I have no problem with people having imaginary friends as long as they play with their friends in the synagogues, mosques, churches, and temples. There is no place for them in schools or government.

@alena-qu9vj

5 ай бұрын

I have no problems with scientist as long as their playing with matter does not end by terminating the civilization. And please do not argument by them not being responsible - if they are soooo clever they must be able to see the possible dangers of their irresponsible playing with toys for which they are not mature enough.

@williamwilson6499

5 ай бұрын

@@alena-qu9vj I only see religious people calling for the end of the world.

@alena-qu9vj

5 ай бұрын

@@williamwilson6499 Well, but this is solely your problem what you see and what you do not want to see. I myself am not a member of any church, and do not live in US - you have to take in account that yours is not the top of the world. But you are right that science often serves to religious fanatics or to any ideology for that matter. Thats the problem with science.

@XarXXon

5 ай бұрын

@@alena-qu9vj So you'd blame the Wright brothers for 9/11 even though they could never have predicted it? Might as well go back to living in a cave then, because people who intend to do evil will use the best tools available.

@XYisnotXX

5 ай бұрын

Atheism is responsible for the trans movement which pushes "truths" like men can be women and women can be men. This is actually the sh1t that has no place in schools nor government. Atheism is bankruptcy! Atheists can keep tripe like this to themselves and refrain from pushing it on the thinking population.

"Religion Poisons Everything" - Christopher Hitchens

@CheckmateSurvivor

5 ай бұрын

He is now in Hell.

@larrycarter3765

5 ай бұрын

no, you are!@@CheckmateSurvivor

@sapaducy1

5 ай бұрын

​@@CheckmateSurvivorThere is no hell

@CheckmateSurvivor

5 ай бұрын

@@sapaducy1 Don't be so sure.

@tgstudio85

5 ай бұрын

@@CheckmateSurvivor *Don't be so sure.* Can you prove kiddo, that there is Hell... if not, then I'm sure it's just made up to scare little kids like you.

I would rather have questions I can't answer than answers I can't question.

“The beautiful thing about science is that it’s true whether or not you believe in it”. - Dr Neil Degrasse Tyson

@tonywiggins8073

5 ай бұрын

Haha lies! That same sentiment didn’t age well with the vax hoax now did it? Nope!

@danielshindler2368

5 ай бұрын

Better not to believe in it then

@danielshindler2368

5 ай бұрын

There's all kinds of horrible things going on across the world. If we believe in all of them we will become very depressed

@danielshindler2368

5 ай бұрын

Still, when you look at some of the things the Catholic church has done, I think you may have a point...

@tonywiggins8073

5 ай бұрын

That didn’t age to well with the trust the science of the jab now did it! Professing themselves to be wise they became fools!! Rom 1:22

Religion is for power and money. Rulers find it useful.

@thegametroll6264

5 ай бұрын

Reminds me of that rick and morty episode where he made the whole world toxic and the wave of toxicity washed over a pastor preaching a "beautiful " sermon and said " GODS A LIE! WE MADE HIM UP FOR MONEY!" 😅

@ajoxadadeus785

5 ай бұрын

​uhhm , well honestly that sounds like black&white thinking . things are more sophisticated than that .

@MarkoVukovic0

5 ай бұрын

Absolutely. Tax free at that. Hundreds of billions worth, unchecked and unregulated.

@FreedomSpirit108

5 ай бұрын

Is the other way around religion allies itself to the powerful

@Shaqoneil81-ci7dr

5 ай бұрын

Only partly true. A lot of religions promote living very meager lifestyles. It’s not the religion. It’s the people.

I always did love the science of ancient life on earth ever since i was a kid. The creationist arguement that all life was crammed together in a tightly packed space all at once never really sat right with me.

It's quite simple. God was created by mankind not the other way around

@CheckmateSurvivor

5 ай бұрын

God will send you to hell if you don't repent.

@xykeem4805

5 ай бұрын

@@CheckmateSurvivor prove that claim.

@CheckmateSurvivor

5 ай бұрын

@What.Now331 He will come, don't worry. But Antichrist has to come first.

@tgstudio85

5 ай бұрын

@@CheckmateSurvivor *He will come, don't worry. But Antichrist has to come first.* Oh wow a lying believer.... how not uncommon;)

@kookamunga2458

5 ай бұрын

​@@CheckmateSurvivorour body's pain receptors , entire nervous system and our brain decomposes after death so can you explain how one can perceive pain in that scenario ?

A tremendous compilation of superb thinkers. Thanks for the sunshine 🌞

@CheckmateSurvivor

5 ай бұрын

Real science leads to God, not Satan.

@toughenupfluffy7294

Ай бұрын

@@CheckmateSurvivor Neither of which actually exists, so you are dead wrong.

@CheckmateSurvivor

Ай бұрын

@@toughenupfluffy7294 Really? Have you watched the CERN opening ceremony?

There's a good reason for the separation of church and state.

@alena-qu9vj

5 ай бұрын

While science can serve to any rogue state and ideology.

Darwin gave us BioScience - religion gives us - The Dark Ages!🤔😉

@gregsanich5183

5 ай бұрын

How exactly did you conclude that religion had anything to do with what caused the dark ages?

@terbospeed

5 ай бұрын

Maybe not exactly the dark ages, but over a thousand years of scientific repression couldn't have helped.. and they seem to still be doing it to this day.

@thegametroll6264

5 ай бұрын

​@@gregsanich5183 * looks at all the times religion has incited extreme violence, hatred and acts of unspeakable cruelty to mankind in the name of God over the centuries which they continue to excuse because " God told them to do it and he can do what he wants" * Huh...

@DG-cu1vt

5 ай бұрын

@@gregsanich5183 From Google: What caused Europe to go into the Dark Ages? The dark ages in Europe was a result of the weakening of the Roman Empire due to multiple invasions by tribes like Goths, Vandals, Huns and others. The Roman Catholic Churches became powerful, superstitious and corrupted. Feudalism and feudal kings also rose to prominence.

@Shaqoneil81-ci7dr

5 ай бұрын

Not to mention some of the greatest scientists were deeply religious. Example: Newton.

Excellent! Thank you for posting!

It astounds me that so many are still fooled by the religion con-game.

If god exists, an Atheist will find him and show the world.

@mlgthelegend5194

4 ай бұрын

Eh probably not considering he's probably dead

@user-qm7ur3sv1c

4 ай бұрын

Ask him and see for yourself don't wait for science to tell you

As a FORMER delusional believing christian and now a rational atheist , I LOVE SCIENCE ❤ !👍

2:51 ...the elegance of life...❤

@yyaa2539

5 ай бұрын

The word "camel" came into English via Old Norman, from the Latin word camēlus, from Ancient Greek κάμηλος (kámēlos), ultimately from a Semitic source akin to Hebrew גמל (gamál) and Arabic جمل‎ (jamal).

@yyaa2539

5 ай бұрын

"The word for beauty in Arabic is “jamaal” which is taken from “jml” the root that means camel. The popular name in Urdu Jameel means beautiful"

@dorkception2012

5 ай бұрын

@@yyaa2539 Where did the word 'biased' come from?

@yyaa2539

4 ай бұрын

@@dorkception2012 ?

The easiest person to fool is yourself. The human mind has infinite capacity for self delusion.

@t-bonewtf

5 ай бұрын

Yet a rational and educated person will understand the difference between religion and reality.

Science is dynamic. Religion is static.

The mystery itself is the doorway to all understanding. When superstition closes the door, then understanding will never be found.

Thanks, Thanks, Thanks

"Science says." "According to science..." No. This has always driven me nuts. Science is a method. A process by which things can be figured out.

A lot of people don't like Dawkins. I want his picture on my t-shirt because I know some people would be annoyed by it .

This video is for the accute minds that are used to juggling ideas And delve into their meaning... not those that are titilating without grasping the essence of what is shared. Those that dare question and seek to consolidate what is and eradicate what isn't. Ignorance is dangerous... and we live in a society that supports it and promotes excess (to not say Abuse).

Your right to belief ends at my right to knowledge.

The last statment was profound!

Make me a liar. -Ellie

I was @ the Hawaii State Library in the philosophy section. I closed my eyes and Christianity defaulted to Nature.

This is important to really grasp the conflating of science as "another faith set" or "the other side of the coin" commonly and unfortunately proffered by the religious community.

@dorkception2012

5 ай бұрын

Because they doesn't even understand how to fact check something, are you expecting people like that to understand what they say in this video?

Your soooo underrated

10:00 💥 10:43

Science by far.. i dare to say inmeasurably to not use the term infinitely .. is our only system which expands our knowledge and now only path to realm..

8:35

actuallt the current hypothesis is that early humans were gatherer / hunters with the vast amount of work in the gathering...legumes and root veg gave the human brain the sustanance to expand. 👍🏴‍☠️⛵

@dorkception2012

5 ай бұрын

Yepp, you've said that right, hypotheses. Actual studies shows that high based protein meals ie.: Meat; gave the boost to grow our brains.

When science came to be religion became redundant.

One could argue ghat god created science so we could eventually outgrow the need for religion.

1:18 *pluck* that ignorance. (remove)

Mythology is very powerful in the human psyche

@dorkception2012

5 ай бұрын

For the psyche of people who doesn't know better...

@charlesbadrock

5 ай бұрын

@@dorkception2012 That includes all theists then the people that don't know any better will take one part of World Mythology and acknowledge it as such yet take another part and argue that as literal truths that's neither rational nor logical

this guy needs to think on how the world really works, and how finely tuned it is....

I am not quite sure about there being some inconsistency between science and religion. You can say that there is a conflict between scientific facts about the world and the empirical claims that some religions make about the world (if they even seriously make them rather than that being merely poetry or stories with some deeper intended meaning). It is very hard to properly pin down the meaning of the word religion, and undoubtedly there can be naturalist religions, and various other types of non-theistic religions. Another problem is that science and religions do not overlap where it really matters - religions usually hold certain metaphysical views, while science investigates the physical world. Yet another point that can be made is that religion need not be based on dogma. I do not think that your content is necessarily incorrect but I think that it would be a good idea to be more clear about what you mean by religion when you discuss it.

@alena-qu9vj

5 ай бұрын

That would pressume a serious, scientific interest in fair exchange of opinions. But most of the atheistic scientists are only struggling with their selfmade strawmen - i.e. with their unreflected psychical issues, and forever repeating their irracional preconditioned mantras without really hearing the answers.

@TheNathanielDurand

5 ай бұрын

A whole lot of garbage to say nothing of substance related to the video. "the meaning of the word religion, and undoubtedly there can be naturalist religions, and various other types of non-theistic religions." Meaningless word salad. This video is about Science, not a discussion about Religion.

@Nexus-jg7ev

5 ай бұрын

@@TheNathanielDurand It is about a comparison between science and religion. What I said is that it is a mistake to reduce the word relgion to Abrahamic religions. The word religion obviously entails much more than just belief in a creator god and other-wordly realms where people's souls live after they die. Religion entails ritual practice, some metaphysical views, an ethical system largely derived from these metaphysical views, etc.

@alena-qu9vj

5 ай бұрын

@@Nexus-jg7ev Respect for your opinions and above all patience😀

@Nexus-jg7ev

5 ай бұрын

@@alena-qu9vj Thank you.

The golden decade of indoctrination is from age 4 to 14. This is before people have developed good analytical skills, making the basis of what they have been taught very hard to reason out of after that, especially with the same thing repeated every week after that. More difficult and contradictory concepts like evolution are often not taught until high school or never, no matter how much evidence there is that proves the process.

science can't solve problems like Familicide: fear of eternal accountability can.

@toughenupfluffy7294

Ай бұрын

Andrea Yates, an Evangelical Christian, drowned all 5 of her children to save their souls.

@elkeism

Ай бұрын

@@toughenupfluffy7294 She'll pay.What's your solution??

8:55 **islamist sweating intensifies**

Through each of us now and our ancestors previously, a creature that is at least 4+ billion years old has been living on earth, having emerged from the earth. That is the source of the lion's share of our genes. Didn't we really become, in large part, what those genes dictated? And we do not know the ultimate source.

@dorkception2012

5 ай бұрын

You mean RNA and amino acids? You've skipped a few classes, haven't you? :)

@prestonbacchus4204

5 ай бұрын

"An international research effort called the Human Genome Project, which worked to determine the sequence of the human genome and identify the genes that it contains, estimated that humans have between 20,000 and 25,000 genes. Every person has two copies of each gene, one inherited from each parent..."

@dorkception2012

5 ай бұрын

@@prestonbacchus4204 Right, and what does that have to do with anything in your initial comment?

@prestonbacchus4204

5 ай бұрын

In other words, you take after your father and mother.@@dorkception2012

@dorkception2012

5 ай бұрын

@@prestonbacchus4204 And the ytake after their father and mother... so, you still haven't answered my question? What is the point of your comment?

This is so general it says nothing.

@dorkception2012

5 ай бұрын

Well, for some people it's like rocket science, they understand nothing, no logical/reasoning skills, hence they find religion comforting.

What happens when a Christian stumbles upon this? First, they consider responding to the one way narrative. Then, think out the response. Then, look at the comments section. Lastly, decide to respect Proverbs 26.

GOD DOES NOT ACTUALLY EXIST EXCEPT FOR AS A CONCEPT: For those who claim God actually exists (besides as a concept), consider the following: a. An actual eternally existent absolute somethingness truly existing. b. An actual eternally existent absolute somethingness that has consciousness, memories and thoughts truly existing. People who claim God actually and eternally exists basically are claiming that 'b' above is correct but yet simultaneously seem to be saying that 'a' is impossible to occur. 'a' above can exist without 'b' existing but 'b' cannot exist unless 'a' exists. Even per the scientific principal of Occam's razor, 'a' is more probable of being really true rather than 'b'. I am one step away from proving God's existence, but am unable to find any actual evidence to do so. And nobody I've talked to seems to have any actual evidence of God's actual existence either. All humans appear to have are 'Theories of God'. Some humans appear to go their whole life basing their life upon their specific theory of God. Many give their God human characteristics and cannot even prove the existence of their God much less the characteristics given to their God. Some have circumstantial arguments for a God's existence, but others have circumstantial arguments for no God existing. Not one has any actual factual evidence that their God actually factually even exists. Hence, at this time in the analysis, God does not actually exist except for as a concept created by humans for humans. Humans have personified Nature and called that personification "God". Instead of what is claimed "God created man in God's image", it's more likely that "Man created God in Man's image". Further consider that if the emotional parts of the brain override the logic and reasoning parts of the brain, people can be made to believe basically anything at all as being really true. It has also been scientifically proven that the brain makes up stuff to 'fill in the blanks' of it's perceived reality. Technology is often needed to perceive items that are outside of the human senses' capabilities. Plus modern science has already proven that humans can have visual and audio hallucinations that are very real to that individual. All the more reason for critical thinking being needed and to follow the facts wherever those facts might lead. Some people for some reason (social conditioning/brainwashing/wishful thinking) even believe in future eternity without end but do not accept eternity past with no beginning. In addition, while modern science does not know what consciousness actually is yet, memories and thoughts appear to require a physical correctly functioning brain to have those items occur. Where is God's brain? Where are God's memories stored at? How are God's memories stored and retrieved? How does God think even a single coherent thought? If inside of this space time dimension we appear are existing in, then where? If outside of this space time dimension we appear are existing in, then where is the interface between that dimension and this dimension? No such interface has been discovered as of yet as far as I am currently aware of. * Note: Since this is a search for the real absolute truth concerning God, Intelligent Designer, Pre-existent Consciousness, etc, feel free to copy and paste this elsewhere to further the analysis and discussion. * For those who claim God actually exists besides just as a concept, please prove that 'b' above is really true and that 'a' is not really true.

@PAPicturesOfficial

5 ай бұрын

Facts, brotha.

@jayb5596

5 ай бұрын

𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐲 -> Genesis 1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. Thousands of years later... 𝐒𝐜𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 -> The Big Bang is a physical theory that describes how the universe expanded from an initial state of high density and temperature. A state of quark, gluon plasma to be specific. Light is used as a metaphor for intellect, wisdom and consciousness. Light encompasses the entire electromagnetic spectrum. We use it for many forms of communications. We use it for broadband internet, we use it for cellular networks. We use electricity to read the memory of a computer and light to extract it out of the machine into our brains. That's how transcendent light is. 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐲 John 8:12 Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: -> C John 10:30 I and my Father are one. -> C Think of C as network speed under specific conditions. Thousands of years later... 𝐒𝐜𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 -> Einstein said, E=MC² & CxC=C² 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐲 -> Christ vs Antichrist He came in the flesh ya know. That means he mattered. Thousands of years later... 𝐒𝐜𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 -> Matter vs Antimatter The two witnesses, testicle fiers or sackclothers. Theology and science. They bear witness to the truth. One arm prophesies and the other arm fulfills prophecy, while simultaneously claiming there is no God and theology is just nonsense. I thought you might prefer the model provided by the 𝐍𝐒𝐅. bigthink.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/https___blogs-images.forbes.com_startswithabang_files_2018_05_history.jpg 𝐒𝐜𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 -> Supernatural doesn't exist it's just a myth. 𝐒𝐮𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐚𝐥 -> (of a manifestation or event) attributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature. 𝟔𝟖.𝟑% 𝐃𝐚𝐫𝐤 𝐄𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐠𝐲 -> Science can indirectly but not directly measure. It's a known unknown. 𝟐𝟔.𝟖% 𝐃𝐚𝐫𝐤 𝐌𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫 -> Science can indirectly but not directly measure. It's a known unknown. 𝟒.𝟗% 𝐎𝐫𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐫𝐲 𝐌𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫 -> Science has an incomplete understanding of this 1/20th fraction of the universe but they claim it's all that exists. qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-c54087b5942ac6cc1ff3ef28c6e68060-lq For reference I used the After planck model.

@gregsanich5183

5 ай бұрын

That's a very interesting hypothesis. ..... do you have any empirical evidence that can demonstrate it to be true?

@conspiracy1914

5 ай бұрын

"Where is God's brain? Where are God's memories stored at? How are God's memories stored and retrieved? How does God think even a single coherent thought?" wouldnt this prove you also have this " All humans appear to have are 'Theories of God'" How do you know god has to have those. the claim is GOD is supernatural. and since there are different types of anatomy like plants and animals. even different within those categories. isnt that an assumption If such a being is there, that it has to be like "natural" also does A=to universe and B=to intelligent designer. technically A and b could be claimed but A is less likely when you ask what and how life came to be. B could be observed with in humans and animals

@conspiracy1914

5 ай бұрын

"I am one step away from proving God's existence, but am unable to find any actual evidence to do so. " would be nice if you give me all the steps

How does Krauss get around now? I imagine Jeffrey Epsteins private jet is no longer an option.

@dorkception2012

5 ай бұрын

LOL, I am more curious about that list that contains the name of priests who were "inappropriate" with c*ldr*n... Funny that we can't see those, isn't it?

@jhonvoyage2564

5 ай бұрын

ROFL Silent now, Paul? You used to be pretty chatty about everything! ;)

@XYisnotXX

5 ай бұрын

@jhonvoyage2564 didn't he used to fly around with him in his private jet, that was my understanding. I wonder is he on the list??

@jhonvoyage2564

5 ай бұрын

@@XYisnotXX Possibly, but hey, if you can't attack what he says, you can always attack him, right? ;)

@XYisnotXX

5 ай бұрын

@jhonvoyage2564 why should I care about what he says anyway? A random piece of protoplasm who wrote a universe from nothing while every nothing he posited was in fact not a nothing at all but was instead guess what, yes you have guessed "something" The guy is a joke with pedophiles and teenagers for company!

Thank God for science.

@keithwalmsley1830

5 ай бұрын

🤣🤣🤣

@tgstudio85

5 ай бұрын

Thank Humans for God:)

@alena-qu9vj

5 ай бұрын

Yes, science is God's most potent deadly weapon used to wipe off civilization after civilization when their hubris reaches His heaven 😁

@jhonvoyage2564

5 ай бұрын

@@alena-qu9vj Are You under medical care? Seriously, get some help!

Theism is the most brilliant mindgame ever. You brainwash people into uncritically believing two things. One: the idea of not really dying when you die. Two: the fear of being punished, by an invisible, ever-present, almighty father-figure, for being human, unable to ever escape surveillance and harsh judgement, even for your own thoughts. Pure genius. Takes a lot of courage to question such a system when it’s established. But brave people did and still do, even facing death.

@dorkception2012

5 ай бұрын

I really think that even back then most of the people didn't believe in it, they just played along to not getting burned, crucified or stoned to death. We, as a species didn't really evolved our brain since the last 20-30 thousands years, we are pretty much at our limits.

'Science' has never said anything as it doesn't speak, what we have are scientists postulating different theories. But it is still silent on the biggest question of whether we should trust what any scientist says, since no scientist has produced scientific evidence that we should trust them.

@dorkception2012

5 ай бұрын

You are right, scientists who made possible to you to share your idiocy all over the world and millions are able to see that and comment back to you are unreliable halfwits... Go and sit in the corner...

@KINGSTUNAX

5 ай бұрын

😂have you seen your God when 9/11 happened because I seen and got the covid vaccine during corona pandemic.

@MrbaldRevell

5 ай бұрын

Maybe God wants us to be atheist because he has never shown himself in any way that can't be explained by liars or good luck

@KINGSTUNAX

5 ай бұрын

@@MrbaldRevell I just want a physical appearance of God to accept that he exist. like physical appearance of tom cruise 😂 it is a example but the point is simple I need evidence solid one not just some random book with a bunch of childish poetry about the world. That is something I can write all by myself and thanks to AI the work is going to be simple and thousands of year later people will end up saying this is a old book it must be true. There is more but I don't have to go through because it is comment section of KZread

@MrbaldRevell

5 ай бұрын

@@KINGSTUNAX me too

Fathers of modern science: "Let's use science to study God's creation". Today scientists: "Science disproves God".

@alena-qu9vj

5 ай бұрын

Todays scientists: Lets just play with the things we do not understand and break up the world "by unforseen accident".

@MrbaldRevell

5 ай бұрын

As more information is shown the argument grows and evolves

The TRUTH is in the ATHEIST videos, 4 real

@ryandaripper9937

5 ай бұрын

MindShift- Friendly Atheist

@dorkception2012

5 ай бұрын

So in videos that arefactual, you mean? Right.

All the process of science does is explain the how in which God created something to function in the universe as it does, it does not cause God to cease to exist. God is the source of all the things that we do know as well as all the things that we don't know.

@GuardianSoulkeeper

5 ай бұрын

lol

@BennyTwennyGrand

5 ай бұрын

God didn't even tell people where the sun went at night.

@SlavaPunta

5 ай бұрын

But how do you know any of that? You now have to demonstrate 1) there is a god. And 2) that god did in fact create all things. Don't you understand that the more attributes that you define your god with, the worse you position is? So bring me a jar of god to the lab, and we'll test it for it's creation powers. Until then, what are we even talking about?

@donnyh3497

5 ай бұрын

Actually, science has been inadvertently destroying religion for centuries to the point where only the fools and the brainwashed still believe in those fairytales.

@dorkception2012

5 ай бұрын

@@donnyh3497 LOL, that's true.

THEORY OF EVERYTHING IDEA: Revised TOE: 1/24/2024: TOE Idea: Short version: (currently dependent upon the results of my gravity test): The 'gem' photon is the eternally existent energy unit of this universe. The strong and weak nuclear forces are derivatives of the electromagnetic ('em') interactions between quarks and electrons. The nucleus is a magnetic field boundary. 'Gravity' is a part of electromagnetic radiation, gravity acting 90 degrees to the 'em' modalities, which of course act 90 degrees to each other. TOE Idea: Longer version: (currently dependent upon the results of my gravity test): THE SETUP: 1. Modern science currently recognizes four forces of nature: The strong nuclear force, the weak nuclear force, gravity, and electromagnetism. 2. In school we are taught that with magnetism, opposite polarities attract and like polarities repel. But inside the arc of a large horseshoe magnet it's the other way around, like polarities attract and opposite polarities repel. (I have proved this to myself with magnets and anybody with a large horseshoe magnet and two smaller bar magnets can easily prove this to yourself too. It occurs at the outer end of the inner arc of the horseshoe magnet.). 3. Charged particles have an associated magnetic field with them. 4. Quarks, protons and electrons are charged particles and have their associated magnetic fields with them. 5. Photons also have both an electric and a magnetic component to them. FOUR FORCES OF NATURE DOWN INTO TWO: 6. When an electron is in close proximity to the nucleus, it would basically generate a 360 degree spherical magnetic field. 7. Like charged protons would stick together inside of this magnetic field, while simultaneously repelling opposite charged electrons inside this magnetic field, while simultaneously attracting the opposite charged electrons across the inner portion of the electron's moving magnetic field. 8. There are probably no such thing as "gluons" in actual reality. 9. The strong nuclear force and the weak nuclear force are probably derivatives of the electro-magnetic field interactions between quarks and electrons. In the case of the alpha particle (Helium nucleus), the electro-magnetic field interactions between the quarks themselves are what keeps them together in that specific structural format. 10. The interactions between the quarks EM forces are how and why protons and neutrons formulate as well as how and why protons and neutrons stay inside of the nucleus and do not just pass through as neutrinos do. (The neutrino being a substance with a very high gravitational modality with very low 'em' modalities.) 11. The nucleus is probably an electro-magnetic field boundary. THE GEM FORCE INTERACTIONS AND QUANTA: 12. At this time, I personally believe that what is called 'gravity' is a part of electromagnetic radiation, gravity acting 90 degrees to the 'em' modalities, which of course act 90 degrees to each other. 'Gravity' is the force which allows a photon to travel across the vast universe without that swirling photon being flung apart or ripped apart by other photons and/or matter interactions. Gravity being a part of the 'em' photon could also possibly be how numbers exist in this existence for math to do what math does in this existence (the internal oscillations of the 3 different parts of the 'gem' photon, each modality having a maximum in one direction, a neutral, and a maximum in the other direction.) 13. I also believe that the 'gem' photon is the energy unit in this universe that makes up everything else in this universe, including space and time. ('Space' being energy itself, the 'gem' photon, 'Time' being the flow of energy, 'Space Time' being energy and it's flow). 14. When these vibrating 'gem' photons interact with other vibrating 'gem' photons, they tangle together and can interlock at times. Various shapes (strings, spheres, whatever) might be formed, which then create sub-atomic material, atoms, molecules, and everything in existence in this universe. 15. When the energy units unite and interlock together they would tend to stabilize and vibrate. 16. I believe there is probably a Photonic Theory Of The Atomic Structure. 17. Everything is basically "light" (photons) in a universe entirely filled with "light" (photons). THE MAGNETIC FORCE SPECIFICALLY: 18. When the electron with it's associated magnetic field goes around the proton with it's associated magnetic field, internal and external energy oscillations are set up. 19. When more than one atom is involved, and these energy frequencies align, they add together, specifically the magnetic field frequency. 20. I currently believe that this is where a line of flux originates from, aligned magnetic field frequencies. NOTES: 21. The Earth can be looked at as being a massive singular interacting photon with it's magnetic field, electrical surface field, and gravity, all three photonic forces all being 90 degrees from each other. 22. The flat spiral galaxy can be looked at as being a massive singular interacting photon with it's magnetic fields on each side of the plane of matter, the electrical field along the plane of matter, and gravity being directed towards the galactic center's black hole where the gravitational forces would meet, all three photonic forces all being 90 degrees from each other. 23. As below in the singularity, as above in the galaxy and probably universe as well. 24. I believe there are only two forces of nature, Gravity and EM, (GEM). Due to the stability of the GEM this is also why the forces of nature haven't evolved by now. 25. 'God' does not actually exist except for as a concept alone. The singular big bang theory is a fairy tale for various reasons. The CMBR from the supposed 'bang' should be long gone by now and should not even be able to be seen by us. Red Shift observations have a more 'normal' already known physics explanation, no dark energy nor dark matter needed. The universe always existed in some form and never had a beginning and will most probably never have an end. Galaxies collapse in upon themselves, 'bang', eventually generating new galaxies. Galaxies and 'life' just come and go in this eternally existent existence. DISCLAIMER: 26. As I as well as all of humanity truly do not know what we do not know, the above certainly could be wrong. It would have to be proved or disproved to know for more certainty. Currently, my gravity test has to be accomplished to prove or disprove that portion of the TOE idea. But, if not this way, then what exactly is the TOE of this existence?

@dorkception2012

5 ай бұрын

Good luck with your test! It's a shame you promote this on an unfiltered, unsupervised platform...

@charlesbrightman4237

5 ай бұрын

@@dorkception2012 Thank you for the good luck. I am really just doing all this to pass the time until my demise.

@dorkception2012

5 ай бұрын

@@charlesbrightman4237 Then I hope you will do it for a long time! Take care! ;)

@charlesbrightman4237

5 ай бұрын

@@dorkception2012 Thank you. You too.

@charlesbrightman4237

5 ай бұрын

@@dorkception2012 Oh also, here is my gravity test, for the sake of this video comment: GRAVITY: WARNING: (CONTAINS EXISTENTIAL MATTERS): Here is the test for the 'gravity' portion of my TOE idea. I do not have the necessary resources to do the test but maybe you or someone else reading this does, will do the test, then tell the world what is found out either way. a. Imagine a 12 hour clock. b. Put a magnetic field across from the 3 to 9 o'clock positions. c. Put an electric field across from the 6 to 12 o'clock positions. (The magnetic field and electric field would be 90 degrees to each other and should be polarized so as to complement each other.) d. Direct a high powered laser through the center of the clock at 90 degrees to the em fields. e. Do this with the em fields on and off. (The em fields could be varied in size, strength, density and depth. The intent would be to energy frequency match the laser and em fields for optimal results, cancelling out the em modalities of the laser, thereby leaving behind the gravity modality.) f. Look for any gravitational / anti-gravitational effects. (Including the utilization of ferro cells so as to be able to actually see the energy field movements.) (And note: if done right, it's possible a mini gravitational black hole might form. Be ready for it. In addition, it's possible a neutrino might be formed before the black hole stage, the neutrino being a substance with a very high gravitational modality with very low 'em' modalities.) (An alternative to the above would be to direct 3 high powered lasers, or a single high powered laser split into 3 beams, each adjustable to achieve the above set up, all focused upon a single point in space. Maybe I could concentrate the Sun's 'em' into a high powered laser. Might even work with the correct set up breaking the Sun's 'em' down into single 'em' energy frequencies acting like a single energy frequency laser. A high energy laser powered by the Sun. Cool, or actually pretty hot. More than one way to build a laser.) 'If' effects are noted, 'then' further research could be done. 'If' effects are not noted, 'then' my latest TOE idea is wrong. But still, we would know what 'gravity' was not, which is still something in the scientific world. (But hey, might even still get a Sun powered laser, which of course could even be utliized in outer space for various agendas.). This test can speak for itself. It will either be true, partly true, or not true at all. It will either show what gravity truly is, might be, or is not. Science still wins either way and moves forward. * And note: Whether my gravity test or another's, a gravitational black hole would have to be formed to prove the concept as being really true. A gravitational black hole that 'if' self fed itself, could literally wipe out this Earth and all on it, possibly this solar system, possibly put a black hole in this section of our galaxy, and potentially even causing a ripple effect in this galaxy and surrounding universe. But hey, if it does, no worries. Nobody would be left to prosecute those who did so. (Possibly famous last words: "Hey, it worked. Ooooppppssss.................) But as NASA has already proven that low gravity conditions over a prolonged period of time is harmful to the human species, and large rotating space ships won't really work for space bases on planets and moons, those space bases probably being needed somewhere along the way out of this solar system and galaxy, we need to figure out what gravity truly is and see if we can generate artificial gravity so as to have smaller space ships and proper gravity conditions for space bases on planets and moons. Otherwise, at least all human life will most probably die and go extinct one day. Currently, no exceptions. * Added note: Just trying to save at least 1 single species from this Earth to exist beyond this Earth so that life itself from this Earth has continued meaning and purpose to. Gives me something to do while I exist, otherwise, what is it all and everything for? Even if my TOE idea were correct, but if it did not help species survive beyond this Earth, what good would it ultimately be? So, are you feeling lucky? Doing nothing and at least the entire human species eventually dies and goes extinct with a high degree of certainty. Doing a gravity test, (mine and/or another's), and there is at least a slim chance of literally wiping out this entire Earth and all on it, and possibly more. Do you and other's truly want me to prove my TOE idea as being really true? But also: Questions: Are at least some black holes in this universe due to a species who were trying to discern what 'gravity' truly was, came up with a test to do so, were successful, but the black hole generated (to prove what gravity truly was) self fed itself and wiped them and at least their entire planet out? What species might have existed where a black hole now resides? (Since all of life itself is ultimately meaningless in the grand of scheme of things anyway, do the gravity test and see what occurs?) * Added note: Suggestion: 'IF' society did not want to do the gravity test, one suggestion might be to at least create a model as if it were true, then see how that model matches with observations and predictions. It might be possible to discern the theory of everything without actually generating a gravitational black hole (which would definitely prove the TOE idea as being really true).

IN THE INTEREST OF FINDING THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING: SOME THINGS MODERN SCIENCE DOES NOT APPARENTLY KNOW: Consider the following: a. Numbers: Modern science does not even know how numbers and certain mathematical constants exist for math to do what math does. (And nobody as of yet has been able to show me how numbers and certain mathematical constants can come from the Standard Model Of Particle Physics). b. Space: Modern science does not even know what 'space' actually is nor how it could actually warp and expand. c. Time: Modern science does not even know what 'time' actually is nor how it could actually warp and vary. d. Gravity: Modern science does not even know what 'gravity' actually is nor how gravity actually does what it appears to do. And for those who claim that 'gravity' is matter warping the fabric of spacetime, see 'b' and 'c' above. e. Speed of Light: 'Speed', distance divided by time, distance being two points in space with space between those two points. But yet, here again, modern science does not even know what space and time actually are that makes up 'speed' and they also claim that space can warp and expand and time can warp and vary, so how could they truly know even what the speed of light actually is that they utilize in many of the formulas? Speed of light should also warp, expand and vary depending upon what space and time it was in. And if the speed of light can warp, expand and vary in space and time, how then do far away astronomical observations actually work that are based upon light and the speed of light that could warp, expand and vary in actual reality? f. Photons: A photon swirls with the 'e' and 'm' energy fields 90 degrees to each other. A photon is also considered massless. What keeps the 'e' and 'm' energy fields together across the vast universe? And why doesn't the momentum of the 'e' and 'm' energy fields as they swirl about not fling them away from the central area of the photon? And electricity is electricity and magnetism is magnetism varying possibly only in energy modality, energy density and energy frequency. Why doesn't the 'e' and 'm' of other photons and of matter basically tear apart a photon going across the vast universe? Also, 'if' a photon actually red shifts, where does the red shifted energy go and why does the photon red shift? And for those who claim space expanding causes a photon to red shift, see 'b' above. Why does radio 'em' (large 'em' waves) have low energy and gamma 'em' (small 'em' waves) have high energy? And for those who say E = hf; see also 'b' and 'c' above. (f = frequency, cycles per second. But modern science claims space can warp and expand and time can warp and vary. If 'space' warps and expands and/or 'time' warps and varies, what does that do to 'E'? And why doesn't 'E' keep space from expanding and time from varying?). g. Energy: Modern science claims that energy cannot be created nor destroyed, it's one of the foundations of physics. Hence, energy is either truly a finite amount and eternally existent, or modern science is wrong. First Law Of Thermodynamics: "Energy can neither be created nor destroyed." How exactly is 'energy' eternally existent? h. Existence and Non-Existence side by side throughout all of eternity. How? * ADDED NOTE: My current TOE idea can potentially answer all of these above items, and more, in a logical, coherent and inter-related manner. And wouldn't one expect the true TOE of existence itself to be able to do that? What other TOE idea in known existence can currently do that? Surely not the General or Special Relativity Models nor even the Standard Model of Particle Physics. TOE Idea: Short version: (currently dependent upon the results of my gravity test): The 'gem' photon is the eternally existent energy unit of this universe. The strong and weak nuclear forces are derivatives of the electromagnetic ('em') interactions between quarks and electrons. The nucleus is a magnetic field boundary. 'Gravity' is a part of electromagnetic radiation, gravity acting 90 degrees to the 'em' modalities, which of course act 90 degrees to each other. I am open to any and all theory of everything ideas that can potentially answer all those above items in a logical, coherent and inter-related manner. Currently, as far as I am currently aware of, there are no others but my own.

@charlesbrightman4237

5 ай бұрын

PERIODIC TABLE OF THE ELEMENTS: Potential completion of the Periodic Table of the Elements: I currently believe that there are 120 chemical elements in this universe. If a person were to look at how electrons fill up the shells in atoms: 2, 8, 18, 32, 32, 18, 8 (seven shells), and realizing that energy could freely flow in this universe if nothing stopped it from doing so, then a natural bell shaped curve might occur. An eighth energy shell might exist with a maximum of two elements in it, chemical element #119 (8s1) and chemical element #120 (8s2). Chemical Element #119 (8s1): #119 I put at the bottom of the Hydrogen group on the Periodic Table of the Elements. It only has one electron in it's outer shell with room for only one more electron. Energy might even enter the atom through the missing electron spot and then at least some of the energy might get trapped inside of the atom under the atom's outer shell. Chemical Element #120 (8s2): #120 I put at the bottom of the Helium group since it's outer shell is full of electrons. It might have some of the properties of group two, Beryllium group (Alkali Earth Metals group) since it has two electrons in it's outer shell; as well as some of the properties of the Helium group (Noble Gases group) since it's outer shell is full of electrons; and if you look at the step down deflection of the semi-metals and where #120 would be located on the chart, it's possible #120 might even have some semi-metal characteristics. #120 would be the heaviest element in this universe. I believe chemical element #120 could possibly be found inside the center of stars. When a neutron split inside of this atom, it would give off one proton, one electron, neutrinos and energy. The proton and electron would be ejected outside of the atom since all their respective areas are full. One proton and one electron are basic hydrogen, of which the Sun is primarily made up of, and the Sun certainly gives off neutrinos and energy. And note, it's the neutron that split, not a proton. So even after the split, there are still 120 protons inside of the atom and the atom still exists as element #120. The star would last longer that way. In addition, if the neutron that split triggered a chain reaction inside of the star, this could possibly be how stars nova, (even if only periodically). If stars were looked at as if this theoretical idea were true, and found to even be somewhat true, then we might just have a better model of the universe to work with, even if it's not totally 100% true. And if it's all 100% true, then all the better. (Except of course for those who might be in the way of a periodic nova or supernova. They might have a no good, very bad, horrible day.)

@jayb5596

5 ай бұрын

Consider the following: a. Numbers: Modern science does not even know how numbers and certain mathematical constants exist for math to do what math does. (And nobody as of yet has been able to show me how numbers and certain mathematical constants can come from the Standard Model Of Particle Physics). What do you think dark matter is? It's the binary correlative of ordinary matter. So if you think there is no foundational support or evidence for where a mathematical framework for the cosmological constant could arise, we have a perfectly good model of said mathematical frameworks with modern computational devices and hardware architectures. Network and hardware can peak, which means they maximized the hardware potential. Meaning you can't make the hardware anymore efficient. You only have expansion to rely on for any type of gains. Now if you understand matter and energy are interchangeable, you can begin to understand how a physical server hardwares expansion, can represent the expansion of spacetime through what we perceive as dark energy. The server represents the container and a server even if has peaked in terms of hardware efficacy can indeed continue expanding on that hardware. These are not postulated in ignorance they are genuine measurements, we know dark matter and dark energy exist because we can indirectly measure them. Gravity is related to node weight edging, part of managing a neural network. Weighted and unweighted edges. When we are in freefall the weight that would normally be applied to our mass becomes unweighted but its continuously applied based on time so if you are in freefall when you catch back up to resistance that net force accumulative over time is applied to your mass when it comes back into contact with resistance. We defeat this by using planes and parachutes we can continue to oppose this accumulative force over time nullifying the impact when you come back into contact with resistance.

@charlesbrightman4237

5 ай бұрын

@@jayb5596 a. "What do you think dark matter is?" You tell me. Nobody has found any of it yet. b. Besides, the singular big bang theory is a fairy tale for various reasons, the CMBR from the supposed bang should be long gone by now, and the red shift observations have a more 'normal' already known physics explanation, no dark energy nor dark matter needed. c. Consider this item from my files concerning numbers: NUMBERS: (AND ZERO POINT ENERGY): 'IF' my latest TOE idea is really true, (and I fully acknowledge the 'if' at this time, my gravity test has to be done which will help prove or disprove the TOE idea), that the pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon is the energy unit of this universe that makes up everything in existence in this universe (including 'space' which is energy itself, 'time' being the flow of energy), and what is called 'gravity' is a part of what is currently recognized as the 'em' photon, the 'gravity' modality acting 90 degrees from the 'em' modalities, which act 90 degrees to each other, then the oscillation of these 3 interacting modalities of the energy unit would be as follows: Gravity: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction; Electrical: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction; Magnetic: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction. Then: 1 singular energy unit, with 3 different modalities, with 6 maximum most reactive positions, with 9 total basic reactive positions (neutrals included). Hence 1, 3, 6, 9 being very prominent numbers in this universe and why mathematics even works in this universe. (And possibly '0', zero, as possibly neutrals are against other neutrals, even if only briefly, for no flow of energy, hence the number system that we currently have. This would also be the maximum potential energy point or as some might call it, the 'zero point energy point'.). And also how possibly mathematical constants exist in this universe as well. * While in bed one morning after a restful nights sleep, and assuming the above is correct, I mentally went 'inside' the 1 (the singular pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon itself). I still saw with my mind the 3 different interacting modalities, the 6 maximum modality points, the '9' including and being the neutral points in the middle which faded into a 6 (as each maximum modality point came towards zero), that 6 fading into a 3 (as each modality came together), which turned into a 1 (which was the '0' point), but '0' wasn't zero. So, '0' is not really '0' but is something, not nothing. '0' is a relative '0'. But then here again, the zero point energy point is the maximum potential energy point for any and all modalities of the 'gem' photon. '0' is '1' and '1' is '0', this is the '1' inside the '1'. Now I just have to come up with some tests to test this idea of the zero point energy point being '1', a maximum potential energy point of the singular pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon itself. The maximum potential energy point not really being potential energy per se, but the neutral point of kinetic energy. Tapping into here would be tapping into the 'zero' point energy point of eternally existent ever flowing energy. But then again, tapping into here, 'if' distorted what makes up space and time itself (assuming that 'space' is energy itself [the 'gem' photon] and that 'time' is the flow of energy), could it alter or even destroy the very fabric of space itself? What would occur if even only a single pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon were to explode? What potential ripple effects could occur with the rest of space and time? Hence also why I try to think some things all the way through so as to try to identify potential issues before the test. Unexpected, unintended, potentially dangerous or even deadly consequences. If nothing else, it keeps my mind active. The mind, use it or lose it, but using it could also lose it, permanently. (My own and other's). Putting the 'zero point energy point' into actual practice could be deadly. Warning: Proceed with Caution. The last words of human existence on this Earth might be, 'Hey it worked, ooooppppppsssssss.............'. * Note also: Nobody as of yet has been able to show me how numbers and mathematical constants can exist and do what they do in this universe from the Standard Model of Particle Physics (SMPP). While the SMPP has it's place, I believe we need to move beyond the SMPP to get closer to real reality.

@charlesbrightman4237

5 ай бұрын

@@jayb5596 a. "What do you think dark matter is?" You tell me. Nobody has found any of it yet. b. Besides, the singular big bang theory is a fairy tale for various reasons, the CMBR from the supposed bang should be long gone by now, and the red shift observations have a more 'normal' already known physics explanation, no dark energy nor dark matter needed. c. Consider this item from my files concerning numbers: NUMBERS: (AND ZERO POINT ENERGY): 'IF' my latest TOE idea is really true, (and I fully acknowledge the 'if' at this time, my gravity test has to be done which will help prove or disprove the TOE idea), that the pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon is the energy unit of this universe that makes up everything in existence in this universe (including 'space' which is energy itself, 'time' being the flow of energy), and what is called 'gravity' is a part of what is currently recognized as the 'em' photon, the 'gravity' modality acting 90 degrees from the 'em' modalities, which act 90 degrees to each other, then the oscillation of these 3 interacting modalities of the energy unit would be as follows: Gravity: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction; Electrical: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction; Magnetic: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction. Then: 1 singular energy unit, with 3 different modalities, with 6 maximum most reactive positions, with 9 total basic reactive positions (neutrals included). Hence 1, 3, 6, 9 being very prominent numbers in this universe and why mathematics even works in this universe. (And possibly '0', zero, as possibly neutrals are against other neutrals, even if only briefly, for no flow of energy, hence the number system that we currently have. This would also be the maximum potential energy point or as some might call it, the 'zero point energy point'.). And also how possibly mathematical constants exist in this universe as well. * While in bed one morning after a restful nights sleep, and assuming the above is correct, I mentally went 'inside' the 1 (the singular pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon itself). I still saw with my mind the 3 different interacting modalities, the 6 maximum modality points, the '9' including and being the neutral points in the middle which faded into a 6 (as each maximum modality point came towards zero), that 6 fading into a 3 (as each modality came together), which turned into a 1 (which was the '0' point), but '0' wasn't zero. So, '0' is not really '0' but is something, not nothing. '0' is a relative '0'. But then here again, the zero point energy point is the maximum potential energy point for any and all modalities of the 'gem' photon. '0' is '1' and '1' is '0', this is the '1' inside the '1'. Now I just have to come up with some tests to test this idea of the zero point energy point being '1', a maximum potential energy point of the singular pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon itself. The maximum potential energy point not really being potential energy per se, but the neutral point of kinetic energy. Tapping into here would be tapping into the 'zero' point energy point of eternally existent ever flowing energy. But then again, tapping into here, 'if' distorted what makes up space and time itself (assuming that 'space' is energy itself [the 'gem' photon] and that 'time' is the flow of energy), could it alter or even destroy the very fabric of space itself? What would occur if even only a single pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon were to explode? What potential ripple effects could occur with the rest of space and time? Hence also why I try to think some things all the way through so as to try to identify potential issues before the test. Unexpected, unintended, potentially dangerous or even deadly consequences. If nothing else, it keeps my mind active. The mind, use it or lose it, but using it could also lose it, permanently. (My own and other's). Putting the 'zero point energy point' into actual practice could be deadly. Warning: Proceed with Caution. The last words of human existence on this Earth might be, 'Hey it worked, ooooppppppsssssss.............'. * Note also: Nobody as of yet has been able to show me how numbers and mathematical constants can exist and do what they do in this universe from the Standard Model of Particle Physics (SMPP). While the SMPP has it's place, I believe we need to move beyond the SMPP to get closer to real reality.

@SextusHempiryk

5 ай бұрын

bla bla bla woo woo woo word salad can I have some mayo with word salad bla bla bla woo woo woo

Science tell us How the world work that way, but religion tell us Why the world work that way.

I agree with all of this and that religion has been responsible for so much suffering, but at the same time scientists as far as I can make out, are no closer to explaining what consciousness actually is, why there is anything at all rather than nothing, where did the Big Bang come from? I don't think religion is the answer but science doesn't satisfy me either.

@dorkception2012

5 ай бұрын

So what? We didn't know how lightning become a hundred year ago, does that made Zeus real?

@t-bonewtf

5 ай бұрын

Can you say how religion defines "consciousness"?

Physics is the new religion with LUG, SR, GR, QM,SUSY, ad nauseum the equivalent of the old trope”how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.” All Standard Theory/Model was replaced by Expansion Theory in 2002. Poor Lawrence stuck in his ivory tower of profound and pathetic ignorance.

@jhonvoyage2564

5 ай бұрын

Because guess what, physics works, and prayer doesn't. Since we "worship" science, you and the likes of you can trashtalk freely through fiber optics that you doesn't even know exist, or how possibly those could work. Get a grip and grow some grey matter!

@KINGSTUNAX

5 ай бұрын

😂lol you can't see a world without religion and fear- such a poor weak soul

The priest would never refer to himself an expert because the scientist can only pretend the accolades don't matter. They need each other and refuse to admit it.

@dorkception2012

5 ай бұрын

Really? Yet, what scientists says can be fact checked, any time, and will give the same results, while priests doesn't even agree on verses from the Bible. Funny isn't it?

@terryparenteau1200

4 ай бұрын

BS

@mikeyb7263

4 ай бұрын

OK

As iF Darwin could've done otherwise lol

Science is a process but Dawkins isn’t very good at it.

@jhonvoyage2564

5 ай бұрын

Example?

@cameronbook1320

4 ай бұрын

Damn no example ?

Theism gave us Science or more specifically Christian theism. Atheism gave us,.......ehhh??? Guess who Krauss loved hanging out with, Jeffrey Epstein.

@GuardianSoulkeeper

5 ай бұрын

Well we're sure not communicating through prayer right now.

@donnyh3497

5 ай бұрын

😅 the Greeks were doing real science way before the ridiculous christian story was ever invented by dysfunctionally superstitious barbarians. But keep pretending that you're special. You and the flat earthers are in the same boat at this point, making $h t up and refusing to look at the real world around you. How embarrassing for you

@dorkception2012

5 ай бұрын

Interesting, tell me again how the Pope almost beheaded Galileo when he proved that we are not the center of the universe?

@XYisnotXX

5 ай бұрын

@dorkception2012 All it would show if indeed true would be what Peter Hitchens told his late brother and that is this, " Man is not great"

@dorkception2012

5 ай бұрын

@@XYisnotXX LOL, and you telling me that through a construct that involves copious amount of knowledge? LOLOLOL, can you feel the irony in your words? Also, I am pretty sure he meant that about that the majority of people are just like you. Dull and illiterate. And those are pretty common feat amongst people who still believe in fairy tales... ;)

Pretty naive to think science could ever answer any of the most fundamental questions that even kids can pose. There is a term for such naivety, namely scientism, which is dogmatic and blind as well.

lol

There is no conflict between science and belief in the biblical God. That is a category error. The scientific method (invented by Christians) is simply the study of time, space, and matter and how the universe works. God is the agent who created it all. Science is simply the study of what God made.

@kelvinhooks9399

5 ай бұрын

Prove your god

@dorkception2012

5 ай бұрын

"The scientific method (invented by Christians) is simply the study of time, space, and matter and how the universe works." LOL Everybody was a Christian back then, or else you were smoked on a stake, you forgotten? Here, let me help you out! So you mean European people who were intelligent enough to not wear publicly, they know that gods are man made and our world is made of reason and logic, and not by a wish of a supernatural entity. ;) Also, the meaning of science is the pursuit of knowledge and understanding of the natural and social world through systematic observation, experimentation, and evidence-based reasoning. You've almost got it! It's pretty good despite you actually know nothing about those methods! ;) "God is the agent who created it all." And that's an opinoin of yours. "Science is simply the study of what God made." Should I say it again? Just to make sure you understand it... That's an opinion of yours. ;) G'bye!

@elkhuntr2816

5 ай бұрын

@@kelvinhooks9399 "Prove your god" There is good evidence that the biblical God exists, which means all other gods are false. Start with the arguments based on scientific evidence such as the kalam cosmological agrument, the argument from fine tuning, etc... Then look at the philosophical argument from morality. Then there is the overwhelming historical evidence surrounding the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Here's a simple one: Premise 1: Everything that has a beginning has a cause. Premise 2: The universe had a beginning. Conclusion: The universe had a cause. If time, space, and matter have to coexist (einsteins relativity), that means they all had to come into being at the same time. So that means the cause of the universe has to be timeless, spaceless, and immaterial.

@Artman1

5 ай бұрын

Which God? Every Theist i've met creates their own.

@elkhuntr2816

5 ай бұрын

@@Artman1 "Which God?" The biblical God. Start with the arguments based on scientific evidence such as the kalam cosmological argument, argument from fine tuning, etc... Then look at the philosophical argument from morality. None of these arguments get you to the biblical God but establish that a creator God exists. Then look at the incredible historical evidence surrounding the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. There is wide consensus even among atheist historians on the basic facts of his crucifixion, burial, empty tomb, and eye witness accounts of Jesus alive after his death. There is good evidence the biblical God exists. If he does exist, though, this eliminates the possibility of all other gods. If you want to falsify Christianity, simply disprove the resurrection of Jesus Christ and it all falls apart.

The whole of society is BUILD... so it needs BUILDERS... society is proof for god... easy as that... in order for something to be build it needs a CREATOR... So Richard can go cry me a river... nothing comes from nothing...

@dorkception2012

5 ай бұрын

"The whole of society is BUILD... so it needs BUILDERS" LOL, and if there would be one builder, every society would look the same, but does it? You debunk your own claim with your own comment! LOLOLOL

@dwoopie

5 ай бұрын

@@dorkception2012 if there would be one builder... then that builder also needs to be build...?????????????????????????????? Who build the builder???? Is my point... don't care if it is one or many...

@dorkception2012

5 ай бұрын

@@dwoopie So, you think there is more than 1 god?

@dwoopie

5 ай бұрын

@@dorkception2012 no just one... who created a universe with nature...this is what god is responsible for... universe ...and nature... ALL the other drama humans put on them Selves with society and wars and people being poor and rich... god divided nature evenly over the planet... humans made cubes out of if with ownership... But all of it was build by one god... and not the one from the bible Quran or the Torah... these are all man made belief systems...

@dorkception2012

5 ай бұрын

@@dwoopie Umm, did you make a comment after mine, because the thread says it has 4 replies, but i can only see 1 of yours, and 2 of mine. Sometimes KZread algorithm censor out comments. Try to change the way you write it, or just copy it into multiple comments!

Here is the problem with all of these people’s perspective. They obviously acknowledge.the limitations of human knowledge. It is this fact that led to the scientific method in the first place. However they reject the possibility of a God because that option is unfalsifiable by that method. That is not a reason to not consider it as a possibility. If something is unfalsifiable, or cannot be shown to be false, It can only be true or nonexistent. And because science can’t way in on what should be the case and only can define what is the case- god might be what defines that should. The God of the gapes reasoning only holds if eventually there are no gaps for god to hide in. This is clearly not the case because the scientific method exists. If we can’t even purpose that God might have some influence on our reality, then how can we ever find proof of that influence? Dark matter is a place holder term for something we can’t currently explain. It’s the same thing as saying Gods influence on our universe. One accounts for the physical aspects of the universe it relates to, the other accounts for the existence of the universe and the should that results from the introduction of the creation. Occam’s razor says we should only consider the simplest explanation. I don’t think that works for physics evidence for a God. Because if God exists he is anything but simple.

@dorkception2012

5 ай бұрын

I have way more simple reach to this whole supernatural thing. If I can't measure it, if it has no effect on me, nor anything point toward that it can cause any sensable phenomena, it is worthless to get it into count. At all. These conversations about wether gods, leprechauns, bigfoot, unicorns exist is so much waste of time and energy. We really should only focus on things that is worth our attention. Sadly religion still has a huge effect on people and we let that happen, but theism is not god. We see and feel the effects of it, and we should make measurements about it's degenerative effects on humanity. Wake up people and get a grip!

@dragonsagesummoner6071

5 ай бұрын

@@dorkception2012 there are plenty of things we as self-conscious beings experience that we “can’t measure”. As for the effects of those experiences in our lives, there extremely relevant subjectivity. This is at least in the Christian sense how god deals with each of us. Objectively I can’t prove you exist through this conversation alone. Every physical trace I could do only will lead me to the device your using to interact with this platform from. And that device could have a bot to generate responses, or as athletes like to point out there could be a monkey punching in random buttons. What I have is faith that there is a person with a will that chose to respond to my post the way you did. And you have faith that my post was generated the same way. I’m fine if you want to call this an assumption in stead of faith, but then I would ask you to extend that same assumption to God.

@dorkception2012

5 ай бұрын

@@dragonsagesummoner6071 I could be a bot, that doesn't change the fact that I exist, and the phylosophical BS that we can not tell if anything is beyond our senses is totally irrelevant. Either I dream you, or you dream me, the interactions that we do is measurable and recordable, even if it happening in a floating brain between universes, that doesn't change the fact that this is something that can be observed and repeated! That's what *matter* (see what I did there ;)! Faith has nothing to do with already proven facts. I had a conversation with you, ergo there is something that reached out for you and you have sensed that with your eyes via your display. Even if I am a bot, I am already proven to be exist!

@dorkception2012

5 ай бұрын

@@dragonsagesummoner6071 Fck this piece of cr*p KZread sh*t! It deleted my comment!

To discover God is easy being honest and impossible lying to oneself. Where would you search for the intelligent creator of the universe? You are a detective trying to discover the murderer examining the crime scene. What do we know about the universe that can lead to the creator? What has a beginning of existence has a cause because from nothing can not be created something. Creation is what has a beginning of existence, like for example you, you didn't exist before you were born. You don't have to believe in God because God is necessary because logically it is impossible the existence of the creation or finitude without the creator or infinitude. Atheists don't understand the debate "evolution or creation" is a false dichotomy. The evolution of the species supports the idea that the universe was created from an eternal intelligent entity with a purpose and design. Atheists don't understand nothing. Nothing is absence of existence. Nothing is what innocent and vulnerable children understand by nothing. Something minus something is nothing. Nothing has no attributes, nothing has nothing. Nothing is not something. Nothing is always nothing. Reality is eternal. It's a fact. It's the truth. It's reality. It's what happened. Either the universe is eternal or what created the universe is eternal. You choose with free will your understanding of reality, that it's the truth or the lie. Would you memorize and understand the atheist logical fallacy to preserve knowledge useful for future generations and not lie to innocent and vulnerable children? Atheism is a logical fallacy that assumes God is the religious idea of the creator of the creation to conclude wrongly no creator exists because a particular idea of God doesn’t exist. I am a poet trying to overcome the most severe and devastating censorship in history.

@SextusHempiryk

5 ай бұрын

bla bla bla woo woo woo gullible sheep bla bla bla woo woo woo

@norbertjendruschj9121

5 ай бұрын

" Atheism is a logical fallacy " Daring comment, given the deluge of BS, you posted. I would say you are a master of self delusion.

@fabianwittmann8121

5 ай бұрын

Yet your argument, doesn't show, why an eternal cause should be conscious, omnipotent, omnibenevolent, omniscient, omnipresent, personal, who became a person and made some miracles. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. You cannot show any of the attributes you claim god to have. You didn't even show, that he is eternal in both directions of time. He simply could have stopped to exist. Also I didn't yet talk about, that what you tried to show isn't even flawlessly shown. You assume time to be linear and infinite. It could simply be a circle, in this case the universe would cause itself. Then time would be finite. It would just appear linear, when observing a small part of it.

@norbertjendruschj9121

5 ай бұрын

@@fabianwittmann8121 "You assume time to be linear and infinite. It could simply be a circle," First time a hear about this idea. Is there a source available for further information?

@fabianwittmann8121

5 ай бұрын

@@norbertjendruschj9121 it is basically the big bounce theory, if you assume everything to be exactly the way, it always has been in every loop.

ok so there was a time where Science and Religion has worked Together and Science has proven it to be Authentic .The Shroud of Turin has been proven with science and tested to be proven Authentic .Jesus the Son of God Existed .So science is a great tool it makes us all move forward but if your using Science to Prove that Jesus or a Creator does not exist there wrong ..If you disagree do the re search i did mine and found out amazing positive enlightening things ..So Most of everything these guys say is irrelevant .Stay well

@SextusHempiryk

5 ай бұрын

bla bla bla woo woo woo ancient forgery fairy tales no evidence bla bla bla woo woo woo

@norbertjendruschj9121

5 ай бұрын

What is your source for the claim: "The Shroud of Turin has been proven with science and tested to be proven Authentic."? All sources I know agree that the fabric of the shroud is middle age origin. So it is a forgery. And even if it would be older: Why should it be Jesus? And mormal proceedings of Roman law suggest that Jesus was never buried but rotted on the cross. The gospels are utterly implausible.

@joshuaf.3723

5 ай бұрын

False, false, false and false. You made four points, and each was demonstrably false, no matter how much 'research' you think you did.

@Tdrums8

5 ай бұрын

@@joshuaf.3723 Im sorry you feel that way .I cant help you to be a more positive person .I know what i have seen .I have cancer and had a NDE and met my dad and everything he told me came true .So maybe dont be so negative and try to educate yourself .Be well

@williamwilson6499

5 ай бұрын

It's funny that the Bible disproves the Shroud of Turin. John's gospel negates it, the other gospels and Jewish customs don't support it.