Did 3D Scans Find Noah's Ark? - (Ken) Ham & AiG News vs William Lane Craig & Ron Wyatt
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 14 พ.ย. 2021
- Ken Ham and his team have a weekly "news" show, reacting to the news stories of the day from a Christian young-earth creation perspective from the Answers in Genesis staff at his Creation Museum.
I join Roger Patterson and Tim Chaffey as they discuss Scans put Turkish Durupinar formation back into the headlines; William Lane Craig endorses old mytho-history heresy and more during Answers News, broadcast live from the Creation Museum.
Did 3D Scans Find Noah's Ark? - Answers News: October 6, 2021
• Did 3D Scans Just Disc...
A Quest for the Historical Adam: A Conversation with William Lane Craig
• A Quest for the Histor...
Everything Wrong with the Creation Museum and the Ark Encounter
• Everything Wrong with ...
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @paulogia
Support Paulogia at
/ paulogia
www.paypal.me/paulogia
www.amazon.ca/hz/wishlist/ls/...
teespring.com/stores/paulogia
Paulogia Audio-Only-Version Podcast
paulogia.buzzsprout.com
Follow Paulogia at
/ paulogia0
/ paulogia0
/ discord - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
This video encapsulates what I consider to be the worst of Paul. Seeng his avatar sit there while listening to dueling apologists is NOT why I come here. If Paul doesn't have anything to say, he should have just cut the segment. He's at his best commentating and debunking religious claims. This bit comes off as lazy, or at least that he has nothing to say.
The point is allowing competing religious claims to debunk themselves. No atheist opinions required. Especially not when a common tactic of apologists is "you're either my type of Christian, or you're an atheist." Which this clearly refutes.
“Ugh, Paulogia isn’t make content the way ** I ** want him to… UUUUGGGHHH”
Cutting all these clips together coherently takes a lot more effort than you would think.
If this be the "worst of Paul", then it is still a cut or two above most Christian TH-cam postings. And I agree with spatbee: cutting and editing these apologist clips into a cohesive debunking takes a lot of time and effort.
Letting the snake devour its own tail is more poignant than cutting it in half with a shovel.
The fact that I'm agreeing with William Craig is evidence for just how crazy Answers in Genesis is.
Lol
My thoughts exactly 😂
This feels like all five of my kids arguing how the rules work in a Pokemon battle, but none of them know the actual rules, and I keep having to explain that Ryan Reynolds is just pretending to be Pikachu.
That's an amazing analogy.
Oh spendid, btw Reynold pretending to be Pikachu confused me too. btw Pokemon itself confuses me, maybe I am too old for it.
I was with you right up until you reminded me of that frigging movie. I dunno if it's bad or good, but the Pokémon designs were the epitome of why I don't care for trying to make live-action versions of video games with cartoony characters. They either look out of place, or are horrifying/off-putting in some respect because the original artists weren't trying to make something that would make biological sense.
Seth Rogan is Donkey Kong, ik this is off topic to pokemon but hey umm Mario, banana slamma am I right? Uhherrrhurrrhurrr
Pokemon uwu i wanna be a skarmory~
I love these "Christian VS Christian"-videos!
Great work, Paul!
solid old christian tradition since Iraneaus: "You disagree with me, you therefor are a heretic."
I second that emotion, Gustav!
That red hot Apologist vs Apologist action... 😲
!!! Cripple Fight!!!!
Thats an odd entertainment choice. I do not spend my time looking at other people in other religions arguing over issues. I actually find that sad. Rather, I spend my time working on better understanding various views and growing my own understanding.
Tell me, what worldview do you have that is so much better than Christianity?
Don't listen to Daniel Kohl. I love Ham and Eggs, and this is exactly what I needed today after a dreadful day of dealing with a school district who doesn't give a damn about the students we teach. Thank you, Paul, for a much-needed grin.
if you are a teacher, i thank you. teachers are the true heroes in america.
@@cliftongaither6642 Thank you so much. I love what I do, no matter what, but it's always nice to be appreciated!
The 'for the bible tells me so' jingle always brings a smile to my face. (It's my ringtone now)
It sounds like an ice cream truck ...
Me too😄
Jesus loves me this l know for the bible tells me so
Even better it drives the apologists into an hysterical frenzy. 🤣
Same here 😂
When WLC comes out sounding like the most reasonable party.... you done goofed.
That's so true!!! 😂 😂 😂 😂
Man, I was *not* ready for that.
My thoughts exactly, not that Craig is all that reasonable, but these AiG idiots are batshit crazy
To me Craig comes off as knowing original sin is a poppycock but he can’t accept it since his entire Christian worldview would collapse around him.
I’d go as far as to say it probably has collapsed but he doesn’t know how to survive outside of the community that holds that worldview.
@@ARoll925 lunatics
That was actually a fascinating view into WLC's thought process and shows how even a well educated and intelligent mind can twist itself beyond reason for a few religious presuppositions. His openness about the tenants he can't avoid for religious reasons was very telling.
I think his most revealing statement was that "the Bible commits me to believe in a historical Adam." It's not a conclusion from evidence it's simply an *a priori* assumption that the Bible has to be true. I've seen even liberal scholars say things like this. Dale Martin from Yale said something like that in a debate about the resurrection. he was arguing AGAINST a literal resurrection but still had some other theological interpretation of it because he said he thought his commitment to the Bible required him to do so. There's a cognitive dissonance going on with a simple solution. I don't why they can't just admit the Bible is wrong.
@@Ken_Scaletta I agree. Many Swedish Christians don't think there was a literal Adam - they do get fuzzy when I ask them what the story is for. The protestant Swedish church has no problem saying there are errors in the Bible and would admit that telling truth from fiction is a problem. All of them do believe in Jesus in some form from my experience, but the rest is less important to them.
I was raised Catholic and for some time I noticed that even many atheists who, understandably, don't like the Church otherwise say that it's perfectly compatible with science and evolution somehow.
Except as I found shortly before my faith collapse that's not exactly true, Original Sin is more or less not only an infallible doctrine (as I found reading the documents from the Council of Trent) but as paragraph 389 of the Catechism really seems to imply without it the entire religion breaks down essentially, it's a cornerstone to say the least (another infallible doctrine, that is the Immaculate Conception, relies on Original Sin being real because otherwise alongside the Virgin Birth it becomes pointless and unnecessary).
Why is that? If Adam was a mere metaphor, as I mistakenly believed alongside so many Catholics, where did Original Sin come from? Explanations given range to something very similar to what WLC said in this video to outright saying that humanity came from a miracle and somehow we survived all the inbreeding (the "God did it!" argument from some apologists I used to look up to) and those explanations are not just unconvincing but I found some of them to be straight up insulting to anyone's intelligence as I became fascinated with human evolution in college, maybe that's why they all go to such great lengths to make their doctrines compatible.
After I left for a while I felt I was lied to by the people I used to look up to in that church and I was really pissed as a result but recently I realized that maybe creationism serves mainly as a defense mechanism for the fundies to latch on to (otherwise their entire worldview breaks down in the spot due to the implication and I imagine that to be terrifying for some, my own deconversion journey turned out to be turbulent) and if anything this problem goes way back to the beginning of the religion (or at least the 4th century when Augustine came up with this doctrine) and maybe the people I was pissed at were duped too as they sincerely believed their religion was perfectly compatible with science, that's how I've been able to make peace with my past. At the end WLC seems to get the implications and sticks with the cognitive dissonance instead like I did for so long.
I've heard that European Catholicism tends to be much more relaxed (I despised the German bishops in my ultra-conservative phase back in college) but here in the United States they tend to be less so and I found out the hard way that a good chunk of them are also creationist just like many of their Protestant neighbors, many of my former church friends were just like that (that's what led me to seek the answers in the first place) and from what I've heard recently they don't like vaccines either so thank goodness I left them for good.
For them if you can cherry pick the Bible you can cherry pick what the pope and church doctrine says as well, that's what I used to do to the point I became a monarchist (yes, for real, and I used Sweden and other Scandinavian countries as examples without knowing the context) all based on what a bunch of pissed off popes from the 19th century said after they lost their political powers for the most part.
many prominent Nazis had Doctorates in Physics, History, Law...
We all have presuppositions. The Christian paradigm is the most coherent paradigm to assess reality, the atheist on is incoherent and arbitrary.
WLC says towards the end: "even given that worst case scenario, there are moves that we can make to preserve orthodox christian belief..." sums it up very nicely. Basically, what he is saying is that if we just make the right moves, shuffle things around a bit, do some cherry picking, interpolate, infer, cross our fingers, turn our heads and keep reality at arms length, we can still keep our faith. If sticking your head into the sand seems like your only option, go ahead. If you prefer having evidence as the basis for what you believe, welcome to the other side.
WLC's entire thing is motivated reasoning. He wants to say X is true and will find whatever he can to make it look true enough to his supporters. The KCA, stolen from Islamic apologetics, is the prime example of that career-making strategy.
@@archapmangcmg Yup, motivated reasoning; the foundation of almost all religious apologetics. One of my biggest beefs with religion is that it encourages people to think this way, as if it were a virtue rather than a logical fallacy.
Yep, eventually I got to the point where it all just crumbled away. Don't get me wrong, it was one of the most traumatic experiences of my life - losing my great love and the centre of my life, and putting myself at risk of eternal hell fire. But I'm so thankful...
@@mikeharrison1868 And your experiences are part of the evidence for calling the teaching of religions to the uncritical, their targeted indoctrination of the vulnerable, abuse.
They don't even try to show they're true until you've swallowed their crap and even then, do so by lying to children, the grieving, the ignorant.
It's only their popularity and viciousness that keep them from being dismantled socially as they already have been on their claims.
There is zero scientific evidence that nature created life ... and ... all the species today evolved over a billion or so years from a common simple ancestor. But this tale ... has been turned into a fact of Science, by the Faithful worshipers of Nature.
The entire classification of Life ... is based purely on nature magically making a simple organism, and then nature introducing small changes over a billion years to get all the flaura & fauna today.
All life are biological machines. A Machine is a physical function that requires specific energy, matter, time & space in order to exist, and to function.
All machines a UNNATURALLY made by an intelligence what must impart a function or purpose to the machine.
The Machine & Function Categories ... prove the Universe & all Life ... were unnaturally made.
This is why there is not and never will be evidence proving the Universe & Life ... have a NATURAL origin. But this BS is taught as a fact of Science.
Science clearly shows an UNNATURAL origin of the Universe & Life. Whether it is the God of Abraham who made the Universe & Life is a valid debate ... but the fact is, the Universe and everything in it, has a function & purpose ... and you can never get this from Nature.
It's interesting to see how AiG is made so uncomfortable by old earth creationists like William Lane Craig. WLC probably bothers AiG even more than athiests do, because he gives AiGs target audience a competiting thiestic worldview thats more scientifically compatible. And that's gotta draw a few subscribers away
While it's problematic to read Genesis literally, it's at least a "simple elegant" interpretation that is consistent. Of course, the gapping hole is how Genesis 2 contradicts 1. What then? Are humans created after plants, or before?
This still doesn't mean WLC's metaphorical interpretation is correct either. How does he decide which part of Genesis to take metaphorically, and which to read literally? It's obvious he does take some parts literally. Anyone who's familiar with his works, knows this. These include Gen 1:1. Who's to say that "in the beginning" means the beginning of the universe? It could mean the beginning of time (read B-block universe to appreciate the difference). It could simply mean the beginning of the Bible, or the beginning of the story, or a story, or the order of creation.
He also obviously believes that sin is literally the cause of death, doesn't he? Why does he read that literally? Simply because Romans states that the wages of sin is death? That seems like a weak argument due to the lack of supplement, especially considering that it doesn't make scientific sense that sin leads to physical death. Not to mention, how does the sin of mankind lead to the mortality of animals?
It's obvious that WLC retains a reading method that defaults to assuming everything in the bible is to be read literally, until proven otherwise. The reason he's able to say that the world wasn't created in literally six 24hours is because astronomy has proven that's not the case. If he was living in Medieval period, he would've said it's created in six 24hours. The reason he doesn't is because he has the luxury of hindsight, not because he knows how to discern literature from history.
hoppefully it also makes them start reconsider how many of the old theists projection tropes about ahteists that is nothing more then fear dogma
@@GrammeStudio Not to argue with anything you're saying, but the myth was taken literally and believed to be literal for a long time. Scholars used Genesis to date the earth a few times, and even reputable scientists like Isaac Newton believed the story literally.
The reason Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 contradict is because they come from different sources; Genesis 1 comes from the Elohist source and Genesis 2 comes from the Yahwist source. They were both taken literally by different people, but when the two traditions merged, they kept both texts.
In my opinion, theists should say that ancient people just didn't understand the true meaning of their scriptures, like esotericists and occultists do. It would mean that balogne artists like William Lane Craig wouldn't have to dismiss the entire field of historical studies to try to sound like his point has some sort of weight to it.
@Abandoned Void
C'mon now, Isaac Newton has been dead for four centuries. It's hardly fair to drag him out of his grave as an example of a "reputable scientist". A pioneer and a genius, certainly, but let's not equate that with our current sense of the word "scientist".
@@annk.8750 I'm using Isaac Newton as an example of the fact that educated people, even brilliant ones like Newton, believed the Genesis story literally, because that was the mainstream understanding. In fact, the Catholic Church still demands that people believe in original sin and Adam and Eve literally, and they persecuted early scientists for their involvement with Deep Time and evolution.
And, absolutely not, you do not get to degrade Isaac Newton just because we've made more discoveries since his time. That's absolutely disgusting, especially when it has literally nothing to do with the point I'm making. Shame on you.
The fact that Kent Hovind believes Ron Wyatt discovered all of these things is the least surprising thing I have heard in a long time. Kent is such a joke.
He wishes he could con people on a level like Ron Wyatt.
Nate why are you still wasting your life watching these videos, Jesus is waiting for you with open arms
@@samuelcalderwood1379 - If Jesus is your friend then can you please inform him that I am not gay so am not interested in him waiting for me with open arms. He is your imaginary friend, not mine.
@@samuelcalderwood1379 Condisering the behaviour of his modern "apostles" I rather expect Jesus waiting with open hands, which are to be filled.
@@samuelcalderwood1379 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
"Don't believe Ron Wyatt's fairytale - believe ours instead!" 🤣
As much as I love your voice Paul, going for some time just hearing WLC and AiG going back and forth is perfect. 😂🤙🏻
Rock on!
Although, listening to WLC is like rubbing together Styrofoam over massive horn loudspeakers with full feedback.
@@LogicAndReason2025 I am not sure if I should now be angry at you for making this comment or my brain for trying to imagine what that would sound like.
@@LogicAndReason2025 sounds like a real sonic treat!!
@@tjarkschweizer "Yes."
When admitting fake Noah's ark claims AiG says, "We really have to think about the motives and intentions behind this."
Paulogia is right. It sounds so hypocritical that they KNOW motives distort your perception yet they are incapable of seeing what a debacle their own motives make of everything they claim. You can always excuse someone for not knowing better, but knowing better and not doing better is definitely admitting you are being intentionally dishonest.
That's a great point
it's amazing that AiG of all types of Christians can denounce Wyatt's Ark finding. you gotta wonder if it's the fact that it was "found" in Turkey that dissuaded them from acknowledging the "discovery", or all that attempt to "use" science to bolster their literalist interpretation, has somehow birth an ounce of rigorous healthy skeptism when confronted with extra-ordinary claims.
It's lack of self awareness, or seeing themselves in their criticisms. The difference in their minds (such as they are) is that they're both right and righteous.
Well as Paul said it is much easier to find the errors in someone elses beliefs than in your own. So it could just be that effect rather than intentional dishonesty...
@@dodobarthel2249 It's possible YEC's are unaware of what they are doing, but I'd have to say it's a pretty big maybe. If scientists were divided in their opinions I could understand the YEC's discent, but when scientific experts in a variety of fields all disagree with you it seems far more likely that your ideas are wrong than it does that every scientific dicipline is wrong. You have to have an extremely biased agenda not to even entertain the thought that your claims are in error, and an even more adamant determination to contradict established theories without plausible evidence acceptable in at least a few fields. Not even creationists can be that thick headed, so there must be some conscious denial if it isn't intentional deception. I just think that they have to know they are fabrication theories to persuade themselves and others at all costs because I realized that was what I was doing in my last days of being a Christian - desperately grasping at straws and thinking I could accept flimsy improbabilities as fact based on faith while my reason was simultaneously screaming to be heard. It was a strange predicament to be in, but there was alway an awareness that I wasn't being honest with myself, even if I was constantly suppressing that awareness. It comes down to whether you want to be honest with yourself or whether you want to retain your beliefs on faith without reason. I guess I just chose reason over faith whereas others don't, and so from my perspective choosing faith despite the evidence is being intentionally dishonest with yourself. I'll pat myself on the back now for maintaining my personal integrity eventhough it was difficult to give up my faith, so in a way I can see how people could do anything not to fall into the terror of loosing faith.
The sad part is that it is an unnecessary fear. Plenty of people maintain their faith while embracing science, they just don't take the radical view of literalism and inerrancy like YEC's do.
They are really stuck in a no win situation where they have to either deny reality or admit their beliefs are wrong. It is typical of that kind of absolutist black-and-white thinking that it precludes them from seeing any logical compromise. They choose to lie to themselves, and so it cannot be avoided that essentially they are intentionally dishonest. If there is some other "excuse" for their unreasonableness it is totally beyond me. They know what they are doing, they just see no way out of the trap that their beliefs have put them in.
Pretty incredible footage that you pulled together here. They do most of your arguing for you lol
Absolutely!
You saved me posting LOL
Devastating.
At this point, we need to point out that almost all religions have hit upon the golden rule. And point out that even when I die, other people will have peak experiences surprisingly similar to my own, as long as I’m not too terribly picky about the details.
When I came down from Christianity at age 15, giving up on eternal life and accepting that I was going to die someday - and sooner rather than later - yeah, that was a tough one. I tried to believe in astral projection for a while.
Might be time to invite the Christians into the tent! That’s what I’m trying to say. 🚴🏾 🏠
I have read "Dr" Sean McDowell's dissertation and my head starts spinning when I think about people calling themselves "doctor" for having written pages upon pages with arguments that can be boiled down to - because the bible says so. Edit: Spelling
Thanks for mentioning Gutsick Gibbon. I absolutely love her! She brings up a huge number of little facts that almost no one talks about that totally sink the Ark and all the creationists aboard.
Anyone who hasn't already should head over to her channel, after finishing watching the video here.
She's a great presenter, funny, smart and (though it has nothing to do with her credibility) cute as a button.
Not a stalker, just a fan 🦧
I'm another fan!!!😊
Gutsick Gibbon makes complex scientific information really easy to listen to and understand, which is something I struggle with usually, she's a great TH-camr!
In what way is a button cute?
@@reubenmanzo2054 oh, just in a general sort of way, ya!!
@@reubenmanzo2054 that's just a figure of speech, but to be pedantic, I am a seamstress and I have seen a lot of buttons, especially those for kids clothes that are very cute 😊 like teddy bears or bumble bees or baseballs, etc.
The duplicity Craig often displays is very entertaining.
At 21:30 he derides biblical stories of magical wells and magical trees as absurd but then immediately advocates for a sudden magical transformation of a pair of early hominids into Adam and Eve.
He then (as he always does) completely reveals his cards in admitting his "commitment" to affirming his religion rather than honestly evaluating true and false.
Sounds like he's reasonable to accept science at its core, and he's struggling to make it fit with his religious beliefs. Maybe he'll die an atheist.
The problem is in the premise
proving Bible true = proving existence of God
Yet, it's possible to strip magic out of Bible and make it _atheistic_ .He did good with "talking snake" and "god walking through the garden", if he just continued to the end in the same spirit, he'd find the way to start apocalypse.
I noticed that too. Gotta love him basically saying "I don't believe in magic" and then straight into "then there was this magic that happened."
This is probably what broke my faith in Catholicism as I was a given a very similar explanation to the one WLC gave (the other options being a YEC as that's what my parish friends turned out to be or saying that "God did it!" as Catholic Answers seem to do) so if anyone tells you it's perfectly compatible with science ask them where did Original Sin come from then if there wasn't a literal Adam, it's a foundational doctrine for the Catholics at least.
And why is that? If Adam never existed obviously there is no Original Sin or its equivalents, and if so what did Jesus die for then (this is implied in 32:19)? That was the final nail in the coffin for me and I suspect this is one thing WLC has in common with most creationists, either they accept the science on their own terms or straight up reject it as a defense mechanism. Other aspects of science like the theory of gravity don't have the same implications, so that's why they tend to go after Darwin and not other findings (I've even come across some fundies who seem interested in science otherwise). At the end WLC seems to get the implications I mentioned and instead sticks with the cognitive dissonance like I did for too long.
@@monus782 Interesting line of reasoning!
"Did 3D scans find Noah's Ark?" No. Next question, please.
Who shot Nice Guy Eddie?
@Jabbatic - That would have been a very short video.
@@barbyonabike Mr White! At least, that's what was is in the script. On screen however... no-one shot Nice Guy Eddie.
@@wickedcabinboy You're correct, but all creationist BS, baseless claims and assertions often require time to debunk with facts and science. Every one of their points have been debunked a thousand times or more and by far better debaters, scientists, interlocutors and other 'contributors' than me. My response was simply the quickest way to express the inevitable conclusion based on reality.
Much as I disagree with many of Craig's positive claims, he made some very relevant points.
Choosing the hill to die on of attacking any science that conflicts with your biblical interpretation is unlikely to have good results in the long run.
It's their right to disagree, but they are choosing to fight on terrain that they have massive handicaps on.
The irony of them attacking the quality of evidence for finding Noah's ark, considering the sorts of "evidence" they present at AIG, is just amazing.
Yip, it takes true hypocrisy to be religious. Paraphrasing William:"It's just ridiculous to think that Genesis is literal, but a magical intelligence is totally what caused the big bang."
William just chooses a smaller hill to die on and will keep choosing smaller hills until he's dead because he knows there will always be a gap to shove his god in.
WLC "there are moves that we can make to preserve orthodox Christian belief"...
I think that tells you something about Craig's relationship to intellectual honesty.
I do think they he has a *form* of intellectual honesty. A very strongly held one even, that he feels compelled to satisfy. The problem is that it is always motivated towards a predetermined conclusion and devoid of the rigour of skeptical self examination
Ugh. On some level I just can't believe we're having a serious conversation between educated, intelligent people about whether species changed over time according to quantifiable, observable principles...or were just zooped into existence by a vaguely anthropomorphic omni-being we have to accept purely on faith in a handful of writings dating back a thousand years or more.
How is this even a thing?
I don't know.
And when I found out that people actually believed the religious stuff, I was baffled that adults actually believe in literal magic ...
It's just so weird.
Non of them would think a fairy tale is true, yet they think that some deity poofed us into existence ...
When I first found out about it, I didn't get it ... and I still don't get it ...
@@BestAnimeFreak you are not alone.
I’m a former Catholic, went to church every Sunday, attended a Catholic college and had my first job out of college teaching at a Catholic school which yes included teaching Bible texts/history (but with much more training and knowledge than any youth minister has ever bothered to receive) none of the priests, monks, professors, school administrators, co-workers, students or parents taught young earth creationism and none of them ever insisted I teach young earth creationism and even if I WANTED to advocate YEC I would have been dragged into my principals office and asked what the hell was wrong with me. It wasn’t until this year watching Atheist TH-cam that I realized how large the YE movement really is it’s astounding. While I don’t consider myself a Catholic anymore (for full disclosure I practice Buddhism now but that’s an entirely separate story) I do find it infuriating that some peoples only exposure to Christianity are apologetics and young earthers. They truly ruin the image for all other Christians who understand the scientific method and ask the question “How does this scientific information fit into my religion?”
(PS Catholicism is not free of criticism by any means at all but in this regard they definitely got it right)
@@anonymous01792 I’m an ex-Catholic. I was in the system from kindergarten thru 12 grade. In 4th or 5th grade I asked the nun who was assigned as “homeroom” teacher why the science class in the afternoon didn’t match up with the morning religion class. She said that science shows us what humans learn about the world by themselves and religion tells us what the Bible and personal experience of the Holy Spirit reveals, and that it was hoped that someday we could resolve any supposed differences. That’s how my branch of the cult dealt with the cognitive dissonance of learning science yet believing in fairy tales.
It's always fun when they start fighting each other. I could watch it for hours!
Group A: "Group B is wrong for all these reasons!"
Group B: "Group A is wrong for all these reasons!"
Wow, I agree with both groups…
i've been saying for a long time that atheists ought to have at least a xian and another (muslim, mormon, buddhist - whatever) in debates, when they start accusing eacho ther it's so appreant that the theists are making stuff up. not to bother debating directly no one wins when you do that.
Me too!
Paul, you should have animated the avatar to have gaze going side to side, as in a tennis match :)
...complete with a ball sound.
@@Cheepchipsable lol I was waiting for the head to turn
Or a sigh and an ugh and a downward looking head shake after each stupid exchange, that would work too.
"How do you return to dust, unless you were dust in the first place".
"How do you return to your house, unless you were the house in the first place".
Makes perfect sense......
Is this the “C”or “D” team?Also how was the Big Bang cataclysmic?Finally I love how they are arguing over which made up thing is less made up.
Because it's what people who think The Big Bang was an actual explosion usually say.
@@Lobsterwithinternet I love how the best physicists in the world acknowledge that we have no idea what exactly the Big Bang was and what caused it, if anything. Yet hack apologists are unafraid to put whatever words they deem necessary directly into those-- and other --scientists' mouths.
@@munstrumridcully Because it's in the name ‘apologist’.
Their job is to apologize for and find excuses for an obviously flawed product.
@@Lobsterwithinternet well that is what apologist do, to be fair apologist comes from the Greek apologia, which means to defend. An apologist is supposed to defend the Faith from attacks using reason. Instead they use word salad, sophistry, logical fallacies, and misrepresentations of Science and logic
@@Lobsterwithinternet As a chemist, I really roll my eyes whenever they say explosions "don't produce order" or "don't make anything". Thermite reactions are literally a means of turning oxides into purified metals and welding shit together, and most explosions work by generating stable, "orderly" gasses. Even nuclear detonations involve making a fuck of a lot of isotopes and high-energy particles, and can produce everything from glass out of silica due to the heat, to new genes in wildlife. Even frigging antimatter-matter annihilation produces things. It wouldn't matter if the Big Bang was an explosion of some kind. Explosions aren't actually chaos, merely change. The ignorance is multiple layers deep.
Still looking for my car keys! Somebody call Ron Wyatt! 😬
Probably in some Ethiopian cave
Your car keys I mean
No idea where Wyatt is
@@kenbee1957 😆
I've been watching Paul's back catalog for a few days and I just wanted to take a moment to appreciate the elegant simplicity of his SOC. "Until next time, later." Short, sweet, to the point. I love it.
I spit out my drink laughing when Aron Ra was talking about how Noah's Ark only had one window... so the 8 people would have died immediately from the methane gas from the animals farting and pooping!!!
At the Ark Encounter, there are NO live animals on the ARK. State Health Department and State building code will not allow them in the structure.
The float would probably have exploded within a week when Naamah started to cook diner
I have 1 Great Dane, and am near death every night from his gas. I cannot imagine an ark full of animals letting loose.
They found the warning sign from the Ark- Don't Pull Fingers.
@@todbeard8118 Let me guess; the sign was in English as any KJ only christian knows English is the language of god.
It's crazy watching Christians argue with each other. It's an unstoppable force meeting an immovable object. They can literally argue back in forth about things in the Bible and never get anywhere, it's just an infinite loop.
Ironically, Paul is the must Christ like human i can think of.
The sheer amount of empathy and good-will with which he engages with his opponents its unmatched and admirable....hell i can't even be this level headed and fair towards my children and my wife on some occasions.
So thank you paul for being an example i can aspire to eventually match.
That doesn't mean he is christ like, it means he is a good dude, if he was christ like he would be an asshole like Jesus was, seems like an insult to me
@@ARoll925 i didn't mean in the literal biblical Jesus way. More like what contemporary Christians mean when they call someone Christ like, they cherry picked version of Jesus.
@@Smitywerban of course they cherry picked, they have to, as it is impossible to follow everything the bible teaches without being arrested or a hypocrite, I think we can both agree that paulogia is awesome though
@@ARoll925 things don't go well for folk who insult Jesus
Paul is an antichrist as prophicied in the end times
As a former Christian myself, I have to say you did an amazing job putting this together. Really enjoying it
Your musical ditty gets me every time :-)
Question: did 3d scans find Noah's ark.
Answer: Noah's ark doesn't exist.
Conclusion: this might be the most obvious video on his channel. But I'm gonna watch it anyways. Can never get enough of atheists debunking religious nonsense.
🤣🤣
I have to say that some of MY FAVORITE videos of yours, is when you just sit there and let the christians refute and debunk each other! There is nothing more satisfying that this, because they are doing the work for us (you).
EXCELLENT VIDEO, Paul! Thank you for your work. I look forward to more of these video. :D
It's kind of amazing how both sides twist themselves into pretzels to avoid the obvious. Craig gets so close to arguing himself into atheism, and then you can almost see his mind flinching away from it.
WLC is getting close to admitting the whole book is metaphor. If my preacher had admitting this, I'd probably still be Christian. I just didn't like being lied to.
70’s Catholicism was big on the metaphor thing. My problem at the time was “ metaphor for what ? “. Humanity is evil and Some Part Of God performed a ritual death, either in heaven or on earth to redeem us ? Why ? And What Drugs Are You On ?
No...they will never find something that never existed in the first place.
Reason #1768:
Mt. Ararat's peak is elevated at 16,000 ft. If the Ark had landed there the oxygen levels compared to sea level would have drop dramatically and the average air temp is no higher than 2°F.
Any mating pair of animals would have eventually succumb to the elements and/or starvation if they already hadn't died from atrophy for standing in the same stop on the Ark (a floating methane factory) for one year straight.
Ah, but you're forgetting the biblical literalists get-out-of-jail-free card: MAGIC!
To even consider the methane levels or temperature is to grant the possibility of Noah's ark. No, it fails wa-ay before that.
Unicorn hunters should feel too ridiculous to apply for a license in the first place.
They would claim that the enormous amounts of water on the surface, etc. raised the temperature of the atmosphere during that time until the water receded. Also God.
@@BigHeretic You mean a 500 year old man and his three 100 year old sons didn't build the Ark out of gopher wood? Ha!
@@Iamwrongbut I guess the thining air pressure and subzero temperatures had no effect on a boat constructed of wood over 450 feet long. Ha!
Yeah that logistically unsound zoo of a proto Titanic defo existed
I know that's not the main topic of the video, but hearing WLC misrepresent Big Bang cosmology AFTER being corrected about his errors repeatedly just shows, that he isn't that much more honest than people like Ken Ham or Kent Hovind.
And that's ignoring how he misrepresented Paul, Scott and others.
On a certain level, they ALL must lie after being corrected or face the reality that reality doesn't support their beliefs. They don't change their arguments even after being told that the strawman they've offered up does not exist. Aka, lying.
Did you see the look on Ken's face when he said "...Mrs. Noah.."? It looked like almost too much, even for him. 3:03
Even IF Noah was real and even IF he built an ark there is no way it would still exist (unless submerged) and no way could he have had all the animals from every continent and food for them on the ark AND no way there was ever a worldwide flood! Could they be any more gullible?
There's also the ridiculous notion that after being thrown about in the storm for more than 40 days that the ark would end up, basically, right where it started and not somewhere in Asia, or South America or …
"Three toed Sloths must have moved from Ararat to South America...."
Give these bible thumpers huge round of applause for this faith...👏👏👏👏👏
Ohh yes they add in hell and heaven
I just came across a creationist who basically said that all the animals were carried by God to their current places after the flood and we're too blind to see that, they always find a way I suppose.
@@monus782
If that's true then it's a shame that such a god is not able to lift up Koalas from australian bush fires...
So, Mrs. Noah was 11 ft tall? I guess the amount of food neccessary to sustain all life on the ark needs to be recalculated and raised.
But at least it explains the stepladder they found in the ark ruins!
Obviously so Noah could kiss her goodnight. 😘
It's like watching grown men who believe Lord of the Rings is real history arguing over whether Gandalf the wizard fought at real Balrog, or if the fight was a mythic metaphor to explain how he ultimately became Gandalf the White.
This demonstrates the main problem with the theological truth claims of Christianity, as they are rooted on the "Original Sin" of Adam & Eve from the Book of Genesis - without the truth of that claim, the significance of Jesus' death and resurrection seem theologically inconsequential.
I think most apologists, including William Lane Craig, have come to the conclusion that they have no good reason to believe in the supernatural.
But they have decided: nobody does; that belief is preferable regardless of reason; and there's good money to be made in maintaining the belief.
Is there money to be made making atheist videos?
@@samuelcalderwood1379 I mean yeah, obviously, but there's money to be made in making any kind of content if you're good at it.
Atheists don't pretend like they're above financial motives. This is a Business and a Job for people. The only reason it's pertinent to mention is because Christians in the vein of WLC or Kent is that they Condemn everyone who isn't themselves for being "corrupted" by money, pronouncing holier than thou judgement on people's morality from their beliefs...
...And they're the biggest money-based sinkholes of people ever, constantly incessantly begging for money and blowing on their own interests.
WE wouldn't care how they spend their money if A: They didn't spend so damn long giving Us shit for wanting a profitable channel, and B: they weren't knowingly lying and committing legal Fraud to do it.
@@samuelcalderwood1379 Don't be so silly troll. Telling people BS that does not challenge them, is exponentially more profitable than debunking comforting illusions. If anyone was in it "just for the money", they would have to be a total idiot not to be a preacher. Look at all the money that the MAGA cult is raking in.
@@LogicAndReason2025 if a mega church is in it for the money then they are wrong.
Christianity isn't believing in the supernatural. It is knowing God.
I’m a newcomer to the channel. I appreciate these cuts. They allow me insight into the opposing discussion without having to expose my algorithm to ridiculousness.
I'm glad to see you back on Ham and AIG, videos weren't the same without you.
Why do they stick to the whole "The Ark is on the mountain!" Shtick? Wouldn't it just be a smarter move to say you can't find the Ark because Noah used it to build his house and farm?
Matthew Tipple ....and his wine cellar, of course.
...or used it for firewood and everything else since most trees would only be a few months old at best.
And his pub.
That is not written in the Bible, so it didn't happen ... obviously ... xD
And the shithouse
"Wood doesn't do a great job out in the elements."
But it totally lasted through a cataclysmic deluge that razed mountains and carved canyons, reshaping the Earth and decimating all life on it, for 40 entire days.
😋 Ham & AiGs for breakfast !
The breakfast of champions
Thank you Paul for meticulously selecting and organizing these videos to illustrate the issues so well!! (from an "agnostic post-evangelical theist")
i love how he talks about trees not surviving anything and wood decaying in one breath but then when actual archelogy is done on treats that fossilized in to stones OH they were standing up right and then bent and flood and they lived for 6 k years and bible true and yada yada , AIG cant even keep to their talking points as soon as an arc story pops up
Analyse the argument that 5 loaves and two fish do not a banquet make, Tim.
I vaguely remember that story as I was a little kid in the late 80s. I always thought it was weird since my child mind assumed that if the ark was out there wouldn't it be on the highest point of the earth?
Yes. I myself had a 1000 page animal encyclopedia that I loved. Just looking at it made me doubt that an ark with everything in it was BS ( as in Blue whale not bull).
When they said noah made it without much help I thought to myself it was a bit far fetched 🤣
@@PabloSanchez-qu6ib “As in blue whale” brilliant lol
@@PabloSanchez-qu6ib Who said there were Blue Whales before the flood? Perhaps after the flood New things formed.
As George Carlin used to say; "When holy people fight each-other, I'm a happy guy." I can't agree more. Although, listening to WLC is like rubbing together Styrofoam over massive horn loudspeakers with full feedback.
Ouch. My ears!!!
And listening to Kent Hovind is like listening to someone trying to strain shit through a sieve.
I was raised Catholic so I always heard the "god breathed a soul into an ape who became adam" type argument, but the complexity of WLC's mental gymnastics to fit that idea into evolutionary theory was on a whole other level. There will never be a small enough gap that prevents them from trying to inject god.
I was too and I heard that argument from Church apologetics shortly before I left, before that no one really told me how exactly did Catholicism fit with evolution (they mostly just said it did somehow) and after finding out that many of my parish friends were creationists that made me question just how accepting of science Catholics really were.
Ron Wyatt the very definition of if you go looking for it you'll find it. As in I'm sure if he goes looking for the Ark of the Covenant in Ohio he'll find it.🤦🏿♂️🤦🏿♂️🤦🏿♂️
He also found Moses' beard comb
No he won't, I have it hidden very well >:3
🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 I'm sure he would
"WLC is trying to make too much sense out of our religious nonsense!"
Nice job having WLC dunking on AIG for you! Was a treat to listen to.
Ever since Paul made his "For the Bible tels me so" jingle available for general use, every time I hear it somewhere else, it makes me smile.😄
Perfect timing, I was just thinking about getting breakfast!
Kent is the second most self centered ego maniac next to the Orange menace.
both prime exemples of Narcissitic Personality Disorder, NPD for short.
There is a certain beauty in watching creationists refute each other's arguments.
Great presentation - most informative!
Thanks for all the work!! I look forward to making a donation, God willing, this coming year.
the idea of 'biblical innerrancy' and its 'perfection' is an invention not found in the bible itself. If anyone doubts this, please quote me your reference in a reply. It is just invented by preachers who find long detailed debate much too much work. But on the whole, I agree with WL Craig
It's in the name: Bery Inerrant Book Low in Errors.
I mean, and I hate to agree with WLC, the Bible has many different types of stories. There are the Psalms, which are "Songs", literally lyrical poetry. There are Parables, metaphorical or allegorical tales presenting a short/exaggerated 'Morality Play' arguing for some philosophical (ethical, theological, social, whatever) concept. The "Book of Revelation" is literally an example of "Apocalypse" literature, which serves the same purpose as political cartoons or science-fiction in commenting on (then-)current social/cultural/political matters.
Literally, Revelation 1 has John recount his face-to-face with God. Even before he notices God, he discerns "seven golden lampstands" which he (at the bottom of Rev 1) admits explicitly "... are the seven churches" of whom he's writing these letters for. Revelation 2 concerns explicit calling-out churches on their misdeeds and praising them for their virtues: the church in Ephesus (taking the extreme of its cynicism against false prophets), Sardis (in its inactivity, likely due to its lack of material or labor resources), and Laodicea (conserving its material wealth) have become apathetic to the plights of others; Pergamum and Thyatira have let heretical sects (idolatry and breaking 'kosher' in the former, adultery and sexual impurity in the latter) go unchecked; Smyrna and Philadelphia (despite their poverty and small sizes) have no true faults. Each of these sounds like the type of conflict you would find in a Twilight Zone episode!
Overcome your flaws and you'll get a big reward such as living forever or being rulers of the world. Give into your flaws and your status as a church will be revoked by God Himself...plus all that "ceasing to exist"/"burning in Hell" shit.
2 Timothy 3v 16
Ps 12:6 is one place where God's Word speaks of itself. Prov 30:5 is another one. There are others. If you want to speak of what is or is not in the Bible, take the time to read it, please. Author Harlan Ellison said, "No, you are not entitled to your opinion, you are entitled to your informed opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant."
@@thomasshannon7793 - well, yes, but 'purity' is not quite the same as the 'I quote my proof text and my interpretation of my proof text, so that is all there is to it'...type of argument, which is what I am referring to.
A Paulogia video is always a welcome sight 👍
Some times I get scared finding material like this online. I am watching an alternative view of reality where two schools of young earthism debate which one of them is wrong .
It's a bit like watching two 8 year old children arguing about how long Santa's beard is.
'Faith is believing what you know ain't so.' - Mark Twain
It's amazing how science is always right if it goes their way, but is always wrong when it goes against them
Yep, thats the Great Creationist Cherry Pick.
"Wood doesn't last hundreds of years"
Que all the medieval ships that have been found.
Bronze Age and even Neolithic boats have been found which are millennia old
Fossilised trees: AM I A JOKE TO U???
Good for you. There are indeed several old wooden ships excellently preserved. My favourite is the Mary Rose, Pompey, UK. She is a 1545 CE Vessel, replete with preserved wooden Bows, Muskets and a multitude of other stuff. Beautiful. Of course she was submerged in oxygen depleted waters and covered in mud. Her entirety had to be chemically treated immediately to prevent her salvaged timbers from succumbing to rapid decay. But there she is. At least she didn't stand on a mountain top for 4,300 years completely exposed to the elements or we may have lost her forever.
Listening to William Lane Craig, I also hear myself as a Christian, where I kept modifying my interpretation of Christianity to fit the discoveries of modern science. Eventually I realized that at some point I should stop trying to fit a square peg in a round hole and instead find a new peg. I've learned so much more since becoming an atheist now that I don't feel the need to greet every new thing I learn with a desperate attempt to reconcile it with what the Bible taught me and instead use it to help build my understanding of the world. Maybe the YEC are too far gone but hopefully those who are more like William Lane Craig come to see this over time as well.
That's really sad ,did God not set it in your heart that you were right to believe
I just want to say that I appreciate you man. I watch your videos all the time. I used to be a patreon, but my situation changed a little and I had to adjust. I wish I still could though. Your work is important to me.
I appreciate that
I know many people who revere Craig and Hamm, which I always thought was a bit weird as their beliefs are hopelessly irreconcilable.
Hilarious. Thank you for this exhibition of YEC “experts” in their natural habitats. Luckily Noah was able to find two of them (or 7 pairs of them if you rather), so that today we might be entertained by their antics. Cheers!
Nice of you to host the debate, Paul.
1:23 The picture just wouldn't be complete without the pet goat.
I can tell already this is going to be a good one!
I love how Ham's D team argues that we should believe a book purely based on it's age over anything else. The Enuma Elish (17th century BCE at least) is older than the Bible (14th century BCE), therefor by their logic we should believe the Earth was created when Marduk carved Tiamat's body in two and created the sky and Earth from the halves.
The argument, if they would only admit it, is that Genesis 1-11, which is so foundational to their ministry, is a compilation of those Mesopotamian stories that go all the way back to Sumer, with other bits and pieces of the Mesopotamian stories not found in Genesis popping up elsewhere (such as Michael casting down Satan like Marduk defeated Tiamat).
Yes they did. Again. How many have they found now?
To some people's comments: this is NOT the worst of Paul, but rather, the BEST of Paul. He allows theists to destroy themselves - without having to say much of anything. Brilliant, Paulogia!
Between you and Viced Rhino and topics like today's, my Monday commute is always a pleasure.
high praise with good company. thanks.
How many Arks have been found now?
This lot should at least be able to produce the B Ark...
"If I had every piece of the cross of Christ, I could make an entire field out of them" - Some Priest/Monk a few centuries ago
This lot would have been on the B Ark. And are making a very good case for the flight plan.
@@aralornwolf3140 would it be fair to say that if one had every "piece of the cross", they'd have enough wood to build Noah's ark?
Don't forget to mention the soon to be build "Tower of Babel" at the Ark Park, 'exactly' to the 'specifications' given by the Bible.
Exactly like the not-floating non-ship called a 'recreation of the biblical ark". Also don't forget the biblical petting zoo and zip-line attraction.
And now I'm off to annoy a cattle breeder by showing his cows some striped sticks...
WHAT specifications?
@@vaiyt Exactly.
I'm pretty sure that the Bible was very specific about God *not* wanting the Tower of Babel to be built...
@@lnsflare1
Don't tell them that!
I want to see what happens
I've always wanted to learn Congolese
@@lnsflare1 That's not important, because building the tower will prove the bible and therefore prove god.
Also, god comming down from heaven to destroy the ark park for building another tower of babel is an added bonus for me.
Love the Gutsick shout out, her channel is phenomenal.
I heard about this channel from watching Gutsick Gibbon's videos so I appreciate the shout out to her.
Love the C v C format here.
Welcome aboard!
I will never get tired of watching WLC try to navigate the Scylla and Charybdis of believing both science and the Bible, and get torn apart from both sides.
Mrs, Noah was Joan of Ark, obviously?
No, Joan was probably Noah's secret 'bit on the side'!
EXCELLENT!!!
The thumbnail of this vid always makes me laugh 😂😂
Paul's avatar has hypnotized me with its endless blinking...
Noah's ark is a plagiarized myth of "The Epic Of Gilgamesh Tablet 11"
Adam and Eve is a plagiarized myth of Tablet 1 - where a wildman is tempted by a harlot to partake of the forbidden food, and drink of the gods, of which bestows all knowledge of good, and evil.
In fact the Epic, predates "The Flood" by well over 1000 years.
The flood takes place in the fables of the buy-bull around 2300 bce. The Epic originates in tablet form about 2400 bce , however its origins are anywhere from 2400 bce to about 6000 + bce when it was first passed on verbally (or by other means) in Mesopotamia, and Syria. Both of which countries predate said flood by thousands of years. Both of which still have ruins, which would be impossible with miles straight up of water. The buy-bull's flood is in fact a myth.
Many existing ruins of many civilizations pre-date the buy-bull flood, not just these. None of which would even be possible with that much pressure of water. Bodies of people exist that pre-date the buy-bull flood, again, of which would be obliterated with that much pressure. Creationists are in fact wrong about any flood, and Adam, and Eve, as well for people have lived on this planet (or pre-hominids) for Millions of years.
Beta that is total garbage
@@samuelcalderwood1379there is evidence of the Gilgamesh tablets, but I don't think the Gilgamesh epic stayed on the top 10 book list for about 2000 years. At least not outside the Assyrian or Babylonian courts, the most recent version was found in the Library of Ashurbanipal atrributed to Sîn-lēqi-unninni ( a sort of Homer of the Assyrians).
Between 2400 bc and about 625 bc when Deuteronomy was written under Josiah there must have been around a multitude of myths and fables in different variations on the subject of which at least one made it into Hebrew Scripture. The rest of the stories told around the campfires got lost forever.
Plagiarisation is therefor an incorrect term, not garbage just because Beta's contribution does not fit your idea's.
@@samuelcalderwood1379 just saying that does not make it so. Unlike the bible which is awful God fanfic. Twilight is a better love story.
@@JosephKano it is called mythology, therefore garbage 🗑️
Im early for once😂😂😂
Ron: "Yo guys I just found the original stone tables Moses smashed buried under the tomb Jesus was buried in!"
Everyone: "Thats cool, why would they be buried there?"
Ron: "Its amazing how God got the tablet pieces there"
Everyone: "Yeah, but how did they get there?"
Ron: "It goes the prove how amazing God is and how the Bible is true"
I appreciate that you care about truth, Paul, and your videos are great. Keep up the excellent work. :)
Why is their “god” hiding?
He just running a big late. A lots of things keep cropping up and stopping him from revealing himself.
They're so pathetic arguing over these fables and fallacies.
Thanks Paul ^^
It's not pathetic, it's fun!
That was very coherent editing together that did not seem to be strawmaning, good job.
Much appreciated!
The amount of mental, "logical", interpretive and linguistic gymnastics going on, both on AiG's and Craig's part is exhausting. It's also so, so familiar. I used to engage in all that as well when I was a devout Christian. At some point, cracks started appearing that I just couldn't ignore anymore.
3:30 A god, picking one of our fellow humans to find and interpret stuff, for us then to accept or reject, instead of shining a heavenly light on it Himself, shouting: _"Oi; Look over here! It's that boat from My book"!_ is an idiot of a deity.
Noah also built a smaller Ark that they towed behind for the skunks
I think he had a second one for the dinosaurs, but he placed the woodpeckers on it so it sank.
Paulogia, this compilation is an amazing amount of work and time investment to present the different sides from the mouths of the participants. You did an amazing job, as I’m just starting to do my own videos, I see and appreciate the time this took. I remain uncompelled to leave my faith, and I wish to listen to this once again to understand your position better... and grasp the primary pillars compelling people to leave... still thinking on it, Cindi
*Woah! Cindi!*
We are among *YEC* royalty here people! (I won't say the connection unless Cindi says it's ok) Lovely to hear from you darling, I genuinely respect & appreciate the fact that you are considering other possibilities & options. I always say to my son to truly understand the other person's position if you want to be successful arguing against them, be that in any field from politics to religion.
I think you are a *LONG* way off seeing the real wood through the mythological trees but I'm thinking you were subject to a lot of indoctrination in childhood & certainly through your life. You may change your mind, you may not but you are asking *QUESTIONS* & that is the most truthful & honest place to be!
I appreciate the compliment, Cindi. I'm sad that your take-away from the video is that I want you to leave your faith. My videos investigating young-earth creation are designed to demonstrate that YEC is not correct and not synonymous with Christianity... which is why so many Christian guests have been willing to come on my channel. Most Christians in the world are not young-earth creationists.