I realize that attempting to teach pigs to sing is a waste of time and annoys the pigs.... but have noticed that a select few can at least dance to the tune. I am currently entertaining some Jehovah Witnesses. I have gotten a few excommunicated in the past. If I can enlighten but one person, I have done more than the Bible has in thousands of years.
just acknowledge that you are ignorant of others ignorance! believe it or not, there are people who believe in creation, flat earth etc. I cant imagine believing in superstition/supernatural, but then I wouldn't ............ because I not a theist!. I used to wonder how some of my family could believe, I did not take them seriously, but they do.
No. I simply said that I was a little unaware of how many people still believe in certain things while I do not, my ignorance comes from my lack of awareness (until recently) that people still actually believe in flat earth, magic, ghosts/jinn, angels and devils, demons etc today! But whilst I disagree with them, I cannot assume they see things the way I do or ought to see things how I do, I simply don't believe in magic but I can only imagine what those who do believe in magic think - but I will never truly know. One example is when I heard a family member talk to his son, telling him the story of adam and eve as fact (whilst he told him that evolution is a myth), my reaction was "wow do people still literally believe these myths?" and that is an example of MY ignorance. We are all ignorant in one way shape or form, the difference here is awareness or unawareness of ones own ignorance and whether that ignorance is voluntary or not. Good Day Sir! :)
21:10 Summary of this quote: "In all of human history, the supernatural has never turned out to be the right answer to anything: Natural explanations of phenomena have replaced supernatural ones thousands upon thousands of times, while supernatural explanations have replaced natural ones exactly never." -- Greta Christina
Aron is one of the most passionate people I've ever come across AND He SPEAKS THE TRUTH. He can get loud, he'll throw around as much fucks as the next guy, he can mock religious ideals and he can get downright vocally nasty BUT fuck me he's still such a cool dude and surprisingly lovable (versus others with some of those harsh seeming traits) and I have so much respect for this man. He's not fake. He doesn't apologize for anything that he shouldn't have to. He's not an asshole as many people want to believe that he is. It's one man that I would hug and whisper thank you in his ear just to be fucking awkward and make sure he knows he should never change I love you Aron
Finally a man with the intelligence, honor, and integrity which is sorely needed in our representatives, but existing in so few today. We needed AronRa involved like this 20 years ago!
20 years ago the access to good information wasn't there, just sitting there on the interwebz. unfortunately it will be easier for religion to move onto other gaps in science than to stick with these same debunked issues and face humiliation and skepticism he does a great job and we do need more like him because i still see lots of idiots trying to tout their belief over every non-believer's existence by just saying "You are silly. You don't know and will be sorely mistaken when..." yada yada *insert bunch of bullshit I'm better than you explanations here* i think the ones that generally tend to debate skeptics are the ones that tend to know something is off on their end and want to find what that is... the ones that just flat out ignore any evidence are the annoying ones that try to demean your life by comparison. (imo)
John Wright one could go as far as saying they are the gods of atheism, and that Hitchens died for our freedom of thought. I know it’s not true, but it’s still a better story than what’s in the Bible
As an Atheist my entire life, it is so refreshing to hear these lectures. I live in Kuwait; so no one understands by Atheism; but I have always expressed my reality/evidence based views on Atheism and never back down on a discusssion expressing my reasoning.
AronRa - you should incorporate the phrase: *"A Seemingly Satanic Klingon Disney Villain"* into your election campaign. That type of self deprecating humor would truly be an "atypical" campaign.
I agree about the checking thing as I like to come up with what I think is a "good one", release it into the wild on popular media then wait to see if any of my work gains notoriety. If it's incorrect this can't happen. Pointless maybe but helps keep me sane, I find. :)
That is not what knowledge is, at all, you know that you exist, and you apprehend that immediately, you do not demostrate, measure and test the veracity of the existence of either yourself or any other, do you? Me thinks your epistemology may be lacking...
@@craigcrawford6595 yet you experience yourself and others with senses, don't you? The same way others experience you. You can test your existence through smell, sounds, touch, taste and sight. What else do you need to place yourself in the reality?
@@craigcrawford6595 you're probably referring to Syllogism right? Ok I get that, you're right. But what about medical examination through which you can prove you're very much a real and living organism? Is it scientific and not based on senses?
@@matearosie We do not need our senses to tell us or prove that we exist, what do you tell a person who is blind, can't smell or taste, has no sense of touch? That they don't exist?
@@judymcclenny9549 From my understanding it's that only the self is true. I think therefore I am. My perception of the world is the only thing that is real. I can only know my own mind, and see things through my own lenses. Everyone else is viewed through my self and vice versa.
@@raysalmon6566 Yes, some of the places and people described in the bible have been shown by archaeology and history to have existed - or still exist today under different names, in some cases. Does that mean that all of the supernatural stuff in the bible is also true? Not really, no. If it did, then we would be equally justified to say that the Avengers or Spiderman (Marvel cinematic universe characters) are real, because both the comics and the movies are set in New York, a real city in a real place. But you can't say that everything written down in a work of fiction must be true just because some parts of it coincidentally do exist in the real world. That's clearly not how any of this works. In this context, the only differences between the Bible and the Marvel comics are that the Bible has been around for approximately 2000 more years, and that we don't know who the real author(s) of the Bible were.
My boss is a creationist and likes to bait me into debating him. After a year of these debates he said to me (recently) when I walked into his office one day,"I understand why you think the way you do. It just clicked...I really get it, it's making a lot of sense now". That is the best feeling I've ever had. I've learned a lot about how to debate theists from you Aron, thank you.
i,ve been teaching my grand son for a few mos.he,s starting to under stand.his mom is related to billy grahm,that had got in our way ,for many years.his father has changed his mind of late too.i tell them,use utube and see men like this good man,and others.i payed a high price,but i was scapgoated from child hood,but not any more.
Ive never lost a debate after killing bill nyes video no one will even debate me prehistoric fish rules out evolution in part not even aaron can challenge that
Gave a presentation to my super catholic teacher about the evolution of horses. It was a grade on the physically presentation and not the subject. She squirmed so much it was beautiful!
@@ginzo666 I'm not sure what you mean by that since you vague-posted, and to be fair, I kinda did as well, so what I meant was that it sounds like a No True Scotsman Fallacy to say no Catholics are creationists. Because there are undoubtedly Catholics who are, and your claim that there are none would cut those people out, i.e. "oh they're Catholic *and* creationist? Then they aren't really Catholic". At least, that was the trip my brain took when reading your comment.
This guy is really brave going into the lion's den of the Bible Belt. When I drove out from MA to KS a few years ago, I found it rather amusing that the billboards along the interstate alternated between those for evangelical churches and - mega porn stores!
I would absolutely love to be in a position where I lacked any moral fiber. Being a preacher/pastor/priest is such a lucrative job... I deliver pizza for a living, and honestly, I'd switch in a heartbeat if I knew that I wouldn't feel guilty about accruing my wealth by lying to and extorting the poor every week.
Aron Ra, You may sometimes be alone in the room. But, you're never alone in our thoughts and support. As us northerners say, "You'll never walk alone". All the best, mate!
Metaphorically true, literally false. Why subscribe to this idea, and reject the idea of religious people making similar metaphorical intended statements, and call them liars by insisting their words should be interpret literally, even contrary to the statement of the speaker? As I stated before, even atheists tend to defend their beliefs religiously, hence their claim they are different from 'other' believers is based on a false dichotomy, the main difference is that where other believers choose to describe their belief with a single word like 'god', atheists just refuse to use the word 'god' for something they happen to believe. Science may be of great value, but it is still just a model of reality, not reality itself. Each claim from any model of reality ought to be verified according to the definitions of that model, using definitions from one model to attempt to disqualify conclusions from another model is by definition making a false dichotomy fallacy. A mathematical example to illustrate my statement: The statement 4 + 4 = 10 can be both mathematically correct and mathematically incorrect, it depends on the mathematical numeral system that was applied by the one making the statement. If the numeral system happens to be the octal numeral system, then it's correct, if it was the decimal numeral system, then it's incorrect. Ignoring the possibility that a statement was made within another system than the one you assumed to be used when the statement was made and as a result judging the person making the statement to be incorrect, or even worse, dishonest, says more about the limited intellectual capabilities of the accuser than it says something relevant about the accused. Aron seems to assume a decimal system even when the text he is trying to debunk specifically states an octal numeral system applies. I greatly appreciate his research in ancient texts, but his interpretations/conclusions often tend to be blinded by his atheistic ideology. I'm all in favor of defending the scientific model, but doing so by misrepresenting other models of reality strikes me as rather disingenuous.
+Giovanny Silva indeed a fine specimen hoppefully he can inject some sanity into at least one chunk of the usa and coutner ther manchild president a bit. we got ouer own dam fools for politcians here to try and weed out next year after all
Wilbur Jenkins Excuse me, but I am a Texan and I can say for sure we have high standards. Nah just kidding just seeing Aron's board of education video makes me weep for my state.
I had a case like that. I had someone challenge me to a debate using Google Hangouts, and the topic I wanted to debate was the evidence for creationism. He said he was fine with that, but then I told him that arguments AGAINST evolution, or anything else are not even evidence, never mind proof of creationism. So then he tried to change to, "You defend evolution, and I'll defend creation". I refused telling him that I did not care if evolution is true or not, so I had no need to defend it. After several back and forths, he agreed to debate on the evidence for creationism, but he insisted that it be on HIS channel, and would not send me a invitation until 5 minutes before the debate - allowing him to invite (as he did) lots of creationists and me to invite basically no one. Right out of the gate, his first argument was about the "impossibility" of abiogenesis and evolution. The debate ended quickly because I insisted that he follow the agreed rules - that evidence AGAINST something else is not evidence for his position. The hangout continued as he and his creationist audience congratulated themselves on "beating" the atheist.
+ajs1031 Exactly. Agree to terms, violate them immediately, and then declare victory. In a sense, I understand - they have nothing else and are emotionally unable to abandon their belief.
As a philosophy major, it's frustrating how creationists hijack philosophy like this. I don't understand how anyone with the critical thinking skills to actually pursue philosophy could also believe in God
Its been 3 years but, if you see this has that changed? Most likely increased right? Ive heard about presup but i have no knowledge in philosophy and to me it sounds like false dichotomies and circular reasoning but then again im out of my league and mostly likely wrong. Have a good day :)
About the "Darwin and the eye" thing, let me provide some inside knowledge. The believers who know about Darwin and the eye DON'T KNOW what's written afterwards, because they've never read it in context; they've never read Darwin. They ALWAYS saw it out of context, inside some apologetic booklet or book; and who knows if even the people making the booklet have read Darwin or merely picked that bit, out of context, from another apologetic source. I have no idea if even the professional debaters themselves have read the context. You could ask them "Oh, that's interesting. What else does Darwin say?" "Uhhh..." "Oh, so you've never actually read the book?" If I would have actually bothered to read Darwin as a believer, who knows, I might have deconverted sooner.
"They've never read Darwin." Most believers haven't even read the whole bible. So they they're certainly not going tackle "Origin of the Species" - especially if they've been raised to be believed that it's an "evil anti-God" book full of "unproven theories" that only atheists would believe.
That's why it's so important to call people out when they use these deceitful tactics. I *still* see that deceitful quote mine used today. It will only ever stop being used if it is regularly and consistently debunked every time some idiot tries to use it.
Ed Gepixel The same with most of the apologetics quote mining. I've seen in a lot of comment sections to these kind of videos where creationists produce some quote by, apparently, an eminent scientist casting doubt on evolution. Doing a Google search for the words in the quote always throw up apologetics sites first, usually the quote is from the 1890s, or an apologist "scientist", or out of context. My favourite was from a 1930s physicist called Millikan, where every single apologist site used the same quote and misspelled his name in exactly the same way (with one 'l'). A most blatant example of copy paste ever (oh, BTW, the original quote was from a speech recorded in a magazine only available through vintage collector sites, I doubt anyone read it.)
Nope... I tried to read Darwin... Tedious does not even begin to describe it... Far too many words to get to the point. With that said it was ground breaking in it's time. And the information contained therein is wonderful in the minutae (sp?) of the observations. I do not have that dedication for a meal, much less for the intricacies of a living organism!
I got another real example like the old ladies thinking tears of God were falling on them. Somewhere south America, there was a statue that appeared to being "crying" so the locals started drinking the water. They claimed it would cure illness. Turned out the statue was by a sewer system, and the supposed "tears" was actually sewage water dripping onto the statue.
I had a HS teacher who once admonished the class with this: "it's fine to have any belief you want, even one that makes no sense to anyone else...but if you don't know WHY you hold that belief, you're just being a sheep and likely only holding that belief because someone told you it's one you should have..." I found that bit of advice to be a touchstone through most of my life. if you don't know WHY you're believing something, then you've probably bought someone else's belief, and that's the worst possible reason to have for ANY belief.... That attitude is part of what drove me gave me the last shove towards Science....and then i discovered the wonder and mystery that the REAL world holds, and possibiities Nature offers us, if we accept it for what it is, and not how we'd want it to be. Thank you Mrs B! There are those of us out here Aron, who hold the same outlook you discuss here. That Reality is what it is, and Science is teh best, most reliable tool we've ever come up with to come to understand it....Keep up the good work Aron! I'd vote for you, but you're not in my state.....
Tim Hyatt Sounds like a great teacher. I still hate that a lot of schools have a policy formally or informally (not entirely sure) that when kids finally get to the age where they learn evolutionary theory that the teacher will have to make a disclosure that they aren't trying to tell anyone God doesn't exist because of evolutionary theory and that there are other ideas about creation ect.
Had a teacher like that in high school as well, although his line that I will always remember for the rest of my life is that while you can have whatever opinion you want, nobody gives a crap or ever will. The only thing they do care about is your argument; why is your opinion justified factually and logically?
Science may be the best approach to understand the observable physical universe, but scientism, the idea that the observable physical universe is the only thing there is, is rather silly. Science is designed to be value free, humans need values in order to choose their actions, hence just a scientific view is insufficient for a human being. Science by it's self imposed limitations can't be a tool for moral guidance, it however can be very useful in complementing a worldview that does provide moral guidance.
@@BlacksmithTWD "Science is designed to be value free" This is false. Science is literally impossible unless you accept quite a large amount of values. The value of the logical absolutes, the value that the laws of the universe should be consistent across time, the value that hard solipsism is wrong, the value that truth is better than the absence of truth, the value of epistemology and empiricism and skepticism, and I can go on for weeks. "humans need values in order to choose their actions" And how do we get those values? Primarily, it's by coming up with ideas that sound good and then seeing how beneficial they actually are in practice, adjusting our values as some get proven to be ineffective and new ones appear to show promise. In other words, we get our values by applying the scientific method to them.
I Remember three lads arguing for atheism close to ten years ago, One got married and settled down other became a nuclear scientist and the third a politician. back then i was just a troubled teen in a religious land and here i am now, still sitting infront a plastic box listening to em... There's a long road ahead before the tyranny of religion is truly forsaken. you have my allegiance sir. - sincerely, a soviet-born israeli.
I donated to the John McCain campaign back in 2000. Sent in $20 USD, never got anything back like a tax receipt. It was a money order and it was redeemed.
+AronRa are you still doing this in association with Justice Dems? (P.S.-thanks for letting me know a few weeks back about that availability of your book. Got it via Kindle and I hope you make the same profit as you would from a printed book!)
AronRa. Yes. Keep the good work. Texas really need someone like you to fix the christians and the muslims problems. Hope you'll win. One thing I would like to say is, why aren't you conversate or argue against a muslim religious believer, that's what I really love to see before you get the new post.
Great point about the solipsist approach. I've noticed that this approach is always a philosophical dead end. Once you question reality, all bets are off and there's no point to argue or discuss anything. The introduction of solipsism is the admission that someone has nothing at all to base their position on.
I had a friend who told me one that she couldn’t not believe and got very emotional. Basically she fits the mold Aron describes. The need to believe regardless of facts. I feel terrible for her.
Very minor point; but the reason Bela Lugosi walked around with a cape in front of his face in _Plan 9_ is because it wasn't Bela. He died very shortly after filming started - in fact, it wasn't even that film when they started, it was just film of him wandering around looking like Bela Lugosi - and the director's wife's chiropractor who looked nothing like Bela Lugosi filled in the rest of the film. He was covering his face to hide that.
When Charles Darwin introduced the theory of evolution through natural selection 158 years ago, the scientists of the day argued over it fiercely, but the massing evidence from paleontology, genetics, zoology, molecular biology and other fields gradually established evolution's truth beyond reasonable doubt. Today that battle has been won everywhere-except in the public imagination.
I have a friend who began a theology course recently. I didn't know he was going to do it, so we argued a lit bit about why he started the course. We are both pastor's sons, but we both had gone away from the church. He knew i am an atheist so when i asked what were the reasons why he came back, he just said that it wouldn't matter for me because i don't take faith as a good reason. And that made me think that he himself knows that faith is not a good reason, so much that he knows that is worthless as an argument to present. But anyway i guess he found some "answer" to some prayer and just decided to let his reason slip away. For you to know that faith is worthless but still believe is just being dishonest with yourself.
I had a longtime friend fall for this "flat earth" nonsense (for that is what it truly is). I don't want to name him because I still consider him a friend, however, he seems to think I should be open to a "fun debate" (his words), like the ones we had 15 years ago back when I was in my late 20s and early 30s and that I have lost my imagination. He provides no evidence for this debate and I recently found out that he was basing this belief on his "gut feeling" that something was wrong. He prefers to believe conspiracy theories and make up stuff v. actually debate anything I show him. And I do mean anything. The last thing I said to him was that he would make a great solipsist. I really can't argue his belief with him if there is no basis for it.
I had long suspected that you were a Usenet user at one point. Your level thoroughness, depth and breadth, into the topics you discuss reminded me of usenet discussions. We don’t have anything like Usenet today in widespread use. Usenet was always a little bit cumbersome to use. When Google groups came along and opened Usenet up to a crapflood of spam, that pretty much destroyed it. The public marketplace of ideas now exists on various social networking sites such as Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, UA-cam, etc. It is moderated by “community guidelines“ that are about as clear as mud and can be interpreted any which way that suits the moderation team. It is now the case that when a large enough group finds a certain topic or viewpoint unacceptable, they find the easiest way to handle that is to ignore it and then the easiest way to ignore it is to prevent the topic from being discussed at all, as if it didn’t exist. This is the current state of open public discourse. It is anything but open at anything but public. Open public discourse does not exist today. I know this because I have been banned from virtually all social media platforms and many other services, such as online schools and dating websites. These are permanent lifetime bans. He stated that the purpose of schools was to educate children and was not indoctrination. Is this true? the original purpose of schools was to train children for factory work. Part of the training included strict adherence to authority, rules, and bells. The Pledge of Allegiance, originally written by Francis Bellamy, a socialist, was part of that indoctrination and even included the Bellamy salute which later became adopted by the Nazis. Schools have changed some but many of the ugly core traits remain. Learning what to think and not how to think has definitely been adapted throughout the years. Schools are indoctrination centers. I distinctly remember in the 80s learning the food pyramid, as designed by the US government to force nutrition policy to promote certain sectors of agriculture for economic reasons. Do eggs and milk belong in the dairy category? Are “dairy eggs” an essential food group? That might seem like a long time ago that that was taught but in perspective of the history of schools in the United States from 1840s until the 1980s, the 1980s until now is a blink of an eye. There is no good reason why schools do not teach abstract and symbolic logic. This is the best type of thinking for young developing minds. But that was never the goal of schools. Schools were set up in America to follow depression model and that model is designed to produce obedient workers. Logic is not taught until college, at an age when the brain is less malleable. That children learn what to think and not how to think is probably why people cannot critically examine things as well as they should be able to and as well as they must be able to to have effective open public discourse. This is the best possible explanation for why schools do not teach logic, objectivism, and critical thinking. Schools are largely indoctrination centers. The indoctrination in schools changes over time, but indoctrination and authoritarianism remains a core principle of schools. (Edited to try to clear up some of the dictation errors)
"If all of this were only going on in my own mind, I would look a lot better and younger than I do!" -- Aron Ra Aron, that is one of the BEST counterarguments to the brain-in-a-vat or solipsist routines I've heard yet! It was also worth a damned good laugh! Look forward to seeing you soon on the North Coast!
Well he should stop eating oily food, sugary desserts and drinks, alcohol, maybe smoking, little physical activity and so forth and if he groomed, shaved and had this desire in mind, sure, he'd be better and perhaps younger looking, but no, he's a nerd and probably enjoys playing this role,
@Jesse Schoedel like I said, some self maintenance and he could look maybe 5 year younger, and with the correct diet - So with the correct approach, he can look younger and healthier, but he is lazy and wants to blame the cosmos for his comfortable nerdy lifestyle
I've been going through a miserable time in my life due to health for (too many) years and the fact that I see Aron, AE, and RR makes feel so positive, comforted and happy all of them exist (and you who are like them). I simply am unable to ever return to an unthinking life. (Thank you) -Santa Cruz, CA
Aron... I take issue with you comparing a doctorate of theology with a doctorate in mother goose (i.e. Children's literally). A doctorate in children's literature is far more applicable to the real world and at least they admit that they are trafficking fiction.
It was mainly because of your video series along with thunder foots is why I question what I was tought and found myself no longer convinced of biblical dogma.
Thunderf00t was so helpful for me in learning to think rationally, that science and inquiry doesn't take a PhD in science or engineering or philosophy, it often just takes a bit of unit conversions, some math, and a good Google search. Thunderf00t brought me to mathematical science, Aron Ra finished off the vestiges of religion. The fear of hell and the source of Deus ex machina to solve my problems we're the last to go. I gotta make the most of this life, not spend all of this life working for the ultimate reward: a lie.
We need more like you Aron, Texas will be lucky to have you (especially Texas's school children), now we just need somebody with some sense here in North Carolina, this state is in bad need of sense and rationality too....
I wish when debating creationist "philosophers" who try the "brain in the vat" argument, someone would say "Ah- my position is that either evolution exists OR we are brains in vats- in both cases NO GOD."
If I lived in Texas, you would most definitely have my vote. There are plenty of rational, reasonable people out there. It just seems as if there are just as many brainwashed willfully ignorants.
"But that's- I'm sorry, but that's completely ridiculous! I mean, you could claim that *anything's* real if the only basis for believing in it is that nobody's *proved* it doesn't exist!" -Hermione Granger
@@Chudea He dropped out of the race for candidate of the Democratic Party and endorsed Kendall Scudder who lost the 2018 election of Texas Senate District 2 to a religious freak. www.patheos.com/blogs/reasonadvocates/2017/11/18/ending-state-senate-run/
One of my friends is also from Texas, and once I began talking to her about her faith (she is a creationist) and told me when we began getting into it, she said that she doesn't want to know the truth and she wants to stay Creationist
We so need more people like this. There are tens of thousands of anti-science religious activists out there working non-stop. It's depressing how few oppose them. The pro-science side really has very little infrastructure or funding earmarked for promotion and countering creationism compared to the other side.
Counterpoint to "If you can't show it, you don't know it". I know that I am sentient, but can never show it. Personal internal experience is a category that is knowable but not showable.
You are a huge inspiration to me. Thank you so much for your presentations. Your level of intellect and knowledge is completely amazing and I am very happy people like you exist. Hope you're well, take care.
Normally when someone says "I've heard it a thousand times" you know they're exaggerating, it's sad that Aron more than likely isn't exaggerating, if anything he's probably being far more humble with that number 😲
When people give me the "I'd rather believe..." excuse, I immediately say "I'd rather believe no person on this planet would ever harm anyone else intentionally, but it doesnt matter what I'd rather believe, only what the evidence shows".
Philosophy is mandatory in high school in my corner of Western Europe. One year of introductory philosophy that is required for all high school students and three full years for humanities/law students. This includes covering fallacies, identifying them along the basic structure of a syllogism and how it pertains to form and validity. If you do pursue humanities, as I did, in senior high you'll cover actual philosophy books from start to finish, ranging from Russell, to Plato and Kant. And all this from a purely non-religious pov, even in Catholic school where I studied Russell without at all being told his views were wrong.
Haha, Aron's story about the church and the chairs is amazing. I don't know what that guy was going to say, but David Hume was a materialist atheist who believed morality was subjective and based on human feelings. Those were radical fucking ideas in the 18th century, he was very controversial. One of my favorite philosophers. The irony of a wannabe Christian Fundamentalist trying to use Hume's philosophy, who almost certainly would have disagreed with him about the chairs anyway, is amazing. But it illustrates the point perfectly! The reality is, some people are just gonna believe what they want to believe, and they expend basically zero effort attempting to justify or defend it. So this guy reaches back for something, *anything*, even though it obviously doesn't make sense, as a kind of intellectual equivalent to an autoimmune response. "I'll just quote David Hume at him, that will make the scary noise go away."
An example of beneficial mutation? Ideonella sakainesis is a bacteria with a new trick. The reason we know it's new is because it couldn't have possibly performed this trick without PET plastics. PET plastics weren't patented until 1941. Now we have a bacteria that in less than 75 years has mutated to be able to use this substance as food. The number of generations and the lack of complexity have helped it evolve this quickly.
arewhyinoh Interesting. Beneficial mutations are rare from what I know (Granted I haven't studied it as well as I should.) but I'd imagine there is plenty of examples of it.
Well, that'll be useful for getting rid of all the old cheap polyester clothing that hardly lasts yet keeps being manufactured. Oh, and for anyone who thinks I misread the original post, polyester fabric is just PET plastic made into fibres.
Agent 1110 yesssss but aren’t humans the most important species? I was under the impression this whole planet was here just for us to pillage and burn til it dries up like a raisin? (/sarcasm) . Ive met a lot of non-theist, science-minded folks that have this notion that humans are the priority species on Earth. I think you’re right about the definition of “beneficial” depending on whom it benefits!
"He will cover you with his pinions, and under his wings you will find refuge; his faithfulness is a shield and buckler." Psalm 91:4 If we're made in the image of God, why don't we have wings? (I know it's not literal, but most Creationists are biblical literalists.)
32:20 Well here's one more: I was told my entire life that the bible was the "perfect inspired word of God, without error" but I knew that there were thousands of churches (dozens even in my home town!) that all preached different versions. I thought if I wanted the truth, I must read the bible for myself! So I did, _and every single page_ I found a new error. Genesis 1-2 were some of the worst offenders, where even an elementary understanding ousts how ridiculous they are. "Okay so we've got plants....without a sun to photosynthesize energy with..." I read about God's exploits and found that they were *freaking horrifying.* Rape, murder, and pillaging that would make the mongols blush, and that wouldn't have bothered me as much if not for the fact it was, again, a *contradiction* with what they had told me. I had been lied to! This only encouraged me to dig deeper and deeper into the rabbit hole until I finally reached Revelations and couldn't decide whether to laugh or cry at the psychotic absurdity. I had even found a picture bible by that point, graphically detailing Jesus collecting bodies into a giant wine press and stomping on them until the blood flowed like an ocean. No atheist argument could have possibly shit all over my religion more than *reading the source material.*
MegaChick: When I questioned the creation of plants before the sun sequence I got, "But plants can live for a twenty-four hour period without the sun." I should have also pointed out that the earth would be too cold for plants before the creation of the sun. When all else fails, they'll say something like "God can do it however he wants." That, of course, is nothing but an all purpose explanation for anything they can't explain otherwise.
My all time favourite. In India or Pakistan. The weeping statue of Mother Mary. People were drinking the ‘holy weepings’. Turned out to be a broken sewer pipe from the adjacent toilet. Lol. That is getting what’s coming to you.
Still think the last 2 minutes contain some of the funniest lines on youtube. "there are either chairs in this room or there are no chairs in this room, but there is no 3rd option where the chairs are figurative, we are imaginary and this building is a metaphor...
P. S. I didn't know that was what I was doing until years after I stopped doing it. I thought I was protecting my soul from evil thoughts and suggestions from "the devil".
Good to hear Aron Ra's challenge around 33:00 which was taken up by Kent Hovind and we got to see Hovind commit EVERY one of those fallacies. This is clearly a prophecy ;)
I was put into a christian school for 5th and 6th grade that was antiscience and told me that there where no transitional fossils. I wish I knew otherwise at the time. Also religious schools should really not be a thing, at least not for young children.
Why do debaters assume that solipsism is inherently religious and anti-atheist? Why are anti-evolution nut jobs linked to solipsism? To me, solipsism is a pragmatic agnosticism of the shared idea of reality. It’s got nothing to do with debunking science or theism. It’s to do with empirical experience and the unknowable logic of the nature of reality outside of a finite conscious experience.
It would really seem to me that the MOMENT a Creationist brings up the idea that Reality is "All in your mind", they've kinda given up their own argument for God.
"they use solipsism like an octopus uses ink" What a great analogy. I instantly saw this as a cartoon.
D Pell: Thanks for the idea. I draw satiric cartoons. The left tentacle doesn 't know what the right tentacle is doing.
I realize that attempting to teach pigs to sing is a waste of time and annoys the pigs.... but have noticed that a select few can at least dance to the tune.
I am currently entertaining some Jehovah Witnesses. I have gotten a few excommunicated in the past. If I can enlighten but one person, I have done more than the Bible has in thousands of years.
I usually inform them to contact www.familiesagainstcultteachings.org to escape their cult.
Satanic Klingon Disney villain! Haha! Perfect description. Great talk.
*TheVoxOfReason* best line ever!
When I was telling one of my friends to check out Aron's videos I said that he may look like a Klingon, but he doesn't believe in Sto-vo-kor.
Christopher Meadors 😂👍🏻
We all believe in Sto-vo-kor, it's just that AronRa doesn't want to admit it so he can live dishonourably.
Amaranth... Hahaha!... That's funny.
"If you can't show it you don't know it."
-AronRa
I dig every version of this saying.
That's like saying physics > metaphysics.
This is something he often asserts but which is foolish and false on any level.
@@horustrismegistus1017 It's nothing at all like saying that.
Show me any non-Christian worldview is true.
How about historical events?
Aaron pushes strawman after strawman.
If nothing in reality can change your belief, then your belief is based on nothing in reality.
just acknowledge that you are ignorant of others ignorance! believe it or not, there are people who believe in creation, flat earth etc. I cant imagine believing in superstition/supernatural, but then I wouldn't ............ because I not a theist!. I used to wonder how some of my family could believe, I did not take them seriously, but they do.
No. I simply said that I was a little unaware of how many people still believe in certain things while I do not, my ignorance comes from my lack of awareness (until recently) that people still actually believe in flat earth, magic, ghosts/jinn, angels and devils, demons etc today! But whilst I disagree with them, I cannot assume they see things the way I do or ought to see things how I do, I simply don't believe in magic but I can only imagine what those who do believe in magic think - but I will never truly know. One example is when I heard a family member talk to his son, telling him the story of adam and eve as fact (whilst he told him that evolution is a myth), my reaction was "wow do people still literally believe these myths?" and that is an example of MY ignorance. We are all ignorant in one way shape or form, the difference here is awareness or unawareness of ones own ignorance and whether that ignorance is voluntary or not. Good Day Sir! :)
People do sometimes change their beliefs. I'm amongst former believers.
I believe that the Earth doesn't need us, we could wipe ourselves out and the earth will just keep going without flinching.
@@asmodeushare2833 The earth is NOT alive in and of itself. It sustains life, including us!
21:10 Summary of this quote:
"In all of human history, the supernatural has never turned out to be the right answer to anything: Natural explanations of phenomena have replaced supernatural ones thousands upon thousands of times, while supernatural explanations have replaced natural ones exactly never." -- Greta Christina
Aron is one of the most passionate people I've ever come across AND He SPEAKS THE TRUTH. He can get loud, he'll throw around as much fucks as the next guy, he can mock religious ideals and he can get downright vocally nasty BUT fuck me he's still such a cool dude and surprisingly lovable (versus others with some of those harsh seeming traits) and I have so much respect for this man.
He's not fake. He doesn't apologize for anything that he shouldn't have to. He's not an asshole as many people want to believe that he is.
It's one man that I would hug and whisper thank you in his ear just to be fucking awkward and make sure he knows he should never change
I love you Aron
Finally a man with the intelligence, honor, and integrity which is sorely needed in our representatives, but existing in so few today.
We needed AronRa involved like this 20 years ago!
20 years ago the access to good information wasn't there, just sitting there on the interwebz. unfortunately it will be easier for religion to move onto other gaps in science than to stick with these same debunked issues and face humiliation and skepticism
he does a great job and we do need more like him because i still see lots of idiots trying to tout their belief over every non-believer's existence by just saying "You are silly. You don't know and will be sorely mistaken when..." yada yada *insert bunch of bullshit I'm better than you explanations here*
i think the ones that generally tend to debate skeptics are the ones that tend to know something is off on their end and want to find what that is... the ones that just flat out ignore any evidence are the annoying ones that try to demean your life by comparison. (imo)
The best time to plant a tree is 20yrs ago. The next best time is today.
@@Baigle1 i
Trump wants the bible taught in Public school! We DO need a wall, but not a damned bible project!
John Wright one could go as far as saying they are the gods of atheism, and that Hitchens died for our freedom of thought. I know it’s not true, but it’s still a better story than what’s in the Bible
As an Atheist my entire life, it is so refreshing to hear these lectures. I live in Kuwait; so no one understands by Atheism; but I have always expressed my reality/evidence based views on Atheism and never back down on a discusssion expressing my reasoning.
AronRa - you should incorporate the phrase: *"A Seemingly Satanic Klingon Disney Villain"* into your election campaign. That type of self deprecating humor would truly be an "atypical" campaign.
Can't possibly be any worse than a 'pussy grabber'!
You might want to look into Disney sex kitten. Mind control programming
The thing is, in England, that would probably work. Look at Lord Buckethead, Elmo, and Mr FishFinger.
@@lisahenry20 lol thanks for mentioning those I had no idea
Very funnily he now is a card carrying member of the Satanic Temple so he IS a Satanist now :D
"Discovery Institute" is an anagram of "Nutty Idiots Service".
Jus' sayin'.
LOL!
SlideRulePirate incredible
When people say things like this, I always have to check, because they've usually got it wrong somewhere.
You, however, are dead on. Kudos. :)
I agree about the checking thing as I like to come up with what I think is a "good one", release it into the wild on popular media then wait to see if any of my work gains notoriety. If it's incorrect this can't happen.
Pointless maybe but helps keep me sane, I find. :)
SlideRulePirate Well done sir nice one.
15:47 "Knowledge is demonstrable, measurable, with testable accuracy. If you can't show it, you don't know it." -- AronRa
That is not what knowledge is, at all, you know that you exist, and you apprehend that immediately, you do not demostrate, measure and test the veracity of the existence of either yourself or any other, do you? Me thinks your epistemology may be lacking...
@@craigcrawford6595 yet you experience yourself and others with senses, don't you? The same way others experience you. You can test your existence through smell, sounds, touch, taste and sight. What else do you need to place yourself in the reality?
@@matearosie I think you need to read Renee Descartes....
@@craigcrawford6595 you're probably referring to Syllogism right? Ok I get that, you're right. But what about medical examination through which you can prove you're very much a real and living organism? Is it scientific and not based on senses?
@@matearosie We do not need our senses to tell us or prove that we exist, what do you tell a person who is blind, can't smell or taste, has no sense of touch? That they don't exist?
Professional apologist is really just a euphemism for professional liar.
More like professional bullshit artist, let's not dignify them with simple "lying."
What does the word " solipsist" mean?
@@judymcclenny9549 From my understanding it's that only the self is true. I think therefore I am. My perception of the world is the only thing that is real. I can only know my own mind, and see things through my own lenses. Everyone else is viewed through my self and vice versa.
@@judymcclenny9549 solipsism: the view or theory that the self is all that can be known to exist.
@@raysalmon6566 Yes, some of the places and people described in the bible have been shown by archaeology and history to have existed - or still exist today under different names, in some cases. Does that mean that all of the supernatural stuff in the bible is also true? Not really, no. If it did, then we would be equally justified to say that the Avengers or Spiderman (Marvel cinematic universe characters) are real, because both the comics and the movies are set in New York, a real city in a real place.
But you can't say that everything written down in a work of fiction must be true just because some parts of it coincidentally do exist in the real world. That's clearly not how any of this works. In this context, the only differences between the Bible and the Marvel comics are that the Bible has been around for approximately 2000 more years, and that we don't know who the real author(s) of the Bible were.
My boss is a creationist and likes to bait me into debating him. After a year of these debates he said to me (recently) when I walked into his office one day,"I understand why you think the way you do. It just clicked...I really get it, it's making a lot of sense now". That is the best feeling I've ever had.
I've learned a lot about how to debate theists from you Aron, thank you.
i,ve been teaching my grand son for a few mos.he,s starting to under stand.his mom is related to billy grahm,that had got in our way ,for many years.his father has changed his mind of late too.i tell them,use utube and see men like this good man,and others.i payed a high price,but i was scapgoated from child hood,but not any more.
The Ultimate Reductionist
Don't ever take an IQ test. It will crush your self-confidence.
Ive never lost a debate after killing bill nyes video no one will even debate me prehistoric fish rules out evolution in part not even aaron can challenge that
@@galactus170X Could boost it
Mar Bachmeier
I don't want to be mean but how can you debate when you can't even form a coherent sentence?????
Gave a presentation to my super catholic teacher about the evolution of horses. It was a grade on the physically presentation and not the subject. She squirmed so much it was beautiful!
Catholicism has no quarrel with evolution. They’re not creationists actually.
@@ginzo666I feel like there's a No-True-Scotsman in there somewhere.
@@impartialthrone2097 Tell it to Gregor Mendel, I guess.
@@ginzo666 I'm not sure what you mean by that since you vague-posted, and to be fair, I kinda did as well, so what I meant was that it sounds like a No True Scotsman Fallacy to say no Catholics are creationists. Because there are undoubtedly Catholics who are, and your claim that there are none would cut those people out, i.e. "oh they're Catholic *and* creationist? Then they aren't really Catholic". At least, that was the trip my brain took when reading your comment.
@@impartialthrone2097 If you don't know who Mendel is, then I can't help you. He's as important to understanding how evolution works as Darwin is.
This guy is really brave going into the lion's den of the Bible Belt. When I drove out from MA to KS a few years ago, I found it rather amusing that the billboards along the interstate alternated between those for evangelical churches and - mega porn stores!
I would absolutely love to be in a position where I lacked any moral fiber. Being a preacher/pastor/priest is such a lucrative job... I deliver pizza for a living, and honestly, I'd switch in a heartbeat if I knew that I wouldn't feel guilty about accruing my wealth by lying to and extorting the poor every week.
Aron Ra, You may sometimes be alone in the room. But, you're never alone in our thoughts and support. As us northerners say, "You'll never walk alone". All the best, mate!
Skeptic Psychologist Did you mean "thoughts and prayers"? 😂j/k
DangerousUrNot, given that prayers are useless as forms of intervention, I felt 'support' was a much more efficacious and constructive sentiment
#YNWA
When you say "northerners" roughly where in the world do you mean?
Metaphorically true, literally false. Why subscribe to this idea, and reject the idea of religious people making similar metaphorical intended statements, and call them liars by insisting their words should be interpret literally, even contrary to the statement of the speaker?
As I stated before, even atheists tend to defend their beliefs religiously, hence their claim they are different from 'other' believers is based on a false dichotomy, the main difference is that where other believers choose to describe their belief with a single word like 'god', atheists just refuse to use the word 'god' for something they happen to believe. Science may be of great value, but it is still just a model of reality, not reality itself. Each claim from any model of reality ought to be verified according to the definitions of that model, using definitions from one model to attempt to disqualify conclusions from another model is by definition making a false dichotomy fallacy.
A mathematical example to illustrate my statement:
The statement 4 + 4 = 10 can be both mathematically correct and mathematically incorrect, it depends on the mathematical numeral system that was applied by the one making the statement. If the numeral system happens to be the octal numeral system, then it's correct, if it was the decimal numeral system, then it's incorrect. Ignoring the possibility that a statement was made within another system than the one you assumed to be used when the statement was made and as a result judging the person making the statement to be incorrect, or even worse, dishonest, says more about the limited intellectual capabilities of the accuser than it says something relevant about the accused.
Aron seems to assume a decimal system even when the text he is trying to debunk specifically states an octal numeral system applies. I greatly appreciate his research in ancient texts, but his interpretations/conclusions often tend to be blinded by his atheistic ideology. I'm all in favor of defending the scientific model, but doing so by misrepresenting other models of reality strikes me as rather disingenuous.
You represent Texas well sir. Keep up the good work.
Bradley Shepherd I agree, I can't vote for him (sadly) I live in Sweden, but he is an excellent texas specimen :)
+Giovanny Silva
indeed a fine specimen hoppefully he can inject some sanity into at least one chunk of the usa and coutner ther manchild president a bit.
we got ouer own dam fools for politcians here to try and weed out next year after all
No, because most Texans aren't like this. But they could be. They could be.
Texas does have low standards.
Wilbur Jenkins Excuse me, but I am a Texan and I can say for sure we have high standards. Nah just kidding just seeing Aron's board of education video makes me weep for my state.
I had a case like that. I had someone challenge me to a debate using Google Hangouts, and the topic I wanted to debate was the evidence for creationism. He said he was fine with that, but then I told him that arguments AGAINST evolution, or anything else are not even evidence, never mind proof of creationism. So then he tried to change to, "You defend evolution, and I'll defend creation". I refused telling him that I did not care if evolution is true or not, so I had no need to defend it. After several back and forths, he agreed to debate on the evidence for creationism, but he insisted that it be on HIS channel, and would not send me a invitation until 5 minutes before the debate - allowing him to invite (as he did) lots of creationists and me to invite basically no one. Right out of the gate, his first argument was about the "impossibility" of abiogenesis and evolution. The debate ended quickly because I insisted that he follow the agreed rules - that evidence AGAINST something else is not evidence for his position. The hangout continued as he and his creationist audience congratulated themselves on "beating" the atheist.
+ajs1031
Exactly. Agree to terms, violate them immediately, and then declare victory. In a sense, I understand - they have nothing else and are emotionally unable to abandon their belief.
Also strutting around like brain damaged peacocks thinking they've masterfully "won" an argument is more important to them than any kind of truth.
Pat Doyle I wish someone would invite me to a hangout, for almost any reason. :(
As a philosophy major, it's frustrating how creationists hijack philosophy like this. I don't understand how anyone with the critical thinking skills to actually pursue philosophy could also believe in God
Its been 3 years but, if you see this has that changed? Most likely increased right? Ive heard about presup but i have no knowledge in philosophy and to me it sounds like false dichotomies and circular reasoning but then again im out of my league and mostly likely wrong. Have a good day :)
Do yourself and us a favor and find a new major. 😊
About the "Darwin and the eye" thing, let me provide some inside knowledge.
The believers who know about Darwin and the eye DON'T KNOW what's written afterwards, because they've never read it in context; they've never read Darwin. They ALWAYS saw it out of context, inside some apologetic booklet or book; and who knows if even the people making the booklet have read Darwin or merely picked that bit, out of context, from another apologetic source. I have no idea if even the professional debaters themselves have read the context.
You could ask them "Oh, that's interesting. What else does Darwin say?" "Uhhh..." "Oh, so you've never actually read the book?"
If I would have actually bothered to read Darwin as a believer, who knows, I might have deconverted sooner.
"They've never read Darwin." Most believers haven't even read the whole bible. So they they're certainly not going tackle "Origin of the Species" - especially if they've been raised to be believed that it's an "evil anti-God" book full of "unproven theories" that only atheists would believe.
That's why it's so important to call people out when they use these deceitful tactics. I *still* see that deceitful quote mine used today. It will only ever stop being used if it is regularly and consistently debunked every time some idiot tries to use it.
Ed Gepixel The same with most of the apologetics quote mining. I've seen in a lot of comment sections to these kind of videos where creationists produce some quote by, apparently, an eminent scientist casting doubt on evolution. Doing a Google search for the words in the quote always throw up apologetics sites first, usually the quote is from the 1890s, or an apologist "scientist", or out of context. My favourite was from a 1930s physicist called Millikan, where every single apologist site used the same quote and misspelled his name in exactly the same way (with one 'l'). A most blatant example of copy paste ever (oh, BTW, the original quote was from a speech recorded in a magazine only available through vintage collector sites, I doubt anyone read it.)
Nope... I tried to read Darwin... Tedious does not even begin to describe it... Far too many words to get to the point. With that said it was ground breaking in it's time. And the information contained therein is wonderful in the minutae (sp?) of the observations. I do not have that dedication for a meal, much less for the intricacies of a living organism!
I got another real example like the old ladies thinking tears of God were falling on them. Somewhere south America, there was a statue that appeared to being "crying" so the locals started drinking the water. They claimed it would cure illness. Turned out the statue was by a sewer system, and the supposed "tears" was actually sewage water dripping onto the statue.
Waters of Life?
To quote George Carlin. "The power of BULLSHIT"
I had a HS teacher who once admonished the class with this: "it's fine to have any belief you want, even one that makes no sense to anyone else...but if you don't know WHY you hold that belief, you're just being a sheep and likely only holding that belief because someone told you it's one you should have..." I found that bit of advice to be a touchstone through most of my life. if you don't know WHY you're believing something, then you've probably bought someone else's belief, and that's the worst possible reason to have for ANY belief....
That attitude is part of what drove me gave me the last shove towards Science....and then i discovered the wonder and mystery that the REAL world holds, and possibiities Nature offers us, if we accept it for what it is, and not how we'd want it to be. Thank you Mrs B!
There are those of us out here Aron, who hold the same outlook you discuss here. That Reality is what it is, and Science is teh best, most reliable tool we've ever come up with to come to understand it....Keep up the good work Aron! I'd vote for you, but you're not in my state.....
Tim Hyatt Sounds like a great teacher. I still hate that a lot of schools have a policy formally or informally (not entirely sure) that when kids finally get to the age where they learn evolutionary theory that the teacher will have to make a disclosure that they aren't trying to tell anyone God doesn't exist because of evolutionary theory and that there are other ideas about creation ect.
I honestly thought you were going to end that story with: And that HS Teacher’s name was...ARON RA!!!
Had a teacher like that in high school as well, although his line that I will always remember for the rest of my life is that while you can have whatever opinion you want, nobody gives a crap or ever will. The only thing they do care about is your argument; why is your opinion justified factually and logically?
Science may be the best approach to understand the observable physical universe, but scientism, the idea that the observable physical universe is the only thing there is, is rather silly. Science is designed to be value free, humans need values in order to choose their actions, hence just a scientific view is insufficient for a human being. Science by it's self imposed limitations can't be a tool for moral guidance, it however can be very useful in complementing a worldview that does provide moral guidance.
@@BlacksmithTWD
"Science is designed to be value free"
This is false. Science is literally impossible unless you accept quite a large amount of values. The value of the logical absolutes, the value that the laws of the universe should be consistent across time, the value that hard solipsism is wrong, the value that truth is better than the absence of truth, the value of epistemology and empiricism and skepticism, and I can go on for weeks.
"humans need values in order to choose their actions"
And how do we get those values? Primarily, it's by coming up with ideas that sound good and then seeing how beneficial they actually are in practice, adjusting our values as some get proven to be ineffective and new ones appear to show promise. In other words, we get our values by applying the scientific method to them.
I Remember three lads arguing for atheism close to ten years ago, One got married and settled down other became a nuclear scientist and the third a politician.
back then i was just a troubled teen in a religious land and here i am now, still sitting infront a plastic box listening to em...
There's a long road ahead before the tyranny of religion is truly forsaken.
you have my allegiance sir. - sincerely, a soviet-born israeli.
@Noah Balboul Most terrorist countries are enemies of Israel (Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iran)
Congratulations Aron! Let us hope that Texas will finally teach SCIENCE! without the interference of pseudoscience.
It gives me hope for the USA when people like AronRa are running for office, eh.
I'm considering a political donation to him. You in?
I donated to the John McCain campaign back in 2000. Sent in $20 USD, never got anything back like a tax receipt. It was a money order and it was redeemed.
There is no limit to the amount that an individual can donate to my campaign --as long as it is a US citizen.
+AronRa are you still doing this in association with Justice Dems? (P.S.-thanks for letting me know a few weeks back about that availability of your book. Got it via Kindle and I hope you make the same profit as you would from a printed book!)
AronRa.
Yes. Keep the good work. Texas really need someone like you to fix the christians and the muslims problems.
Hope you'll win.
One thing I would like to say is, why aren't you conversate or argue against a muslim religious believer, that's what I really love to see before you get the new post.
He is one of the most brilliant and eloquent speakers on the reason for atheism I've ever heard.
Apologists are liars. It’s a requirement for the job.
Great point about the solipsist approach. I've noticed that this approach is always a philosophical dead end. Once you question reality, all bets are off and there's no point to argue or discuss anything.
The introduction of solipsism is the admission that someone has nothing at all to base their position on.
I had a friend who told me one that she couldn’t not believe and got very emotional. Basically she fits the mold Aron describes. The need to believe regardless of facts. I feel terrible for her.
Very minor point; but the reason Bela Lugosi walked around with a cape in front of his face in _Plan 9_ is because it wasn't Bela. He died very shortly after filming started - in fact, it wasn't even that film when they started, it was just film of him wandering around looking like Bela Lugosi - and the director's wife's chiropractor who looked nothing like Bela Lugosi filled in the rest of the film. He was covering his face to hide that.
When Charles Darwin introduced the theory of evolution through natural selection 158 years ago, the scientists of the day argued over it fiercely, but the massing evidence from paleontology, genetics, zoology, molecular biology and other fields gradually established evolution's truth beyond reasonable doubt. Today that battle has been won everywhere-except in the public imagination.
I have a friend who began a theology course recently. I didn't know he was going to do it, so we argued a lit bit about why he started the course. We are both pastor's sons, but we both had gone away from the church. He knew i am an atheist so when i asked what were the reasons why he came back, he just said that it wouldn't matter for me because i don't take faith as a good reason. And that made me think that he himself knows that faith is not a good reason, so much that he knows that is worthless as an argument to present. But anyway i guess he found some "answer" to some prayer and just decided to let his reason slip away. For you to know that faith is worthless but still believe is just being dishonest with yourself.
@@Damaged262 I'm sorry for your loss, I'd probably go mad. I can just barely imagine that kind of anguish, I hope you find joy again.
@@KuLaydMahn Thank you for the kind words. It's appreciated.
I had a longtime friend fall for this "flat earth" nonsense (for that is what it truly is). I don't want to name him because I still consider him a friend, however, he seems to think I should be open to a "fun debate" (his words), like the ones we had 15 years ago back when I was in my late 20s and early 30s and that I have lost my imagination. He provides no evidence for this debate and I recently found out that he was basing this belief on his "gut feeling" that something was wrong. He prefers to believe conspiracy theories and make up stuff v. actually debate anything I show him. And I do mean anything.
The last thing I said to him was that he would make a great solipsist. I really can't argue his belief with him if there is no basis for it.
Congratulations on the victory, Aron. As Shakespeare said; "the truth will out!"
Except on the internet.
"VICTORY"? Umm, it was NOT a DEBATE. It was a PRESENTATION.
The Bipolar Bear Pretty sure the OP is referring to Aron running for state senate.
I was thinking they meant the school board hearing wherein they agreed evolution should be taught...
I had long suspected that you were a Usenet user at one point.
Your level thoroughness, depth and breadth, into the topics you discuss reminded me of usenet discussions.
We don’t have anything like Usenet today in widespread use. Usenet was always a little bit cumbersome to use. When Google groups came along and opened Usenet up to a crapflood of spam, that pretty much destroyed it.
The public marketplace of ideas now exists on various social networking sites such as Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, UA-cam, etc. It is moderated by “community guidelines“ that are about as clear as mud and can be interpreted any which way that suits the moderation team.
It is now the case that when a large enough group finds a certain topic or viewpoint unacceptable, they find the easiest way to handle that is to ignore it and then the easiest way to ignore it is to prevent the topic from being discussed at all, as if it didn’t exist. This is the current state of open public discourse. It is anything but open at anything but public. Open public discourse does not exist today.
I know this because I have been banned from virtually all social media platforms and many other services, such as online schools and dating websites. These are permanent lifetime bans.
He stated that the purpose of schools was to educate children and was not indoctrination. Is this true?
the original purpose of schools was to train children for factory work. Part of the training included strict adherence to authority, rules, and bells.
The Pledge of Allegiance, originally written by Francis Bellamy, a socialist, was part of that indoctrination and even included the Bellamy salute which later became adopted by the Nazis.
Schools have changed some but many of the ugly core traits remain. Learning what to think and not how to think has definitely been adapted throughout the years. Schools are indoctrination centers. I distinctly remember in the 80s learning the food pyramid, as designed by the US government to force nutrition policy to promote certain sectors of agriculture for economic reasons. Do eggs and milk belong in the dairy category? Are “dairy eggs” an essential food group?
That might seem like a long time ago that that was taught but in perspective of the history of schools in the United States from 1840s until the 1980s, the 1980s until now is a blink of an eye.
There is no good reason why schools do not teach abstract and symbolic logic. This is the best type of thinking for young developing minds. But that was never the goal of schools. Schools were set up in America to follow depression model and that model is designed to produce obedient workers.
Logic is not taught until college, at an age when the brain is less malleable.
That children learn what to think and not how to think is probably why people cannot critically examine things as well as they should be able to and as well as they must be able to to have effective open public discourse. This is the best possible explanation for why schools do not teach logic, objectivism, and critical thinking.
Schools are largely indoctrination centers. The indoctrination in schools changes over time, but indoctrination and authoritarianism remains a core principle of schools.
(Edited to try to clear up some of the dictation errors)
C'mon.... We can't have facts and reality running this country!
This country.....I live in England, nothing like that here. DO NOT ASSUME THE WHOLE WORLD IS AMERICAN YOU WANKER....!
No danger of that as long as Trump is in office.
Please tell me your statement is sarcastic.
Also, what does the word "solypsis" or whatever it is in the title mean?
@@judymcclenny9549 solipsist: self centered, egocentric
"If all of this were only going on in my own mind, I would look a lot better and younger than I do!"
-- Aron Ra
Aron, that is one of the BEST counterarguments to the brain-in-a-vat or solipsist routines I've heard yet! It was also worth a damned good laugh! Look forward to seeing you soon on the North Coast!
Well he should stop eating oily food, sugary desserts and drinks, alcohol, maybe smoking, little physical activity and so forth and if he groomed, shaved and had this desire in mind, sure, he'd be better and perhaps younger looking, but no, he's a nerd and probably enjoys playing this role,
@Jesse Schoedel like I said, some self maintenance and he could look maybe 5 year younger, and with the correct diet - So with the correct approach, he can look younger and healthier, but he is lazy and wants to blame the cosmos for his comfortable nerdy lifestyle
As someone currently struggling with OCD due to solipsism, Aron’s talks about it helped me, thanks man.
I'm glad you're running. I hope you win.
Did he?
It's for senate this year so we won't know until November.
I hope he does win. People of all religions and ones that aren't religious should have an equal opportunity to office.
Not *just* equal opportunity...also equal representation. He speaks for a lot of people. People who are often ignored or marginalized.
Whatever Imtold Yeah, and everyone should have equal representation.
I've been going through a miserable time in my life due to health for (too many) years and the fact that I see Aron, AE, and RR makes feel so positive, comforted and happy all of them exist (and you who are like them). I simply am unable to ever return to an unthinking life. (Thank you) -Santa Cruz, CA
Aron... I take issue with you comparing a doctorate of theology with a doctorate in mother goose (i.e. Children's literally). A doctorate in children's literature is far more applicable to the real world and at least they admit that they are trafficking fiction.
Noice
I enjoy listening to your videos. They are well spoken and well though out. Thank you for all that you do AronRa. &)
Beneficial mutation: Lactose tolerance in adulthood. (We don't all have it).
Aron drops the hammer yet again. Bravo!
The creationists are right, evolution is just a theory. A theory that explains the facts that point to evolution.
Love your work Aron, keep it up you are doing a great service to humanity.
It was mainly because of your video series along with thunder foots is why I question what I was tought and found myself no longer convinced of biblical dogma.
Thunderf00t was so helpful for me in learning to think rationally, that science and inquiry doesn't take a PhD in science or engineering or philosophy, it often just takes a bit of unit conversions, some math, and a good Google search.
Thunderf00t brought me to mathematical science, Aron Ra finished off the vestiges of religion. The fear of hell and the source of Deus ex machina to solve my problems we're the last to go. I gotta make the most of this life, not spend all of this life working for the ultimate reward: a lie.
We need more like you Aron, Texas will be lucky to have you (especially Texas's school children), now we just need somebody with some sense here in North Carolina, this state is in bad need of sense and rationality too....
I wish when debating creationist "philosophers" who try the "brain in the vat" argument, someone would say "Ah- my position is that either evolution exists OR we are brains in vats- in both cases NO GOD."
Wonderful to see you back at another conference!
If I lived in Texas, you would most definitely have my vote. There are plenty of rational, reasonable people out there. It just seems as if there are just as many brainwashed willfully ignorants.
A Satanic Klingon battling PRATTs. Guardians of the Galaxy 3 is going to be weeeeeird.
dunno if this account is active but gaurdians of the galaxy 3 is a thing now
AronRa is still my hero because he is direct and doesn't minced words ! Matt Dillahunty is right beside him alongside.
"But that's- I'm sorry, but that's completely ridiculous! I mean, you could claim that *anything's* real if the only basis for believing in it is that nobody's *proved* it doesn't exist!"
-Hermione Granger
Who the hell is paying Ray Comfort $35k for one "performance?".
I hope you win! Especially in Texas.
I can't find any information anywhere. Did he win?
@@Chudea He dropped out of the race for candidate of the Democratic Party and endorsed Kendall Scudder who lost the 2018 election of Texas Senate District 2 to a religious freak. www.patheos.com/blogs/reasonadvocates/2017/11/18/ending-state-senate-run/
Never
One of my friends is also from Texas, and once I began talking to her about her faith (she is a creationist) and told me when we began getting into it, she said that she doesn't want to know the truth and she wants to stay Creationist
I’d love to have this man as a teacher
We so need more people like this. There are tens of thousands of anti-science religious activists out there working non-stop. It's depressing how few oppose them. The pro-science side really has very little infrastructure or funding earmarked for promotion and countering creationism compared to the other side.
Counterpoint to "If you can't show it, you don't know it".
I know that I am sentient, but can never show it.
Personal internal experience is a category that is knowable but not showable.
"
P oint
R efuted
A
T housand
T imes
"
-- AronRa
that is nice category of argument when talking with creationism =w=
Aron is the man.
You are a huge inspiration to me. Thank you so much for your presentations. Your level of intellect and knowledge is completely amazing and I am very happy people like you exist. Hope you're well, take care.
Normally when someone says "I've heard it a thousand times" you know they're exaggerating, it's sad that Aron more than likely isn't exaggerating, if anything he's probably being far more humble with that number 😲
Monetized for the Pureflix ads. Nice work AR.
When people give me the "I'd rather believe..." excuse, I immediately say "I'd rather believe no person on this planet would ever harm anyone else intentionally, but it doesnt matter what I'd rather believe, only what the evidence shows".
Philosophy is mandatory in high school in my corner of Western Europe. One year of introductory philosophy that is required for all high school students and three full years for humanities/law students.
This includes covering fallacies, identifying them along the basic structure of a syllogism and how it pertains to form and validity.
If you do pursue humanities, as I did, in senior high you'll cover actual philosophy books from start to finish, ranging from Russell, to Plato and Kant. And all this from a purely non-religious pov, even in Catholic school where I studied Russell without at all being told his views were wrong.
A group of little old ladies is called a gossip.
Apologetics is the art of lying, and of making excuses.
It's not for nothing it has the word 'apologize' in it.....
"If life is an illusion, then I am no less an illusion. Thus, the illusion is real to me....." -Conan the Cimmerian
Haha, Aron's story about the church and the chairs is amazing.
I don't know what that guy was going to say, but David Hume was a materialist atheist who believed morality was subjective and based on human feelings. Those were radical fucking ideas in the 18th century, he was very controversial. One of my favorite philosophers.
The irony of a wannabe Christian Fundamentalist trying to use Hume's philosophy, who almost certainly would have disagreed with him about the chairs anyway, is amazing.
But it illustrates the point perfectly!
The reality is, some people are just gonna believe what they want to believe, and they expend basically zero effort attempting to justify or defend it.
So this guy reaches back for something, *anything*, even though it obviously doesn't make sense, as a kind of intellectual equivalent to an autoimmune response.
"I'll just quote David Hume at him, that will make the scary noise go away."
Hume was an inmaterialist; a type of idealist, just like Berkeley. Today known as phenomenalism.
Aron I am thinking of moving to Texas JUST to vote for you!
That remark at the start about "since the war", etc...
Now it's either going to be "since the 2016 election" or "since the pandemic".
There are too many solipsists in my universe.
An example of beneficial mutation? Ideonella sakainesis is a bacteria with a new trick. The reason we know it's new is because it couldn't have possibly performed this trick without PET plastics. PET plastics weren't patented until 1941. Now we have a bacteria that in less than 75 years has mutated to be able to use this substance as food.
The number of generations and the lack of complexity have helped it evolve this quickly.
arewhyinoh Interesting. Beneficial mutations are rare from what I know (Granted I haven't studied it as well as I should.) but I'd imagine there is plenty of examples of it.
Well, that'll be useful for getting rid of all the old cheap polyester clothing that hardly lasts yet keeps being manufactured.
Oh, and for anyone who thinks I misread the original post, polyester fabric is just PET plastic made into fibres.
Agent 1110 yesssss but aren’t humans the most important species? I was under the impression this whole planet was here just for us to pillage and burn til it dries up like a raisin? (/sarcasm) . Ive met a lot of non-theist, science-minded folks that have this notion that humans are the priority species on Earth. I think you’re right about the definition of “beneficial” depending on whom it benefits!
"He will cover you with his pinions, and under his wings you will find refuge; his faithfulness is a shield and buckler." Psalm 91:4
If we're made in the image of God, why don't we have wings?
(I know it's not literal, but most Creationists are biblical literalists.)
And if we are made in his image, why would God have a nose or ears. They are useless outside our atmosphere
@@barbaraannen3340 If their god has a nose and ears, does he get colds? what happens when he gets a running nose or a pain in the ears?
I'm in Denton Tx and can't wait to vote for you Aronra!
32:20 Well here's one more: I was told my entire life that the bible was the "perfect inspired word of God, without error" but I knew that there were thousands of churches (dozens even in my home town!) that all preached different versions. I thought if I wanted the truth, I must read the bible for myself! So I did, _and every single page_ I found a new error. Genesis 1-2 were some of the worst offenders, where even an elementary understanding ousts how ridiculous they are. "Okay so we've got plants....without a sun to photosynthesize energy with..."
I read about God's exploits and found that they were *freaking horrifying.* Rape, murder, and pillaging that would make the mongols blush, and that wouldn't have bothered me as much if not for the fact it was, again, a *contradiction* with what they had told me. I had been lied to! This only encouraged me to dig deeper and deeper into the rabbit hole until I finally reached Revelations and couldn't decide whether to laugh or cry at the psychotic absurdity. I had even found a picture bible by that point, graphically detailing Jesus collecting bodies into a giant wine press and stomping on them until the blood flowed like an ocean.
No atheist argument could have possibly shit all over my religion more than *reading the source material.*
MegaChick: When I questioned the creation of plants before the sun sequence I got, "But plants can live for a twenty-four hour period without the sun." I should have also pointed out that the earth would be too cold for plants before the creation of the sun. When all else fails, they'll say something like "God can do it however he wants." That, of course, is nothing but an all purpose explanation for anything they can't explain otherwise.
@@nightjar8898 the good ol *DON'T WUESTION IT* stance, truly evidence that they are on the right side
My all time favourite. In India or Pakistan. The weeping statue of Mother Mary. People were drinking the ‘holy weepings’. Turned out to be a broken sewer pipe from the adjacent toilet. Lol. That is getting what’s coming to you.
I really appreciate you, man. Keep doin' what you're doin'....
Still think the last 2 minutes contain some of the funniest lines on youtube.
"there are either chairs in this room or there are no chairs in this room, but there is no 3rd option where the chairs are figurative, we are imaginary and this building is a metaphor...
0:56 -- _"I look like a seemingly Satanic Klingon Disney villain..."_ ROFLMAO!
40:19 -- Awww...
Yes Aaron I have. Arguing with creationists is pointless.
"Has anyone explained to you what 'Armor of God' is?"
Oh, oh! It's that Jackie Chan movie, right?
It's a psychological trick to defend your mind from facts and logic(I successfully used it for a decade; the '90s)
P. S. I didn't know that was what I was doing until years after I stopped doing it. I thought I was protecting my soul from evil thoughts and suggestions from "the devil".
Im with you on the misrepresentation. I can't stomach the dishonesty
Good to hear Aron Ra's challenge around 33:00 which was taken up by Kent Hovind and we got to see Hovind commit EVERY one of those fallacies. This is clearly a prophecy ;)
I could and often do listen to this guy for hours. 🤓
The fool says in his heart there is no evolution.
That needs to go on a billboard.
The fool is the one who gives a shit, screw em, just bypass them as irrelevant in the long run.
I was put into a christian school for 5th and 6th grade that was antiscience and told me that there where no transitional fossils. I wish I knew otherwise at the time. Also religious schools should really not be a thing, at least not for young children.
When are you running for President!?!? :)
Why do debaters assume that solipsism is inherently religious and anti-atheist? Why are anti-evolution nut jobs linked to solipsism? To me, solipsism is a pragmatic agnosticism of the shared idea of reality. It’s got nothing to do with debunking science or theism. It’s to do with empirical experience and the unknowable logic of the nature of reality outside of a finite conscious experience.
It would really seem to me that the MOMENT a Creationist brings up the idea that Reality is "All in your mind", they've kinda given up their own argument for God.
Aron's got a great flow to this one. Fluid AF
The audience is SO rude. They keep walking in front of the camera throughout the entire presentation.
I total enjoyed this! Love from Sweden
Aronra: a cow can't jump over the moon.
Elon Musk: hold my beer
He's brilliant.
I don't know why those people keep walking past all the time, don't they known it's the great AronRa up there speaking?
We need more people like this guy in the government