat what JPEG does. Its compression algorithm is lossy, one cannot recreate the original from the information remaining. there's a thing people play with basically as art called deep frying, which is more or less just repeatedly compressing and decompressing a JPEG image until it's mostly fragmented image artifacts vaguely in the shape of the image you started with
The 1% chance of poison thing bothers me because we do that everyday with everything. Various types of food poisoning, machine parts being faulty or breaking, and medications having adverse effect, and just tripping while walking and bludgeoning yourself are things we deal with on a regular basis. There are thousands of car fatalities in the US every year, yet the country is dominated by cars! We deal with these things because the benefits outweigh the chances of harm. I don't think any of that has anything to do with believing there's evidence of life occurring naturally.
It depends entirely on the circumstances. If you were in a life raft on the middle of the ocean and all you had was one bottle of water that you believe could be poisoned I think there is a good chance you would take a risk on the bottle of water when you became thirsty enough.
@@jasongaylard2547 Yeah, I know its circumstantial. My point is we engage in things every day that have a chance of harming us because the chances are reasonably low, as well as how this is a really weird argument to make about whether we should trust the evidence that life occurs naturally. It'd be like saying its rare to get struck by lightning, thus lightning has nothing to do with electrons.
@@Nyrinx "It'd be like saying its rare to get struck by lightning, thus lightning has nothing to do with electrons." That actually doesn't make sense in what suboor said lol
The more I see of any apologist, from any religion, the happier I am I'm an atheist. I like evidence, not excuses. I like being honest and not having to lie to myself constantly to get by. Everything that guy said had less truth in it than your sweater. So Emma once again for the win!
Such an outlook is not unique to atheism. Don't get me wrong, there are a lot of religious people who like excuses and lies. I've noticed some atheists do too though. This guy, however, is a bit disingenuous but then the whole video she's critiquing is like that, as evidenced that they just let him go over time, answer everything without challenged, etc.
@@juliabriggs1141 When someone talks about evidence, it's expected he/she brings some. We are not interested in your beliefs, but in what made you believe them. What you are doing is just performing, i'm not sure for who.
@@juliabriggs1141 I was born and raised in a Catholic family. I know Catholicism. I am not an atheist because I never had religion, I'm an atheist because I had religion.
@@theother1281 and they are still gonna claim that everything had been meticulously crafted like why tf would it take billions of years to come into place then, why would god make it "look" random if we just had been created anyways
The human brain is amazing, yet there are a few bunch of ignorant who think that the universe is created by itself, yet they know their breakfast can be made itself 😅 so people are mentally ill 😅
My partner has been deconstructing for a few years now and when looking back on the birth of our child, they asked "what would have happened to you before C-sections?" ...Well dear, you would have prayed and I would have died. They eventually responded "I'm really glad that god isn't in control of anything then," and came out as an atheist to their fundie mom the next day
Why didn’t natural selection allow you to conceive without C-sections then? If your ancestors couldn’t reproduce properly without C-sections, then their genes couldn’t have been passed on. The only genes that would be passed on would the ones that allow birth without C-sections. And besides, Christianity is not against C-sections.
My new favorite argument: "God does not need a creator, because god never began to exist." "We have a word for things that never begin to exist: Nonexistent.'
God's "existential" status is neutral, not negative. Yet, also, neither positive. It's Paradoxical. It's based on the Neutral Monad, or Vedic Tetralemma. Every Authentic Religion has Neutral Monism in common. Including Islam (Kalima). And Christianity (Trinity).
Anything existent exists in time. Something that exists outside of time is indistinguishable from something that exists for 0 seconds, i.e. that doesn't exist.
Considering you have intelligence and consciousness… Is it more likely that it arose from atoms that lack them or a creator that has these attributes? What is more rational?
@@y.v.8803 why not 10 creators, then? Why not the Cosmic Fairies who fart Universes? Yes, complexity may arise from simple components, it's called emergence; go study the dynamics of complex systems instead of always reading the same fairy tales book from the Bronze Age.
The entire Pascal's wager depends on the basic idea that their god is easily fooled: Just pretend that you believe in this god and he will act as if this is true.
Reminds me of Pratchett's response to Pacals wager. The subject wakes up in the after life surrounded by gods carrying baseball bats saying 'we'll show you what we do to smart Alec's around here'
I don't even think that is what he was trying to say. I think he was trying to use the logic of the pascal wager to justify why the universe being created makes more sense... what makes no sense. I'll have to watch the original video later to see wtf he was trying to say.
@@joachimschoder if I recall Pascal actually argued for something slightly different. Not pretending, but actively deluding yourself by any means necessary until you actually believe. I think a more readily available flaw is that it presumes to know anything about *which* god not to anger, which begs the question But you're right, most people citing versions of Pascal's wager need to believe that god is stupid for it to make sense
As for the "flashing sign saying MEMORY FULL" - there is evidence that the brain needs SLEEP to do maintenance on the memory - moving a few things from short-term to long-term memory, discarding most of it. Prolonged and severe sleep deprivation can lead to hallucinations, delusions, and even psychosis, which is a heck of a sign.
Sleep is more like a trawl for metadata, archive semantics, delete acontextual debt, and defrag. As we learn more about the best way to create machine learning models, we end up learning more about consciousness. Seizures are _literally_ a defrag operation, but also tend to be a little destructive.
@@slowmotionatheist I don't know what exactly sleep does but our brain is not like a camera that is recording continuously while we are awake. This is something that has been said on various documentaries. Most of it is forgotten right away. We just memorize a few portions. I don't know what the total memory capacity of the human brain is but we can be certain that it is not infinite. I don't know what the muslim guy is going to say but I am guessing he is going to say that the brain is a miraculous device and we haven't created something like it.
I think his argument about the random creation of the universe out of different possibilities, failed to take into account that if one of the other possibilities happened, we wouldn't be in our universe to question why ours didn't happen. By that argument he must think being a lottery winner means the lottery specifically picked him
He's so confident just like Christians I know (and was). Confidence is the root of Con man, in fact they used to call them Confidence Men. To pull a con you have to be confident. This guys and those like him are trying to persuade people to believe what they believe. People like that.Give me a recipe make it easy. Truly spiritual people teach things that work that are valid and integrate together. Teacher vs Preacher.
If an infinite number of monkeys were given an infinite number of typewriters and banged away for infinity, eventually one of them will type the entire works of Shakespeare. This universe is the Hamlet. But it’s the only universe we know, so survivorship bias tells us the infinite number of gibberish gibbons don’t exist.
And that is why people like to believe in the multiverse idea, because it solves the fine tuning problem by using a (maybe virtually, maybe not) infinite number of tries. However since we have as much evidence for it as we have for "God did it", it will probably stay in the realm of philosophy for a while where it belongs.
I grew up evangelical and I can tell you, having an atheist view of nature brings way more appreciation to it than some big guy in the sky flicking his wrist and making stuff appear.
Considering you have intelligence and consciousness… Is it more likely that it arose from atoms that lack them or a creator that has them? What is more rational?
As an atheist, I’ve never had MOST of those questions about religion. I’m baffled constantly by this need to believe a religious text over science. I feel like I’m taking crazy pills!!!
They're questions that tend to pop up when the atheist is allowing certain assumptions for the sake of argument... although mostly rephrased to make them extra soft-ball.
Chances are this aren't "questions atheists have" but at best "questions atheists ask theists when theists try to proselytize and expect atheists to believe their nonsense" if not outright "questions that theists think atheists have".
the idea of chance has always bothered me because there are reasons for the ways that galaxies, planets, chemical compounds, etc form. They call it chance when carbohydrates are oxidized and the result is both predictable and kinda necessary. Chemical combinations are just how elements react. Spherical objects in space is a product of how gravity works... They either know this and are lying, at this point, or they dont know, so they're not people we should listen to with regard to anything any more important than "how should I filter my next fart?"
Yeah, I think sometimes the words we use in a scientific context trip up theists. They hear "chance" and think "completely random with no rhyme or reason." They hear "theory" and think "wild guess that has no backing."
Its Douglas Adams puddle analogy. They think all the laws of nature exist to create all the things we find beautiful and amazing in the world. When in reality the world just is, and we just decided to find beauty in it.
@@danilooliveira6580 There's also a degree of arrogance and self-centeredness. "It must have been made to have me in it!" It's not about you, dude. We're just another population of organisms hanging out on this planet.
It's causality. There can not be infinite causality in the past because that will lead to infinite regress which is illogical. There must be something that had initiated the causality, something that is always there. Which is known as God.
Emma, in the beginning you stated not remembering something when you enter a room, as if to say your memory isn't all that good. Actually, this is quite common -- it's called 'the doorway effect'. From Wikipedia: The 'doorway effect' or ‘location updating effect’ is a replicable psychological phenomenon characterized by short-term memory loss when passing through a doorway or moving from one location to another. We tend to forget items of recent significance immediately after crossing a boundary and often forget what we were thinking about or planning on doing upon entering a different room. Research suggests that this phenomenon occurs both at literal boundaries (e.g., moving from one room to another via a door) and metaphorical boundaries (e.g., imagining traversing a doorway, or even when moving from one desktop window to another on a computer).
Yes and surprisingly u can remember the thing again if you walk backwards after you've cross a door or boundary ( like not turning around and walking back but literally stepping backwards the way u came into the new room ) this really works, it has happened many times with me when I forget the thing i was looking for when i entered a new room but then i again walked backwards to the previous room and suddenly i remember what i came for , i saw this trick on "brain games" which used to premier on national geography channel when i was a kid.
Yeah its something about our brain doing a “soft clear” upon crossing a boundary into a new environment. The boundary basically primes your brain for new information/input, so it soft clears perceptions and ideas from the previous environment to make room. The item you wanted to grab was an idea you had in the previous environment, and it soft clears when entering a new one. It also explains why you remember what you wanted to get upon reentering the old environment
His example of setting up a factory and then walking away was hilarious. Oh, you mean like, what if Henry Ford set up a factory to make cars and then died? Because, like, he did, and Ford Motors is still cranking out vehicles. Great example!
I think at least some of the religious UA-cam channels are abusing the algorithm to get big. I've seen several examples of UA-cam channels intentionally posting misinformation and even racist content, knowing that lots of people will call them out in the comments section. All comments and sharing generate engagement even if they are calling out the channel for wrongdoing. The algorithm will promote the video question, which is being called out is dangerous misinformation. It's a big problem with the algorithm on most social media platforms.
depends on how grifty the channel is. if it's a "serious" religious channel they usually disable comments if too many nonbelievers start posting and correcting them, because they don't want their followers to maybe learn something that might be factually correct, or worse, get curious and start googling things for themselves.
@dyamonde9555 That is a good point. And of course, it's not just religious channels that do this either I once saw a "science" channel do it to. It was absolutely one of the worst examples I've ever seen. This bastard put out blatantly pro occupation propaganda video that and tried to claim it was an innocent geology video despite the fact that it was loaded with racist language and symbols. The worst part was that a bunch of trump supporters rushed to his defense and started a huge war with the people trying to call this clown out for his blatant racism and the UA-cam algorithm loved it. As far as I know that video is still on UA-cam 3 years later despite being repeated by hundreds of people. What the hell is wrong with UA-cam?
I converted to the Esoteric Order of Dagon, if that helps. Sure, we may be trying to open a portal to the Outer Gods, but the dedication to environmental issues is outstanding.
25:08 This guy doesn't understand business because he's trying to employ an example that is actually an extremely common practice framed as something you wouldn't do in business. Someone often will own a successful business and have absolutely nothing to do with that business' day to day operations. In fact a business will often collapse specifically because an owner insists upon meddling and won't allow the operations management to do what they were employed to do. It's really common in food service and in his scenario the presence of a creator-god would likely ruin the whole thing by being present.
Proving god is easy. Have god turn up and demonstrate their power in an undeniable way. I'm just surprised that despite so many people saying they have a direct line to god no one seems to have done this.
How would you verify that an extremely powerful being was the creator god of the universe. They may just be a very naughty alien. Depending on their power and attitude, it may be prudent to treat them as such though, if that is what they desire of us.
@@daveg2104 In this scenario why would I need to verify it's "the creator god of the universe?" It's just proven it is a god, or possibly that it had god like powers and abilities and wants to be called a god which covers my general definition of a god. But it's still not happened so it's still a moot point.
I have a freckle on my hand on that exact spot too. What are the odds of that? Apparently a lot better than you would think. The real question is have you ever pretended that the freckle was an eye and used your hand as an ad-hoc cyclops puppet?
Muslim apologetics are relatively weak because they have not been well developed, because in Muslim countries it's actually unsafe to openly question religious dogma. Therefore, Muslims have had little practice in having to develop arguments to defend their faith.
Never thought of it that way. When I compare their excuses to their xtian counterparts, I'm always surprised how lackluster they are (xtian excuses are still crap, but at least they're entertaining in how they come up with their nonsense).
Even though i am a Muslim my self i agree though this wasn't always the case . Now its been used as a way of control . Thats why some revert Muslim from England or European nation will have better debateing ability than most arab born muslims .😅
14:02 That's not how probability works either, because once something has happened, the probability of it have happened is 1. The probability of it happening again might still be low, but that's a separate sampling. You can use probability to guide future decisions, like if you should drink from a glass that has a 1 in 1,000,000 chance of making you bleed out the eyes and praise Mittens the All-Fluffy - but if you walk in the room and someone is bleeding out the eyes and scribbling on the walls about The Fluffy One, then how unlikely it was that the glass was poisoned before it was tested is irrelevant.
Also, the whole question of probability in this context is stupid, because we don't _know_ what the probability is. For all we know, the starting state of the universe had a 100% guaranteed change of creating life... we don't (yet) know the mechanisms that started the universe, so we can make absolutely zero claims about how likely any subsequent event might be. Basically he just made an unfounded argument from incredulity, about as stupid as it seems.
@@wraitholme exactly, for all we know "Life, the Universe and Everything" were all inevitable. Claiming that it is 1 in a billion chances is an absolute fabrication
I love how these people will acknowledge the human desire for meaning but not take that extra step to realize that belief in “god/gods” stems directly from that desire. Like, dude, why do you think that idea was so prevalent in the first place?!?
cuz its within the nature of a human (as muslims believe is given by god), otherwise, youll have to explain why you even think to think or want to feel. or why anything even exists at all. The most logical explanation is that you should'nt exist to be able to think or anything, but you do, and the concept of existing makes no sense unless some infinite source that is literally impossible couldve created the concept of existence
The idea of an independent creator is a logical conclusion and the only one. Inductive and deductive reasoning are valid epistemological methods. Conducted studies, and the fact that every civilization before the current one largely accepted the existence of a higher power points to the fact that this belief in inherent to humans.
Oh my LORD I get SO sick of people literally defending tooth and nail the idea that God is both omniscient and omnipotent and then also start talking about how we can understand the meaning of life. My dude... If God is as perfect as you say then life LITERALLY CAN NOT HAVE ANY PURPOSE. God already has all possible power and all possible knowledge. To say that he needed or wanted to create us infers that he either requires us to exist or he simply wanted us to for some kind of curiosity implying he didn't already know how it would turn out. It makes absolutely no sense. Then when you bring it up people always say: "Oh well we can't possibly comprehend his methods or his reasons." I remain agnostic. Because I think it takes more guts to just say you don't know than it does to act like you do. Maybe there is a God. But if there is a reason to life than I can't see knowing that reason doing anything other than defeating the purpose all together. I'm betting on just being good to the people around us so I'll keep doing that. Obviously if you've ever seen a news report or read a history book, not a lot of theists seem to think that's the answer.
im pretty sure that helps the muslim argument more than it does the atheistic one because muslims have an explanation as to reason why it came out the way it did, the 100% chance of it. As we believe there is no such a thing as chance, its a made up concept to help us understand things we do not yet understand, the person in the vid is actually compensating for the atheists that believe in chance in general showing it cannn be a ludicrous measure. As an atheist, you have to contend with the fact that existence will never make any sense since it leads to an infinite regress, or ones mere existence as is is completely impossible. Why who what when where would something come from nothing (and i mean the real definition of nothing, i.e. the absence of anything).
Being a programmer (a Creator of programs), once I release a piece of software I need to intervene only if it fails, so yes, if I did a good job my creatures can go on indefinitely without me. I'd say that's probably the whole point of my work
Imagin developing game with ai game character. The Ai game character believe that he and the Game software do not have a developer. Does that mean you do not exist?
@@user-eq3jn9rh8v of course not. But if I designed my game in a way that the character doesn't have any reasons to believe that there is a creator, then I would be a dick to punish him.
@@yahyawiab1423 so my game has sufficient internal consistency to not appear "god-made", except that from time to time (very rarely) I intervene just to make sure I'm worshipped by the characters in it. If they don't, I punish them. What a narcissist
@@fostena As a software developer myself too, creating any application needs knowledge, you can't just type in your keyboard and expect to have working software by chance not in millions of years, I'm not sure how you can accept our complex universe has popped up and structured by chance and from nothing
There are around 4000 religions all together. Muslims believe in one religion and say all other 3999 religions are wrong. I'm only saying all 4000 are wrong
These proof of God arguments so often revolve around the infinitesimal chance of our creation, but that infinitesimal chance is equally true for any other result that could have happened. That humans are to be the proof of God, being that we are so incredible, centres the existence and greatness of humans, not God. "We think humans are the greatest creation ever; therefore, God" is more an argument for the outsized egos we must all possess than it is for a metaphysical being we have to make unimaginably great just to handle our existence.
muslims believe god favoured humans in the sense that he gave them free will and intellect, but they are just one of his best creations, 'one of'. this reveals that it could be the best, or it might not be, but just amongst them. It also alludes to the fact there could be aliens and such (in other verses).
You are correct. I worked at a debt collection agency back in 2000-2006. Part of my portfolio was recovering funds from people who received deposits that were accidentally sent to their account. Most were local but some were international deposits. So I'm not sure why these islamic males think their bank analogy is relevant.
@@jaclo3112 I have noticed that if ever large companies make these mistakes in favour of ordinary individuals, they are extremely rapid to seek reversals (and if that individual can afford a solicitor, they may get to keep a big chunk). On the other hand, if it's a bank or big company that makes an error in their own favour, they will never, ever admit to having been wrong.
You should try the 60 second format in a video. Find some questions, put up an onscreen timer and impose a strict 60 second limit on yourself. Or maybe a random time limit. Might be interesting.
I don't have a specifically diagnosed memory issue but I don't remember barely anything from... honestly the majority of my life but particularly my childhood. Though not really a great argument in the first place, having someone explain to me how the beauty of our wonderful memories points to a creator would just push me in the opposite direction of whatever they're arguing for lol
8:34 Design doesn't require a designer. Gravity "designs" honeycombs, planets, their moons, and the syncronization of their orbits. All from a blind force that's not even a force. It's just time flowing at different rates.
he said science is used to understand the universe, never said otherwise. but science cant ever explain the why, just the how. Fairly limited methodology for inferring ones existence.
There are all examples of what Daniel Dennett calls deepies , Dennett used "deepity" for a statement that is apparently profound, but is actually trivial on one level and meaningless on another. Generally, a deepity has two (or more) meanings: one that is true but trivial, and another that sounds profound and would be important if true, but is actually false or meaningless.
The one that gets me is ‘the power of prayer’ They think their god will change his vast plan for the entire universe to suit them - along with changing it for every other follower - imagine the convulated computations involved in that? Inverse butterfly effect?
from a muslim perspective, this is not a contradiction because if god is all knowing and say the inventor of concepts like time. Then for god, people wanting to pray for certain things is already a known, so it will have already happened, as in its already played out. You might then ask, then whats the point in us going through this simulation if its already known? answer is because we were given 'a version of' free will, in the sense that we do yes make absolutely our own choices, but god already knows these choices (for example to pray or ask for help etc). But if we dont let them play out, it would be unfair to say we made them, and it would be unjust to us. And we believe that god is all just aswell as all knowledgeable. This also answers the question about there being a calamity where peoples prayers are conflicting because there is only 'one' version of reality, and its already known by god
You do realise just how convuluted and contradictory your answer is, don’t you? You pray; God WILL change his plan - because that WAS his plan. But… If you don’t ask him to change it… He will leave his plan as originally planned, because that was his plan! And do exactly the same for all the millions of other ‘believers’ WOW.
At the end someone should tell him that, because he exceeded his timer so often, he actually proved that god is not real. It makes as much sense as any of his arguments in favor of a god.
Well as a matter of fact, I think he is one of the more pro scientific theists I've seen in this channel, as long it fits its narrative. He allows evolution to some degree, allows laws of physics, to some degree. When it gets difficult, then he's is not different to any other theist.
"Why did God create me without asking me?" LOL that's definitely what an atheist would say. "I don't believe in the pink unicorn, but why did it have sex with me without getting consent first?" Pretty sure these are questions from believers not non-believers.
The human brain is not about ascertaining truth, it’s about survival. It makes up whatever story it needs to and rewrites memories every time you remember them.
37:00 Today, even in developed countries with all the luxuries of modern medicine, people still die during childbirth. A lot less than before sure, but it's still a dangerous thing to go through.
I just started this and I already had to go google shark bones, whale bones to compare and fish bones in general, and now my memory is also full of things I need but glad to have there.
That Quranic verse about Allah holding up the bird reminds me of that silly line in the Rings of power series at the beginning when Galadriel's brother explains why a boat floats on the water and a rock sinks.
Damn! This guy understands absolutely nothing about how science works. I apologize to you Emma, but after 11.51, this was all I could stand of this guy
Certainly 'is there a creator' is a question, but more importantly is what pressing need does it or the answer fill? By no means does the mere existence of one have necessary implications for souls/afterlife/etc. For all we know the creator could be unaware of us, just some entity playing with chemicals in their garage in another universe. Or it could be a natural process. The need for an answer needs to be established. I, for one, do not really worry about what a hypothetical entity might have done 14 billion years ago. There are many far more interesting questions.
Yep. I think the thing theists really can’t get their heads around is that most atheists don’t actually believe there isn’t a god. We just don’t care. It makes no sense to us, so it’s an irrelevant question in the first place. I wish there was a more accurate word for this - if atheism is the belief that there is no god, and agnosticism is the belief that there may be, but there’s no evidence for it, then what is the word for ‘I just don’t fucking care!’ ?
It matter a lot because the vast majority of our species believe in some sort of invisible friend or another and it forms their views of the world. Usually in VERY bad and dangerous ways.
I lost my faith the day I REALISED im more merciful than GOD. Theres zero evidence of god's existence but there are millions of evidence that god doesnt exist.
25:00 The phrase "law of nature" comes from Galileo, Newton, Pascal etc following from the classical philosophy of Aristotle. No scientist puts as much stock in the "correctness" of laws as laypeople do. A better phrase might be "observed relationship", but not catchy enough. Most "laws" are only mathematical approximations that match certain observations (e.g. Newton's gravity, Hooke's law, ideal gas law), while also being derivable from a set of assumptions (e.g. homogeneity, elasticity). Religious-types like to say "well who wrote these laws then?", but the answer is people. "All models are wrong, but some are useful"
A distinction must be made between natural and physical law. In fact, religious people question the existence of nature in this form, not our mathematical description of it.
20:17 they’re not just using a timer for no reason. They’ve edited his responses by jumping from camera to camera but they’ve screwed up and jump cut to the same camera a few seconds ago. He could have rattled on for 5 minutes each question.
First "question" is already making my eyes roll right out their sockets, I don't get why these people always think there _needs_ to be "consequences" for not believing in a creator if we have one. I know that if my characters were real and if they didn't believe in me, I certainly wouldn't punish them for it.
The idea that "science can't explain everything, therefore religion is the answer" is just so stupid. It depends on the erroneous belief that it must be possible to know the answer.
I've never met a Muslim who is both willing to debate religion (the smart folks won't) and able to give anything more than "look at sunsets! flowers! are they not proof enough?!" no. they're literally not.
chance doesnt exist, its a made up concept because we dont understand the full truth and its our incompetence that leads us to believe that there is something called chance. (This is from a muslim perspective btw)
The thing about memory is, we tend to recall it more with our emotions...our feelings. It's not just cold raw data. The more emotion we felt with the experience, the more likely it is we'll remember it for the rest of our lives, be it positive or negative with joyous memories or painful traumatic ones. As for the whole possibilities thing, my personal theory is that God suffered from extreme holy boredom to the point of utter pain and so, He gave us the ability to change and evolve because He wants to be surprised lol. Just my theory and I would never try to pass it off as fact because I know I can't prove it but that's all right.
I posted a comment awhile back asking you to review this video and you did! Thank you. I am impressed with how you can do this while being simultaneously delightful, entertaining and analytical. Plowing through these videos can be so dreary, as they stack one logical fallacy on top of another and talk in complete circles. And thank you for sharing your great shirts.
His argument about probability doesn't even hold water. We say "chances are, I'll be ok" each time we leave our homes. It is a very real possibility that we get into an accident, it happens daily. By his logic, we should never do anything because there's always a chance of getting hurt or killed.
Now in the " does science eliminate belief" section I think you got it wrong,what he is saying is that God UPHOLDS creation ,so basically evolution,and all the other scientific explanation would be MECHANISTIC , because based on his explanation they explain "how" but not "why" at a fundamental level. So basically science explains" how "and God explains why the physical world works the way it works and why there is something rather then nothing.
As a former agnostic, I find it fascinating that atheists can have such strong opinions about religion when they have never read or even been anywhere near the religious textbooks. You watch one or two videos, read a few articles and biased books, and form your position without due diligence. It baffles my mind how people who put themselves forward as scientific and intellectuals have this bizarre methodology of forming a position without pursuing knowledge in the field they are opposing.
Why do you assume we’ve never been near religious textbooks? I believe Emma has a Bible in her book collection. I personally went to a C of E primary school, have very religious members of my family and family friends, went to church and Sunday school. I’m an atheist. I find it fascinating that people think because something convinced them it must necessarily convince everyone else.
Can someone please explain to this person that evolution is not a blind process. Random mutations are, but natural selection is not random. His way if thinking is one of the things that has turned me away from any religion. In order to believe in an omniscient, omnipotent, and eternally existing being, I have to deny every object of science that contradicts it, but praise other aspects of science that supposedly prove it.
The thing that early child memories are basically made up is really scary. My earliest "memory" is one I made up from a phot when I was something about 1,5 years old. And even though I know the story and the memory is false I still can not distinguish this false memory from a real one.
The "Why did Allah make me without asking?" is meant to be from an atheist. Someone Allah made *and blinded to the truth* according to the Quran. And still tortures eternally. So, that question was cut off waaaaay too early by their pet mouthpiece. It's "Why did Allah who's supposed to be GOOD and MERCIFUL make me to be tortured?" which is a pretty damn important question.
Atheist vs Muslim? I want to be the announcer! "IN THIS CORNER, WEIGHING IN AT...-35 kg (?) AND THE UNDISPUTED WORLD CHAMPION LOUDMOUTH; EMMA "CUTETUS" THORNE" "AND IN THE OPPOSED CORNER, WEIGHING IN AT 80 kg...some Muslim dude" "LETS GET READY TO RUMBLE...or Argue"
For any scientific explanation for the beginning or existence of the universe to be successful, it has to conform to observations. So there is not an infinite amount of explanations for the universe. The creation of the universe by a deity does not conform to any observations.
@brb__bathroom, is there any evidence of a second deity observing the creating of the universe? If everyone just used a theological paradigm to describe the universe, we'd still be throwing our poo at each.
@@markgoodall1388we don't even have reproduceable evidence of the first deity, let alone the second deity, so the whole conversation is highly hypothetical.
The fact these antique excuses can be used to defend any brand of theism kinda gives the game away. You'd never get to this point if you weren't taking the dogma for granted.
Coming from a muslim background, we were constantly thought how major scientific discoveries are mentioned in the quraan. Always through some obscure metaphor or creative translation. So the quraan must be superior to science. All the questions are answered. Close up our universities and get to mosque (unless you're a women, then you pretend you don't exist). The problem is, you can't really use metaphors to send a satellite up into space that would allow me to near instantly communicate with anyone. There's no verses that discribes the method to turn ancient life forms into fuel and plastic. There's no divine knowledge that showed us how to use one of the most destructive forces in nature to treat cancer. And the worst part is that older Muslim scholars knew this. Sometimes you need to stop obsessing over abusive, petulant sky fathers and just figure out the world you live in.
Yes, God gives power to do so. BTW is there only one universe? there could be millions of Universes may be billions. For me no existence of God making no sense. Let's put every religion aside. But there should be a entity/infinite entities that is/are controller and managing everything.
“The human brain is thousands of times stronger than a computer.” -2000s “The human brain is hundreds of times…” -2010s “The human brain is dozens of times…” -2020s “The human brain is inferior...” -2030s
@starwarslegends8583 no, a cpu isn’t a brain it’s a processor that makes computers run. The brain can create drugs, perceive the world and universe, make a heart beat, think and a whole lot more. Computers and their cpus are not like human brains at all. They don’t have a thalamus let alone a hypothalamus.
I'm not sure if anyone caught the circular reasoning of "How do you know God is eternal?" "Because he is God." It's like, "Why are these sunglasses $300?" "Because they're durable." "How do you know they're durable?" "Because they cost $300"
32:37, "If we were to, within our lifetimes, apply the rule that whatever you see, you Believe and whatever you don't see you don't believe, We wouldn't believe in historical events." ... uh what? I can't see air, that doesn't mean I don't believe it exists, I can't see the molecules of Light, just the things the light touches, that doesn't mean that I don't believe that light has molecules or that those molecules are doing more than that the things I can see. What kind of statement is that?
If you were poisoned and there were a hundred glasses in front of you and 1% of them had the antidote. Would you not try all of them, or stick with just one specific cup? If a percentage of the rest of the cups were poisoned, would you still risk drinking one or throw your hands up and just go to the doctor? (The cups are religions, the antidote is salvation, and the poisons are sins BUT also things in the real world like religious trauma)
Use my code EMMATHORNE to get $5 off your delicious, high protein Magic Spoon cereal by clicking this link: sponsr.is/magicspoon_emmathorne_0224
Does the company require your ad show you eating the product? Seems like that’s a consistent aspect of Magic Spoon ads from content creators. To be candid, I really hate watching people eat. It’s a “me” problem, but it makes me want to forward through the ad as fast as possible. Others may feel the same way, so please consider this as constructive feedback for the sponsor. 😊
@@mjjoe76I prefer the Content Creators eat the food on camera in the 1% chance that it's poison. 😊
@@nathanhails5901 😆
Emma, review the Chosen tv show
One thing common among Atheists they use too many 'f' words and bad words. Also, they make fun of everything.
Him ignoring the 60 second timer is very indicative of theists in general. They set a bunch of rules for everyone to follow and then proceed to immediately break them.
That's reading into it a bit much
Kinda like the cosmological argument 😮
My favorite one: "Follow the evidence wherever it leads". The clips I have seen (which I have to admit have a strong selection bias) they drop that one withing less than a minute
I’ve seen people on all sides of debates do this. Then again, I’m in the US. Our presidential candidates frequently don’t follow the rules of debate.
That said, I’d probably struggle with a 60-second timer. I get the need for limits, but my neurodivergent thought processes don’t work optimally at speed. Maybe I’m just not cut out for debate?
ABSOLUTELY 🏳️🌈👍🏳️🌈
"Atheism is wrong, therefore my god exists." is the same argument as "This dress isn't white, so it has to be green."
It's red. Satan is telling you it's green.
@@mariaquiet6211 So you're telling me it was Satan that made me color blind?
It's a variation on the Politician's Fallacy.
1. We need an explanation.
2. God is an explanation.
3. Therefore God is the explanation.
As you can see, the conclusion does not follow from the previous two points.
@@thomasoates3003 Even worse than it not following, God isn't even an explanation.
@jursamaj Yes, but good luck convincing a theist of that.
i really hate their attacking darwin, not because of the man, but because of the millions of people that have proven and expanded his original theory. we only honor him as being the first to get a good approximation in writing and the process tha lead him there. the man could have been anyone
Because Darwin comes with something contradicts there fundamental beliefs of Allah created Adam and Eve!!
When science contradicts there beliefs, they reject science and goes with there unproven man tale!!
That is because creationists treat Darwin as the "Jesus of atheists". Either because that is the only way their brain can work, or because it paints atheists as hypocrites. Which one probably depends if the creationist is arguing of good faith or not.
It almost was. Darwin only published his work when he was aware Wallace was going to do the same.
Individuals who view the world through such an extreme Great Man Of History framework as to follow literal messianic figures, contextualise literally everything else through the same lens.
As pointed out by smart commenters, it's because the world view they ascribe to needs this messianic founder and if they can discredit him, that is an equivalent effort as proving evolution wrong overall. Since they have no hope at all to overcome the gargantuan pile of evidence for evolution, they have to attack a man who lived over 150 years ago and point out that he wasn't perfect.
When a sweater speaks more truth than most apologists...
You know what's pretty amazing?
There will be bi people, or other LGBT+ folks who are unsure of themselves, worried about how people will react to them, how to deal with the hate and the discrimination... and this wonderful "stimky lil guy" Emma Thorne rocks up, takes everything the world throws, chews it up, spits it out and keeps on going with empathy and positivity.
Emma's space here on YT is supportive and welcoming and safe; I'd hazard a guess that someone, somewhere in the world in a tough spot, saw one of Emma's videos and literally had their lives saved.
I don't know how she'd react to being viewed as a role-model, but she is.
Absolutely wonderful person.
Well said to the utmost degree.
And she does it in a way that never spews hate on anyone.
God is an outdated idea.
@@Jeremy0509Agreed we aren't peasants in fields anymore we have science and technology no need for superstition and religion
Absolutely 👍
Imagine a phone that worked like a brain.
You take a picture, it's saves some details, then makes up most of it when you try and find it.
Basically what AI generated images are. 😄
You've just described ChatGPT, careful there ;)
iMemory, coming with iPhone29, enables your phone to last longer with insufficient storage by just fudging photos. Have one image to represent 6 events.
You want it because we told you to want it.
not to that extent of course, but that's somewhat what JPEG does. Its compression algorithm is lossy, one cannot recreate the original from the information remaining. there's a thing people play with basically as art called deep frying, which is more or less just repeatedly compressing and decompressing a JPEG image until it's mostly fragmented image artifacts vaguely in the shape of the image you started with
It would save space.
The 1% chance of poison thing bothers me because we do that everyday with everything. Various types of food poisoning, machine parts being faulty or breaking, and medications having adverse effect, and just tripping while walking and bludgeoning yourself are things we deal with on a regular basis. There are thousands of car fatalities in the US every year, yet the country is dominated by cars! We deal with these things because the benefits outweigh the chances of harm. I don't think any of that has anything to do with believing there's evidence of life occurring naturally.
I thought the same thing when I heard him say that, then immediately took a drink of my Coke Zero thinking, I’ll risk it.
He actually proved the opposite. Funny.
It depends entirely on the circumstances. If you were in a life raft on the middle of the ocean and all you had was one bottle of water that you believe could be poisoned I think there is a good chance you would take a risk on the bottle of water when you became thirsty enough.
@@jasongaylard2547 Yeah, I know its circumstantial. My point is we engage in things every day that have a chance of harming us because the chances are reasonably low, as well as how this is a really weird argument to make about whether we should trust the evidence that life occurs naturally. It'd be like saying its rare to get struck by lightning, thus lightning has nothing to do with electrons.
@@Nyrinx "It'd be like saying its rare to get struck by lightning, thus lightning has nothing to do with electrons."
That actually doesn't make sense in what suboor said lol
The more I see of any apologist, from any religion, the happier I am I'm an atheist. I like evidence, not excuses. I like being honest and not having to lie to myself constantly to get by. Everything that guy said had less truth in it than your sweater. So Emma once again for the win!
Such an outlook is not unique to atheism. Don't get me wrong, there are a lot of religious people who like excuses and lies. I've noticed some atheists do too though.
This guy, however, is a bit disingenuous but then the whole video she's critiquing is like that, as evidenced that they just let him go over time, answer everything without challenged, etc.
If you liked evidence you would cease to be atheist and would submit to the authority of the Catholic Church. Viva Cristo Rey!❤️🔥🇻🇦
@@juliabriggs1141 When someone talks about evidence, it's expected he/she brings some.
We are not interested in your beliefs, but in what made you believe them. What you are doing is just performing, i'm not sure for who.
@@juliabriggs1141
And yet you are the one who apparently came here to troll instead of discuss.
@@juliabriggs1141 I was born and raised in a Catholic family. I know Catholicism. I am not an atheist because I never had religion, I'm an atheist because I had religion.
God is a person in Mexico trying to deposit money into their bank account but continually failing.
God keeps getting tripped up by the CAPTCHA “prove you are human” at the login.
Jesús you're drunk again. get off yer mobile banking app
I meet that guy. He worked at a great Mexican restaurant.
Yes! I need some unexplained money in my account about now. 🤔
He just needs a deposit of 200 to free up the funds
"The human brain is amazing, therefore god is real" k...
And yet we're all morally bankrupt sinners who need the threat of eternal punishment by an eternal tyrant to keep us all in line
Which one is it
It's amazing what you can achieve with a few billion years of trial and error.
@@theother1281 and they are still gonna claim that everything had been meticulously crafted like why tf would it take billions of years to come into place then, why would god make it "look" random if we just had been created anyways
@@AusbilderGruenn how tf is a human brain random?
The human brain is amazing, yet there are a few bunch of ignorant who think that the universe is created by itself, yet they know their breakfast can be made itself 😅 so people are mentally ill 😅
My partner has been deconstructing for a few years now and when looking back on the birth of our child, they asked "what would have happened to you before C-sections?" ...Well dear, you would have prayed and I would have died. They eventually responded "I'm really glad that god isn't in control of anything then," and came out as an atheist to their fundie mom the next day
Deconstructing?
Why didn’t natural selection allow you to conceive without C-sections then? If your ancestors couldn’t reproduce properly without C-sections, then their genes couldn’t have been passed on. The only genes that would be passed on would the ones that allow birth without C-sections. And besides, Christianity is not against C-sections.
@@louistournas120 the process of picking apart and examining your world view piece by piece
@@emdivine Good. Logic is slowly taking over the world. The darkness of faith is being pushed aside.
God is ultimately in control of everything. Whether we live or die is in God’s hands.
My new favorite argument:
"God does not need a creator, because god never began to exist."
"We have a word for things that never begin to exist: Nonexistent.'
God's "existential" status is neutral, not negative. Yet, also, neither positive. It's Paradoxical. It's based on the Neutral Monad, or Vedic Tetralemma. Every Authentic Religion has Neutral Monism in common. Including Islam (Kalima). And Christianity (Trinity).
Anything existent exists in time. Something that exists outside of time is indistinguishable from something that exists for 0 seconds, i.e. that doesn't exist.
link to comment??
Considering you have intelligence and consciousness…
Is it more likely that it arose from atoms that lack them or a creator that has these attributes?
What is more rational?
@@y.v.8803 why not 10 creators, then? Why not the Cosmic Fairies who fart Universes? Yes, complexity may arise from simple components, it's called emergence; go study the dynamics of complex systems instead of always reading the same fairy tales book from the Bronze Age.
Homeboy going immediately for Pascal’s wager is all I needed to hear
A very wordy version, yes.
The entire Pascal's wager depends on the basic idea that their god is easily fooled: Just pretend that you believe in this god and he will act as if this is true.
Reminds me of Pratchett's response to Pacals wager. The subject wakes up in the after life surrounded by gods carrying baseball bats saying 'we'll show you what we do to smart Alec's around here'
I don't even think that is what he was trying to say. I think he was trying to use the logic of the pascal wager to justify why the universe being created makes more sense... what makes no sense. I'll have to watch the original video later to see wtf he was trying to say.
@@joachimschoder if I recall Pascal actually argued for something slightly different. Not pretending, but actively deluding yourself by any means necessary until you actually believe. I think a more readily available flaw is that it presumes to know anything about *which* god not to anger, which begs the question
But you're right, most people citing versions of Pascal's wager need to believe that god is stupid for it to make sense
As for the "flashing sign saying MEMORY FULL" - there is evidence that the brain needs SLEEP to do maintenance on the memory - moving a few things from short-term to long-term memory, discarding most of it. Prolonged and severe sleep deprivation can lead to hallucinations, delusions, and even psychosis, which is a heck of a sign.
Yes. We essentially have a "move to trash" function: Sleep.
Sleep is more like a trawl for metadata, archive semantics, delete acontextual debt, and defrag. As we learn more about the best way to create machine learning models, we end up learning more about consciousness.
Seizures are _literally_ a defrag operation, but also tend to be a little destructive.
@@slowmotionatheist I don't know what exactly sleep does but our brain is not like a camera that is recording continuously while we are awake. This is something that has been said on various documentaries. Most of it is forgotten right away. We just memorize a few portions.
I don't know what the total memory capacity of the human brain is but we can be certain that it is not infinite.
I don't know what the muslim guy is going to say but I am guessing he is going to say that the brain is a miraculous device and we haven't created something like it.
@@louistournas120
It is estimated that the brain can store between 2.0 terabytes and 2.5 petabytes of data. (1 petabyte = 1,000 terabytes)
@@creamwobbly a defrag that carries a virus?
I think his argument about the random creation of the universe out of different possibilities, failed to take into account that if one of the other possibilities happened, we wouldn't be in our universe to question why ours didn't happen.
By that argument he must think being a lottery winner means the lottery specifically picked him
He's so confident just like Christians I know (and was). Confidence is the root of Con man, in fact they used to call them Confidence Men. To pull a con you have to be confident. This guys and those like him are trying to persuade people to believe what they believe. People like that.Give me a recipe make it easy. Truly spiritual people teach things that work that are valid and integrate together. Teacher vs Preacher.
Exactly he's a smug asshole. That's why I want to see a Christian vs. Muslim debate.
Con men pull "confidence tricks". I suspect it was always abbreviated before the word "man".
If an infinite number of monkeys were given an infinite number of typewriters and banged away for infinity, eventually one of them will type the entire works of Shakespeare. This universe is the Hamlet. But it’s the only universe we know, so survivorship bias tells us the infinite number of gibberish gibbons don’t exist.
Gibberish Gibbons. I'm stealing this.
It was the best of times, it was the BLURST of times?!
And that is why people like to believe in the multiverse idea, because it solves the fine tuning problem by using a (maybe virtually, maybe not) infinite number of tries. However since we have as much evidence for it as we have for "God did it", it will probably stay in the realm of philosophy for a while where it belongs.
Um actually, gibbons aren’t monkeys therefore your entire point is wrong.
"If an infinite number of monkeys were given an infinite number of typewriters"
there would be a LOT of poo.
I'm guessing he isn't a scientist or philosopher.
But neither are his intended recipients.
He has a PhD in "Philosophy of Science" lmao
Embarrassing how wrong you are
@user-ib9of6dm5n Thanks that cheered me up 😂 If he had an education, he could sue the university.
@@andy2950 no problem, I pray for your guidance.
Too much education is very bad for faith. It would be better to be uneducated, then belief in a god makes the most sense.
He really does just answer every question with "Because I said so" tier answers huh? I'm impressed you stuck it out while he was such a broken record.
I grew up evangelical and I can tell you, having an atheist view of nature brings way more appreciation to it than some big guy in the sky flicking his wrist and making stuff appear.
Considering you have intelligence and consciousness…
Is it more likely that it arose from atoms that lack them or a creator that has them?
What is more rational?
As an atheist, I’ve never had MOST of those questions about religion. I’m baffled constantly by this need to believe a religious text over science. I feel like I’m taking crazy pills!!!
They're questions that tend to pop up when the atheist is allowing certain assumptions for the sake of argument... although mostly rephrased to make them extra soft-ball.
It’s not you, mate, it’s them.
Really!
Chances are this aren't "questions atheists have" but at best "questions atheists ask theists when theists try to proselytize and expect atheists to believe their nonsense" if not outright "questions that theists think atheists have".
We must all submit to the authority of the One Holy and Apostolic Church founded by Christ.🇻🇦Science is not God, only God is God.
@@juliabriggs1141 evidence, please
the idea of chance has always bothered me because there are reasons for the ways that galaxies, planets, chemical compounds, etc form. They call it chance when carbohydrates are oxidized and the result is both predictable and kinda necessary. Chemical combinations are just how elements react. Spherical objects in space is a product of how gravity works... They either know this and are lying, at this point, or they dont know, so they're not people we should listen to with regard to anything any more important than "how should I filter my next fart?"
Yeah, I think sometimes the words we use in a scientific context trip up theists. They hear "chance" and think "completely random with no rhyme or reason." They hear "theory" and think "wild guess that has no backing."
Its Douglas Adams puddle analogy. They think all the laws of nature exist to create all the things we find beautiful and amazing in the world. When in reality the world just is, and we just decided to find beauty in it.
@@danilooliveira6580 There's also a degree of arrogance and self-centeredness. "It must have been made to have me in it!" It's not about you, dude. We're just another population of organisms hanging out on this planet.
It IS amazing. It is wonderful. It is crazy, almost unbelievable. And yet we are here. It does not prove god, only the crazy, absurd chance.
It's causality. There can not be infinite causality in the past because that will lead to infinite regress which is illogical.
There must be something that had initiated the causality, something that is always there.
Which is known as God.
Emma, in the beginning you stated not remembering something when you enter a room, as if to say your memory isn't all that good. Actually, this is quite common -- it's called 'the doorway effect'.
From Wikipedia:
The 'doorway effect' or ‘location updating effect’ is a replicable psychological phenomenon characterized by short-term memory loss when passing through a doorway or moving from one location to another. We tend to forget items of recent significance immediately after crossing a boundary and often forget what we were thinking about or planning on doing upon entering a different room. Research suggests that this phenomenon occurs both at literal boundaries (e.g., moving from one room to another via a door) and metaphorical boundaries (e.g., imagining traversing a doorway, or even when moving from one desktop window to another on a computer).
Oh my gosh I thought it was just me being a dingus this whole time!
Yes and surprisingly u can remember the thing again if you walk backwards after you've cross a door or boundary ( like not turning around and walking back but literally stepping backwards the way u came into the new room ) this really works, it has happened many times with me when I forget the thing i was looking for when i entered a new room but then i again walked backwards to the previous room and suddenly i remember what i came for , i saw this trick on "brain games" which used to premier on national geography channel when i was a kid.
Yeah its something about our brain doing a “soft clear” upon crossing a boundary into a new environment. The boundary basically primes your brain for new information/input, so it soft clears perceptions and ideas from the previous environment to make room. The item you wanted to grab was an idea you had in the previous environment, and it soft clears when entering a new one. It also explains why you remember what you wanted to get upon reentering the old environment
His example of setting up a factory and then walking away was hilarious. Oh, you mean like, what if Henry Ford set up a factory to make cars and then died? Because, like, he did, and Ford Motors is still cranking out vehicles. Great example!
Also, entropy and the heat death of the universe...
Like, even within his own analogy, he's wrong 😑
such on a stupid example
I think at least some of the religious UA-cam channels are abusing the algorithm to get big. I've seen several examples of UA-cam channels intentionally posting misinformation and even racist content, knowing that lots of people will call them out in the comments section. All comments and sharing generate engagement even if they are calling out the channel for wrongdoing. The algorithm will promote the video question, which is being called out is dangerous misinformation. It's a big problem with the algorithm on most social media platforms.
depends on how grifty the channel is. if it's a "serious" religious channel they usually disable comments if too many nonbelievers start posting and correcting them, because they don't want their followers to maybe learn something that might be factually correct, or worse, get curious and start googling things for themselves.
@dyamonde9555 That is a good point. And of course, it's not just religious channels that do this either I once saw a "science" channel do it to. It was absolutely one of the worst examples I've ever seen. This bastard put out blatantly pro occupation propaganda video that and tried to claim it was an innocent geology video despite the fact that it was loaded with racist language and symbols. The worst part was that a bunch of trump supporters rushed to his defense and started a huge war with the people trying to call this clown out for his blatant racism and the UA-cam algorithm loved it. As far as I know that video is still on UA-cam 3 years later despite being repeated by hundreds of people. What the hell is wrong with UA-cam?
is it just me or did emma not sound pretty insensitive and discriminatory in this video?
I converted to the Esoteric Order of Dagon, if that helps. Sure, we may be trying to open a portal to the Outer Gods, but the dedication to environmental issues is outstanding.
So, is there any truth to the rumours about your - shall we say "controversial" - sexual relationships with amphibians?
@@chriswilliamson9993 thou shout not f with argonians unless thou is willing to get f'ed themselves
@@chriswilliamson9993 These days we mainly use OnlyFins
@@chriswilliamson9993 Show some respect to our Deep Ones overlords. They are gods, not frogs!
"You remember what happened, when you were a child." Me, a traumatized lil goblin: Bold of you to assume I remember anything at all.
25:08 This guy doesn't understand business because he's trying to employ an example that is actually an extremely common practice framed as something you wouldn't do in business. Someone often will own a successful business and have absolutely nothing to do with that business' day to day operations. In fact a business will often collapse specifically because an owner insists upon meddling and won't allow the operations management to do what they were employed to do. It's really common in food service and in his scenario the presence of a creator-god would likely ruin the whole thing by being present.
The factory metaphor is funny because collective exist, factories with collective ownership and no leader exist.
A good CEO makes sure the company can function without him...
Proving god is easy. Have god turn up and demonstrate their power in an undeniable way. I'm just surprised that despite so many people saying they have a direct line to god no one seems to have done this.
If there's a god, he seems to like to watch his creations abuse and murder each other for his approval.
I mean. That's what history seems to show.
How would you verify that an extremely powerful being was the creator god of the universe. They may just be a very naughty alien. Depending on their power and attitude, it may be prudent to treat them as such though, if that is what they desire of us.
God would be indistinguishable from a powerful alien...
@@daveg2104 In this scenario why would I need to verify it's "the creator god of the universe?" It's just proven it is a god, or possibly that it had god like powers and abilities and wants to be called a god which covers my general definition of a god.
But it's still not happened so it's still a moot point.
God has already done this by resurrecting from the dead.
I have a freckle on my hand on that exact spot too. What are the odds of that? Apparently a lot better than you would think. The real question is have you ever pretended that the freckle was an eye and used your hand as an ad-hoc cyclops puppet?
Finally someone asking the real questions
Muslim apologetics are relatively weak because they have not been well developed, because in Muslim countries it's actually unsafe to openly question religious dogma. Therefore, Muslims have had little practice in having to develop arguments to defend their faith.
Good point!
@@dewardroy6531
Thank you.
Never thought of it that way. When I compare their excuses to their xtian counterparts, I'm always surprised how lackluster they are (xtian excuses are still crap, but at least they're entertaining in how they come up with their nonsense).
Even though i am a Muslim my self i agree though this wasn't always the case . Now its been used as a way of control . Thats why some revert Muslim from England or European nation will have better debateing ability than most arab born muslims .😅
14:02 That's not how probability works either, because once something has happened, the probability of it have happened is 1. The probability of it happening again might still be low, but that's a separate sampling.
You can use probability to guide future decisions, like if you should drink from a glass that has a 1 in 1,000,000 chance of making you bleed out the eyes and praise Mittens the All-Fluffy - but if you walk in the room and someone is bleeding out the eyes and scribbling on the walls about The Fluffy One, then how unlikely it was that the glass was poisoned before it was tested is irrelevant.
Also, if you told me that 1 out of 100 of your customers were getting poison, I would certainly call the police.
As a cat lover with mild allergies, I'm too far gone to make sense of this
Hail Mittens!
Also, the whole question of probability in this context is stupid, because we don't _know_ what the probability is. For all we know, the starting state of the universe had a 100% guaranteed change of creating life... we don't (yet) know the mechanisms that started the universe, so we can make absolutely zero claims about how likely any subsequent event might be.
Basically he just made an unfounded argument from incredulity, about as stupid as it seems.
@@wraitholme exactly, for all we know "Life, the Universe and Everything" were all inevitable. Claiming that it is 1 in a billion chances is an absolute fabrication
I love how these people will acknowledge the human desire for meaning but not take that extra step to realize that belief in “god/gods” stems directly from that desire. Like, dude, why do you think that idea was so prevalent in the first place?!?
cuz its within the nature of a human (as muslims believe is given by god), otherwise, youll have to explain why you even think to think or want to feel. or why anything even exists at all. The most logical explanation is that you should'nt exist to be able to think or anything, but you do, and the concept of existing makes no sense unless some infinite source that is literally impossible couldve created the concept of existence
The idea of an independent creator is a logical conclusion and the only one. Inductive and deductive reasoning are valid epistemological methods. Conducted studies, and the fact that every civilization before the current one largely accepted the existence of a higher power points to the fact that this belief in inherent to humans.
Oh my LORD I get SO sick of people literally defending tooth and nail the idea that God is both omniscient and omnipotent and then also start talking about how we can understand the meaning of life.
My dude... If God is as perfect as you say then life LITERALLY CAN NOT HAVE ANY PURPOSE. God already has all possible power and all possible knowledge. To say that he needed or wanted to create us infers that he either requires us to exist or he simply wanted us to for some kind of curiosity implying he didn't already know how it would turn out. It makes absolutely no sense. Then when you bring it up people always say: "Oh well we can't possibly comprehend his methods or his reasons."
I remain agnostic. Because I think it takes more guts to just say you don't know than it does to act like you do. Maybe there is a God. But if there is a reason to life than I can't see knowing that reason doing anything other than defeating the purpose all together. I'm betting on just being good to the people around us so I'll keep doing that. Obviously if you've ever seen a news report or read a history book, not a lot of theists seem to think that's the answer.
as far as i have seen there is a 100% chance of the universe coming about in the exact way it did
How does anyone even begin to calculate the odds of a universe existing vs not in the first place?
@@AnotherCraig i simply took what percentage of measured times it has happened vs times it hasn't
but im not sure how else you could
im pretty sure that helps the muslim argument more than it does the atheistic one because muslims have an explanation as to reason why it came out the way it did, the 100% chance of it. As we believe there is no such a thing as chance, its a made up concept to help us understand things we do not yet understand, the person in the vid is actually compensating for the atheists that believe in chance in general showing it cannn be a ludicrous measure. As an atheist, you have to contend with the fact that existence will never make any sense since it leads to an infinite regress, or ones mere existence as is is completely impossible. Why who what when where would something come from nothing (and i mean the real definition of nothing, i.e. the absence of anything).
@@BeastFilms where did god come from in that argument
Being a programmer (a Creator of programs), once I release a piece of software I need to intervene only if it fails, so yes, if I did a good job my creatures can go on indefinitely without me. I'd say that's probably the whole point of my work
Imagin developing game with ai game character. The Ai game character believe that he and the Game software do not have a developer. Does that mean you do not exist?
@@user-eq3jn9rh8v of course not. But if I designed my game in a way that the character doesn't have any reasons to believe that there is a creator, then I would be a dick to punish him.
@@fostena But they are reasons if your creator told you to believe in him, you should do so, why does it have to be in your way
@@yahyawiab1423 so my game has sufficient internal consistency to not appear "god-made", except that from time to time (very rarely) I intervene just to make sure I'm worshipped by the characters in it. If they don't, I punish them. What a narcissist
@@fostena As a software developer myself too, creating any application needs knowledge, you can't just type in your keyboard and expect to have working software by chance not in millions of years, I'm not sure how you can accept our complex universe has popped up and structured by chance and from nothing
“Some people are big mad” Winston Churchill
“Slay yasss queen” George Washington
"Not everything you hear on the internet is true" Abraham Lincoln
There are around 4000 religions all together. Muslims believe in one religion and say all other 3999 religions are wrong. I'm only saying all 4000 are wrong
💯
Bunch of world salad copy and pasted from reddit.
These proof of God arguments so often revolve around the infinitesimal chance of our creation, but that infinitesimal chance is equally true for any other result that could have happened. That humans are to be the proof of God, being that we are so incredible, centres the existence and greatness of humans, not God. "We think humans are the greatest creation ever; therefore, God" is more an argument for the outsized egos we must all possess than it is for a metaphysical being we have to make unimaginably great just to handle our existence.
muslims believe god favoured humans in the sense that he gave them free will and intellect, but they are just one of his best creations, 'one of'. this reveals that it could be the best, or it might not be, but just amongst them. It also alludes to the fact there could be aliens and such (in other verses).
25:07 Anthropomorphising creation of the entire universe as running a factory... late stage capitalism babyy 😎
You can absolutely, accidentally, deposit into the wrong account. Wiring money with the right routing number but a flipped digit account number.
IBAN has a checksum for that very reason.
@@rolfs2165 looking it up, what if it with in your banks internal transfers?
You are correct. I worked at a debt collection agency back in 2000-2006. Part of my portfolio was recovering funds from people who received deposits that were accidentally sent to their account. Most were local but some were international deposits. So I'm not sure why these islamic males think their bank analogy is relevant.
@@jaclo3112 I have noticed that if ever large companies make these mistakes in favour of ordinary individuals, they are extremely rapid to seek reversals (and if that individual can afford a solicitor, they may get to keep a big chunk). On the other hand, if it's a bank or big company that makes an error in their own favour, they will never, ever admit to having been wrong.
MORE EMMA CONTENT! Your stuff always makes me smile, thank you for being you!
You should try the 60 second format in a video. Find some questions, put up an onscreen timer and impose a strict 60 second limit on yourself. Or maybe a random time limit. Might be interesting.
"You can claim anything about anything" is the source of religion.
I don't have a specifically diagnosed memory issue but I don't remember barely anything from... honestly the majority of my life but particularly my childhood. Though not really a great argument in the first place, having someone explain to me how the beauty of our wonderful memories points to a creator would just push me in the opposite direction of whatever they're arguing for lol
8:34 Design doesn't require a designer. Gravity "designs" honeycombs, planets, their moons, and the syncronization of their orbits. All from a blind force that's not even a force. It's just time flowing at different rates.
Hi Emma! Just became a member! Been loving your content for awhile! Keep being an amazing silly little guy!!!
Yay thank you :3
if people didn’t study science, he wouldn't be on some stupid podcast talking to 8 strangers
he said science is used to understand the universe, never said otherwise. but science cant ever explain the why, just the how. Fairly limited methodology for inferring ones existence.
"I'm God's favourite, He named me John!" 🤔
Sounds like something John would say
There are all examples of what Daniel Dennett calls deepies , Dennett used "deepity" for a statement that is apparently profound, but is actually trivial on one level and meaningless on another. Generally, a deepity has two (or more) meanings: one that is true but trivial, and another that sounds profound and would be important if true, but is actually false or meaningless.
How does Dennett deal with Paradoxes...?
The one that gets me is ‘the power of prayer’
They think their god will change his vast plan for the entire universe to suit them - along with changing it for every other follower - imagine the convulated computations involved in that?
Inverse butterfly effect?
from a muslim perspective, this is not a contradiction because if god is all knowing and say the inventor of concepts like time. Then for god, people wanting to pray for certain things is already a known, so it will have already happened, as in its already played out. You might then ask, then whats the point in us going through this simulation if its already known? answer is because we were given 'a version of' free will, in the sense that we do yes make absolutely our own choices, but god already knows these choices (for example to pray or ask for help etc). But if we dont let them play out, it would be unfair to say we made them, and it would be unjust to us. And we believe that god is all just aswell as all knowledgeable. This also answers the question about there being a calamity where peoples prayers are conflicting because there is only 'one' version of reality, and its already known by god
You do realise just how convuluted and contradictory your answer is, don’t you?
You pray;
God WILL change his plan - because that WAS his plan.
But… If you don’t ask him to change it…
He will leave his plan as originally planned, because that was his plan!
And do exactly the same for all the millions of other ‘believers’
WOW.
At the end someone should tell him that, because he exceeded his timer so often, he actually proved that god is not real. It makes as much sense as any of his arguments in favor of a god.
Wow. He’s not the brightest bulb in the box, is he? 😂
Well as a matter of fact, I think he is one of the more pro scientific theists I've seen in this channel, as long it fits its narrative. He allows evolution to some degree, allows laws of physics, to some degree. When it gets difficult, then he's is not different to any other theist.
"Why did God create me without asking me?"
LOL that's definitely what an atheist would say. "I don't believe in the pink unicorn, but why did it have sex with me without getting consent first?" Pretty sure these are questions from believers not non-believers.
The human brain is not about ascertaining truth, it’s about survival. It makes up whatever story it needs to and rewrites memories every time you remember them.
37:00
Today, even in developed countries with all the luxuries of modern medicine, people still die during childbirth. A lot less than before sure, but it's still a dangerous thing to go through.
I just started this and I already had to go google shark bones, whale bones to compare and fish bones in general, and now my memory is also full of things I need but glad to have there.
Don't need*
That Quranic verse about Allah holding up the bird reminds me of that silly line in the Rings of power series at the beginning when Galadriel's brother explains why a boat floats on the water and a rock sinks.
Damn! This guy understands absolutely nothing about how science works.
I apologize to you Emma, but after 11.51, this was all I could stand of this guy
Certainly 'is there a creator' is a question, but more importantly is what pressing need does it or the answer fill? By no means does the mere existence of one have necessary implications for souls/afterlife/etc. For all we know the creator could be unaware of us, just some entity playing with chemicals in their garage in another universe. Or it could be a natural process. The need for an answer needs to be established.
I, for one, do not really worry about what a hypothetical entity might have done 14 billion years ago. There are many far more interesting questions.
Yep. I think the thing theists really can’t get their heads around is that most atheists don’t actually believe there isn’t a god. We just don’t care. It makes no sense to us, so it’s an irrelevant question in the first place.
I wish there was a more accurate word for this - if atheism is the belief that there is no god, and agnosticism is the belief that there may be, but there’s no evidence for it, then what is the word for ‘I just don’t fucking care!’ ?
It's a pressing need for those who need to pressure others. Control freaks. Gurus. Etc.
@@simontillson482 The word you are looking for is Apatheism!
@@NeptuneLuke Oooh, I like it. I like it a lot! Thanks, mate.
It matter a lot because the vast majority of our species believe in some sort of invisible friend or another and it forms their views of the world. Usually in VERY bad and dangerous ways.
When he talks about the 99% vs 1% poison chance he's getting at pascal's wager. Poison = chance of going to hell.
I lost my faith the day I REALISED im more merciful than GOD. Theres zero evidence of god's existence but there are millions of evidence that god doesnt exist.
25:00 The phrase "law of nature" comes from Galileo, Newton, Pascal etc following from the classical philosophy of Aristotle.
No scientist puts as much stock in the "correctness" of laws as laypeople do. A better phrase might be "observed relationship", but not catchy enough.
Most "laws" are only mathematical approximations that match certain observations (e.g. Newton's gravity, Hooke's law, ideal gas law), while also being derivable from a set of assumptions (e.g. homogeneity, elasticity).
Religious-types like to say "well who wrote these laws then?", but the answer is people.
"All models are wrong, but some are useful"
A distinction must be made between natural and physical law. In fact, religious people question the existence of nature in this form, not our mathematical description of it.
20:17 they’re not just using a timer for no reason. They’ve edited his responses by jumping from camera to camera but they’ve screwed up and jump cut to the same camera a few seconds ago.
He could have rattled on for 5 minutes each question.
First "question" is already making my eyes roll right out their sockets, I don't get why these people always think there _needs_ to be "consequences" for not believing in a creator if we have one. I know that if my characters were real and if they didn't believe in me, I certainly wouldn't punish them for it.
It's because their religion relies on fear to keep the believers in line and recruit new ones.
The idea that "science can't explain everything, therefore religion is the answer" is just so stupid. It depends on the erroneous belief that it must be possible to know the answer.
I've never met a Muslim who is both willing to debate religion (the smart folks won't) and able to give anything more than "look at sunsets! flowers! are they not proof enough?!"
no. they're literally not.
Ahhh, but what about the science in the Qur'an? It says mountains are tent pegs? How could Mohammad have known that mountains were actually pegs?
s/
Muslim apologists are the worst of the religious apologists..by far....absolutely hopeless.
00:31 Shout out to The Royal Tit Watching (Ornithological) Society of Britain (archived on the Wayback Machine).
The 1% chance of the cup being poisoned is such a flawed argument because it would mean there is a certain % chance that every religion is possible.
Never accept a drink from this person
12:55 to quote jim carry in dumb and dumber: "so you're saying there's a chance?!"
chance doesnt exist, its a made up concept because we dont understand the full truth and its our incompetence that leads us to believe that there is something called chance. (This is from a muslim perspective btw)
The thing about memory is, we tend to recall it more with our emotions...our feelings. It's not just cold raw data. The more emotion we felt with the experience, the more likely it is we'll remember it for the rest of our lives, be it positive or negative with joyous memories or painful traumatic ones. As for the whole possibilities thing, my personal theory is that God suffered from extreme holy boredom to the point of utter pain and so, He gave us the ability to change and evolve because He wants to be surprised lol. Just my theory and I would never try to pass it off as fact because I know I can't prove it but that's all right.
I posted a comment awhile back asking you to review this video and you did! Thank you. I am impressed with how you can do this while being simultaneously delightful, entertaining and analytical. Plowing through these videos can be so dreary, as they stack one logical fallacy on top of another and talk in complete circles. And thank you for sharing your great shirts.
His argument about probability doesn't even hold water. We say "chances are, I'll be ok" each time we leave our homes. It is a very real possibility that we get into an accident, it happens daily. By his logic, we should never do anything because there's always a chance of getting hurt or killed.
Now in the " does science eliminate belief" section I think you got it wrong,what he is saying is that God UPHOLDS creation ,so basically evolution,and all the other scientific explanation would be MECHANISTIC , because based on his explanation they explain "how" but not "why" at a fundamental level. So basically science explains" how "and God explains why the physical world works the way it works and why there is something rather then nothing.
Man just gaslighted every question cos that's the only way to answer these questions 😂😂😂
I think the main difference between Atheist and Theist is how comfortable you are living with "I don't know".
As a former agnostic, I find it fascinating that atheists can have such strong opinions about religion when they have never read or even been anywhere near the religious textbooks. You watch one or two videos, read a few articles and biased books, and form your position without due diligence. It baffles my mind how people who put themselves forward as scientific and intellectuals have this bizarre methodology of forming a position without pursuing knowledge in the field they are opposing.
Why do you assume we’ve never been near religious textbooks? I believe Emma has a Bible in her book collection. I personally went to a C of E primary school, have very religious members of my family and family friends, went to church and Sunday school.
I’m an atheist.
I find it fascinating that people think because something convinced them it must necessarily convince everyone else.
Can someone please explain to this person that evolution is not a blind process.
Random mutations are, but natural selection is not random.
His way if thinking is one of the things that has turned me away from any religion. In order to believe in an omniscient, omnipotent, and eternally existing being, I have to deny every object of science that contradicts it, but praise other aspects of science that supposedly prove it.
The thing that early child memories are basically made up is really scary. My earliest "memory" is one I made up from a phot when I was something about 1,5 years old. And even though I know the story and the memory is false I still can not distinguish this false memory from a real one.
The "Why did Allah make me without asking?" is meant to be from an atheist.
Someone Allah made *and blinded to the truth* according to the Quran. And still tortures eternally.
So, that question was cut off waaaaay too early by their pet mouthpiece. It's "Why did Allah who's supposed to be GOOD and MERCIFUL make me to be tortured?" which is a pretty damn important question.
Atheist vs Muslim? I want to be the announcer!
"IN THIS CORNER, WEIGHING IN AT...-35 kg (?) AND THE UNDISPUTED WORLD CHAMPION LOUDMOUTH; EMMA "CUTETUS" THORNE"
"AND IN THE OPPOSED CORNER, WEIGHING IN AT 80 kg...some Muslim dude"
"LETS GET READY TO RUMBLE...or Argue"
For any scientific explanation for the beginning or existence of the universe to be successful, it has to conform to observations. So there is not an infinite amount of explanations for the universe. The creation of the universe by a deity does not conform to any observations.
if a second deity observed the creation of the universe, wouldn't that conform with observations?
@brb__bathroom, is there any evidence of a second deity observing the creating of the universe?
If everyone just used a theological paradigm to describe the universe, we'd still be throwing our poo at each.
@@markgoodall1388we don't even have reproduceable evidence of the first deity, let alone the second deity, so the whole conversation is highly hypothetical.
@brb__bathroom are you a troll?
@@markgoodall1388 today is Saturday, so no.
The fact these antique excuses can be used to defend any brand of theism kinda gives the game away. You'd never get to this point if you weren't taking the dogma for granted.
the irony of that sweater and the fact that its really big and baggy
Exactly.......Indeed more evidence before I can render an opinion!☹️😁
This guy is full on going "I reject reality and substitute it with my own."
Coming from a muslim background, we were constantly thought how major scientific discoveries are mentioned in the quraan. Always through some obscure metaphor or creative translation. So the quraan must be superior to science. All the questions are answered. Close up our universities and get to mosque (unless you're a women, then you pretend you don't exist).
The problem is, you can't really use metaphors to send a satellite up into space that would allow me to near instantly communicate with anyone. There's no verses that discribes the method to turn ancient life forms into fuel and plastic. There's no divine knowledge that showed us how to use one of the most destructive forces in nature to treat cancer.
And the worst part is that older Muslim scholars knew this. Sometimes you need to stop obsessing over abusive, petulant sky fathers and just figure out the world you live in.
If there is a creator, it's some interdimensional student that built a simulation of a universe, and they probably got a C-.
Oh come on, the fjords alone have to bump that up to a B at least.
@@wraitholme on aesthetics maybe, but I'd say the majority of the grade would be based on humanity and how it behaves and develops lol
What a fabulous idea
Yes, God gives power to do so.
BTW is there only one universe? there could be millions of Universes may be billions.
For me no existence of God making no sense. Let's put every religion aside. But there should be a entity/infinite entities that is/are controller and managing everything.
@@MAli-rr9km lol wtf?
Somebody had to add that timer in post. Somebody had to have seen him going over time and just said "yeah, that's fine."
This show isn't made to dissuade anyone. It is made to reinforce the opinions of people who already agree with them.
So he can break /suspend the rules when he wants, so if he is all loving why hurt them because of the rules.
“The human brain is thousands of times stronger than a computer.” -2000s
“The human brain is hundreds of times…” -2010s
“The human brain is dozens of times…” -2020s
“The human brain is inferior...” -2030s
Comparing a human brain to a computer is like comparing apples to iron bars.
@starwarslegends8583 no, a cpu isn’t a brain it’s a processor that makes computers run. The brain can create drugs, perceive the world and universe, make a heart beat, think and a whole lot more. Computers and their cpus are not like human brains at all. They don’t have a thalamus let alone a hypothalamus.
I'm not sure if anyone caught the circular reasoning of "How do you know God is eternal?" "Because he is God." It's like, "Why are these sunglasses $300?"
"Because they're durable."
"How do you know they're durable?"
"Because they cost $300"
32:37, "If we were to, within our lifetimes, apply the rule that whatever you see, you Believe and whatever you don't see you don't believe, We wouldn't believe in historical events." ... uh what? I can't see air, that doesn't mean I don't believe it exists, I can't see the molecules of Light, just the things the light touches, that doesn't mean that I don't believe that light has molecules or that those molecules are doing more than that the things I can see. What kind of statement is that?
Sorry for the rant. That ignorance hurt a little.
My god is real because I can't believe it any other way. I see.
If you were poisoned and there were a hundred glasses in front of you and 1% of them had the antidote. Would you not try all of them, or stick with just one specific cup? If a percentage of the rest of the cups were poisoned, would you still risk drinking one or throw your hands up and just go to the doctor?
(The cups are religions, the antidote is salvation, and the poisons are sins BUT also things in the real world like religious trauma)
I love that shirt lol