@@RighteousnessWillPrevail What is arrogant and unwise is asserting something you don't have any evidence for MUST be considered. Give us some evidence to go off, or go sit down.
John: "Atheists try to run from their actual belief system" Matt and Forrest: Define their belief system and describe the many ways their belief system is supported by evidence. John: Runs away.
@@EnthusiasticTent-xt8fh " Liberal ideology has destroyed the world because they're mentally ill. " - That would be you, projecting. Many theists are mentally ill, and since you brought that up, I bet you are.
@@markderamo9229every time I have seen something that negatively affect education, it is being done by republicans, and studies have been done to show that there is a positive correlation between being more educated, and Democrat/liberal
@@denverarnold6210 And fungus and parasitic vines sucking the life out of the trees. It's almost like nature isn't all butterflies and rainbows and is in fact a system that has developed in some pretty horrific ways with no preferential treatment of one lifeform over another.
On a slightly related note, given that John failed to demonstrate that accepting scientific facts is a bad thing, whilst simultaneously demonstrating his claims do a far worse job of explaining anything. It never ceases to surprise me how so many theists still seem to be genuinely stunned by the revelation that _if_ it turns out that their God exists (whichever one it is) that not everyone would immediately start worshipping it. I like a great many things, I love quite a lot of things, and there's a handful of things in this life I might willingly die for. I've never worshipped anyone or anything, and I can't imagine I ever will.
That's because they live in fear of not believing and then being punished. So they pass on their frustrations and childish fears by demanding others feel the same. You need to fear their god....or in other words ,fear me . When you push back ,certain religious leaders turn into the queen of hearts.... And others claim to be a member of a chosen race...... you can never be part of.
I mean, this is literally what Forrest did for his 'objective evidence for evolution' when he said look at your arms, they tell a story. I would have loved him to go further in detail instead of Matt interrupting him to yell and moan.
@@EnthusiasticTent-xt8fh God existence claims are extraordinary supernatural claims which require extraordinary evidence. You also need extraordinary evidence to prove your mere assertion. If you can't, then your claim is dismissed.
one of the absolute worst things about Xtians in the US is how the loudest and most hateful almost never even know what all is in the bible. statistically, with the exception of Mormons, atheists usually know it better than xtians 😫
and he is ignorant about himself. rant: Its an individuals view that needs to be broken down and analysed by oneself to really seperate from religion. its hard and even ones own brain tries to stop that... as this causes a loss of identity- if you are religious for a long time
@@colorbugoriginals4457 yeah, ive been getting a lot of deleted msg too (usually on Christian channels though). but i was quoting the bible, maybe its censored- some words, or words together are sensitive-
"Just look around" has gotta be one of the worst apologetics you could possibly give for your god, literally everything I can see from where I'm sitting has a natural cause that can be verified. This is so monumentally stupid I can't believe people actually use it as a talking point
@TheChancellor212 my favorite response is something like "your lack of imagination doesn't mean we just settle on whatever preconceived notion you are already biased towards." People still gotta do the work and I can think of 20 different things that could take the place of a god claim. Magic is a good one cause christians generally have an aversion to comparing their god to magic but it's easily a 1:1
I had a Christian try that on me one time, before proceeding to tell me what I believe in and that I’m just secretly a believer. He was arrogant enough to say “I bet I can convince you that god exist within 10 minutes”. Guess who was still the atheist 10 minutes later?
John presented no objective verifiable proof of his god. Saying "just look around you" is meaningless if you can point to something specific around us that ties directly back to your proposition that a god exists. John needs to learn how to formulate an argument, hypothesis, theory, etc.
John didn’t have time to prove a god exists. He was too busy talking about what Matt said. John is so logic-challenged that he doesn’t understand that talking about other subjects can not possibly help him prove any god exists.🤤
I like the argument that I do not remember who said: If we destroy all humanity and science in one moment and then new humans and civilizations occur none of their religion would be the same as now. And their science, mathematics, physics and so on would be the same working the same.
"If every trace of any single religion were wiped out and nothing were passed on, it would never be created exactly that way again. There might be some other nonsense in its place, but not that exact nonsense. If all of science were wiped out, it would still be true and someone would find a way to figure it all out again." ~ Penn Jillette
When you turn it around on them though they say nothing would convince them God does not exist. The theists mind is closed whereas the atheist is asking for their minds to be changed, they're willing to believe if provided good reason to and good evidence. It's wild that theists claim the atheists are closed minded in the least.
One couldn’t possibly answer that question anyway. There is no solid, verifiable or working definition of what god is. In my experience, most of the time people describe god as a spirit that exists outside of time and describe him in terms of the negative; timeless, formless, immaterial or mysterious.
I'm convinced the extent of these people's understanding of science comes from movies and tv shows because apparently every discovery ever must come exclusively from a laboratory
No, its even worse. Their "scientific" understanding comes from liars and grifters like Ken Ham, Mat Powell, Eric and Kent Hovind, Mike Winger, ted Haggard, Ray Comfort, Cliffe Knechtle, "Low bar" Billy Craig and so in. Unfortunately there's a plethora of charlatans to choose from, some of them are even too stupid and uneducated to know or understand that they are constantly lying.
We use Math to measure the world, it is a tool we use to help us. Just because you can write a logical math formula doesn’t make it true. It is just an educated speculation until we can measure and test the formula. Theoretical physics does this all the time. Christians you are never getting out of needing to provide verifiable evidence for your claim. I swear the level of scientific illiteracy apologists have is amazing.
Sorry, you couldn't be more wrong. Math is not empirical, it's axiomatic. It therefore has nothing to do with observation or testing, only with formal proofs. We use INSTRUMENTS to measure the world. We may use math to describe features of those measurements. But we use math for vastly more than that one narrow purpose.
"Abiogenesis has never been shown in a lab" Oh boy. If that's our standard, then we're going to have fun with this one. Have we ever reproduced god in a lab?
Religious Person: "I have evidence of God!" Matt and Forrest : "Great, can you show it to us?" Religious Person: "No, you'll just have to have faith that I have evidence." Matt and Forrest: Sigh, "next please."
Im not intelligent. I am under the 100iq line. But fun fact, i know a lot of science and dont believe in a silly evil man in the sky. Intelligence has nothing to do with it. Its just opening your eyes and mind to allllll the evidence and logic around you. Nothing more
That crazy evolution theory. John is referring to that peculiar evolution theory that Christian apologists believe in, because they are too lazy or dishonest to find out anything about the actual Theory of Evolution.
When people talk about math as being objective... they fail to understand that math does not exist independent of the 'material world' it is a symbolic representation of the 'material world' .... a mathematical model of the universe REPRESENTS actual physical components of the universe (like the constants for gravity, speed of light, electron spin, etc) and describes their interactions... the math DESCRIBES what is happening... it does not PRESCRIBE what is happening...
"Do you believe in mathematics?" Isn't that question just kind of nonsensical? I would have answered NO. I don't *believe* in mathematics. Math isn't something you believe in, math just IS. This is sort of like asking "Do you believe in the English language?" I speak English, I use English, I certainly believe in and have direct evidence for the existence of the English language, but I don't *believe* in English. Or maybe Mandarin is a better analogy, because I'm not a mathematician and I don't speak Mandarin, but I obviously accept that it's a language that exists. I think maybe what he's trying to ask is: "Would you believe in something that can be shown to be true through mathematics." Maybe? I don't know. I honestly don't entirely understand what he's even trying to get at here, and I'm generally pretty good at doing mental contortions to understand where most points of view are coming from.
I couldn't imagine going live on a podcast with people who are way more educated on topics than I am, and then in the same breath, claiming that I'm not that smart, but also insisting that I'm right in my beliefs and that their science isn't real, despite not knowing much about science.
We have Neil deGrasse Tyson and the like on our side, god's team has John. That is a match not worth bringing out the popcorn for, unless to stuff it in your ears.
@@SerranoSalazar it's sweet/sugar honey iced tea. Forgot the I. I got it the first time... lol. I was just pedantically joking. Could've also gone with, "...you should probably flush your toilet... it shouldn't be that full."
"Look around you" OK, I look around and I see chaos. That proves beyond a shadow of a doubt the world was created when Marduk slew the water serpent of chaos and formed the world from her corpse. Wow, I was a naturalist, but John has proven the truth of the Enuma Elish. Thank you John.
Some idiots from the jehovaswitness came to my door the other day and started by asking me "how do you feel these days?". I supose the idea is that a lot a of people are suffering and they go and suggest a way to relieve those issues by asking them to join their little cult. Not without merit, since as soon as you join them, you realize how happy you were before, and you forget all about your so-called problems, now when you see what shit you're in. But I digress. When I answer "I'm fine, you know, working and enjoying life" they seemed a little annoyed but procedeed then to tell me the "good news", and started saying some quote from the bible. And I asked "So why should I believe what is written in the bible?". They looked at me like I was dumb, which I guess makes sense, cause I'm plenty dumb. And then they uttered in a soft voice "'cause it comes from god". I laughed out loud and was just able to say "I think it's all a lie, god and all of this religion stuff". "But then, how do you explain trees and birds?" asked timidly the two poor souls. "Well, I've learn about evolution in the 6th grade, and nothing I've learned after that was inconsistend with that idea. Does that answer your question?" "But,... you know, there are predictions in the bible" they tried again, but I just couldn't take that anymore. Now, I won't bore you all the details about the ensuing short conversation, but my little monologue about how religion was designed as a measure of population control didn't seem to change their mind about their imaginary friend. Oh well.
Scientific evidence has to be replicable to be considered evidence. The subjective viewpoint of a deluded religious believer doesn't exactly count here
These religious fringe cases must be some of the most dishonest people among us. Can’t even imagine how tiresome it must be to sit and listen to it for years and years.
Josh came out as prob a follower of James Tour. When he jumped from a dialogue about evolution to abiogenesis without any reason and said "has never been achieved in a lab", that's kind of that guy's mantra. That, to me, was the moment he's been disqualified from any hope of constructive conversation.
I don't "believe" in science. I accept the truths that science has confirmed through rigorous testing and relentless peer review. I would do the same with religion, but the only thing religion has ever proven was how gullible most people are willing to be. I accept that truth. If religion ever manages to prove anything else, I will accept that truth, as well. That's one of the benefits of Atheism. I am allowed to accept proven facts from any source.
If there is no alternative to 1+1=2 added algebraically then God had no choice. And therefore did not make it so. And there is so much that follows from that. Including the Golden Ratio.
@@stephenolan5539 *"If there is no alternative to 1+1=2 added algebraically then God had no choice."* But there are alternatives. For high values of 1, that equation results in 3.
@@samhhaincat2703 The EXACT opposite. I'm saying God could not have had anything to do with it. I think it was Pascal that thought math must have been made by God. I'm saying nunh uh.
In the first place he was asking "If there was mathematical proof of God, would you believe it." I would have said "You need more than just math to prove something in reality. You need logic and a theory that explains why and how the math proves what you say it does."
2:34 Forrest is correct evidence is not when someone convinced ed someone blindly, evidence is when an objective agreement of acceptance is reached because you have failed to prove it wrong, or failed to present another proponent
Gods are humanity's earliest attempts at explaining the weird, wonderful, and frightening world we found ourselves in. They're not real, they're made up. Can we finally move on as a species please?
In fact, Kurt Gödel wrote a demonstration of the existence of God by mathematics and logic, and it takes him just one page. It's a pity "our" John didn't know that, because the conversation would be more interesting. You should make more research, John! By the way, the Gödel sheet of paper about God was only an exercice of logic, not a claim for his true existence.
Gödel was just a restatement of the "ontological argument" from the middle ages. which was discounted in the middle ages because it relies on a set of initial assumptions.
It's all in the way people look at things. Some people look at a tree and think "That's a really beautiful tree", and some people think "It's amazing that such a thing has evolved to pump water 100 feet into the air", and some think "There's no way that could exist unless a god created it". What people think about things in the universe is just that, and only that.
It’s absolutely astounding to me that these people have so much hubris that they still think they can convert Matt, after allllll the calls he’s had over the years.
Would have loved to hear his Mathematical equation It's my area of expertise and I could use As good a laugh as each of you got I watched the tape several times and I must have missed it if I did please supply it I would appreciate it
When people bring up a rejection of evolution, go straight to the "life is not designed" argument. A chair is designed. We know who designed them-humans, and humans exist. DESIGN has three components: form, function and [intent/purpose]. The assumption that life has purpose is erroneous. It has forms, which allow functionality. To posit purpose /intent, you MUST demonstrate that the intender/designer exists FIRST, or the argument fails. Therefore life does not DEMONSTRATE a creator-god. Darwin and Wallace solved this conundrum of "design-like" life changes in form and function over generations via natural selection. Variations in organisms over time produce forms which can have functions. Those functions will determine survival and reproduction. Non-human animal can have intent or purpose. You can say that a Bowerbird intends/designs and builds Bowerbird nests. We know that the Bowerbird exists, and we can witness them creating their nests. But in general, if we see a Bowerbird nest, we can reasonably infer that a Bowerbird built it. "Trees, ergo God" just doesn't work. it is a fatal causality violation in the logic. Chairs and Bowerbird nests, ergo humans and Bowerbirds are not, because both can be demonstrated to exist a priori to chairs and Bowerbird nests, so no causality violation. Intelligent design /creationism is also a "top-down" fallacy. With humans and Bowerbirds, it is valid to assume that they can create chair and nests. Evolution is a "bottom-up" process, simpler forms lead naturally to more complex ones over time. Not all the time, because viruses are thought to be degenerate parasites that evolved from living cells/cell parts, because they require cells to perform functions.
I am arguing with another person named John in the comments section of a different video that sounds exactly like the John in this video. So frustrating.
I’m a mathematical Platonist: I am of the opinion that the objects mathematics study are real. But the existence of any mathematical equation is not evidence of god.
Two central arguments against scientism, the (false) dilemma and self-referential incoherence, are analysed. Of the four types of epistemological scientism, three can deal with these counterarguments by utilizing two methodological principles: epistemic evaluability of reliability and epistemic opportunism.Jul 21, 2020
'God' is not an entity - it was just a convenient way for people (eons ago) to try and work out how things 'became'. The concept was captured by those who saw it as a great way to control the masses. Hence religion in all its forms. Even before organized religion, people had to hang their hats on some kind of 'entity' to explain what they couldn't understand and that too was used to control people (now there's another debate - what is control over people). In a way though, I kinda get what John is saying. He's trying to say that god created everything, ergo John's very existence is proof of god. And it actually is, because he's part of creation/everything. But what he doesn't get is the existence of science and the objective evidence of evolution that proves that 'God' is not an entity, 'God' is a convenience.
there are other books to consult about the world around us than ancient israelite tribal mythology via the bible. the caller displayed his ignorance with disturbing pride.
Yes and no, but mostly no. From my understandings, they were able to create synthetic cells and all that. But it more informs how it could happen in a closed system without something intentionally guiding the process. I can see why a Google search would convince some people that it has, but ultimately it's a far more complex issue. I'd say the answer is we are getting there.
The most honest thing John has said is: "I am not that smart."
Thanks, we can tell.
These fundies all believe in science when they want it to save them from the reward of heaven!
@@danquaylesitsspeltpotatoe8307they're using science just to call the show, they clearly have belief in science when it benefits them.
“That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.”
- Christopher Hitchens
That is terrible thinking because something can be true even if you currently have no rvidense of it😂 How arrogant and unwise.
@@RighteousnessWillPrevail What is arrogant and unwise is asserting something you don't have any evidence for MUST be considered. Give us some evidence to go off, or go sit down.
Fun fact, in Texas, John is the guy running for school board.
😢
It's a scary fact indeed.
Fun?
@@martinhuhn7813 There are people who have fun watching horrors.
I feel sorry for Texans
John: "Atheists try to run from their actual belief system"
Matt and Forrest: Define their belief system and describe the many ways their belief system is supported by evidence.
John: Runs away.
John: "Uh, I gotta go..."
John meant "a theist" runs from the hosts' belief system, it was a typo... And that theist was John
And Atheism is not a belief system.
John is not equipped to actually understand the questions or the answers that Matt and Forest give.
@@mnguardianfan7128 John isn't equipped to handle anything but his pastor.
Defunding public education for >60yrs was a brilliant strategy usa. ... bloody hell that was tragic
@@EnthusiasticTent-xt8fh " Liberal ideology has destroyed the world because they're mentally ill. " - That would be you, projecting. Many theists are mentally ill, and since you brought that up, I bet you are.
You can thank your fellow liberal atheist friends for that one.
@@markderamo9229 .
How?
@@markderamo9229every time I have seen something that negatively affect education, it is being done by republicans, and studies have been done to show that there is a positive correlation between being more educated, and Democrat/liberal
@markderamo9229 you're a douche
"Look at the trees" not again!
I did! I looked and looked ... and I never saw god or his angels install new branches! It´s almost, as if they were not involved in trees at all!
@@martinhuhn7813I know, right? All I found looking for trees was a forest and a bunch of bugs and animals.
@@denverarnold6210 And fungus and parasitic vines sucking the life out of the trees. It's almost like nature isn't all butterflies and rainbows and is in fact a system that has developed in some pretty horrific ways with no preferential treatment of one lifeform over another.
@@martinhuhn7813 God was hiding behind the trees.
When I become an all powerful deity I will only hide in trees.
On a slightly related note, given that John failed to demonstrate that accepting scientific facts is a bad thing, whilst simultaneously demonstrating his claims do a far worse job of explaining anything. It never ceases to surprise me how so many theists still seem to be genuinely stunned by the revelation that _if_ it turns out that their God exists (whichever one it is) that not everyone would immediately start worshipping it. I like a great many things, I love quite a lot of things, and there's a handful of things in this life I might willingly die for. I've never worshipped anyone or anything, and I can't imagine I ever will.
Yeah exactly, even if the God of the Bible or Quran did exist, they are sadistic monsters and don’t deserve worship, no one does
And I would certainly not worship a narcissistic, insecure, vindictive god like the one in the Bible.
These empty minds will slaughter each others babies over opposing myths about a strip of land.
A rugged, rocky, hot, sandy, desert, infertile strip of land for that matter.
That's because they live in fear of not believing and then being punished. So they pass on their frustrations and childish fears by demanding others feel the same. You need to fear their god....or in other words ,fear me .
When you push back ,certain religious leaders turn into the queen of hearts.... And others claim to be a member of a chosen race...... you can never be part of.
"Have an objectively verifiable equation for God"
"What is it?"
**gestures at literally everything** "SEE?!?"
the classic "look around ya, man!"
G=42
@@steveOCalley That's the answer to life, the universe, and everything. No mention of god, that's why god's a myth.
I mean, this is literally what Forrest did for his 'objective evidence for evolution' when he said look at your arms, they tell a story. I would have loved him to go further in detail instead of Matt interrupting him to yell and moan.
@@biigsmokee because the bone structure of your arms is a significant piece of evidence for evolution
John is so incompetent, he isn't even aware of how dishonest he is.
That's 70% of religious people.
@@EnthusiasticTent-xt8fh No it sounds like you are brainwashed into science and reality denial.
Religion turns its victims into perpetrators.
Not even wrong.
@@EnthusiasticTent-xt8fhThanks for your opinion but opinion. Now get back to your church to study your "science"
“Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence”
--Carl Sagan
Sure. But unfortunately...
"Extraordinary stupidity only requires ordinary ignorance"
- me
As long as evidence is provided and can be tested.@@EnthusiasticTent-xt8fh
@@EnthusiasticTent-xt8fh How do you confirm an extraordinary claim?
@@EnthusiasticTent-xt8fh Life so empty you decide to troll, pathetic.
@@EnthusiasticTent-xt8fh God existence claims are extraordinary supernatural claims which require extraordinary evidence. You also need extraordinary evidence to prove your mere assertion. If you can't, then your claim is dismissed.
John is typical of creationists. He's ignorant of both, life science and his dumb book! 👍💙💙💙🥰✌
one of the absolute worst things about Xtians in the US is how the loudest and most hateful almost never even know what all is in the bible. statistically, with the exception of Mormons, atheists usually know it better than xtians 😫
He is indeed 🤦♂️
and he is ignorant about himself.
rant: Its an individuals view that needs to be broken down and analysed by oneself to really seperate from religion. its hard and even ones own brain tries to stop that... as this causes a loss of identity- if you are religious for a long time
i had a comment here about atheists almost always knowing the bible better than US christians, was deleted ? weirdness
@@colorbugoriginals4457 yeah, ive been getting a lot of deleted msg too (usually on Christian channels though). but i was quoting the bible, maybe its censored- some words, or words together are sensitive-
"Just look around" has gotta be one of the worst apologetics you could possibly give for your god, literally everything I can see from where I'm sitting has a natural cause that can be verified. This is so monumentally stupid I can't believe people actually use it as a talking point
The entire argument is an exercise in the argument from incredulity fallacy.
@@jamesonrosen1773 which, in fairness, is the apologists’ favorite fallacy. “I can’t think of another explanation, so god.”
@TheChancellor212 my favorite response is something like "your lack of imagination doesn't mean we just settle on whatever preconceived notion you are already biased towards."
People still gotta do the work and I can think of 20 different things that could take the place of a god claim.
Magic is a good one cause christians generally have an aversion to comparing their god to magic but it's easily a 1:1
I had a Christian try that on me one time, before proceeding to tell me what I believe in and that I’m just secretly a believer. He was arrogant enough to say “I bet I can convince you that god exist within 10 minutes”. Guess who was still the atheist 10 minutes later?
@@aft5264 Yeah, many of them are certainly not experienced in talking about it with people outside their heavily fortified brainwash bubble.
John presented no objective verifiable proof of his god. Saying "just look around you" is meaningless if you can point to something specific around us that ties directly back to your proposition that a god exists. John needs to learn how to formulate an argument, hypothesis, theory, etc.
I looked around me and saw a tower-block. There is just no way a man could have built that on his own.
John didn’t have time to prove a god exists. He was too busy talking about what Matt said. John is so logic-challenged that he doesn’t understand that talking about other subjects can not possibly help him prove any god exists.🤤
I like the argument that I do not remember who said:
If we destroy all humanity and science in one moment and then new humans and civilizations occur none of their religion would be the same as now. And their science, mathematics, physics and so on would be the same working the same.
"If every trace of any single religion were wiped out and nothing were passed on, it would never be created exactly that way again. There might be some other nonsense in its place, but not that exact nonsense. If all of science were wiped out, it would still be true and someone would find a way to figure it all out again."
~ Penn Jillette
One crazy thing about the question of "what proof would it take for you to believe" is, they could just present the actual proof.
When you turn it around on them though they say nothing would convince them God does not exist. The theists mind is closed whereas the atheist is asking for their minds to be changed, they're willing to believe if provided good reason to and good evidence. It's wild that theists claim the atheists are closed minded in the least.
One couldn’t possibly answer that question anyway. There is no solid, verifiable or working definition of what god is. In my experience, most of the time people describe god as a spirit that exists outside of time and describe him in terms of the negative; timeless, formless, immaterial or mysterious.
John is not nearly as smart as he makes himself out to be, which is why he falls for flimsy arguments about divinity.
To be fair, he openly admitted to NOT being smart, which he then went on to very clearly demonstrate lol
I'm convinced the extent of these people's understanding of science comes from movies and tv shows because apparently every discovery ever must come exclusively from a laboratory
Its what happens when you demonize science for generations.
It all might as well be magic and magic is bad based on the bible
No, its even worse. Their "scientific" understanding comes from liars and grifters like Ken Ham, Mat Powell, Eric and Kent Hovind, Mike Winger, ted Haggard, Ray Comfort, Cliffe Knechtle, "Low bar" Billy Craig and so in. Unfortunately there's a plethora of charlatans to choose from, some of them are even too stupid and uneducated to know or understand that they are constantly lying.
What's funny is that by that logic we can't prove God exists because it can and has never been shown in a lab
"i'm not that smart"-- no shit
We use Math to measure the world, it is a tool we use to help us. Just because you can write a logical math formula doesn’t make it true. It is just an educated speculation until we can measure and test the formula. Theoretical physics does this all the time. Christians you are never getting out of needing to provide verifiable evidence for your claim. I swear the level of scientific illiteracy apologists have is amazing.
Sorry, you couldn't be more wrong.
Math is not empirical, it's axiomatic. It therefore has nothing to do with observation or testing, only with formal proofs.
We use INSTRUMENTS to measure the world. We may use math to describe features of those measurements. But we use math for vastly more than that one narrow purpose.
We use math to predict not measure. F=MA uses math but is not math.
"Abiogenesis has never been shown in a lab"
Oh boy. If that's our standard, then we're going to have fun with this one. Have we ever reproduced god in a lab?
His lab is the gaps in his knowledge.
Religious Person: "I have evidence of God!"
Matt and Forrest : "Great, can you show it to us?"
Religious Person: "No, you'll just have to have faith that I have evidence."
Matt and Forrest: Sigh, "next please."
I've had people tell me "you can'rt define evidence" or "evidence for god is spiritual". Never ceases to be funny
Forrest is a rising superstar in the atheist/science-denialist community.
And that hair!
Science-denialist ?
@@awdfan2259 forgot the "anti"
rofl "research Nickelback"
That was pretty good.
Idgi
“Go research Nickelback” sounds like a child-friendly version of a more profane swear.
@@Leith_Crowther "Go get your Shine(down) box!"
@leithcrowther6086 thanks, but I still can't think of what the swear would be..?! Haha wow this is going way over my head
Unlike John, Forrest is actually intelligent
If you add an "a" before Forrest and remove an "r" out of that name, it still seems to hold truth.
Im not intelligent. I am under the 100iq line. But fun fact, i know a lot of science and dont believe in a silly evil man in the sky.
Intelligence has nothing to do with it.
Its just opening your eyes and mind to allllll the evidence and logic around you. Nothing more
That crazy evolution theory. John is referring to that peculiar evolution theory that Christian apologists believe in, because they are too lazy or dishonest to find out anything about the actual Theory of Evolution.
"he'll be back shortly"
What a sick and sneaky burn
11:56 that was a low blow Forrest 😂
At least John was honest enough to admit he got absolutely destroyed and retreated instead of doubling down.
Matt and Forrest is the best combo
When people talk about math as being objective... they fail to understand that math does not exist independent of the 'material world' it is a symbolic representation of the 'material world' .... a mathematical model of the universe REPRESENTS actual physical components of the universe (like the constants for gravity, speed of light, electron spin, etc) and describes their interactions... the math DESCRIBES what is happening... it does not PRESCRIBE what is happening...
"Do you believe in mathematics?" Isn't that question just kind of nonsensical? I would have answered NO. I don't *believe* in mathematics. Math isn't something you believe in, math just IS. This is sort of like asking "Do you believe in the English language?" I speak English, I use English, I certainly believe in and have direct evidence for the existence of the English language, but I don't *believe* in English. Or maybe Mandarin is a better analogy, because I'm not a mathematician and I don't speak Mandarin, but I obviously accept that it's a language that exists.
I think maybe what he's trying to ask is: "Would you believe in something that can be shown to be true through mathematics." Maybe? I don't know. I honestly don't entirely understand what he's even trying to get at here, and I'm generally pretty good at doing mental contortions to understand where most points of view are coming from.
Don’t make a rational argument for them, just let them struggle. It’s funnier lol.
For many years, it was not possible to grow diamonds in a lab. Therefore, diamonds never existed until they were able to be grown in a lab.
Patently false 😂
Loved it when John blew the bugle call for a desperate retreat.... "oh, oh. oh.... I gotta go....". Only intelligent thing he said or did.
I couldn't imagine going live on a podcast with people who are way more educated on topics than I am, and then in the same breath, claiming that I'm not that smart, but also insisting that I'm right in my beliefs and that their science isn't real, despite not knowing much about science.
The mathematical formula for god is the following equation:
(Ignorance+stupidity) × (arrogance+intellectual dishonesty) ÷ (narcissism) = god
Checks out
@7:10 As usual it boils down to "Look at the pretty trees, look at the pretty flowers".
We have Neil deGrasse Tyson and the like on our side, god's team has John.
That is a match not worth bringing out the popcorn for, unless to stuff it in your ears.
Both are slaves , one is slave of military industrial complex and establishment and another is slave of religion.
@@Manish_3333 Nope. A stupid theistic lie.
@@Manish_3333cringe
Neil doesn’t believe in god.
@@trufflesrheaven no one said he does
Should’ve known it was a ‘look at the trees’ non argument
Forrest 😂 “don’t drop him, don’t drop him” 😂 Matt was for sure bout to drop him
John: theist and apologist
John: colloquial term for toilet.
What do they have in common? It's one word and both are full of it.
...water?
@@cctomcat321 Tea, as in sweet honey... 😬
@@SerranoSalazar it's sweet/sugar honey iced tea. Forgot the I. I got it the first time... lol.
I was just pedantically joking. Could've also gone with, "...you should probably flush your toilet... it shouldn't be that full."
@@cctomcat321 I know, got it... Just some banter back and forth 😬. Glad to see this not devolve into name calling and stuff. Good sport.
@@SerranoSalazar nah. No need for any of that.
I don't believe in my family tree because it has no starting point and nobody can prove it in a lab.
Who else had “poor conversation with a caller named John” on their BINGO card?
"Look around you" OK, I look around and I see chaos. That proves beyond a shadow of a doubt the world was created when Marduk slew the water serpent of chaos and formed the world from her corpse. Wow, I was a naturalist, but John has proven the truth of the Enuma Elish. Thank you John.
Some idiots from the jehovaswitness came to my door the other day and started by asking me "how do you feel these days?".
I supose the idea is that a lot a of people are suffering and they go and suggest a way to relieve those issues by asking them to join their little cult. Not without merit, since as soon as you join them, you realize how happy you were before, and you forget all about your so-called problems, now when you see what shit you're in. But I digress.
When I answer "I'm fine, you know, working and enjoying life" they seemed a little annoyed but procedeed then to tell me the "good news", and started saying some quote from the bible. And I asked "So why should I believe what is written in the bible?". They looked at me like I was dumb, which I guess makes sense, cause I'm plenty dumb. And then they uttered in a soft voice "'cause it comes from god".
I laughed out loud and was just able to say "I think it's all a lie, god and all of this religion stuff".
"But then, how do you explain trees and birds?" asked timidly the two poor souls.
"Well, I've learn about evolution in the 6th grade, and nothing I've learned after that was inconsistend with that idea. Does that answer your question?"
"But,... you know, there are predictions in the bible" they tried again, but I just couldn't take that anymore.
Now, I won't bore you all the details about the ensuing short conversation, but my little monologue about how religion was designed as a measure of population control didn't seem to change their mind about their imaginary friend. Oh well.
They knocked on my door once and I answered in nothing but my underwear and yelled F off at them. They never came back.
They knocked on my door once and I answered in nothing but my underwear and yelled F off at them. They never came back.
"Dude just look at the math!"
"Dude just look at the universe!"
"Dude just look at the trees!"
"DUDE! JUST TRUST ME!"
😂😂😂
"Proof of god... Well, look around you!"
"Evolution? I don't believe in that crazy stuff..." 😂😂😂😂
I zoned out processing whether math's objective
in what sense: epistemically, ontologically..? Is language objective
You can't be a creationist without lying.
Matt and Forrest, shame on y'all for believing in proven facts and not in mythology that's been proven to be false. Shame on y'all.
Message for John. We undestand fire now.
Scientific evidence has to be replicable to be considered evidence. The subjective viewpoint of a deluded religious believer doesn't exactly count here
This caller's mental gymnastics and turning his brain into a pretzel is impressive.
If. If. If. If does so much heavy lifting in these calls.
Exactly. The pointless "if".
_"If my *rse was my elbow, would I walk funny?"_
The mire of magical thinking
These religious fringe cases must be some of the most dishonest people among us. Can’t even imagine how tiresome it must be to sit and listen to it for years and years.
Debater like John, shouldn't be tolerated, we've had enough of that troll. 😢 we need people with serious arguments!
Josh came out as prob a follower of James Tour. When he jumped from a dialogue about evolution to abiogenesis without any reason and said "has never been achieved in a lab", that's kind of that guy's mantra. That, to me, was the moment he's been disqualified from any hope of constructive conversation.
Guess no one can get convicted in court , if the crimes weren’t committed in a lab.
Great logic John
Matt and Forrest make an awesome dynamic duo, i just love it!
I believe the equation for God is 2+2=5
I don't "believe" in science. I accept the truths that science has confirmed through rigorous testing and relentless peer review.
I would do the same with religion, but the only thing religion has ever proven was how gullible most people are willing to be.
I accept that truth.
If religion ever manages to prove anything else, I will accept that truth, as well.
That's one of the benefits of Atheism. I am allowed to accept proven facts from any source.
7:15 Look at the trees.
Observable and verifiable. Simple. Human belief systems… not so much!
Mathematics isn't sentient, it cannot be a god.
If there is no alternative to 1+1=2 added algebraically then God had no choice. And therefore did not make it so.
And there is so much that follows from that. Including the Golden Ratio.
@@stephenolan5539 *"If there is no alternative to 1+1=2 added algebraically then God had no choice."*
But there are alternatives. For high values of 1, that equation results in 3.
@@stephenolan5539 Ooo someone learned about the Fibonacci sequence and they think they saw god. Hahahaha.
@@samhhaincat2703
The EXACT opposite.
I'm saying God could not have had anything to do with it.
I think it was Pascal that thought math must have been made by God.
I'm saying nunh uh.
@@stephenolan5539 In spherical coordinates 1+1 does not have to equal 2. The Euclidean is just one special case.
I love how forrest is waving his periodic table with the "look at this cool thing I made" kind of energy!
Forest seems so polite, intelligent and patient to a levels that are almost supernatural! Does that prove the supernatural 😉
" i have to go!"
Sure you do john😂 sure you do
In the first place he was asking "If there was mathematical proof of God, would you believe it."
I would have said "You need more than just math to prove something in reality. You need logic and a theory that explains why and how the math proves what you say it does."
Invoking maths to prove the existance of God was always going to fail when maths disproves so much of the Bible.
2:34 Forrest is correct evidence is not when someone convinced ed someone blindly, evidence is when an objective agreement of acceptance is reached because you have failed to prove it wrong, or failed to present another proponent
Gee another creationist thats dishonest... as if they could be anything else.
Gods are humanity's earliest attempts at explaining the weird, wonderful, and frightening world we found ourselves in. They're not real, they're made up. Can we finally move on as a species please?
Math is god and physics is my bitch 😅
Not going to lie, some times I think the title are a bit condescending… but this one is just perfect 😂👌🏼
*sigh* All that preamble just to give us a tired "LOOK AT THE TREES!" argument.
I heard Cliff saying, and then, Matt, *you* want to use science!😂😂😂 Well, yeah, dude!😂
6:54 He already told you, the fact that math exists proves god 🤣🤣🤣🤦♀️
And now he's back for more mind-numbing idiocy...same bat-time, same bat-channel
The beast mode team of Forrest and Matt will always be entertaining. Thank you gentlemen for your contributions to reason.
In fact, Kurt Gödel wrote a demonstration of the existence of God by mathematics and logic, and it takes him just one page. It's a pity "our" John didn't know that, because the conversation would be more interesting. You should make more research, John!
By the way, the Gödel sheet of paper about God was only an exercice of logic, not a claim for his true existence.
Gödel was just a restatement of the "ontological argument" from the middle ages. which was discounted in the middle ages because it relies on a set of initial assumptions.
Even Euler pretended to have found proof of the esistence of God with mathematic, but was a dead end.
Gödels "evidence" is pretty much: "Word-salad, balderdash, gobbledygook and claptrap, therefore god"
It's all in the way people look at things. Some people look at a tree and think "That's a really beautiful tree", and some people think "It's amazing that such a thing has evolved to pump water 100 feet into the air", and some think "There's no way that could exist unless a god created it". What people think about things in the universe is just that, and only that.
It’s absolutely astounding to me that these people have so much hubris that they still think they can convert Matt, after allllll the calls he’s had over the years.
Damn Forrest got him good 😂
I feel like I've heard John before. There's something about the cadence of his voice that's familiar.
God has “never occurred in a lab” either! 😅
Would have loved to hear his Mathematical equation
It's my area of expertise and I could use As good a laugh as each of you got
I watched the tape several times and I must have missed it
if I did please supply it I would appreciate it
When people bring up a rejection of evolution, go straight to the "life is not designed" argument. A chair is designed. We know who designed them-humans, and humans exist.
DESIGN has three components: form, function and [intent/purpose].
The assumption that life has purpose is erroneous. It has forms, which allow functionality. To posit purpose /intent, you MUST demonstrate that the intender/designer exists FIRST, or the argument fails. Therefore life does not DEMONSTRATE a creator-god.
Darwin and Wallace solved this conundrum of "design-like" life changes in form and function over generations via natural selection. Variations in organisms over time produce forms which can have functions. Those functions will determine survival and reproduction.
Non-human animal can have intent or purpose. You can say that a Bowerbird intends/designs and builds Bowerbird nests. We know that the Bowerbird exists, and we can witness them creating their nests. But in general, if we see a Bowerbird nest, we can reasonably infer that a Bowerbird built it.
"Trees, ergo God" just doesn't work. it is a fatal causality violation in the logic. Chairs and Bowerbird nests, ergo humans and Bowerbirds are not, because both can be demonstrated to exist a priori to chairs and Bowerbird nests, so no causality violation.
Intelligent design /creationism is also a "top-down" fallacy. With humans and Bowerbirds, it is valid to assume that they can create chair and nests.
Evolution is a "bottom-up" process, simpler forms lead naturally to more complex ones over time. Not all the time, because viruses are thought to be degenerate parasites that evolved from living cells/cell parts, because they require cells to perform functions.
"There's no variable [or] formula for love" who else immediately thought of xkcd 55?
I am arguing with another person named John in the comments section of a different video that sounds exactly like the John in this video. So frustrating.
I'm confused.. isn't adaption in itself evolution as its just evolving/adapting to environments to survive?
……..mentally ILL person……poor John……needs to be treated.
Why?
"Hey your position is what you said your position is. I knew it! Anyway I gotta go-" _runs away_
I’m a mathematical Platonist: I am of the opinion that the objects mathematics study are real. But the existence of any mathematical equation is not evidence of god.
Two central arguments against scientism, the (false) dilemma and self-referential incoherence, are analysed. Of the four types of epistemological scientism, three can deal with these counterarguments by utilizing two methodological principles: epistemic evaluability of reliability and epistemic opportunism.Jul 21, 2020
'God' is not an entity - it was just a convenient way for people (eons ago) to try and work out how things 'became'. The concept was captured by those who saw it as a great way to control the masses. Hence religion in all its forms. Even before organized religion, people had to hang their hats on some kind of 'entity' to explain what they couldn't understand and that too was used to control people (now there's another debate - what is control over people).
In a way though, I kinda get what John is saying. He's trying to say that god created everything, ergo John's very existence is proof of god. And it actually is, because he's part of creation/everything. But what he doesn't get is the existence of science and the objective evidence of evolution that proves that 'God' is not an entity, 'God' is a convenience.
So, am I understanding John correctly that his evidence for God is "look at the trees?"
when talking to john keep the words small and simple as he cannot understand large complicated concepts.
there are other books to consult about the world around us than ancient israelite tribal mythology via the bible. the caller displayed his ignorance with disturbing pride.
Look at the trees/Nickleback
10:59 Abiogenesis HAS been objectively proven in the lab... John is just completely ignorant.
Yes and no, but mostly no. From my understandings, they were able to create synthetic cells and all that. But it more informs how it could happen in a closed system without something intentionally guiding the process.
I can see why a Google search would convince some people that it has, but ultimately it's a far more complex issue.
I'd say the answer is we are getting there.
@@cctomcat321 Your understanding is flawed.