Virtually every dogma has been hammered by modernity. Except the dogmas of religion. It seems religion gets a free pass by most people when it comes to critical thinking and hides behind the notion of "faith". People like Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Christopher Hitchens, Ayaan Hirsi Ali and other prominent atheists are working hard to convince people of the dangers and harms that come from religion. This channel covers compilations of their debates and talks.
Пікірлер
Some people write a story and millions believe it because it's shoved into their heads from an early age.
- I Can N O T Think Of A N Y O N E Who - - - . . . Here // Now // Today . . . Intellectually // // Passionately / Compassionately // And Frankly . . . Fearlessly Insultingly // Rudely (( that ' s a compliment )) A D V O C A T E S In Upholdance Of A T H E I S M . Advocates A G A I N S T All Things Religious . A N Y -- -- O N E ? ? ? ? Sam Harris ? ? Hell No ! ! ! ! Sam Is Too Nice . Richard Dawkins ? ? ? ? ? Again . . . Nope . Rich Is A Scientist . H I s Insulting Tone Is Not Tempered With Socio // // Historical Compassion . - S i r Christopher Hitchens . - I Miss Him I M M E N S E L Y . - I M M E N S E L Y . -
People who believe in fairy tales should not be allowed to vote.
At 20:30 or so he said North Korea is not a religious state, but isn't the kim's have been proven to be a man turned in to a deity after death as their fearless leader and God, and that is to be worshiped with an iron fist all throughout that state fervently and with detrimental consequences if not compliant? Also didn't Hitler operate in nazi Germany which encompassed the Catholic population with no disapproval or condemning from the Papacy?
Did Jesus ever exist al ALL? I doubt it. If he existed and was "divine" one would think that he would have made sure that there was tangible evidence, and I don't mean the so called "gospels".
150 years since Darwin and still not a shred of evidence for evolution . Richard Dawkins never presents any evidence for evolution . Dawkins is like a catcher on a losing baseball team . He talks a good game , but nothing else .
2000 years after the bible and still not a shred of evidence for creation countless Christian apologists and still no evidence for creation There are hundreds and thousands of books and scientific peer-reviewed papers that all have evidence to support and back up the theory of evolution because you don't want to understand the science of evolution doesn't make it any less factual.
I would be happy to argue for the existence of God, but to defend the Old Testament, that's an impossible task.
A very boring talk with no evidence but pure asumptipns.
I also think that what confuses people is they just cannot get their head around the vast time scale of years evolution took to produce US.That is where geologists can help to understand evolution when we look at the shape of countries coasts and see when we pull them together how closely they can fit like a jig saw.
If i had the power i would make sure that every school private and public by law should teach every pupil about evolution...because we can prove it .Not one religion on earth can disprove it .
One of the better, respectful debate from a theist that I've seen. 🙂
What an incredile man. R.I.P Chris
You cant get through to theists my bro is 74 and a jw,for about 50yrs, when i say things like dan to him ,i always get a feeling of smugness off him ,like its the devil talkingetc that how they have been brain washed, its so hard,and frustrating ,i know its their EGO is massive they care only for the carrot in front ,ta
Why did Tom keep mentioning the Essenes halfway through if they were a sect? If a group is heretical then there is less plausibility in what they teach.
Like the way Carrier takes over this debate.
Why didn't god tell Moses that humanity will have planes, trains and automobiles. I would add cell phones, too.
Yeah... And these bible characters have western names while living in the middle east... 🤔🤔🤔
Your fucked up head and brain is a myth
I knew most of my classmates from elementary school to be raised in Christian homes and churches. In those days, every school day began with Christian devotionals. Christianity was a major element in society and culture. My friends were religiously and culturally indoctrinated as children, when they trusted authorities and before they could reason critically on their own. Today, many years later, I know most of them to still be Christians. Firmly entrenched in the beliefs they accepted as children, they remain committed to those beliefs like children. I'm not sure what made me different, but I was never a believer, even though I was raised in the same churches, schools and culture. I read secular books and practice my art during "big church". I remember well understanding that Santa was just make believe by the age of four, and figured that other kids were just pretending to still believe out of fun. The only thing I can figure that was different for me was that I grew up around the movie business, and, seeing firsthand how they were made, was very aware of the reality behind the pretend. Today, I look as my old classmates - and other believing adults - like children who were never allowed to grow up, and it saddens me in a way.
Their more informed about the lies in the Bible
Was Jesus Greek?
"One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we've been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We're no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It's simply to painful to acknowledge, even to ourselves, that we've been taken. Once you give a charlatan power over you, you almost never get it back."-Carl Sagan.
So, if you believe in miracles, the bible is perfectly acceptable history. Got it.
"Religion began when the first scoundrel met the first fool." Voltaire
The "horrible fiction" is this guy's spiritual intelligence.
Theist Boy should've defined what "giant" is. As a Filipino, most Americans for me are giants because they are relatively taller than us.
Why this theist debater talks so fast?
We can’t even demonstrate that jesus was a real person, let alone one who was divine and rose from the dead. The claim of jesus being resurrected is just that, a claim. You cannot use the claim as evidence and if Christianity as a whole hinges upon said claim, then it’s safe to say that the religion debunks itself.
Bible guy said "uh" 347 times.
I feel sorry for Carrier. Smith is a liability. If RC chose him as his sidekick, his judgement was poor.
The Theist's evidences are mainly comprised of secondary sources, and his supposed primary sources have no external criticism from other independent contemporaries such as Roman Governor or other Roman politicians who lived during the supposed timeline of Jesus.
This kid has drunk the Kool Aid .... gallons of it.
🤔
It is impossible to have a relationship with a perfect being, if one existed that is.
Paul had very good mushrooms 😂
Or very advanced schizophrenia. 😁
You guys should be taken off the you tube. You are full off shit
This guy is a walking advertisement for atheists as spiritual kindergartners.
No one can disprove a resurrection 2000 years ago, he just gave plausible explanations. People have religious experiences and visions all the time. People also exaggerate and lie often. People also die for their religions, Jews killed themselves rather than be converted to Christianity. Muslims and Bhuddists have died for their religion too. Do you deny that?
This guy is as square and robotic as any programmed computer.
PEOPLE LOVE DAN BECAUSE THEY LOVE SIN AND LOVE SINNING AND THEY ARE GETTING FULL SUPPORT FROM HIM AS ALL DEMONIC REASON HE GAVE TO KEEP GOING... DO EXCORSIM ON DAN AND LEGION OF DEMONS WILL COME OUT FOR SURE...✝️❤️
Don Barker reminds me of Judah... Whole life he was with Lord Jesus but in last days he was fooled by Demonic lies...As he betrayed Lord Jesus Christ . √ He also reminds me of Peter as he denied Lord Jesus Christ inspite knowing truth, but He repented and came back to Lord Jesus Christ .. √ He also reminds of the two thief on Cross... One believed and one inspite knowing truth rejected Lord Jesus Christ... Still He accepted Peter with all His heart ..How Great He is.. Sadly again the biggest deceiver of the world Satan the Devil deceived Don Barker and his end is in Lake of fire... Never do Judah, thief on Cross and Don Barker mistake and don't give oppurtunity to devil... GOD bless you ✝️❤️
Jeezus don't need to raise from the dead to be important ....Jeezus' spirit could be non different than the the absolute spirit which is not different from existence itself....just a thought
Common descent and the evolutionary theory vs common sense and the law of procreation: The evolutionary theory of common descent implies that all species have derived from a common ancestor, which was first put forward Charles Darwin who asserted his ideas from Carlos Linnaeus. Carlos Linnaeus assumed that all varieties of creatures held a distinct characteristic that related certain groups of creatures as being in the same phylum or group by way of genealogical descent. This gave rise the term, mammal, which is used by the evolutionary theory to conclude that all life has a common ancestor. But what the term, mammal, does not take into account, is a species method of reproduction, which must be taken into account in order to define a breeding group in terms of a phylum. Procreation is a copying process that is limited by a set of parameters that act as a set of rules. These rules are applicable to procreation in that a species can only be defined as breeding group or phylum, while anything outside of the breeding group will be defined as a separate species or kind. So, because each group of human beings can procreate, it will mean that mankind is only one species, which in turn, defines mankind as only one kind. A common ancestor that relates all creatures into a single family tree or phylum has been rejected by genetic research on the basis that there is no such creature that can house all genetic traits. DNA RNA transcription is a copying process, and the rule with any copying process is that each copy must derive from an original copy, because only the original copy will have all of the information for variation. This implies that all life began as complex with separate ancestors in terms of a phylum, because if the physical features that an organism has were not with the first copy that its genome began replication with, then there is nothing for the copying process to select from in terms of physical traits. So, for this reason, speciation leads to a reduction in terms of variability, because all of the information for variation has derived from an original copy, which cannot be a bacterium, because a bacterium does not include a set of genetic traits that can be expressed by every organism. When variability is passed down to the offspring hereditarily, there will always be a loss of variability due to the copying process by definition of the fact that a variant is only a variety within a kind. This means that speciation leads to a reduction in variability on the basis that a variant cannot express all of the information for variation, while the original copy does. And this also proves that each creature has not derived from a common ancestor, but from distinct groups instead, because the DNA RNA copying process limits the amount of variation that an organism can express in terms of a standard. So, in order for a standard to occur in terms of a species, then a biological kind is also required, because it is the word "kind" that will define a group of species in terms of a common ancestor. Carlos Linnaeus attempted to divide all groups of creatures into a phylum of separate species, thereby establishing the Linnaean classification system as being based on separate kinds. And though Linnaeus' description of separate kinds allowed for the introduction of multiple species within a kind, he also asserted that separate kinds were of common descent, such as apes and humans. Charles Darwin took things one step further by asserting that all species have derived from one kind of creature despite the fact that no one creature contains all of the physical characteristics that each creature has. This means that all living creatures are broken up into different kinds with separate species within a kind so that an open breeding population is favoured over a closed breeding population. So, because DNA RNA transcription is a copying process, it will mean that all of the physical characteristics of a species are relative to a particular kind that its genome began replication with, because it is the kind of creature that implies a standard version, while a species is simply a version or variety of the standard in place. So, a biological kind is any standard version that will speciate over time into distinct varieties, which proves that not all creatures have derived from a common ancestor. While a group of species within a particular kind have derived from a common ancestor by reason of deduction, because there is a standard version in place, from which, speciation has occurred. So, for this reason, a species cannot be defined unless a particular kind has been identified first, because a group of species will always be the result of a biological kind, rather than the cause of one.
*there is no such creature that can house all genetic traits* This is where evolution and mutation kick in.
That duality of respect indeed needs to be reciprocated, I respect others beliefs, on the basis that mine too are equally treated. I would not impose my Catholic belief on others, I invite others to our church as part of history, they may leave with something that is important to them or not.
This guy should be mounted in the Museum of Dopes. Too bad we don't have Jesus in the flesh, instead of him.
7:11 Animals don’t talk. FALSE. Parrots 🦜 can talk. #God #Jesus ❤
Sorry Christians but when you pray there's nobody listening
Whether in Greek, English or French, it's still ridiculous and obviously made up. It's honestly ridiculous that in 2024 we're still having this debate. People, let go of your imaginary friend!!
Good job dan keeping it together And colm You did amazing Unlike tom Following everything without evidence That mommy and daddy taught him
“Ignorance breeds monsters to fill up the vacancies in the soul that are unoccupied by the truths of knowledge.” Horace Mann
Why are snowflakes evidence of design? In the late 18th century, German physicist and musician, Ernst Chladni, demonstrated how vibrations could be used to create striking geometric imagery by spreading fine sand across the top of a metal plate and then running a violin string along the side of its edge. Chladni’s demonstrations show that the sand will settle into distinct geometric patterns depending on the frequency that the sound waves produce by the violin string rubbing against the edge of the metal plate. When the Chladni plate, for instance, vibrates in one of its modes, a hexagonal geometric pattern appears in the sand on top of the plate, which is why geometric patterns, such as circles and triangles overlapping each other, are found in nature. Centuries later, in the 1960's, a Swiss physician named Hans Jenny built on Chladni’s experiments in an effort to study vibrational phenomena, which he called cymatics. Cymatics is a physics term which refers to the study of visible effects that sound and vibrations cause on matter, and everything that is organic or inorganic vibrates at a certain frequency, because the structure of an atom is vibrational. For example: A snowflake is born when water vapour travels through the air and condenses by changing from a gas to a solid which then forms into an ice crystal. Water is a liquid crystal that holds memory in terms of its geometric shape at a molecular level, and when water molecules are vibrated the molecule will take on the particular shape that the vibration is making, which gives each snowflake a signature pattern. Sound is not only visible in terms of geometric patterns, and is therefore deterministic, but also, the frequencies must be in tune with one another in order for a molecule to be stable within its environment, which is evidence of design due to the presence of a rhythm (or sequence) that is held in tune (or calibrated) according to a method (or standard). When musical vibrations are channelled through a malleable medium, such as a liquid or gas, the vibrations cause the medium to arrange itself into visible geometries with overlapping shapes, and this is what actually causes the unique pattern for a snowflake to form, because as the vapour is solidifying into an ice-flake, a geometric pattern is formed simultaneously, which is entirely due to the resonant vibrational frequencies that are affecting the particles at a subatomic level. So, because a snowflake can retain its geometric shape, and because the geometric shape is the result of electromagnetic vibrations, it will mean that there is a space for memory that is both vibrational, as well as electromagnetic. The arrangement of atoms to make up a molecular bond is arranged according to a set of base frequencies from the force of the vibrational resonances that are produced by the electromagnetic polar effect between the positively charged protons and the negatively charged electrons. The signature frequency of each resonant impulse according to a scale of different frequencies in ratio specifies for the arrangement of a molecular structure, which is evidence of creativity, because any set of frequencies that are in ratio with one another according to a rhythm in tune is by definition, specific. The structure of a molecule must be synchronized according to a set of base frequencies that are in ratio with one another in order for a rhythm to occur that is in tune, which is predetermined according to each figure or value that each base frequency has in terms of musical scale or notation. And atoms must be in tune with one another or they will not bond, which is why atoms were indeed created, because the stability of a molecular structure is depending upon the atoms to be in tune with one another according to a set of base frequencies that are in rhythm, (or ratio) the same as it is for musical scale when a group of instruments are working together in synchrony, or symphony. The structure of an atom is constant motion, which means that an atom must work according to rhythm in sequence so that the electrons do not collide with one another. And anything that works according to a rhythm in sequence, is by definition, specific, which is evidence of design, because there is only specified and unspecified to chose from. The structure of an atom also works according to a cycle in place that is repeatable under observation, and anything that is repeatable under observation, is also specific, which cannot occur at random by definition of the fact that anything random will be unpredictable.