yep, science professors who leave reality behind aren’t professors anymore. They are simply telling fairy tales. The same with doctors who try to sell magic and lies. They aren’t what they were.
funny how that video is about a well known fraud Eric Hedin. I commented on the video two years ago. Here’s what I said:
“Eric Hedin is a well known liar. he tried to teach Christian creationism and got caught. He was not “cancelled”, he chose to try to lie to people and he failed. It’s always sweet when a Christian intentionally lies to try to pretend he is some kind of “martyr”. Unsurprisingly, the title of his course and the description had nothing about what was really the subject. Now, why would a Christian choose to lie about that? Oh yes, for the same reason that christians try to hide their creationism under the term “intelligent design”, when they do not believe that any entity other than their particular god is the “intelligence” here. We got to see just how much Christians creationists depend on lies in the Kitzmiller vs Dover case here in PA, where the book “Of Pandas and People” was a great exhibit of this intentional lying, when they tried to do a “find and replace” in the text to change creationism to “intelligent design” and got “cdesign proptentists” as a result.
There is no scientific evidence that points to a creator, and we know that “creator” simply means a version of the Christian god in this case. We have nothing to show that a creator is needed, nor that it has to be a god of one particular religion. We also have no evidence for any of the events that this god supposedly caused, therefore there is no reason to believe it exists.
As for the claims of “fine-tuning”, they all fail. Christians have the problem that if the universe is “fine-tuned” for humans, why is 99.999…% of the universe utterly inimical to human life? Even here on earth, we can’t survive in many places. Another problem is that if there was a supposed “perfect” universe prior to the “fall”, how can they claim what we see now is “fine-tuned”? The prior universe would have been that if their nonsense is true. A third problem is that the universe cannot be shown to be made for humans at all, but we can be shown to be a result of the universe, an organism that isn’t perfect in any sense, but that works most of the time. If Christians want to claim that their god made humans as they are, they have to explain why their super being couldn’t figure out not to put the trachea next to the esophagus so thousands of its supposed chosen species wouldn’t die of choking every year. They end up with either an incompetent god or a malicious one.
As always the Discovery Institute is no more than failed creationists who have yet to show any evidence their god exists, much less is the creator of reality, this is despite decades of promising they’ll have this evidence “real soon now”.”
As far as this guy being some lying fraud: I suppose you can have that opinion, but I just refer people to look into the issue themselves and decide for themselves.
There is so much evidence that is consistent with Christianity and other theistic beliefs. Like the fact that earth is so amazingly suitable for life! That there is life in the first place at all! That there is consciousness and intelligence on earth! Did that come by random chance (non intelligent consciousness) or by an intelligent being? You say there is no evidence that an intelligent being did this to which I would argue 1) there is no evidence random chance did this 2) it makes a whole lot more scientific sense that life comes from life and consciousness from consciousness and everything from something rather than nothing.
Again, I ask you where is your evidence that nothing produced everything (vacuum in quantum field theory doesn’t count cause a vacuum is not nothing according to that theory)?
Where is your evidence that life came from non life? Intelligence from non intelligence and/or consciousness from non consciousness? This is experimentally unverified and without any evidence. If science is so great then why does all of science at the experimental/observational level verify that life comes from life and intelligence from intelligence and consciousness from consciousness and nothing comes from nothing nada!
An atheist wants me to believe in the scientifically unverified and contrary to all observational science that life comes from non life and intelligence from non intelligence etc etc etc. If I were to use your same standard, then I should reject your position due to your lack of evidence!
Science points to or rather is consistent with theistic thoughts in that theism doesn’t teach everything from nothing and consciousness from non consciousness etc etc etc.
Again, if man were to create consciousness in a robot it would only prove that consciousness is necessary to create consciousness, which is consistent with theism and not at all with atheism.
So, the evidence we have to deal with is consistent with Christianity and not with atheism.
This is not a God in the gaps argument this is showing that the evidence experimentally is consistent with Christianity whether you as an atheist likes it or not. And that it is not consistent with atheism whether you think so or not. So, I wasn’t there to observe creation but neither were you so we are on the same level here and so we must ask what makes sense intellectually and experimentally and I just don’t see atheism all that tenable on either ground and so it must be some form of theism that is the case.
If a scientist creates life in a lab, that would be perfectly consistent with and hardly contrary to theism. It would only continue to prove that life (scientists are living beings after all) is necessary to create life and that it took a whole lot of intelligent input thruout the millenia!
This would hardly be observational evidence contrary to any theistic position! Quite the opposite…
For the “fine tuning” argument, many find it compelling. One of my favorite documentaries is Particle Fever where they discover the Higgs Boson but the journey and discussion and then conclusion is quite fascinating when you watch that all the way thru. But many scientists have found the “finetuning” a compelling fact about our universe that would be consistent with theism. But Particle Fever proposes an alternative to the “fine tuning” argument in the “multiverse” and the experiment at CERN and the conclusion is a must get to!
TJ, everytime you claim to want to allow people to decide for themselves is when you can’t show I’m wrong. How convenient for you.
No evidence is consistent with Christanity, since Christianity isn’t consistent itself with dozens, if not far more versions that contradict each other. Christian can’t agree on what the bible ‘really means’ so your claims of consistency is quite a lie. Same with the nonsense of “other theistic beliefs” since those don’t agree either.
The earth is not amazingly suited for life. Life is amazingly suited for it, just like evolutionary theory says. And it is mostly lethal for humans, so your nonsense fails again. Why is it a surprise that there is life at all, since we know that the probability of life existing is 1, since here we are. No surprise that we are conscious, and other animals seem to be too, so again the probability for consciousness is also 1. Curious how you still can’t show your god exists or is needed at all.
No random chance, as you mean it since the laws of physics aren’t random. You also have no clue about any of the sciences to make the idiotic claim that it makes more sense that magic happened rather than evolution and abiogenesis.
I’ve repeatedly shown you the evidence that something can come from nothing. As usual, you whine and insist that people have to make their own decision since you can’t show I’m wrong. It’s always fun when Christians try to define “nothing”, and surprise, you all come up with a vacuum. You simply try to move the goalposts to desperately cling to your cult.
Evidence that life came from non-life is that you can’t show that it didn’t and your iamgnary friend exists at all. We can also see thanks to research that there are indeed self-replicating molecules, so no reason to think it can’t happen. As usual, your god of the gaps argument fails, since the fact that we don’t know *yet* how life came from non-life doesn’t mean your imaginary friend exists. Same with intelligence and consciousness.
So where is your evidence for your particular god, TJ. Give an argument that can’t be used by any other theist. Unsurprisngly, your attempts to lie and claim that “all science at the experimental/observational level” verifies your claims is simply false.
An atheist wants you to accept evidence and not lie about science and your imaginary friend. Again, still waiting for that evidence your imaginary friend exists.
It’s also nice that you lie about the sciences supposedly pointing to, or being consistent with theistic thoughts, when that is demonstrably false. Curious how your cult’s silly book claims that stars are little lights on a dome that can fall off, that hailstones are stored in magic warehouses, that your god’s “wrath” causes illness, that humans are made of mud and magic and were made as we see humans now. Science has disproven all of that.
Again, still no evidence for magical deities creating anything, so your nonsense about how man creating consciousness in a robot fails, since humans aren’t evolution and aren’t the big bang. You try to compare apples to oranges in your desperation.
hmm, which version of christanity, TJ, does your evidence agree with? Which version of ignorant creationism? Oh right, not a single one of them.
It is indeed a god of the gaps argument, but nice attempts to lie otherwise. This is a definition of the fallacy: ““God of the gaps” refers to the argument that gaps in scientific knowledge are evidence for God’s existence and direct intervention. One example of the God of the gaps argument is the argument from ignorance or argumentum ad ignoratiam. The argument goes as follows: If a proposition has not been disproven, then it cannot be considered false and must therefore be considered true. If a proposition has not been proven, then it cannot be considered true and must therefore be considered false. However, this argument is a fallacy, because it says that true things can never be disproven and false things can never be proven but this implies that true things can never be proven and false things can never be disproven” – Springer
You’ve done exactly this. You appeal to your own ignorance and claim that since science hasn’t yet found an answer, there is none except for your imaginary friend.
It’s great how you first tried to lie to me and claim that if I wasn’t there to witness something, I had no evidence. Now you have to admit that your claim was simply false. I have evidence on how reality happened. You still have nothing, except baseless myths. Oh dear, you “just don’t see” atheism as tenable. ROFL. And yet you can’t show your god exists at all. So your argument is, yet again, personal ignorance.
Again, comparing a scientist in a lab with the big bang fails since they aren’t the same. It’s even more hilarious when you claim that your imaginary friend put “a whole lot of intelligent input” into life when, if this god is the “designer” it is quite an idiot since it managed to make the sun pointlessly give humans and animals cancer, made the human body to guarantee that thousands choke to death, and made DNA fail often and horriblely. BTW, the fall doesn’t work as an excuse since that would mean you have no idea what your god actually intended.
It’s also a lovely lie when you claim “many scientists” agree with fine-tuning, which is not true at all. Vanishingly few do out of the millions of scientists. I’ve seen Particle Fever. I’m curious what this “conclusion” you are mentioning is. No evidence for any multiverse just like no evidence for your imaginary friend.
it literally is. A god of the gaps argument is when a theist claims that, since they don’t understand or there is no answer, their god has to have done it.
funny how still no evidence for your imaginary friend or that it created anything at all. No evidence that life was started by an intelligent being. Your lie isn’t a fact.
it’s hilarious how you keep trying to lie, dear. Strange, when your god hates lies and liars.
Another christian has tried to lie to me and has failed. No surprise that no apologies were offered, and you still supposedly worship a god that hates lies and liars.
it’s quite funny to see christians laud Alex for not showing how ridiculous and false their claims are. “New atheism” is the same as the “old” atheism. Christians do show their ignorance about how Ingersoll and Russell ripped apart their baseless nonsense back in the late 1800s and early 1900s.
Various atheists have run back to the cult when they have gotten older, wanting their foot in those pearly gates. That still doesn’t show your imaginary friend exists, TJ.
1love1god.com 
yep, science professors who leave reality behind aren’t professors anymore. They are simply telling fairy tales. The same with doctors who try to sell magic and lies. They aren’t what they were.
LikeLike
LikeLike
funny how that video is about a well known fraud Eric Hedin. I commented on the video two years ago. Here’s what I said:
“Eric Hedin is a well known liar. he tried to teach Christian creationism and got caught. He was not “cancelled”, he chose to try to lie to people and he failed. It’s always sweet when a Christian intentionally lies to try to pretend he is some kind of “martyr”. Unsurprisingly, the title of his course and the description had nothing about what was really the subject. Now, why would a Christian choose to lie about that? Oh yes, for the same reason that christians try to hide their creationism under the term “intelligent design”, when they do not believe that any entity other than their particular god is the “intelligence” here. We got to see just how much Christians creationists depend on lies in the Kitzmiller vs Dover case here in PA, where the book “Of Pandas and People” was a great exhibit of this intentional lying, when they tried to do a “find and replace” in the text to change creationism to “intelligent design” and got “cdesign proptentists” as a result.
There is no scientific evidence that points to a creator, and we know that “creator” simply means a version of the Christian god in this case. We have nothing to show that a creator is needed, nor that it has to be a god of one particular religion. We also have no evidence for any of the events that this god supposedly caused, therefore there is no reason to believe it exists.
As for the claims of “fine-tuning”, they all fail. Christians have the problem that if the universe is “fine-tuned” for humans, why is 99.999…% of the universe utterly inimical to human life? Even here on earth, we can’t survive in many places. Another problem is that if there was a supposed “perfect” universe prior to the “fall”, how can they claim what we see now is “fine-tuned”? The prior universe would have been that if their nonsense is true. A third problem is that the universe cannot be shown to be made for humans at all, but we can be shown to be a result of the universe, an organism that isn’t perfect in any sense, but that works most of the time. If Christians want to claim that their god made humans as they are, they have to explain why their super being couldn’t figure out not to put the trachea next to the esophagus so thousands of its supposed chosen species wouldn’t die of choking every year. They end up with either an incompetent god or a malicious one.
As always the Discovery Institute is no more than failed creationists who have yet to show any evidence their god exists, much less is the creator of reality, this is despite decades of promising they’ll have this evidence “real soon now”.”
LikeLike
As far as this guy being some lying fraud: I suppose you can have that opinion, but I just refer people to look into the issue themselves and decide for themselves.
There is so much evidence that is consistent with Christianity and other theistic beliefs. Like the fact that earth is so amazingly suitable for life! That there is life in the first place at all! That there is consciousness and intelligence on earth! Did that come by random chance (non intelligent consciousness) or by an intelligent being? You say there is no evidence that an intelligent being did this to which I would argue 1) there is no evidence random chance did this 2) it makes a whole lot more scientific sense that life comes from life and consciousness from consciousness and everything from something rather than nothing.
Again, I ask you where is your evidence that nothing produced everything (vacuum in quantum field theory doesn’t count cause a vacuum is not nothing according to that theory)?
Where is your evidence that life came from non life? Intelligence from non intelligence and/or consciousness from non consciousness? This is experimentally unverified and without any evidence. If science is so great then why does all of science at the experimental/observational level verify that life comes from life and intelligence from intelligence and consciousness from consciousness and nothing comes from nothing nada!
An atheist wants me to believe in the scientifically unverified and contrary to all observational science that life comes from non life and intelligence from non intelligence etc etc etc. If I were to use your same standard, then I should reject your position due to your lack of evidence!
Science points to or rather is consistent with theistic thoughts in that theism doesn’t teach everything from nothing and consciousness from non consciousness etc etc etc.
Again, if man were to create consciousness in a robot it would only prove that consciousness is necessary to create consciousness, which is consistent with theism and not at all with atheism.
So, the evidence we have to deal with is consistent with Christianity and not with atheism.
This is not a God in the gaps argument this is showing that the evidence experimentally is consistent with Christianity whether you as an atheist likes it or not. And that it is not consistent with atheism whether you think so or not. So, I wasn’t there to observe creation but neither were you so we are on the same level here and so we must ask what makes sense intellectually and experimentally and I just don’t see atheism all that tenable on either ground and so it must be some form of theism that is the case.
If a scientist creates life in a lab, that would be perfectly consistent with and hardly contrary to theism. It would only continue to prove that life (scientists are living beings after all) is necessary to create life and that it took a whole lot of intelligent input thruout the millenia!
This would hardly be observational evidence contrary to any theistic position! Quite the opposite…
For the “fine tuning” argument, many find it compelling. One of my favorite documentaries is Particle Fever where they discover the Higgs Boson but the journey and discussion and then conclusion is quite fascinating when you watch that all the way thru. But many scientists have found the “finetuning” a compelling fact about our universe that would be consistent with theism. But Particle Fever proposes an alternative to the “fine tuning” argument in the “multiverse” and the experiment at CERN and the conclusion is a must get to!
LikeLike
TJ, everytime you claim to want to allow people to decide for themselves is when you can’t show I’m wrong. How convenient for you.
No evidence is consistent with Christanity, since Christianity isn’t consistent itself with dozens, if not far more versions that contradict each other. Christian can’t agree on what the bible ‘really means’ so your claims of consistency is quite a lie. Same with the nonsense of “other theistic beliefs” since those don’t agree either.
The earth is not amazingly suited for life. Life is amazingly suited for it, just like evolutionary theory says. And it is mostly lethal for humans, so your nonsense fails again. Why is it a surprise that there is life at all, since we know that the probability of life existing is 1, since here we are. No surprise that we are conscious, and other animals seem to be too, so again the probability for consciousness is also 1. Curious how you still can’t show your god exists or is needed at all.
No random chance, as you mean it since the laws of physics aren’t random. You also have no clue about any of the sciences to make the idiotic claim that it makes more sense that magic happened rather than evolution and abiogenesis.
I’ve repeatedly shown you the evidence that something can come from nothing. As usual, you whine and insist that people have to make their own decision since you can’t show I’m wrong. It’s always fun when Christians try to define “nothing”, and surprise, you all come up with a vacuum. You simply try to move the goalposts to desperately cling to your cult.
Evidence that life came from non-life is that you can’t show that it didn’t and your iamgnary friend exists at all. We can also see thanks to research that there are indeed self-replicating molecules, so no reason to think it can’t happen. As usual, your god of the gaps argument fails, since the fact that we don’t know *yet* how life came from non-life doesn’t mean your imaginary friend exists. Same with intelligence and consciousness.
So where is your evidence for your particular god, TJ. Give an argument that can’t be used by any other theist. Unsurprisngly, your attempts to lie and claim that “all science at the experimental/observational level” verifies your claims is simply false.
An atheist wants you to accept evidence and not lie about science and your imaginary friend. Again, still waiting for that evidence your imaginary friend exists.
It’s also nice that you lie about the sciences supposedly pointing to, or being consistent with theistic thoughts, when that is demonstrably false. Curious how your cult’s silly book claims that stars are little lights on a dome that can fall off, that hailstones are stored in magic warehouses, that your god’s “wrath” causes illness, that humans are made of mud and magic and were made as we see humans now. Science has disproven all of that.
Again, still no evidence for magical deities creating anything, so your nonsense about how man creating consciousness in a robot fails, since humans aren’t evolution and aren’t the big bang. You try to compare apples to oranges in your desperation.
hmm, which version of christanity, TJ, does your evidence agree with? Which version of ignorant creationism? Oh right, not a single one of them.
It is indeed a god of the gaps argument, but nice attempts to lie otherwise. This is a definition of the fallacy: ““God of the gaps” refers to the argument that gaps in scientific knowledge are evidence for God’s existence and direct intervention. One example of the God of the gaps argument is the argument from ignorance or argumentum ad ignoratiam. The argument goes as follows: If a proposition has not been disproven, then it cannot be considered false and must therefore be considered true. If a proposition has not been proven, then it cannot be considered true and must therefore be considered false. However, this argument is a fallacy, because it says that true things can never be disproven and false things can never be proven but this implies that true things can never be proven and false things can never be disproven” – Springer
You’ve done exactly this. You appeal to your own ignorance and claim that since science hasn’t yet found an answer, there is none except for your imaginary friend.
It’s great how you first tried to lie to me and claim that if I wasn’t there to witness something, I had no evidence. Now you have to admit that your claim was simply false. I have evidence on how reality happened. You still have nothing, except baseless myths. Oh dear, you “just don’t see” atheism as tenable. ROFL. And yet you can’t show your god exists at all. So your argument is, yet again, personal ignorance.
Again, comparing a scientist in a lab with the big bang fails since they aren’t the same. It’s even more hilarious when you claim that your imaginary friend put “a whole lot of intelligent input” into life when, if this god is the “designer” it is quite an idiot since it managed to make the sun pointlessly give humans and animals cancer, made the human body to guarantee that thousands choke to death, and made DNA fail often and horriblely. BTW, the fall doesn’t work as an excuse since that would mean you have no idea what your god actually intended.
It’s also a lovely lie when you claim “many scientists” agree with fine-tuning, which is not true at all. Vanishingly few do out of the millions of scientists. I’ve seen Particle Fever. I’m curious what this “conclusion” you are mentioning is. No evidence for any multiverse just like no evidence for your imaginary friend.
LikeLike
It is not a God in the gaps argument. Let me try to focus on one subject for clarities sake.
Let us assume a scientist creates life someday.
OK, now we have an intelligent being that created life.
That is it! The fact will be when and if this happens that: an intelligent being created life.
How does this fact alone help atheism out? And why does it not compliment Genesis?
LikeLike
it literally is. A god of the gaps argument is when a theist claims that, since they don’t understand or there is no answer, their god has to have done it.
funny how still no evidence for your imaginary friend or that it created anything at all. No evidence that life was started by an intelligent being. Your lie isn’t a fact.
it’s hilarious how you keep trying to lie, dear. Strange, when your god hates lies and liars.
LikeLike
Fair enough… take care for now
LikeLike
Another christian has tried to lie to me and has failed. No surprise that no apologies were offered, and you still supposedly worship a god that hates lies and liars.
LikeLike
Hey, what do you think of Alex Oconnor? He is my favorite atheist. Love this guy…. Here is a recent interview: https://youtu.be/18rUFODYYQc?si=hSWhmBTaQ2i3oyMY
LikeLike
it’s quite funny to see christians laud Alex for not showing how ridiculous and false their claims are. “New atheism” is the same as the “old” atheism. Christians do show their ignorance about how Ingersoll and Russell ripped apart their baseless nonsense back in the late 1800s and early 1900s.
Various atheists have run back to the cult when they have gotten older, wanting their foot in those pearly gates. That still doesn’t show your imaginary friend exists, TJ.
LikeLike