The Religious Ads on My Atheist Videos Are Ridiculous
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 27 ก.ย. 2024
- These Christian ads are all over my channel whether I like it or not, so I might as well make a response video to them. Thousands of you guys have written me comments and messages about the religious advertisements playing on my atheist videos. I assumed most of those ads were there to try to discredit atheism in order to convert atheists and skeptics, but it seems the ads running at the moment are there to keep questioning Christians in the faith. In that way, they're staying true to the mission of Christian apologetics.
"What Would You Say?" creates intentionally short videos, so their format has limitations, but their content needs work if they want it to answer big questions for Christians, provide solid arguments for God's existence, or defend the faith from skeptics. Here, I discuss their video, "Do You Have to Choose Between Science and Religion?" and touch on questions like: "Do science and religion conflict?" and "Is faith reliable?" as well as concepts like God of the gaps, science literacy, equivocation fallacies, atheistic religion, evolutionary theory, and moral psychology.
Original video: • Do You Have to Choose ...
Pledge here to see my Patreon exclusive live stream: / geneticallymodifiedske...
------------------------------------------FOLLOW------------------------------------------
Twitter: / gm_skeptic
Facebook: / gmskeptic
Discord: / discord
------------------------------------------SUPPORT------------------------------------------
Patreon: / geneticallymodifiedske...
PayPal: www.paypal.me/...
------------------------------------------Resources for atheists in need------------------------------------------
Find a Secular Therapist: www.secularthe...
Recovering from Religion helps connect those who are leaving or have left their religion with support, resources and community: www.recovering...
Resources for Ex-Mu’s: exmuslims.org/...
This video contains 100% therapeutic grade skepticism.*
*This statement has not been evaluated by the FDA
*Clicks on atheist video about religious ads, gets religious ads on the video*
If you want to see me debunk more ads like this, check out my Patreon exclusive live stream on June 29th at 5pm Central
patreon.com/GeneticallyModifiedSkeptic
You know you are not the only one. Apostate Prophet gets religious adds too, but they are Islam based.
Funny, they seem to target the leavers of the faith.
Genetically Modified Skeptic funny thing is. I just got a religious add before this video started 😂😂😂
I'm so glad I pay for youtube premium, I have for the past 8 years, and even completely forgot ads on youtube were a thing.
And you still get paid when I watch, even if your video is demonetized. : - D
2:40
Wait, I actually got an ad for What Would You Say? on this video... This is hilarious.
A HA, JOKES ON THEM, I HAVE ADBLOCK!!
Ok anyone who mentions adblock is going to hell
Adblock
*Straight to the fiery depths with you*
lol
Can I mention TH-cam Premium instead? No annoying ads, but creators are still supported.
@@hithere7080 lollll
Can we talk about how "offensive" it would be to get atheist ads on a religious video?
What are 'adds'?
I know/understand 'ads' is the plural of a short for _advertisement_ and henceforth a short for _advertisements_ by itself, but what are 'adds'? Is that a short for additions!?
The shit-fit theists would throw would be awesome!
Apollorion oh hell you know what Miguel here saying. What do you gain from leaving comments like this? Smart ass.
@@Apollorion
Grammar Nazi.
What atheist ads?
"Science was founded by Christians"
*Ancient India has left the chat*
*Ancient China has left the chat*
*The Middle East in the Middle Ages has left the chat*
Ancient Greece and Egypt are also out of here
@Sandcastle • so you're going to disregard what those nation's have done to advance science?
@Sandcastle •
* Cough * MATHEMATICS IS THE FOUNDATION OF ALL SCIENCES * cough *
@Sandcastle • It appears that Sandcastle ("this channel has no content") has left the chat. Not before time, in my opinion.
@Sandcastle • science started when i made a paper mache volcano in 3rd grade
Church: "Earth is flat"
Science: "No, its not"
Church: "OK, but it's immovable"
Science: "No its not" (dies by holy execution)
Church: "OK, but you can't explain disease"
Science: "Yeah, we can for a lot of them now"
Church: "See, science doesn't know everything!"
The Church believing the earth is flat is a myth.
We thought that the Earth was the center of the Universe. Everything revolved around it.
@@calebfasnacht8698 huh, wat
The church never thought the earth was flat, but they did believe that it was at the center of the solar system
@@calebfasnacht8698 still wrong and the church killed Giordano bruno for saying they were wrong
@@fidelluz2942 I mean technically none of you are wrong, you are all stating facts.
He litterally gets paid by the people he's debunking. Now that's what I call a next level move.
*6D Chess Moment*
"Checkmate Christians!"
Agree. Also an atheist channel is the best place for religous adds to go to die.
Good point.
I just gave you the 666th like... I hope it stays that way for a long time to mess with all the christians.
"All the scientists before 1700 were religious"
Yes, and there was nobody else to do the job at that point. Nobody was allowed NOT to identify with the state church (or maybe another "accepted" Christian religion).
Newton kept most of his religious views private, in part because they'd been seen as heretical and maybe he'd have lost his job.
There were also some atheist scientists, but they got burned on stake.
@@elainelouve no, they didn't. Give examples.
There's quite a space between being part of a state church and being religious. The private writings of scientists often show that they were religious as well as members of the state church. They were, of course, unevenly religious, as all people have been and are still, but they were quite often devout: Maxwell, Lavoisier, Boyle, Copernicus, Mendel, Newton, Riemann, Dalton, Barkla, Lemaitre, Fisher, Euler, Faraday...
@@monus782 Not so private. He published a commentary on the Books of Daniel and of the Revelation (he seemed fascinated by spectacle). He was not always exactly orthodox, but he was interesting.
I was waiting for the Mom to tell her daughter "God is making the water boil"
He's boiling the hell out of it
yes, uncreative and I'm leaving
@@mrsuzan533 That's how to create holy water xD
same
@@KunaiGore WAIT SO LIKE... I HAVE SO MANY QUESTIONS
@@KunaiGore Does that mean clouds are the essence of hell? Being boiled water essentially. But doesn't that also make the heavens where hell is?!?! Does that also mean, God throw down hell apon everyone when he made the world flood???? Does that mean he have power over hell and evil??? If God has power over evil doesn't that make him evil, "for good trees can't bear evil fruit". DOES THIS MAKE GOD EVIL?!?!?
Religious ads are hilarious to me. Living in Europe, I don’t think I’ve ever seen a religious ad. America is wacky.
Its a little ironic if toy think about it, they are using things "worldy things of the devil" like money to bring their teachings against money to more people. It's a very small far fetched contradiction, but it's still funny.
I live in the UK, and I’ve seen quite a few religious ads. Just last night, I got an ad from a channel centred around Judaism. I think it can depend on where you are and what you watch, since most of the religious ads I’ve had have been on DarkMatter2525 videos. :)
@@Rachel98246 Same for me. I live in the UK and the majority of Religious ads I've seen are on Atheist videos, like DarkMatter2525. It's crazy how the ads we get are so similar. It's almost like they don't want you to be Atheist or something.
I grew up in the community of the bible hokage (also known as the pope, I call him bible hokage since I learned he can cast buffs with a one handed ninja hand sign). But in Europe. So even when I still believed everything ion the bible is historical fact. I still thought nobody is actually this insane. As you know, televangelists, like Kat.
(western border to Belgium/Luxembourg of Germany)
Lucky you, never seeing religious ads. There are many I have seen that are stupid and insulting. Religion, I am encountering of late is tyrannical and sick in its conformity. Hateful and nasty, I made a serious mistake leaving agnosticism & atheism behind. Religious people who use to vary from sweet to ‘well at least it has ethics’ are revealing themselves constantly to be deranged and sadistic. Judging others, judging and forbidding thoughts and ideas, spreading slanders and lies all seem to be religious hobbies. Every few days some child is persecuted and pushed into suicide. Last one, earlier this month, was a sweet looking blond little nine year old who liked pink and painted his fingernails. Really sad, very dead. No one actually does a count on these poor children...
'Science can't explain everything: religion explains nothing."
And philosophy explains what remains.
@@victzegopterix2 philosophy just give more theories without proof.
@@tanishqpandey9564, I doubt that you know what is philosophy. Could you try to define what it is just to be sure.
@@victzegopterix2 yeah I had a vague definition of philosophy in my mind so I went to check out what is philosophy could u tell me in brief
@@tanishqpandey9564, philosophy is a field of study that tries to establish knowledge with logical reasoning and rational approches. You may think definition is, in some way, incorrect because it includes science, but, actually, no. Science is a branch of philosophy, and if you doubt on that, just look at Newton's most known book's title: _Mathematical Principles of _*_Natural Philosophy_* , that's right, not _science_ , _natural philosophy_ , that's the name that science had before being a full-fledged field of study, when it still was philosophy.
Obviously, finding a definition of philosophy is harder than that but this one is a really good one.
Here's the kicker: *Even if* science was incapable of answering those questions that doesn't mean religion is more suited to do so instead.
If there is no god who created our brains, why pursue the truth at all? It is just one brain fizzing with neurochemicals against someone else's neurochemicals. So steal, kill, and enjoy until we die. Everything is permissible.
@@cockroachv If there is no god who created the water, why would it make waves at all, it's just a bunch of atoms in an ocean of atoms.
See how dumb your question is? I thought not. Everyone else does. Go sit in the corner and play with your ball.
Religion gives no explanations. Explanations are verifiable; not unsubstantiated claims. Religions only make unsubstantiated claims that require and encourage the reliance on heuristics and logical fallacies to maintain and is therefore unsustainable and damaging to the whole of society and this will never change. Religion belongs in a museum.
_"Everything is permissible."_
Again, I expect you to be too stupid to understand, but others are not as dumb as you are and perhaps you will surprise me and show to be more intelligent than you seem. Right now you seem less intelligent than the average monkey.
Under religion everything is permissible because it relies on interpretation and heuristics and logical fallacies to rationalize said interpretations and has therefor no basis or method to show any other interpretation wrong and can be and is used to overthrow, ignore and undermine rational and evidence based reasoning, making religion the most useless and dangerous "basis" for beliefs and choices.
If instead we rely on rationality and evidence to make our choices, then we can actually show what serves a purpose better or worse. I can show that if we prefer well being over suffering that refusing basic rights to LGBTQ+ will increase suffering and decrease well being and that we should extend all human rights to all people regardless of gender or (a)sexuality.
What have you to show that equating showing love in a physical way to another enthusiastically consenting adult to murder and rape and saying that all three categories are equally deserving of death is a good thing when both of the people in the sexual act are men, like is written in Romans 1? Can you show that homosexuality is bad or can you show my interpretation of the verses to be false?
Of course I don't expect anything like an answer and only angry dismissals, insults, projections and more childish short sighted and stupid straw men from you, but should you find your brain somewhere, think about those questions and try not to rationalize and dismiss them but honestly try to answer them. I don't expect that that's within your capabilities, but who knows? Maybe I just caught you on a bad day.
@@stylis666 You should really go to jail. You just murdered that little boy's ass.
Setekh GET THAT MAN AN AMBULANCE
This argument goes both ways though. The reason people can say these things is that it's a logical fallacy rooted in people being ignorant of both religion and science. Religion doesn't answer questions and if that's what you expect from it then you misunderstand the fundamentals of religion as a whole.
"Modern science was started by Christians"
*Looks at South America's development of astronomy and trigonometry*
*Looks at early Greece*
*Looks at Rome*
*Looks at China*
*Looks at the Islamic Golden Age*
*Glances at Christianity, still cleaning up from it's 500-year long hissy fit during the Dark Ages*
Indians : Am I a joke to you.
Yes indians invented pytagoras theorem before pytagoras
@@risyanthbalaji805 Indians just KNEW it. Pythagoras actually proved it. Coming from an Indian myself
The church actually held back scientific progress for about 100 years in the renaissance age
@@advaygiradkar9708 So did every other aggressive religion with numerous followers
@@rinzhler6922 yes
"Science can't explain the purpose of life!".
Philosophy also tries, and I feel it's much less oppressive while at it.
@IN REGENERATIONE that's a nice way of thinking. being alive is enough.
@IN REGENERATIONE eeyyyy an absurdist thinker I see lol.
Scientific inquiry never asks our purpose for being here. This thought presupposes that there is some unknown entity that issues purpose to humans like traffic tickets. Life's purpose for any individual is what they make of it and nothing more. A sense of purpose is an emergent property of an individuals brain.
I dont think theres really any purpose for life, but my personal purpose is to live a good life I can one day look back on with good memories
Logic and Religion bite each other so much;
HENCE why Atheist-Channels have endless supply of valid questions.
I got an Ad in this video , the one he was talking about. Perfect
So did I lol
Oh boy I'm currently a few minutes away from the first mid roll, can't wait
Well I got a "catholic militant" ad that, in so many words, said if you vote "wrong" you'll go to hell so you have to buy their voting guide. And get this. The book is called "saving civilization".
So thats fun
Same, about pinecones and the church
I got hershey kisses and nerf guns
>10:36
>"Molecules of the water"
>shows propane molecules
I never would’ve caught that imagine if they used LSD or something 🤣
I knew there was something wrong there, H2O is shorter
I WAS LOOKING FOR THIS COMMENT.
Chem major here and I'm like: "do you _want_ to die?"
"Science is silly. Religion is wise. I am thirsty. Here is a clear liquid. Water is a clear liquid. So this is water. Glug glug."
Creators of the video: We want to use an interesting graphic to represent water.
*finds a random molecule*
Ooohhh! ✨Prettyyyyy✨
*copy and paste* 😋
"Belief is meaningless to all but the believer, knowledge is meaningful and available to all" - GWD 2011
knowledge is meaningless to the faithful though, If it disproves anything they agree with it is a false conclusion.
"Knowledge without proof isn't a knowledge" D.C Khmer
Garynt Wynn-Davies?
You neither can- nor seek to , define "Knowledge, as you are about to demonstrate. Moreover you do not trouble yourself to define belief either.
"Owing to the loss of the capacity to ponder and reflect,
whenever the contemporary average man hears or employs in conversation any word with which he is familiar only by its consonance, he does not pause to think, nor does there even arise in him any question as to what exactly is meant by this word, he having already decided,once and for all, both that he knows it and that others know it too.
A question, perhaps, does sometimes arise in him when
he hears an entirely unfamiliar word the first time; but in this case he is content merely to substitute for the unfamiliar word another suitable word of familiar consonanceand then to imagine that he has understood it.
To bring home what has just been said, an excellent
example is provided by the word so often used by every
contemporary man-”world.”
If people knew how to grasp for themselves what
passes in their thoughts when they hear or use the word
”world,” then most of them would have to admit-if of
course they intended to be sincere-that the word carries
no exact notion whatever for them. Catching by ear simply the accustomed consonance, the meaning of which
they assume that they know, it is as if they say to themselves “Ah, world, I know what this is,” and serenely go on thinking.
Should one deliberately arrest their attention on this
word and know how to probe them to find just what they
understand by it, they will at first be plainly as is said “embarrassed,” but quickly pulling themselves together, that is to say, quickly deceiving themselves, and recalling
the first definition of the word that comes to mind, they
will then offer it as their own, although, in fact, they had
not thought of it before.
If one has the requisite power and could compel a
group of contemporary people, even from among those
who have received so to say “a good education,” to state
exactly how they each understand the word “world,” they
would all so “beat about the bush” that involuntarily one
would recall even castor oil with a certain tenderness."
You have *absolutely_no*idea of the flaw in that the gibberish: "Belief is meaningless to all but the believer, knowledge is meaningful and available to all", have you?But what the hell, if you are indeed wholly innocent of*any* kind of wits and learning, why not flaunt it, or ape one even more innocent than yourself?
I actually spit out my soda when the ad stated that Galileo was a “Christian” - no dude, he was persecuted by the church!
But he was a Christian never the less. If you wanted friends, a job, your life, you needed to be Christian.
He was persecuted by the church because he deliberately insulted his former friend and ally, the pope, and in print too ! Called him a simpleton. It wasn't a conflict between science and religion, it was Galileo being an a*sehole and the church responding in kind.
@@jdmitchell6559 oh yeah of course. Obviously Galileo was prosecuted by the church just because he dissed the pope, not because he was teaching heretical science that contradicted the Bible.
Yeah, produce the actual letter you are referring to, and show that it was sent before there was any pushback or accusations from the church. And even if that somehow was the REAL reason they tried him, and his heretical teachings were only used as an excuse, how do you think the church would have reacted to any other person going around teaching heliocentrism?
@@asagoldsmith3328 Feel free to show me where I referred to a 'letter', because I didn't.
The whole, complicated story is described in the Wiki article en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_affair and the bit about insulting the pope is about half way through under 'Modern Views'. Yes, I agree there were plenty of factions in the church that did persecute people who held the heliocentric view, but pope Urban VIII gave Galileo permission to publish his book "Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems" and Galileo used the opportunity to insult the pope in it - allegedly. That's what got him banged up. Yes, the church was an ass, but so was Galileo.
@@jdmitchell6559 ah yes. Galileo mocks the pope’s intellectual beliefs in a book, the church arrests Galileo threatens him with torture, makes him sign a document recanting his beliefs, ban his work, and puts him under house arrest for the rest of his life. On a scale where the usual response would be burning at the stake I suppose if you step far enough away the church’s response is “in kind “, but perhaps a more reasonable response to an academic dispute, even by a pope would be to publish a rebuttal.
The irony is that advertising on atheist videos is a waste of their money. In the end, they're actually paying the atheists 😆
I play their ads on mute so GMA can get paid.
@@jebushypocristos2037 thats actually pretty clever, i dont know why i didnt think of that
As a chirstain I don't care about atheists most of us don't hate you so calm down
Not if the people watching them a religious people questioning their beliefs.
Well bucko you've just explained lots of peaple and what's his opinion on religion if he doesn't care
Early scientists were the religious trying to use it to prove God. But when the evidence repeatedly kept not pointing towards a God. That's when the division began.
They were trying to prove the Sumerian God's existence not realizing Romans, and other European scribes and scholars drastically changed some texts and outright removed others, because it didn't fit their "Earth is center of Universe, Human is perfect being" rhetoric. So scientists were just running into the facts that were already known, but Government (religion run back then) couldn't inform the masses, knowledge is power. Have to keep the sheep down, don't even teach em' to read!
I dont know about that but scientists like aristotle and davinci went ahead with theor studies trying to disprove the current religions back then like how da vinci used fossil evidences to quickly dispatch the noah's ark story and tge like
you find god by reading the bible with a humble disposition. thats how faith works. its stands in opposition to manmade logic and its by design.
@@baronvonbon9669 why wouldnt noahs ark have been able to have been real? how difficult is it to build a big boat in like 40 years... the hebrew word translated as the earth (aretz) can also be translated as "the land" which can refer to a specific land in which the adamic descendants lived in.
this of course very much allows for the biblical narrative to be true.
the bible is the perfect inspired word of god. but we the interpretors arent perfect and get things wrong sometimes.
the flood myth is very prevelant in many old religions and writings which points to there being a flood at some point but the bible does not explicitly claim that it covered the entire globe.
get your facts straight before you start bashing things you know nothing about. research scripture. every single prophecy is true if you properly identify who is who and what means what in the bible.
@@BlurpGooDiJabba Do you mind pointing out several links to justify yoyr claim of there being a flood in the first place?
There has been no such proof and archeological evidences easily disprove of the flood myth since of the sinple fact that cultures all around the earth are intact and unscathe with not even the alightest hint of flooding on a typhoon scale at the least a flood that lasted for 40 days in total would have easily amhiliated any previous signs of life or history of that sort
The story of babylon for instance couldnt have been possibly been true since there have been little refferences to floods and stories like the pagan story epic flood was something cometelh different and was basically the super saiyan mode of the hero but in flood form
Do try to send me evidences to disprove my logic
Note: Christian and catholic scholars agree that the flood occured around 2500 bc or something of that sort i likely got it wrong but i am open to correction
Science doesn't know exactly how life came to be, but I think Shrek made us from his earwax. I have a theory, but science doesn't, therefore I'm correct.
How many hypotheses does your (jokingly I assume) theory contain?
Hail the *SHREK*!!!🙏🛐🤲
I'm doubting about Shrek creting life with his earwax, the only I'm sure is that he did use it to create fire.
So who created Shrek? This is the problem with creation, who created the creator... Since that question can only result in an endless paradox, it makes no sense, and all we are left with is that there is no god, because 'who made god?' Our current understanding of our universe it that the energy of the system (our microsecond old universe) was immensely higher than it currently is, and most of that energy was converted to matter (in accordance with E=MC2). This is the answer to the oft asked, "how can you get something from nothing?"... The answer is that there was never 'nothing', energy is 'something'. Creationists, bite me!
@@Chris-hx3om Shrek is allp owerful, earth is flat
The irony... The "Israel Institute of biblical studies" is advertising at the beginning of this video.
Love this one. It talks about reading the original bible verses in the original Hebrew....... yet the bible wasn't written in Hebrew originally lol!
And here I thought that IIBS stood for Insufferably Irritable Bowel Syndrome.
@@ET-jv1wm The books in the Old Testament were originally written in Hebrew with parts Aramaic, to be honest. It's mainly the New Testament books which were originally written in Greek and probably other languages.
Israel is a special exception, they are going after drew directly. When he and Mrs GM Skeptic were in Israel working on documentaries, they fit in so well Israel has never been the same since they left... so the advertising I think is personal in this case ;)
I know
Everyone: getting religious ads
Me:gets a Hershey’s chocolate ad and and an asmr ad
Welp- all hail the almighty Hershey’s chocolate. but don’t do to loudly
And I just keep getting ads from Liberty Insurance. I've seen worse so I don't mind.
I got an ad for CAD software.
Hail to the sugar, the milk, and the cocoa bean.
All I get is soap ads, I want soda, gun, chocolate, and HBO ads!
I got an add for tampons once... I'm a guy by the way
- "Science is good for answering "how" questions and religion is good for answering "why" questions."
Replace the word "religion" with "philosophy" and we're done here. Humanity can move on.
No. Religion makes countless claims about how the natural world works that is simply incorrect. Period. So if religion is demonstrably wrong about that which is demonstrable, why beleive in the claims that are not demonstrable?
@@blaster-zy7xx what claims are those?
@@jamiegilliam3658 (I assume you meant, "What claims are those?" ) Claims such as the order of creation according to Genesis that are wrong, claims about of Noah's Ark that are impossible; worldwide flood, man created in his current form, woman created from man's rib, man living inside a whale (or fish or whatever) etc.
@@blaster-zy7xx How are they wrong?
@@jamiegilliam3658 REALLY? This is why religion is detrimental. Let's start with human evolution. Humans are evolved primates with common ancestors with other hominids (great apes including humans). This is accepted science and demonstrated by DNA analysis of endogenous retrovirus markers that not only demonstrates common ancestry but also a perfect genealogical hierarchy that places our ancestral divergence into proper chronological order. Humans poofing magically into existence in our present form is a superstitious religious myth completely rejected by modern science.
Thank you for saying that you can be religious and not believe in god. I’m Jewish because I wanted to connect with my family and it made me feel good to be in my synagogue. I don’t believe in god, I believe in my community and the love they’ve given me. I believe in my Rabbi and mother, who helped me to have a batmitzvah because I loved the Hebrew language and connection to my roots it brought me. I’m a Jew who doesn’t believe in god, and that’s all there is to it. 😊
I really appreciate hearing your perspective as someone who grew up Catholic and went through a long process of doubt and questioning to landing in agnostic pseudotheism I guess. I am in flux where I sometimes think there may be a God, there may be something we cannot explain, but also realizing my God is a God of the gaps. Then thinking the universe is God, then thinking it's okay to not have a God at all. Wondering if this means I'll never see my dead loved ones ever again. I always wanted to meet God so I could get answers to my questions and meet people from history. And now it seems to be that this probably is all I've got.
@@KiraNightshade All I can suggest is to focus on those loved ones who are alive still and fond memories of those gone. And maybe on trying to leave more fond memories for others. There are questions that probably won't get answered anytime soon, but we can still do our best. Gods are irrelevant in this respect, they also can't answer anything that you can't answer yourself.
The first of the ten commandments is belief in hashem. You can't be a Jew without doing that one thing. And you can be in a community without being religious.
This is coming from a Jew.
@@diomandcyborg4182 Without looking religious, you mean? xD
That has little to do with religion and everything to do with the people around you. Don't conflate the two.
That “science and religion are complementary” ad is Christianity getting desperate. They realize they can’t win by beating science, so are trying this “we can coexist” strategy. It’s so transparent.
Its the same thing they did with pagan rituals
Religion and science aren't at war.
Its ridiculous to assume those of faith aren't interested in scientific enlightenment or think all scientists are athiest, their not.
Hey, if you can't beat 'em, join 'em.
Those who take the Bible/Koran literally have been in conflict with anyone and everyone else for thousands of years. However not all Christians take their Bible literally and not all religions follow the Hebrew text, so religion and science aren't at war.
@Aditya Chavarkar Maybe but they'd be wrong.
Hinduism, Sikhism and Buddhism along with many other beliefs are classed as religions. Hinduism, Sikhism and Buddhism along with most religions and people of spirituality, including mainstream (Christians ) are not in conflict with science.
"Science doesnt explain where matter came from ... etc."
And.. neither can religion.
don't they just say "god did it" anytime they can't explain anything?
@@DuckInGameStop they do.
@@DuckInGameStop yes
Quantum Fluctuations and entanglement: *Am I a joke to you?*
Contemporary science can't explain where matter came from but scientists will endeavour to find out its origins. Science is on the never ending road of discovery.
He basically says that "because we don't understand the big bang, women must dress with long sleeves and men shouldn't have sex together" (~Y.N. Harari)
Ariel M. Tayar Yeah, talk about skipping over a sh*t ton of steps; even if we can’t provide a good explanation for the universe’s start, that doesn’t make any other argument without good evidence more valid, especially not a religious one, and double especially not your specific book of myths.
"And we'd also like to just definitely not comment on women having sex with other women."
@@KnakuanaRka Nice comment but that username gave me a stroke
The big bang was discussed by Plato, Aristotle, and Socrates; they were just discussing something others had been discussing for at least a thousand years; which means over 3000 years now people have discusses something from nothing. I hope the poster doesn't believe these atheist videos that don't specify times and dates; which is all because:
These atheist video creators know their past thoughts on the subject of the big bang theory being created by atheists in the 20th century is as ignorant as thinking adhesives didn't exist during the time of Noah - even though, science says cavemen used adhesives and the oldest piece of evidence is carbon dated at over 250,000 years old.
On a side note, something from nothing is easy to answer, I could do it in one word - but why should I help belligerent idiots that can't figure out something so simple?
Deductive Reasoning here’s a fun challenge for theists that that i heard from @nonstampcollecter as a response to the cosmological argument. prove without a doubt that there was one creator. and not two or three or ten. you can use anything except the bible (i hope i don’t have to explain how that’s a circular argument)
12:43 Actually speaking as a theist and a psychologist, I would argue that science is getting quite good at explaining why we desire to do things we know we shouldn't do.
Really, what would be a *good-or clear *example* of"Science getting quite good at explaining why we desire to do things we know we shouldn't do," or science explaining why we desire to do things we know we shouldn't do."?
What exactly do you mean by " should" or shouldn't" and know? Who the fcuk is "we"?-You, and which specific identifiable interlocutor?
Is there a " we", and how could " we" know"? the same we way " we" have an headache?
Do let me know the next time we " know" anything or *"we"*have an headache. You are a kinderlander(mercan/american) are you not?That explains much, for the kinderlander cannot bear to contemplate that there is no " we".
Interesting that you suppose hat whatever-you- mean -by, but -have- no idea "science"concerns itself with the normative( all that should/ought mumbo jumbo)
What exactly do you suppose*"science"* to be?
Do you know what the word" science" means?
You are about to demonstrate that you have no idea on either core, or so my left pocket bets my right pocket, but- as the blind man said" we shall see"
I love these ads. They’re free mental exercise. Pop quizzes. I like to pause the video at various points to provide objections/answer rebuttals on my own as though I’m making my own reaction video. If I’m not capable of rebutting one of these ads on my own, what am I even doing here?
Also, Christians founded modern science? Eratosthenes, al-Khwarizmi, and Brahmagupta would like some words, Colson
that was not really "modern" science as they meddled around without a formulated scientific method at their hands. Sure they got results science still correlates to and mostly will confirm as at least close to correct, but it was still the age of trial and error, not of systematic methodology of research.
Ugly German Truths You and I will have to agree to disagree on that. To pick one, Eratosthenes developed a question based on a theory (the world is round, how big is it?) and then conducted a careful experiment to derive the answer. He was not mucking about.
And Muslims say they invented math
I guess it depends on what you mean by "modern". The origins of the scientific method can be traced back to the Islamic Golden Age, but the first precise, quantitative scientific theory would probably be Newton's laws of mechanics and gravity.
Yes Sir Isaac Newton was a devout Christian. He invented the scientific method.
I can’t believe they’d use Galileo as an argument for “christians invented science” when it was the Catholic Church that put him on trial for believing the Earth goes around the Sun.
Me : Watching this
TH-cam: Christian singles in your area
Same
Would be a shame not to at least try to their god's name repeatedly
"oh god, oh god, oh god"
"Pretty sure you're just having an orgasm."
"Shut up! Baka!"
its almost ironic some of the scientists he left out would include Mendel and Darwin
Lol yah
You are about to demonstrate that you have not the faintest idea what science or a scientist might be, but you don't know that yet.
Darwin based his idea on a fundamental misapprehension which he was later good enough to concede when it was pointed out to him that his supposed mechanism of heritability could not possibly work, and he never suggested anything remotely like what contemporary fanatical unrollers(evolve means unroll) suppose- also mistakenly; there is no mechanise for inheriting supposedly advantageous traits(which are pronounced trays by all with wits learning and breeding that know that the T is silent as in restaurant).
The hilarious thing is that those that -rightly,reject the mister god fantasy have replaced it with the equally fanciful and anthropomorphic mister Unrolling who is also supposed by the loons to have likes and dislikes wants and not wants. There is something about men(human beings/dreaming machines)that they are forever inventing various 'misters', mister god or mister evolution which they suppose to be men like themselves - You might say that anthropomorphism or the tendency thereto is endemic in the strange creatures that also have a predisposition to accept without question(or believe) which they do passively mechanically faute de mieux.
Darwin set a hare running which the loons have chased into all sorts of absurdities which never crosed his mind; the word evolution was not a word that he used initially and to which he had occasional resort only later when he too clearly went quite mad.
He would not have recognised what contemporary fanatical flowers of the religion scientism call evolution -I doubt anything so absurd crosed his mind. The contemporary fanatical loons now worship two of their fantastic(the stuff of fantasy) misters: Mister science and mister evolution(unrolling) but the men men creatures are much given to that sort of anthropomophic mumbojumbo; if it's not mister god it's Some other mister of their own invention.When they are not dreaming up their various religions they dream up equally fantastic(what they-call" sciences" and before you can say knife their greatest weakness and stupefying factor- their predisposition to passive mechanical acceptance-without-question, is in full swing, it is supposed because for whatever reason yet to be determined they are and have no choice but be, the abject slaves of their functions with which they identify or suppose themselves to be, but of course the poor creatures are not only blithely unaware of that- or even that they have functions, clearly because they live in a dream-like state of semi-consciousness or sleep, but if that is pointed out to the creatures one or another of their functions reacts mechanically(means choicelesly) automatically and they be become as is- said " livid and immediate start calling whoever is foolish enough to point out to them the what-is-and- cannot- be- different of their situation names, as the writer supposes he is about to discover, but he is used to the creatures and their mechanisms(which he shares) and has developed a relatively thick skin.
Now there are contemporary Lilliputian big-enders and little -enders calling themselves creationists-whatever the fcuk that is supposed to mean and non -creationists or some similar tosh but big-enders and little-enders will serve as well.
Both sets of lilliputians are equaly the slsves of their rmotional)like/dislike) function and equally hypnotisse by their assciciative dreaming function and simply have no-choice-but, to identify(say*I* to) the reactions of those functions in which they hsve no say whatsoever and can no more *not_identify* with their functions than can the writer.
what makes you imagine that Darwin was any kind of whatever-you-mean-by-but-have-no-idea" "scientist"?
@@vhawk1951kl holy yap
The biggest problem I have with religions that have demons is that they use demons to explain mental disorders. It's so traumatic and doesn't help those who have disorders :(
Being a lesbian, I feel the exact same way! I feel that it also enables anti-vaxx/typical karen moms, as it acts as justification to not vaccinating/not properly treating their children, because they don't want to have their child possessed by said "dEmOnS."
@@midgetwaffles8635 are you sure religious people think that because I don't even think that
@@lionelladvelino4795 What I'm saying is, it just gives people more excuses to discriminate, regardless of their actual beliefs.
@@midgetwaffles8635 oh, ok but even though I am religious I hate those anti vax Karen's and I also hate the religious ads that try to convert atheists because I think that people should just choose if they want to believe in something or not
@@lionelladvelino4795 Of course, any and all religious beliefs are "not all X...". Not all religious people believe any one thing, you'll always find one who disagrees because it's a large and diverse group and Believers are people too. But, many religions or at least religions organization have or have had explained mental illnesses to be the result of actual demons (see: jesus driving away the demons in the bible)
“...It's more like lerning to walk and chew gum.“
Walking get's you somewhere. Admittedly something to places others don't want you to be.
Chewing gum gives you a flavor of your choice and some people stick their gum to places where they really don't belong.
"Believing in" science implies that people who do, do so because Christians may see it as an alternate "authority". Whereas most people who rely or use science prefer it because of the evidence or proof it provides, rather than an authoritative institution or belief system.
What evidence do you have for your claim?
Right? As I always say, if you believe in science, you're doing it wrong.
@@Nerdsammich doing science wrong? Not sure what you mean.
Science provides nothing. Occasionally an instrument measures something; but what that measurement MEANS is still a human construction.
@@skeptischism1324 He means that science is not supposed to be about "belief" but accurate, anyone-can-repeat-it measurements. It's okay to provisionally believe a scientist until you can verify the claim, but then it is just another religion waiting for verification of claims.
So discovering this thing called Covenant Eyes threw me for a loop... Looking it up and learning that the premise was to let friends and family shame you into conformity by allowing them to monitor your screentime blew my mind... Seeing that price tag friggin floored me! Turns out God is hella expensive! Who knew?
I'm almost convinced Covenant Eyes is run by religiously neutral people. They simply have this app, made it cost a fortune, and prey on the fears of Christian parents.
I can't say for sure though. I just like conspiracy theories.
@@calebfasnacht8698 Liking Conspiracy Theories is one thing. Actually buying into and trying to spread them like you do is stupid and dangerous.
@@sebastianb.3978 they literally said they weren’t sure so idk what you mean by that or why your so toxic about it?
Matin Ludero, that's why he started Protestantism
LOVE how they call science a ,,Belief“.
I could believe I can fly when I step out of a 10. floor window, but I scientifically KNOW that gravity will make me fall.
You have no idea that that is a tautology have you?
It is also semantic gibberish.
Those that abuse capital letters not only emphasise nothing but the hysteria of the abuser, they also declare the abuser to be a lunatic
Abusers abuse all sorts, who or what remains to be seen or prosecuted.self -abuse like abusing capital letters is like masturbation generally best not done in public.
Garn, give it a try and*really* prove your point; it's not as if you will be missed, is it?
It is gratifying to learn that you do not " believe_in" atoms electrons and ll that sort of mumbo jumbo , presumably because you have no direct immediate personal experience of atoms electrons, etc. No doubt you adopt the same apptoxch to the cannon of the religion scientism, so no " big bang " , no unrolling(evolution) eh titch?If only you hade the wits learning and Latin to know what the word " science" means, but you are about to demonstrate that you have (absolutely_no* idea what science *is* nor what the word " science" means. In semantic terms science is an empty box for you is it not titch?-You have the word but absolutely_no* idea what it means-it being an empty word for you as you are about to demonstrate.
I actually spat our my water 😂😂😂
"what is our purpose?" "why does the universe exist?" these questions presuppose that there IS a purpose...that there IS a reason for the universe. Maybe...it just is.
Even if the universe just “is” there has to be a reason. There couldn’t have been nothing at one point and if there was we probably evolved out of some other dimension or realm or some weird shit. I’m not saying we have a purpose per say but we definitely came from somewhere random chance or not. Without life and consiousness technically nothing that exists exists so for all we know we are living in some weird quantum matrix land from some other realm.
Tbf I do a lot of hallucinogenics but I think they are the scientific link to anything that could prove or deny a god or otherworldly phenomenon.
As much as you might dislike it, humans are not and can never be wholly rational creatures. For any action to be made, we need motivation and discernment to decide to act. That's really what people are asking when they're asking about purpose. They're looking for meaning in their lives. The classic way of creating meaning in psychology is by creating a narrative, hence the emphasis on creation myths in most religions.
The scientific narrative by itself does not provide this meaning. It does not give you away to discern what actions to take, or any motivation to pursue. These are irrational needs for us to even function and not having them causes distress. There is, luckily, naturalistic religions, philosophies, and political ideologies, even if these can never find objective answers.
Although, as a perennialist, I do think that all religions converge if you look at their esoteric mysticism towards Scientific Pantheism, which does give value to the cultivation of holistic well-being. I've found that a lot of occultists, Thelemites, Theosophists, Sufis, Kabbalists, Rosicrucians, Taoists, Neopagans, Gnostics, and Yogis agree with me on this one. I think Humanists tend toward this understanding as well, and we're seeing it emerge in Game Theory and meta-ethics. So I think there's a good system to work with there.
@@AbandonedVoid I can't say I completely understand your comments, but I do agree that humans are irrational and will always look for meaning. Looking for one doesn't mean there's one to look for, however. It doesn't mean there's not, either. Nothing wrong with looking, just... to assume that there *is* an answer to be found is a fallacy by itself. Doesn't have anything to do with what I like (or don't.)
I tend toward optimistic nihilism myself. Summed up by this quote in Gunship's "when you grow up your heart dies": "There is no fate but what we make for ourselves." If nothing matters, then there's no point in not making the best of it we can, for what we get, right?
I also tend to enjoy a side helping of objectivism in the form of I try to be and do the best I can in everything I do because I enjoy excellence.
But these are my answers, they're subjective to me and what I've experienced, others may feel differently.
@@dope8878 Why does there have to be a reason? Why couldn't there have been nothing at one point?
I agree that there is no measure of existence except the consciousness of it. Maybe nothing actually 'exists' like we think it does and we are just perception. Maybe each of us lives in our own bubble of perception and everything we perceive is an illusion of some kind (somewhat true by any measure, honestly, although I mean altogether disconnected). Maybe you are all figments of my imagination. There's really no way to answer these questions, although I tend to think that the last one isn't the case. (Still, maybe we're all bits of Bahamut or something, putting on a giant play for our own amusement?)
I enjoy wondering about the 'true' nature of reality. But nothing can be assumed.
Imagine the horrified screaming if it were the other way around!
*clicks on how to pray in 5 easy steps* THIS IS WHY RELIGION IS DUMB
@@zkull9982 sounds like something that would happen in my Christianity class, like the teacher gets up a guided prayer and there's an unskippable ad on the flaws of Christianity
@The Prime Star parents spank their children. They hear them cry. They caused their tears. Obviously they are abusive sickos.
All kidding aside, I am a Christian, and the doctrine of Hell is the thing that causes me the most amount of doubt about my faith. It seems incongruous in a lot of ways. I still believe though. Just thought you would like to know that most Christians aren't happy about Hell either. I'm confident that neither is God.
@@calebfasnacht8698 What does that first statement mean? You are aware that spanking is harmful, right?
txvoltaire - yeah it is the other way around. I would watch videos from a street preacher and see beer ads or others I know the guy wouldn't endorse, while the atheist girl I watched got religious ads. Sort of funny.
An alternative answer to the question "what is love?":
Baby don't hurt me, don't hurt me, no more.
@Cool Dude a combination between oxytocin, dopamine and serotonin if you want to be pedantic.
@Cool Dude i prefer to identify love as chemical and electrical signals within the brain.
I'll take A Night at the Roxbury for 200, Alex.
@Cool Dude Scientifically love IS dopamin and your evolutionary instinct kicking in.
And then there’s Aromantics-
I love how you said that maybe TH-cam is trying to send people a message about their search habits. LOL, that was so perfectly worded.
EDIT: I've never understood the religious standpoint against human influenced climate change. As far as I understand, there is no conflict in the Christian bible regarding human influenced climate change.
It might be because a thing made in gods image just can’t be destroying the whole gallery
I can explain it for you in three words: the Koch brothers.
How do you define religion/religious?
Can you improve on religion is: Any worldview based on any set of related *unquestioned* beliefs assumptions presumptions and norms( which latter embraces all that good/evil, right/wrong, morality/ethics mumbojumbo)*necessarily* involving any attachment to the idea ofgod, there being numerous religions that make no reference to god whstsoever, some examples being , socialism , modernism and their various sub-religions such as wimininism, homosexualism/sewerism, and of course climate-change/globalwarming_ism) Long version or the shorter simpler:
Any worldview based on any set of related *unquestioned* beliefs assumptions presumptions and norms?
If you can improve on that I would be infested in how since a good definition must be able to embrace all instances of what it seeks to define, which is why Dicey's definition of law as: " the command of a sovereign backed by a sanction" is in some respects inadequate, but not all are lawyers that have studied jurisprudence(the philosophy of law)
@@vhawk1951klnice bait dude but try harder.
@@ACharmedEarthling You have told all in one word child,now let us try a little game and see it you can re-arrange the following wordsinto a well-known phrase or saying:off fcuk.
if it uses the asinine word'dude' you can be certain it is a kinderlander imbecile child;that one word says it all.
You can't "believe" in Science, you either understand or fail to understand it.
Their whole world view is usually built around belief, its no wonder they'd think science is also just a matter of belief.
No reputable scientist would ever claim that they understand science. They'll say things like I know the maths, and I can make predictions based off of our current understanding (key word "Current" ). New information is coming all the time from experiments both big and small. But I get your point.
@Rhiannon Young Yes, but they will never claim that they "believe" in science, they'll say they know about science. Since believe implies it not being real
I appreciate that you have idea, but what exactly does" believe in" in" science" *mean* what do you mean by science Elsie?I'd be better off asking a dog than you would I not titch?
Everyone else: gets ads for Christianity or religion.
Me: gets ad for a Steve Hordsford, whoever that is.
Anti-Science is a Rising Problem.
And so is the non-identical-but-bloodrelated Issue of Fake-Science.
So much so that the channel simply named 'Spirit Science' misueses
this word,
has 1,16 mio subs,
and is growing.
So much of a social problem that actively damages our Planet and the human-species that i have even tried to report them. But for a simple factor, it didnt work yet:
Not enough people do the same i do. Not enough report such a big channel, thinking 'Ah, it wont do anything anyway, so why even try'.
Yeah, 'why even try'... thanks for that mindset...
...
Sorry for the long comment but it woul be cool if you use the reportsystem of YT as it was once intended: to help 'us'.
They also forgot cognitive dissonance, People can have conflicting beliefs.
If YHWH exists, then the reason he doesn't intervene as much as he did when the events in the old testament were happening
By the Law of Explosion in Logic, then, anything is justified to do or say to those people no matter what they say.
I love how the guy monopolizes the terms religion and god to Christianity as if there weren't many more religions and gods out there.
I mean, Yahweh _is_ the most popular space daddy at the moment
Something something all gods are actually Yahweh.
This is an argument I've encountered before for why they don't have to murder people who believe in other religions:
'Believers of other religions actually believe in Yahweh, the one true god, but they just don't know it yet. Other Monotheistic deities are actually just Yahweh, and Polytheistic Pantheons just represent different aspects of Him. Non-Theistic, Spiritualistic religions like Buddhism just also believe in a different form of Yahweh.'
I mean most regions have their own specific brand many native american religons were similar, The Abrahamic faiths are similar, Norse Mythologys were similar, South East Asia religions are similar its almost as if they all copied their stories from each other
This reminds me of a conversation I had 20+ years ago, when I was home from college and hanging out on the roof of a barn talking with a sweet young guy who was very, very Christian. He couldn't get how I could be agnostic (atheism wouldn't come along for another 5 years or so), and I was explaining to him my thought process. In exasperation, he finally said something like, well what if science doesn't know? And I explained that I'm comfortable with not knowing all the answers, that I don't need to know everything, and that some things will never be understood, and that's a really lovely thing. Funny enough that I eventually became a librarian 🤣
You fall into the atheists paradox-albeit without having any idea what it is.
@@vhawk1951kl Not at all. I spend almost no energy in my belief that no god exists. There is a difference in arguing that no god exists, and simply believing that no god exists; I am the latter. The discussion I described was one that was lovely and respectful, held on a quiet summer's night spent among friends and acquaintances. Not everything needs to be combative.
"Why is it like that?'
'We still dont know'
'We dont either - GOD!'
12:30 Allow me to quote Aron Ra on that one: "Science might not be able to explain EVERYTHING, but religion can't explain ANYTHING."
wait.....is there an atheist called "Aron Ra"......we need a "Jhon Odin" and "Mary Zeus".
@@nicolasinvernizzi6140 That guy actually said a lot of quotable stuff (though he probably wasn't the first one to say those things). Things like:
- "men created god in his own image"
- "Christians think they're oppressed when they're not allowed to oppress others"
- "We are born atheist and we remain so until someone lies to us."
- "God can supposedly make everything humans can't make but he can't make anything humans can make"
I disagree with this quote from Aron Ra.
Religion can explain anything.
Whether you can TRUST their explanation, now that's something else.
@@TheChiog Questionable, yes, but I find them true in essence, as I see it. They are maxims, their form is outlandish by nature, and as with all maxims they need interpretation (example: "actions speak louder than words" sounds catchy, "presented with a discrepancy between one's statements and actions, the logical conclusions of the actions is a better basis for forming an opinion about his character" doesn't, therefore we use the maxim rather than the explanation)
His statements are maxims that lack circulation and mainstream interpretation so here are my personal interpretations, prone to horrible misunderstanding:
- Everyone seems to have a personal version of God that agrees with his or her view of reality, morality and opinions. One true, immovable God should not have interpretations so polarized.
- It is not acceptable for a religion to claim persecution when the outside world points to and tries to correct immoral behavior, both within it's ranks and outside them.
Examples for both:
~ within: pedophiles as priests, keeping faithful chained to the cannonical dogma through the fear of shunning
~ outside: the backlash to the non-violent atheist community that presents inconsistencies, attempts to keep monopoly of areas and deny other religions to express
- While lying to us is not what religious people do, as their faith is true, I believe the third one could point to the lack of religious inclination of newborns (the same baby could be raised as belonging to any religion). The baby has no way of discerning, he is presented the dogma as true, so he believes that it's true. As most impactful decisions in life should be taken when informed of all and any possibilities with little to no pressure, religious preference should too.
- The fourth may allude to the appearance that gods exist in between the gaps of our understanding, presenting a solution or explanation to unexplained phenomena, thus doing whatever man can't. However, when we discover a plausible explanation and it becomes mainstream, the dogmatic explanation becomes rhetoric, therefore being unable to do whatever man can, preserving the religion while parts of it fail. This property of religions should be exposed.
This is too wordy for everyone to say on an informal basis, and wouldn't circulate.
The problem is, while atheists may react the essence, theists will react to the blasphemous form, therefore creating a big divide.
@random videos ... yes I'm sure you started out believing everything aron ra says and then researched a bunch of apologetic claims that have been debunk several hundred times and was convinced of that? Seems unlikely. Not saying you're lying but if you really believe your... rebuttal? Whatever you wanna call that and claiming *that* was well researched, then... good luck to you cause that sounded super transparent.
“U cant pray the gay away” sounds like a chant from an LGBT protest
Ummm... Whats your point?
No you totally can when he/she comes over to you just assume the prayer position and go "Dear God please make this person leave" and like magic they walk away
@@arcadeinvader8086 😂😂😂
@@arcadeinvader8086 XDDD
Happy Pride Month!
"You cant pray the gay away" the funniest shit iv heard today
Well it’s true
@@maulikbishwokarma6034
Can you watch the video of ‚Illuminaughtii’ named ‚ What is The Flat Earth Society? Corporate Casket’ fully and till the end and then tell me your honest opinion, especially about the end-thoughts?
I want to 'gather opinions' here, if you know what that means...
@@loturzelrestaurant Oh, sweet! An Illuminatii watcher!
@@StoutShako you too?
Y'all are getting religious ads while I'm over here getting ads about Alzheimer's and I'm 17..
Hey that's got to be a little less annoying than when they get the ad targeting right.
I'm stuck with ads that basically say, "Hey Gen Xer. Remember this Ben Harper song from when you were in your twenties and life wasn't a terrifying collection of economic, political, and environmental disasters? Cool. And since you're the last generation that has any disposable income, buy this car that has nothing to do with any of that."
Good times.
I get those Dr Squatch soap for men videos, and I'm a woman. The ads are hilarious though, so it's not as bad as the PureFlix ones
@@stthomasaquarius I have a terrifying story, my period was 4 days late and I got an ad for pregnancy test, two days later I bought pregnancy test, I was pregnant...
If they know everything they could have just told me I'm pregnant and spared me the trip to the shop.
@@tatiana4050 Damn. My Ben Harper story seems like a tiny inconvenience.
I keep getting political ads
the ads are ironically doing the “God of the gaps” fallacy: ‘you don’t understand this atheist, therefore God is in the gaps right over here, buddy!”
A good friend of mine uses god of the gaps in his arguments. I bring up that he's using that fallacy and he claims he isn't. Then he gives me another argument that's literally a different version of god of the gaps. We talked about it for a solid 30 mins and he never got that he was saying we don't know X, therefore it must be god, the Christian god, the specific sect of Christianity that he just so happened to grow up in.
Eric Folsom - sometimes I try ‘using’ the same flawed argument against them. It takes extra energy and creativity to building something that’ll make a specific person respond. But it can be worth it. For some reason they only ‘get it’ when they’re forced to battle with a clone of their argument. As I age, I just avoid it now. People cling to it and hate you secretly even when you’re right. I’ve converted more people by just being ‘cool and atheist,’ and after a while the believers say ‘huh look at that, you’re a kinda good dude without Jesus, made me think, maybe it possible. Thanks man.’ Socializing is a better ‘argument’ than theorizing sometimes.
When I am asked (by my christian family members), How do I think we got here? I shut them down when I truthfully say, I don't care. I'm here until I'm not anymore so it does not matter to me. I am not in charge of answering that question. The fact is I don't really care.
My go to argument for why science is better than religion is quite simple: "Science is adaptable; it allows for recently uncovered information to worked into the current model of the universe. And this encourages people to ask questions, and perhaps more importantly seek answers. However, religion is stagnate; If new information is uncovered and you are your average religious person than you wont question why or how that information changes how you operate, or how it will affect the model of the universe. You just say "Well, that how god wanted it." and move on. In short, because religion can always default to god there's no reason to take advantage of the information we have, and there's no reason to further our library of knowledge. So in my opinion even if god is real its still better to work as though there is no god, at least when studying the natural world because this mind set is more likely to further our understanding of the universe."
_However, religion is stagnate; If new information is uncovered and you are your average religious person than you wont question why or how that information changes how you operate_
Well, no. It hasn't been like that for two thousand years. Paul quotes four times from Greek authors (playwright, philosophers, scientist), and it continued:
From Cardinal Bellarmino's letter to Paolo Foscarini before galileo's trial (Ballermino would have been the presiding official at the trial had he not died before it, and he was pro-Galileo):
_Third, I say that if there were a true demonstration that the sun is at the center of the world and the earth in the third heaven, and that the sun does not circle the earth but the earth circles the sun, then one would have to proceed with great care in explaining the Scriptures that appear contrary, and say rather that we do not understand them than what is demonstrated is false_
You do not seem to understand the Christianity ('religion' you say but don't say what you mean) you describe, thus you get it wrong and do not understand it. Perhaps you should study it.
Well, Stalin also worked at though there was no God. At least he wasn't a hypocrite. I think your understanding of "Religion" is stagnate. Didn't a few Jews "Seek" God in Christ?
Aristo Telian so to argue against that religion being stagnate you bring up 2 men who where prosecuted for trying to change the churches model of the solar system...nice. Also I think you took my “religion is stagnate” comment the wrong way, my point was that religion doesn’t encourage change and makes it hard to accept change, not that it physically doesn’t, sorry for being unclear.
Nachiketh wow there’s a lot to unpack here, first off, Stalin was an orthodox Christian. Second even if he wasn’t being an atheists doesn’t make someone worse then Stalin. Last what about what I said is hypocritical? Do you even know what that word means?
@@aristotelian3098 .... no one asked maybe you should study science not write down qoutes
The add I get is an Iman saying "I want you to imagine yourself in front of Allah the day of resurrection?" well ex Muslim now atheist don't care 🤷🏽♀️
@AIFAHRA HORGGHRO LMAO no it's an add that almost every body gets. When he speaks about islma I get Muslims add and when he speaks about Christianity I gets Christians adds. It's because of the TH-cam's algorithm. He even made a video about it.
I get this stupid ad very often especially on videos by TheraminTrees
@AIFAHRA HORGGHRO your profile picture matches your comment
Same I sometimes get that ad on islamic or religious videos lmao
For real lmao we don't care tbh
For me, those ads just remind me why I'm watching an atheist and why it actually matters.
I got the dumbest ad where it said if dogs exist then god exist and hearing this made my brain have a stroke and a seizure and the same time
At* god the dumbness is getting to me
@@therussianpenguin7493 hahahaha...
@@therussianpenguin7493 Ya made me laugh but don't worry we will hold ya up in prayer for a quick recovery from that stroke
@@therussianpenguin7493 haha **remembers the time someone says knowledge is the devil**
Since everyone apparently wants to share, all of the ads I've been getting are about religion, politics, or Dr. Squatch Soap- all three things you should never bring up around friends and family.
You're not a dish, you're a man
@@goodnightosaka the soap you're washing with? It's sh- *aggressive beep*
I GOT A RELIGIOUS AD ON THIS VIDEO!
The irony dude, the irony.
I got some fitness ad. But I think TH-cam knows I'm fat.
Me too, i got the fantastic "atheist tells you have to choose between science and religion one"
Uh, actually that would be the opposite of irony since the entire topic of this video is about religious ads.
Learn what words mean before you use them if you want to appear even half as clever as you think you are.
@@toarrestsomeoneistoviolate2643 It is ironic tho, because its a video criticizing/refuting religious ads
I got a unique experience where I got an advert at the beginning and then the video addressing that exact advert video.
It's how the algorithm is designed. I seen similar cases in regards ads on other types of topics. and that it happens less if a person uses the interest based ads feature in a person's Google account. because inerest based targets a person with ads about things that they are interested in.
I got a religious ad at the start and thought it was a satirical skit.
Huge fan of your work. Your emphasis on respect, empathy, and a genuine attempt to understand the position of others is beautiful. Also, as a person who identifies as Atheist Buddhist - following Buddhist philosophy without a belief in the supernatural - thank you for the shout out.
Thank you for your kind words! I’m glad I could be of any help. There are lots of different kinds of atheists and lots of different kinds of theists. I think we can better understand the human condition if we’re actually aware of what our fellow humans believe (or disbelieve).
@@GeneticallyModifiedSkeptic ........
2 Atheists knocked on my door..........
They didn't want anything.
Religious explanation is just saying "because god made it that way" or "only god knows why"
This two sentences are why i started doubting my religion chistianity and now want to devote my life to science
Anti-Science is a Rising Problem.
And so is the non-identical-but-bloodrelated Issue of Fake-Science.
So much so that the channel simply named 'Spirit Science' misueses
this word,
has 1,16 mio subs,
and is growing.
So much of a social problem that actively damages our Planet and the human-species that i have even tried to report them. But for a simple factor, it didnt work yet:
Not enough people do the same i do. Not enough report such a big channel, thinking 'Ah, it wont do anything anyway, so why even try'.
Yeah, 'why even try'... thanks for that mindset...
What exactly do you seek to convey when you use the word "Science"?
As you are about to demonstrate, you have no idea whatsoever.
@@vhawk1951kl Simple, you explain scientifically how something happened. You never just say "Science did it" or "Science knows", because you can just say the actual explanation. Like gravity for instance, it's bending spacetime. That answer was found using observation and calculation, both of which anyone saying god cannot provide.
Example:
God created the earth. We find out it was made through a process like any other planet, a mixture of gas and dust coalescing into a single mass.
God created the solar system: A solar mas formed and gathered dust around it.
God created the universe: A large explosion from a single point.
God created the big bang: We don't know the answer yet.
Once we find what caused/created the big bang, they'll simply move onto the next thing we can't explain.
@@vhawk1951kl religious clown🤡
You defining religion/religious exactly how?
You have no idea?
This you are about to demonstrate
12:22 -- _"Science can't explain..."_ -- The better response to this is, "So what?" This is a combination of a God of the Gaps argument as well as a false dilemma fallacy. Science can't explain something, so therefore whatever childish superstition I want to inject into that gap in our knowledge (whether just our current understanding or our capability to ever understand) must be blindly accepted. But the other problem is that they are implying that the only way to explain something is either through science or religion. Those are our only 2 choices. Science really can't dictate our "purpose in life", but that doesn't mean religion can answer that question, either. Some things are just purely subjective. Science might help determine that, but it's not going to actually answer it.
Depends on your definition of religion, actually. In Einstein version of NOMA, "the purpose of life" is answered by religion... But religion in this case is closer to philosophy than system like Christianity. In fact, Christianity doesn't count as religion by Einstein since some of the beliefs is an is fact and it belongs to science. So Christianity is a mix of religion and pseudoscience.
The difference between science and religion is that science doesn't try to explain EVERYTHING. It tries to explain as much as it can, one little bit at a time.
@Dienekes There's an additional element there. The premise about religion explaining anything starts from an unsubstantiated assumption: that there's a purpose or a why. They claim religion explains why, but we haven't even established yet that there's a grand plan with a reason for things to happen and we are discovering what those reasons are. There's zero evidence to say that the universe has a purpose, or at a smaller scale, that a human life does. This, in my opinion, is a very sleazy move, because you imply the reason of existence for your whole argument within the argument itself. It's like going into an argument going "let me tell you why that guy killed his wife" and proceeding to establish motive. However, they don't go into showing the guy actually did that, just part from the assumption he did, but even worse, haven't even gotten to determine the guy is married to begin with. If you want to explain something, the first step is show that something exists. Has anyone put up any evidence showing the universe has a purpose? How did they prove that?
Holy shit my parents installed the program Covenant eyes into all the family’s devices.. damn that brings back memories lol.
I don’t remember how me and my brother got around it to watch porn but we definitely did
@@ARandomSpace they may have done it just to rebel, breaking the rules to prove they can.
@@ARandomSpace I'm not defending them, I'm just pointing it out. Obviously what they did was wrong sorry for not making that clear enough. 100% agree with you.
@@ARandomSpace No, it is not. On all your points.
@@ARandomSpace Well, I have you here, so yes.
legendary
"God did it" is not an answer to those things science can't yet explain completely, it's a non-answer to avoid the question.
Exactly
I was asked to go to jummah prayers, and when the scholar said “search for truth” i got a notification from your video.
"Do You Have to Choose Between Science and Religion? | What Would You Say?"
I literally got this ad as it started playing in the actual video wtf
I use both and more. When I check the gasoline gauge before a trip, I have just performed science. When I pray for safety on that same trip, or to ask whether I should go at all, I have just performed religion.
@@thomasmaughan4798 You realize you're just asking yourself
YES!! I'm in Europe and we don't get much religious advertising, but halfway through this video I got one ... thank you thank you! :D
Then you should use a VPN and find a server from somewhere in the Southeast US. You can delight in the weirdness of the American Fundamentalist Christian movement.
@@wickedguppy3715 Err no, thanks, lol, got enough with what I see on TH-cam :D but been thinking of VPN for other reasons
Hey... first one?
Welcome to Hell.
Me: Watches countless atheist/lgbtq+ videos
TH-cam Advertisers: Here's an ad telling you to pray!
1:15 No, please show me more Covenant Eyes ads. They are hilarious one several levels, and I wasn't sure it was even real the first time few times i saw it.
Lol I thought it was satire and like a snl skit the first time I saw one.
"Hey, look at all these christian scientists!"
Ah, yes, the classic argument from authority.
"Science can't explain what it means to love."
To quote the great Rick Sanchez C-137, "What people call "love" is just a chemical reaction that compels animals to breed."
Rick and Morty quote,
also what are your favourite
Rick and Morty episodes?
It's more of an argument from willfull ignorance. They are simply ignoring that those scientists were brought up in religious environments and that the majority of scientists are not religious, or people from other religions. When they point towards Einstein they not only ignore that he was just an atheists speaking in metaphors, but that he was also a Jew, and if Einstein is the biggest scientific authority in their minds, then that would mean that Judaism is the right religion and not theirs.
Then they willfully ignore that the first great scientists were raised in a society that was 100% religious. That the research those scientists conducted to figure out "God's mysteries" added to our knowledge that God is not needed for the world to work and that he's totally missing.
"the classic argument from authority" With the prevailing authority here a disembodied SCIENCE.
Yikes you say you believe in science and prof but have 0 evidence and your using cartoons for this is just sad but it is true every emotion is just a chemical reaction you realize that right. dumb ass
@@thomasmaughan4798 Science doesn't ask for blind faith, it invites you to research and experiment and discover the truth for yourself, if you can. It's about making claims only when you can support them and show others how to find and test them for themselves
But yes, the ultimate source of our emotions isn't important in human life. The meaning we see in them is what matters
i kinda hate how angry i am with the christian religion. ik it’s not something to get upset over but i’ve recently just discovered your channel and how the process of the modern day christianity has a hold on society. plus my parents are kind in my face about and believe i’m “broken” and “lost” bc i don’t wanna attend church. So as much as i live for watching these, sometimes i’m hesitant bc of knowing that an ad like that could send me into a spiral. pretty sure it’s freshly discovered religious trauma but idk for sure 😟🦅
I would like a genuine answer to the question: why can't people, or the universe exist without a creator because of how complex it is, but god can exist without a creator dispite being just as, if not more complex than people?
Cant wait for the answer. None have one.
Can it exist? Unlikely
Does it exist without a creator? I would say no, and then get thrown down by y'all. I would rather say time is clearly wonky, we tend to think how it all began, because we are constrained by time.
It would all come together if you try to prove that Jesus actually came to the earth as a human. Am in the process of doing this and so far all pieces fit without contradictions.
I ain't no religious person nor have I ever debated with others (this is my first comment on an atheist (?) video). So yeah that's that. I do feel sad for ppl saying "convert to Christian or else hell or smth" , Religious divisions were created by humans. Jesus infact scorned and flipped the tables in chruch cause of the corruption.
All I would like to say is rather than judging ppl (who are well prone to mistakes), maybe try disproving the events of Jesus historically (without/with the Bible). cause that helped me personally.
If I offended anyone/ said some wrong facts, sorry in advance and kindly prove where is this flawed
@@theepicguy6575 Life's to short and my brain's to old to be offended by shaky Christian thought that I've heard and read about throughout my life. The thing that bothers me most is that religions, when in power, have seen independent thought as anathema to their religion and have created governments that came down on religious non believers like a ton of bricks. Benevolent acceptance of differences has never been a strength of traditional religion.
Yeah right, like please make it make sense
@@serpentinewolf7085 probably because the universe cannot exist.
"Science isn't philosophy, ergo Christianity."
Philosophy is what happens when you try to figure out the truth but forget to check your process back against reality. Philosophers pretty much have justified every idea AND it's opposite with the same claim of rational clarity of thought. You cannot trust philosophy until it is tested against the world and that pretty much IS what we have science for.
@@Ugly_German_Truths do you not consider philosophy a science? I think when philosophers use Aristotles logic framework and make probabilistic arguments to model reality they make a much better job then religions even psychology can answer why questions rather objectively better then religions
@@Ugly_German_Truths Yes! Philosophy is rationalism and science is rationalism combined with empiricism. Rationalism cannot ever tell us if a big rock will fall faster than a small rock. It would probably lead us to the wrong answer. Here, science is needed. Rationalism cannot tell us what is inside an atom. Here the scientific method of testing (empiricism) is needed.
@@keslauche1779 Philosophy is not science. The scientific method requires empiricism, testing, checking. Philosophy, is done in armchairs.
@@martinlag1 Science is a specialized domain of philosophy (like say moral philosophy), it's pretty apparent if you do science seriously (PhD level and beyond) because you encounters all kind of conceptual questions that you cannot solve empirically. All of science is rooted into these philosophical issues, it's just a particularly successful offshoot that now happens to appear distinct from the surface, mainly because of sociological issues ; e.g. faculty wars for funding and recognition.
Saying that because science can't explain EVERYTHING, then god exists is like saying "you can't tell me exactly how this happens, therefore unicorns"
*glancing at my adblock* yeah... these pesky religious ads...
I just deal with them because they still support GM.
I found you about a week ago and I really appreciate your channel. I'm a long time atheist in the middle of the Bible belt. There are more churches in my city than any other business except gas stations. Thank you for your insight and presentation.
Seems pretty unfair that advertisers get so much control on what video can be monetized while the video creators have no say on what kind of advertisers get associated with their channel.
You’ll never guess what kind of ad I just got...
Taco Bell?
@@reese9705 Lmao
Have a great day ahead of you! 😄
God Bless! Stay strong, stay safe and take care of yourselves! Wishing everyone the best! 😇 💗
KFC? Hersheys? The local thrift shop down the road?
You dont need to "believe" in science 😂 I'm pretty sure everyone knows it's real unlike religion
The results are demonstrable, therefor no "believing in"/"faith" required.
So science is like looking at the bottom of a pit and religion is imagining what at the bottom of the pit?
@@supe4701 no science is looking into a pit and discovering whats in the mf pit
I have faith in the scientific process, which, unlike religious faith, has been proven to be truth.
pretty sure there has been research suggesting people *don't* know it's real
No way, I watch your video about people getting religious ads, what is promoted directly under the video? The religious TH-cam channel "Yes He Is" 🙄.😂
"Many of the best scientists today are people of faith."
1% of "the best scientists" is still many people. There are just that many scientists out there.
Are they really even good scientists though? In order to believe In a god you need to skip that pesky "scientific method" step to coming to a conclusion that he is real.
Obligatory comment about how I got the science and religion ad on this video covering the science and religion ad.
Edit: While I was listening to this I got another ad from the same guys right as Drew was playing the video, and was very confused as to why five solid minutes of the video was just an ad playing.
These ads are good. Imagine paying for Atheists to put you out of business, lmao
What I notice with a lot of these things is that the religious content matter comes across as extremely simplified and "dumbed down". Resorting in oversimplified analogies, they sound like they are speaking to a child. On the other hand, the atheist or scientific content, and especially your explanations, explain your point in a mature and nuanced way. I think this speaks volumes about the way they both perceive their respective audiences.
I got the science vs Christian ad on this video.
I got the one trying to debunk the "I'm an atheist because there's no proof that there's a God" argument.
See, this is why I worship Nature: no dogma, no theology, no apologetics, and science continues to help me understand it.
yesssssss
But why do you worship at all? Why not _not_ worship anything?
Math is MY god!
It's why I worship my dog.
I know he's 100% real, and science can help me understand him better.
I worship my cats 🐈🐈⬛🐈🐈⬛
Another perk of being Scandinavian: No religious adds. ;)
Get yourself a VPN with a server in the US. You too can experience the joys of fundamentalist Christian idiocy. Personally, I'm trying to learn Danish on my VPN.
"Believe in science". What does that even mean?!
Believing in science means that you're sciencing wrong.
@@skyjack1 yes
@@skyjack1 I mean, I believe Ibuprofen helps with fevers, because it's demonstrable.
I also want to add that “modern” science and philosophy were mostly started and fundamentally made possible by assyrians, Greeks, and golden Islamic scholars (who like you mentioned with the Christian scientists proposed - were as Muslim as Galileo was Christian - forced into it or else they were killed. Basically middle easterners -mostly Persian and Mesopotamian).
This to say, it was made possible by humans and their awesome adventures into our natural world.
Their (Christian video/ad) arguments are very fishy and seem to prey on people who wouldn’t have conflict with them switching words - as they think it’s the same terms - such as god and religion.
I always get the one where he says “hey! Will you take a moment and pray with me?” And right at the 5sec skip mark when he finishes that sentence I skip. 😂 it’s so satisfying. I’m just like 😐 nope.
Same. As though they think that a lack of interest in church attendance is considered a “sin.” Jeez!
Thanks man, I have recently found myself doing this, commenting about the ads. Didn't know how obnoxious it could be. Aside from being a small bonding experience with other viewers who go through the experience is fun, I don't think there's anything of significant value for stating that.
I'll stop doing it on other channels too. Cheers!
Oh don’t worry! It isn’t obnoxious. I was just having fun with the intro. 😊 Honestly, all comments help me in TH-cam’s algorithm so I welcome those comments! They also gave me a video idea so I can’t complain about that.
the way i literally got an ad for hallow on this vid. sobbing
Hey, here's something weird. I *didn't* get a religious ad while watching this. 😆
I was getting angry at certain points in that video that was reviewed, but you, Mr. Skeptic, addressed those problems I saw well, and with a calmness and grace that kept me from losing my cool entirely. It was surreal, because usually, I come to a video like this expecting to come away with my blood pressure increased. This video was a pleasant experience, despite the "god-of-the-gaps" nonsense of the apologists' video.
So I guess I'm left with only one thing to say regarding religious ads harassing us skeptics (though, as you said, they aren't necessarily aimed at us skeptics):
Theorists suggest, merchants advertise.
Just think how flat earthers feel every time they watch the weather channel.
Thanks for giving your take on this! I really like your attention to detail. The way you define belief, faith, and religion separately is something that I identify with.
one of the things i tend to think of when someone argues that we dont know, therefore god, is that ancient greeks didnt know how lightning struck, so they attributed it to a god. we know now exactly how it happens and why it happens, dispelling the need for a god for that idea. whats to say that the origins of life and the universe are a similar problem?
"what is love" - a chemical reaction. "why we desire to do things we shouldn't do" - more like why do some people have the gall to forbid things other people desire.
disingenuous bs.
"Why we desire to do things we shouldn't do" I think is referring to the antisocial impulses that we all have to deal with and learn to suppress in order to live as the highly social animals that we are.
@@12201185234 which some assholes have forbidden in earlier times throughout history. sure, in current society, fun is considered antisocial and thus "needs" to be suppressed (that's why drugs exist - if you can never feel good in real life, you will turn to tricking yourself into feeling good chemically), but the society and social order itself is also a human invention and thus it's not immutable.
Not necessarily. People often have an emotional compulsion to do things that they rationally know are demonstrably harmful, for example shoplifting or excessive drinking. When driving down a highway I've occasionally thought "I could just drive straight into that oncoming traffic". Any rational person rejects such thoughts, but that doesn't mean they don't happen. We all have subconscious impulses we need to control.
@@wizardsuth which is what i just said. things that feel good have bad consequences. hence we control these impulses, grit our teeth, and bear it.
@@wizardsuth www.deviantart.com/librarian-of-hell/art/The-Consent-Principle-646598282
i love how well formulated your arguments are. its stuff i heared a million times over the last decade on youtube, but its always nice to have a fresh new perspective
Anti-Science is a Rising Problem.
And so is the non-identical-but-bloodrelated Issue of Fake-Science.
So much so that the channel simply named 'Spirit Science' misueses
this word,
has 1,16 mio subs,
and is growing.
So much of a social problem that actively damages our Planet and the human-species that i have even tried to report them. But for a simple factor, it didnt work yet:
Not enough people do the same i do. Not enough report such a big channel, thinking 'Ah, it wont do anything anyway, so why even try'.
Yeah, 'why even try'... thanks for that mindset...
...
Sorry for the long comment but it woul be cool if you use the reportsystem of YT as it was once intended: to help 'us'.
Damn... I admire Drew's ability to effortlessly speak in scientific terminology. It's almost an art, really.
A computer can speak in scientific terminology. See the program "SciGen". pdos.csail.mit.edu/archive/scigen/