I was an atheist before I ever found the atheist experience a few years back, but I can honestly say that they've helped me to think more critically and have taught me a lot over the years.
*FallingGalaxy* I never was a believer and it's helped me field these ridiculous arguments (should I need to) by addressing them. It can also be great fun like Matt's performance above! Thanks Matt, you call them out so that we don't have to.
I prayed and didn't feel better: * You didn't pray right * You prayed to the wrong god * You weren't sincere .... (etc) (etc) I prayed and got better: * God exists
One thing I will never understand is how people who've suffered natural disasters tend to give god credit for protecting them, but they never stop to think about *who* allowed that natural disaster. They want to have their cake and eat it too. Similar logic when it comes to successful surgeries, they never ask god why he allowed them to get sick, but immediately thank him instead of the surgeons... So annoying.
@@HEARTS-OF-SPACE I've been pointing that out for years. It's just as plausible to assume that god is trying to kill you with a tornado as it is to assume he saved you from it.
As laughable as it may seem, I can’t help but think some truth about the flood and human mentality asserting that “it’s okay”. With the way things are lately with mass farm production, in a sense, we are okay with genocidal murder towards non-human animals. If you’re a meat eater and you find this joke funny then I can only imagine the irony of your logic.
@Alastair Archibald I think what they really mean is that they skipped a couple of sundays in the pew. No thinking person was ever brought to religion by reason and evidence.
@@bobs182 I can pretty much guarantee it. It was my teen education in science that, I think, convinced me that, at age 14, that I no longer believed. I have continued to study science for the intervening 46 years, and no amazing scientific theory has made me question my lack of belief since, though I doubt string theory, because of the total lack of evidence of the extra dimensions required, or any other evidence for it. Thus, I extend my scepticism to unsupported scientific claims as well as religions. I don’t believe anything without supporting evidence. Alfred Wegener was widely mocked for his 1912 hypothesis of tectonic (plate) drift when it first came out. Now, no geologist challenges it, because Wegener was right, and we know why and how tectonic drift happens. There isn’t even a single letter of evidence for the evidence of God, or any other deity, because the books that supposedly demonstrate their existence were written by humans after the belief in those deities began. Even if the books were written before the case,
It was great and that idiot trying to justify his belief was agonising and fucked up dishonest as usual like all religious people try to do, ty mat again that was a brilliant end to that pathetic caller.
The logic of the caller can be briefly summarized by this example. It's the year 3,000 BC: 1. We don't know how lightning is created. 2. Everyone thinks a god did it. Therefore it's 99.99% probably that a god did it.
@@tossaja Apparently, neither were anyone other than Noah's eight at the infamous "great flood" that wiped out all (other) life on earth. Which no one else even happened to notice. 8< D
@Hey Girl I Like Your Kitchen Romania politics. using that term like it is one single thing, and like religions has nothing to do with it (ever heard of political islam ?), that makes me only think : you keep using that word, I dont think it means what you think it means
Yeah, Matt and Don was giving him enough rope to hang himself. We all watched in anticipation as the caller tied his noose, flung it over a tree, put it around his neck climbed up the tree and jump off weeeeeeeeeeee! *crack* snap* 😆
Every week, on every show, the hosts attempt to lead these theists on a path of logical integrity. And almost every time cognitive dissonance remains a barrier to reason.
@@mgenetos the lord is strong with this one, yeah but his brain ain't strong lol. What weak and feeble shit arguments religious people come up with ffs.
Removing a fundamental part of one's worldview is very painful. It's unlikely to happen in one call. The interesting thing is that these callers at least try to first use logic and then fall back on dogma rather than just relying on their conviction for the dogma.
@Frances Snowflake I disagree. Yet time and time again theists want to use bullshit like the Kalam Cosmological argument. In the absence of anything even laughingly resembling evidence, it's really all they have.........
@@graceandpanic9281 Islam is arguably the most dangerous religion currently. But it's no worse than any of the others from an indoctrination point of view. They are all tragic.
We've come a long way in the last 400-500 years and I like to think progress is still being made. But it's tough when so many children are being indoctrinated into religion and have to be deconverted after the fact. Support the separation of church and state how and wherever you can. I won't live to see it but I hope religion will someday be eradicated or at least be seen as largely a thing of the past like smallpox, polio, and tuberculosis.
“Can you conclude that I cheated?” Caller: “Do I know you?” “Is this our first hand?” “Did the sun rise at 7:36am?” “Was Lassie saying the barn is on fire?” “Did you save 15% or more by switching to Geico that morning?” “Was there a hawk perched on a cactus standing on one leg with a piece of Aunt Susan’s pie in its mouth?” “If it’s yes to all those questions, then yes I conclude that you cheated Matt.”
@@Waltham1892 sad, but true. With a lot of people, the more you give them evidence that contradicts their beliefs, the tighter they cling to said beliefs.
@@DenyThisFlesh That is true, but I think its not the sole mechanism we are confronting. The very concept of "true" has been converted from objective to simply subjective. Therefore, your evidence carries the same weight as my beliefs. Not great days.
Mor If anything it's worse, because there's less justification or excuse for the ignorance, and more and more it's a stubborn and intentional, designed ignorance.
Often on this show I hear believers stating “i don’t believe that” when what they really mean is “i don’t understand that”. Geology, evolutionary biology, etc. Just because you don’t understand something doesn’t mean it isn’t true. And I LOVE Matt’s point about the popularity of an idea having no bearing on it’s veracity.
This is why free speech must be maintained! Of course, we have to assume the general public is smart enough to spot BS. These days that seems to be a more rare trait...
Fascinating when these callers are confronted with logic seemingly for the first time in their life… And also fascinating how this ended in total fantasy
""there's not really a mass murderer in the bible" apparently he skipped Genesis. But murder is defined as "The unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.", so if it's god doing the killing, it isn't murder.
You can't argue with Matt...he's too damn smart for people like Daniel. Why do they keep trying? This is the type of stuff that makes my day. Thanks Matt. "I've got one finger" HAHAHAHA
Right Matt debates these arguments with smarter people than all these callers put together. Yet they call in and sincerely believe they have a new viewpoint and can win the argument. I haven’t seen an original argument in years. YEARS.
I'm in complete favor of them calling in and trying, because the key factor is that no one's forcing them to try. There's a virtual mountain of research that shows that you are far more likely to change your mind if you voluntarily seek challenges to your own beliefs rather than being forced to accept challenges as fact because of social convention or law.
"How did you know they were humans? " And THERE is the entire reason why I am so fervently against religions. Dehumanizing an entire populace because you couldn't come to terms with god ordering the death of countless people.
That call perfectly demonstrated what religion does to a possibly otherwise reasonable person. Turns them into a blithering, jibbering, equivocating, non-thinker.
@@lovehumanity6468 Whether or not something is possible is a dichotomy. Whether or not something is probable is not a dichotomy, but a quantification of how likely it is to happen. Example: It is possible that earth will be hit by an asteroid within the next week. It is also possible that that won't happen. How probable it is that earth will be hit by an asteroid within the next week is a different question.
I saw debating on someone about this and they used this same response on the giants and everything. It baffled me when I heard it. Like... Wtf? Where did that come from?
*Mr Ryuk* "Where did that come from?" is a reasonable question to the god claim itself, I mean why bring up a supernatural daddy in the _first place?_ Where does that come from?
People who have gone to church since birth have been taught the more they resist their beliefs being debunked the more virtuous and faithful they are. They think god is keeping track and they get a gold star next to their name to be reimbursed upon death. Also atheism isn’t an outrageous claim. It’s claiming reality is nothing more than what we see around us everyday. It’s the default position.
Argumentum ad populum is a fallacious argument that concludes that a proposition must be true because many or most people believe it, often concisely encapsulated as: "If many believe so, it is so."
How was it beautiful? It was a horrible example. It is a fair assumption, especially given the way that Matt posed the example, that a cheating dealer will hand out interesting hands more likely than uninteresting hands.
@@SuperDipMonster the usual for most greetings. A confirmation that you're there and that you aren't holding a weapon. The one that the caller seemed to be referring to was the open hand, in the air, with your fingers together and an exclamation of "how". That's somewhere out west. Over on the east at my particular tribe, it's a closed fist over your heart with and exclamation of "a-ho". (I believe that's how they are spelled. I've never thought to ask anyone about spelling)
@@crimsonsean, you're from an Eastern tribe? This may sound ridiculous but do you know of any stories of people from Wales coming into contact with any Eastern tribes some 1300 years ago? They may have integrated.
I'm not sure rebellion against parents because of bad experience even really counts as being an atheist. Doesn't require any critical thought and is reactionary. And this guy clearly doesn't have any critical thinking skills. I mean, giants to justify God's Noah flood genocide. HIGH PROBABILITY! TRUE. Unlike the Koran.. that has the same Abrahamic god as the bible. Guy is so critical, because only this god could explain life, none of the others do. Not biased at all.
Yeah, not all atheists skeptics. They're skeptical about God claims, but some atheists are superstitious or hold other bizarre beliefs, not excluding the supernatural.
@@jeremyg7261 A man who embraces atheism because he believes god has dealt him a bad hand is no wiser than the fool who grovels to god for forgiveness when he believes he's been an unworthy sinner. True atheism is only acquired through extinguishing ridiculous claims with a lashing of logic.
I’ll never forget the first time someone tried to explain god to me; first grade, a classmate in the lunch line. I was six years old. He asked “Do you believe in god?”, and I had no idea what he was talking about. He tried to explain it, but I thought he was crazy. Fast forward about six years and I finally figured out what he was talking about.
I remember being the first kid in my class to know that Santa Claus wasn't real. There were 27 third graders, who all treated me as an oddball... I wore the title with pride, because I knew I was right, and all of them were behind the curve. It seems I was the first to deny the existence of God as well, but that wasn't til 8th grade. Again, I was the oddball.. But still I wore the title with pride. Being right is often a lonesome palace, with walls as cold as stone, but my integrity keeps me warm, and my knowledge comforts me.
People always say, " the likely hood that life exists on this plant, must be god" No There are hundreds of trillions of plants, many chances for the "perfect formula" for life
But it is also a positive claim, which means the burden of proof is on the person making such a claim. We don't have evidence that leads to either way, if god exists or not, so you'd need to prove one way or the other, or else "there is no god" can be dismissed as easily as "there is a god".
@S Gloobal DNA itself is non-intelligent, correct? It operates based on set rules regarding which nucleotides can bind together, and which proteins they can produce. However, DNA can produce beings with intelligence. Therefore, we already have examples whee non-intelligence produces intelligence.
@@meloveAi do you know anyone who has any difficulty dismissing the claim that there's no tooth fairy, or that there's no vampires? Is "there's no such thing as vampires" really an extraordinary claim?
What I personally experienced first hand swimming the lakes of Minnesota and walking the streets of Minneapolis in the midst of the Great Depression that prompted me to say at 5 years old in Church/Sunday School(?) "What in hell is wrong with these people?" After traveling so much of the world to all compass points, 80 years later I'm saying "What in hell is wrong with these people?" Of course I know very well 'what the hell is wrong with them'. And the answer is exactly the same.
1. The Flood (Genesis 6-8) 2. The cities of the plain, including Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 18-19) 3. The Egyptian firstborn sons during the Passover (Exodus 11-12) 4. The Canaanites under Moses and Joshua (Numbers 21:2-3; Deuteronomy 20:17; Joshua 6:17, 21) 5. The Amalekites annihilated by Saul (1 Samuel 15)
You get to the point where you can present convincing evidence that the universe required a god, then comes the tough part: providing convincing evidence that you, or anyone knows the details of the god.
I agree with Manly....what's the convincing evidence that the universe required a god? I think, logically, if you got to the first point, you would have to have the second part, too. I don't think the first part can ever be reached. It's like Sagan's invisible dragon in the garage scenario. If you could reach the point where you had evidence that the invisible dragon existed, you would have to know at least some of the details about it - otherwise you wouldn't have any evidence of it's existence.
"You get to the point where you can present convincing evidence that the universe required a god" I'm not so sure about this. What evidence exactly are you presenting to get to this point? Simply saying "I don't know how it happened and it seems really improbable that it happened" does not move the needle whatsoever towards a god.
This had to be a prank call. A good sign is "I used to be an atheist until I had a supernatural experience", then he went so cuckoo with those weird claims it sounded as if he was calling from a place for the insane.
5:208:45 The analogy where Matt posits the hypothetical of a poker dealer that cheats half the time doesn't work. The probabilistic distribution of hands from a cheating dealer will be different from a fair dealer. As a result, receiving a hand that has an extremely low probability of being dealt by a fair dealer allows us to assess the odds of this being a 'cheated' hand at more than 50%. The odds of a Royal Flush in a fair hand is 1 out of 649739. I'll round this to 600,000 for convenience. The exact odds of a Royal Flush from a cheating dealer depends on the motivations of the dealer, but I suggest that we can very reasonably infer that the odds of a cheating dealer whipping up the most dramatic hand in the game is higher than 600000. Lets be conservative and say it is 1 out of 100,000. If we get 1,200,000 hands from this dealer, we can expect 600,000 fair hands, and one Royal Flush from a fair deal. We can expect 600,000 cheated hands, and 6 Royal Flushes from cheated deals. In the event of receiving a Royal Flush, there is now a 6 out of 7 chance that this hand was cheated. If we picked a less conservative estimate of a cheating dealer dealing out a Royal Flush, this probability would be higher. This is different from the case of the universe in that we have no a priori knowledge of the probability of the Universe as we know it resulting given the existence or non-existence of God.
Thank you so much. Everyone seems to just keep repeating "what a beautiful wall of logic" or "this caller doesn't understand probability" and the like, but it's the contrary: Matt doesn't seem to understand probability here. Matt's argument here was so bad that it earned the video a dislike from me. Let's imagine the extreme case, where: when the dealer cheats, this means that the dealer deals out a royal flush, and when the dealer plays fair, he deals out a random card. In Matt's example, the dealer cheats 50% of the time. If a player receives a royal flush, then the odds that the dealer cheated during the deal is overwhelmingly high: The odds of getting a royal flush from a random deal is ~1/600,000 (I will also use an approximation) and the odds of getting a royal flush from a cheat deal is 1. If 1,200,000 hands are dealt out this way, the player can expect to receive 600,001 royal flushes: 600,000 from cheat deals and 1 from a fair deal. Thus, if a player is dealt a royal flush, there is only 1 chance in 1,200,000 that it is from a fair deal, and 600,000 in 1,200,000 that it is from a cheat deal. It is 600,000 times more likely that the Royal flush is from a cheat deal than not. I think that the above is such an easily-understood way that the so-called analogy fails, that to claim that anyone is "factually incorrect" if they see that there is a differential in probability is, frankly, insulting. Furthermore, for people to cackle out "the caller doesn't understand probability" because he asked if it was the first deal is unfair. Can we really fault the caller for misunderstanding the situation if Matt does too? If we know nothing about the dealer and he deals royal flushes every time, the odds that the dealer is cheating is vastly higher than if he is dealing them out of pure chance. This is a fair question to ask while trying to ascertain what Matt is trying to get at. This is an endemic issue with this show and its followers: people are always eager to bash the callers and call them stupid, while giving the hosts free passes when they make mistakes. It's dangerously close to being an echo chamber. We need to admit that, while Matt is good at debunking Christian apologetics, he's just not a great host all the time. He often abuses the hold button, yells and calls callers "idiots", speaks quickly and dazzles his opponent, and makes elementary mistakes like this. He's not the greatest host. People here seem to think he's as eloquent as Hitchens or as clear as Dennett, but he's just not. It's time that we admit this. P.S. Fancy seeing you here and not in my subscription feed. Thanks for all your KSP videos over the years. Still waiting on the advanced orbital mechanics series though 😛 (But, if it's an overly-complicated video, don't sweat it. Don't overdo it with sky-high expectations like pannenkoek2012 and then end up with burn-out.)
The caller had a chance here to say that he knew Matt cheated because he's an Atheist and therefore he has no morals and so must have cheated. What a waste of a call.
All atheists don’t see enough evidence for a god, but there are thousands of gods believed in by different people. They all claim that there god is the right one. That’s extraordinary.
Indeed it's extraordinary, how people still believe in all those hundreds of gods without those coming closer to each other. You would expect that as time goes by, all ideas would converge as more and more evidence comes in. But in religion/spirituality, ideas are just as fragmented as thousands of years ago. Unlike ideas investigated by the scientific method where hypotheses get closer and closer and individual sources confirm each other at the end. There are no separate English vs Chinese aerodynamics, both claiming to have the true knowledge about flying. So yes, the fact that so many people still believe in unjustified claims when we could/should know better is extraordinary.
Along with the first born of Egypt, the animals killed in the plagues, whatever other human casualties that the plagues likely caused, the people of Sodom and Gomorrah, the Canaanites, victims of the ark of the covenant, and so much more. If the bible is true, the Christian god has more blood on his hands than any person in the entire history of the human race.
Well, being a demonspawn myself, I merely paint one finger camouflage or use a monodigital cammo glove before I say, "How!" Or mirrors. Sometimes mirrors around one finger works. Magicians probably already know this..
In the first half of this call, I thought to myself: Okay! Here's a misunderstanding that a lot of people have with regards to probability. This caller seems reasonable and maybe Matt and Don can clear this up for them. Second half of the call: Umm... WHAT?!
Wrong. In a five-card hand, the odds of dealing a royal flush are 649,740 to 1. The odds of dealing any straight flush other than a royal flush are only 72,192 to 1. The odds of dealing a pair are 1.37 to 1.
@@willdwyer6782 I think he meant that the probability of getting any specific 5 cards combination that appears random is exactly the same as getting a Royal Flush combination of cards.
Yes, that is true, but we aren't talking about playing a game where everyone gets dealt five cards with no rules about what those cards might mean. We can discuss the straight probability, but that takes the reference that Matt was using out of the context he was using - a game of poker where there are rules and certain combinations of cards are considered better than others, with Aces high and 2's low. In that context the chance of getting dealt a "Royal Flush" as compared to other types of hands to win in a game of poker are 4 in about 3 million, whereas getting dealt a hand with no pairs is something like 1,300,000 in 3 million. Discussing straight probability is cool, and it plays a role, but if the context is poker, then it's not about any possible card combination, it's more about if you got a three-of-a-kind, or Jacks or Higher to open. The 1,300,000 hands that don't have a single pair probably wind up going in the "I'm out" pile, unless you have an Ace high, or you like to bluff.
Something that Matt could have added to the card analogy is that any combination of five cards is just as likely as any other combination. It's just that we put value on specific combinations. Therefore, basing whether or not someone cheated solely on probability, which is what the caller was doing, would actually help exonerate the accused, since the probability of getting those cards is no more or less likely than any other combination. Of course, the value placed on those specific cards is the key variable, which is why making a determination of cheating would require further information, as was said in the video. Edit: That laugh at 12:53 was great. XD
@Nate Franco If the shoe fits. It certainly doesn't help your cause that the caller is so vile, he would rather demean the genocide victims in the Bible as demonic offsprings than to admit that his deity is atrocious. Calling him a liar would be mild; the real choice of word would be psychopath. Are you here to defend his position and thus also let your opinions speak for your character?
I was an atheist before I ever found the atheist experience a few years back, but I can honestly say that they've helped me to think more critically and have taught me a lot over the years.
Same. Non ex Fundamentalist
*FallingGalaxy* I never was a believer and it's helped me field these ridiculous arguments (should I need to) by addressing them. It can also be great fun like Matt's performance above!
Thanks Matt, you call them out so that we don't have to.
@LordKellthe1st same
LordKellthe1st are you still an atheist now?
Sometimes I'm an atheist, sometimes I'm not. Depends on whether my family are around or not. No drama, lifes too short
I prayed and didn't feel better:
* You didn't pray right
* You prayed to the wrong god
* You weren't sincere
.... (etc) (etc)
I prayed and got better:
* God exists
One thing I will never understand is how people who've suffered natural disasters tend to give god credit for protecting them, but they never stop to think about *who* allowed that natural disaster. They want to have their cake and eat it too. Similar logic when it comes to successful surgeries, they never ask god why he allowed them to get sick, but immediately thank him instead of the surgeons... So annoying.
I prayed to Cthulhu to feel better.
@@HEARTS-OF-SPACE I've been pointing that out for years. It's just as plausible to assume that god is trying to kill you with a tornado as it is to assume he saved you from it.
@@thebooca God loves you. He just hates your stuff. Lolol
All unfalsifiable
"There was no genocide in the bible ... except for that flood thing, but that's ok 'cause they weren't human." Beautiful.
Think he's referring to nephilims. Cross of angel and humans
@@clementnade972 Annunaki, Chanooblocki.
Besides, just because they aren't human doesn't necessarily mean it's ok to kill them.
As laughable as it may seem, I can’t help but think some truth about the flood and human mentality asserting that “it’s okay”. With the way things are lately with mass farm production, in a sense, we are okay with genocidal murder towards non-human animals. If you’re a meat eater and you find this joke funny then I can only imagine the irony of your logic.
@@Godlimate Vegans and thinking that they are different than religious fanatics.
It´s all fun and laughter until you realize he can vote...
Thats depressing
and reproduce
@@macmcdermid8677 this scares me for my children.
It means ... we must work harder, tirelessly to outvote them every election.
They’ve already captured the Supreme Court...
I don't believe these people who say, "I was an atheist for years." What is more likely is, "I finally found a denomination I liked."
@Alastair Archibald I think what they really mean is that they skipped a couple of sundays in the pew. No thinking person was ever brought to religion by reason and evidence.
Yes, and they likely never had critical thinking skills.
@@bobs182 I can pretty much guarantee it. It was my teen education in science that, I think, convinced me that, at age 14, that I no longer believed. I have continued to study science for the intervening 46 years, and no amazing scientific theory has made me question my lack of belief since, though I doubt string theory, because of the total lack of evidence of the extra dimensions required, or any other evidence for it. Thus, I extend my scepticism to unsupported scientific claims as well as religions.
I don’t believe anything without supporting evidence.
Alfred Wegener was widely mocked for his 1912 hypothesis of tectonic (plate) drift when it first came out. Now, no geologist challenges it, because Wegener was right, and we know why and how tectonic drift happens.
There isn’t even a single letter of evidence for the evidence of God, or any other deity, because the books that supposedly demonstrate their existence were written by humans after the belief in those deities began.
Even if the books were written before the case,
"Game of Thrones is over and so is this call"
Might be the funniest way Matt ever ended a call
And thank god in both instances!
"I got one finger"
I agree
It was great and that idiot trying to justify his belief was agonising and fucked up dishonest as usual like all religious people try to do, ty mat again that was a brilliant end to that pathetic caller.
Read this right when he said it lmao
That took a *really* weird turn at the end.
Which one, the thing about Giants, or Game of Thrones being over?
@@meloveAi What do you think?
Pretty normal for Christians, actually....sadly.
The guy started to talk about probability and stuff....and ended up talking about giants.
@@solimarra He's been on conspiracy theory sites - the ones that try to pass off entries into a Photoshop competition as genuine archaeological finds.
The logic of the caller can be briefly summarized by this example. It's the year 3,000 BC:
1. We don't know how lightning is created.
2. Everyone thinks a god did it. Therefore it's 99.99% probably that a god did it.
You forget the extra 3. Only humans agree with me
Because the man's a foolish nuttard
The giants in the next village over, think it's just clouds and stuff. That is why Thor killed them all.
I'm pretty sure most people think that Daniel is an idiot, and he probably is. So checkmate, atheist
HVYMETL If you don't know how lightning is started, then you don't know if there's a God or not.
Someone text me and said that atheists doesn't care what I think, so the feeling is mutual.
HOLY MOLY, if there is ONE thing that makes me fight religions, it is this dehumanization of people
@@tossaja
Apparently, neither were anyone other than Noah's eight at the infamous "great flood" that wiped out all (other) life on earth.
Which no one else even happened to notice. 8< D
Do you guys ever read the bible?
Well, organized Wasteland Death Cults, but yeah...
@Hey Girl I Like Your Kitchen Romania politics. using that term like it is one single thing, and like religions has nothing to do with it (ever heard of political islam ?), that makes me only think : you keep using that word, I dont think it means what you think it means
@Hey Girl I Like Your Kitchen Romania like I told you, you dont have any idea what you're talking about
This has been my favorite video so far. The looks of incredulity from Don and Matt were priceless.
Yeah, Matt and Don was giving him enough rope to hang himself. We all watched in anticipation as the caller tied his noose, flung it over a tree, put it around his neck climbed up the tree and jump off weeeeeeeeeeee! *crack* snap* 😆
The weakness of theistic arguments is always so painfully obvious.
Daniel's ability to reason completely evaporated in the end, and madness surfaced.
Every week, on every show, the hosts attempt to lead these theists on a path of logical integrity. And almost every time cognitive dissonance remains a barrier to reason.
Cognitive Dissonance is a hell of a drug.
@@mgenetos the lord is strong with this one, yeah but his brain ain't strong lol. What weak and feeble shit arguments religious people come up with ffs.
Removing a fundamental part of one's worldview is very painful. It's unlikely to happen in one call. The interesting thing is that these callers at least try to first use logic and then fall back on dogma rather than just relying on their conviction for the dogma.
@Frances Snowflake I disagree. Yet time and time again theists want to use bullshit like the Kalam Cosmological argument.
In the absence of anything even laughingly resembling evidence, it's really all they have.........
The Bible has really messed up this guys imagination and critical thinking skills.
Austin Mark word
That's why the bible is considered the goat herders guide to the universe.
@SS 1964
Yea I can totally picture it. Here donkey, donkey. Then donkey flies over and starts shooting the shit with ya, lol. Cheers.
@SS 1964
What's up donkey? have you seen god around, I can't seem to find him? LMFAO!
@SS 1964 Shrek donkey. Seriously though, don't animals especially marine species communicate on a higher level?
The way religions turn people's minds to mush would almost be funny if it didn't have such a tragic impact on reality...
bowser515 especially the Islam religion. I agree all religion is a problem.
@@graceandpanic9281 Islam is arguably the most dangerous religion currently. But it's no worse than any of the others from an indoctrination point of view. They are all tragic.
bowser515 agreed.
We've come a long way in the last 400-500 years and I like to think progress is still being made. But it's tough when so many children are being indoctrinated into religion and have to be deconverted after the fact. Support the separation of church and state how and wherever you can. I won't live to see it but I hope religion will someday be eradicated or at least be seen as largely a thing of the past like smallpox, polio, and tuberculosis.
@@NormDPlume-mc5dh i think less and less children are being taken in by it as they have social and internet values to contend with.
“No god exists” is NOT an extraordinary claim.
True. But it IS an unfalsifiable claim.
What. That would be the easiest thing in the world! Just demonstrate one god exists. With a camera, or something.@@renejean2523
"I've got one finger"
- Matt Dillahunty
“Can you conclude that I cheated?”
Caller: “Do I know you?”
“Is this our first hand?”
“Did the sun rise at 7:36am?”
“Was Lassie saying the barn is on fire?”
“Did you save 15% or more by switching to Geico that morning?”
“Was there a hawk perched on a cactus standing on one leg with a piece of Aunt Susan’s pie in its mouth?”
“If it’s yes to all those questions, then yes I conclude that you cheated Matt.”
"Same for God."
That guy doesn't realize this, but that was the knockout punch.
@@richardgay7990 Ok.
Pastor Pickle you might, I don’t..
@@richardgay7990 'Jesus will provide the knockout punch'
😂 Will it be mostly Kool Aid again, I think I'll pass.
Chad, Don
It actually made NO sense.
Matthew Williams dude, burn!!! Like we are told we will in hell! Lol
I can't believe this invincible ignorance still persists in 2019.
I hate to break it to you, but invincible ignorance is stronger in 2019 than it was in 2009.
@@Waltham1892 sad, but true. With a lot of people, the more you give them evidence that contradicts their beliefs, the tighter they cling to said beliefs.
@@DenyThisFlesh That is true, but I think its not the sole mechanism we are confronting.
The very concept of "true" has been converted from objective to simply subjective.
Therefore, your evidence carries the same weight as my beliefs.
Not great days.
Mor
If anything it's worse, because there's less justification or excuse for the ignorance, and more and more it's a stubborn and intentional, designed ignorance.
@Burger Clown You are bellow average intelligence if you sum that up to all people who don't think like you or perceive things in a different light.
Often on this show I hear believers stating “i don’t believe that” when what they really mean is “i don’t understand that”. Geology, evolutionary biology, etc. Just because you don’t understand something doesn’t mean it isn’t true. And I LOVE Matt’s point about the popularity of an idea having no bearing on it’s veracity.
Matt not talking for a moment and let Daniel show how stupid he is just amazing.
This is why free speech must be maintained! Of course, we have to assume the general public is smart enough to spot BS. These days that seems to be a more rare trait...
first time I've ever heard that "they weren't actually human" argument. Wow.
Demon babies and giants...yea, that sounds more likely than evolution.
🤨
If we can pick what race we are, I'd either be an Elf, or a Jotunn, since I'm from Scadinavia.
@@Lupinemancer87 Why not Asgardian?
Lets purge all the giants and demons from this world! but you can keep and fuck virgin ones.
@@Lupinemancer87 both of those races are considered evil in Scandinavian lore. And both of the races get their butt kicked. I'd pick an Asgardian
@@Fearless154 Giants don't live Midgar.
Fascinating when these callers are confronted with logic seemingly for the first time in their life…
And also fascinating how this ended in total fantasy
It only makes the believer more intrigued to find out answers in truth.
Might be one of my favorite calls. Just turned into some crazy acid Trip real quick at the end. 🤣😂
Undoubtedly one of the best AXP segments I've seen.
I laughed so hard I had to eat immediately after to replenish the calories I lost.
"there's not really a mass murderer in the bible"
apparently he skipped Genesis.
matthew and luke too.....and somewhere in the old testament ...people fried their 1st born males as an offering to god............so
And Leviticus..... And Deuteronomy.... And judges.... And that bit about Joshua.....
God had it out for children too. Dashing ‘em on rocks, stoning them to death, sending bears to kill them..I’m sure I left out a few.
At what point do you suppose the Christians will look at each other and ask "Are we the baddies?"
Perhaps never.
""there's not really a mass murderer in the bible"
apparently he skipped Genesis.
But murder is defined as "The unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.", so if it's god doing the killing, it isn't murder.
Listening to him slip slowly into madness was hilarious. Atheist Experience is my favourite comedy show!!!
Way better than most of the crap on Comedy Central
@@scruffylookingNerfherder5742 And scarier than tales from the crypt
@@Muckytuja you got that shit right
@@scruffylookingNerfherder5742 Absolutely. It's like a roast but the roastee has no idea what's going on.
@@rydersonthestorm7175 lol I really like that analogy
You can't argue with Matt...he's too damn smart for people like Daniel. Why do they keep trying? This is the type of stuff that makes my day. Thanks Matt. "I've got one finger" HAHAHAHA
Who is Daniel ?
@@ebiushardy4078 The caller in this video.
Right Matt debates these arguments with smarter people than all these callers put together. Yet they call in and sincerely believe they have a new viewpoint and can win the argument. I haven’t seen an original argument in years. YEARS.
Ebius Hardy
The guy who served me at McDonalds today.
I'm in complete favor of them calling in and trying, because the key factor is that no one's forcing them to try. There's a virtual mountain of research that shows that you are far more likely to change your mind if you voluntarily seek challenges to your own beliefs rather than being forced to accept challenges as fact because of social convention or law.
The ill-contained laughter of the crew is the best part... 🤣
“but Game of Thrones is over and so is this call”
Killing blow.
FATALITY
Finish him!
WASTED
Classic mat love it.
Flawless. Victory.
The end of this call is hilarious.
"How did you know they were humans? "
And THERE is the entire reason why I am so fervently against religions.
Dehumanizing an entire populace because you couldn't come to terms with god ordering the death of countless people.
I love Don and his laugh.
That call perfectly demonstrated what religion does to a possibly otherwise reasonable person. Turns them into a blithering, jibbering, equivocating, non-thinker.
Weird confusion between possibility and probability.
There is no confusion, this is the effect of intentional ignorance. What your witnessing is stupidity.
Whats the diff between the 2 ?
@@lovehumanity6468 Whether or not something is possible is a dichotomy. Whether or not something is probable is not a dichotomy, but a quantification of how likely it is to happen.
Example: It is possible that earth will be hit by an asteroid within the next week. It is also possible that that won't happen. How probable it is that earth will be hit by an asteroid within the next week is a different question.
Boy, when that guy drank the kool-aid he drained a full barrel. Giants and 6 fingers? Ffs.
Investigate deeper. Don’t just look to your peers for how you should form your beliefs.
R E
Don’t dig too deep. You’ll drop straight through your flat Earth.
This show is simultaneously extremely entertaining and hopelessly frustrating and has kept me occupied while I've studied and it's been great
If this guy believes in giants
What stops him from believing Norse mythology?
After all, Odin did defeat the frost giants
But Odin exists! You know why? Well, did you see any Frost Giants? No? That's because Odin killed them.
The end of the call is a major reason why I love watching this show. Priceless.
13:25 This is the moment when the caller's brain left the chat and all that was left was a pile of crazy
Hahahahahhahahahha.
Thanks! For the hightlight. Was getting bored aft 5mins.
Great name for a Rock band: PILE OF CRAZY.
I saw debating on someone about this and they used this same response on the giants and everything. It baffled me when I heard it. Like... Wtf? Where did that come from?
*Mr Ryuk* "Where did that come from?" is a reasonable question to the god claim itself, I mean why bring up a supernatural daddy in the _first place?_ Where does that come from?
Giants are high probability. Just look at all the evidence. You know, the bible lol.
@@BigHeretic I think the "hyperactive agency detector" explanation works well
Matt and Don were really good in this one!
People who have gone to church since birth have been taught the more they resist their beliefs being debunked the more virtuous and faithful they are. They think god is keeping track and they get a gold star next to their name to be reimbursed upon death. Also atheism isn’t an outrageous claim. It’s claiming reality is nothing more than what we see around us everyday. It’s the default position.
In the 13 minute timeframe when Matt sat back, mouth open, both hands covering mouth with that shocked face look, I was having that same reaction too.
Yep, my jaw was on the floor at this exact moment too, but I was making 'cuckoo' noises.
I think your callers should wake up before trying to argue with you.
In all fairness it's hard to stay alert when being on hold fo over an hour
@@jamesphillips2734 has fuck all to do with it, his backwards thinking and his stupid ass religion has this guy the way he is simple.
@@PaulBrown-uj5le I think James was being just a little facetious.
Man I don't watch these as much anymore but that ending felt like a blast from the past.
Argumentum ad populum is a fallacious argument that concludes that a proposition must be true because many or most people believe it, often concisely encapsulated as: "If many believe so, it is so."
Dropping Latin. A barbaric tool for communicating, as you will see: A popular, established method to define what is accepted as logical and true.
6:05 is the most beautiful logic trap I've seen in ages. Bravo, Matt!
How was it beautiful? It was a horrible example. It is a fair assumption, especially given the way that Matt posed the example, that a cheating dealer will hand out interesting hands more likely than uninteresting hands.
The laughter from off-camera is great... especially the "koo koo" at 13:48
It's at about 12:11 that the wheels fall off for this caller.
Wow.
“It’s common sense.”
Knee-slapper right there.
As a Native American I can confirm what he said was not true.
Would you expand upon that? Just for clarity. I’m not native and that’s a culture I haven’t really been exposed to.
@@dr.floridamanphd which part? What tribes I decend from or the bullshit?
@@crimsonsean, holding your hand up in greeting.
@@SuperDipMonster the usual for most greetings. A confirmation that you're there and that you aren't holding a weapon. The one that the caller seemed to be referring to was the open hand, in the air, with your fingers together and an exclamation of "how". That's somewhere out west. Over on the east at my particular tribe, it's a closed fist over your heart with and exclamation of "a-ho". (I believe that's how they are spelled. I've never thought to ask anyone about spelling)
@@crimsonsean, you're from an Eastern tribe? This may sound ridiculous but do you know of any stories of people from Wales coming into contact with any Eastern tribes some 1300 years ago? They may have integrated.
The last minute destroyed a few million of my brain cells.
"Do I know you beforehand?" WTF?? Grasping.
“Game of Thrones is over and so is this call.”
BOOOOOOOOM!
The guy may have been an atheist at some point, but he was no skeptic.
I'm not sure rebellion against parents because of bad experience even really counts as being an atheist. Doesn't require any critical thought and is reactionary. And this guy clearly doesn't have any critical thinking skills. I mean, giants to justify God's Noah flood genocide. HIGH PROBABILITY! TRUE. Unlike the Koran.. that has the same Abrahamic god as the bible. Guy is so critical, because only this god could explain life, none of the others do. Not biased at all.
Yeah, not all atheists skeptics. They're skeptical about God claims, but some atheists are superstitious or hold other bizarre beliefs, not excluding the supernatural.
@@jeremyg7261 A man who embraces atheism because he believes god has dealt him a bad hand is no wiser than the fool who grovels to god for forgiveness when he believes he's been an unworthy sinner. True atheism is only acquired through extinguishing ridiculous claims with a lashing of logic.
@@hauntboy I think this is why Don shook his head immediately at the 12 minute mark
I nearly switched this off part way in , I'm glad I stayed to the end , it was high class comedy!
I’ll never forget the first time someone tried to explain god to me; first grade, a classmate in the lunch line. I was six years old. He asked “Do you believe in god?”, and I had no idea what he was talking about. He tried to explain it, but I thought he was crazy. Fast forward about six years and I finally figured out what he was talking about.
Needless to say…. Poor, confused bastard. Probably beating it into his children today.
I am amazed at the sheer fragility of human intellect.
The odds of winning the lotto are 1 in 302.6 million yet there's a winner almost every week.
This call went downhill very quickly towards the end Lol
Like the storylines at end of Game of Thrones😭
Actually this call was headed downhill before the call ever began.
When he started talking about the Quran he was soooooo close to understanding it.
Wow what a perfect way to end the call!
Awesome punchline at the end!!!! Totally worth it to listen to the entire video front to back!
I remember being the first kid in my class to know that Santa Claus wasn't real. There were 27 third graders, who all treated me as an oddball... I wore the title with pride, because I knew I was right, and all of them were behind the curve. It seems I was the first to deny the existence of God as well, but that wasn't til 8th grade. Again, I was the oddball.. But still I wore the title with pride. Being right is often a lonesome palace, with walls as cold as stone, but my integrity keeps me warm, and my knowledge comforts me.
But, that ending was joyous bonkers fun!
The end was a reversal...unexpected!!
I love seeing the same user profiles on different channels!🤣
People always say, " the likely hood that life exists on this plant, must be god"
No
There are hundreds of trillions of plants, many chances for the "perfect formula" for life
do you by any chance mean 'planet'?
"There is no god" is not an extraordinary claim. Claiming that something which we have no evidence for is imaginary, is not extraordinary.
But it is also a positive claim, which means the burden of proof is on the person making such a claim. We don't have evidence that leads to either way, if god exists or not, so you'd need to prove one way or the other, or else "there is no god" can be dismissed as easily as "there is a god".
@S Gloobal What exactly about intelligence and DNA convinces you of a god? I'm curious to see what your reasoning is for this.
@S Gloobal DNA itself is non-intelligent, correct? It operates based on set rules regarding which nucleotides can bind together, and which proteins they can produce. However, DNA can produce beings with intelligence.
Therefore, we already have examples whee non-intelligence produces intelligence.
@@meloveAi do you know anyone who has any difficulty dismissing the claim that there's no tooth fairy, or that there's no vampires? Is "there's no such thing as vampires" really an extraordinary claim?
S Gloobal why does the question have to be, "who" put the information there? Why not "what put the information there"
What I personally experienced first hand swimming the lakes of Minnesota and walking the streets of Minneapolis in the midst of the Great Depression that prompted me to say at 5 years old in Church/Sunday School(?) "What in hell is wrong with these people?"
After traveling so much of the world to all compass points, 80 years later I'm saying "What in hell is wrong with these people?"
Of course I know very well 'what the hell is wrong with them'.
And the answer is exactly the same.
1. The Flood (Genesis 6-8)
2. The cities of the plain, including Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 18-19)
3. The Egyptian firstborn sons during the Passover (Exodus 11-12)
4. The Canaanites under Moses and Joshua (Numbers 21:2-3; Deuteronomy 20:17; Joshua 6:17, 21)
5. The Amalekites annihilated by Saul (1 Samuel 15)
14:19 What a way to end this...
You need EVIDENCE to prove the existence of anything. Where the subject of a god is concerned, no evidence has ever been forthcoming.
You get to the point where you can present convincing evidence that the universe required a god, then comes the tough part: providing convincing evidence that you, or anyone knows the details of the god.
I'm not even sure we'll ever get to the first point.
I agree with Manly....what's the convincing evidence that the universe required a god? I think, logically, if you got to the first point, you would have to have the second part, too. I don't think the first part can ever be reached. It's like Sagan's invisible dragon in the garage scenario. If you could reach the point where you had evidence that the invisible dragon existed, you would have to know at least some of the details about it - otherwise you wouldn't have any evidence of it's existence.
"You get to the point where you can present convincing evidence that the universe required a god"
I'm not so sure about this. What evidence exactly are you presenting to get to this point?
Simply saying "I don't know how it happened and it seems really improbable that it happened" does not move the needle whatsoever towards a god.
Hay Matt, you're doing a great job for Jahovah, keep up the good work.
as yes "I was an atheist because of issues with my parents." deciding to skip church does not make one an atheist.
Matt's reaction at the end says it all 😂😂 he's prepared for anything but this even took him by surprise 😂😂
The convoluted nonsense people have to keep making up to continue explaining their nonsense is astounding.
Justin Bieber has millions of fans - therefore Justin Bieber is the greatest singer of all time!
I see your point lol...
This had to be a prank call. A good sign is "I used to be an atheist until I had a supernatural experience", then he went so cuckoo with those weird claims it sounded as if he was calling from a place for the insane.
Claiming no Scooby-Doo is the extraordinary claim....
5:20 8:45
The analogy where Matt posits the hypothetical of a poker dealer that cheats half the time doesn't work. The probabilistic distribution of hands from a cheating dealer will be different from a fair dealer. As a result, receiving a hand that has an extremely low probability of being dealt by a fair dealer allows us to assess the odds of this being a 'cheated' hand at more than 50%.
The odds of a Royal Flush in a fair hand is 1 out of 649739. I'll round this to 600,000 for convenience.
The exact odds of a Royal Flush from a cheating dealer depends on the motivations of the dealer, but I suggest that we can very reasonably infer that the odds of a cheating dealer whipping up the most dramatic hand in the game is higher than 600000. Lets be conservative and say it is 1 out of 100,000.
If we get 1,200,000 hands from this dealer, we can expect 600,000 fair hands, and one Royal Flush from a fair deal. We can expect 600,000 cheated hands, and 6 Royal Flushes from cheated deals.
In the event of receiving a Royal Flush, there is now a 6 out of 7 chance that this hand was cheated. If we picked a less conservative estimate of a cheating dealer dealing out a Royal Flush, this probability would be higher.
This is different from the case of the universe in that we have no a priori knowledge of the probability of the Universe as we know it resulting given the existence or non-existence of God.
Thank you so much. Everyone seems to just keep repeating "what a beautiful wall of logic" or "this caller doesn't understand probability" and the like, but it's the contrary: Matt doesn't seem to understand probability here. Matt's argument here was so bad that it earned the video a dislike from me.
Let's imagine the extreme case, where: when the dealer cheats, this means that the dealer deals out a royal flush, and when the dealer plays fair, he deals out a random card. In Matt's example, the dealer cheats 50% of the time. If a player receives a royal flush, then the odds that the dealer cheated during the deal is overwhelmingly high:
The odds of getting a royal flush from a random deal is ~1/600,000 (I will also use an approximation) and the odds of getting a royal flush from a cheat deal is 1. If 1,200,000 hands are dealt out this way, the player can expect to receive 600,001 royal flushes: 600,000 from cheat deals and 1 from a fair deal. Thus, if a player is dealt a royal flush, there is only 1 chance in 1,200,000 that it is from a fair deal, and 600,000 in 1,200,000 that it is from a cheat deal. It is 600,000 times more likely that the Royal flush is from a cheat deal than not.
I think that the above is such an easily-understood way that the so-called analogy fails, that to claim that anyone is "factually incorrect" if they see that there is a differential in probability is, frankly, insulting.
Furthermore, for people to cackle out "the caller doesn't understand probability" because he asked if it was the first deal is unfair. Can we really fault the caller for misunderstanding the situation if Matt does too? If we know nothing about the dealer and he deals royal flushes every time, the odds that the dealer is cheating is vastly higher than if he is dealing them out of pure chance. This is a fair question to ask while trying to ascertain what Matt is trying to get at.
This is an endemic issue with this show and its followers: people are always eager to bash the callers and call them stupid, while giving the hosts free passes when they make mistakes. It's dangerously close to being an echo chamber.
We need to admit that, while Matt is good at debunking Christian apologetics, he's just not a great host all the time. He often abuses the hold button, yells and calls callers "idiots", speaks quickly and dazzles his opponent, and makes elementary mistakes like this. He's not the greatest host. People here seem to think he's as eloquent as Hitchens or as clear as Dennett, but he's just not. It's time that we admit this.
P.S. Fancy seeing you here and not in my subscription feed. Thanks for all your KSP videos over the years. Still waiting on the advanced orbital mechanics series though 😛 (But, if it's an overly-complicated video, don't sweat it. Don't overdo it with sky-high expectations like pannenkoek2012 and then end up with burn-out.)
That which is insereted without evidence.
Does not require evidence to refute.
Agree but try "asserted". Not criticising just helping because I get not everyone is fluent English.
I started believing in Santa Claus at age 40 because of my supernatural encounter with giant demons giving presents to my parents who I did not like.
I got one finger. Pissed myself laughing
The caller had a chance here to say that he knew Matt cheated because he's an Atheist and therefore he has no morals and so must have cheated. What a waste of a call.
😂
All atheists don’t see enough evidence for a god, but there are thousands of gods believed in by different people. They all claim that there god is the right one. That’s extraordinary.
Indeed it's extraordinary, how people still believe in all those hundreds of gods without those coming closer to each other. You would expect that as time goes by, all ideas would converge as more and more evidence comes in. But in religion/spirituality, ideas are just as fragmented as thousands of years ago.
Unlike ideas investigated by the scientific method where hypotheses get closer and closer and individual sources confirm each other at the end. There are no separate English vs Chinese aerodynamics, both claiming to have the true knowledge about flying.
So yes, the fact that so many people still believe in unjustified claims when we could/should know better is extraordinary.
@@doctorgorgomel Thank you for your cogent comment.
There's not really mass murder in the bible - Daniel
The thousands of dead midianites : 🤔🤦🏼♂️🤷🏼♀️
Thousands if not millions of people, plants, and animals killed by the flood:
Am I a joke to you?
Along with the first born of Egypt, the animals killed in the plagues, whatever other human casualties that the plagues likely caused, the people of Sodom and Gomorrah, the Canaanites, victims of the ark of the covenant, and so much more. If the bible is true, the Christian god has more blood on his hands than any person in the entire history of the human race.
Well, being a demonspawn myself, I merely paint one finger camouflage or use a monodigital cammo glove before I say, "How!"
Or mirrors. Sometimes mirrors around one finger works.
Magicians probably already know this..
I like when Matt says "we kept all the booty for ourselves," just for the sake of the double entendre.
If it's raining, the chance of rain is 100%. Same idea applies to the probability of life on this planet.
This is one of the best videos I have seen in a while!
In the first half of this call, I thought to myself: Okay! Here's a misunderstanding that a lot of people have with regards to probability. This caller seems reasonable and maybe Matt and Don can clear this up for them.
Second half of the call: Umm... WHAT?!
"But Game of Thrones is over and so is this call."
Holy shit that guy sounded like he was from about 3000 B.C.
Coke is always in the same place. hahahaha
Damn that took a hell of a left turn
The probability of getting dealt a Royal Flush is exactly the same as getting dealt any other combination of cards.
Wrong. In a five-card hand, the odds of dealing a royal flush are 649,740 to 1. The odds of dealing any straight flush other than a royal flush are only 72,192 to 1. The odds of dealing a pair are 1.37 to 1.
@@willdwyer6782 I think he meant that the probability of getting any specific 5 cards combination that appears random is exactly the same as getting a Royal Flush combination of cards.
@@mephistopheles94 - Yes.Thanks.
Yes, that is true, but we aren't talking about playing a game where everyone gets dealt five cards with no rules about what those cards might mean. We can discuss the straight probability, but that takes the reference that Matt was using out of the context he was using - a game of poker where there are rules and certain combinations of cards are considered better than others, with Aces high and 2's low. In that context the chance of getting dealt a "Royal Flush" as compared to other types of hands to win in a game of poker are 4 in about 3 million, whereas getting dealt a hand with no pairs is something like 1,300,000 in 3 million. Discussing straight probability is cool, and it plays a role, but if the context is poker, then it's not about any possible card combination, it's more about if you got a three-of-a-kind, or Jacks or Higher to open. The 1,300,000 hands that don't have a single pair probably wind up going in the "I'm out" pile, unless you have an Ace high, or you like to bluff.
I lost it when he mentioned giants 😂😂😂 like you clearly are a flawed being. More so than plenty of others
Kinda hard to believe but the bible does mention giants...They were like a hybrid from fallen angels and human women.
Goddamn, even my jaw dropped after hearing his last statement.
Something that Matt could have added to the card analogy is that any combination of five cards is just as likely as any other combination. It's just that we put value on specific combinations. Therefore, basing whether or not someone cheated solely on probability, which is what the caller was doing, would actually help exonerate the accused, since the probability of getting those cards is no more or less likely than any other combination. Of course, the value placed on those specific cards is the key variable, which is why making a determination of cheating would require further information, as was said in the video.
Edit: That laugh at 12:53 was great. XD
Matt educating the masses once again
"I was an atheist for years" !!! Like any one can believe him 😂😂 !!! "The Qur'an has been debunked over & over again but not the bible" really ??😂😂😂
Actually i believe him, he was atheist for 2-3 years, before his parents indoctrinated him into his religion.
@Nate Franco If the shoe fits.
It certainly doesn't help your cause that the caller is so vile, he would rather demean the genocide victims in the Bible as demonic offsprings than to admit that his deity is atrocious. Calling him a liar would be mild; the real choice of word would be psychopath.
Are you here to defend his position and thus also let your opinions speak for your character?
@@Julian0101 -Fair enough 😂😂