Darth is objectively wrong that there was never a widespread belief in Flat Earth. He's simply wrong about it. He says to look up the work of some random scholar. Does he not realize that you can't just blindly believe what some random scholar says? There are competing opinions among scholars which are backed up by stronger historical evidence. The issue is: Darth does know what he's talking about regarding presup, but he has a massively inflated ego regarding other topics he isn't actually as knowledgeable about.
Darth's arrogance regarding the Cosmology debate is absolutely disgusting, particularly given his wide-ranging ignorance on the topic combined with his refusal to allow anyone to debate for any competing position in his presence.
DD seems to be very upset that science can be updated. That earlier ideas can be overwritten by newer ideas. Very much unlike a Biblical view of the world.
It's absolutely nuts how creationists will acknowledge that koonin accepts evolution as a scientific fact, and then will turn around and quote his criticism gradualism, as if gradualism is the whole of modern synthesis and not just a proposed mechanism that has been left behind in favor of new and better proposed mechanisms like punctuated equilibrium. Talk about a Trojan source for darth.
“Everybody in the room is punished” - except darth himself. He spreads punishment like a wrathful god who caught people eating some juicy fruit, kicking ass and chewing gum, the only time he’s not on a excessive monologue.
No little darth that's not his position at all. 1. His position is you claimed your god is needed to invoke facts. 2. He invoked a fact with absolutely no requirement for your god. 3. Quod erat demonstrandom BY YOUR OWN LIGHTS, YOUR GOD DOES NOT EXIST!
Here's a thought- if we define God as "that which is necessary for reality to exist", then yes, God must exist; but if we then acknowledge that any of the other characteristics that are often associated with him- including that he is a "him", a person in some sense- are irrelevant to this definition, then we can also say that God does not exist in that he does not necessarily have those other characteristics. Otherwise we would be smuggling them in without justification. This means that the term "God" is not a very useful one, because it has baggage that only confuses the issue.
Explain to me how he decides to make an argument for the other interlocutor andn tell them their positions but never makes his own argument or truly express his position but you better not tell him what his position is.
@@widescreennavel LMFAO, now I know you are Wilfully IGNORANT. I made a video where WLC admits the bible has MYTH in it and on the 6 days of creation should not be taken literary. He calls it MythoHistory.
@@LookOutForNumberOne LOL ok, I will look for it. But be nice next time, I didn't attack you or call you names. Willful I am, yes, but ignorant, no. I love my enemies and treat everyone with respect until someone attacks me personally. Let's be sociable. Peace.
@@LookOutForNumberOne That makes no sense. I do not want your respect. I think you are judgmental and not living by your own self-described standards. You have no abilities, can do nothing I cannot do, except you have a bunch of hateful laws you abide by in a vain attempt at immortality. You will blaze through this life, wasting every moment only to discover the end is final. You are not immortal, you are an animal like all of us. You are not being friendly; therefore I am done with you. I do not understand why so many theists refuse to remember they are human beings first.
It was a Darth argument! If even one fact can be invoked without referencing the necessity of God? God does not exist!? 2 + 2 = 4! Sir! How do you know!? you're not referencing, God!? LOL God +2+2=5? Who's smuggling?
*There is no planetary observation by which we on Earth can prove that the Earth is moving in an orbit around the sun* Physicist, I. Bernard Cohen *People need to be aware that there is a range of models that could explain the observations. For instance, I can construct you a universe with Earth at its center, and you cannot disprove it based on observations. You can only exclude it on philosophical grounds. What I want to bring into the open is the fact that we are using philosophical criteria in choosing our models. A lot of cosmology tries to hide that.* Physicist, George F.R. Ellis *So which is real, the Ptolemaic or Copernican system? Although it is not uncommon for people to say that Copernicus proved Ptolemy wrong, that is not true...one can use either picture as a model of the universe, for our observations of the heavens can be explained by assuming either the earth or the sun to be at rest* Physicist, Stephen Hawking *I have come to believe that the motion of the Earth cannot be detected by any optical experiment* (he then adds his subjective belief that the Earth actually does move without justification afterward) - Physicist, Albert Einstein *The struggle, so violent in the early days of science, between the views of Ptolemy and Copernicus would then be quite meaningless. Either CS (Coordinate System) could be used with equal justification. The two sentences, the sun is at rest and the earth moves, or the sun moves and the earth is at rest, would simply mean two different conventions concerning two different CS* - Physicist, Albert Einstein “Such a condition would imply that we occupy a unique position in the universe, analogous, in a sense, to the ancient conception of a central Earth…This hypothesis cannot be disproved, but it is unwelcome and would only be accepted as a last resort in order to save the phenomena. Therefore we disregard this possibility…. the unwelcome position of a favored location must be avoided at all costs…. such a favored position is intolerable…” Edwin Hubble "In order for the Earth to be at rest in the center of the system of the sun, planets, and comets, there is required both universal gravity and another force in addition that acts on all bodies equally according to the quantity of matter in each of them and is equal and opposite to the accelerative gravity with which the Earth tends to the sun...And thus celestial bodies can move around the Earth at rest, as in the Tychonic system."- Physicist, Isaac Newton "...to the question whether or not the motion of the Earth in space can be made perceptible in terrestrial experiments. We have already remarked...that all attempts of this nature led to a negative result."- Physicist, Albert Einstein "Briefly, everything occurs as if the Earth were at rest..."- Physicist, Henrick Lorentz "There was just one alternative; the earth's true velocity through space might happen to have been nil."- Physicist, Arthur Eddington "The failure of the many attempts to measure terrestrially any effects of the earth's motion..."- Physicist, Wolfgang Pauli "We do not have and cannot have any means of discovering whether or not we are carried along in a uniform motion of translation."- Physicist, Henri Poincaré "A great deal of research has been carried out concerning the influence of the Earth's movement. The results were always negative."- Physicist, Henri Poincaré "This conclusion directly contradicts the explanation...which presupposes that the Earth moves."- Physicist, Albert Michelson "The data [of Michelson-Morley] were almost unbelievable...There was only one other possible conclusion to draw - that the Earth was at rest."- Physicist, Bernard Jaffe "We can't feel our motion through space, nor has any physical experiment ever proved that the Earth actually is in motion."- Historian, Lincoln Barnett "Thus, even now, three and a half centuries after Galileo...it is still remarkably difficult to say categorically whether the earth moves..."- Physicist, Julian B. Barbour "Thus, failure [of Michelson-Morley] to observe different speeds of light at different times of the year suggested that the Earth must be 'at rest'...It was therefore the 'preferred' frame for measuring absolute motion in space. Yet we have known since Galileo that the Earth is not the center of the universe. Why should it be at rest in space?"- Physicist, Adolph Baker "...The easiest explanation was that the earth was fixed in the ether and that everything else in the universe moved with respect to the earth and the ether...Such an idea was not considered seriously, since it would mean in effect that our earth occupied the omnipotent position in the universe, with all the other heavenly bodies paying homage by moving around it."- Physicist, James Coleman "In the effort to explain the Michelson-Morley experiment...the thought was advanced that the Earth might be stationary...Such an idea was not considered seriously, since it would mean in effect that our Earth occupied the omnipotent position in the universe, with all the other heavenly bodies paying homage by revolving around it."- Physicist, Arthur S. Otis "The Michelson-Morley experiment confronted scientists with an embarrassing alternative. On the one hand they could scrap the ether theory which had explained so many things about electricity, magnetism, and light. Or if they insisted on retaining the ether they had to abandon the still more venerable Copernican theory that the earth is in motion. To many physicists it seemed almost easier to believe that the earth stood still than that waves - light waves, electromagnetic waves - could exist without a medium to sustain them. It was a serious dilemma and one that split scientific thought for a quarter century. Many new hypotheses were advanced and rejected. The experiment was tried again by Morley and by others, with the same conclusion; the apparent velocity of the earth through the ether was zero."- Historian, Lincoln Barnett "If we were to adopt a frame of reference like Tycho's in which the Earth is at rest, then the distant galaxies would seem to be executing circular turns once a year, and in general relativity this enormous motion would create forces akin to gravitation, which would act on the Sun and planets and give them the motions of the Tychonic theory."- Physicist, Steven Weinberg "Let it be understood at the outset that it makes no difference, from the point of view of describing planetary motion, whether we take the Earth or the Sun as the center of the solar system. Since the issue is one of relative motion only, there are infinitely many exactly equivalent descriptions referred to different centers - in principle any point will do, the Moon, Jupiter...So the passions loosed on the world by the publication of Copernicus' book, De revolutionibus orbium caelestium libri VI, were logically irrelevant..."- Astronomer, Fred Hoyle "...we can take either the Earth or the Sun, or any other point for that matter, as the center of the solar system. This is certainly so for the purely kinematical problem of describing the planetary motions. It is also possible to take any point as the center even in dynamics, although recognition of this freedom of choice had to await the present century."- Astronomer, Fred Hoyle "It is possible to describe the entire universe using any chosen point as the unmoving center - the Earth will do very well - and no one can prove that choice is wrong....Scientists today prefer to picture everything in motion and nothing as being the center. If you haven't given much thought to the implications of twentieth-century science, you may be chagrined...to realize that because of the concept of relative motion, no one can prove that the Earth moves."- Kitty Ferguson, Science Writer "...Thus we may return to Ptolemy's point of view of a 'motionless Earth' This would mean that we use a system of reference rigidly fixed to the Earth in which all stars are performing a rotational motion with the same angular velocity around the Earth's axis...one has to show that the transformed metric can be regarded as produced according to Einstein's field equations, by distant rotating masses. This has been done by Thirring. He calculated a field due to a rotating, hollow, thick-walled sphere and proved that inside the cavity it behaved as though there were centrifugal and other inertial forces usually attributed to absolute space. Thus from Einstein's point of view, Ptolemy and Copernicus are equally right. What point of view is chosen is a matter of expediency."- Physicist, Max Born
"How did you come to believe in no creator god?" Well, here "creator god" is just a category label which makes it abstract and this does not actually exist in reality and I don't believe in things that do not actually exist in reality (AKA imaginary).
Lol maybe we should start with “god” before adding all these attributes to him and debating his existence based on all of those “extra” attributes. Darth doesn’t seem to understand when he’s talking to an atheist, all of that extra stuff, including being a “creator”, isn’t supporting his case. We’re just debating his existence in reality. Once we establish that, somehow, then we can go into what god is.
He's a serial killer of the English language. He frequently makes up words to sound smarter. Oh, the irony. He adds superfluous words onto ordinary words, like rather than "a belief in all gods," it becomes "a belief in all god concepts." He should be eating his word salad in a lexical jail cellularity🙂
@@Winslow920 You're right. The guy who vaguely gestures to a black box labelled "God's nature" as an explanation of everything is the true intellectual.
I've noticed how atheist interrupt the conversation with vulgar statements because their worldview is being disproven. It's a psychological defense mechanism. It proves the falsity of the worldview of the person displaying such behavior.
@carlosa4852 since we can all define atheism any way we want, I guess I'm an atheist to. But atheism affirms Jesus Christ as God in the flesh, and God is the irreducible primary and ground of all being.
It is uncomfortable to hear him make sexual references like he does when he knows young people are listening. From Dickens, "“He’s a comical old fellow,” said Scrooge’s nephew, “that’s the truth; and not so pleasant as he might be. However, his offences carry their own punishment, and I have nothing to say against him…. His wealth is of no use to him. He don’t do any good with it. He don’t make himself comfortable with it. He hasn’t the satisfaction of thinking-ha, ha, ha!-that he is ever going to benefit Us with it.”
@@lightbeforethetunnel Right. The people at quote mine project unfortunately don't understand how quote mine fallacies actually work. They basically just say that any time anyone quotes a scientist to support any conclusion that isn't the current consensus it must be a quote mine. Lol
@@Winslow920First of all, nobody believes *_they_* are spinning at 1,000 mph. They accept that the *_earth_* is spinning at 1,000 mph. Secondly, what do you find difficult to accept about this fact?
It's moments around 3:00 when Darth makes numerous false assertions about a topic he hasn't researched at all which destroy his credibility and actually damage the reputation of Presup. He said "even the Greeks knew Earth is a globe in ancient times because they measures shadows, etc". This is widely known to be a begging-the-question fallacy in the globe vs flat debate because the exact same results, mathematically, are obtained by presupposing a local sun and flat earth... instead of a distant sun and spherical earth. This is not even a remotely difficult to comprehend point, it's just Darth's unwarranted arrogance on the issue holding him back from even doing cursory research on the issue. Why? Because it isn't being presented to him by academics. Darth idolizes academia and irrationally excludes research into anything they don't talk about, particularly if he lumps it into the group of "conspiracy theorists" (all of whom he writes off as crazy prior to investigation with guilt by association fallacious reasoning) I don't criticize Darth's approach to this issue to be mean, but simply because it needs to be said. He is behaving in a parallel manner as the atheists he despises. He's engaging in all the same pseudoskepticism and should know better.
What's worse is the way Darth makes all these fallacious & false assertions about Cosmology, always followed by "WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET OFF TOPIC ONTO FLAT EARTH" when people rightfully rebut what he declared. I've noticed this is a common pattern of behavior among prominent debaters who are Heliocentrists. THEY make assertions about Cosmology, but if anyone dispute what they're saying? Well, then that's going off topic... for directly address what was asserted. If he doesn't want to talk about that issue, then fair enough. But then he needs to stop making declarations about it. If he decided to make declarations about it, then he needs to stop gaslighting when people rebut him by falsely claiming they are changing the topic when they're clearly didn't.
Darth still out here deceiving atheists. "How did you come to believe in no creator god?" Well, here "creator god" is just a category label (AKA a group of gods consisting of Allah, Yahweh, God, Brahma, etc) and Darth has said in other conversations that category labels like "reality" or "the universe" are abstract and thus do not actually exist. So Darth's question is really "How did you come to believe in concrete (AKA no abstraction)?" The answer is obviously because they actually exist in reality. Congratulations! You have just completed the first community college lecture on Darth Dawkin's Word Salad 101.
Darth is objectively wrong that there was never a widespread belief in Flat Earth. He's simply wrong about it.
He says to look up the work of some random scholar. Does he not realize that you can't just blindly believe what some random scholar says? There are competing opinions among scholars which are backed up by stronger historical evidence.
The issue is: Darth does know what he's talking about regarding presup, but he has a massively inflated ego regarding other topics he isn't actually as knowledgeable about.
“You don’t know how to talk like an adult.” Darth Dawkins 2022
Every scholar darth has ever talked to has dunked on him so hard.
He’s a master at cherry picking.
Copernicus never had a telescope. What a liar darth is. Copericus had a small tube, sans optics of any sort.
Darth's arrogance regarding the Cosmology debate is absolutely disgusting, particularly given his wide-ranging ignorance on the topic combined with his refusal to allow anyone to debate for any competing position in his presence.
@@lightbeforethetunnelSo, how 'bout that flat Earth "debate"😂?
DD seems to be very upset that science can be updated. That earlier ideas can be overwritten by newer ideas. Very much unlike a Biblical view of the world.
Wdym? There have been multitudes of biblical worldviews, some overwriting others, some more traditional ones kept.
1:00 DD can not accept that his definition could be wrong.
It's absolutely nuts how creationists will acknowledge that koonin accepts evolution as a scientific fact, and then will turn around and quote his criticism gradualism, as if gradualism is the whole of modern synthesis and not just a proposed mechanism that has been left behind in favor of new and better proposed mechanisms like punctuated equilibrium. Talk about a Trojan source for darth.
“Everybody in the room is punished” - except darth himself. He spreads punishment like a wrathful god who caught people eating some juicy fruit, kicking ass and chewing gum, the only time he’s not on a excessive monologue.
If you want to be wrong about practically everything just become a follower of Darth.
No little darth that's not his position at all.
1. His position is you claimed your god is needed to invoke facts.
2. He invoked a fact with absolutely no requirement for your god.
3. Quod erat demonstrandom BY YOUR OWN LIGHTS, YOUR GOD DOES NOT EXIST!
Here's a thought- if we define God as "that which is necessary for reality to exist", then yes, God must exist; but if we then acknowledge that any of the other characteristics that are often associated with him- including that he is a "him", a person in some sense- are irrelevant to this definition, then we can also say that God does not exist in that he does not necessarily have those other characteristics. Otherwise we would be smuggling them in without justification. This means that the term "God" is not a very useful one, because it has baggage that only confuses the issue.
Oh god I can see the Eugene koonin cherry pick from a mile away. Dude called him out for him and fucking blew it.
Explain to me how he decides to make an argument for the other interlocutor andn tell them their positions but never makes his own argument or truly express his position but you better not tell him what his position is.
So, flat Earth is a myth in ancient days even it says it in the bible, but the 6 days of creation is ok, LMFAO
Isn't it obvious? One is a lie, and the other gospel truth!!! lol
@@widescreennavel LMFAO, now I know you are Wilfully IGNORANT.
I made a video where WLC admits the bible has MYTH in it and on the 6 days of creation should not be taken literary. He calls it MythoHistory.
@@LookOutForNumberOne LOL ok, I will look for it. But be nice next time, I didn't attack you or call you names. Willful I am, yes, but ignorant, no. I love my enemies and treat everyone with respect until someone attacks me personally. Let's be sociable. Peace.
@@widescreennavel Not interested in engaging when you are capable of being narrow-minded for the sake of a book. Respect is earned, not given.
@@LookOutForNumberOne That makes no sense. I do not want your respect. I think you are judgmental and not living by your own self-described standards. You have no abilities, can do nothing I cannot do, except you have a bunch of hateful laws you abide by in a vain attempt at immortality. You will blaze through this life, wasting every moment only to discover the end is final. You are not immortal, you are an animal like all of us. You are not being friendly; therefore I am done with you. I do not understand why so many theists refuse to remember they are human beings first.
Lol He's quite sad and pitiful really isn't he?
No little darth that's NOT his position.
He got battered and hasn't got the integrity to admit it.
Darth is doing the worst job of explaining the point of his argument.
It was a Darth argument! If even one fact can be invoked without referencing the necessity of God? God does not exist!? 2 + 2 = 4! Sir! How do you know!? you're not referencing, God!? LOL God +2+2=5? Who's smuggling?
*There is no planetary observation by which we on Earth can prove that the Earth is moving in an orbit around the sun* Physicist, I. Bernard Cohen
*People need to be aware that there is a range of models that could explain the observations. For instance, I can construct you a universe with Earth at its center, and you cannot disprove it based on observations. You can only exclude it on philosophical grounds. What I want to bring into the open is the fact that we are using philosophical criteria in choosing our models. A lot of cosmology tries to hide that.* Physicist, George F.R. Ellis
*So which is real, the Ptolemaic or Copernican system? Although it is not uncommon for people to say that Copernicus proved Ptolemy wrong, that is not true...one can use either picture as a model of the universe, for our observations of the heavens can be explained by assuming either the earth or the sun to be at rest* Physicist, Stephen Hawking
*I have come to believe that the motion of the Earth cannot be detected by any optical experiment* (he then adds his subjective belief that the Earth actually does move without justification afterward) - Physicist, Albert Einstein
*The struggle, so violent in the early days of science, between the views of Ptolemy and Copernicus would then be quite meaningless. Either CS (Coordinate System) could be used with equal justification. The two sentences, the sun is at rest and the earth moves, or the sun moves and the earth is at rest, would simply mean two different conventions concerning two different CS*
- Physicist, Albert Einstein
“Such a condition would imply that we occupy a unique position in the universe, analogous, in a sense, to the ancient conception of a central Earth…This hypothesis cannot be disproved, but it is unwelcome and would only be accepted as a last resort in order to save the phenomena. Therefore we disregard this possibility…. the unwelcome position of a favored location must be avoided at all costs…. such a favored position is intolerable…”
Edwin Hubble
"In order for the Earth to be at rest in the center of the system of the sun, planets, and comets, there is required both universal gravity and another force in addition that acts on all bodies equally according to the quantity of matter in each of them and is equal and opposite to the accelerative gravity with which the Earth tends to the sun...And thus celestial bodies can move around the Earth at rest, as in the Tychonic system."- Physicist, Isaac Newton
"...to the question whether or not the motion of the Earth in space can be made perceptible in terrestrial experiments. We have already remarked...that all attempts of this nature led to a negative result."- Physicist, Albert Einstein
"Briefly, everything occurs as if the Earth were at rest..."- Physicist, Henrick Lorentz
"There was just one alternative; the earth's true velocity through space might happen to have been nil."- Physicist, Arthur Eddington
"The failure of the many attempts to measure terrestrially any effects of the earth's motion..."- Physicist, Wolfgang Pauli
"We do not have and cannot have any means of discovering whether or not we are carried along in a uniform motion of translation."- Physicist, Henri Poincaré
"A great deal of research has been carried out concerning the influence of the Earth's movement. The results were always negative."- Physicist, Henri Poincaré
"This conclusion directly contradicts the explanation...which presupposes that the Earth moves."- Physicist, Albert Michelson
"The data [of Michelson-Morley] were almost unbelievable...There was only one other possible conclusion to draw - that the Earth was at rest."- Physicist, Bernard Jaffe
"We can't feel our motion through space, nor has any physical experiment ever proved that the Earth actually is in motion."- Historian, Lincoln Barnett
"Thus, even now, three and a half centuries after Galileo...it is still remarkably difficult to say categorically whether the earth moves..."- Physicist, Julian B. Barbour
"Thus, failure [of Michelson-Morley] to observe different speeds of light at different times of the year suggested that the Earth must be 'at rest'...It was therefore the 'preferred' frame for measuring absolute motion in space. Yet we have known since Galileo that the Earth is not the center of the universe. Why should it be at rest in space?"- Physicist, Adolph Baker
"...The easiest explanation was that the earth was fixed in the ether and that everything else in the universe moved with respect to the earth and the ether...Such an idea was not considered seriously, since it would mean in effect that our earth occupied the omnipotent position in the universe, with all the other heavenly bodies paying homage by moving around it."- Physicist, James Coleman
"In the effort to explain the Michelson-Morley experiment...the thought was advanced that the Earth might be stationary...Such an idea was not considered seriously, since it would mean in effect that our Earth occupied the omnipotent position in the universe, with all the other heavenly bodies paying homage by revolving around it."- Physicist, Arthur S. Otis
"The Michelson-Morley experiment confronted scientists with an embarrassing alternative. On the one hand they could scrap the ether theory which had explained so many things about electricity, magnetism, and light. Or if they insisted on retaining the ether they had to abandon the still more venerable Copernican theory that the earth is in motion. To many physicists it seemed almost easier to believe that the earth stood still than that waves - light waves, electromagnetic waves - could exist without a medium to sustain them. It was a serious dilemma and one that split scientific thought for a quarter century. Many new hypotheses were advanced and rejected. The experiment was tried again by Morley and by others, with the same conclusion; the apparent velocity of the earth through the ether was zero."- Historian, Lincoln Barnett
"If we were to adopt a frame of reference like Tycho's in which the Earth is at rest, then the distant galaxies would seem to be executing circular turns once a year, and in general relativity this enormous motion would create forces akin to gravitation, which would act on the Sun and planets and give them the motions of the Tychonic theory."- Physicist, Steven Weinberg
"Let it be understood at the outset that it makes no difference, from the point of view of describing planetary motion, whether we take the Earth or the Sun as the center of the solar system. Since the issue is one of relative motion only, there are infinitely many exactly equivalent descriptions referred to different centers - in principle any point will do, the Moon, Jupiter...So the passions loosed on the world by the publication of Copernicus' book, De revolutionibus orbium caelestium libri VI, were logically irrelevant..."- Astronomer, Fred Hoyle
"...we can take either the Earth or the Sun, or any other point for that matter, as the center of the solar system. This is certainly so for the purely kinematical problem of describing the planetary motions. It is also possible to take any point as the center even in dynamics, although recognition of this freedom of choice had to await the present century."- Astronomer, Fred Hoyle
"It is possible to describe the entire universe using any chosen point as the unmoving center - the Earth will do very well - and no one can prove that choice is wrong....Scientists today prefer to picture everything in motion and nothing as being the center. If you haven't given much thought to the implications of twentieth-century science, you may be chagrined...to realize that because of the concept of relative motion, no one can prove that the Earth moves."- Kitty Ferguson, Science Writer
"...Thus we may return to Ptolemy's point of view of a 'motionless Earth' This would mean that we use a system of reference rigidly fixed to the Earth in which all stars are performing a rotational motion with the same angular velocity around the Earth's axis...one has to show that the transformed metric can be regarded as produced according to Einstein's field equations, by distant rotating masses. This has been done by Thirring. He calculated a field due to a rotating, hollow, thick-walled sphere and proved that inside the cavity it behaved as though there were centrifugal and other inertial forces usually attributed to absolute space. Thus from Einstein's point of view, Ptolemy and Copernicus are equally right. What point of view is chosen is a matter of expediency."- Physicist, Max Born
All claims/concepts with varying degrees of possibility. Nuffing 'bout yo' god, though.🤭
@@twcnz3570 Uh, what?
Ouch hard loss from darth at 1:10 😮 love seeing him get owned like the dog he is.
"How did you come to believe in no creator god?" Well, here "creator god" is just a category label which makes it abstract and this does not actually exist in reality and I don't believe in things that do not actually exist in reality (AKA imaginary).
Creator God is a concrete claim, not abstract.
@@Lakermallow3 so how are category labels concrete?
@@Lakermallow3 And how is a claim concrete?
Lol maybe we should start with “god” before adding all these attributes to him and debating his existence based on all of those “extra” attributes.
Darth doesn’t seem to understand when he’s talking to an atheist, all of that extra stuff, including being a “creator”, isn’t supporting his case. We’re just debating his existence in reality. Once we establish that, somehow, then we can go into what god is.
I don’t like the gibberish version of Darth. He’s just using psycho babble these days
May or may not be is an i don’t know. Haha darth you kill me.
Where's the tjump part or did I get click baited
Darth is one of the most verbose, trolls 🧌 on the internet. I wonder how many packages of word salad he keeps in the fridge.
Cool troll emoji
He's a serial killer of the English language. He frequently makes up words to sound smarter. Oh, the irony. He adds superfluous words onto ordinary words, like rather than "a belief in all gods," it becomes "a belief in all god concepts." He should be eating his word salad in a lexical jail cellularity🙂
A whole aisle !
Gary learned that Explicit is his daddy.
Gary learned nothing at all. He never does.
You guys are embarrassingly anti-intellectual
@@Winslow920 You're right. The guy who vaguely gestures to a black box labelled "God's nature" as an explanation of everything is the true intellectual.
Apparently Darth is a global theist!?
I've noticed how atheist interrupt the conversation with vulgar statements because their worldview is being disproven. It's a psychological defense mechanism. It proves the falsity of the worldview of the person displaying such behavior.
Darth is an atheist?
@carlosa4852 since we can all define atheism any way we want, I guess I'm an atheist to. But atheism affirms Jesus Christ as God in the flesh, and God is the irreducible primary and ground of all being.
@@adriansoto239 so, you're defining atheist as christian theism? Weird, but ok.
@carlosa4852 well atheist define atheism for whatever suits them best. I figured I would do the same
@@adriansoto239 sure, and christians define christianity even more wildly for what suits them best.
Sniff sniff sniff, I smell b/s, must be darth!!!!!
"Do you have homosexual tendencies? Is that why you don't believe in God"? But again, not a bigot.
It is uncomfortable to hear him make sexual references like he does when he knows young people are listening. From Dickens, "“He’s a comical old fellow,” said Scrooge’s nephew, “that’s the truth; and not so pleasant as he might be. However, his offences carry their own punishment, and I have nothing to say against him…. His wealth is of no use to him. He don’t do any good with it. He don’t make himself comfortable with it. He hasn’t the satisfaction of thinking-ha, ha, ha!-that he is ever going to benefit Us with it.”
Check the quote mine project in talk origins. It references gould.
It references Gould, fallaciously.
@@lightbeforethetunnel Right. The people at quote mine project unfortunately don't understand how quote mine fallacies actually work. They basically just say that any time anyone quotes a scientist to support any conclusion that isn't the current consensus it must be a quote mine. Lol
Does someone keep popping in with the N-word? 😮
Darth is good on presup, but he's dead wrong on Flat Earth (and history)
so you are saying the Earth is flat ?
@@_Stargazer_. Of course it is.
You didn't actually believe you're spinning at over 1000 mph right now, did you?
@@Winslow920First of all, nobody believes *_they_* are spinning at 1,000 mph. They accept that the *_earth_* is spinning at 1,000 mph.
Secondly, what do you find difficult to accept about this fact?
And most things!
@@TH3-MONKThe complete lack of evidence, for starters.
Tjoke is beyond bottom barrel
Jesus Christ is King. Jesus Christ is Lord.
Prove it!
Maybe in the mythical world of the holy fable.
"Jesus christ" is dead. 2,000 years ago.
I really don't think that's the case.
It's moments around 3:00 when Darth makes numerous false assertions about a topic he hasn't researched at all which destroy his credibility and actually damage the reputation of Presup.
He said "even the Greeks knew Earth is a globe in ancient times because they measures shadows, etc". This is widely known to be a begging-the-question fallacy in the globe vs flat debate because the exact same results, mathematically, are obtained by presupposing a local sun and flat earth... instead of a distant sun and spherical earth.
This is not even a remotely difficult to comprehend point, it's just Darth's unwarranted arrogance on the issue holding him back from even doing cursory research on the issue. Why? Because it isn't being presented to him by academics. Darth idolizes academia and irrationally excludes research into anything they don't talk about, particularly if he lumps it into the group of "conspiracy theorists" (all of whom he writes off as crazy prior to investigation with guilt by association fallacious reasoning)
I don't criticize Darth's approach to this issue to be mean, but simply because it needs to be said. He is behaving in a parallel manner as the atheists he despises. He's engaging in all the same pseudoskepticism and should know better.
What's worse is the way Darth makes all these fallacious & false assertions about Cosmology, always followed by "WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET OFF TOPIC ONTO FLAT EARTH" when people rightfully rebut what he declared.
I've noticed this is a common pattern of behavior among prominent debaters who are Heliocentrists. THEY make assertions about Cosmology, but if anyone dispute what they're saying? Well, then that's going off topic... for directly address what was asserted.
If he doesn't want to talk about that issue, then fair enough. But then he needs to stop making declarations about it.
If he decided to make declarations about it, then he needs to stop gaslighting when people rebut him by falsely claiming they are changing the topic when they're clearly didn't.
Lol YOURE A FLAT EARTHER LOLLLOLLLOLLLLLL
@@lightbeforethetunnel Responding to your own blathering nonsense??? You're gonna make me redundant😂!!!!
Id really love to see him emulate the atheists that he hates. That would be a welcome change.
Darth still out there slaughtering atheism 👍🏻
You must be high sir.
Not quite. But he can sure pack a word salad.
Ha ha ha ha ha. If you want to slaughter my atheism just bring me your god. Ill wait.
Is he though?🤨
Darth still out here deceiving atheists. "How did you come to believe in no creator god?" Well, here "creator god" is just a category label (AKA a group of gods consisting of Allah, Yahweh, God, Brahma, etc) and Darth has said in other conversations that category labels like "reality" or "the universe" are abstract and thus do not actually exist. So Darth's question is really "How did you come to believe in concrete (AKA no abstraction)?" The answer is obviously because they actually exist in reality.
Congratulations! You have just completed the first community college lecture on Darth Dawkin's Word Salad 101.
No NO NO little darth. Come take ME on you coward!