Plus we could create hypotheses all day on what could be, but if they aren't demonstrable, they are only philosophical and cannot be used to prove anything outside of how creative the people debating are.
@@umairz2178 Of course it is just a lame excuse to justify unfounded belief. It amounts to, "If you can't provide a satisfactory explanation, then I'm logically justified in picking the explanation I see fit, for no particular reason". ;)
I'm worried that this way of thinking, believing that saying "I don't know" is not an acceptable answer, is perpetuated in schools. Because of this, we find ourselves among adults who are afraid to admit that they don't know, even when it's clear that they don't know. I think that this is one of the big faults of the education system in general. I'm not saying that the education system is bunk as a whole, I'm just saying that there are a few holes in it and I think this is one of them.
@william perkins - Cheers William, counting never was my strong point..... I think I may have dozed off while listening to his multiple 'claims' which did not help either....
Charmiskit that is pretty ridiculous claim to say every right wing/conservative argument is without "proof", I would rather use word evidence in this case but that's not important. I would even say you're being arrogantly ignorant here. Reminds me highly of creationists.
This kid has *so many* gotchas, and Matt has a direct response to each and every one right off the cuff, because he's heard all this shit before. It's quite entertaining.
- "Can you demonstrate that God exists" - "No but..." That's basically where the conversation ends. This is the vital point that has to be answered in order for the entire God argument to progress.
@@fearandloathing9976 Atheists dont want an answer and any given to them they just make fun of and show contempt. You should know this. Its not hate. Its the truth. The only way for sure to find out is to die. Do you agree with this?
No matter how “complex” a Christian’s argument is at some point will have to concede that it is based on faith and almost always an argument from ignorance. I don’t know; therefore, God.
Squid GamingYT You clearly did not understand the caller's point, which was that we all operate out of ignorance to one degree or another. All forms of knowledge and belief are built on foundational propositions for which there is no evidence. The caller was merely asserting that God is a foundational belief.
@@oldschoolsaint I am sorry you are the one who didn't understand. That is a false equivalent. The pen example was good. You may have a degree of ignorance if the pen will work. Once you test it you have no ignorance. You cannot do the same with cheap myths such as gods, flying unicorns and so on
I assume they mean false equivalency. False equivalency is the logical fallacy that two arguments are logically equivalent when in fact they aren't. Saying that you have faith in the pen that it works so you're justified in believing in god on faith is a false equivalency. Why? Because we can demonstrate that the pen works, we have evidence that pens have worked in the past, and we have demonstrable evidence to point to what a pen does. You cannot say any of those things about god. Therefore, it's a false equivalency to assert that thinking that pen will work is the same as believing there is some magical sky daddy that made everything. Demonstrate that.
Clearly a stupid kid who thought he knew more than these seasoned debate professionals. He immediately lost the argument when he said "god is timeless and spaceless" because that means he exists outside of the time-space continuum, outside of our reality. (meaning he doesn't exist)
@@TmanT321 I mean there could be multiple realities in which he does exist or does not, but if he's outside of ours then yeah to us he does not exist and can never be contacted.
*Used to be* LOL None of that shit anymore, there's legit no way we can expect him to be throwing THAT MUCH ENERGY for someone who's geniunely plugging their ears and going na nananana.
@@martinkuliza Technically you're being disingenuous which is rather dishonest. Perhaps it's because you have nothing of substance to add. Having the mind of a twit creates limitations Martina... Let us who have an education do the talking. Meanwhile you can do the only thing you're capable of doing right, which is restocking the hot dog cooker when you begin your night shift at 7-Eleven. Now you know your role in this world. You're Welcome.
@@Pranav-rp8wi On the contrary, the kid is willing to give up positions gracefully, admit he's wrong, confused, and he's patient. He's trying to figure out how he understands the universe and in addition to the weak sauce Kalam's cosmological argument, he's also looking at what Krauss is talking about. It seems to me that he might sort things out for himself eventually. If matt from the past called into today's Atheist Experience, current Matt would have eviscerated him.
I suggest you listen to the callers arguments and Matt's responses more carefully. In a controlled debate the caller would have wiped the floor with Matt. The kid should have known that you can't debate someone who has complete control of the microphone and who has the luxury of always having the last say. Matt's responses to the callers arguments were worthy of a high school freshman.
@@aft5264 Not true many have changed their mind, it takes time, and many watching may find this the first crack. So well worth the effort and argument.
@@aft5264 We can't say that, as the number of people identifying as atheist or "formerly religious" is trending upward over time. People are changing their minds. The loudest among the religious may not be, but for every person debating like this young man on the phone, there are plenty more who are quietly doubting their own religiosity.
But kind of a small hypocrite. What i mean by this is that the caller talks and Matt cuts him off or starts talking over the caller but it seems like he cant stand it when the caller talks over him. Ps. Have not watched the video yet, this was ment in general.
@@Blozox Well he's definitely a hypocrite in that regard lol. You can see he's trying to not be that way though. It's just hard when you've heard all the arguments and already have an answer and don't really have the patience to wait for them to read from a book you've memorized by heart and can navigate to any exact line in his head. as it is read.
@@Blozox Hypocrite? No, he's a talk show host. Those are the rules of the game. Nobody promised the callers that they would get to witness on the air, uninterrupted. Someone has to steer the conversation. When a debate begins with an unproved assertion, it's best not to let that person get to "...and therefore, X is true."
Wait... but which version of fairies? The old European folk-type fairies which were more like trickster imps with twisted features and spiky hair, or the pretty, tiny and glittery Tinkerbell winged type? You're about to start a religious war here, pal.
Alex was venting at the end and trolling noises and sound effects while matt was talking as he couldn't win the argument as no one has ever been able to.
I mean the only thing I could think about when the noises started was "did my man just call in to this talkshow from an active warzone only to be schooled?"
Alex: *throws a trolley full of dirty dishes down the stairs* Matt: "I'm not saying the universe I'm saying the cosmos" Alex: *backs a forklift onto a seven lane freeway* Matt: "When physicists say nothing they don't mean absence of anything" Alex: *bangs ancient Chinese gong* Matt: "I don't believe nothing can be acted upon" Alex: *launches a twelve cannon salute* "hello?"
Bruh after reading this comment. I rewatched the and I laughed so fucking hard every time he made some wacky ass noise. Thank you sir. That was too god damn funny.
This is one of my favorite clips from the show. The delusional arrogance of the caller from the start to his utter defeat and pathetic whimper at the end. This caller has changed his name many times with other hosts and I'm so happy he finally met up with Matt.
@John Thijm Thijm flying spaghetti monster feeds you in your sleep All hail the flying spaghetti monster. R'amen " And he said, thou fool hath saith in thy stomath there is no spaghetti monster" be saved
"there has to be some entity beyond time" ...is the same kind of sloppy thinking as: "there has to be a tortoise holding our flat earth so it won't fall down"
Sloppy thinking? Energy doesn't die, it only changes forms. Wouldn't that mean energy is eternal? I.E. beyond time? Maybe you should pull your foot out of your mouth, you might start making sense.
@@KS4RonPaul "eternal" means infinite in time, therefore meaningless without the concept of time energy is just a physical concept, a property of fields, not existing as a separate entity existense itself is temporal
"What the hell was that?", the sound that prompted it, the following sounds and the way the caller abruptly hangs up immediately after with no further comment is absolutely golden. I'm dying right now..
I've been watching since 2011 and one thing that has never changed since the beginning are how confident the callers are and how they always fall flat on their faces. Always bringing up the same bad points and non-arguments. I was unsubscribed for a decade but came back recently and it's literally still the same and that's so hilarious to me. Religion has one thing going for it, it never fucking changes 😆😆
For you religious people, how does it feel to know that your supposed "ALL Powerful Omnipotent" god needs callers like this to vouch for him? Again I ask, why do religious people expect so little of a god that is supposedly "All Powerful, All Knowing, Perfect, and Loving"?
@TREX LEX -- Many of us now Atheists were Brainwashed christians for most our lives. I was. I was one for the first 35 years of my life. Then, I wanted to get "closer" to our "lord and savior". So I did something I wish more people would actually do......I READ one of the bibles. The first time I read it and came across all those contradictions and EVIL parts they never talk about in church, I did what any good brainwashed christian does......I made EXCUSES and did Olympic style gymnastics! lol!! I prayed every day while reading it. But by the time I got to the end, I was tired of all those excuses. I thought "why would a REAL god, that was actually a GOOD god...need Excuses!??" So I told myself I would read it a 2nd time, but with an OPEN MIND, not a Brainwashed one.........BOY WHAT A DIFFERENCE!!! That 2nd time reading it I became agnostic. Then after years of research, I became what I still am, an Atheist. I read it to get closer to our lord........and I was Set free of the shackles of Religion!! How ironic. Great feeling isn't it? If only people would actually READ their supposed "holy books"!!!!!! Instead of reading them, they go to their church and have it read TO them. If there is a god, he sure as hell does NOT want us to know, because there is ZERO proof. The time to believe is After there is Real Evidence, not one second before. This was true in my case, and for so many others -- “Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived.” - Isaac Asimov "The point is not that I'm an atheist, so I know more about religion; that's the wrong cause and effect. I think the more accurate way to phrase it is that I know more about religion, so I'm an atheist." -- Isaac Asimov EXACTLY!
@@MasterSpade Imagine if god explained the germ theory of disease, cell theory, evilution, ect, ect in the bible. Instead we get "who makes the thunder and the wind, god does". "who do you call when you have a ghost in your house, god" "who do you praise when 20% of earth's human population dies out, god ofc"
@@meusana3681-- Exactly. Religious people demand more from us mere Humans than they do from their All Everything god. Just think, back in 1905 and 1915 Einstein gives the Theory that showed how to make Specific Predictions with Real Evidence that can be Tested and is Falsifiable about our World/Universe. Using that Theory, things like Black Holes were calculated!! Then in 1971 the first Black Hole was discovered, and in 2019 the very first Image of a black hole's event horizon were unveiled. He gave all the Math and Falsifiable Real Evidence for a Specific thing, and it is discovered. What does god predict? Is he held to AT LEAST a Human standard? Nope. He predicts that "there will be wars and rumors of wars!"....and that "One day" he will return.......wow. How specific. Supposed to be All Knowing and All Loving .....yet does nothing. Einstein >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any god
@@MasterSpade Black holes aside, though I must agree that is a significant theoretical "thing" that has since been proven. I like to go to the orbit of mercury as example of general relativity (GR) being a solid theory. No form of classical physics could accurately predict the orbit of mercury before GR, and GR did so perfectly. We saw a thing and nothing could explain the thing, so we know our theories were wrong, and then we made a new theory and explained the thing. "But god had it right the first time! the planets are in his hands, he makes the planets move as if GR was real, thats all it is" - god of the gaps evolves into god of the undeserved credit.
He called several times and talked to different people and started exactly the same way. Same arguments, same bullshit. That script of his must have been worth writing, it got much use.
Yep, but it's just a pathetic front the arrogantly ignorant use. It's been a staple of Fox 'news' for 20 years or more. You being from the very start to not have any respect for those who disagree with you (or show a semblance of actual intellect). This gives the easily impressed the impression that you're not to be respected on your views, or your possession of basic logic, even if they're supported with sound evidence and reasoning. It's pretty sheep-like behavior.
The kid came in sparring and it was great. Regardless of what people think of the caller it sure made this episode one of the most entertaining I have seen on the show.
Alright this is the third Andrew call I've watched and does he have literally any other reason to believe in his god? He has this one single argument that they refute every time. Also I just love that exchange: Matt: I can show you this pen works, can you show me that god works? Andrew: Well, okay, that's where I kind of wanted to move on from that
kim weaver if their god wants to remain non-existent outside of space and time that’s their problem. Also the ego, if they truly believe their god exists, they feel they can will it into existence.
One of the main things that I’ve learned from watching this channel is that the person that can admit “I don’t know” is much more intelligent, humble and confident than any of the people that need to twist and turn their minds to some form of god
I agree. Religion is rather dishonest when it comes to the big existential questions concerning time, space, infinity, the beginnings of life etc. Sometimes the more honest answer is to admit that we don't know yet. The dishonest answer is to invent "God" because we can't cope with not knowing.
One of the main things that I've learned from watching this channel is that the atheist is not able to say to themselves "maybe I am wrong" when they say "I don't know." The atheist uses "I don't know" as a defense to hide their faith.
Question for theists: If it’s legitimate to accept YOUR religion on faith, why isn’t it just as legitimate to accept a CONTRADICTORY religion on faith?
Christians accept the death and resurrection of Christ on faith. The rest of the belief system is a matter of historical record. Or is this the part where you tell me Jesus never existed?
First of all, the historical record with regard to Jesus is in contention among experts. Secondly, even if it wasn’t, your comment about faith doesn’t speak to my question. It is a reasonable question. You should either address it, or leave me alone and stop obfuscating. But if you’re like most Christians I know, you’ll either leave me alone or CONTINUE to obfuscate, because those are your only real options. Answer my question or leave me alone. I don’t have time to play with you. ...or is this the part where you continue to dodge?
@@KS4RonPaul chirstians accept the death and resurrection of christ on faith. 1930's-40's germans accepted that hitler would bring them out of poverty and establish germany as a world power. What's the difference in the decision-making process between these two groups?
Back in the days when I was a Christian, I'd say "Others believe their god is true, I *know* mine is true". Easier to say when you're sitting in a church in NZ, harder when you're sitting in a Buddhist temple in Japan.
@@Ichabod_Jericho I'm a militant atheist and that was a lame attempt at a joke. We're going to turn churches into museums in the future. And by the way, natural disasters exist therefore god does not. this isn't rocket science.
@@larryfulkerson4505 I'm a an atheist but we'll never get rid of churches completely too many people rely on their god-belief as a means of coping with the fear of death. And natural disasters existing therefore god does not is a dumb argument against ehe existence of god, plenty of god models including the Christian model take into account the existence of gods and natural disasters happening.
I utterly detest this shit. When theists are called on evidence for their god they proceed to disingenuously start to question us on whether reality itself is real. An attempt to make reasonable axioms and presuppositions invalid so they can equivocate their god.
@@Ergeniz Do you have an absolute putdown that I might employ against them? It's so frustrating to hear them condescend and claim that we have faith in evidence. All I can do in response is say that their belief in God accomplishes literally nothing of utility that belief in rationality and evidence can, and there's far, far more things that rationality can do for us that a belief in God cannot. Somehow, this isn't enough to shut them up.
@Christopher Adams it wasn't his voice although that was a definite factor it was more the content of his argument. It was propped up on metaphysics that he hadn't thought about for more then 5 mins
No, it is a stupid mind that allows himself to get dragged into a useless debate filled word salads and navel gazing nonsense about an imaginary sky wizard.
@@adriangeh6414 this show is a service to humanity, religions have fcked the world and the reason of millions of people. they do very good job, they support people, and the whole show is an exhibition of good use of logic. its very entertaining and useful to so many people. there are no lies here, no stupid arguments, as yours, and as a service requires exactly this. patience and commitment ..and this is not his fault but the situation of the believers that believe so many nonsense things and fail miserably to see whats going on.. so ... how do you do it better clever man ?
@@gaithouri the show is great. But matt can sometimes be a simple idiot like yourself, so obsessed with 'winning' that even a dumb kid can lure him into a most tiresome contest on 'who can gaze into their mysterious navels deeper'. Lol
@@adriangeh6414 yes ...sometimes.. but that doesnt make him stupid or idiot.. have you ever done something similar.. do you have any idea how difficult is it to have clear mind loosing yourself in the stupidness of others ? calling other people idiots is easy ..
@@gaithouri all it takes is to lose the stupid ego and see the person's 'argument' for what it is - high-browed navel-gazing nonsense. Then call it out rather than wasting everyones time engaging in it. There's really no need to 'philosophize' or logik over whether there's really an invisible magical wizard with super powers living somewhere 'up there'. Just stick to good ol fashioned Evidence.
Per Keyser I think it’s just you. I think he’s a clever kid who’s working his way through this stuff. “Incredibly arrogant” is not remotely fair. He was a little bit cavalier in the beginning because I suspect he thought this would be an easy victory for him, But his thinking that isn’t the product of arrogance, it’s called being 17. He was overconfident, maybe a little full of himself, but that got smacked out of existence after a few minutes talking to these athiests, Which is fine. It’s not like he kept a smug demeanor the whole time. Once he realized he didn’t know as much as he thought he knew, he adopted an appropriate tone.
Everyone here so quick to judge. Not only that he’s arrogant, but the fact that he’s arrogant is somehow related to his theism. Yes theism is arrogant from a certain point of view, but fro those who believe it that think they are doing a good thing, it’s not arrogant as it exists in their view. They aren’t arrogant people. They’re just indoctrinated.
Maybe if the hosts would shut the hell up and let him actually make the argument he wants to make instead of trying to Corner him into talking about the arguments they want to talk about, he would be able to do this without so many arguments. I think he said at least three times that that wasn't really what he wanted to talk about. But Matt keeps pushing
@@jsmall10671 Matt is pushing because the kid is trying to 'but what if..' his version of god into existence. Also, you'll notice the dual name in the title ("Alex/Andrew")? That's because this same idiot has called in multiple times under different names to try the *exact same arguments* in order to 'trip Matt up' (which also wouldn't mean he ""won"" but he's not smart enough to understand that). Matt has no time for these idiots, and neither do I.
@@jsmall10671 If this wasn't what he really wanted to talk about, then he should have talked about what he really wanted to talk. Why would you blame the hosts for the caller not being able to do just that? Sounds like you're mad Matt didn't let him define God into existence before presenting the argument proving that God exists, based on that very definition. If the conclusion is already in the premise, then it's circular reasoning. No need to go through the whole syllogism to call out the fallacious premise(s). Maybe you would have enjoyed hearing the syllogism make a full circle and conclude what it already presupposed. It would still have been an exercise in futility though.
ConfusionFusion I believe you are RIGHT on the money, with the troll thing! Did you hear ALL the noise (distraction) towards the end of the conversation? That HAD to be him being a TOTAL ASSHOLE!
@I nut on birds In the beginning God created the Heavens and the Earth! Can't be more self explanatory than that! Nothing doesn't create everything! Keep soul searching and you'll understand...
@I nut on birds Well only one claimed to be God in the flesh (The Creator Of All Things)... You will probably never submit to our Creator and that is sad because you are going to be separated from Him for all eternity...
His entire argument essentially boiled down to, "Well, we can't _prove_ that reality is real... so therefore I'm perfectly justified in believing in magic"
There is only one God. The various religions choose to call him by various names. The only real change is the doctrines. Bible tells us many will worship false gods and there will be gods god gods all over the place, so it's no surprise. The one thing which makes the God of the Bible the true God, is what NO OTHER religion on earth has...Jesus Christ. The atheist can know that God our creator is the God of the Bible by simply researching. The answer to ''which god and why'' is answered all over the internet. So for the host of this stupid show to say ''which god''...shows he never studies and DOES NOT WANT truth. Those atheists who really don't want truth, are those who mock and attack but never go on an honest search for it.
@@aggie7756 Replacing the word 'God' with “flying spaghetti monster” is a classic straw-man fallacy. You're literally creating a weaker version of the argument and knocking it down. Of COURSE the argument sounds ''silly'' if you arbitrarily replace the subject! You fail to realize that ‘God’ being the subject, actually has certain properties, attributes and features which give the word a meaning differing from ''flying spaghetti monster''. Now, if you wish to say the spaghetti monster ALSO has the same features, attributes etc... then you're really describing God, behind the caricature!
@@voiceoftruth2646 You genuinely think I was making a serious argument about the FSM? Lol!! Pointing out a "fallacy" in humorous matters when your entire make-belief story is the mother-of-all fallacies.
Alex has no better arguments than someone 500 years ago saying the Moon was made of green cheese. Total argument from ignorance front to back and top to bottom.
The noises in the background, he was throwing shit around and stamping his feet. The hello at the end was him putting the phone back to his hear to seem reasonable at the end.
@@chadrasmussen6127 Anti matter exists in time and space. No mystery there. What evidence do you have for things that exist outside time and space? How would you observe it? What does it even mean to exist outside time and space?
I don't know but there had to be something outside of space time and matter because what was beoore that I'm not saying it's a god I'm just saying it doesn't make sense there was nothing before the universe we don't know though
@@chadrasmussen6127 Just because something doesn”t make sense to you personally doesn’t mean you can just assert something else that you feel more comfortable with to be true. There are several candidate models for the big bang. Some of them has time beginning at the big bang while others suggest that there was something prior to it. We don’t know which one is correct, but what the scientists DON’T do, is to pick the one they feel makes the most sense, and proclaim it to be the right one.
Well said! I'm so impressed with this channel in general! I love the intellectual rationality and how the experts are able to articulate themselves. My mind is blown because my view on the world has been enhanced now! Before I looked into these atheist debates I already had a critical view on religion (though still accepting of it) but now I am developing a sad (and angry) aversion to its followers (and trying so hard not to judge!).
God is spaghetti. Spaghetti exists. Therefore the Flying Spaghetti Monster exists. All hail the Flying Spaghetti Monster (pasta be upon Him). The Perfect Pope of Pasta. The First Flour. The Supreme Semolina. The Minister of Marinara. The Nadir of Noodle. The Top Tortellini. The Paternal Penne. The Wonderful Wonton. The Sublime Soba. The Fabulous Pho. The First Fusilli. The Majestic Macaroni. The Lofty Lo Mein. The Voluptuous Vermicelli. The Unfettered Fettuccine. The Universal Udon. The Raging Ravioli. The Sacrificial Spaghettini. The Canonical Cannelloni. The Angel of Angel Hair. The Zen of Ziti. The Bestest Bucatini. The Gentle Gnocchi. The Biggest Bigoli. The Man Among Manicotti. The Rightous Rigatoni. The Legendary Lasagna. The Orgasmic Orzo. The Captain of Capellini. The Linguine of Love.
haaa...... yes, I actually met good old Al once at a creationist execution. Since he was awash in a good chianti he inadvertently revealed that "Al Dente" is actually French for "undercooked".
This demonstrates so well what I’ve been thinking about the concept of a god. You just come up with all the attributes you think something would need to cause the universe, and then give all those attributes to a “being” or “entity” and then call that God.
This is an example of Matt at his peak. He wiped the floor with this kid. As he did the other several times he called. You can tell just how careful the guy is being to define his terms so specifically to be able to weasel out with semantics and whataboutisms, but it just wasn't good enough. Matt sniffed that shit out like a dog on a hunt. Razor sharp, brutal dismantling of his dishonest tactics. So cathartic to watch, he controls every second of this conversation. I mean he pummeled him so bad in the end there I think he broke him out of the matrix, you can hear the confusion in his voice and the whizzing of the machines outside the nebuchadnezzar.
26:15"our fear of not knowing the answer encourages us to accept answers before they're sufficiently justified." Wow. Yeah that's basically what religion boils down to.
@billy0 90 You skipped the first question of how you know it's immaterial and also, that doesn't help me because saying it's immaterial doesn't tell me what it is, it just tells me what it isn't.
@billy0 90 *And I know consciousness is immaterial because consciousness is the capacity for experience and an experience is by its nature immaterial* - Can you explain how "experience" is immaterial? And again you're still using the word immaterial which doesn't tell me what it is, merely what it isn't. What is it?
I doubt he read a book. All he needs for this drivel is a couple of Bill Craigs youtube videos. Hes just copying and pasting the same argument William Lane Craig makes.
@@yuuseir3391 It's amazing not only that there are people that call in to argue against something they know nothing about, but that the same people think it's urgent to "spread the word"! If you don't know any atheists, or the only ones you know about are the ones who spend their time arguing with you, why and where are you going to share the 'good news'?? smh, so bizarre
I'm pretty certain that Matt will never read this but the last 5 or 6 minutes of this were amazing! Thank you, thank you, thank you!!!! I'm in awe. That was on a par with some of the things that Christopher Hitchens sometimes said. Utterly brilliant.
3:25 he basically debunks most of the Christian evidence of God. Saying oh we prayed and I recovered from illness isn’t proof of God. That’s just coming up with your own explanation for something you don’t really know the answer to. If it’s not something that can be observed, tested, etc it isn’t legit evidence.
I can see why Dan got you on his podcast, a person who understands the answers to be answerable..I enjoyed this and will be looking at other videos of yours..cheers
Alex repeatedly makes the same mistake within this call where, when Matt says it's not necessarily the case that Alex's claim is true (because Alex hasn't made a demonstration of how he or anyone else could know his claim is true), Alex asserts that Matt must think the opposite of his claim is true. Alex: Well, no. I'm saying that a multiverse or anything that exists apart from our local regime of space that we call the universe, [some stammering] it would have to have space, right? Matt: No. How did you determine that? Alex: You're saying that a multiverse could exist but it's immaterial? Matt: I don't know what the multiverse can or can't be. I'm wondering how you made this determination. Alex: How did I make this determination... Because well, if you're going to say that the multiverse is just something that's immaterial, then [unintelligible] just say that it's a god then... Alex doesn't seem to get that Matt isn't making a claim that the opposite is true. Alex is claiming something has to be a certain way and Matt's saying that it doesn't necessarily "have to be" a certain way, unless Alex has some way of demonstrating how he knows with such certainty that it must be the case. Matt's casting doubt on the certainty of Alex's assertions and pressing Alex to demonstrate how he knows the claims Alex is making are true. You can only make knowledge claims about a thing if you have a reliable way of demonstrating you can know anything about that thing in the first place. And we don't know a multiverse exists yet. It remains a hypothesis for now. Alex seems to mistakenly think that Matt is claiming an immaterial multiverse exists, when that's not what Matt's doing at all.
ZangelDemon The multiverse claim was tossed into the conversation by Matt as a Red Herring. At one point in the conversation he used it as a positive proposition to deflect the callers assertion. Later on he correctly asserted that the existence of the multiverse could not be demonstrated. That's called talking out of both sides of your butt.
This thing is called a Black and White Fallacy. He was presenting option A and option B and believe that if you dont believe A, then it must be B. However he presented no proof whatsoever that it A or B are the only answers and that answer C,D,E,F or G does not exist.
Nick Ericson No. it's called hypocrisy, disingenuousness, and manipulation. Matt demands that the caller demonstrate that the multiverse is material when Matt freely admits that the multiverse itself can't be demonstrated. Why then did Matt inject the multiverse into the conversation in the first place?
oldschoolsaint The multiverse theory is relevant because Alex proposed something outside of human cognition and science which multiverse clearly is. Matt mentioned the multiverse and also existence from absolute nothing because they both similarly to Alex’s God, are unproven and hypothesis that shouldnt be taken as fact as of the moment. Alex took it and asked a question that demands the assumption that the multiverse exist which was whether the multiverse was material or not. Matt didnt even claim the multiverse as something that exist while Alex immediately asked a question that need the unproven assumption that it did
@20:50 - "If my premise holds true, about it all beginning, then, before that, there was nothing." No. Before that there was simply something else. Before you have a building, do you have nothing? No, you have concrete and pipes. Before you have concrete and pipes do you have nothing? No, you have steel and dirt. Before you have an omelet do you have nothing? No, you have eggs. Just because you have a beginning of everything doesn't mean there was nothing before that. It simply means "what started" didn't exist.
The problem with arguing with theists is that they can't understand how "I don't know" is an acceptable answer.
They see "I don't know" as being equivalent to "Goddidit". ;)
Plus we could create hypotheses all day on what could be, but if they aren't demonstrable, they are only philosophical and cannot be used to prove anything outside of how creative the people debating are.
@@umairz2178 Of course it is just a lame excuse to justify unfounded belief. It amounts to, "If you can't provide a satisfactory explanation, then I'm logically justified in picking the explanation I see fit, for no particular reason". ;)
I'm worried that this way of thinking, believing that saying "I don't know" is not an acceptable answer, is perpetuated in schools. Because of this, we find ourselves among adults who are afraid to admit that they don't know, even when it's clear that they don't know. I think that this is one of the big faults of the education system in general. I'm not saying that the education system is bunk as a whole, I'm just saying that there are a few holes in it and I think this is one of them.
my son is 8 years old. he already understands that "i dont know" is an acceptable answer.
Debate in a Nutshell:
Caller makes 50 separate claims he is unable to prove....
@william perkins - Cheers William, counting never was my strong point..... I think I may have dozed off while listening to his multiple 'claims' which did not help either....
@william perkins - And you too Brother....
Charmiskit that is pretty ridiculous claim to say every right wing/conservative argument is without "proof", I would rather use word evidence in this case but that's not important.
I would even say you're being arrogantly ignorant here. Reminds me highly of creationists.
That's like all of the 'debates' on this channel lmao
Every EFFING time .....................
This kid has *so many* gotchas, and Matt has a direct response to each and every one right off the cuff, because he's heard all this shit before. It's quite entertaining.
Ikr
I know I almost feel bad for him but he chose to enter the dojo.
@@Cal6009 I did feel bad for him. The caller showed nothing but respect and genuine interest.
@@MrCph2200 Interesting. I found his assertions about Matt to be disrespectful. The caller came in assuming he was correct.
Yeah was quite an impressive display of intellectual and philosophical sparring. Too bad the kid is wasting his brain believing in god
- "Can you demonstrate that God exists"
- "No but..."
That's basically where the conversation ends. This is the vital point that has to be answered in order for the entire God argument to progress.
Agreed - Honestly, the call should have ended within 4 minutes. The caller made that mistake much earlier.
Wu Tang Forever ✊🏼
@@tweezerjam atheists dont deserve a reason for god. let them die and find out the hard way.
@@bobdobbs943 There’s no hate quite like Christian love :)
@@fearandloathing9976 Atheists dont want an answer and any given to them they just make fun of and show contempt. You should know this. Its not hate. Its the truth. The only way for sure to find out is to die. Do you agree with this?
"Our fear of not knowing the answer encourages us to accept answers before they are sufficiently justified."
What a brilliant sentence.
No matter how “complex” a Christian’s argument is at some point will have to concede that it is based on faith and almost always an argument from ignorance. I don’t know; therefore, God.
Squid GamingYT You clearly did not understand the caller's point, which was that we all operate out of ignorance to one degree or another. All forms of knowledge and belief are built on foundational propositions for which there is no evidence. The caller was merely asserting that God is a foundational belief.
The Fox Strikes Yup.
@@oldschoolsaint I am sorry you are the one who didn't understand. That is a false equivalent. The pen example was good. You may have a degree of ignorance if the pen will work. Once you test it you have no ignorance. You cannot do the same with cheap myths such as gods, flying unicorns and so on
What exactly is a false equivalent?
I assume they mean false equivalency. False equivalency is the logical fallacy that two arguments are logically equivalent when in fact they aren't. Saying that you have faith in the pen that it works so you're justified in believing in god on faith is a false equivalency. Why? Because we can demonstrate that the pen works, we have evidence that pens have worked in the past, and we have demonstrable evidence to point to what a pen does. You cannot say any of those things about god. Therefore, it's a false equivalency to assert that thinking that pen will work is the same as believing there is some magical sky daddy that made everything. Demonstrate that.
Man ALIVE, this caller. He's like an amalgamation of every completely frustrating argument I've ever been in.
Plus his voice grates on your nerves after a while. He's so condescending and smug.
Clearly a stupid kid who thought he knew more than these seasoned debate professionals. He immediately lost the argument when he said "god is timeless and spaceless" because that means he exists outside of the time-space continuum, outside of our reality. (meaning he doesn't exist)
@@TmanT321 I mean there could be multiple realities in which he does exist or does not, but if he's outside of ours then yeah to us he does not exist and can never be contacted.
@@TmanT321 Turns out he was always an atheist and was just trolling.
turns out?
The fact he gave this kid 24+ minutes to say nothing shows how generous Matt is with his time.
*Used to be* LOL None of that shit anymore, there's legit no way we can expect him to be throwing THAT MUCH ENERGY for someone who's geniunely plugging their ears and going na nananana.
Technically HE DID SAY SOMETHING
Therefore your argument is fallacious LMFAO
The entire 'conversation' between matt and the caller was complete navel-gazing nonsense.
I think conversations like this really show the fencesitters and questioners that theism is not the right answer. This tool is a good teaching tool.
@@martinkuliza
Technically you're being disingenuous which is rather dishonest. Perhaps it's because you have nothing of substance to add.
Having the mind of a twit creates limitations Martina...
Let us who have an education do the talking. Meanwhile you can do the only thing you're capable of doing right, which is restocking the hot dog cooker when you begin your night shift at 7-Eleven.
Now you know your role in this world.
You're Welcome.
Glad Alex took the time to call in from the metal bucket factory during his break.
19:53
22:31
23:43
😂😂😂
Sounds like he is still using a rotary phone
Oh, I just got that!
No wonder he had to cut the call short at the end, his break was up!
He gives a bad name to metal bucket factory workers
Your teenage girlfriend may be impressed with your veneer of depth, but you are dealing with professionals here. Welcome to adulthood.
hareofsteel -It is soap bubble thin.
Lol
Oh no you didn't! LOL :)
That guy thinks too much about himself
@@Pranav-rp8wi On the contrary, the kid is willing to give up positions gracefully, admit he's wrong, confused, and he's patient. He's trying to figure out how he understands the universe and in addition to the weak sauce Kalam's cosmological argument, he's also looking at what Krauss is talking about. It seems to me that he might sort things out for himself eventually.
If matt from the past called into today's Atheist Experience, current Matt would have eviscerated him.
Debate in a Nutshell:
I've lost this argument, so can we please move to something else. Can't you see I'm trying to dodge the question.
"I know that my responses are not to your satisfaction."
That pretty much describes every episode :-)
They always call up totally unprepared, they just wing it, and stumble over their words. They aren't even good debaters or able to defend their views.
I've seen Matt in plenty of serious debates. It doesn't really matter you just can't rationalize religion.
I suggest you listen to the callers arguments and Matt's responses more carefully. In a controlled debate the caller would have wiped the floor with Matt. The kid should have known that you can't debate someone who has complete control of the microphone and who has the luxury of always having the last say. Matt's responses to the callers arguments were worthy of a high school freshman.
The amount of patience that is required to deal with religious people🤦🏻♂️
You might say it’s supernatural.
There’s never any reason to argue with them because they never change their minds no matter how right you may be
Ironically, it's saint-like!
@@aft5264
Not true many have changed their mind, it takes time, and many watching may find this the first crack. So well worth the effort and argument.
@@aft5264 We can't say that, as the number of people identifying as atheist or "formerly religious" is trending upward over time. People are changing their minds. The loudest among the religious may not be, but for every person debating like this young man on the phone, there are plenty more who are quietly doubting their own religiosity.
Matt at his best. I learned a lot from this. The man is a logic surgeon.
But kind of a small hypocrite. What i mean by this is that the caller talks and Matt cuts him off or starts talking over the caller but it seems like he cant stand it when the caller talks over him.
Ps. Have not watched the video yet, this was ment in general.
@@Blozox Well he's definitely a hypocrite in that regard lol. You can see he's trying to not be that way though.
It's just hard when you've heard all the arguments and already have an answer and don't really have the patience to wait for them to read from a book you've memorized by heart and can navigate to any exact line in his head. as it is read.
@@Blozox he only does that when the caller wont get to the point.
@@Blozox Cutting off because he deviates from the question asked!
@@Blozox Hypocrite? No, he's a talk show host. Those are the rules of the game. Nobody promised the callers that they would get to witness on the air, uninterrupted. Someone has to steer the conversation. When a debate begins with an unproved assertion, it's best not to let that person get to "...and therefore, X is true."
"Our fear of not knowing the answer encourages us to accept answers before they're sufficiently justified" -Matt Dillahunty
"Our lack of knowing the answer encourages us to believe on faith that God does not exist" -every atheist
@@Aroniyahu 😅
@@Aroniyahusimply wrong on all levels 😭
@@jacobyscommentary Simply right, you (all) just are in denial.
@@Aroniyahu it’s not that atheists BELIEVE that god doesn’t exist they simply DONT BELIEVE the claim that he does exist
“But I’ve added special pleading to my unfounded claim , so no problem with the claim.”
When you are the smartest one in your group of incredibly guillable friends...
All those strange random noises at the end of the call was his argument falling apart piece by piece
Having some trouble with his Realdoll.
Hilarious.
Shattering I like to think
I like at the beginning...
"I'm a THEIST *loud heavy breathing and crackling*"
😂
@@MrRed-cf6gk Alex was having great difficulty breathing through his Darth Vader mask and holding a coherent debate....
I believe in fairies. I have no evidence, I have no proof, and it makes me feel good.
you're a fool you provided evidence and proof. it makes me sad
@@raghusj2473 Which makes me happy lol
Wait... but which version of fairies? The old European folk-type fairies which were more like trickster imps with twisted features and spiky hair, or the pretty, tiny and glittery Tinkerbell winged type?
You're about to start a religious war here, pal.
They wear boots and you gotta believe me.
Even tolkien elves are a variation fairies, Which fairies?
Alex was venting at the end and trolling noises and sound effects while matt was talking as he couldn't win the argument as no one has ever been able to.
I think he was playing a videogame, it is still annoying and doesnt help him prove his argument though.
I mean the only thing I could think about when the noises started was "did my man just call in to this talkshow from an active warzone only to be schooled?"
@@oljo0527 😂😂
Alex: *throws a trolley full of dirty dishes down the stairs*
Matt: "I'm not saying the universe I'm saying the cosmos"
Alex: *backs a forklift onto a seven lane freeway*
Matt: "When physicists say nothing they don't mean absence of anything"
Alex: *bangs ancient Chinese gong*
Matt: "I don't believe nothing can be acted upon"
Alex: *launches a twelve cannon salute* "hello?"
23:43 yeah, I was also confused with where those sounds were coming from 😆🤣😂
Bruh after reading this comment. I rewatched the and I laughed so fucking hard every time he made some wacky ass noise. Thank you sir. That was too god damn funny.
@@kevind6723 it had me dying as well 😂
It should be illegal to make comments THIS funny 🤣
Lolol this comment is gold.
This is one of my favorite clips from the show. The delusional arrogance of the caller from the start to his utter defeat and pathetic whimper at the end. This caller has changed his name many times with other hosts and I'm so happy he finally met up with Matt.
Your name also doesn't seem correct 😅
@@ronitsrivastava377 correct?
@@MustbeTheBassest Just joking man. I think that guy actually has a lot to say and never gets the time.
@@ronitsrivastava377 what's the joke?
@@MustbeTheBassest Your name sounds like a cartoon character.
I can claim to have a super power - I can fly -- but dont ask me to demonstrate it. You just have to believe me.
I like the movie Mystery Men.
There is Invisible Boy. But he can only turn invisible when no one is watching.
Not even him.
@@stephenolan5539 I have that exact same superpower!
@@terrypussypower you're alone in your room one day and try to turn invisible. You realise you can't. (curtsey of tumblr (I think))
Need to have faith
@John Thijm Thijm flying spaghetti monster feeds you in your sleep
All hail the flying spaghetti monster. R'amen
" And he said, thou fool hath saith in thy stomath there is no spaghetti monster" be saved
"there has to be some entity beyond time"
...is the same kind of sloppy thinking as: "there has to be a tortoise holding our flat earth so it won't fall down"
Don't forget the elephants! The Earth would roll off the turtle if it wasn't for the 4 elephants, that give optimal stability to it.
Sloppy thinking? Energy doesn't die, it only changes forms. Wouldn't that mean energy is eternal? I.E. beyond time? Maybe you should pull your foot out of your mouth, you might start making sense.
@@KS4RonPaul What are you calling "energy"?
Oh and energy can be transformed into matter.
@@KS4RonPaul "eternal" means infinite in time, therefore meaningless without the concept of time
energy is just a physical concept, a property of fields, not existing as a separate entity
existense itself is temporal
Tortoises all the way down.
"What the hell was that?", the sound that prompted it, the following sounds and the way the caller abruptly hangs up immediately after with no further comment is absolutely golden. I'm dying right now..
The last couple of minutes of the call is hilarious. With the strange noises and Matt saying "WHAT THE HELL WAS THAT?"
Lmao ya what WAS it Lol I agree
Lol, I'm at about 21 minutes in at the moment but looking forward to hearing these strange noises people are commenting about.
update: just reached the point where the strange noises begin, and they are indeed hilarious.
If someone can prove it without saying “I think” “I feel” “I believe”, then I’m listening.
"the Bible says..."
@@NB-qm7rk that too I forgot. Good man.
Prove what?
@@mysticwine the existence of god
Show proof of gods existence.
Alex's proof: trust me bro
"I'M expanding; the doesn't mean the UNIVERSE is expanding!.. Actually I've lost 30 lbs."
LMFAO!!
Leon is getting Laaaarger!
The chuckle I heard in the background from probably the people in the studio had me dying laughing.
Otherwise it would be a big shrink or bounce..
I love this show !!! Just found you guys....so excited for a binge on all your episodes 😀😊
You're gonna be on YT for a long time. Worth it tho😊
Life changing..❤
@@michaelbath6306 fr
I don't think god herself has seen ALL the episodes.
I've been watching since 2011 and one thing that has never changed since the beginning are how confident the callers are and how they always fall flat on their faces. Always bringing up the same bad points and non-arguments. I was unsubscribed for a decade but came back recently and it's literally still the same and that's so hilarious to me. Religion has one thing going for it, it never fucking changes 😆😆
You can literally hear his mind exploding through his mic
For you religious people, how does it feel to know that your supposed "ALL Powerful Omnipotent" god needs callers like this to vouch for him?
Again I ask, why do religious people expect so little of a god that is supposedly "All Powerful, All Knowing, Perfect, and Loving"?
All powerful god does seem to be expert at selecting piss poor spokes persons :)
@TREX LEX -- Many of us now Atheists were Brainwashed christians for most our lives. I was. I was one for the first 35 years of my life. Then, I wanted to get "closer" to our "lord and savior". So I did something I wish more people would actually do......I READ one of the bibles. The first time I read it and came across all those contradictions and EVIL parts they never talk about in church, I did what any good brainwashed christian does......I made EXCUSES and did Olympic style gymnastics! lol!! I prayed every day while reading it.
But by the time I got to the end, I was tired of all those excuses. I thought "why would a REAL god, that was actually a GOOD god...need Excuses!??" So I told myself I would read it a 2nd time, but with an OPEN MIND, not a Brainwashed one.........BOY WHAT A DIFFERENCE!!! That 2nd time reading it I became agnostic. Then after years of research, I became what I still am, an Atheist. I read it to get closer to our lord........and I was Set free of the shackles of Religion!! How ironic. Great feeling isn't it?
If only people would actually READ their supposed "holy books"!!!!!! Instead of reading them, they go to their church and have it read TO them.
If there is a god, he sure as hell does NOT want us to know, because there is ZERO proof. The time to believe is After there is Real Evidence, not one second before.
This was true in my case, and for so many others -- “Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived.” - Isaac Asimov
"The point is not that I'm an atheist, so I know more about religion; that's the wrong cause and effect. I think the more accurate way to phrase it is that I know more about religion, so I'm an atheist." -- Isaac Asimov
EXACTLY!
@@MasterSpade Imagine if god explained the germ theory of disease, cell theory, evilution, ect, ect in the bible. Instead we get "who makes the thunder and the wind, god does". "who do you call when you have a ghost in your house, god" "who do you praise when 20% of earth's human population dies out, god ofc"
@@meusana3681-- Exactly. Religious people demand more from us mere Humans than they do from their All Everything god.
Just think, back in 1905 and 1915 Einstein gives the Theory that showed how to make Specific Predictions with Real Evidence that can be Tested and is Falsifiable about our World/Universe. Using that Theory, things like Black Holes were calculated!! Then in 1971 the first Black Hole was discovered, and in 2019 the very first Image of a black hole's event horizon were unveiled. He gave all the Math and Falsifiable Real Evidence for a Specific thing, and it is discovered.
What does god predict? Is he held to AT LEAST a Human standard? Nope. He predicts that "there will be wars and rumors of wars!"....and that "One day" he will return.......wow. How specific. Supposed to be All Knowing and All Loving .....yet does nothing.
Einstein >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any god
@@MasterSpade Black holes aside, though I must agree that is a significant theoretical "thing" that has since been proven. I like to go to the orbit of mercury as example of general relativity (GR) being a solid theory. No form of classical physics could accurately predict the orbit of mercury before GR, and GR did so perfectly. We saw a thing and nothing could explain the thing, so we know our theories were wrong, and then we made a new theory and explained the thing.
"But god had it right the first time! the planets are in his hands, he makes the planets move as if GR was real, thats all it is" - god of the gaps evolves into god of the undeserved credit.
I recognize this caller from other episodes. Matt is like a cat toying with its prey.
He has other Utube videos on other topics. He doesn't know what he is talking about on those other topics as well.
@@JohnMorris-ge6hq Can you provide a source? I'm curious lol
he fucked him up when he changed universe to cosmos
i have a friend that has the same kinda logic as this caller and it’s very annoying..
He called several times and talked to different people and started exactly the same way. Same arguments, same bullshit. That script of his must have been worth writing, it got much use.
Damn it Matt, you are NOT following my script!
Every caller that agues ferociously that “nothing can be infinite”
ends with “god is infinite.”
Aww, he’s taking his first philosophy class, so he decided to challenge the masters. Adorable.
He’s got a smug voice like ‘I’m actually too smart to even be talking to you’
The dangers of consuming way too much William Lane Craig - it makes you sound like a prat.
Yep, but it's just a pathetic front the arrogantly ignorant use. It's been a staple of Fox 'news' for 20 years or more. You being from the very start to not have any respect for those who disagree with you (or show a semblance of actual intellect). This gives the easily impressed the impression that you're not to be respected on your views, or your possession of basic logic, even if they're supported with sound evidence and reasoning. It's pretty sheep-like behavior.
@@D-me-dream-smp Or too much Mike Winger and Trinity Radio.
Yea it’s like Anderson Cooper, with their smug looks and constant expression like ‘Don’t you realize how important I am?’ ... can’t stand those guys.
His vocal fry is off the charts
Best part about religious people's argument:
"so we know that..."
*lists a bunch of things we have absolutely no proof for*
yoseph berhan
I have a friend who tried providing me with religious “truths” when I started having my doubts. Actually made me leave theism faster.
The kid came in sparring and it was great. Regardless of what people think of the caller it sure made this episode one of the most entertaining I have seen on the show.
1:58 - 2:05
"Which God are you claiming that you have a direct experience with"
"Well, iT dOeSn'T rEaLlY mAtTeR. . ."
@Tannis It also means that the caller is quite aware that if he let himself be nailed down to his specific god/s, he'd get torn apart.
@@Arkloyd YEEES
Lol, right. If it doesn’t really matter “which” god then why on earth do we care to bother with whether it exists?
No don't it's is dogs god ..can't you tell
@@kentonbaird1723 Would explain 2020
Alright this is the third Andrew call I've watched and does he have literally any other reason to believe in his god? He has this one single argument that they refute every time.
Also I just love that exchange:
Matt: I can show you this pen works, can you show me that god works?
Andrew: Well, okay, that's where I kind of wanted to move on from that
"We all believe something on faith."
The eternal argument of kindergarten children everywhere.
Classic response when a point they don't agree with is made: I wanna move on.
Imagine doctors during a surgery doing stuff based on their faith..
Good point Sandy!
Well said
Don't have to imagine anymore, check out Florida
Doctor: I believe you liver is gone. *Pulls out a functioning liver.* Yanks out kidneys as well cause reasons.
@@whispersmithcuh it’s getting worse down here istg, everywhere I go there’s smthn religious, the only other atheist I’m close with is my mom💀
They keep trying to define their gawds into existence. Doesn't work.
Define? "Define" is kind for what they are doing. I would say they are rather trying to force them into reality.
kim weaver if their god wants to remain non-existent outside of space and time that’s their problem.
Also the ego, if they truly believe their god exists, they feel they can will it into existence.
Umair Z where you born yesterday in side of a church?
How is it possible for man to exist without Brahma?
AXIOM OF AXIOMS CO-EXISTING IN A (SOMEWHAT BEUTIFUL) CO-EXISTANCE OF GAWD
He believes because faith, but defines faith as belief without evidence. So he apparently believes because he believes without evidence
Someone smart should come up with a word for that one of these days
One of the main things that I’ve learned from watching this channel is that the person that can admit “I don’t know” is much more intelligent, humble and confident than any of the people that need to twist and turn their minds to some form of god
I agree. Religion is rather dishonest when it comes to the big existential questions concerning time, space, infinity, the beginnings of life etc.
Sometimes the more honest answer is to admit that we don't know yet. The dishonest answer is to invent "God" because we can't cope with not knowing.
I like the way Neil DeGrasse Tyson says he doesn't know.
"We don't know, but we've got top people working on it".
One of the main things that I've learned from watching this channel is that the atheist is not able to say to themselves "maybe I am wrong" when they say "I don't know."
The atheist uses "I don't know" as a defense to hide their faith.
"I'm expanding but that doesn't mean the Universe is expanding". -- Matt Dillahunty. LOL I love your sense of humor, Matt, and your brilliant mind.
Question for theists: If it’s legitimate to accept YOUR religion on faith, why isn’t it just as legitimate to accept a CONTRADICTORY religion on faith?
Christians accept the death and resurrection of Christ on faith. The rest of the belief system is a matter of historical record. Or is this the part where you tell me Jesus never existed?
First of all, the historical record with regard to Jesus is in contention among experts. Secondly, even if it wasn’t, your comment about faith doesn’t speak to my question.
It is a reasonable question. You should either address it, or leave me alone and stop obfuscating.
But if you’re like most Christians I know, you’ll either leave me alone or CONTINUE to obfuscate, because those are your only real options.
Answer my question or leave me alone. I don’t have time to play with you.
...or is this the part where you continue to dodge?
@@KS4RonPaul theres literally 10,000 religions, how do you not understand the unliklliness of ur god being real and for that matter any?
@@KS4RonPaul chirstians accept the death and resurrection of christ on faith. 1930's-40's germans accepted that hitler would bring them out of poverty and establish germany as a world power. What's the difference in the decision-making process between these two groups?
Back in the days when I was a Christian, I'd say "Others believe their god is true, I *know* mine is true". Easier to say when you're sitting in a church in NZ, harder when you're sitting in a Buddhist temple in Japan.
In Sagan's name, you guys are saints for dealing with this.
Great show,there is nothing better than fact and logic, thank you Matt.
Idk about that, have you ever had *really* good sushi?
Toward the end, it sounded like he stopped paying attention, started disassembling his drum kit, and then had to go really quickly.
It sounds like he was counting money and also threw drums down a stairwell
I cannot go to church any longer. All the face palming is making my forehead bleed.
Still going?
@@Ichabod_Jericho I'm a militant atheist and that was a lame attempt at a joke. We're going to turn churches into museums in the future. And by the way, natural disasters exist therefore god does not. this isn't rocket science.
@@larryfulkerson4505 I'm a an atheist but we'll never get rid of churches completely too many people rely on their god-belief as a means of coping with the fear of death.
And natural disasters existing therefore god does not is a dumb argument against ehe existence of god, plenty of god models including the Christian model take into account the existence of gods and natural disasters happening.
People rip on Matt for being impatient, but he was a saint here. This caller is so snarky and dishonest.
I utterly detest this shit. When theists are called on evidence for their god they proceed to disingenuously start to question us on whether reality itself is real. An attempt to make reasonable axioms and presuppositions invalid so they can equivocate their god.
@@Ergeniz Do you have an absolute putdown that I might employ against them? It's so frustrating to hear them condescend and claim that we have faith in evidence. All I can do in response is say that their belief in God accomplishes literally nothing of utility that belief in rationality and evidence can, and there's far, far more things that rationality can do for us that a belief in God cannot. Somehow, this isn't enough to shut them up.
This kid, Alex, must have been a ballerina in a different life. I've never seen so many bends, moves and dancing.
This caller has an annoying, condescending voice. And he's a wannabe intellectual.
And TOTALLY trashed ! ...........................
Anyone else feel like he is the precursor of Jordan Peterson
@Christopher Adams it wasn't his voice although that was a definite factor it was more the content of his argument. It was propped up on metaphysics that he hadn't thought about for more then 5 mins
Why dos this channel have more slow idots callers?
@Christopher Adams Tone matters, dipshit
I think Alex's brain was exploding in the background near the end there.
Super waste of time! Why doesn't he go somewhere else to ask this? Or go fuck himself or something!!!!
Im amazed of how Matt spotting all the fallacies and decomposes the arguments....what a great mind
No, it is a stupid mind that allows himself to get dragged into a useless debate filled word salads and navel gazing nonsense about an imaginary sky wizard.
@@adriangeh6414 this show is a service to humanity, religions have fcked the world and the reason of millions of people. they do very good job, they support people, and the whole show is an exhibition of good use of logic. its very entertaining and useful to so many people. there are no lies here, no stupid arguments, as yours, and as a service requires exactly this. patience and commitment ..and this is not his fault but the situation of the believers that believe so many nonsense things and fail miserably to see whats going on..
so ... how do you do it better clever man ?
@@gaithouri the show is great. But matt can sometimes be a simple idiot like yourself, so obsessed with 'winning' that even a dumb kid can lure him into a most tiresome contest on 'who can gaze into their mysterious navels deeper'. Lol
@@adriangeh6414 yes ...sometimes.. but that doesnt make him stupid or idiot..
have you ever done something similar.. do you have any idea how difficult is it to have clear mind loosing yourself in the stupidness of others ?
calling other people idiots is easy ..
@@gaithouri all it takes is to lose the stupid ego and see the person's 'argument' for what it is - high-browed navel-gazing nonsense. Then call it out rather than wasting everyones time engaging in it.
There's really no need to 'philosophize' or logik over whether there's really an invisible magical wizard with super powers living somewhere 'up there'. Just stick to good ol fashioned Evidence.
Says he's not demanding absolute proof. A minute later: "Can you absolutely prove the laws of logic."
Is it just me, or does he sound increeedibly arrogant?
Well, he believes an eternal omniscient omnipotent entity created the cosmos to serve as his playground, so.........yeah......
Yes! That is very true of almost every religious nut job I've heard and/or spent time with.
Yes he does because they think that they're going to a higher place if they suck up their gods ass enough
Per Keyser I think it’s just you.
I think he’s a clever kid who’s working his way through this stuff.
“Incredibly arrogant” is not remotely fair.
He was a little bit cavalier in the beginning because I suspect he thought this would be an easy victory for him,
But his thinking that isn’t the product of arrogance, it’s called being 17.
He was overconfident, maybe a little full of himself, but that got smacked out of existence after a few minutes talking to these athiests,
Which is fine. It’s not like he kept a smug demeanor the whole time. Once he realized he didn’t know as much as he thought he knew, he adopted an appropriate tone.
Everyone here so quick to judge. Not only that he’s arrogant, but the fact that he’s arrogant is somehow related to his theism.
Yes theism is arrogant from a certain point of view, but fro those who believe it that think they are doing a good thing, it’s not arrogant as it exists in their view.
They aren’t arrogant people. They’re just indoctrinated.
The caller's voice is like fingernails on a chalkboard.
he does that "vocal fry" thing...
Vocal fry + crackly radio connection. Definitely not a good combination.
I'm pretty sure this is Eric Dubay, that flat-earth TH-cam geek.
Justin Carbaugh I am certain you are wrong about that.
@@manonymous4737 well, shit. Can't win em all I guess.
"How many of these arguments are we going to entertain, because usually people lead with their best one?" - Gansta Jen
Maybe if the hosts would shut the hell up and let him actually make the argument he wants to make instead of trying to Corner him into talking about the arguments they want to talk about, he would be able to do this without so many arguments. I think he said at least three times that that wasn't really what he wanted to talk about. But Matt keeps pushing
@@jsmall10671 Matt is pushing because the kid is trying to 'but what if..' his version of god into existence.
Also, you'll notice the dual name in the title ("Alex/Andrew")? That's because this same idiot has called in multiple times under different names to try the *exact same arguments* in order to 'trip Matt up' (which also wouldn't mean he ""won"" but he's not smart enough to understand that). Matt has no time for these idiots, and neither do I.
@@jsmall10671 There are actually other people like Alex :)
@@jsmall10671 If this wasn't what he really wanted to talk about, then he should have talked about what he really wanted to talk.
Why would you blame the hosts for the caller not being able to do just that?
Sounds like you're mad Matt didn't let him define God into existence before presenting the argument proving that God exists, based on that very definition.
If the conclusion is already in the premise, then it's circular reasoning.
No need to go through the whole syllogism to call out the fallacious premise(s).
Maybe you would have enjoyed hearing the syllogism make a full circle and conclude what it already presupposed. It would still have been an exercise in futility though.
I love the “Happy Easter” right after excoriating religious apologists at the end.
Caller sounds like McLovin'
Check out his other calls .. he's also Josh, Brad, Adam and Lucas . ... get ready to laugh 🤣🤣
Jaci Bea I’ve noticed
ConfusionFusion I believe you are RIGHT on the money, with the troll thing! Did you hear ALL the noise (distraction) towards the end of the conversation? That HAD to be him being a TOTAL ASSHOLE!
and Andrew and Adam and Nick...
I'll pass. I think this one call is enough to realize he lost.
DerickE he always loses and it’s all the same. He uses his bullshit philosophical drivel to try and get them in a “gotcha!” moment. It’s pathetic
No one ever proves the existence of the christian god, ever.
There is literally more evidence for Santa Clause being real. :-)
And nobody shows how everything can come from nothing ever!
@I nut on birds In the beginning God created the Heavens and the Earth! Can't be more self explanatory than that! Nothing doesn't create everything! Keep soul searching and you'll understand...
@I nut on birds Well only one claimed to be God in the flesh (The Creator Of All Things)... You will probably never submit to our Creator and that is sad because you are going to be separated from Him for all eternity...
@I nut on birds Faith is the substance of things hoped for. The evidence of things not seen. Hebrews 11:1
His entire argument essentially boiled down to, "Well, we can't _prove_ that reality is real... so therefore I'm perfectly justified in believing in magic"
Matt nailed it in his first sentence "Which god."
There is only one God. The various religions choose to call him by various names. The only real change is the doctrines. Bible tells us many will worship false gods and there will be gods god gods all over the place, so it's no surprise. The one thing which makes the God of the Bible the true God, is what NO OTHER religion on earth has...Jesus Christ. The atheist can know that God our creator is the God of the Bible by simply researching. The answer to ''which god and why'' is answered all over the internet. So for the host of this stupid show to say ''which god''...shows he never studies and DOES NOT WANT truth.
Those atheists who really don't want truth, are those who mock and attack but never go on an honest search for it.
Cool story, bro. By your fruits, hypocrisy and projection, I have known thee.
@@voiceoftruth2646 Yep, you're absolutely correct. The almighty, all knowing, and one and only Flying Spaghetti Monster!
@@aggie7756 Replacing the word 'God' with “flying spaghetti monster” is a classic straw-man fallacy. You're literally creating a weaker version of the argument and knocking it down. Of COURSE the argument sounds ''silly'' if you arbitrarily replace the subject! You fail to realize that ‘God’ being the subject, actually has certain properties, attributes and features which give the word a meaning differing from ''flying spaghetti monster''. Now, if you wish to say the spaghetti monster ALSO has the same features, attributes etc... then you're really describing God, behind the caricature!
@@voiceoftruth2646 You genuinely think I was making a serious argument about the FSM? Lol!! Pointing out a "fallacy" in humorous matters when your entire make-belief story is the mother-of-all fallacies.
Alex has no better arguments than someone 500 years ago saying the Moon was made of green cheese. Total argument from ignorance front to back and top to bottom.
@Bob Rabbins one million thumbs up
Wow! Matt Dillahunty as articulate and compelling as ever.
'I'm expanding that doesn't mean the earth is expanding' was hilarious
That day when McLovin called in.
Lulz wow..I literally cant stop picturing him now when this guy talks
HA! wiki wiki wiki...
Nah, I went to school with McLovin, I want to say he was smarter than this guy
😂😂😂😂😂
Lmao
It sounded like you were doing his homework for him.
Mojos Bigstick That’s what I thought. I bet he had a debate the next day 🤣
The noises in the background, he was throwing shit around and stamping his feet. The hello at the end was him putting the phone back to his hear to seem reasonable at the end.
The kid: I’m going to DESTROY you with feelings and fallacy.
Timeless and spaceless... Isn't that the same as non-existent?
No because I think there can be something that exists outside of time and space like anti matter
@@chadrasmussen6127 Anti matter exists in time and space. No mystery there. What evidence do you have for things that exist outside time and space? How would you observe it? What does it even mean to exist outside time and space?
I don't know but there had to be something outside of space time and matter because what was beoore that I'm not saying it's a god I'm just saying it doesn't make sense there was nothing before the universe we don't know though
@@chadrasmussen6127 Just because something doesn”t make sense to you personally doesn’t mean you can just assert something else that you feel more comfortable with to be true. There are several candidate models for the big bang. Some of them has time beginning at the big bang while others suggest that there was something prior to it. We don’t know which one is correct, but what the scientists DON’T do, is to pick the one they feel makes the most sense, and proclaim it to be the right one.
I agree it's just we will never know on this side of life
Although Matt still hit a brick wall with this guy, this talk seemed a lot more productive than most.
Thats whats so sad. He is an intelligent man. But his parents did him a huge injustice. I am confident he will some day grow out of fairy tales.
Well said! I'm so impressed with this channel in general! I love the intellectual rationality and how the experts are able to articulate themselves. My mind is blown because my view on the world has been enhanced now! Before I looked into these atheist debates I already had a critical view on religion (though still accepting of it) but now I am developing a sad (and angry) aversion to its followers (and trying so hard not to judge!).
7:50 Iconic quote
God is spaghetti. Spaghetti exists. Therefore the Flying Spaghetti Monster exists.
All hail the Flying Spaghetti Monster (pasta be upon Him). The Perfect Pope of Pasta. The First Flour. The Supreme Semolina. The Minister of Marinara. The Nadir of Noodle. The Top Tortellini. The Paternal Penne. The Wonderful Wonton. The Sublime Soba. The Fabulous Pho. The First Fusilli. The Majestic Macaroni. The Lofty Lo Mein. The Voluptuous Vermicelli. The Unfettered Fettuccine. The Universal Udon. The Raging Ravioli. The Sacrificial Spaghettini. The Canonical Cannelloni. The Angel of Angel Hair. The Zen of Ziti. The Bestest Bucatini. The Gentle Gnocchi. The Biggest Bigoli. The Man Among Manicotti. The Rightous Rigatoni. The Legendary Lasagna. The Orgasmic Orzo. The Captain of Capellini. The Linguine of Love.
Kent Fletcher praise be to he. May we all bask in the moisture that swells it’s righteous noodles. And the congregation said “I’ll have seconds”
Ramen
haaa...... yes, I actually met good old Al once at a creationist execution. Since he was awash in a good chianti he inadvertently revealed that "Al Dente" is actually French for "undercooked".
Arrrrrgh...... The Great Gliding Pasta Beast is just a myth. Every sane Pastafarian knows at least that much.
May sauce be upon Him...
23:07 "....I'm not sure I understand..."
Yeah, that much is obvious
God of the word salad.
Nice
Hahahaahhahahahaahahahahah. Well said!
Mmmmh salad
This demonstrates so well what I’ve been thinking about the concept of a god. You just come up with all the attributes you think something would need to cause the universe, and then give all those attributes to a “being” or “entity” and then call that God.
The variety of different sound effects at the end had me dying laughing 😆
"Nothing exists so my god exists." Shoot, I'm sold.
LOL! You can hear the kid playing with his toys. LOL!
April May
The kid was Matt’s toy. Ok door mat.
This is an example of Matt at his peak. He wiped the floor with this kid. As he did the other several times he called.
You can tell just how careful the guy is being to define his terms so specifically to be able to weasel out with semantics and whataboutisms, but it just wasn't good enough. Matt sniffed that shit out like a dog on a hunt. Razor sharp, brutal dismantling of his dishonest tactics. So cathartic to watch, he controls every second of this conversation. I mean he pummeled him so bad in the end there I think he broke him out of the matrix, you can hear the confusion in his voice and the whizzing of the machines outside the nebuchadnezzar.
Yes.
😂😂 I was wondering what that sound was
This guy again. This is the 3rd time I've heard this guy call in.
All arguments from callers fall by the wayside when they are asked, "How can you demonstrate that?"
16:22 - "Nothing other than _something..."_
Sometimes these callers need to take a step back and listen to what they're saying.
Alex sounds like he watched William Lane Craig's series of videos and was dazzled then began spouting everything he heard.
26:15"our fear of not knowing the answer encourages us to accept answers before they're sufficiently justified." Wow. Yeah that's basically what religion boils down to.
" It exists apart from matter" - How can anything that exists be apart from matter? All existence we've ever encountered is made up of matter.
@billy0 90 It's funny how you just say that and don't include an example of something that isn't matter.
@billy0 90 and I'm still waiting for you to give an example instead of just say "incorrect". What does anyone learn from that? Nothing.
@billy0 90 How do you know consciousness is immaterial? And if it's not material, what is it made up of instead?
@billy0 90 You skipped the first question of how you know it's immaterial and also, that doesn't help me because saying it's immaterial doesn't tell me what it is, it just tells me what it isn't.
@billy0 90 *And I know consciousness is immaterial because consciousness is the capacity for experience and an experience is by its nature immaterial*
- Can you explain how "experience" is immaterial?
And again you're still using the word immaterial which doesn't tell me what it is, merely what it isn't. What is it?
Read one book
Thinks he can debate Matt
I doubt he read a book. All he needs for this drivel is a couple of Bill Craigs youtube videos. Hes just copying and pasting the same argument William Lane Craig makes.
teentits
My favorite part was when a steam golem enters the call near the end.
LOVE the clever, cocky theists who call in seemingly without ever having heard an atheist before!!!!
They're not used to get any reply ever, that's the problem. The only feedback they ever get is, amen this, amen that, amen everything.
@@yuuseir3391 It's amazing not only that there are people that call in to argue against something they know nothing about, but that the same people think it's urgent to "spread the word"!
If you don't know any atheists, or the only ones you know about are the ones who spend their time arguing with you, why and where are you going to share the 'good news'?? smh, so bizarre
I'm pretty certain that Matt will never read this but the last 5 or 6 minutes of this were amazing!
Thank you, thank you, thank you!!!!
I'm in awe. That was on a par with some of the things that Christopher Hitchens sometimes said.
Utterly brilliant.
3:25 he basically debunks most of the Christian evidence of God. Saying oh we prayed and I recovered from illness isn’t proof of God. That’s just coming up with your own explanation for something you don’t really know the answer to. If it’s not something that can be observed, tested, etc it isn’t legit evidence.
I can see why Dan got you on his podcast, a person who understands the answers to be answerable..I enjoyed this and will be looking at other videos of yours..cheers
Alex repeatedly makes the same mistake within this call where, when Matt says it's not necessarily the case that Alex's claim is true (because Alex hasn't made a demonstration of how he or anyone else could know his claim is true), Alex asserts that Matt must think the opposite of his claim is true.
Alex: Well, no. I'm saying that a multiverse or anything that exists apart from our local regime of space that we call the universe, [some stammering] it would have to have space, right?
Matt: No. How did you determine that?
Alex: You're saying that a multiverse could exist but it's immaterial?
Matt: I don't know what the multiverse can or can't be. I'm wondering how you made this determination.
Alex: How did I make this determination... Because well, if you're going to say that the multiverse is just something that's immaterial, then [unintelligible] just say that it's a god then...
Alex doesn't seem to get that Matt isn't making a claim that the opposite is true. Alex is claiming something has to be a certain way and Matt's saying that it doesn't necessarily "have to be" a certain way, unless Alex has some way of demonstrating how he knows with such certainty that it must be the case. Matt's casting doubt on the certainty of Alex's assertions and pressing Alex to demonstrate how he knows the claims Alex is making are true.
You can only make knowledge claims about a thing if you have a reliable way of demonstrating you can know anything about that thing in the first place. And we don't know a multiverse exists yet. It remains a hypothesis for now.
Alex seems to mistakenly think that Matt is claiming an immaterial multiverse exists, when that's not what Matt's doing at all.
ZangelDemon The multiverse claim was tossed into the conversation by Matt as a Red Herring. At one point in the conversation he used it as a positive proposition to deflect the callers assertion. Later on he correctly asserted that the existence of the multiverse could not be demonstrated. That's called talking out of both sides of your butt.
This thing is called a Black and White Fallacy. He was presenting option A and option B and believe that if you dont believe A, then it must be B.
However he presented no proof whatsoever that it A or B are the only answers and that answer C,D,E,F or G does not exist.
Nick Ericson No. it's called hypocrisy, disingenuousness, and manipulation. Matt demands that the caller demonstrate that the multiverse is material when Matt freely admits that the multiverse itself can't be demonstrated. Why then did Matt inject the multiverse into the conversation in the first place?
oldschoolsaint The multiverse theory is relevant because Alex proposed something outside of human cognition and science which multiverse clearly is. Matt mentioned the multiverse and also existence from absolute nothing because they both similarly to Alex’s God, are unproven and hypothesis that shouldnt be taken as fact as of the moment. Alex took it and asked a question that demands the assumption that the multiverse exist which was whether the multiverse was material or not. Matt didnt even claim the multiverse as something that exist while Alex immediately asked a question that need the unproven assumption that it did
Nick Ericson I'm astonished.
I love how he pretended to lose connection towards the end of the call lol. You heard everything you clown
Matt is being so gentle with this kid. Sweet.
@20:50 - "If my premise holds true, about it all beginning, then, before that, there was nothing."
No. Before that there was simply something else. Before you have a building, do you have nothing? No, you have concrete and pipes. Before you have concrete and pipes do you have nothing? No, you have steel and dirt. Before you have an omelet do you have nothing? No, you have eggs.
Just because you have a beginning of everything doesn't mean there was nothing before that. It simply means "what started" didn't exist.