I am sitting here, therefore the Flying Spaghetti Monster exists, all those that deny his existence are suppressing the truth he boiled into your hearts. Ra-men!
+cmyers92xd1 We'll be having the Flying spaghetti Monster over for dinner tonight, with all his noodley appendages and delicious meatballs. We expect a delicious experience.
Jacen Solo Odin is in the corner watching your blasphemous mouth babbling, with it's only eye... you should sacrifice a hamster to excuse your bad behavior...
If they're celibate anyway...what's it matter if it's women they wanna sleep with...but (presumably) don't. Or guys they wanna sleep with, but (presumably) don't? It's gotta be STRAIGHT sex you want, but foreswear forever? Pffft. It's a silly doctrine. Nowhere near "original canon". The "Jesus was Jewish, but we changed a bunch of his 'how to be a better Jew' policies when we rebranded" stuff is funny. And, though JC (as depicted in that book) didn't have a wife, rabbis did. And other priests mentioned. But somehow, now that we've switched to the "Christian" brand (Catholic product line)...priests (still just men), don't get the perks rabbis got.
Well said. My mother died in January, at age 59, and some people think I'm saying her life had no purpose because I don't think she still exists in an afterlife of some sort. But I think they're insulting all the good she did in her life by saying her life only mattered because she has eternal life. She did wonderful things in less than 60 years; it seems those things are meaningless if that 60 years was part of an infinite existence.
"...therefore God sent himself as a human so he could have himself sacrificed to appease himself because he purposefully created us flawed so they we are incapable of following all the laws in a book so hard to interpret, historically flawed, scientifically inaccurate and contradictory that there's 40,000 denominations that all disagree on its meaning so that we don't get punished for eternity which what happens who don't believe this argument even though he loves us." That buries the needle of my bullshit meter. As a side note, I just broke my run-on sentence meter too.
"As a side note?" No worries here I didn't feel like I was falling over like a Dominoe. And you placed a period just in time so I didn't fall over. So I'm good. Thanks
Traci is fucking smart. I had no idea what that guy was talking about at first and she summed it up clearly. Damn she is intelligent as hell and so articulate.
I do not know why theists insist on trying to prove there is a God. Belief in God is a matter of faith and by definition faith is believing in something despite the lack of evidence. So go ahead and believe what you want to believe but don't make yourself look ridiculous by trying to prove it . and definitely don't try to prove it to an atheist. almost all of the atheists I know, myself included, come from a religious background. the more they study the Bible and are exposed to reality they realized the two cannot coexist
Existance is what you make of it. I feel my personal purpose on this earth is to become the best martial artist i can, and to share my knowledge and skills with other people, and for them to do what they will with it, as well as training my clients to be in good shape so they can live a healthy and longer life.
I'm a muddled thinking illogical gullible human being who worships a god in blind faith and obedience. Many of us exist. Therefore god exists. We are the proof. We are his chosen people! I have to agree that your gods exist in your imagination only.
+Lai Keat Seng I will observe your own protocol and answer 3 months after your question about somebody else asking me a question. Or maybe I might ask a random question posted by someone else that posted 3 months ago.
+Heywood Yabloome I personally think that the non-existent god makes more sense until I find some reasonable and not faith based evidence. The fact that many believers of gods all have different opinions and cannot agree and dogmatically insist that have the true god proves my point.
You're right. That's the biggest thing undermining his position. Usually the God fearing people who call are more pleasant even when they Don't come up with a convincing argument. And often I think Matt thinks he's scored the victory when really all he's done is rejected the caller or shouted over them. Slamming the door is not the same thing as winning the discussion. He's really far more about shooting people down than actually winning an intelligent debate.
Consider for a moment, that the universe looks "perfect" to us, because it is the universe we live in. What would an "imperfect" universe look like? Would gravity only work some of the time? Would the laws of physics act weird, preventing the stars from forming? If so, it'd be doubtful we would exist in that universe, or if we did, that we'd be the same as we are here. You see perfection in the only universe you can see. That's what is called 'selection bias'. Still, I do enjoy the aesthetics
My pops tried to argue god's existence saying that earth is the only planet that has life, therefore god exists. I was like why is this it necessary for there to be a god? Simple question; ridiculous answer. He was all mad because he knows well never know, then tried to switch it up saying atheism is a belief system. Let's say it is a belief. How does that prove god exists? I should've recorded the discussion.
+MortalMan You responded well. It's always ridiculous to me when anyone says that "earth is the only planet that has life." It makes me cringe and facepalm. Like, really? Our galaxy is around 100,000 light years across. Within that distance, there are half a trillion stars, each likely with craploads of planets. We have NO idea what's out there in our own galaxy. Then, add another several hundred billion observable galaxies in there. Yet theists say with such confidence "there is only life on earth?" It boggles my mind. How can anyone claim to know such a thing? With our oh so limited sphere of experience on this tiny speck. Even if we WERE the only life in the universe, so what? There is no actual causal relationship that can be formed between that possibility and a god existing. You should also say, atheism is not a belief system, it's simply the worldview that we only accept as true what can be proven to be (99.99%) true, and don't make extraneous claims. For anything else mysterious, we say "I don't know" until sufficient evidence and validation can be provided for either side of the argument. Also, if theists think a "belief system" is bad or non-ideal, why do they so happily accept theirs? It's like they try and validate their position by attempting to undermine an opposing position, thinking it somehow makes theirs better or true. Science could be wrong about EVERYTHING and that would still not validate the god hypothesis.
Hitting you a little late, but a few points you might include: - how does one thing that we, at present, can't prove either way...relate to another thing that we haven't proven either way? - so if we get a radio message from aliens in the Horsehead Nebula...that would, somehow disprove God? Would your dad, then, disbelieve in God? Or come up with "well, he must've created & redeemed them separately" or some such? - which god does it prove? Why that one? - There being other life, in some form, on at least one of the trillion plus planets...is nearly a statistical certainty. So nevermind the supposed connection between the two...how do you get "we're alone" much less "therefore x"? - how do "God isn't manifesting to us right now...but He totes exists" and "Aliens...somewhere...aren't manifesting to us right now...therefore they don't exist"...even work on any level?
Those are some solid points, & good questions my friend. The only issue(s) I've noticed in my anecdotal experiences with asking these questions is it mostly, (not always) tends to strengthen their faith as they will no doubt look for answers in the big book of multiple choice, i.e. bible. It's as if Science, logic & critical thinking aren't even a thought for them. I've had more memorable, & meaningful dialog when using epistemology and questioning the reliability of faith as a way of coming to "know" something. Example(s): -If you had a time machine and could go back and watch the resurrection, would you still need faith? -What might you say to that Hindu person that is using faith to conclude that Vishnu is real? They're 100% confident in their belief just like you; and they also use the same method (being faith) to come to their conclusion, but they're arriving at a completely different god than you. Where did they go wrong? In essence, it would be very difficult for me to differentiate between the Hindu and you; and you're both using faith. -Is the woman that believes in Allah, or the man who believes in Vishnu just as true with their belief as you are with yours? -Does it alarm you in any way that "truth" might be dependent on your location and how how happen to be raised? Shouldn't truth be constant? -If that's true, shouldn't that be moving you down on the confidence of your belief if you would readily admit that truth is only what happens to be if you've been raised a particular way? -Do you think if you were raised as a muslim, you'd still be a christian today? -Just not knowing something makes you think it's all the more possible that the specific god exists in your life? -It seems like you've almost set up a scenario where....regardless of the outcome you're gonna view it as god helping you, or working in your life, correct? -In what way does that make belief in the god true? -Does it diminish the likelihood that there's even a god in the life working?
@VESANG I'm doing well, thanks for asking. Hope the same for you. The reason no one can demonstrate that man came from fish is because there is no evidence that points to that conclusion and secondly, not likely. Although the big bang has it's challenges, it is the most likely scenario. Besides, fundamentally all the BB is, is an expansion event, Expansion events take place all the time and have been observed. We know evolution is true because it's observable and demonstrable, so it can and has
One of these two is a hot atheist.... Mythology is fictional. Whichever fictional being u believe is purely dependant on what part of the globe you are born on.
Why are those who believe in a god saddle themselves with trying to prove that he exists? Is god a COWARD? If god is not a COWARD why then has he been hiding for the last 2000 years? Zeus declined the same invitation so no one believes in him anymore.
Ok, where is he now? Why does he hide in the 21st century? Why does God need money? Is God all powerful or ALL BULLSHIT? The very fact that I can and will try to humiliate him doesn't that demonstrate that there is no god? Hey Elijah, you won't go to hell because there is no hell. Sorry but the afterlife theory is weak but that only means that we must make the very best of this life. Elijah, its alright you and I and everyone else will make it through pleasantly and not in a fiery ball of fire. Enjoy this life without the shackles of god's unreasonable demands. Don't let religion get the best of your life. And yes I am prepared to when I die to walk up to the Pearly Gates and tell God he is a "moral thug" no matter the consequences. If god did exist why did he allow Jim Jones to kill all of his followers in Jonestown? If god did exist why did he allow Catholic Priests to rape little boys? If god did exist why would he kill everyone on earth with a flood and start all over again? And if we are decedents of Noahs Ark eeeuuuuuuwwwwww, were we born from a family practicing incest? And I also apologize Elijah, but the bible is no book that we should give any credence to as anything near the "TRUTH"! I apologize because I realize that believing in god is very dear to you. But do you believe in Buddha? Do you believe in Hinduism? Do you believe in Zeus? No you don't. Belief in Christianity is just a phase in history.
God ascended back to heaven after His resurrection. Haven't you read the story? God doesn't need your money, His streets are made of pure gold. As far as you trying to humiliate God..He overlooks your ignorance and is very patient with people like you, but make no mistake about it. If you continue to mock and reject Him, there will come a day when you die and face Him at the judgment...and FYI, you won't be the one doing the talking.
Hah, nice try. What you don't understand is that I am an Atheist. I don't believe in god. I don't believe in your bible. What I know about your bible is that you haven't read it yet. So by the next time you decide to reply back to me, please read the bible cover to cover.
The odds of this universe just happening on it's own are so vast that it is nearly incomprehensible, even the thought that an eye could form on it's own without any input from an outside source is astronomical, and that's just an eye. He's already proven himself to you in his creation, you just refuse to acknowledge him as God. I know he is real..how do I know? The day I came to him, he changed me. I'm not the same as I was before. He's with me daily. My friend, there is a God..his name...
“He’s already proven himself to you, you refuse to acknowledge him.” In other words, you’re a dishonest tool, and no Atheist has any reason to believe you. Either prove your claims, without using fallacious reasoning, or STFU.
Matt I swear. Is so funny that I would just laugh and laugh at his jokes. Some people are just natural and Matt is. He's damn funny! I'm not being sarcastic. I love him. I mean not like a gay way. NOT THAT THERE'S ANYTHING WRONG WITH IT! I mean he's so cool.
@Scyntist I know it's been awhile but i really want to thank you for your time and sharing your believes in such a nice manner ...i appreciate that and i mean it! Obviously for some reasons people believe what they believe and all think they have evidence...interesting...i guess we differ mainly on what counts as evidence and what authority has the knowledge to determine that. I wish you all the best in your search for truth !
@Chinomareno "Most Christians have no idea what they are worshiping," We're all worshiping something. We have no choice but to. We're not self sufficient, no matter how rich we are. That is a conclusion everyone comes to when they decide to get absolutely honest. As an atheist, assuming you are, what exactly are you worshiping (giving the credit to for your sustenance)? The big bang? Evolution? What, exactly, created you? Are you grateful? Or confused and unaware of where your praise was going?
You're right that I shouldn't be rude. It's hard though, with many on your side being vicious against me. Glad to see I was worth your time with a comment you took time to type out just for me. :-]
Here, from a quick wikipedia search: On 24 May 2011, it was reported that quark-gluon plasma (the densest matter besides black holes) has been created in the LHC.[64]
Because,(And I'm not a psychologist, so yeah.)he just wants to sound smart. It's the way religions always have been. People have questions that they don't know the answer to and religion provides this miraculous answer that not only answers the question, but makes their point of view unarguably right and gives people comfort.
In general you'd be right, but there are a couple of factors to consider: 1) They have a limited amount of time on the show and a lot of material / callers (they only had a minute left when they cut him off). 2) The caller's argument has been made in previous shows, it's nothing new. 3) It's easy to predict where that conversation was going to go and it wouldn't be anywhere useful.
I think you might be mistaken. I have never heard of this until now and I've studied this subject long and hard. I know about quantum fluctuations but it doesn't mean that particles are "jumping out of existence" or "into existence". The particles are in different states, but that doesn't mean that they no longer exist.
Right. When a syllogism is valid and its premises true, the conclusion must be true. If either of those conditions does not obtain, this is not guaranteed. This, I may add, is called the Garbage In, Garbage Out principle: if your premises are false, even a valid argument fails.
Matter is fluctuating but not "jumping out of existence". Your desk does actually exist. If it didn't, you wouldn't see it. Light is being absorbed and rebounded off the actual desk and specific wavelengths of light enter your eye to be processed by your brain to allow you to see the desk. I think either you didn't understand your teacher or your teacher was mistaken.
I have to agree. Whenever a caller brings on multiple points he cuts them off saying they can only bring one point at a time but then he goes on listing varying points. He uses the hold button to dominate the argument. Neutral viewer here so I have no bias but that is something I observed. The funny thing is the other hosts don't do that much. You gotta keep it fair for both sides in a debate.
I think I saw this even on a show with Mitchio Kaku, or what's he called anyway and yes, it seems they also used the exact terms' jumping in and out of existence, regarding particles in matter..
@Scyntist Great points! Thank you for sharing them! If you you follow back you will see that one of my points is to not trust 100% anything.We all have been greatly influenced/brain washed / in many ways.It's the consistency of the argument that revels it.You said""the universe looks designed. That's only a subjective assertion" Here the fact if we say computer is designed based on what do we say that ...and how much more complex is man who actually designs the computer ?
When a problem affects your brain, your personality/memories/feelings can be affected. This proves that they are tied to your brain. If you don't understand that, I have nothing more to say to you.
The salient difference between a house, and the universe, is that we have numerous examples of houses being built, and no examples of houses forming by themselves. Conversely we have no examples of universes being created, but have evidence that leads to the notion that the universe formed according to natural laws.
@Scyntist Great points! I appreciate you trying to be honest.I agree with you"that should not stop us from attempting to understand more"...let's just try to be truthful to the facts and honest as you said. I am not trying to shift burden of proof with those questions...sorry you took it that way. What about Q#2- Yes or No. Since the discussion is about God why not finding where we are on this field /being honest with ourselves as you said/. I have to stop for tonight.Thanks a lot
@lederereddy I don't have a belief with regards to where I'm going after death. I personally have no idea, so my answer is "I don't know" to that question. There is no such thing as "atheist beliefs." What an atheist believes is up to the individual; it is not dictated to them by some atheistic authority, which makes it the opposite of dogmatic.
"You are obviously very emotionally troubled." -says the one trigger happy with the caps lock. "What BULLSHIT." Well, you proved me wrong there. How can I refute that rebuttal? It's too good. The genius needed for its creation is beyond me.
Descartes argument for existence "I think therefore I am" pre-supposes the existence of a "thinking thing" and doesn't provide any evidence for a person - it's circular reasoning. All you can get logically out of that line of thought is "there is a thought, therefore there is a thought", nothing else. To get from "I'm sitting here" to "Therefore the god of Abraham exists" is nothing short of hilarious. Why not say "I'm sitting here so therefore Zeus exists or blue is actually red?"
No, it means that gravity works whether I believe in the God of Gravity, Electricity works whether I believe in the God of Electricity, and so on, where on the other hand you have to actively believe in God to believe that things happen that only God can make happen.
@Lleanlleawrg As a scientist, now a day's, students are instructed not to search for non physical answers for physical things. That works fine until you start questioning why physical things exist in the first place. Think about it. Every atom came into existence along with time and space. But from where? As far as we're concerned, a non physical, infinite place. In other words a supernatural place. All that means. my frend is this, there's more to this than we're privy to, physically speaking.
I think it's so much simpler than any of this. Science: the real. Mysticism: the fantasy. Philosophy: The wishful thinking that there is a link between the first two.
can't escape an intelligent designer being out there. Whether a person wants to believe it is God, or an alien, whatever, something had to have helped. The mechanics of it all declares it, which is why this world declares the majesty of God, and why this world alone proves to you he exists.
Irreducible complexity is something invented by creationists and intelligent design advocates. It doesn't actually exist in reality. Irreducible complexity is simply the logical fallacy of the argument from ignorance. Simply because you don't know doesn't mean that no one knows.
I agree, even if it does get annoying, not all stances should just be abandoned. The only problem is that if dogma is being spouted rather than debates, the hosts get a little irritated. Whether it's the right thing to do or not, I see it happen. On an interview with Matt Dillahunty, he said something about the show not being a theists place to preach. To debate and discuss=ok...preach=no no. I guess it just depends on how the caller presents himself though the conversation.
"The laws of physics are exactly right for life to exist, therefore it is designed." Well if the laws of physics DIDN'T allow life to exist then we WOULDN'T be here to say "Oh the laws of physics don't allow for life, therefore it can't have been designed"!
@Scyntist I see your point and it is very common for us /me including/ people trying to avoid the core of the discussion.If you don't like the word design what about "result of intelligence" when it comes to origin of computer and man respectively. Intelligence according to definition is knowledge related and knowledge on it's turn to conscience ...you know what mean...let's go to the core not trying to play with words. Again the inconsistency is a big problem to what we discuss
Well, no atheist would want a personal revelation from god when we are alone, but would ask for a conformation to everyone at once dispelling doubt and showing he is there.
@ledereddy "it really depends on whose science you want to believe" I seek to understand whose science makes the most logical sense, through methods of demonstrable, tangible results that I and others can observe. My beliefs are validated because of this. I don't have to believe or have faith, because it's right there. If I choose to be ignorant and say it doesn't fit my beliefs religious or otherwise; I just become someone who closes their mind because the results are not what fits my faith or
@Lleanlleawrg "I mean that what you call "creation" is not evidence of a creator. You presuppose that it could only have come by through a process of creation by a creator superbeing you call God." All I am sying is that is the best explanation given the evidence. It's no small thing when you study the subjects, their complexities are genuinely remarkable. Something has to know what it's doing in order for things to work, like birds flying, fish breathing under water, people talking, seeing etc.
@VESANG Urr I awnsered that in the first sentance, I said "Because everything's a possiblity" simple as that. We learn somthing new everyday and one day it just might just be god himself.
You have to understand that the language back then is not the same as our language now. Terminology and definitions that we give things, now, did not exist then. The word used in Hebrew is "owph", it simply means "owner of a wing". It grouped all animals with wings under this one, but classed them as either clean or unclean.
That logic only follows if there is such a thing as a creator. Once you prove the existence of a creator, then you can go on to proving that we, the supposed created, were made for a purpose.
@VESANG You wouldn't expect to see large changes directly, which macro suggests. Your "fish into man" would be an example of macro if the duration of change occurred in a short period of time. Macro means changes occurred at our above the species level and has been documented. New species have been discovered as a result of the exchange at one level or another; mosquitos are a good example. Macro also breeds subspecies and has been observed. The north American deer mouse has over 50 subspecies
@ledereddy I would never tell someone that they shouldn't pray, shouldn't believe in God etc. That's the kind of behavior that Christians participate in, at least that's been my experience. Once they find out you're an Atheist or an Agnostic, all of a sudden you're the bad guy and you just need to find God and have faith. My favorite questions are "why do you hate God?" or "what bad or traumatic thing happened in your life?". How about just forgetting about God and help those in need just beca
The burden of proof in ANY situation falls on the believer of whatever it is they are believing. You are born as a disbeliever, not as a believer. What caused you to BEGIN believing in something that the rest of us don't believe in?
Something that never changes is the fact that this creation declares his majesty. If you want to believe something like this can just "happen" that is your choice, but you know full well that the chances of something as complex and incredible as the universe, let alone a single protein molecule, managing to come together without a guide, or designer, is next to impossible. The mathematical odds are beyond astronomical. Yet, you believe it...which do you think is logical?
@lederereddy A few reasons here: - You could substitute the word "God" with "Magical Universe Creating Fairy" and your theory would be just as strong. - You can't demonstrate that God exists, so I need faith for this explanation to work. - Nature shows us that complexity can come from simplicity, it doesn't always need a higher and more complex thing behind it, whereas your position has the inherent problem of explaining what process God used to accomplish creation, and how God came to be.
awesome to know this is an actual televised show over in the states, not sure I'd make for a very interesting guest though since I'd just agree with everything they say.
watchmaker argument or not, anyone who thinks that this universe can just happen refuses to accept that the mathematical odds make it impossible. And just because it's here, doesn't make the impossible possible.
@Scyntist Sorry for the delay my friend! Trying to understand you better...what you are saying is that even absolute sound logic can not prove anything /when it comes to existence of things as you said/ until that thing is demonstrated and observed? Did i get this right?
@lederereddy "I suggest, there's a telling reason for that!" Well, at least we can agree on that. Yes there is very telling reason for that. I won't make the mistake of making a positive claim without presenting evidence to support my claim.
@Lleanlleawrg "Yes these places like the red sea are real places, but to say that this means the event actually occurred is like saying wizardry is real because London exists." That's not how the authentication of an event works. I'm not saying just because a place exists it means Moses was there. There are hundreds of corresponding artifacts etc verifying the fact that Moses came through there, parted the sea, was chased by Egyptians on Chariots and they were drowned in the sea. Big difference
alternatively chant: F is for friends who do stuff together U is for you and me N is for anytime and anyplace and anywhere under the deep blue sea, when you require spongebob's aid.
You can't get people to see this "impossibility" because you cannot show that it IS impossible. And, of course the same logic must then apply to that thing that you think is powerful, complex, and intelligent enough to create universes. How could it just occur on its own? That is even less likely.
Simple. It wasn't the first thing to be. Also, the word "theory" in the context of science, must be backed up by observable facts. In this context, the word "theory" is not the same as "guess". The word "theory" in something like "It works, in theory" is not the same way it's used in something like "scientific theory".
I am sitting here, therefore the Flying Spaghetti Monster exists, all those that deny his existence are suppressing the truth he boiled into your hearts. Ra-men!
+cmyers92xd1 We'll be having the Flying spaghetti Monster over for dinner tonight, with all his noodley appendages and delicious meatballs. We expect a delicious experience.
+cmyers92xd1
If the Flying Spaghetti Monster were not real then why would all planets be shaped as meatballs? Vermicelli 3:15
cmyers92xd1 No, my child. It's all about the penguin god.
R'amen!
R'amen
It’s easier to believe lies than understand the truth.
Love your answer. Religion is nothing more than a huge cop out for the weak -- the ignorant, the fearful, the desperate and confused.
The path of least intellectual resistance.
I'm sitting here! So Thor exists!
Ra would like to have a word with you.
Jacen Solo Odin is in the corner watching your blasphemous mouth babbling, with it's only eye... you should sacrifice a hamster to excuse your bad behavior...
Who said he doesn't?
@clifton gaither did you get the order correct?
Incorrect. Me sitting here on the toilet prove Poseidon exists!
I wrote this comment, therefore I exist. Or do I?
I doubt it
Mortal Kombat Reconciliation
Your comment exists, but you don't....
*Queue X-Files music...*
Ermmmm,,,,,,maybe
You could be a bot.
Well, IF you exist, send my Church of Myself, 10 000 Dollars. if I don`t get that MONEY, you don`t exist ! ..................
it's a miracle if a catholic preist is straight!
If they're celibate anyway...what's it matter if it's women they wanna sleep with...but (presumably) don't. Or guys they wanna sleep with, but (presumably) don't? It's gotta be STRAIGHT sex you want, but foreswear forever? Pffft.
It's a silly doctrine. Nowhere near "original canon". The "Jesus was Jewish, but we changed a bunch of his 'how to be a better Jew' policies when we rebranded" stuff is funny. And, though JC (as depicted in that book) didn't have a wife, rabbis did. And other priests mentioned. But somehow, now that we've switched to the "Christian" brand (Catholic product line)...priests (still just men), don't get the perks rabbis got.
It's a prerequisite, it's on the application form just under "are you willing to sexually defile young children"?
Well said. My mother died in January, at age 59, and some people think I'm saying her life had no purpose because I don't think she still exists in an afterlife of some sort. But I think they're insulting all the good she did in her life by saying her life only mattered because she has eternal life. She did wonderful things in less than 60 years; it seems those things are meaningless if that 60 years was part of an infinite existence.
'Ah screw all that.'
Lmfao. Matt's hilarious 😂
5:22 Matt shape-shifting...PROOF!!!
Gandalf Looks like a camera artifact to me.
One night out with Tracy must be the greatest experience and interesting chat ever !
"...therefore God sent himself as a human so he could have himself sacrificed to appease himself because he purposefully created us flawed so they we are incapable of following all the laws in a book so hard to interpret, historically flawed, scientifically inaccurate and contradictory that there's 40,000 denominations that all disagree on its meaning so that we don't get punished for eternity which what happens who don't believe this argument even though he loves us." That buries the needle of my bullshit meter.
As a side note, I just broke my run-on sentence meter too.
"As a side note?" No worries here I didn't feel like I was falling over like a Dominoe. And you placed a period just in time so I didn't fall over. So I'm good. Thanks
Well done !
Traci is fucking smart. I had no idea what that guy was talking about at first and she summed it up clearly. Damn she is intelligent as hell and so articulate.
THEORIGINAL JUNKDNA she is a National Treasure
I do not know why theists insist on trying to prove there is a God. Belief in God is a matter of faith and by definition faith is believing in something despite the lack of evidence. So go ahead and believe what you want to believe but don't make yourself look ridiculous by trying to prove it . and definitely don't try to prove it to an atheist. almost all of the atheists I know, myself included, come from a religious background. the more they study the Bible and are exposed to reality they realized the two cannot coexist
''I assure you I am not dillusional, crazy, deluded or whatever...'' Best joke I heard this month
Existance is what you make of it. I feel my personal purpose on this earth is to become the best martial artist i can, and to share my knowledge and skills with other people, and for them to do what they will with it, as well as training my clients to be in good shape so they can live a healthy and longer life.
Haven sounds like a graduate of the PHD School of Apologetics, That stands for Pile it Higher and Deeper.
I'm a muddled thinking illogical gullible human being who worships a god in blind faith and obedience.
Many of us exist.
Therefore god exists.
We are the proof.
We are his chosen people!
I have to agree that your gods exist in your imagination only.
+harryrambler I'm...sorry?
+Barnaby ap Robert he try to say thing that believe by many didn't prove it is true. it require both hard and soft evident.
+Lai Keat Seng
I will observe your own protocol and answer 3 months after your question about somebody else asking me a question.
Or maybe I might ask a random question posted by someone else that posted 3 months ago.
+Heywood Yabloome
I personally think that the non-existent god makes more sense until I find some reasonable and not faith based evidence.
The fact that many believers of gods all have different opinions and cannot agree and dogmatically insist that have the true god proves my point.
It's always really awkward at the start whilst they sit there just listening to the music.
its not awkward...matt looks like he has fun jamming to it.
For a few months I thought Matt and Tracy were married lol, their kids would be hella smart tho, just saying
You're right. That's the biggest thing undermining his position. Usually the God fearing people who call are more pleasant even when they Don't come up with a convincing argument. And often I think Matt thinks he's scored the victory when really all he's done is rejected the caller or shouted over them. Slamming the door is not the same thing as winning the discussion. He's really far more about shooting people down than actually winning an intelligent debate.
Consider for a moment, that the universe looks "perfect" to us, because it is the universe we live in.
What would an "imperfect" universe look like? Would gravity only work some of the time? Would the laws of physics act weird, preventing the stars from forming?
If so, it'd be doubtful we would exist in that universe, or if we did, that we'd be the same as we are here. You see perfection in the only universe you can see. That's what is called 'selection bias'.
Still, I do enjoy the aesthetics
8 years ago......and still Jesus has not returned! Fuck, who knew??
My pops tried to argue god's existence saying that earth is the only planet that has life, therefore god exists. I was like why is this it necessary for there to be a god? Simple question; ridiculous answer. He was all mad because he knows well never know, then tried to switch it up saying atheism is a belief system. Let's say it is a belief. How does that prove god exists? I should've recorded the discussion.
+MortalMan
You responded well.
It's always ridiculous to me when anyone says that "earth is the only planet that has life." It makes me cringe and facepalm. Like, really? Our galaxy is around 100,000 light years across. Within that distance, there are half a trillion stars, each likely with craploads of planets. We have NO idea what's out there in our own galaxy. Then, add another several hundred billion observable galaxies in there. Yet theists say with such confidence "there is only life on earth?"
It boggles my mind. How can anyone claim to know such a thing? With our oh so limited sphere of experience on this tiny speck. Even if we WERE the only life in the universe, so what? There is no actual causal relationship that can be formed between that possibility and a god existing.
You should also say, atheism is not a belief system, it's simply the worldview that we only accept as true what can be proven to be (99.99%) true, and don't make extraneous claims. For anything else mysterious, we say "I don't know" until sufficient evidence and validation can be provided for either side of the argument. Also, if theists think a "belief system" is bad or non-ideal, why do they so happily accept theirs? It's like they try and validate their position by attempting to undermine an opposing position, thinking it somehow makes theirs better or true. Science could be wrong about EVERYTHING and that would still not validate the god hypothesis.
Hitting you a little late, but a few points you might include:
- how does one thing that we, at present, can't prove either way...relate to another thing that we haven't proven either way?
- so if we get a radio message from aliens in the Horsehead Nebula...that would, somehow disprove God? Would your dad, then, disbelieve in God? Or come up with "well, he must've created & redeemed them separately" or some such?
- which god does it prove? Why that one?
- There being other life, in some form, on at least one of the trillion plus planets...is nearly a statistical certainty. So nevermind the supposed connection between the two...how do you get "we're alone" much less "therefore x"?
- how do "God isn't manifesting to us right now...but He totes exists" and "Aliens...somewhere...aren't manifesting to us right now...therefore they don't exist"...even work on any level?
Those are some solid points, & good questions my friend. The only issue(s) I've noticed in my anecdotal experiences with asking these questions is it mostly, (not always) tends to strengthen their faith as they will no doubt look for answers in the big book of multiple choice, i.e. bible. It's as if Science, logic & critical thinking aren't even a thought for them.
I've had more memorable, & meaningful dialog when using epistemology and questioning the reliability of faith as a way of coming to "know" something.
Example(s):
-If you had a time machine and could go back and watch the resurrection, would you still need faith?
-What might you say to that Hindu person that is using faith to conclude that Vishnu is real? They're 100% confident in their belief just like you; and they also use the same method (being faith) to come to their conclusion, but they're arriving at a completely different god than you. Where did they go wrong? In essence, it would be very difficult for me to differentiate between the Hindu and you; and you're both using faith.
-Is the woman that believes in Allah, or the man who believes in Vishnu just as true with their belief as you are with yours?
-Does it alarm you in any way that "truth" might be dependent on your location and how how happen to be raised? Shouldn't truth be constant?
-If that's true, shouldn't that be moving you down on the confidence of your belief if you would readily admit that truth is only what happens to be if you've been raised a particular way?
-Do you think if you were raised as a muslim, you'd still be a christian today?
-Just not knowing something makes you think it's all the more possible that the specific god exists in your life?
-It seems like you've almost set up a scenario where....regardless of the outcome you're gonna view it as god helping you, or working in your life, correct?
-In what way does that make belief in the god true?
-Does it diminish the likelihood that there's even a god in the life working?
She sinded me with blience.
@VESANG I'm doing well, thanks for asking. Hope the same for you. The reason no one can demonstrate that man came from fish is because there is no evidence that points to that conclusion and secondly, not likely. Although the big bang has it's challenges, it is the most likely scenario. Besides, fundamentally all the BB is, is an expansion event, Expansion events take place all the time and have been observed. We know evolution is true because it's observable and demonstrable, so it can and has
I liked David though! The Wonder Twins thing was hilarious
One of these two is a hot atheist....
Mythology is fictional. Whichever fictional being u believe is purely dependant on what part of the globe you are born on.
Not true, it's also based on cultural and societal impact on the individual as well as personal experiences, research, influences, etc.
Tracie's hot
Debatable
masterdebatable
She has a hotness factor. Her brain is sexy, for one thing.
Why are those who believe in a god saddle themselves with trying to prove that he exists? Is god a COWARD? If god is not a COWARD why then has he been hiding for the last 2000 years? Zeus declined the same invitation so no one believes in him anymore.
God hasn't been hiding. He came to this earth and walked it for 33 years. Read a bible..get a clue.
Ok, where is he now? Why does he hide in the 21st century? Why does God need money? Is God all powerful or ALL BULLSHIT? The very fact that I can and will try to humiliate him doesn't that demonstrate that there is no god? Hey Elijah, you won't go to hell because there is no hell. Sorry but the afterlife theory is weak but that only means that we must make the very best of this life. Elijah, its alright you and I and everyone else will make it through pleasantly and not in a fiery ball of fire. Enjoy this life without the shackles of god's unreasonable demands. Don't let religion get the best of your life.
And yes I am prepared to when I die to walk up to the Pearly Gates and tell God he is a "moral thug" no matter the consequences. If god did exist why did he allow Jim Jones to kill all of his followers in Jonestown? If god did exist why did he allow Catholic Priests to rape little boys? If god did exist why would he kill everyone on earth with a flood and start all over again? And if we are decedents of Noahs Ark eeeuuuuuuwwwwww, were we born from a family practicing incest?
And I also apologize Elijah, but the bible is no book that we should give any credence to as anything near the "TRUTH"! I apologize because I realize that believing in god is very dear to you. But do you believe in Buddha? Do you believe in Hinduism? Do you believe in Zeus? No you don't. Belief in Christianity is just a phase in history.
God ascended back to heaven after His resurrection. Haven't you read the story? God doesn't need your money, His streets are made of pure gold. As far as you trying to humiliate God..He overlooks your ignorance and is very patient with people like you, but make no mistake about it. If you continue to mock and reject Him, there will come a day when you die and face Him at the judgment...and FYI, you won't be the one doing the talking.
Hah, nice try. What you don't understand is that I am an Atheist. I don't believe in god. I don't believe in your bible. What I know about your bible is that you haven't read it yet. So by the next time you decide to reply back to me, please read the bible cover to cover.
Oh and I'll be asking questions. Test questions.
I LOVE THE INTROS!!! Always humorous
The odds of this universe just happening on it's own are so vast that it is nearly incomprehensible, even the thought that an eye could form on it's own without any input from an outside source is astronomical, and that's just an eye.
He's already proven himself to you in his creation, you just refuse to acknowledge him as God. I know he is real..how do I know? The day I came to him, he changed me. I'm not the same as I was before. He's with me daily.
My friend, there is a God..his name...
Prove it.
“He’s already proven himself to you, you refuse to acknowledge him.”
In other words, you’re a dishonest tool, and no Atheist has any reason to believe you. Either prove your claims, without using fallacious reasoning, or STFU.
Matt I swear. Is so funny that I would just laugh and laugh at his jokes. Some people are just natural and Matt is. He's damn funny! I'm not being sarcastic. I love him. I mean not like a gay way. NOT THAT THERE'S ANYTHING WRONG WITH IT! I mean he's so cool.
BLAST OFF gay.
right, yeqh he's gay
Only fools say in their hearts, "There is no God." They are corrupt, and their actions are evil; not one of them does good! - Psalms 53:1
@Scyntist I know it's been awhile but i really want to thank you for your time and sharing your believes in such a nice manner ...i appreciate that and i mean it!
Obviously for some reasons people believe what they believe and all think they have evidence...interesting...i guess we differ mainly on what counts as evidence and what authority has the knowledge to determine that.
I wish you all the best in your search for truth !
@Chinomareno "Most Christians have no idea what they are worshiping,"
We're all worshiping something. We have no choice but to. We're not self sufficient, no matter how rich we are. That is a conclusion everyone comes to when they decide to get absolutely honest. As an atheist, assuming you are, what exactly are you worshiping (giving the credit to for your sustenance)? The big bang? Evolution? What, exactly, created you? Are you grateful? Or confused and unaware of where your praise was going?
You're right that I shouldn't be rude. It's hard though, with many on your side being vicious against me. Glad to see I was worth your time with a comment you took time to type out just for me. :-]
Here, from a quick wikipedia search: On 24 May 2011, it was reported that quark-gluon plasma (the densest matter besides black holes) has been created in the LHC.[64]
the fact that you are sitting somewhere is evidence that you exist.
kazoosc yes but not god
Aw...that little Wonder Twin fist bump was so adorable.
Because,(And I'm not a psychologist, so yeah.)he just wants to sound smart. It's the way religions always have been. People have questions that they don't know the answer to and religion provides this miraculous answer that not only answers the question, but makes their point of view unarguably right and gives people comfort.
In general you'd be right, but there are a couple of factors to consider:
1) They have a limited amount of time on the show and a lot of material / callers (they only had a minute left when they cut him off).
2) The caller's argument has been made in previous shows, it's nothing new.
3) It's easy to predict where that conversation was going to go and it wouldn't be anywhere useful.
I miss Tracie so much! She really made this show. Her and Matt together was about as good as it gets.
I think you might be mistaken. I have never heard of this until now and I've studied this subject long and hard. I know about quantum fluctuations but it doesn't mean that particles are "jumping out of existence" or "into existence". The particles are in different states, but that doesn't mean that they no longer exist.
Right. When a syllogism is valid and its premises true, the conclusion must be true. If either of those conditions does not obtain, this is not guaranteed. This, I may add, is called the Garbage In, Garbage Out principle: if your premises are false, even a valid argument fails.
Absolutely. I do with my life what i want to do, not what anyone or anything else wants me to do with it.
Matter is fluctuating but not "jumping out of existence". Your desk does actually exist. If it didn't, you wouldn't see it. Light is being absorbed and rebounded off the actual desk and specific wavelengths of light enter your eye to be processed by your brain to allow you to see the desk. I think either you didn't understand your teacher or your teacher was mistaken.
I have to agree.
Whenever a caller brings on multiple points he cuts them off saying they can only bring one point at a time but then he goes on listing varying points.
He uses the hold button to dominate the argument.
Neutral viewer here so I have no bias but that is something I observed. The funny thing is the other hosts don't do that much. You gotta keep it fair for both sides in a debate.
As degrasse tyson put it, "The difference between Science and Religion is that Science works whether you believe in it or not."
I think I saw this even on a show with Mitchio Kaku, or what's he called anyway and yes, it seems they also used the exact terms' jumping in and out of existence, regarding particles in matter..
I think all our purpose is to enjoy life to the fullest:) But most are simply going through the motion, always seeking, but never finding fulfillment.
@Scyntist Great points! Thank you for sharing them! If you you follow back you will see that one of my points is to not trust 100% anything.We all have been greatly influenced/brain washed / in many ways.It's the consistency of the argument that revels it.You said""the universe looks designed. That's only a subjective assertion"
Here the fact if we say computer is designed based on what do we say that ...and how much more complex is man who actually designs the computer ?
When a problem affects your brain, your personality/memories/feelings can be affected. This proves that they are tied to your brain. If you don't understand that, I have nothing more to say to you.
@Ebvardh
i totally agree, fellow person of sanity
nice to know one is not alone
Matt starts out on a way better mood years back lok
The salient difference between a house, and the universe, is that we have numerous examples of houses being built, and no examples of houses forming by themselves. Conversely we have no examples of universes being created, but have evidence that leads to the notion that the universe formed according to natural laws.
@Scyntist Great points! I appreciate you trying to be honest.I agree with you"that should not stop us from attempting to understand more"...let's just try to be truthful to the facts and honest as you said. I am not trying to shift burden of proof with those questions...sorry you took it that way. What about Q#2- Yes or No.
Since the discussion is about God why not finding where we are on this field /being honest with ourselves as you said/. I have to stop for tonight.Thanks a lot
@lederereddy I don't have a belief with regards to where I'm going after death. I personally have no idea, so my answer is "I don't know" to that question.
There is no such thing as "atheist beliefs." What an atheist believes is up to the individual; it is not dictated to them by some atheistic authority, which makes it the opposite of dogmatic.
"You are obviously very emotionally troubled." -says the one trigger happy with the caps lock.
"What BULLSHIT." Well, you proved me wrong there. How can I refute that rebuttal? It's too good. The genius needed for its creation is beyond me.
@MrSeniorPickle Matt does seem to be very impatient in this video. You're right though, he could have responded differently and been nicer.
Descartes argument for existence "I think therefore I am" pre-supposes the existence of a "thinking thing" and doesn't provide any evidence for a person - it's circular reasoning. All you can get logically out of that line of thought is "there is a thought, therefore there is a thought", nothing else. To get from "I'm sitting here" to "Therefore the god of Abraham exists" is nothing short of hilarious. Why not say "I'm sitting here so therefore Zeus exists or blue is actually red?"
No, it means that gravity works whether I believe in the God of Gravity, Electricity works whether I believe in the God of Electricity, and so on, where on the other hand you have to actively believe in God to believe that things happen that only God can make happen.
@Lleanlleawrg As a scientist, now a day's, students are instructed not to search for non physical answers for physical things. That works fine until you start questioning why physical things exist in the first place. Think about it. Every atom came into existence along with time and space. But from where? As far as we're concerned, a non physical, infinite place. In other words a supernatural place. All that means. my frend is this, there's more to this than we're privy to, physically speaking.
Not the only way, but it certainly gives you a boost.
I think it's so much simpler than any of this. Science: the real. Mysticism: the fantasy. Philosophy: The wishful thinking that there is a link between the first two.
can't escape an intelligent designer being out there. Whether a person wants to believe it is God, or an alien, whatever, something had to have helped. The mechanics of it all declares it, which is why this world declares the majesty of God, and why this world alone proves to you he exists.
Irreducible complexity is something invented by creationists and intelligent design advocates. It doesn't actually exist in reality. Irreducible complexity is simply the logical fallacy of the argument from ignorance. Simply because you don't know doesn't mean that no one knows.
I agree, even if it does get annoying, not all stances should just be abandoned. The only problem is that if dogma is being spouted rather than debates, the hosts get a little irritated. Whether it's the right thing to do or not, I see it happen. On an interview with Matt Dillahunty, he said something about the show not being a theists place to preach. To debate and discuss=ok...preach=no no. I guess it just depends on how the caller presents himself though the conversation.
"The laws of physics are exactly right for life to exist, therefore it is designed."
Well if the laws of physics DIDN'T allow life to exist then we WOULDN'T be here to say "Oh the laws of physics don't allow for life, therefore it can't have been designed"!
@Scyntist I see your point and it is very common for us /me including/ people trying to avoid the core of the discussion.If you don't like the word design what about "result of intelligence" when it comes to origin of computer and man respectively. Intelligence according to definition is knowledge related and knowledge on it's turn to conscience ...you know what mean...let's go to the core not trying to play with words.
Again the inconsistency is a big problem to what we discuss
Well, no atheist would want a personal revelation from god when we are alone, but would ask for a conformation to everyone at once dispelling doubt and showing he is there.
@ledereddy "it really depends on whose science you want to believe" I seek to understand whose science makes the most logical sense, through methods of demonstrable, tangible results that I and others can observe. My beliefs are validated because of this. I don't have to believe or have faith, because it's right there. If I choose to be ignorant and say it doesn't fit my beliefs religious or otherwise; I just become someone who closes their mind because the results are not what fits my faith or
@Lleanlleawrg "I mean that what you call "creation" is not evidence of a creator. You presuppose that it could only have come by through a process of creation by a creator superbeing you call God."
All I am sying is that is the best explanation given the evidence. It's no small thing when you study the subjects, their complexities are genuinely remarkable. Something has to know what it's doing in order for things to work, like birds flying, fish breathing under water, people talking, seeing etc.
@VESANG Urr I awnsered that in the first sentance, I said "Because everything's a possiblity" simple as that.
We learn somthing new everyday and one day it just might just be god himself.
And people like you strengthen my belief in the lack of one
You have to understand that the language back then is not the same as our language now. Terminology and definitions that we give things, now, did not exist then.
The word used in Hebrew is "owph", it simply means "owner of a wing". It grouped all animals with wings under this one, but classed them as either clean or unclean.
That logic only follows if there is such a thing as a creator. Once you prove the existence of a creator, then you can go on to proving that we, the supposed created, were made for a purpose.
I cant believe that people are going AGAINST science.
@VESANG You wouldn't expect to see large changes directly, which macro suggests. Your "fish into man" would be an example of macro if the duration of change occurred in a short period of time. Macro means changes occurred at our above the species level and has been documented. New species have been discovered as a result of the exchange at one level or another; mosquitos are a good example. Macro also breeds subspecies and has been observed. The north American deer mouse has over 50 subspecies
@ledereddy I would never tell someone that they shouldn't pray, shouldn't believe in God etc. That's the kind of behavior that Christians participate in, at least that's been my experience. Once they find out you're an Atheist or an Agnostic, all of a sudden you're the bad guy and you just need to find God and have faith. My favorite questions are "why do you hate God?" or "what bad or traumatic thing happened in your life?". How about just forgetting about God and help those in need just beca
The burden of proof in ANY situation falls on the believer of whatever it is they are believing. You are born as a disbeliever, not as a believer.
What caused you to BEGIN believing in something that the rest of us don't believe in?
Something that never changes is the fact that this creation declares his majesty. If you want to believe something like this can just "happen" that is your choice, but you know full well that the chances of something as complex and incredible as the universe, let alone a single protein molecule, managing to come together without a guide, or designer, is next to impossible. The mathematical odds are beyond astronomical.
Yet, you believe it...which do you think is logical?
I think it's logical not to believe in something for which you have no evidence,,,,, to think otherwise is jyst plain silly
The circumference of a circle is infinite.
Indeed. And that Is why perfect do not exist in our universe(other than in a theoretical way).
@lederereddy A few reasons here:
- You could substitute the word "God" with "Magical Universe Creating Fairy" and your theory would be just as strong.
- You can't demonstrate that God exists, so I need faith for this explanation to work.
- Nature shows us that complexity can come from simplicity, it doesn't always need a higher and more complex thing behind it, whereas your position has the inherent problem of explaining what process God used to accomplish creation, and how God came to be.
awesome to know this is an actual televised show over in the states, not sure I'd make for a very interesting guest though since I'd just agree with everything they say.
Descartes, "I think, therefore I am." Caller, "I sit, therefore God is." To be honourable, we need to stop using the Sapiens part of our name now.
Exactly, therefore the burden of proof falls on the believer.
The answer 'I dont know' is much better than 'Let's make something up and pretend we know'. Why do you seem to prefer the latter ?
In the Austin, Texas area since it's public access
watchmaker argument or not, anyone who thinks that this universe can just happen refuses to accept that the mathematical odds make it impossible. And just because it's here, doesn't make the impossible possible.
@Scyntist Sorry for the delay my friend! Trying to understand you better...what you are saying is that even absolute sound logic can not prove anything /when it comes to existence of things as you said/ until that thing is demonstrated and observed? Did i get this right?
A wide range of metal, rock, and oddly enough some pop. I have bits of a few other genres but those are my main three.
I'm sitting here, therefore Leprechauns who always be tryin to steal my lucky charms exist!
@lederereddy "I suggest, there's a telling reason for that!" Well, at least we can agree on that. Yes there is very telling reason for that. I won't make the mistake of making a positive claim without presenting evidence to support my claim.
What you _can_ say is: " I'm Sitting Here, Therefore Anthropy".
That's the starting position of the _Anthropic Principle._
"...trolling is fun."
Yes, troll. Being a sociopath is, obviously, the only reason that you are able to get any sleep at all.
@Lleanlleawrg "Yes these places like the red sea are real places, but to say that this means the event actually occurred is like saying wizardry is real because London exists."
That's not how the authentication of an event works. I'm not saying just because a place exists it means Moses was there. There are hundreds of corresponding artifacts etc verifying the fact that Moses came through there, parted the sea, was chased by Egyptians on Chariots and they were drowned in the sea. Big difference
alternatively chant: F is for friends who do stuff together U is for you and me N is for anytime and anyplace and anywhere under the deep blue sea, when you require spongebob's aid.
You can't get people to see this "impossibility" because you cannot show that it IS impossible. And, of course the same logic must then apply to that thing that you think is powerful, complex, and intelligent enough to create universes. How could it just occur on its own? That is even less likely.
"I sit therefore god exists"
Tristan Nish
Every time a man stands up a god dies somewhere outside of space and time. As soon as the man sits down again the god is resurrected.
said the fundamentalist? Sitting on his "fundament" (a term for ass)
Simple. It wasn't the first thing to be. Also, the word "theory" in the context of science, must be backed up by observable facts. In this context, the word "theory" is not the same as "guess". The word "theory" in something like "It works, in theory" is not the same way it's used in something like "scientific theory".
It sure makes me smile everytime I destroy someone's hope. Oh wait...no it doesn't.