Go to ground.news/skeptic to get the full side of every story. Subscribe through my link before September 1 and get 30% off unlimited access.

@edgarg.4610

10 ай бұрын

You cannot use variety and complexity if you CANNOT NATURALLY CREATE LIFE. God: I create variety of life, with the ability to adapt and change the environment Evolution problems: 1. Giant morphological and anatomical leaps. 2. Cambrian and Precambrian Explosion: Animals Suddenly Developed, Structured, and Formed 3. Having similarities and differences does not affect creationism. Because it is part of God's creativity 4. Organisms have similarities because they are necessary for the life of organisms. HAVING SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES IN CREATIONISM IS NOT SYNONYMOUS WITH CONCLUDING AN ANCESTOR SECTARIANLY (fallacy of false dilemma: either we come from an ancestor or another opinion is not valid) 5. The layers only show a deluge.

@edgarg.4610

10 ай бұрын

SMART DESIGN: All organisms have similarities. Conclusion: we come from an ancestor Criticism: GOD CREATED A GREAT DIVERSITY OF ORGANISMS IN GENESIS. From a rational logical point of view. These: 1. They present similarities (chemical, molecular, etc) because they are necessary for the life of organisms 2. They present similarities (physiological, genetic, etc) because they fulfill a function. PRS. Principle of sufficient reason. 3. They present similarities and differences because they are part of the variety and creativity of God (morphological, anatomical, embryological, etc.) 4. They present differences because each organism is distinguished according to its capacities and/or environment. (biogeographical, genetic, morphological, anatomical evidence, etc.) HOW WE CONCLUDE: It is evolutionary arguments that take advantage of intelligent design. WEAKNESSES, CAMBRIAN EXPLOSION. ANIMALS APPEARING FORMED, DEVELOPED, STRUCTURED without millions of gradual intermediate transitional fossils. Remember that paleontology (floods, universal flood, preservation events of thousands of years) favors creationism, since you are based on the fact that a gradualism existed, despite not having millions of intermediate transitional fossils. What they do is use created, designed and structured organisms. Therefore, you have naturalistic faith. I await an answer. If you would be so kind.

@LouisGedo

10 ай бұрын

👋

@Aldogfelix

10 ай бұрын

I would rather call this "Bulverism" for what it is, a Psychologism. Psychologisms cannot attack an argument, for it only deals with how that statement was built inside the mind of the locutor, it cannot even touch an argument for this reason, although it can support the Why's an argument was made. a psychologism is in its self an Ad hominem. it cannot be used to argue but only to support how an argument came to be, wheter it be false o true.

@DerpLvIAsian

10 ай бұрын

in (probably unnecessary) defense of Joe, he generally lets people talk without always challenging their viewpoints, even when he disagrees. In his own words, his podcast is not meant to convince everyone of his opinion, or have a discussion about what is actually true; he just likes to find out how people think and why they think that way.

If you can disprove evolution, turn in your paperwork and collect your Nobel Prize.

@kristopherjon6496

10 ай бұрын

@@polythenewrappedme6102Ah, so you have a peer reviewed paper you can produce to that effect?

@0816M3RC

10 ай бұрын

​@@polythenewrappedme6102 No it hasn't.

@Fang1241

10 ай бұрын

​@@polythenewrappedme6102are you stupid on purpose

@carlschjelderup5532

10 ай бұрын

​@@polythenewrappedme6102Bruh

@ConsciousExpression

10 ай бұрын

@@polythenewrappedme6102That's like saying the moon has been discredited. Evolution is a fact not an opinion. Various theories of evolution attempt to account for the observable facts related to evolutionary processes in nature.

-"There's several reports of him appearing to people after his resurrection." -"Right. But there's also reports of Bigfoot." 😂🤣😂🤣

@n0etic_f0x

10 ай бұрын

A fun story about this kind of thing. A guy I know decided to become a preacher because he saw a meitior. I started laughing at this and he said "Oh yeah? What can you predict when I could see one or something?" the answer to which is... obviously. Obviously, I can. So I told him that on the night of my birth to look out to his rose garden and into the sky and shall see the sky scared by fire at least trice an hour. He took that challenge knowing I would be shown a fraud. He saw 25 meteors that night. He then changed his profession and even how he thinks about the world.

@Z4r4sz

10 ай бұрын

I cant imagine Joe was seriously making a reasonable analogy about how unreasonable claims about both are. It must have been an accident or a joke.

@taylorlibby7642

10 ай бұрын

@@Z4r4sz Shows some bigotry and a lack of imagination on your part there.

@briananuvattanachai6646

10 ай бұрын

You go into a desert and claim you see something people think most likely you are hallucinating but, when Moses sees a burning bush in the desert and claims it talked to him that is valid...

@kayew5492

10 ай бұрын

Surely that only proves that he wasn't actually dead. Even the bible clearly says he was only on the cross for a few hours, rather than days or even weeks, as was usual. Then he is seen eating, drinking, walking and talking. It always made more sense to me to assume that he survived rather than resurrected. If I accepted the bible as a reliable source, which I don't.

"But, there are reports of Big Foot" Such a great way to instantly destroy his argument, and yet the dude just skipped right over it. He knew he was dumb lol

@justaghostinthesea

9 ай бұрын

I can never decide on where to place Joe Rogan. The man is an enigma.

@paladro

8 ай бұрын

@@justaghostinthesea you know his whole purpsoe his is ad reads right... way back when they realized rogan had that capitve market of 18-35 year old men and their disposable income, that's when rogan's value shot up. they were able to witness him sell his gullible audience everything from jerkoff toys to bigfoot. that's his value to the system, its certainly not his standup.

@zidanelionheart

8 ай бұрын

@@paladrowow….nailed it

@d4rkblu386

8 ай бұрын

Wish I could give him a high five for that. Such a great, off the cuff way to completely shut down an argument.

@epsteindidntkillhimself69

8 ай бұрын

@paladro So JR is evil because he makes a living? Lmao. If advertising something is the bar, we have a lot of people to throw in the evil bucket.

Talking snakes, walking on water, magic boats, coming back to life, water to wine. But evolution…..can’t believe that 🙄

@timo.5449

3 ай бұрын

Dude. A whole universe- with the right conditions to sustain life- exists against all odds. And you’re tripping over the small, trivial stuff? It takes more faith to be an atheist, my friend.

@awesomeboi1772

2 ай бұрын

​@@timo.5449 not true. We cannot say that life was only formed on earth. There may be life on other planets too. Plus evolution does have evidences supporting it (you can find a video on it or search on the internet. Literally just read a high school biology book.)

@timo.5449

2 ай бұрын

@@awesomeboi1772 It is possible for life to exist on other planets. But so far, those other planets seem to lack some or all the ingredients/conditions necessary to sustain life, and so far we don't have any evidence of intelligent life out there. So we can speculate the possibility, but as far as we know, there is no evidence of life apart from earth. As for the evolution bit, the materialist claim that we are the consequence of time, matter, and blind happenstance is laughable at best. I highly doubt the odds of that recipe having replicated anywhere else, especially those place lacking said ingredients and conditions necessary for life. As a medical professional, I kinda have a good gist about the theory of evolution.

@awesomeboi1772

2 ай бұрын

@@timo.5449 "other planets seem to lack some or all the ingredients" how do you know that? Of course you are a medical professional saying that evolution is laughable. Of course you must have your own evidences disproving it. Of course you wouldn't give those evidences however.

@timo.5449

2 ай бұрын

@@awesomeboi1772 I'll clarify. Microevolution does happen- I do agree to that. But there isn't sufficient evidence to support macroevolution, or at least it is still contested in the scientific community because, again, there isn't proper evidence to substantiate it, among many, many other reasons.

When Joe Rogan makes you look dishonest and unintelligent with simple questions... you know you've made some really terrible life choices.

@Dan_Kanerva

10 ай бұрын

talking as if over half the internet is not way more ignorant than Rogan.

@Dan_Kanerva

10 ай бұрын

@@PeterYT123 dishonest? ignorant at worst . The man has argued and disagreed with many people in his own political affinity . That's more than i can say about most internet clowns , like Hasan

@iansheppard6735

10 ай бұрын

@@PeterYT123 Yore' qwite rite, it doens't

@rembrandt972ify

10 ай бұрын

Meyer didn't look nearly as dishonest as Matt Walsh did when he appeared on Rogan. Still looked pretty bad though.

@shinobi-no-bueno

10 ай бұрын

​@@PeterYT123what has Joe Rogan been dishonest about? Are there any examples that stand out to you?

"yeah but people have sightings of Bigfoot" probably the smartest thing Joe ever said

@marcsimard2723

10 ай бұрын

Low bar

@shinobi-no-bueno

10 ай бұрын

​@@marcsimard2723Joe Rogan isn't unintelligent, uncouth at times, but he clearly has a high capacity for knowledge and a willingness to learn

@AwesometownUSA

10 ай бұрын

@@shinobi-no-buenocitation desperately needed

@zwenkwiel816

10 ай бұрын

​@@AwesometownUSAlook at the variety of guests he has on...

@nakkadu

10 ай бұрын

​@@AwesometownUSAJust listen to some of his podcasts

“There’s reports of Bigfoot” I don’t know why but that just made my day😂😂

Just discovered this channel. Being a french raised in an atheist family, i've had no particular religious education, so i've always been fascinated with religions - not as truths, but as cultural, important parts of our history. I've also been confronted to bigotry on the internet and been bemused and unable to respond to it properly, so listening to this satisfyingly measured arguments are truly helpful.

Professor Dave gonna have a field day on this guy lol

@meghanworkman6449

10 ай бұрын

He already has. He tore Stephen Meyer a new asshole; it was beautiful.

@willytcg

10 ай бұрын

@@meghanworkman6449 I'm aware of that one, but I'm certain volume 2 is coming. The DI just continue to give him ammo.

@bllla

10 ай бұрын

I’ve been waiting for Dave

@OlivierGabin

10 ай бұрын

@@bllla Me too ! That would be both educative and fun !

@jonathanhenderson9422

10 ай бұрын

Paulogia would have a field day on the claim about Christian martyrs dying for the belief they saw a resurrected Jesus. As he's repeatedly noted, we have almost zero documented evidence of Christians being martyred for their belief as opposed to, like Jesus himself, being political troublemakers, and no record of any of them being given the opportunity to recant. We also don't know how many of them (if any of them) actually claimed to have seen Jesus as opposed to having been convinced by stories about him from his followers. The entire "Christian martyrdom" argument is one of the biggest lies in all of apologetics, and like most lies apologists believe it naively because they've never bothered to investigate the evidence for it themselves.

Never underestimate the ability of intelligent charlatans to make ignorant people say “Wow”.

@rembrandt972ify

10 ай бұрын

I never even underestimate the abilities of moronic charlatans like Stephen (mammals first appeared in the Eocene) Meyer.

@equinoxproject2284

10 ай бұрын

@@11235but 100 agree. When you say spoon feed it reminds me of the crusades some denominations hold. They promo them as outreach or opportunities to evangelize to the lost souls of the community but 99.99% of attendees are self proclaimed Christens already.

@NottherealLucifer

10 ай бұрын

​@@11235butThere are very few unique ideas left on this planet. To prove my point, you spent a good amount ton of words just to say what has been said on the internet for decades, you're not sharing some unique insight that no one else has said before. That's okay though, that's what literally everyone else is doing too, because we're billions of humans deep into this species and we all have the capacity to reflect upon existence.

@steveg1961

10 ай бұрын

@@11235but In the context of creationism pseudoscience, it's not just "gurus" - but fundamentalist/evangelical Christians following fundamentalist/evangelical Christian prognosticators who have a degree in some area of science who are promoting creationism pseudoscience to try to pretend that their particular religious beliefs are "scientific" - and, so, the confirmation bias is very strong with these ones, as a very powerful psychological religion-motivated bias. Note that I'm speaking from personal experience on this core, having been a young earth creationist myself many years ago. But in my case, as is the case with many younger people who are brought up in fundamentalist/evangelical Christian families and church denominations, the part about not digging into facts to check into the scientific details for yourself didn't take, so I did a lot of digging, and found out that my creationist "gurus" were a bunch of snake oil salesman and ALWAYS wrong in regard to the actual details about the actual science. (In my own personal timeframe, these were the creationism pseudoscience proponents who were still prominent in the 1979-1983 time frame, such as Henry Morris, Duane Gish, Thomas Barnes, and Richard Bliss.)

@SGN30

10 ай бұрын

Ignorant people being joe rogan?

I very much appreciate the time stamps and "edited for commentary" on the JRE footage. I wish this sort of transparency was a trend!

@GeneticallyModifiedSkeptic

9 ай бұрын

I think it’s a must when responding to long form content. That way people can check the original for context and see if my responses are relevant. Also, it’s really easy to edit this kind of thing to make it sound like a person said something they didn’t. People have done that to me and those are some of the most viewed response videos to my content.

@KeganStucki

9 ай бұрын

@GeneticallyModifiedSkeptic well done, good sir! You remain my favorite voice in this sort of analytical, breakdown content. These are truly important concepts, and they spawn even more important conversations...whether specific comment sections reflect that or not lol

@celestialsatheist1535

9 ай бұрын

​@@GeneticallyModifiedSkepticdrew thank goodness I found you here. Listen buddy do you think you can cover the secular movement in Iran. It is being neglected here in the west when this mass exodus out of Iran needs all of our support. If you bring this up the rest of the secular community will also notice it . Please pal just consider

@luisbarbosa8136

22 күн бұрын

@@celestialsatheist1535 man.. the only thing that you proved was that you are excellent in oratory and in deciving others LOL there were a few points (and I am sure of this) that you missunderstanding (on propose or not) Meyers. one example: Meyers NEVER said that the believe of islam was HIS believe (in meyers eyes), so He could NEVER admit that Islam is right and Cristianity is wrong.. and then you said that was what he just said, and is 100% lie. you are very good with words, but terrible in being intellectual honest (I am an agnostic searching for truth and I can see that is not with you that I will find it)

The micro evolution vs macro evolution distinction is like saying "We have lived long enough to observe this person walk 5 steps. Every time he takes a step, he leaves a footprint. We have 20 footprints behind this person. It's insane to believe he could've taken more than 5 steps, that's all that's ever been observed afterall."

@the0nlytrueprophet942

9 ай бұрын

It’s hilarious they don’t realise accepting micro evolution means macro will happen over vast amount of time.

@pineapplepenumbra

9 ай бұрын

Or that there are curved lines, but there can never be a circle.

@paladro

8 ай бұрын

@@pineapplepenumbra o

@pineapplepenumbra

8 ай бұрын

@@paladro Lol.

@dastran2731

8 ай бұрын

Micro evolution is like standing at same place and dancing, macro evolution will be making steps and moving forward

I love the idea that only micro-evolution is possible, as if many small changes don't lead to big changes.

@CookiesRiot

10 ай бұрын

Because they are incapable (or unwilling) to differentiate between change and the language we use to describe change. They think that the arbitrary categories we assign to biological phenomena are supposed to be a 1:1 perfect match between reality and the way humans comprehend reality. A species is not some immutable fact of nature (like the biblical "kind" is alleged to be) - it's basically a circle we've hand-drawn on a low-resolution map projection, and then we've spent 150 years arguing over where the borders actually should go. It's just the Ship of Theseus. Scientists are discussing how many planks have to be replaced to count as a different ship, but creationists kick in the door to the classroom and loudly proclaim that they've solved the problem because some guy 3,000 years ago who didn't know what replaceable parts are wrote down that ships don't change. Edit: And then they say if you don't believe the guy 3,000 years ago and another guy 2,000 years ago that said some human who was also the supreme creator of the universe sacrificed himself to himself to appease himself and then rose from the dead, then you get to *literally burn in fire for infinite time.*

@the0nlytrueprophet942

9 ай бұрын

Well if you believe there simply hasn’t been enough time, you start to twist yourself into that logic.

@francesconicoletti2547

9 ай бұрын

On of the revelations of dna is that all life on earth shared it, shared the same genetic code and the same fundamental mechanism to build proteins from the dna code sequence. None of this is because of optimal design, it could be done multiple different ways it isn’t . It’s done one way. Either this mechanism was coincidentally or magically recreated multiple times or it developed once . If it developed once every creature on earth is descended from whatever creature developed the mechanism. Or you could go with Magic.

@CookiesRiot

9 ай бұрын

@@francesconicoletti2547 See, but, it could've developed multiple times. It's just that we find that all life we've ever checked for DNA similarities clearly comes from the same lineage... This could mean life did develop once, but it could mean that all other branches are extinct or we just haven't found them yet.

@ulyssespaculaba1802

9 ай бұрын

As a computer engineer, I need more explanation for how the code is created and activated to create new forms. Are you suggesting that the code has been there all along? Then what activates one set of codes to run and not the other?

I've always found the argument that people would not be willing to die for a lie entirely uncompelling. History is full of people doing exactly this. Whether or not the individual in question knew it was a lie is untestable but the lies of "manifest destiny", "divine right of kings" or "my country, right or wrong" have claimed 100s of 1000s pf lives.

@miskatonic_alumni

10 ай бұрын

Hundreds of millions of lives.

@pansepot1490

10 ай бұрын

“it’s not a lie if you believe it”. Plenty of people can sincerely believe and be mistaken. Just think of those serving time for the January 6th assault. Would you go to prison for a lie? They definitely did.

@UTU49

10 ай бұрын

In regards to your first sentence. I believe that we can dismiss this claim immediately... but even if we do not reject it immediately, it is still a gargantuan claim. The strength of his argument is fully dependent on the idea that NO person EVER in history has given their life for a false claim. That's a flimsy argument at best. And, as Drew points out, Meyer seems to be ignoring the possibility that their belief is both sincere and mistaken.

@ReivecS

10 ай бұрын

@@pansepot1490 The exact parallel I was thinking of. I don't doubt the belief of those that stormed the capitol, but it doesn't make it any less of a lie.

@NottherealLucifer

10 ай бұрын

​@@pansepot1490"No matter how tender, how exquisite, a lie will remain a lie." It doesn't matter if they believe it, that just means they're believing a lie. Someone's belief doesn't supersede fact.

Although I have difficulty following along with in-depth analytical content like this, I try to take away as much practical info as I can. Thank you for the work you put into these.

@jurassicsmackdown6359

8 ай бұрын

Good on you for actively trying to learn. I struggle in the same way Anti-science bullshit and willful ignorance is *_way_* too popular. People like Meyers should be laughed off stage and allow the proper scholars and great minds talk and continue to discover actual things that exist, not just make up faerie tales and demand others play along.

@Acceptablehandleaheada2.-_

8 ай бұрын

@@jurassicsmackdown6359 I was told the other day by my optometrist who used to be my Sunday school teacher that "God has done everything he has to reveal himself to me and I should continue seeking him everywhere I go" I couldn't respond in the contrarian as it would've made a bigger ass out of me due to I do badly with arguments.

@JosephRodriguezFinance

4 ай бұрын

I think the intent is what matters. It's good that you are trying because most people don't. I used to struggle to analyze these videos too. It gets easier with time. You become more familiar with concepts and start grasping them quicker. Keep at it.

This was comprehensive and super helpful, as I overheard my mom listening to that guy on her FB feed and now I can respond if I feel like engaging in this with her.

I've never heard someone refute evolution accurately explain evolution.

@cryptochris9001

10 ай бұрын

That's what happens when you think macro evolution is fact. Just like you probably don't think we will all be judged by Heavenly Father after we die. We all evolved from fish billions of years ago for no reason huh lol

@aster2790

10 ай бұрын

​@@cryptochris9001how does someone thinking that macro evolution is fact make creationists not able to accurately explain evolution?

@Natorz111

10 ай бұрын

​@@cryptochris9001you can't disprove it so you resort to laughing at it.. maybe try to study the topic

@jakemorrison3028

10 ай бұрын

​@@cryptochris9001Distinguishing between "macro" and "micro" evolution just shows your hand. Its the same damn thing.

@chubbyanemone696

10 ай бұрын

​@@cryptochris9001God lol.

Why does he think atheists are not accountable to a moral judge? A moral judge is my wife. My neighbor. My friends. My coworkers. The stranger on the street. I am accountable to ALL of these moral judges. I must deal with the consequences of my actions. Tired of these weirdos mischaracterizing others, to try and discredit their position.

@Sxcheschka

10 ай бұрын

People like that never seem to take into account of the words in their holy book, don't judge others, but if I use words that are semantically the same, but use it in grandiloquent lingo, it will fool the average people and make them think X group we don't like is morally bad. I once knew a guy who told me, if God isn't real, than that should allow him to do anything he wants, killing, murder, non-consensual acts towards others, me trying to explain to him that personal morals are a thing, and him not understanding that one can have morals without the belief in a higher power, made me realize, there is no way I can speak intelligently with this person, as he more than likely thinks I am going to a fictional dimension for all eternity.

@pechaa

10 ай бұрын

I like this point. It occurs to me that certain Christians I know do believe they have no moral judge other than God. As I am an atheist, it looks to me as though they recognize no moral judge at all. They feel justified in doing ANYTHING as long as they believe their God condones it. How their neighbors, fellow citizens, and family members characterize their actions matters not a whit to them.

@claytonreeves150

10 ай бұрын

@@pechaa Absolutely. Religious moralists are actually some of the most horrendous excuses for human beings I've ever met because they think they answer to no one for their frankly evil lack of empathy except their made-up god.

@zwenkwiel816

10 ай бұрын

​@@pechaawell except that "their god" isn't really theirs. It's like communal property that's being influenced by powerful men in fancy dresses or yelling on TV on Sunday morning. If it was like you said they'd practically be their own God and not much different from atheists. But they don't do that at all. They form all these different groups and the go tell other people what to do.....

@Programmable_Rook

10 ай бұрын

I think they’re confusion comes from the difference between objective and subjective moral code. An atheist’s moral compass is subjective, it depends on how they view the world and how they react to their peers. On the other hand, a Christians moral code is objective. It comes from a higher being, and that’s all there is to it. I mean, except for the Bible being able to be interpreted different ways, and different denominations of Christianity, and the whole period where churches just wanted as much money as possible which brings into question the church as a system for communicating God’s will…

Yup. As an atheist, I don't worry about going to Hell for wearing mixed fabrics or eating meat on a Friday

@norswil8763

10 ай бұрын

Isn’t is incredible that today in 2023 we’re still citing this primitive and ignorant line from iron-age manuscripts.. as if we need to announce it to reaffirm our positions on some dusty, middle-eastern cults psychotic rules.

@Stevewilldoit96

4 ай бұрын

Good thing you don’t have to. “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that *whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.”* John 3:16 - He asked: “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?” Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

@camwyn256

4 ай бұрын

​@@Stevewilldoit96gotcha. So homosexuality isn't a sin anymore, then, either. Do you support gay marriage?

@Ichabod_Jericho

3 ай бұрын

@@Stevewilldoit96if you’re okay with a guy like Jeffery Dahmer earning his spot in eternal afterlife by saying “sorry” to someone he didn’t even hurt, I don’t wanna share space with you up there😂

@jks3190

3 ай бұрын

​@@Stevewilldoit96 Jesus also said that it's adultery if you so much as "look" at another woman with lust, or if you divorce for any other reason than unfaithfulness. So thought crimes are real and divorcing due to an abusive relationship are both sins. I'm sure that you respect these ideas as they're the very word of Jesus?

While there is zero demonstrable objective evidence for any kind of supernatural phenomena ever, creationists will always be left holding an empty sack

I am not any less moral now than I was as a Christian. In fact, the biggest motivating factor was for me to start doubting was definitely the hypocrisy of Christians and the need to adhere to the values that I would actually argue Christianity instilled in me: desire for truth, compassion for the disenfranchised, love for one's neighbors, etc. I saw (thanks to the evangelical conservative obsession with Trump) that these values were NOT being followed with any consistency, that many Christians were perfectly willing to ignore them when it was convenient for them. I had Christians tell me I HAD to vote for Trump, that he was chosen by God, etc. This was absolutely abhorrent to me. I could not, would not, and never will support such a blatantly narcissistic and dangerous person. This was the beginning of my questioning and a huge part of what led me out of the faith. My values, my dedication to what I believe is right, has not changed; it was WHY I left the faith. Had my moral compass not said, "No, something is very, very wrong here," I probably would not have begun the intellectual process that led me to leave the faith.

@macmac1022

10 ай бұрын

I expose this hypocrisy with some simple moral questions. #1 You see a child drowning in a shallow pool and notice a person just watching that is able to save the child with no risk to themselves but is not, is that persons non action moral? #2 If you go to save the child, the man tells you to stop as he was told it was for the greater good, but he does not know what that is, do you continue to save the child? #3 Is it an act of justice to punish innocent people for the crimes of others? #4 If you were able to stop it and knew a person was about to grape a child would you stop it? #5 Would you consider a parent who put their kids in a room with a poison fruit and told the kids not to eat it but then also put the best con artist in the room with the children knowing the con artist will get the kids to eat the fruit and the parent does nothing to stop it a good parent?

@briananuvattanachai6646

10 ай бұрын

I am an ex christian and honestly I am glad that I left. It's crazy that religion is often connected with right winged ideology. Also, I think its funny how supposedly God is "pro life" when in Hosea a bunch of pregnant women are slaughtered. I just think anyone who considers themselves a reasonable person can ignore the fact that God literally said to slaughter countless of people "but, keep the virgins and the livestock to yourself." I don't want to be associated with any God that orders the mass slaughter of people.

@MrFringehead

10 ай бұрын

Glad to hear you made your way out of the desert. I also feel that in many ways, Evangelical Christianity has abandoned Jesus and left those of us who internalized the gospel message like a congregation who longer have a place to call home. Now that I've seen how religion fails believers and nonbelievers alike, apologia and exegesis no longer have any appeal or effect. The number of Christians who eagerly put down rival sects/denominations in order to win brownie points makes the whole topic even more gross.

@gabrielmccray3457

10 ай бұрын

Welcome. Principles suck when you really just want your side to win. No one likes thinking they're a sucker.

@billcichoke2534

10 ай бұрын

WHERE did Jesus talk about love of the disenfranchised? He talked about love of your fellow man, even your enemy, and the need for man to repent and live OBJECTIVELY moral lives in order to escape damnation. That would leave out rioting and burning for Marxist gains and all the alphabet perversions. That's not hate, any more than it's hate to keep a heroin junkie from shooting up in a needletrack-marked arm. And anyone trying to get you to vote a certain way by saying GOD WANTS YOU TO, is not an example of Christianity. Telling you who is guilty of ACTUAL corruption and illegality as a means of deciding, IS. You had lefty friends who were anything left no matter east. They told you 'orange man bad,' and you didn't want to be ridiculed for thinking on your own. It's a common ailment in the so-called 'skeptic community,' otherwise known as the ABG religion (Anything But God).

Dr Stephen Liar is an excellent example of how religiosity dangerously distorts your ability to think clearly.

@MisterMcCrumch

10 ай бұрын

"Dr Stephen Liar" made me cackle so loud my neighbours came to check on me

@DrgnZip

10 ай бұрын

Faith poisons the mind.

@duaneelliott5194

10 ай бұрын

That kind of thinking is sadly not restricted to religious people.

@vestafreyja

10 ай бұрын

When anyone is associated with the Discovery Institute my brain translates it to Dishonesty Incorporated. and if a spokesperson associated with DI says a thing to be true I almost immediately reach the conclusion that they are lying.

@JimCastleberry

10 ай бұрын

You are lying to claim Dr Meyer is lying. Typical atheist trash.

My one complaint about this video is that it mentioned 6-toed cats without making a 5-minute detour into pictures of said cats being adorable.

@mikaylafrancis6036

4 ай бұрын

Agreed! All points are now void due to lack of visual evidence shown on screen XD

@sstolarik

4 ай бұрын

LOL

I was literally looking for this exact video last week, many thanks for reading my mind

I had a memory that grew in my own mind over a period of roughly 25 years. At 8-10 years old, I went with my dad to the "rock hound pow wow." This was an annually event in central Oregon where any arts and crafts were sold mostly dealing with rocks. Early on I bought a raffle ticket for 50 cents. Ticket numbers through the day were called out over a loudspeaker. At one point my ticket was called. I went to the customer service booth and redeemed my prize. As a second or third grader I didn't have a good understanding of what I won. It was a bolo tie. At that age it was amazing and it stayed with me for years. But as it was something I would never wear, I didn't look at it often in the following years. The tie was a horse hand painted on an agate rock. The artistry was amazing and certainly had value. This wad my 10 year old impression. At one point when I was about 40, the conversation of this object came up with my brother and he asked to see it. I went to the garage and took this out for the first time in years. Upon leaving the garage I noticed that the weight didn't really feel like what a rock should be. Upon closer inspection I realized that this amazing painting on a piece of stone was nothing more than plastic with a very poor decal adhered to it. Turning it over I saw the words, "made in Tiwan." I disappointed my brother.

@ReivecS

10 ай бұрын

I learned of the fallibility of memory in middle school when I got in trouble for crawling on the floor (I think I was trying to prank someone but don't fully remember), but I told the teacher I was just trying to tie my shoe. I held firm to my story for so long I found myself actually getting upset that I was being accused of something when I just needed to tie my shoe. After repeating my frustration years later I found myself thinking, "What am I doing? I am starting to believe my own lie. I got in trouble for a legit reason but my desire to deflect blame extended so far that I actually started to believe it." It was clear to me at that point that what people firmly believe and assure you about, is not always what really happened. I knew this to be true because I did it to myself and later snapped out of it. If I could do it to myself, then anyone could do it to anyone else and firmly believe it, yet still be wrong.

@aliensoup2420

10 ай бұрын

Memories can be distorted by the exaggerated perception of youth or physical and emotional stress. Memories can be confused with dreams. Even the recounting of memories in our own minds can become modified or fragmented over time. For a time in my youth I recounted a memory of being bathed as a baby in the kitchen sink - my mother said that never happened. Even movies or tv shows we thought as kids were terrific, later seem lame or stupid.

@jaya1000

10 ай бұрын

😂 took you 35+ years 😂

@bathin813

10 ай бұрын

@@jaya1000 that's why they send small kids to school. To brainwash them in history. To paint a certain picture. Before they can question. If anyone thinks Christopher Columbus accidentally came upon that land they were probably brainwashed

@darkagedrifter

8 ай бұрын

@@aliensoup2420I'm a prime example. For the longest time, my dumbass somehow confused a really weird dream of me and some family visiting a family friend of ours in the hospital inside of a water tower for something that we actually did. Obviously we didn't, water towers don't have complete functioning hospital rooms and equipment inside them, and my grandparents wouldn't have made it up all the steps to begin with.

"I studied origin of life and I doubt it" Professor Dave's eyes suddenly begin glowing red, he's about to end this mans whole career

@MrFringehead

10 ай бұрын

I'll go out on a limb to say that a qualified scientist has already bailed on their career when they join the Discovery Institute.

@trick7039

10 ай бұрын

He's already done that once. Dave absolutely demolished Meyer's credibility and yet here he is, regurgitating the same talking points that have already been disproven countless times.

@trumpisthemessiah7017

10 ай бұрын

Petulant student Dave is like team skeptic. Angry cuz he's not nearly as smart as he thinks he is. So he uses insults instead of facts, just like a flatty.

@MrDeadhead1952

10 ай бұрын

Except he didn't it was a history science course, so he studied the history of the study of the origin of science not the science underlying it. The man's misrepresenting if not out and out lying.

@Gandhi_Physique

10 ай бұрын

@@trick7039 Oh this is that same dude? lmao I didn't even realize it. Dave has gotta fight on JRE.. but I doubt Dave would ever go on that podcast.

You don’t believe in evolution. You understand it. You never accept any hypothesis, you fail to reject it.

@cewla3348

8 ай бұрын

you can accept a hypothesis. what you are saying is a hypothesis. i succeed in rejecting it, instead accepting the hypothesis that you can accept hypothesises

@tgenov

8 ай бұрын

@@cewla3348 When you admit a hypothesis to belief status you are committing the mind-projection fallacy - you become religious. You are saying "the map I have in my head about the way the world works is actually how the world works". Scientific understtanding depends on models/theories to make sense of the world; while we also understand that our theories are NOT the world itself. Realism is a tempting philosophy, but it's ultimately an error.

@jmwild1

7 ай бұрын

I cringe whenever someone asks or answers whether someone "believes" in evolution. The implication is that they're trying to frame evolution as a belief like a religion, so that they can then build their argument around that. I don't believe in evolution myself, I accept the theory of evolution by natural selection as the best explanation of the fact of evolution (note that "evolution" is both a fact and a theory, depending on the context).

@tgenov

7 ай бұрын

@@jmwild1 I cringe when people don’t understand that all belief is belief. Justified beliefs or unjustified beliefs are still beliefs. Do you cringe when somebody asks you whether you believe in global warming? Cringing at perfectly normal use of language is itself cringeworthy.

@jmwild1

7 ай бұрын

@@tgenov I don't believe in global warming. I accept that the science shows that anthropogenic climate change is real. That's the difference. You don't "believe" in scientific theories, you either accept the science or you don't.

Growing up, my parents often challenged one another's beliefs. My mother is an agnostic atheist and my father is Lutheran. I like watching your videos because it often feels like a more in-depth version of their previous conversations.

He believes in microevolution, but not macroevolution. It is like believing in little snow fall, but not a lot of snow fall....

@steve112285

10 ай бұрын

You could bike 100 miles in a day, sure, but biking 10000 miles in 100 days is inconceivable.

@davidbentley4731

10 ай бұрын

@@steve112285no it’s not. That’s pretty easy. Believe me, I’ve done loads of long distance cycling. I ride with guys who have ridden across the US, which is 3500 miles, in 8 or 9 days. 10000 miles in 100 days is easily achievable for any well trained cyclist. Not sure why you’d do it. But it’s do’able.

@Z4r4sz

10 ай бұрын

Its like accepting inches but rejecting miles.

@jjphank

10 ай бұрын

Yo, Recombinant DNA- anytime a host cell is attached by another cell it dies. It’s a death program every time! The atomic weights table with all of the elements, and some of them would explode apart when put together ! How did this & the South American dart frog, whose skin is 200 times stronger than morphine at times, evolve without killing itself & everything around it? At the current rate of erosion the continents would have eroded flat in 14 million years! how come we have Rocks 300 times older than that still above sea level ? Atoms and molecules are 99.99% empty space with electrons circling the nucleus constantly. Thus Making solid objects impossible without God setting the laws of physics. Electromagnetic fields, or the four forces would interfere with each other! without God, you have no stabilizing force. The strongest destructive force controlled by man is tearing apart one of God’s smallest building blocks. Forcefully changing unstable atoms can destroy a city, forcefully changing more unstable atoms will destroy a small country. Concerning atoms and the things that are made, Jesus holds them all together so they don’t explode apart! Colossians 1: 16 For by Jesus were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him! The sun loses 5,000,000 tons of mass per second so it couldn’t be bigger or heavier, Its gravity would suck all the planets in. There are no transitional fossils between monkey and man, so evolutionists have changed their theory on that! Lying Evolutionary atheists fabricated, Nebraska man, Piltdown man, and Lucy, and they were found out to be fake skeletons! First law of thermodynamics and DNA need a creator. They both do not auto encrypt, nor were they capable of making themselves according to their own definitions. We’ve never seen evolution happen in real time in a laboratory, even up to this year, so why do you still believe in lies?

@junbiok7188

10 ай бұрын

It's always amusing seeing an atheist try parables.

Knowing he works for the Discovery Institute is the only fact I need to know he's going to be full of it. Intentionally misunderstanding science is what they do best. AKA: Lying for Jesus.

@vestafreyja

10 ай бұрын

When I hear the words Discovery Institute I immediately translate it to Dishonesty Incorporated and when anyone from DI is on Prague U you can bet the farm that it is going to be a double heaping of BS.

@CorwinFound

10 ай бұрын

This guy didn't say it but I've seen other apologists and even just regular Christians admit that even if undeniable proof was found that disproved core tenets of the religion, they'd *still* believe. When a person of faith admits that there is no real world or scientific evidence imaginable that would shake their faith, then how can they possibly use science or other real world evidence to substantiate their beliefs? I don't believe this guy is "Lying for Jesus." Rather the science _does not matter_ to his core beliefs. What obligation does he then have to play by the science rules in his apologia? My guess is that as far as he's concerned, there is no ethical issues with manipulating science to "prove" God and Jesus or "disprove" evolution. He thinks science is a rigged game anyways, so he's under no obligation to adhere to scientific ethics. A nonreligious example. If a scammer calls me fishing for my social insurance number or whatever, I have zero compunction about feeding them false information. I don't even consider it "lying" from any ethical point of view. The rules of normal human interaction have been obliterated already and I'm under no moral obligation to adhere to them myself since I didn't start it. I believe this guy and others like him see science and scientists as the liars (knowingly or unknowingly) and anything he does to counteract that as fully justified. I'm not saying that this is okay. I just think it's important to understand why people do things that seem or are unethical. Calling all apologists liars and grifters doesn't really help to counteract the damage that they can do. A person who truly believes something that is untrue is far more convincing than any con man knowingly spreading that same untrue information.

@rapdactyl

10 ай бұрын

@@CorwinFound >I don't believe this guy is "Lying for Jesus." As a member of the Discovery Institute cult, he is. During their biggest push to get their god's creation myth into schools, the DI publicly claimed they were doing so for a variety of reasons, none of them to do with their god's creation myth. Only for a document to come out where they confirm that every public statement they made was a lie, and that they were using "Intelligent Design" as a "wedge" ("The Wedge Document") to get the rest of their favored creation myth into American schools. The document wasn't just an admission, it was an instruction guide for DI's followers - they were (and are) advised to vigorously lie to the public in order to achieve their organization's goals. That is, they were advised to "Lie for Jesus." As a member of this organization, Meyer can safely be assumed to be a Liar for Jesus. After all, the organization that pays him insists that lying is both necessary and appropriate to achieve their goals.

@shinobi-no-bueno

10 ай бұрын

​@@CorwinFoundthat's a long, weird way to say "this dude lies for Jesus"

@pablogonzalez2009

10 ай бұрын

@@CorwinFound well said

I'm always confused by the, "Your lack of faith is likely due to you wanting freedom to sin." I started being agnostic quite early in my teen years, yet my Mormon friend from high school claimed I was "more Mormon than him," and my life since then has been much the same in the way of holding myself to high standards of kindness. My experiences also lead me to raise an eyebrow at the thought that you can only have a moral compass with faith in God. It may be selfish (which in a roundabout way applies to everything, even faith), but being unkind makes me feel immensely guilty. Clearly there's something guiding my morals without faith. Anyway, the first bit which was implied by Stephen makes me wonder how authentic any given theist's approach to morals are.

@3Xero3

9 ай бұрын

You don't need an imaginary friend to hold you morally accountable for your actions when you know how to do this yourself. 😀

@terryfall8915

9 ай бұрын

Point him to Penn Jillette's video about morality. "I don't want to rape or kill anyone. How many are on YOUR list."

@DigiacomoDave

8 ай бұрын

In my experience, I attribute it just Christian arrogance. They feel because they believe in the Bible it gives them them morale superior high ground.

@terryfall8915

8 ай бұрын

@@DigiacomoDave The supreme satisfaction is to be able to despise one's neighbor and this fact goes far to account for religious intolerance. It is evidently consoling to reflect that the people next door are headed for hell. -- Aleister Crowley (source unknown)

@stferret

7 ай бұрын

When realizing one has acted unjustly: •Many theists are able to look to the supernatural and say 'oops, sorry God, my bad" and get a free pass for their misdeeds. There is no requirement to make amends, or adjust future behaviors, as they receive unlimited mulligans (absolvement). •Atheists are required to look to the natural, and the historical. They rationalize their actions, and the potential societal implications/repercussions. They must either accept their actions as justifiable/permissable, or make amends with the aggrieved. Different people will find different meanings, and not everyone accepts appropriate culpability. Ceteris paribus, I'd opt for those taking personal responsibility.

'Right but there's reports of Bigfoot' 😆 I nearly spat my tea out. So nonchalantly too, good on ya Joe 👍🏻.

This Christian commits one of the most common mistakes in his shallow thinking. He imagines ONLY a Christian view. He says “why would someone DIE for false beliefs” as if that’s proof their beliefs are true. But, he never imagines that “extremist Muslims” who commit to a suicide bombing are also dying for beliefs that MUST be true. There’s a conflict here…and religious apologists continually ignore competing religious conflicts…and what they imply about the illogic of their collective claims. (Edit: sorry…you fully say this later on…hahaha. Well, we’re on the same page.)

@pechaa

10 ай бұрын

It’s worth repeating, especially as Christians keep repeating the martyrdom fallacy.

@zwenkwiel816

10 ай бұрын

It's like arguing with a toddler...

@deanmccrorie3461

10 ай бұрын

Hmm atheists aren’t too smart I see.

@TFStudios

10 ай бұрын

​@@deanmccrorie3461demonstrate why.

@fomori2

10 ай бұрын

​@@zwenkwiel816 Toddlers dont know any better so, while frustrating, they get a pass. Apologists, on the other hand, should be mocked because they are dishonest con men.

JRE seems to think that because someone is a contrarian, you should give that someone's opinion the same weight than other more established opinion.. doesnt work that way

@taylorlibby7642

10 ай бұрын

He pushes back pretty consistently in this right from the start. JR's usual m.o. is to just let people talk and explain themselves.

@n0etic_f0x

10 ай бұрын

I think Joe himself as a person just thinks you should be able to hear the contrarians, but you are correct his methods do lead to that result.

@joshualavender

10 ай бұрын

Yeah, basically, and that's why I don't watch Rogan. It's one thing to hear out contrarians, another to value the opinions of any given idiot because he happens to be a contrarian. A lot of people in Rogan's audience are really damn credulous, and he doesn't seem to realize it or do much to account for it.

@ROVA00

10 ай бұрын

I don’t see how he is giving that person’s opinion the same weight as other more rational views. Why do you think that? Because he had him on his show and didn’t ridicule the guy?

@ElektrykFlaaj

10 ай бұрын

It's important to give people a platform to talk. It's called a freedom of speech. Silencing is not the way, even if those people talk nonsense. Let them talk

First 40 seconds: “There are many reports of him after the resurrection”(something like that) Joe Rogan: “yeah but there’s reports of big foot” Might be one of the realest things Joe has ever said.

Man I love your videos. You are so smart man, so well articulated.

I appreciate that opening juxtaposition of Meyer saying "I'm skeptical about (extraordinarily well verified fact)" vs "I'm convinced of (favorite myth)" - that sums up Meyer well and sets the stage perfectly.

Meyer's is a great example of a well read intelligent person, who can articulate fallacious reasoning well, but goes on to commit those fallacies himself regardless. Pretty much motivated reasoning in a nut shell.

@MrFringehead

10 ай бұрын

Those who know the rules often know best how to subvert them.

@zwenkwiel816

10 ай бұрын

No he doesn't. He makes mistakes of course. Some of them could be even described as fallacies but they're totally different.

@rduse4125

10 ай бұрын

That’s exactly how I would describe you… now what?

@PianoDentist

10 ай бұрын

@@rduse4125 I was commenting on Meyer. If you're going to describe me from suffering from the same, what did I say that led you to that conclusion?

@PianoDentist

10 ай бұрын

@@zwenkwiel816 How so?

“Despite a mountain of evidence Evolution isn’t credible….also, this old book says people saw Jesus alive after he died, so I believe that”

@sstolarik

4 ай бұрын

Riiiight?!

@Meyer-gp7nq

Ай бұрын

“This old book says Julius Caesar was the emperor of Rome, what a bunch of bull crap, Julius Caesar was a character from a Shakespeare play not a real person!”

Creationists deliberately misrepresenting and lying about evolutionary theory led to me losing faith in Christianity. In fact, it was Christian hypocrisy and cruelty, not "wanting to sin", that made me abandon the religion.

@bobvance-

3 ай бұрын

Yeah. When your world view is so fragile you have to lie about something like evolution (which doesn't OUTRIGHT prove 'most' of religion) you know something is very, VERY wrong.

@user-er9pq3iq1t

3 ай бұрын

this is fucking stupid.

“The evidence supporting the idea that all living things are descended from a common ancestor is truly overwhelming. I would not necessarily wish that to be true as a Bible loving Christian, but it is so. It does not serve faith well to try to deny that.” Dr. Francis Collins, leader of the Human Genome Project and devout Christian.

@Idiotsays-ox5km

10 ай бұрын

9.3: Evidence for Evolution 04 Sept 2021 - It shows how humans are related to apes by descent from common ancestors. ❤ Closest is Homoerectus oldest Genesis 2, God forms "Adam", this time meaning a single male human, out of "the dust of the ground" and "breathed into his nostrils the breath of life" (Genesis 2:7). 7then the LORD God formed the man* out of the dust of the ground and blew into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being. 8The LORD God planted a garden in Eden, in the east,* and placed there the man whom he had formed. Ardipithicines. Ardipithecus is the earliest known genus of the human lineage and the likely ancestor of Australopithecus, a group closely related to and often considered ancestral to modern human beings. Ardipithecus lived between 5.8 million and 4.4 million years ago. For the king’s ships went to Tarshish with the servants of Huram: every three years once came the ships of Tarshish bringing gold, and silver, ivory, and apes, and peacocks. -1 Kings 10:22 NKJV Analyses of DNA have revolutionized the study of human evolution. Comparing the human genome with the genomes of the living great apes has shown conclusively that we are most closely related to chimpanzees and bonobos, sharing nearly 99 percent of their DNA. Lucy, Ethiopia, 3.2 Million Years Ago Found in Hadar, Ethiopia, Lucy is the oldest and most complete human fossil ever found, making up 40% of a complete human skeleton. She was dated at 3.2 million years old and was a hominid with clear evidence of being bipedal (two-legged). Her small skull, long arms and conical rib cage are like an ape's, but she has a more human-like spine, pelvis and knee due to walking upright. Johanson thought Lucy was either a small member of the genus Homo or a small australopithecine.

@smidlee7747

10 ай бұрын

But DNA-R-US is false. There has been a lot more evidence discovered since he made that statement. They thought they would understand fully what made us human with mapping out genes but this is false. The greatest differences are not due to genes.

@Idiotsays-ox5km

10 ай бұрын

Human and chimp DNA is so similar because the two species are so closely related. Humans, chimps and bonobos descended from a single ancestor species that lived six or seven million years ago.

@cineblazer

10 ай бұрын

Dr. Francis Collins seems based

@smidlee7747

10 ай бұрын

@@Idiotsays-ox5km Similarities in DNA do not prove ancestry. Darwin's tree of life has not hold up with recent discovery since selecting a different genes will produce complete different trees. DNA-R-US is false and is not what makes us human. Collins believe when he made that statement the DNA evidence would prove common ancestry but with time it proved the exact opposite. The similarities in DNA lead to a big mess and didn't produce a tree. Collins statement was over 20 years ago.

Creationists who say "I believe in microevolution but not macroevolution" are like that guy saving the seat for their friend who "is going to be here any minute"

@AnotherCraig

10 ай бұрын

Akin to believing minutes are real but years are somehow a hoax

@vestafreyja

10 ай бұрын

@@AnotherCraig Or walking a short distance but somehow walking a longer distance is impossible.

@Insultedyeti712

10 ай бұрын

Wouldn't God being the origin also mean we originate from a single source? Why is common descent so weird when even God would still be a type of common descent just through "creation" and not biologically.

@isaacholzwarth

10 ай бұрын

​@@Insultedyeti712this is why belief in God as creator resulting in something like we see today is not unreasonable. I don't find the theory of evolution and natural selection to be sufficient for 1 simple reason. Intelligence. I don't think it's possible for us to have intelligence (free will) without a God. If there is no God we're as natural as the dirt, and no more intelligent, just really complicated. No free will. If we arose from pure cause and effect, then cause and effect we remain. I believe I have free will (which I don't think I could do if I didn't have free will), therefore I Believe in God.

@Programmable_Rook

10 ай бұрын

⁠@@Insultedyeti712Because if we assume Creationism is true and try to work it into actual science we come to one of two solutions: Creationism is false and does not explain natural phenomena, or Creationism is true and God deliberately created everything in the world to precisely match all our predictions. In the second interpretation, God didn’t make dinosaurs, they never existed. Only the fossils and footprints and evolutionary paths were created to precisely mimic what a population of dinosaurs would’ve looked like. All the stellar evolution we determined happens? Never did, God just felt like putting stars precisely the way they would’ve looked if stellar evolution were true. Radio-carbon dating showing elements that couldn’t possibly have formed in a few thousand years? God decided to create those particles ahead of their time. If you want to find a way to fit Creationism into science, just say God deliberately made everything in a way to match all of science for no discernible reason. Also, God being a Last Universal Common Ancestor wouldn’t make him the creator in the sense that he created the universe, it would mean He was just one of the cells that evolved into all of life (And also that He’s been dead since those cells died off). So there isn’t really a parallel for everything coming from one source between evolution and religion.

JRE's short videos from this interview have been popping up in my KZread feed, and I wanted to hear the counterpart position of Dr. Meyer's explanations and claims. I'm always careful went people use a lot of words and arguments too complex for the average person to comprehend, or to understand what those words and arguments are claiming. Although JR made good questions, the answers sometimes were so complex, that he couldn't make a follow-up question. This is not an apology for JR, He should do a better job to educate himself in many fields. Thank you for this video and your work!

Its always funny to me how Creationists will draw a random, completely arbitrary, line beyond which they think evolution just magically stops working anymore.

@Diviance

10 ай бұрын

And if you ask them what the mechanism preventing the buildup of beneficial changes is... they will say they have no idea, nobody has ever detected one... but it is totally real. They remind me of the "pineal gland gives you spirit sense" people.

@alanna_weiss

10 ай бұрын

They would happily deny all evolution, but so called "microevolution" has so much hard, direct, in-your-face evidence to back it up that even these morons can't just ignore or dismiss it. Occurrence of new strains of bacteria and viruses, breeding of domestic animals, and so on. It's much easier to dismiss more abstract things like radiocarbon dating as none of them actually knows how it works. That's not even god of the gaps in scientific knowledge, more like god of the gaps in my own ability to understand anything more complex than a sharpened stick.

@notloki3377

7 ай бұрын

watch the interview with meyer more closely. his points went over your head.

@timeshark8727

7 ай бұрын

@@notloki3377 Hahaha. Sure, sure his points went over my head, even though I have more education and experience in biology and chemistry than him. What utter nonsense. The real problem is that the science goes over _your_ head. You don't understand it, like Meyer's conclusion for other reasons, so just assume he's right. Have you even actually fact-checked one of his claims about biology? It barely matters which one, the vast majority of his claims about biology and chemistry are wrong.

@notloki3377

7 ай бұрын

@@timeshark8727 nice non specific reversal. maybe I'd take what you said more seriously if you went into adequate detail instead of appealing to credentialism, common sense fallacies, and assuming my motivations.

It is like one of the major creationist in my country is a geologist. Dude studied radiactive dating and rock morphology just to throw away all knowledge and say "earth is 6000 years old".

@lastnamefirstname850

10 ай бұрын

C 14 dating is not nearly as reliable as people think.

@XraynPR

10 ай бұрын

@@lastnamefirstname850 for geology not, no, since it goes only about 50k years back.

@andersandersen6295

10 ай бұрын

Religious people have no problems with dismissing reality. Its sort of their bread and butter.

@shawn092182

10 ай бұрын

​@@lastnamefirstname850Correct. That's why scientists use a variety of different methods of dating.

@NottherealLucifer

10 ай бұрын

​@@lastnamefirstname850 Good thing no one brought that up, right? Even if it's unreliable, it still shows the Earth isn't a few thousand years old, it's much older.

a good way to explain evolution to the folks who "don't get it" - it's like language, latin is the common ancestor to italian, portugese and spanish, but at no point did a roman give birth to a spanish speaker, romans only begat romans (!) words got added to latin and words became redundant until it evolved into spanish, spanish, italian and portugese are all "cousins" like humans and apes, and "if spanish is evolved from latin, why is there still latin" - why are there still apes, the answer should be obvious, latin did not have to "become extinct" for spanish to evolve.

@numericalcode

10 ай бұрын

My favorite analogy

@Bradawick

10 ай бұрын

Bad analogy as all are. It is impossible to prove that life could form from a chemical soup in a mud puddle.

@numericalcode

10 ай бұрын

@@Bradawick Analogies don’t prove things. You might want to study some philosophy of science.

@Bradawick

10 ай бұрын

@@numericalcode i agree hence the "as all are".

@numericalcode

10 ай бұрын

@@Bradawick This analogy is a corrective for a common misconception. If it doesn’t work for you, no problem. Stephen Meyer himself is a philosopher of science. You might get some useful arguments from his analogies.

Man I forgot just how good Jon is at explaining biology!

Small changes lead to big changes over time. It's not that hard to understand. Just because you don't understand something doesn't mean it's wrong

Such a difference in seeing this guy and Professor Brian Cox on Rogan, Cox shows humility when answering questions about the vast and sometimes unfathomable universe, Meyer on the other hand tries to shoehorn his apologetics and ID into every crevice.

@GeneticallyModifiedSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

To be fair, Meyer only does this because other scientists discriminate against his ideas unfairly 😉

@nerdyali4154

10 ай бұрын

@@GeneticallyModifiedSkeptic Is Dembski still around? I'd love to see a contemporary dissection of his mathematical flimflam.

_"They have lost the capacity to recognise God, because God has given them up"_ - that is basically equivalent to the statement: "Yes, I agree fully with atheists that God is only a concept that is personal and subjective and that it is impossible to be verified objectively". He is basically making the statement that he is an atheist.

@ReivecS

10 ай бұрын

I KIND of get your logic but I don't think that conclusion is what would naturally flow from it. His point implies that God is an outside force that acts us on us where as your point seems to imply that God is an internal idea that forms our view. They are not totally unrelated but I don't think it is fair to compare them this way. I say this as someone that likely agrees you with you on the larger picture here, I just didn't find this point compelling.

@renedekker9806

10 ай бұрын

@@ReivecS _"His point implies that God is an outside force that acts us"_ - that is a fair point. But if God only acts on believers, and it is not possible to objectively verify how those interactions occurs, then that viewpoint is still in line with atheism. Atheists don't claim that God does not exist. They only claim that there is no objective evidence of any interaction with God. And that is exactly the situation if God only acts on certain people, and other people cannot verify those interactions.

@cobrasys

10 ай бұрын

Frank Turek's whole spiel on that topic is basically a very long-winded version of the No True Scotsman fallacy. It's pathetic, like most things Frank Turek does.

@pungorhizomes

10 ай бұрын

@renedekker9806 based dialectics

Great video, as always. And also, nice to see you in voiceover in JJ McCullough’s newest video!

This was great, thank you! I did listen to this episode on JRE, but found Meyer's claims dubious (though it was a nice discussion aside), nice to have them combed through more finely here than I could have done myself. As a non-religious agnostic who has come to a worldview something like Bernardo Kastrup's analytical idealism, I've been interested lately in actually looking into all the weird, mystic, "woo" stuff that exists on the fringes of mainstream scientific discourse. It's been a very interesting journey, but it's easy to get lost and find oneself contemplating fields of unsubstantiated claims, so channels like this one are an excellent grounding resource. I'd be curious for your thoughts Drew sometime on the nature of physics, information, ontology, and thoughts on arguments like those of Kastrup's. Religion, in my view, is a deep and dogmatic distortion of what is quite an important epistemic insight, namely that we are unable to define a non observer-participatory definition of information without engaging in a performative contradiction (since we are participatory observers to the idea we think we are proposing, the property of being observed is intrinsically encoded in the idea which claims it is not).

@terryfall8915

9 ай бұрын

Are you an agnostic theist or an agnostic atheist. Agnostic is not the middle ground as some people think. Theist/atheist deals with what we believe Gnostic/agnostic is the about claim to knowledge. Gnostics claim to KNOW. Agnostics don't. If you know something, you should be able to prove it. Due to lack of evidence, I do not believe that gods exist, however, I am aware that there is currently no method to prove or disprove the existence of gods. I am an agnostic atheist.

1:03 "But some of Meyer's points went unchallenged, to the detriment of the educational value of the episode." A typical Joe Rogan episode, then? There's seldom much if any real "educational value" to that show. The audience tunes in for controversy. That's Rogan's business model.

@GeneticallyModifiedSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

That’s my impression of much of JRE too, but I don’t watch the show much and didn’t want to make a generalization without knowing more.

@TheNotSoFakeNews

10 ай бұрын

If say they tune in for a variety of reasons. One of the main ones would be conspiracy theories, there's is rarely an episode that goes by without a dude claiming to have been victimised by "them" (insert scientists, archiologists, politicians etc.) And claiming it's because they have this secret knowledge that they must suppress.

@OlivierGabin

10 ай бұрын

What John Rogan does is, at best, complacency, at worst, complicity.

@guymor910

10 ай бұрын

@@OlivierGabin You'd rather watch an interrogation than an interview?

@marcsimard2723

10 ай бұрын

@@guymor910with some people? Absolutely

The JRE is touted as a “discussion of both sides” but has quickly diverged into a discussion of conspiracies without fact checking. Joe will push back against those with a more mainstream opinion and just let’s the conspiracies go relatively unchallenged

@nakkadu

10 ай бұрын

His shows are 3 hours long. He lets his guests speak for the most part...that's how we get to hear what they think. He doesn't want a 3 hour heated debate every week....not everything has to be a confrontation.

@davzinzan

10 ай бұрын

The exceedingly rare occasions when he has a leftist on are mostly categorised by him interrupting and steering the conversation to try and make them look bad

@nakkadu

10 ай бұрын

@@davzinzan example? Did you hear him giving Crowder a hard time? He liked Bernie also

@NottherealLucifer

10 ай бұрын

​@@nakkaduSteven Crowder is a right winger, did you genuinely bring him up as an example of a left winger?

@nakkadu

10 ай бұрын

@@NottherealLucifer The person I was responding to said Rogan gives left wingers a hard time, so I pointed out an occasion when he gave a right winger a hard time

His argument stemmed from ‘i was 14 and I couldn’t live with everything being pointless, so god is real’ just pathetic analysis

Well done, interesting, comprehensive, informative.

Among creationists, “macroevolution” is just code for speciation. If you ever meet a creationist, just show them cases of new species that can’t reproduce together emerging into existence and in my experience that usually ends the conversation. My favorite example is that of dogs and how some breeds like chihuahuas and Great Danes can’t reproduce.

@Diviance

10 ай бұрын

In my experience, they will just start saying "Those are the same kinds" and when you try to get them to explain what a kind is they vanish or start ranting about something else.

@xenoblad

10 ай бұрын

@@Diviance maybe. I can’t say they’ll all react the same, but they usually will concede ahead of time that those in the same kind can reproduce with each other, so in that case, there is a parallel with the category of species.

@Diviance

10 ай бұрын

@@xenoblad I have seen it happen over and over and over again. Mainly because the people they get their info from go out of their way to never explain what a kind is, so they have nothing to say in their script.

@AnotherCraig

10 ай бұрын

Ring species are, at the very least, another helpful illustration of the concept of speciation. How it goes, is: a species starts on one side of some impassable/uninhabitable area, and as the species' range extends around the obstacle, the two separate lines differentiate, until, when they finally meet up again on the other side they can no longer interbreed.

@NottherealLucifer

10 ай бұрын

​@@xenobladI have literally never met a Christian who would just accept "here are two canines that can't reproduce" and not just wave it off to keep talking. They almost always bring up "kinds" because "Species has like fifteen different definitions while kinds is more specific" even though that's not at all true. Christian cognitive dissonance allows them to just shake off points that defeat their arguments.

When Joe said Big Foot I literally laughed out loud 🤣

@royharpershat8059

10 ай бұрын

Beliefquatch....

Ah, yes, the science of science denial...

All very well put together, very convincing and a fine breaking down of Dr Meyer's assertions.

Oh my word! Now, THIS is how it is done, people! Thank you, Drew, for your calm, thoughtful, rational, and thorough response to this disinformation. You were able to perfectly balance needed corrections without devaluing the position of the truth AND uplifting/platforming the real and correct information in a way that is truly, rarely done, and almost never this well. Excellent! Truly, thank you and Jon, both.

@fuferito

10 ай бұрын

I agree. Lately, _Rationality Rules_ has gotten pretty snarky.

@ReadyPlayerPiano

10 ай бұрын

@@fuferito snark is often warranted. I love Rationality Rules and my compliment to Drew is not, and was not intended as, a put down of anyone else.

@TheTruthKiwi

10 ай бұрын

Totally agree. I wish I could elucidate as well as these guys and am somewhat jealous but more importantly I'm very happy that they're doing what they're doing by inspiring rationality and reason in more young minds. Misinformation, delusion and ignorance needs to be put to sleep, hopefully permanently.

as soon as i heard "there s reports of bigfoot" my curiosity was sky freaking high lololol

thank you Drew for making this!

Not even a minute in and I just really appreciate the time stamps on original video

Hey Drew, as a former evangelical christian, I'd love to hear your thoughts on C.S Lewis. When I was still a very skeptical christian I read his book Mere Christianity and it was a major influence on me turning away from the religion itself. Not that it was poorly written or that his opinions were off base and out of touch. More so that he nailed everything that's wrong with current western Christians and the church itself. I felt that if any modern western Christians were to read it today, they'd probably be offended by the majority of whats written in the book. Thanks for your content. Much love from Canada

@dp1381

10 ай бұрын

Modern western Christianity is an atheist factory. Eastern Orthodoxy is the true and living church established by Christ through the apostles. Learn about Orthodoxy and return to Christ.

@rhinocraft2594

10 ай бұрын

@@dp1381 Christians try not to proselytise challenge (IMPOSSIBLE)

@supme7558

10 ай бұрын

​@@dp1381blah hahahaha😂 dalusions

@michaeldoerksen2841

10 ай бұрын

@@dp1381 I agreed with everything up to the point where you said that me turning to Eastern Orthodoxy would turn me back to Christ. Sorry there friend that ship has sailed, then was lit on fire and sunk to the depths of the ocean

@paulpenfold867

10 ай бұрын

What did you think of Lewis's alternatives to what you would see as the standard modern, western, Christian view?

At least the guy managed to say "evolutionary biologist" instead of "evolutionist" 😬 😅

Very interesting! I thoroughly enjoyed this video, thanks for making it!

A professor of philosophy and history speaking authoritatively on biology… Well outside his area of expertise. Now where have we seen this before

@monkeibusiness

10 ай бұрын

Way too common in academics. Professor for one thing, professor for all things.

@michaelbenson5677

10 ай бұрын

@@monkeibusiness Is it, though? I am very accustomed to academics being very conservative with claims outside their field, preferring to refer to more qualified colleagues on subjects they do not specialize in.

@BootyFish

10 ай бұрын

@@monkeibusinesswell a lot of what’s argued about in the media and among people like yourself is common sense shit that anybody with a 2nd grade education should be able to figure out. Evolution being a perfect example. Professors rarely speak on things outside of their field unless they’re repeating some pretty basic shit. And 9/10 they’re repeating shit from their colleagues who do specialize in said fields, not their science denying Pastors. Theologians do not use science. Even when they try they fuck it up by infusing their mythology into it.

I lost my faith (RC) during college, when I was exposed to lots of contrary ideas that simply sowed doubt on typical RC beliefs such as the resurrection, transfiguration and perhaps most especially transubstantiation (if you don't know what those mean, don't worry, not a biggie). So the faith wasn't lost in an Aha! moment, it eroded over the course of 2-3 years without any really deep philosophical contemplation of what faith meant. The doubts simply overcame the beliefs gradually and I stopped believing and practicing any faith.

Not even a century ago Japanese pilots flew themselves into Allied ships. We have this on video. They did this for a man they knew for a fact was a god, their emperor. Their emperor was alive at that time, meaning that, according to the interviewee, the sacrifice of these pilots prove that Christianity isn't real.

Aron Ra brought up a rather good point in regards to the whole "atheists' leave religion for moral freedoms" talking point, by highlighting the fact that leaving religion is the ultimate unforgivable sin, where all other sins can be forgiven.

@kamorant

6 ай бұрын

Sin is a made up, and doesn't exist.

@Mitch-MD

5 ай бұрын

If not believing in God is asserted one “wants” to sin, then why do Christians keep sinning and we have pedarist Priests?

18:54 dang, I hate it when my infinite amount of patience runs out, and my infinite goodness doesn't stop me from damning people to an eternity of torture

The deadpan "Right.. But there's reports of bigfoot.." absolutely killed me

Fantastic work from the both of you! 🍻

“People do not give their lives for a factual claim that they know to be false.” Correct…..people DO give their lives for falsifiable claims which they believe to be fact. THIS. SHOULD. MAKE. YOU. THINK.

"Better to be a happy idiot than someone who knows the truth" - Michael Scott I love stated clearly. It's my go to channel for sharing facts that are stated clearly... lol

@MrTomyCJ

10 ай бұрын

The problem of being a happy idiot is that it's not necessarily sustainable. If you're idiot enough, you'll have a happy but probably VERY short life, or rather, the happines may be erased by the bad consequences of your idiot actions.

@zwenkwiel816

10 ай бұрын

Joe does look really happy....

@deczen47

10 ай бұрын

truth is not relevant if there is no God, anything will ended to nothingness, absurdity

@Gaming_Vegan_Ape

10 ай бұрын

​@@deczen47 So you're the kind of guy that would rape and murder If you thought there was no god? If there's no truth without God, then does that also apply to morality? That's a sad, scary way of living. Don't ever leave your house.

@Gaming_Vegan_Ape

10 ай бұрын

​@@zwenkwiel816 word.

I wish I knew why the whole "atheists are only pretending not to believe 'cause they want to sin" claim never seems to get any direct pushback. I figured even a meatskull like Rogan would be able to point out that it's actually Christians who get to avoid accountability by simply praying for forgiveness. You can sin all you want and still get the greatest infinite reward for eternity as long as you get dunked in the right water and say the right words no matter how many puppies you kick and churches you burn. There's even denominations that believe God chooses your afterlife for you before you're even born and your actions and choices in life are irrelevant. You can be the most pious believer to ever live and your chances of ending up in Hell are identical to someone who pathologically throws acid on infants for Satan because God knew everything you were going to do before you were even born and, since literally everything is part of his plan, _someone_ had to throw that acid on those infants for Satan. It was part of God's plan. Sucks to be the guy God created for that purpose since he's gonna be tortured for eternity for having the audacity to exist and get unknowingly piloted by an infinitely powerful psychopath like a meat robot, but those infants aren't gonna acid themselves and someone's gotta be accountable for all the infant aciding God made him do.

@asdilar

10 ай бұрын

It is an illogical argument too. If I stop believing in the law, will I be able to avoid the consequences of breaking the law? The answer is no. Neither does it make sense to pretend not to believe in order to avoid the consequences of sinning. 🤦

@Neognostic-pk5wu

10 ай бұрын

Calvinists seem to be the ones that talk like that. They get a real hard-on for what they call "predestination". The Westboro Baptist Church is a particularly delightful offshoot of that brand of "Christian philosophy". Colour me surprised....

@francesconicoletti2547

9 ай бұрын

Yes the only way to sin and get away with it from the christian perspective is to believe in god. All other ways don’t work. Of course from the atheist perspective sin doesn’t exist, but this is solely a christian argument.

@cloutfrogger

8 ай бұрын

@@francesconicoletti2547the only problem with atheism is that it only leads to despair and suffering.

0:28 "But there's reports of bigfoot." was not a line I expected from Joe but it was incredible.

To be honest, "The Theory of Evolution *Through Natural Selection"* (for some reason, these nutjobs always forget that last part) makes a lot more sense than a sky fairy wishing everything into existence during a six-day working week.

@anzawilldie4379

6 ай бұрын

You still stuck in the Bible part of the debate.... When science explains how tons over tons of matter came into existence out of nowhere, unless they explain how the first cell took shape, divide itself, and pass the instructions to each half on how to divide as well...

@kamorant

6 ай бұрын

Tons of matter didn't come from nowhere. It came from the Big Bang, the cosmic expansion, as the energy in the newly formed and expanding Universe cooled, that energy converter to matter, specifically Hydrogen.

@bradynutzman4488

6 ай бұрын

Except that all natural selection does...is select. It's not a creative force.

@anzawilldie4379

6 ай бұрын

@@bradynutzman4488 even worse, nature doesn't select, nature will take any result and "keep it" as the right one, which, usually is... But there's no selector...

@annalieff-saxby568

6 ай бұрын

@@bradynutzman4488 Nobody said it was. The choice is easy: you either believe in the eternal existence of matter (which we are made of, and experience daily), or the eternal existence of a being which, strangely, looks just like a man, but whom nobody has ever seen. I'm a material girl.

Great video! As is often the case, it takes a lot of careful effort to unpack and counter the statements of skilled apologists.

John's description of the debating side of science was exquisite. Also, that whole point on finger development seems really weird to me - everybody knows people can be born with an unusual number of digits out of seemingly nowhere, so why should we hold cats up to higher scrutiny?

I love how the evolution guy talks, it’s so calming and soothing to the point where I could probably fall asleep to him explaining in depth evolutionary facts

I think there's a lot of value in you dissecting and breaking down this type of content. Especially in the way done here with such a great guest and your style! I will be checking out that podcast. Thanks for sharing!

Joe's show consists entirely of him letting on any crazy person and instead of asking them intelligent questions, he just falls for their bs right away and his only contribution is saying "wow" over and over again.

@GYI5U

10 ай бұрын

Credit where its due: "There are many reports of Christians who claim to have seen the resurrection." "Right but...there's reports of Bigfoot." Some crazy is too crazy even for joe

@buckyhurdle4776

10 ай бұрын

I used to be on the "free speech he can have whoever he wants on" but at this point its like, Crowder, Shapiro, Tim Pool, Alex Jones, Peterson, trans this, woke that, like holy shit dude just say you're conservative now. Its the fence sitting that really bothers me

@dat2ra

10 ай бұрын

"Trumpisthe messiah" says it all.

@Aledahal

10 ай бұрын

I wouldnt say he buys into everything his guests say? He just lets them talk and doesnt fight back. U know- a civil conversation?

@csarmii

10 ай бұрын

​@Aledahal he gives platform to dangerous ideas, outright lies, conspiracy and even worse things. Enables them. Gives them credibility. You can't let those things on without challenging them. Without being complicit anyway.

Sparkism...don't question everything...contemplate everything. This channel definitely gives great content to contemplate.

I feel your last question on the cultural psychology of (christian) martyrs is missing one key point. No one brought up the benefits that those engaging in "credibility enhancers" would receive. While it seems like a priest engaging in celibacy or giving up certain foods would appear to be a purely negative sacrifice on their part, it ignores the political power, wealth, and position of control that those sacrifices would bring. Not to mention, the appearance of celibacy...etc, does not always mean the priest is actually celibate haha

Somewhere Paulogia is screaming (or at least Canadian screaming), "None of them claimed to see Jesus other than Paul! And there is no evidence that any of them were ever given a chance to recant! And the evidence that they were even killed is very sparse!"

“I believe in micro evolution” Aka “I can’t deny that evolution is the truth but I’m going to try anyway”.

@Johnny.G.

7 ай бұрын

That's an adaptation. So false. There is no evidence of a change in kind. The cat thing for example. That's still a cat

@marcocortes9968

6 ай бұрын

He is not wrong though. Micro evolution can be observed, macro evolution cannot.

Wild to see my grandfather’s name in your screenshot of that article on deconversion from Christianity. He’s still popping up and saying hello from beyond the grave 😊

How could evolution not be credible when it’s observed in modern times? Even macroevolution has been observed in modern times, even of vertebrate species. So, if a person says they don’t believe in evolution, or don’t believe in macroevolution, they must either not know what these terms mean, or know what they mean but don’t know it’s been observed in modern times. Evolution is defined as when a population of organisms undergoes a change in inheritable traits across generations. And macroevolution simply refers to evolution at or above the species level. Despite the definitions of these terms used by scientists and taught in universities, people who say they don’t believe in evolution or don’t believe in macroevolution more often mean that they do not believe in universal common ancestry, as well as most of the clades that most scientists think species are organized into. A clade, for those that don’t know, is a group that includes a common ancestor population and all of its descendants, and nothing else. People who say that they don’t believe in evolution, or that they don’t believe in macroevolution, also often mean by that they they don’t believe that “a kind can change into a new kind.” Yet, mainstream scientists do not group organisms into “kinds” or even agree that it’s a valid concept, and creationists cannot provide a consistent definition of what a kind even is. So, no logic then in basing their entire objection to evolution around this ambiguous irrelevant concept of “kinds.”

@FlyingSpaghettiJesus

8 ай бұрын

Because muh story book says things and makes me feel all special! Sums up the hand waving from the science deniers

The "That's too stupid, therefore I wouldn't have done it" defense. 🤣

He rejects the notion that all things came from a single ancestor... yet god? This is as goofy as using 'something from nothing' as an argument against atheism when god made everything from nothing.

I know John! I invited him to speak for my skeptic group several years ago. He’s a great guy and great educator!

When someone says "I believe in micro-evolution" I want to rip my hair out. Micro and macro-evolution are terms made up by people who have no idea what they're talking about.

@marknieuweboer8099

10 ай бұрын

Forrest Valkai partly disagrees with you. The thing is rather that creacrappers rob scientific terms from their meanings. They do it with information and entropy too.

@slickshewz

10 ай бұрын

@@marknieuweboer8099 I'm not sure what there is to disagree with. Broken down to the simplest terms, Evolution is merely tiny changes that accumulate over time. Many small changes = big change.

@marknieuweboer8099

10 ай бұрын

Look up Forrest Valkai Micro evolution. You'll find a video called Real Biologist Explains Micro vs. Macro Evolution. And ForrestV definitely knows what he's talking about.

@slickshewz

10 ай бұрын

@@marknieuweboer8099 I know who Forrest is (smart guy. Explains things well), and I don't care. Appeals to authority don't interest me.

@marknieuweboer8099

10 ай бұрын

BWAHAHAHA! The point is not that ForrestV is an authority, the point is that he refutes your "no idea what they're talking about". Because he does. Thanks for making my day.

Well stated on both fronts - most surprising part to me was how good Rogan was on his questions. He demonstrated the non-resistant skeptical position perfectly.

@danhoff4401

10 ай бұрын

That in a nutshell is why JRE is popular

@MrTomyCJ

10 ай бұрын

The real non-resistant skeptical position would be to just leave and not engage in conversation.

@zwenkwiel816

10 ай бұрын

​@@MrTomyCJno it wouldn't, like no matter how slim the chances you're never going to convince someone he's wrong by just walking away...

@Diviance

10 ай бұрын

@@zwenkwiel816 You are never going to convince one of the intelligent design "scientists" that they are wrong, so why try?

@jackwhitbread4583

10 ай бұрын

​@@Divianceno but you may convince someone who follows and supports such a charlatan. Outspoken atheists like Dawkins, Dillahunty and even Aron Ra get thousands of letters/ emails every week from such people.

Thanks for showcasing the article from the Journal of Religion and Society entitled, "Explaining Deconversion from Christianity." I'm heading over to read it right now!

"insufficiently challenged" is the mantra of the JRE

It drives me up the wall when theists refuse to believe three simple and basic facts. 1. The amount of people who believe something has no impact on whether or not it’s true. More people believe in Allah than Yahweh, so by that argument Islam is the true religion, not Christianity. 2. Whether or not someone is willing to die for their beliefs has no impact on whether or not those beliefs are true. Again, 9/11 would therefore be proof of the truth of Islam with this argument. 3. The claims of a holy book are NOT evidence for those claims (nor is a holy book a witness). By that argument, EVERY religion is true, and given much of them contradict each other, that is obviously not the case. This is why I get more and more convinced as I get older that most public apologists aren’t simply misled but are actively deceitful. These counter arguments are EVERYWHERE nowadays. The only reason to not consciously recognize how and why these arguments are trash is to be willfully ignorant. Plus, disproving evolution does absolutely nothing towards proving any god.

@christopherhamilton3621

4 ай бұрын

Totally agree: well said!

Another wonderful discussion. Thank you Drew for everything you do.