Atheist Experience

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 13 гру 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 133

  • @nikkfrostt
    @nikkfrostt 9 років тому +8

    I'm starting to understand Creationists:
    - Redefine evidence and theory but at the same time equate them to scientific evidence and theories
    - Insist that the Theory of Causation (cause and effect) is a Scientific Law (never budge)
    - Refuse to acknowledge how Evolution actually works
    - Never give scientific evidence but instead consistently point out why evolution is false
    - When forced to explain the evidence of Intelligent Design, restate the watch on a beach argument (or a slight variation) and insist that that is evidence
    - Let scientifically educated people inform you of how science works and than respond with "is that all"/"is that your opinion"
    - Endlessly state quotes that support your position and move on to the next one when it's dismantled. If pushed on the previous quotes, disagree that they are invalid.
    What else am I missing?

    • @brucebaker810
      @brucebaker810 9 років тому +1

      +Nick Di Mario My additions. (some overlap w yours)
      - Cite Bible verses...either just as self-evidently true...or as proof of the Bible.
      - When God is questioned, point at trees.
      - When that's disemboweled, fall back to "love".
      - When Bible is questioned, cite Jerusalem exists, therefore Bible is accurate.
      - When countered by Spiderman/NY, Leprechaun or Captain Kirk argument, take offense. Presume that "offensive to me" equates to "disallowed".
      - Use "what if you're wrong?" and, when countered by the numerous defeaters for Pascal's Wager (and learning that your argument has a name...so maybe they knew it and its refutation long ago)...insist that God/no God is the choice. Not Christianity vs all other religions in history (and unimagined ones). And that "Christianity" is one wager, not tens of thousands (or millions) of different wagers/stances.

  • @mangravy2897
    @mangravy2897 8 років тому +13

    how can any theist watch this and still walk away convinced god is real?

    • @larjkok1184
      @larjkok1184 5 років тому +3

      Man Gravy
      They turn the volume off.

    • @mahfuzurrahmansazal3974
      @mahfuzurrahmansazal3974 4 роки тому

      Childhood indoctrination.

    • @muveemanone2067
      @muveemanone2067 3 роки тому

      Cvs clothing

    • @starlaminde3113
      @starlaminde3113 3 роки тому +3

      I ask the same thing
      I wound up here about 7 years ago and The first episode I watched had me starting the process of deconverstion and being a skeptic.

    • @SPL0869
      @SPL0869 2 роки тому +3

      I first watched Penn and Tellers “bullshit” regarding the Bible. I watched it, had no real pushbacks against any of the problems they brought up. And I somehow remained a Bible believing theist for at least eight years after watching it.
      If a theist can cherry-pick his holy book then he can surely tune out logical arguments against his faith

  • @darksoul479
    @darksoul479 4 роки тому +4

    I wonder if this conversation is still going to be the same in the year 3020?

  • @danniealexander4131
    @danniealexander4131 5 років тому +3

    Yooww. That opening song went in hard

  • @brucebaker810
    @brucebaker810 9 років тому +2

    40:00 Catholic..."period of atheism"...aaaaaand back to Catholic. "I like to think of myself as logical..." Well I like to think of myself as six feet tall with blond hair. But the reality is... not what I "like to think".
    Turns out, reality doesn't give a shit what we'd "like to think".

  • @dogless10
    @dogless10 10 років тому +3

    Do yourself a favor and skip the kalam colossal waste of time argument from about 51:00 on.

  • @MsTommyknocker
    @MsTommyknocker 10 років тому +2

    Here's an example of deductive reasoning:
    Which word, if pronounced right is wrong, and if pronounced wrong is right??

    • @hitomi969
      @hitomi969 10 років тому +3

      Well, it's wrong, of course...

  • @gregorypdearth
    @gregorypdearth 10 років тому +9

    So he thinks the dragon explanation for the big hole and knocked down tree us a false analogy to his muddy Kalam variation. That is indeed the crux of the matter. He MUST commit the special pleading fallacy so he CANNOT concede the dragon analogy is precisely equivalent. Intellectual dishonesty and cognitive dissonance simultaneously.

    • @dignerds
      @dignerds 9 років тому +1

      Gregory Dearth Wow...you're really smart, using all those big words...good for you..

    • @gregorypdearth
      @gregorypdearth 9 років тому +1

      Right.......... A snipey comment about my decent vocabulary. Hmmmm. That type of comment probably seems funny to a theist... Or a known troll.

    • @gregorypdearth
      @gregorypdearth 9 років тому +1

      TheSapphiretrooper Yeah, figured as much since I haven't heard from this tool since June. Attacking my superior vocabulary was not a particularly encouraging sign. lol

    • @tylercampbell6365
      @tylercampbell6365 6 років тому

      Gregory Dearth Guy thinks he's smart

    • @tylercampbell6365
      @tylercampbell6365 6 років тому

      They all talk that way..It supposed to make them seem more credible

  • @MoldredTMalcontent
    @MoldredTMalcontent 10 років тому

    “The condition of alienation, of being asleep, of being unconscious, of being out of one’s mind, is the condition of the normal man. Society highly values its normal man. It educates children to lose themselves and to become absurd, and thus to be normal. Normal men have killed perhaps 100,000,000 of their fellow normal men in the last fifty years.”
    ― R.D. Laing,

  • @CoolHardLogic
    @CoolHardLogic 10 років тому +8

    Jesus H tapdancing christ that Kalam caller wasted a shed-load of time getting absolutely nowhere. Matt must have been in a great mood that day to not just cut it down to size immediately instead of letting him ramble on and on, and on for the rest of the show with irrelevancies to sugar coat an argument that simply doesn't work however you dress it up.

    • @BeautyHealthZoneBlog
      @BeautyHealthZoneBlog 10 років тому

      I'm not an atheist....I believe in God.
      On the Internet though you must say things 100 times so people who are slow can get what you're saying.
      I was brought up Christian, however I am not a fanatic......I respect other people's beliefs so long as it's not imposed upon me.

    • @qhsperson
      @qhsperson 9 років тому

      TheThinkingApeMan Come, let us fling together.

  • @slumberzzzz
    @slumberzzzz 8 років тому +3

    Always an argument from ignorance. The caller just don't get it.

  • @roybaines3181
    @roybaines3181 8 років тому +2

    Science uses real tools to get real data to find things out, using 'paranormal tools' + wooly language then make assertions gets nowhere, you have to show your tools exist first.

  • @mellodees3663
    @mellodees3663 9 років тому +1

    I need to know who the rapper was at the beginning.

  • @greenytaddict
    @greenytaddict 9 років тому +3

    the one theist caller toward the end took too much damn time, and we still come to the same conclusion how does this prove belief in a god?

    • @Godslayer1975
      @Godslayer1975 6 років тому +1

      i agree but i blame Tracie more because this bs of them and there readings at start is garbage and it nearly killed the show it is why they do not do it any more and if they do it is 5 min max . take don he was the worst talking about garbage that was wrong constantly to the point were Matt had to call him out on it so many times and worse he would talk for avg 55 min when the show was hour and half .

  • @TheZooCrew
    @TheZooCrew 11 років тому +1

    And of course, this particular theist completely mangled the concepts involved in the delayed choice quantum eraser experiment

  • @joshiegntn
    @joshiegntn 4 роки тому

    I love how the guy says he follows reason above empirical science but then lists experiments in quantum physics which seemingly defy reason. Mixing science and religion is ridiculous.

  • @Nicklyft
    @Nicklyft 9 років тому +1

    5:06 Tracie pronouces vehement as "Vuh-heem-int-ly" when its really pronounced "Vee-emm-int-lee" (Silent "H")...Kinda surprised that she did that... she seems so well spoken...Eh well, we all make mistakes sometimes that do not represent us well. Anyways, fix that, Tracie!

    • @trishayamada807
      @trishayamada807 5 років тому +2

      Really, that’s what bothered you?

    • @starlaminde3113
      @starlaminde3113 3 роки тому

      Could be Dialect and accent.
      Neither right nor wrong.
      Please go take your own inventory.

  • @captaink5217
    @captaink5217 8 років тому +1

    My mother in law knowing I'm atheist buys me a shirt that says "pray for me I married an Italian", normally not a big deal being a joke shirt but with her and I getting into these atheist, catholic discussions to me, I didn't think it was very funny and certainly won't be wearing that shirt.

  • @allim.5941
    @allim.5941 5 років тому

    My roommate would tell that cat story, lol.

  • @eljesperado
    @eljesperado 11 років тому

    I can't believe they let that guy go on for about 20 minutes only to come down to the false Kalam Cosmo argument. & then he still kept rambling on until he ended the show. I really thought they should've cut him off sooner. & the 1st guy whining about his relationship... It's been 4 months, buddy, set her free, before you waste years of your life...

  • @TheZooCrew
    @TheZooCrew 11 років тому

    Disappointing. That last caller talked forever only to end with an argument from ignorance. Shame that someone who can actually understand physics at a high level chooses to abandon reason and cling to mythology.

  • @katherineflowers1121
    @katherineflowers1121 7 років тому

    I would say to that is a clue to a college student that is studying.

  • @josephdodd5770
    @josephdodd5770 6 років тому

    If a religious person try’s to preach to me I don’t put up with it. Because I would not do it to them .that includes relatives

  • @TheZooCrew
    @TheZooCrew 11 років тому

    Nuclear decay is causeless.
    There. I just defeated Kalam. Easy peasy.

    • @jonschreiners5006
      @jonschreiners5006 5 місяців тому

      It’s not though…an unstable nucleus is the cause. In most cases electromagnetism overpowers the strong force. Just because it’s probabilistic and doesn’t mean that it doesn’t have a cause, and it’s even predictable as long as you look at a group of atoms rather than an individual one.

  • @HokoAoi
    @HokoAoi 10 років тому +1

    I would lmao at that intro xD Awkward moment.

  • @JohnCashin
    @JohnCashin 8 років тому

    If I ever saw or experienced something that appeared to be supernatural, then depending on exactly what it was that I saw or experienced then I MIGHT be willing to change my position as an Atheist, eg, if I said one day..... 'okay God....if you are really there show yourself to me'....and then the next minute my phone rings and I get some strange message on it saying.... 'heyyy...God has heard your cry John...he loves you'....that would NOT be enough because I get text messages all the time from all kinds of people advertising products, pushing religious or other kinds of alternative ideas, so I would put that down to coincidence, besides, I would have to ask myself why a supposedly 'all powerful' being would need my phone or any gadget to communicate with me, surely such a being could find a much better way to prove himself?
    However, if I made that same prayer of....'show yourself to me God'...blah blah blah and all of a sudden I get some strange light appearing in my room that seems to have no source and it really glows clear and bright and then I hear a voice saying....'I am he...the Alpha and the Omega' etc....sure....that would just about do the trick for me, I mean, I might still wonder if maybe I've gone nuts or that I might be hallucinating but considering that I don't take drugs that might bring those kinds of effects on, I have no history of hallucinating or any problems with seeing things that others don't see even when they are with me, it would be unlikely.
    Of course, this is all hypothetical because the fact of the matter is I have never had any such manifestations from God or otherwise and in all honesty I don't ever expect to because I am just not convinced that there is any God or supernatural being to bring about such manifestations, if there is this supreme being we would call 'God' that really exists then I have to ask myself why this being hasn't done a much better job of convincing me they exist instead of expecting me to just look at the flowers, the trees and the stars etc and expecting me to think....'well I dunno how they came about so there must have been a being greater than me who did it'....I get this from Christians all the time, it has got to be the most childish argument for the existence of God anyone could come up with Lol, trees, flowers and stars have been around for millions of years, what has this God been doing for the last few hundred millenniums since he supposedly made all of those phenomena, sleeping?

    • @rijden-nu
      @rijden-nu 8 років тому +1

      Look, good points, but this whole wall-o-text can be summarized by what Matt has always said on this show (although this is me paraphrasing it): it would be inconsequentially trivial for any even remotely omni-everything interventionist god to know what it would take to convince me, even if I don't know myself, and subsequently it would also be trivial to actually convince me. The fact that it hasn't happened yet means that either such a god does not exist or he does not want me to know him/be convinced.
      So I don't even have to think about what would actually convince me - I may not even be able to actually imagine it before I experience it. So until that happens, I have this brain that I either got from god or not and all I can do is use it to make the best of it. If god ever wants to judge me, he's gonna have to go by the effort I put into that. If he sends people to hell for needing that, which he already knew by the way, and only prefers people who use that gift to worship him, take things on faith, accept contradictory statements and blindly follow commands that go straight against every moral fiber he also planted in me (kill your son for me - teehee, let's see if he actually does it!) then, well, fuck that god I guess.

  • @raul1899
    @raul1899 6 років тому

    0:05 OMG! I don't have an explanation for that shit! It must be GOD!!!! Finally shows up on the show!!

  • @the-trustees
    @the-trustees Рік тому

    Shouldn't religious "conversion" be an explicit defeater for any theist that has claimed the factual existence of both or all of the pretend god characters they have selected? Shouldn't it also apply to unconverted theists when they claim KNOWLEDGE of the existence of their pretend god character, using the same "arguments" as a converted one?

  • @robertwhite1810
    @robertwhite1810 7 років тому

    Wrong..."cause" is a verb not a noun. The "universe" wasn't "caused". The observable "universe" may have been the result of one or more objects acting upon other objects to "cause" the observable universe to come into being but only existing objects can act upon other existing objects to "cause" anything. So the only rational conclusion one can draw is that the "U"niverse is eternal and the "u"niverse we observe is just a happening within this larger eternal "U"niverse

  • @MoldredTMalcontent
    @MoldredTMalcontent 10 років тому

    there are known knowns; there are things that we know that we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns, the ones we don't know we don't know. - Rumsfield

    • @qhsperson
      @qhsperson 9 років тому

      Moldred T. Malcontent I actually felt sorry, in a way, for Rumsfeld after this. His statement is true, but it's so foolishly ponderous that it's impossible not to make fun of it.

    • @MoldredTMalcontent
      @MoldredTMalcontent 9 років тому

      qhsperson
      how would you shorten it and still retain the meaning? "I know stuff. I don't know stuff. There's stuff I don't know that I don't know." doesn't quite work.

    • @qhsperson
      @qhsperson 9 років тому

      Moldred T. Malcontent Some things we know. Some things we don't know. But there are also things we don't know that we don't know.

    • @MoldredTMalcontent
      @MoldredTMalcontent 9 років тому

      qhsperson
      very close but you lost the distinction between what we know we don't know and what we don't even suspect we don't know.

    • @qhsperson
      @qhsperson 9 років тому

      Moldred T. Malcontent No, I think it's spot on, just not fancied up to sound intellectual.

  • @JonYodice
    @JonYodice 11 років тому +14

    incredibly awkward and pointless intro music

    • @mgtplayer1
      @mgtplayer1 11 років тому +3

      Music?

    • @JonYodice
      @JonYodice 11 років тому +2

      outrageously annoying for 50 seconds. idc if I agree with the premise

    • @lolsrslythesepeople7254
      @lolsrslythesepeople7254 10 років тому +19

      How is it pointless exactly? It's some of the only rap about atheism that is out there as far as I know. Awkward? For you maybe. You find it annoying, good for you. Please tell us about all of the different things you don't like, the world wants to know.
      You don't like rap. We get it. No one fucking cares.

    • @JonYodice
      @JonYodice 10 років тому

      calm down. it is pointless because it has no point. they're waiting for it to end and you can tell they're embarrassed. btw nice profile picture and link to facebook account, not anonymous at all. Anyway, if you had mirror neurons in your brain (aka empathy) you'd be able to detect the embarrassment of the hosts

    • @hoss1962
      @hoss1962 10 років тому +11

      I don't see it. I think your interpretation has been coloured by your own preferences to musical genres or mybe your personal take on this song. The hosts always wait for the songs to end and stare into the camera while they wait. And why would Matt enthuse about the track and the relevance to the show as HE recognizes, if he was "embarrassed" about it?
      You could fairly argue that any musical introduction is pointless; you could also argue the merits on the choice of music based on your personal preference. However, I am convinced that your claims that the hosts agree with you - isn't substantiated by what we can observe from the video. I think you have allowed your preferences to cause you to draw conclusions (in your later posts in this thread) that are not supported by the reactions of the hosts or anything else in the clip.
      Time to hold your hand up and admit you went a step too far in your response to the person who replied to your original post?

  • @Tyndalic
    @Tyndalic 9 років тому +2

    I love you guys! Tracie you're my homegirls.😀

  • @TheZooCrew
    @TheZooCrew 11 років тому

    Around 51:00 displays the real problems with theist apologetics. If you have to do crazy mind-bending mental gymnastics and go off on bullshit tangents to justify your apriori conclusion, then it is almost certainly wrong.

  • @Susana456
    @Susana456 8 років тому

    Oh my gosh! Horrible music!

  • @ljubomirjuraj9658
    @ljubomirjuraj9658 7 років тому

    nice to hear an inteligent theist for a change

  • @yakojjy
    @yakojjy 10 років тому

    The intro song is called "Religion is Poison"

  • @billhinsperger8120
    @billhinsperger8120 2 роки тому

    Word salad anyone? This guys been rambling forever with no evidence of a creator period, the universe began and know one knows how period

  • @cadenpolen9531
    @cadenpolen9531 10 років тому

    I'm tired of all these disapproving points. How much more can you say? Wow what a joke; if you don't know the difference between Deism and theism DONT CALL IN. I'ts as simple as that. Study your facts. Then call in. Don't waste our time!

  • @MsTommyknocker
    @MsTommyknocker 10 років тому +1

    If a person doesnt understand logic, it's their problem, which is why it's pointless to try to prove anything. "Proof" is a certain discipline in math, but other than that you can never verify a theory, that is, make it understandable. That's why a theory has to be falsifiable and have a great explainatory value. The statement "Logic can be applied to everything" is a very falsifiable statement, but indeed a statement, and can never be proven unless you understand it. Which leads me to a somewhat simple conclusion:
    1. Everything is based on logic
    2. God is supernatural
    3. The supernatural defies logic.
    -------------------------------------------
    Therefore no God.

    • @obtusegnostic441
      @obtusegnostic441 10 років тому

      No, prove to me that it's pointless to prove anything to me.

    • @MsTommyknocker
      @MsTommyknocker 10 років тому

      Obtuse Gnostic I can't

    • @MsTommyknocker
      @MsTommyknocker 10 років тому

      Obtuse Gnostic And this, my friend, shows the importance of Popper's theories. Philosophers can have an endless debate about "truth" whatever that curious emanation is, but as long your statement is testable your scientific mission is done.

    • @MsTommyknocker
      @MsTommyknocker 10 років тому

      Obtuse Gnostic No amount of observations, data etc. can EVER verify a theory which is the reason a theory should never be based ON observations. Are the things you learn in Math class based on observations?? Hell, is evolution based on observations??

    • @MsTommyknocker
      @MsTommyknocker 10 років тому

      Baby Punter But are these observations not more predictions?? I don't think palaeontologists were particularly surprised when it turned out that archaeopteryx had avian and reptilian traits.

  • @Multi1628
    @Multi1628 9 років тому

    Supernature is no more than a great dance classic by Cerrone from 1977, & it did not prove the existence of anything supernatural either - is just a great dance song! Always enjoy all Atheist Experience videos!! DAVEDJ

  • @tedgrant2
    @tedgrant2 6 років тому

    Rap is a derivative art form. It originates from poetry and opera. In opera it's called recititave.

  • @Godslayer1975
    @Godslayer1975 6 років тому +1

    i agree but i blame Tracie more because this bs of them and there readings at start is garbage and it nearly killed the show it is why they do not do it any more and if they do it is 5 min max . take don he was the worst talking about garbage that was wrong constantly to the point were Matt had to call him out on it so many times and worse he would talk for avg 55 min when the show was hour and half .

  • @paulleavitt8742
    @paulleavitt8742 10 років тому

    Mindless dribble

    • @geuwglesuxballz6074
      @geuwglesuxballz6074 10 років тому +4

      What is?

    • @punchline43
      @punchline43 10 років тому +1

      I think you mean "drivel"? Dribble is what one does with a basketball, or at least I thought. And yeah I would agree they're just going around and around but not really getting to a worthwhile point. They seem to just be outlining what their idea of an explanation is regarding "supernature" but not offering any examples or answers.

    • @slimfatchance9592
      @slimfatchance9592 10 років тому

      punchline43 +punchme "Dribble"is what one does at the end of a squirt- I.P. Erratically
      kickslimtoo.com And I mean drivel. Exemplary and inexplicable.

    • @B2BCreditandCollection
      @B2BCreditandCollection 9 років тому +3

      +Paul Leavitt Christianity? I couldn't agree more

  • @AnitaLife27
    @AnitaLife27 10 років тому

    I believe in Supernatural. Great show. Mischa Collins rules!

  • @MoldredTMalcontent
    @MoldredTMalcontent 10 років тому

    what if we're living in a book? The author would be outside our universe and unknowable

    • @TheSapphiretrooper
      @TheSapphiretrooper 9 років тому

      Moldred T. Malcontent but yet we could see his name on the cover and read his blurb on the rear of the cover and therefore not unknowable.

    • @MoldredTMalcontent
      @MoldredTMalcontent 9 років тому +1

      TheSapphiretrooper Holy mackerel there sapphire! if we live inside the book how would we see that? Does Frodo know who JRR Tolkien is ? Does Sherlock Holmes know who Arthur Conan Doyle is?

    • @TheSapphiretrooper
      @TheSapphiretrooper 9 років тому

      Moldred T. Malcontent Maybe, how do you know they don't?

    • @MoldredTMalcontent
      @MoldredTMalcontent 9 років тому

      TheSapphiretrooper
      I was thinking of the "Thursday Next" books by Jasper Fforde where the 'book police' know but the characters in the books don't know. or in a larger sense there are known knowns; there are things that we know that we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns, the ones we don't know we don't know. yet....

    • @verticalhorizon4633
      @verticalhorizon4633 9 років тому

      +Moldred T. Malcontent We're not, Skippy.

  • @dwayneab1
    @dwayneab1 5 років тому

    People are blind if you think the supernatural doesn’t exist.

  • @punchline43
    @punchline43 10 років тому +1

    EVP, poltergeists, orbs, "ghosts" if you will, tons of examples of strange phenomena in the world and they're just playing the same old "god card"..boring, and misleading title. Bottom line, investigating the paranormal is tedious and time consuming but there is plenty of evidence for it trust me, and it will humble you. Drop god and christianity for one damn show and talk about that, because to me the tone of the program just seems as agenda-driven as the religious types you always try to discredit.