Quite, I don't believe anything but I'll accept things based on reason logic and rational arguments. I don't have faith in anything but I'll give my trust based on reasonable expectations. Belief ≠ acceptance and faith ≠ trust. Just because a group of words appear together in a dictionary, it doesn't mean they are the same.
Some of us get better. What started it all for me was a high school psychology class where I thought I would be Super Christian and Defender of the Faith™️. I made some dumb reply about god and he asked me, "Can god make a rock so heavy that he couldn't lift it?" Looking back now, I know he recognized the very instant I thought "Well, wait a minute...". Took me another 10 years to fully embrace rationality. Please don't ever give up on a christian you care about.
@@chuckhunter77 I had my grandfather to learn me read and write, at the age of 4, after reading the bible, I realised it is pure fiction ................
It doesn't say that Yiiisus had to go to the john, but that may be extrapolated from the fact that he ate food, unless he was like Kim Jung Un who never takes a dump because he converts 100% of what he eats into energy 🤣🤣🤣🤣. Maybe Kim is the real son of gaaad, and our orange Yiiiisus here (aka orange turd) is his brother. Yeah, the bible must be true 😂😂
Here is some logic. x'=x-vt y'=y z'=z t'=t Algebra equations are statements of logic. They can be proven true or false according to axioms of algebra. I have been posting these equations to atheists for about a year. I can prove the equations atheistic scientists use are incorrect and that these equations are correct. No atheist will even discuss this. Atheists avoid logic like the plague.
The mind of a young earth creationist will never cease to amaze me. Imagine if they put that bold and unyielding stupidity towards constructive endeavors.
Indeed. I feel the same for apologists as well. Only if they could channel that level of effort and devotion to something conducive to pushing humanity forward, not backward.
Believer: But the Bible says.... Skeptic: Why should anyone believe the Bible? Believer: Well the Bible says .... Skeptic: But you need to validate that the content of the Bible is true before you can use the Bible as evidence Believer: Well in XXXXX section of the Bible it says... Skeptic: You still haven't said why the Bible is a source of truth. Believer: Well XXXX in the bible said.... .... it's exhausting.
It would be fair enough to say something like, “The Bible predicts X, nothing and no one else ever predicted X, and X is true.” But even that doesn’t lend credibility to Y or Z.
The Bible is also inerrant... I don't think On The Origin of Species is. 🤣Yes, it is exhausting. I've been listening to this crap for 74 years. I'm done. I turn most of these videos off.
Can you tell me who plays the role of the skeptic? It can't be an atheist because atheism is a disbelief which means it's an unwillingness or inability to accept God. It doesn't question anything it doesn't it's a refusal or inability to accept..
@@TheToscanaMan Yeesh. Talk about holding an imperfect species working with models of observation that are sometimes flawed yet contiguously reliable to such a high standard as to say their first step in the right direction should be perfect, and then holding another thing which is clearly flawed and errant enough that it had to be reinterpreted dozens of times to make sense of its unstable theology and STILL has nothing to substantiate any of its content as infallible. Yikes.
Fyi: After years of research and study, I can now say that am no longer a theist, and I would love to share my personal testimony. Ben (Québec, Canada, French teacher, etc.)
Young earth? 🙄 I’m an amateur astronomer and the photons I captured to create an image of The Black Eye Galaxy had been traveling 17 million years before reaching my image sensor.
I think you're confusing religion with atheism. If you replace the brain of a person who believes in God with a rock and replace the brain of an atheist with a rock what you get is tWo atheist. Atheism is the opposite of the scientific approach it's a disbelief it has nothing to do with logic has nothing to do with evidence has nothing to do with critical thinking matter of fact like I just argued above you don't even need a brain to be an atheist. It's a disbelief you just have to be unwilling or unable to accept God.
@@HumanismIsEvil @Richard ‘HumanismIsEvil’ Levnine: the question you keep ignoring and pretending you can’t see, despite it having been posted numerous times directly to you: *_When you put up your nasty, hateful, bigoted anti-LGBT+ comments and posts, do you consider how that will make those people feel? Are you aware that a lot of LGBT+ people have committed suicide because of bullying by people like you? Do you even care? I’m genuinely interested in why you believe hate campaigns against vulnerable minority groups is ok, particularly as you identify as a Christian._* And the fact that you’re too scared to answer that speaks volumes.
@@HumanismIsEvil "US boy, 9, killed himself after homophobic bullying, mum says A nine-year-old boy has killed himself after enduring four days of homophobic bullying at school in Denver, Colorado, his mother says." 28.08.18
Your inability to grasp science is not a valid argument against it! Poor kid, completely poisoned by religion, thinking he knows more than ALL scientists. Poor kid.
When creationists are ignorant of science, they think everything that they don't understand is supernatural. When abiogenesis describes chemical reactions and autocatalysis and nonenzymatic replication, they think that is supernatural. When they hear that man can go to the moon, they think that's supernatural. When they hear that gravity is a curvature in spacetime, they think it's supernatural. But when they hear that an entire universe comes into existence from a preexisting entity with a mind and a will and somehow has omnipotence, they don't think that's supernatural. What kind of upside-down bizarro world are they living in? And why are they crying into a Rachel Levine body pillow every night to overcome their fear of mortality?
Quecee believes saying the word science and abiogenesis is equivalent to improving his faith-based belief in the supernatural that the origins of Life popped into existence because of a non intelligent occurrence. I keep trying to explain to him as well as other atheists simply saying the word science and abiogenesis it's not proving his belief in the supernatural. I keep trying to explain to him that a scientists trying to physically create life is Life coming from life it's Life coming from an intelligence source it's not proving his belief in the supernatural that life popped into existence because of a non intelligent occurrence It would be equivalent to somebody asking me to prove God and my saying the word science and abiogenesis and then claiming look I proved God I said the word science, I like science therefore my belief in the supernatural is correct. Sorry quincee it doesn't work that way you can say the word science 100,000 times and it still won't improve your faith-based belief. Science does not deal with the supernatural therefore they're not dealing with your faith-based belief that the origins of Life came into existence without God.
Let me further simplify for you. Do you believe if we understood the ingredients used to make a banana cake that it would equate to proving that banana cakes pop into existence because of a non intelligent occurrence. That banana cakes just pop into existence, they're not made by a human making them. Again the natural process as we know it is life comes from life, Life comes from an intelligent source. Your belief is in the supernatural because you believe the origins of Life popped into existence because of a non intelligent occurrence. You can say the word abiogenesis and science until you blue in the face it's not going to change the fact that science doesn't deal with your belief in the supernatural and saying the word science isn't equivalent to proving using the scientific method that your belief in the supernatural is part of the natural process.
@@HumanismIsEvil Abiogenesis is the *scientific* hypothesis that life on Earth originated from abiotic material. There's nothing supernatural about this. Nowhere in the SCIENTIFIC hypothesis does it say, "goddunit". WHY do you say that positing a naturalistic mechanism for the origin of life make it "supernatural"? Do you NOT understand what "supernatural" mean? Do you think naturalism is supernatural? Oh, wait. Do you understand what naturalism means?
The vast majority of creationists on atheist experience threads won't even tell me whether or not they believe the origins of Life came into existence via their god. And this is probably because they don't believe the origins of Life came into existence by creation, by their god but they just don't want to admit it. They don't believe in a god but are just too embarrassed to admit that they don't believe it. They know there is no afterlife, so they want to remain on earth as long as possible. And all they will do is come on here and make patently false statements and are so hypocritical that they don't recognize when someone does the exact same think to them.
I am the one who does not believe in your atheistic miracle. I believe the Galilean transformation equations are the correct equations for relativity. I would be really embarrassed if people thought I believed that two clocks with different rates result in the same speed for an airplane. I just think you do not know how to do junior high algebra.
@@rbwinn3 WtF is an “atheist miracle” Miracle noun a surprising and welcome event that is not explicable by natural or scientific laws and is therefore *considered to be the work of a divine agency.* "the miracle of rising from the grave" 🤦♂️😂🤣
Honestly while I still watch AXP, the show grew tiresome because callers rely on the same exhausted arguments while having the gall to paint them as a never before heard of apologetic.
hallmark of cults and narrow minded religions , it tricks its members to think because x or y argument or semantic convinced them it must be an 'unheard of' argument for whom ever not joined their 'tribe' , and if it has internal logic , any natural evidence , any demonstrable capacity thats all just 'heretic tests of gawd!'
Yeah I try and find the calls where callers are genuinely questioning or asking the hosts informative questions, not just trying to set the record for most logical fallacies and asking the same questions for the literal 10,000,000th time, the answers to which are a single google search away
Creationism usually relies on one or more of the following debunked arguments: Fine tuning - no constants have been demonstrated to be tuned. Anthropic principle / puddle reasoning (distinct from FTA) - relies on assuming that things are noticeably existent because they were intended to be rather than because they exist and were noticed. KCA - relies on special pleading a particular something from nothing. Contingency - relies on special pleading that contingency exists. Note that causality isn't contingency. Design - relies on comparing known human design with known lack of design then assuming everything unknown is designed. Irreducible Complexity - still not even demonstrated to exist. Objective Moral Values - still not demonstrated ontologically. Assertions that a god is required isn't demonstrating ontologically. NDEs - basically another claim that personal experiences are true by default. DNA as information - usually hampered by misrepresentation of the definition of information, often with the false claim of being digital. Existence of Consciousness/Intelligence - often falsely claimed to require themselves already existing in order to exist. Free Will - usually involves equivocation on what free will means and false dichotomies on determinism and randomness. Are there other debunked arguments not covered here?
Humans make things out of existing material for our needs therefore a super human like mind without a brain willed/thought everything into existence from nothing.
It wasn’t about young. What he said was basalt with a known age was radiometrically dated to far older than its known age. But the claim is dubious and could be from the wrong type of dating method used.
Even by AXP standards this caller was mislead, misinformed and mistaken. Faith does not welcome challenge and does not require evidence. Another closed mind.
Oh my god lol, how many people per square inch did he say? what a bonehead, so we would just keep poping them out when it came to 1 person per square inch, how cosy
Actually I came across an article in, I think, Psychology Today. The article was about a study of the extremely religious which found that their brains didn't develop well. We develop our brains by investigating, questioning, doubting etc. This creates the neural connections we use for rationalising that which we encounter throughout life. Such people are actively discouraged from doing so and their thinking processes don't develop the way the brains of those who are not so handicapped do.
When I 1st read Greek myths aged about 7 and came across the same sort of stories as in genesis i puzzled as to why 1 was calle 'the truth' while the other was called 'myth'.
Why is all the pyramid artifacts undamaged by water if there was a great flood? Keep in mind it took decades to build one and 10's of thousands of people and there was 8 people on the arc according to the story.
I’m not sure what you mean by pyramid artifacts. If you mean the pyramids, they aren’t necessarily a problem for the flood story because the flood could have been before them, but there is a trillion things that are major problems for the flood story in geology, paleontology, history, archaeology, physics, mathematics, biology, and logic.
The caller has no idea how many scientific methods work. For instance, carbon dating does not measure the amount of carbon, but rather the decay rate of carbon 14, a radioactive isotope which is absorbed by living creatures only while it is alive. Once a creature dies, it stops absorbing carbon 14 which begins to decay at a fixed rate. If you measure the amount of carbon 14 in a sample of a creatures remains, the amount of carbon 14 in it will tell you the approximate age of the sample. The caller should have paid more attention in science class. If he did, he wouldn't be relying on magical thinking. Just as with flat earthers, science has disproven much of the early beliefs about our world and those views are changing with more information discovered.
I admire you guys for spending however long the show is, beating your heads against brick walls. I wonder how many "believers" actually listen, and realize how foolish they sound?
Theoretical physics currently has about a half dozen viable tentative, alternative theories that might possibly provide an explanation as to how the current universe came into existence. None of them involve a God. That possibility was discarded literally centuries ago.
Homeboy doesn't know what any of the shit he just said means. He was told by someone making big bucks off of his stupidity that all he has to do is go down this list of talking points, without needing to understand any of them, and he automatically wins.
If man is trying to convince you of God, don't trust them. As God warned against trusting in man Jer 17:5 🙏 And a good Monday Morning 🌞 AXP Fans and Theists ❤❤❤ Peace Love Empathy From Australia 💪🤠☝️
A Hebrew god that always existed created the world from nothing. I read this in an ancient document written by Hebrew priests promoting their belief in a Hebrew god. At age 76 I'm still looking for the authors of this claim and their evidence for claiming it but finding nothing but words.
if he is looking at the age of the earth by the human population and growth rate, wait until he learns about bacteria. given bacterial growth rates and the current population, the earth is about 24 hours old. lol.
The example I give for the radiometric dating myth, these people claiming they measures these things and it is wrong, they are using the wrong type of dating, that is like saying this I measured this sticks length with my scale set to grams
Yesterday i saw The flying spaghetti monstear speaking to me and explained me it was the true religion. Considering the standards of some theists commentiing here, it must be considered true until it can be demonstrated that it's not. It would be very hypocrite by them to not accept this story, but still continue to say we have to demonstrate christianity is false
@@HumanismIsEvil "US boy, 9, killed himself after homophobic bullying, mum says A nine-year-old boy has killed himself after enduring four days of homophobic bullying at school in Denver, Colorado, his mother says." 28.08.18
@@HumanismIsEvil There once was a Richard Levine Who had delusions of being divine His bluster was totally despotic To hide his urges homo erotic Making his posts one continuous whine.
Or that the earth was there before light in the bible. Or that there were days and nights on earth...4 days before the sun...which is also an error because the sun came before the earth It literally gets things wrong from the first verse of the first chapter of the first book...
The Iliad and the Odyssey both mention the city of Troy. Up until 150 years ago no one thought the city of Troy existed. Now we know that it actually did. Because that aspect of Homer is correct does that mean the rest of the Iliad and the Odyssey are true? Using this guy's logic we would have to say yes
How do people study so little and then pretend to have all of the answers? You would think being shown to be wrong, over and o er would discourage them in to trying to learn but do far no, they are able to keep their heads down and trust their faith over the evidence.
The Christian caller isn’t seeking the truth, he’s seeking to be right at any costs and did not expect to be challenged so he repeatedly just lied his face off. If you start your evidentiary statement with “My evidence is that I believe…” you’ve lost. You’ve already lost horribly.
@@solly119119 I mean, they still have "homo" in their names so i think it's still true that they are considered humans. When i try to look on google multiple wordings of "how old are humans on earth"/"first human on earth", i can get both answers
@@quentind1924 Yeah, currently all species placed under Genus _Homo_ are labelled humans. So _H erectus_ is considered human not just us, the Neanderthals, Denisovans, and "Hobbits".
There have been near extinction events several times. We know in the year 500 and in the year 1700 there was huge ice events which lasted several years
"The earth is 6000 years old and even if you prove 100% that things on the earth are actually older it does not matter because god can create things that look on purpose so I still win". Yea, god filled the entire universe with SYNCRONIZED LIGHT to make it LOOK like stars are millions of light years away, when in fact they are only 6000 years old, because god can get perfect timing of trillions to the powers of trillions to the powers of trillions of individual photons of light to make it look that way. Wow.
Yeah, the best answer agaisnt this is "do you REALLY believe god said in the bible it's 6000 years old, but then made every evidence on earth (and even in space) act like it was billion years old ?"
Well, an omnipotent god could get those things right. That’s what omnipotence means. You’re making an argument from incredulity. The real question is whether a perfectly just god would base its creation on such a lie. This is why Philip Gosse’s _omphalos_ argument failed.
I'm going to write a list of 100 things, only one will be true; therefore, my list will be completely accurate. Just you wait, I'll be a trillionaire in a moment.
The Bible is very accurate -- the pages are numbered in perfect order -- therefore GAWD, JAY-SUS, and the HOOOOOOOLY SPONGEBOY are my gourds and savories.
Peter Parker's address in The Amazing Spider-Man is 20 Ingram Street in Forest Hills, Queens. The address was first hinted at in issue 316 in June 1989, and fully revealed in the following issue. The Parkers, the real-life family who live at the address, began receiving letters addressed to Spider-Man in 1974, but didn't know why until a journalist told them about the comic. The letters came from all over the world, including Kentucky, India, and the Netherlands, and often began with "Dear Spider-Man". Some of the letters asked for Spider-Man's costume or praised him as a superhero. The Parkers also received credit card offers and prank phone calls addressed to Peter Parker. Some of the letters are now on display at the City Reliquary Museum in Williamsburg, Brooklyn as part of the Dear Spider-Man, Letters to Peter Parker exhibit.
"I believe the universe is so accurately designed. You can't deny a creator." After all of the conversation that happened before, you go back to that. Typical Christian mind, holy shit.
ah this one , poor kid.. i hoppe his call if nothing else sparked the desire that caused paulogia to leave religion aka , ''i know its true , all these people wouldet lie/be wrong'' then cue a decade of every claim investigated either showed flat out lies or miss representation or fallacious flaws and reading the wholly book turned the theist.. atheist
For the caller "Sam"; the passage in Isaiah (40:22) was written in Hebrew and the word "circle" is English. And while spheres are all circular, not all circles are spheres. The word "circle" can describe a disk, a cylinder, a cone, or a sphere. And the word used in the Hebrew text was "chug" (or "chuwg") which means the shape described by a compass, which is flat and round... a disk, but only 2-dimensional. So no, the Bible describes Earth as flat-ish with a round perimeter. And in Matthew 4:8 it claims that Jesus relayed being taken to the top of an "exceedingly high mountain" where he could see all of the kingdoms of the world. So again, we have a description that isn't possible on a sphere, and depicts a flat-ish Earth.
@-D-I-V-A- "What's the Evidence that you're totally that reliable?" Nothing. I don't need to be "totally that reliable" for all the things you said in your first message
Whoever wrote the verse's Luke 22:43 and Luke 22:44 would have had to have ("added,") those two verses if they hadn't been found written on in, ("early manuscripts.")
Most kings had armies and armies need metal for weapons, armor, etc. That's a bit like noting a claim that kingdoms had equipment for the basic processing of food, and then finding archaeological evidence for such equipment. That's exactly what should be expected whether the Bible is true or not. Sam's bias is clouding his ability to think critically.
Their god keeps proving himself not omniscient again-and-again through his ignorant believers. …enough times that happened, he acts exactly like a god who does not exist., and believers just conjured up a personal imaginary friend.
19:56 If it doesn't matter... what the hell have we been listening to for the last... 19 minutes and 56 seconds? 20:49 Best evidence.... = simply restating a BELIEF. Waste of bloody time.... Jesus, I hope this guy never gets jury-service.
When you say “here’s my best evidence for god”, and it starts with “I believe”, you’ve already lost.
Quite, I don't believe anything but I'll accept things based on reason logic and rational arguments. I don't have faith in anything but I'll give my trust based on reasonable expectations.
Belief ≠ acceptance and faith ≠ trust. Just because a group of words appear together in a dictionary, it doesn't mean they are the same.
That's exactly what was running thru my mind.
I said that out loud lol
Poor kid. This poor, poor kid.
Some of us get better. What started it all for me was a high school psychology class where I thought I would be Super Christian and Defender of the Faith™️. I made some dumb reply about god and he asked me, "Can god make a rock so heavy that he couldn't lift it?" Looking back now, I know he recognized the very instant I thought "Well, wait a minute...". Took me another 10 years to fully embrace rationality. Please don't ever give up on a christian you care about.
@@chuckhunter77 I had my grandfather to learn me read and write, at the age of 4, after reading the bible, I realised it is pure fiction ................
Hi. Geologist here. No chance this guy could pass any related exams in his current state.
I took a Geology class once. I agree. 😂
😂
He does pass a few tests.
Sam is obviously home schooled with John Morris, Kent Hovind, Ken Ham, Tod Malone Pseudo Science.
@@Mewse1203
I threw some rocks at someone.
The bible says Jesus ate food and we know people eat food, therefore the bible is completely accurate and God exists. Nice logic there!!!
And he walked, don't forget walked and I've seen people walking.
It doesn't say that Yiiisus had to go to the john, but that may be extrapolated from the fact that he ate food, unless he was like Kim Jung Un who never takes a dump because he converts 100% of what he eats into energy 🤣🤣🤣🤣. Maybe Kim is the real son of gaaad, and our orange Yiiiisus here (aka orange turd) is his brother. Yeah, the bible must be true 😂😂
A man exists! Holy crap, you've proven the extraordinary! 😂
Here is some logic.
x'=x-vt
y'=y
z'=z
t'=t
Algebra equations are statements of logic. They can be proven true or false according to axioms of algebra. I have been posting these equations to atheists for about a year. I can prove the equations atheistic scientists use are incorrect and that these equations are correct. No atheist will even discuss this. Atheists avoid logic like the plague.
Yes and the bible never say that Jesus shit. So Jesus must be a constipated god.
The mind of a young earth creationist will never cease to amaze me. Imagine if they put that bold and unyielding stupidity towards constructive endeavors.
Indeed. I feel the same for apologists as well. Only if they could channel that level of effort and devotion to something conducive to pushing humanity forward, not backward.
Then we'd have stupid endeavors.
I call it willful ignorance.
You'd have Marjorie Taylor Greene and Lauren boebert
weeeeeell we wouldnt have been able to go to the moon if everybody was thinking like this dude thats for sure 😂😂
Sam says the "date known" for Mt. Etna is 21,000 years, which totally debunks his claim of 6,000 years.
And at one point he also says that humans have been on the Earth for millions of years 😆
@@Sundae_Times He was attempting to be sarcastic, describing evolutionary theory how his tiny mind (mis)understands it. 🤪
Look at the Grand Canyon. That means it was created 2 weeks ago.
Believing the universe is 6000 years old is one thing, but people like this don't even have the decency to be embarrassed about it.
Our local universe is an expansion of a black hole that formed within an infinite eternal, Cosmos. This is a good starting point.
You would need evidence to support that very bold assertion I'm afraid. @@JamesRichardWiley
@@JamesRichardWileyprove it, then.
This is your brain on religion
Religion really dumbs people down. Way down.
Believer: But the Bible says....
Skeptic: Why should anyone believe the Bible?
Believer: Well the Bible says ....
Skeptic: But you need to validate that the content of the Bible is true before you can use the Bible as evidence
Believer: Well in XXXXX section of the Bible it says...
Skeptic: You still haven't said why the Bible is a source of truth.
Believer: Well XXXX in the bible said....
.... it's exhausting.
It would be fair enough to say something like, “The Bible predicts X, nothing and no one else ever predicted X, and X is true.” But even that doesn’t lend credibility to Y or Z.
The Bible is also inerrant... I don't think On The Origin of Species is. 🤣Yes, it is exhausting. I've been listening to this crap for 74 years. I'm done. I turn most of these videos off.
Can you tell me who plays the role of the skeptic? It can't be an atheist because atheism is a disbelief which means it's an unwillingness or inability to accept God. It doesn't question anything it doesn't it's a refusal or inability to accept..
@@HumanismIsEvil You still stuck on your bullshit definition of atheism? Oh well.. maybe your mommy will buy you a dictionary for your 6th birthday.
@@TheToscanaMan Yeesh. Talk about holding an imperfect species working with models of observation that are sometimes flawed yet contiguously reliable to such a high standard as to say their first step in the right direction should be perfect, and then holding another thing which is clearly flawed and errant enough that it had to be reinterpreted dozens of times to make sense of its unstable theology and STILL has nothing to substantiate any of its content as infallible. Yikes.
I got all excited when he said there was evidence of the Bible being true, but sadly, I was disappointed again.
Fyi:
After years of research and study, I can now say that am no longer a theist, and I would love to share my personal testimony.
Ben (Québec, Canada, French teacher, etc.)
Background:
Six (6) years of philosophy and theology: private school + university.
Grammar (Latin, French, Greek, Hebrew).
Young earth? 🙄 I’m an amateur astronomer and the photons I captured to create an image of The Black Eye Galaxy had been traveling 17 million years before reaching my image sensor.
Sams parents should be ashamed.
sam is now a u.s. supreme court judge.
LMAO
Sources ? (If i'm not getting wooshed)
And will become the next president.... Idiocracy
hah
@@quentind1924 seriously, though, aarrgghh was making a joke. WOOSH
Talking plants and animals and zombies and virgin births is “accurate in terms of science?” 😂
Not just his arguments, but his whole thought process is just so _weak._ This is what religion does to people, it turns their minds into weak mush.
I think you're confusing religion with atheism.
If you replace the brain of a person who believes in God with a rock and replace the brain of an atheist with a rock what you get is tWo atheist.
Atheism is the opposite of the scientific approach it's a disbelief it has nothing to do with logic has nothing to do with evidence has nothing to do with critical thinking matter of fact like I just argued above you don't even need a brain to be an atheist. It's a disbelief you just have to be unwilling or unable to accept God.
@@HumanismIsEvil @Richard ‘HumanismIsEvil’ Levnine: the question you keep ignoring and pretending you can’t see, despite it having been posted numerous times directly to you: *_When you put up your nasty, hateful, bigoted anti-LGBT+ comments and posts, do you consider how that will make those people feel? Are you aware that a lot of LGBT+ people have committed suicide because of bullying by people like you? Do you even care? I’m genuinely interested in why you believe hate campaigns against vulnerable minority groups is ok, particularly as you identify as a Christian._*
And the fact that you’re too scared to answer that speaks volumes.
@@HumanismIsEvil "US boy, 9, killed himself after homophobic bullying, mum says
A nine-year-old boy has killed himself after enduring four days of homophobic bullying at school in Denver, Colorado, his mother says."
28.08.18
@@HumanismIsEvilyour brain was replaced with a cabbage and nobody noticed a difference
@@joshsheridan9511 He thinks inanimate things can hold a belief.
Your inability to grasp science is not a valid argument against it! Poor kid, completely poisoned by religion, thinking he knows more than ALL scientists. Poor kid.
When creationists are ignorant of science, they think everything that they don't understand is supernatural.
When abiogenesis describes chemical reactions and autocatalysis and nonenzymatic replication, they think that is supernatural. When they hear that man can go to the moon, they think that's supernatural. When they hear that gravity is a curvature in spacetime, they think it's supernatural.
But when they hear that an entire universe comes into existence from a preexisting entity with a mind and a will and somehow has omnipotence, they don't think that's supernatural.
What kind of upside-down bizarro world are they living in? And why are they crying into a Rachel Levine body pillow every night to overcome their fear of mortality?
que cee How are you doing with your junior high algebra? Any progress yet?
@@rbwinn3 Ah, the guy who thinks he knows more than Einstein with junior high algebra. When you getting your Nobel prize?
Quecee believes saying the word science and abiogenesis is equivalent to improving his faith-based belief in the supernatural that the origins of Life popped into existence because of a non intelligent occurrence.
I keep trying to explain to him as well as other atheists simply saying the word science and abiogenesis it's not proving his belief in the supernatural.
I keep trying to explain to him that a scientists trying to physically create life is Life coming from life it's Life coming from an intelligence source it's not proving his belief in the supernatural that life popped into existence because of a non intelligent occurrence
It would be equivalent to somebody asking me to prove God and my saying the word science and abiogenesis and then claiming look I proved God I said the word science, I like science therefore my belief in the supernatural is correct.
Sorry quincee it doesn't work that way you can say the word science 100,000 times and it still won't improve your faith-based belief. Science does not deal with the supernatural therefore they're not dealing with your faith-based belief that the origins of Life came into existence without God.
Let me further simplify for you. Do you believe if we understood the ingredients used to make a banana cake that it would equate to proving that banana cakes pop into existence because of a non intelligent occurrence. That banana cakes just pop into existence, they're not made by a human making them.
Again the natural process as we know it is life comes from life, Life comes from an intelligent source. Your belief is in the supernatural because you believe the origins of Life popped into existence because of a non intelligent occurrence.
You can say the word abiogenesis and science until you blue in the face it's not going to change the fact that science doesn't deal with your belief in the supernatural and saying the word science isn't equivalent to proving using the scientific method that your belief in the supernatural is part of the natural process.
@@HumanismIsEvil Abiogenesis is the *scientific* hypothesis that life on Earth originated from abiotic material. There's nothing supernatural about this.
Nowhere in the SCIENTIFIC hypothesis does it say, "goddunit".
WHY do you say that positing a naturalistic mechanism for the origin of life make it "supernatural"? Do you NOT understand what "supernatural" mean? Do you think naturalism is supernatural? Oh, wait. Do you understand what naturalism means?
If your evidence begins with ‘I believe that…’ you’re not presenting evidence.
The vast majority of creationists on atheist experience threads won't even tell me whether or not they believe the origins of Life came into existence via their god. And this is probably because they don't believe the origins of Life came into existence by creation, by their god but they just don't want to admit it.
They don't believe in a god but are just too embarrassed to admit that they don't believe it. They know there is no afterlife, so they want to remain on earth as long as possible.
And all they will do is come on here and make patently false statements and are so hypocritical that they don't recognize when someone does the exact same think to them.
I am the one who does not believe in your atheistic miracle. I believe the Galilean transformation equations are the correct equations for relativity. I would be really embarrassed if people thought I believed that two clocks with different rates result in the same speed for an airplane. I just think you do not know how to do junior high algebra.
@@rbwinn3 You think you know more than Einstein and ALL physicists because you think you know junior high algebra.
@@rbwinn3 Who did you say is going around changing the clocks in all inertial reference frames? Gremlins? You never mentioned how that works.
@@rbwinn3
WtF is an “atheist miracle”
Miracle
noun
a surprising and welcome event that is not explicable by natural or scientific laws and is therefore *considered to be the work of a divine agency.*
"the miracle of rising from the grave"
🤦♂️😂🤣
@@rbwinn3 Typical bible babbling hypocrisy - deluded fool who believes in magic spells accuses others of believing in magic spells.
Honestly while I still watch AXP, the show grew tiresome because callers rely on the same exhausted arguments while having the gall to paint them as a never before heard of apologetic.
And they are all pretty much "god of the gaps".
hallmark of cults and narrow minded religions , it tricks its members to think because x or y argument or semantic convinced them it must be an 'unheard of' argument for whom ever not joined their 'tribe' , and if it has internal logic , any natural evidence , any demonstrable capacity thats all just 'heretic tests of gawd!'
@wiI1776 it's all fallacies, all the time
Yeah I try and find the calls where callers are genuinely questioning or asking the hosts informative questions, not just trying to set the record for most logical fallacies and asking the same questions for the literal 10,000,000th time, the answers to which are a single google search away
Creationism usually relies on one or more of the following debunked arguments:
Fine tuning - no constants have been demonstrated to be tuned.
Anthropic principle / puddle reasoning (distinct from FTA) - relies on assuming that things are noticeably existent because they were intended to be rather than because they exist and were noticed.
KCA - relies on special pleading a particular something from nothing.
Contingency - relies on special pleading that contingency exists. Note that causality isn't contingency.
Design - relies on comparing known human design with known lack of design then assuming everything unknown is designed.
Irreducible Complexity - still not even demonstrated to exist.
Objective Moral Values - still not demonstrated ontologically. Assertions that a god is required isn't demonstrating ontologically.
NDEs - basically another claim that personal experiences are true by default.
DNA as information - usually hampered by misrepresentation of the definition of information, often with the false claim of being digital.
Existence of Consciousness/Intelligence - often falsely claimed to require themselves already existing in order to exist.
Free Will - usually involves equivocation on what free will means and false dichotomies on determinism and randomness.
Are there other debunked arguments not covered here?
I can't think of any.
Humans make things out of existing material for our needs therefore a super human like mind without a brain willed/thought everything into existence from nothing.
Basalt is an igneous rock. It is not surprising to find young igneous rock on or near a volcano.
It wasn’t about young. What he said was basalt with a known age was radiometrically dated to far older than its known age. But the claim is dubious and could be from the wrong type of dating method used.
"I think if you show that what I want to be true is the case, then the thing I want to be true would be true."
2:19 "Imma use this book, to prove my belief in the book is based on fact..........using only this f(*&ing book."
Even by AXP standards this caller was mislead, misinformed and mistaken. Faith does not welcome challenge and does not require evidence. Another closed mind.
It's like an alcoholic trying to justify their drinking.
Spot on
👍
That's a low blow! At least we can prove our god!
@@JoshuaCleardaY
You mean proof right? 😉
@@JoshuaCleardaY
Ok, prove it!
It's horrible what religion can do to perfecttly working human's brain.
very true.
Oh my god lol, how many people per square inch did he say? what a bonehead, so we would just keep poping them out when it came to 1 person per square inch, how cosy
The religious mind is such a broken thing.
What makes you think THIS guy has a brain?
Actually I came across an article in, I think, Psychology Today. The article was about a study of the extremely religious which found that their brains didn't develop well. We develop our brains by investigating, questioning, doubting etc. This creates the neural connections we use for rationalising that which we encounter throughout life. Such people are actively discouraged from doing so and their thinking processes don't develop the way the brains of those who are not so handicapped do.
His arguments boiled down to " Hey, you who deny a creator, I don't believe you can deny a creator."
I like the spiderman analogy in these circumstances. They have quite a bit of accurate things in spiderman comics, thus spiderman is real 🤷♀️
I’ll betcha I can find 500 people in New York who will claim to have seen Spider-Man.
@@Leith_Crowther Yeah, they've all seen him on the web.
But only my favourite releases are accurate, the rest are apocryphal
It's not fair laughing at Sam, he can't help his brain damage.
His parents created him that way.
You people are far nicer than I'd ever have the patience for.
Likewise.
We all know it is possible for a man to love a woman.
I saw a cartoon in which Popeye loved Olive Oyl.
That shows that the cartoon is accurate.
There are trees older than 6000 years.
When I 1st read Greek myths aged about 7 and came across the same sort of stories as in genesis i puzzled as to why 1 was calle 'the truth' while the other was called 'myth'.
Caller is another puddle that believes the hole was designed for it.
He's going to be disappointed when the sun comes out.
This kid is so out of his league 😂
Life on planet Earth evolved to live on planet Earth
We fit because we are an integral aspect of everything rather than being separate needing somone like us to make something for us to fit into it.
Here's my number one evidence ... I believe... 😅
Why is all the pyramid artifacts undamaged by water if there was a great flood? Keep in mind it took decades to build one and 10's of thousands of people and there was 8 people on the arc according to the story.
I’m not sure what you mean by pyramid artifacts. If you mean the pyramids, they aren’t necessarily a problem for the flood story because the flood could have been before them, but there is a trillion things that are major problems for the flood story in geology, paleontology, history, archaeology, physics, mathematics, biology, and logic.
The caller has no idea how many scientific methods work. For instance, carbon dating does not measure the amount of carbon, but rather the decay rate of carbon 14, a radioactive isotope which is absorbed by living creatures only while it is alive. Once a creature dies, it stops absorbing carbon 14 which begins to decay at a fixed rate. If you measure the amount of carbon 14 in a sample of a creatures remains, the amount of carbon 14 in it will tell you the approximate age of the sample. The caller should have paid more attention in science class. If he did, he wouldn't be relying on magical thinking. Just as with flat earthers, science has disproven much of the early beliefs about our world and those views are changing with more information discovered.
Their arguments haven't evolved in 13 years.. 😂
More like 2000 years.
@@Nocturnalux Very true. 😄
My man leads off with the Spider-Man argument!
I admire you guys for spending however long the show is, beating your heads against brick walls. I wonder how many "believers" actually listen, and realize how foolish they sound?
Theoretical physics currently has about a half dozen viable tentative, alternative theories that might possibly provide an explanation as to how the current universe came into existence.
None of them involve a God. That possibility was discarded literally centuries ago.
Theism belongs in the DSM
Do the chemicals cause correct delusions in your soulless atheist head?
Damn, the “chemicals” BS again, you need new material Edith.
Like RTS (Religious Trauma Syndrome)
It does!!
Only excessive theism really
Homeboy doesn't know what any of the shit he just said means. He was told by someone making big bucks off of his stupidity that all he has to do is go down this list of talking points, without needing to understand any of them, and he automatically wins.
If man is trying to convince you of God, don't trust them. As God warned against trusting in man
Jer 17:5 🙏
And a good Monday Morning 🌞 AXP Fans and Theists ❤❤❤
Peace Love Empathy From Australia 💪🤠☝️
the people who believe the bible will tap dance and do anything they can to keep their Harry Potter fantasies alive
A Hebrew god that always existed created the world from nothing.
I read this in an ancient document written by Hebrew priests promoting their belief in a Hebrew god.
At age 76 I'm still looking for the authors of this claim and their evidence for claiming it but finding nothing but words.
This kid is so incredibly desperate to believe in biblical creationism that he's totally brainwashed himself.
if he is looking at the age of the earth by the human population and growth rate, wait until he learns about bacteria. given bacterial growth rates and the current population, the earth is about 24 hours old. lol.
Oh wow all the way at the end there he just goes with "my god is a trickster that created the universe looking old." Last Thursdayism.
"Tired creationist arguments " Is there any other kind?
I did recently hear about the “argument from mangos” for the first time.
@@Leith_Crowther Is that like the banana "It fits in your mouth" argument?
The example I give for the radiometric dating myth, these people claiming they measures these things and it is wrong, they are using the wrong type of dating, that is like saying this I measured this sticks length with my scale set to grams
Indoctrinating children to believe in magic is cruel and disgusting. This is a kid who has been brainwashed.
Teach people how to think not what to think.
I doubt his guy has the mental capacity to be anything but a sheep.
Child abuse.
Yesterday i saw The flying spaghetti monstear speaking to me and explained me it was the true religion. Considering the standards of some theists commentiing here, it must be considered true until it can be demonstrated that it's not. It would be very hypocrite by them to not accept this story, but still continue to say we have to demonstrate christianity is false
Caller needs to apply for his Nobel Prize if he's so confident.
LOL, a book says a thing.
😂 atheist humanist Rachel Levine says he's a woman
@@HumanismIsEvil "US boy, 9, killed himself after homophobic bullying, mum says
A nine-year-old boy has killed himself after enduring four days of homophobic bullying at school in Denver, Colorado, his mother says."
28.08.18
@@HumanismIsEvilirrelevant as usual
@@HumanismIsEvil
There once was a Richard Levine
Who had delusions of being divine
His bluster was totally despotic
To hide his urges homo erotic
Making his posts one continuous whine.
And God said, Let there be light!
Just never mind that light had been around for only ten billion years before the Sun was formed 😂
Or that the earth was there before light in the bible. Or that there were days and nights on earth...4 days before the sun...which is also an error because the sun came before the earth
It literally gets things wrong from the first verse of the first chapter of the first book...
Or how plants grew before he created ligth.....
He knows nothing but will fall for anything.
God made everything with age 🤣🤣🤣 pure desperation
Pleasantly harsh end to this call
The Iliad and the Odyssey both mention the city of Troy. Up until 150 years ago no one thought the city of Troy existed. Now we know that it actually did. Because that aspect of Homer is correct does that mean the rest of the Iliad and the Odyssey are true? Using this guy's logic we would have to say yes
How do people study so little and then pretend to have all of the answers? You would think being shown to be wrong, over and o er would discourage them in to trying to learn but do far no, they are able to keep their heads down and trust their faith over the evidence.
The Christian caller isn’t seeking the truth, he’s seeking to be right at any costs and did not expect to be challenged so he repeatedly just lied his face off.
If you start your evidentiary statement with “My evidence is that I believe…” you’ve lost. You’ve already lost horribly.
How the hell did the hosts let this guy get away with saying - multiple times - humans (homo sapiens) have been on Earth for millions of years?
The guy could have meant the genus Homo, which has been around a few million years.
@@TheistsTapOut Yeah ... I really, really doubt that given his extreme ignorance of science.
@@solly119119 I mean, they still have "homo" in their names so i think it's still true that they are considered humans. When i try to look on google multiple wordings of "how old are humans on earth"/"first human on earth", i can get both answers
@@quentind1924
Yeah, currently all species placed under Genus _Homo_ are labelled humans.
So _H erectus_ is considered human not just us, the Neanderthals, Denisovans, and "Hobbits".
There have been near extinction events several times. We know in the year 500 and in the year 1700 there was huge ice events which lasted several years
I can see the mount Etna right there being angry with this guy for calling its name invain
if this guy was any more stubborn, he would be my ex wife
"The earth is 6000 years old and even if you prove 100% that things on the earth are actually older it does not matter because god can create things that look on purpose so I still win". Yea, god filled the entire universe with SYNCRONIZED LIGHT to make it LOOK like stars are millions of light years away, when in fact they are only 6000 years old, because god can get perfect timing of trillions to the powers of trillions to the powers of trillions of individual photons of light to make it look that way. Wow.
Yeah, the best answer agaisnt this is "do you REALLY believe god said in the bible it's 6000 years old, but then made every evidence on earth (and even in space) act like it was billion years old ?"
Well, an omnipotent god could get those things right. That’s what omnipotence means. You’re making an argument from incredulity.
The real question is whether a perfectly just god would base its creation on such a lie. This is why Philip Gosse’s _omphalos_ argument failed.
Hey, that proves just how powerful an imaginary being can be. Checkmate, atheists! 😜
An all powerful god could do that easily, the real question is WHY would he do that?
@@marcusreading3783 Yeah, especially if it’s to say how old it is in the bible
I'm going to write a list of 100 things, only one will be true; therefore, my list will be completely accurate.
Just you wait, I'll be a trillionaire in a moment.
The Bible is very accurate -- the pages are numbered in perfect order -- therefore GAWD, JAY-SUS, and the HOOOOOOOLY SPONGEBOY are my gourds and savories.
With radiocarbon dating, they're only interested in two forms of carbon; Carbon-12 and Carbon-14 and the ratio of one to the other.
sam is totally comfortable with just making stuff up.
2011.. same arguments today. Why don't they learn?
Claims they’re going to prove something, starts with I believe
Same thing with Mark 16:9-20 verses (Mark 16:9-20 verse's) weren't found written on in, ("early manuscripts.")
the tried and true argument “nuh uh ”
Why would god make the universe to appear billions of years old? Seems random. How old did he make Adam and Eve anyway? Teens? 20s? 30s?
Look up Dave Allan on Adam and Eve 😂
@@duncanbryson1167 checked it. Excellent!!
Marvel Comics mentions New York City, and New York City is a real place, therefore Spider Man is real.
Not only that, there are probably dozens of people called Peter Parker in New York.
Peter Parker's address in The Amazing Spider-Man is 20 Ingram Street in Forest Hills, Queens. The address was first hinted at in issue 316 in June 1989, and fully revealed in the following issue. The Parkers, the real-life family who live at the address, began receiving letters addressed to Spider-Man in 1974, but didn't know why until a journalist told them about the comic. The letters came from all over the world, including Kentucky, India, and the Netherlands, and often began with "Dear Spider-Man". Some of the letters asked for Spider-Man's costume or praised him as a superhero. The Parkers also received credit card offers and prank phone calls addressed to Peter Parker. Some of the letters are now on display at the City Reliquary Museum in Williamsburg, Brooklyn as part of the Dear Spider-Man, Letters to Peter Parker exhibit.
"I believe the universe is so accurately designed. You can't deny a creator." After all of the conversation that happened before, you go back to that. Typical Christian mind, holy shit.
ah this one , poor kid..
i hoppe his call if nothing else sparked the desire that caused paulogia to leave religion aka , ''i know its true , all these people wouldet lie/be wrong'' then cue a decade of every claim investigated either showed flat out lies or miss representation or fallacious flaws and reading the wholly book turned the theist.. atheist
This is one young kid. He has been 'taught' to believe one thing and one thing only. Let his delusion begin... He'll grow up and wake up one day.
Some early manuscripts don't have verses Luke 22:43 and Luke 22:44 ('the sweating of blood.')
For the caller "Sam"; the passage in Isaiah (40:22) was written in Hebrew and the word "circle" is English. And while spheres are all circular, not all circles are spheres. The word "circle" can describe a disk, a cylinder, a cone, or a sphere. And the word used in the Hebrew text was "chug" (or "chuwg") which means the shape described by a compass, which is flat and round... a disk, but only 2-dimensional. So no, the Bible describes Earth as flat-ish with a round perimeter. And in Matthew 4:8 it claims that Jesus relayed being taken to the top of an "exceedingly high mountain" where he could see all of the kingdoms of the world. So again, we have a description that isn't possible on a sphere, and depicts a flat-ish Earth.
I wouldn't care if there was one, I wouldn't worship a god. That is ridiculous, anyway.
@-D-I-V-A- Myself.
@-D-I-V-A- "What's the Evidence that you're
totally that reliable?"
Nothing. I don't need to be "totally that reliable" for all the things you said in your first message
And again, using the claim to prove the claim! SMH! Round and Round and Round and Round and Round and Round
etna, the rocks they dated have inclusions of older rock that came up with the lava
The verse in Isaiah he's referring to says the Earth is a circle. A circle by definition is flat. The Bible is clearly saying the Earth is flat.
Another example of religion claiming a person’s logic and reason.
Whoever wrote the verse's Luke 22:43 and Luke 22:44 would have had to have ("added,") those two verses if they hadn't been found written on in, ("early manuscripts.")
Most kings had armies and armies need metal for weapons, armor, etc. That's a bit like noting a claim that kingdoms had equipment for the basic processing of food, and then finding archaeological evidence for such equipment. That's exactly what should be expected whether the Bible is true or not. Sam's bias is clouding his ability to think critically.
Sweating blood is not found in early manuscripts
Jesus sweating blood only proves that he was human. Nothing about a god.
This poor homeschooled kid. I say that because I was one too.
Their god keeps proving himself not omniscient again-and-again through his ignorant believers.
…enough times that happened, he acts exactly like a god who does not exist., and believers just conjured up a personal imaginary friend.
19:56 If it doesn't matter... what the hell have we been listening to for the last... 19 minutes and 56 seconds?
20:49 Best evidence.... = simply restating a BELIEF. Waste of bloody time....
Jesus, I hope this guy never gets jury-service.
Paddington Railway Station in London, UK exists… therefor, the books of Harry Potter must be true?
My religion is true if you throw out many verified facts about the universe. Mine is a god of alternative facts!