Comments by "sandgrownun66" (@sandgrownun66) on "" video.

  1.  @danteh73  There are many flood myths from different civilisations. The one with Noah's boat is nothing special.
    12
  2. Due to evolution of course. The same way humans have a tail bone.
    11
  3. Exactly. Evolution keeps on being proved. It's the only show in town.
    9
  4. Wow! What impeccable logic you have.
    9
  5. Correct. It's not even a credible choice. Evolution has a mountain of evidence to support it. Whilst "god must have done it", has none.
    6
  6. What's being a patriot got to do with god-bothering? You can love your country without having imaginary friends.
    6
  7. He couldn't bring himself to believe, because he was a scientist. Such people use, reason, logic and facts to determine truth. None of these apply to so-called "Intelligent Design".
    4
  8. You need to make a choice. Either provable scientific facts. Or what some ignorant people said in some old book.
    4
  9. "God will never be disproven". Another one who obviously doesn't know how truth claims work. If you claim that your god exists. Then provide evidence to support your claim. It not on those who reject your claim to do do anything. So what cha got? Also remember, the bigger the claim, the more evidence required, and so a god would require the most proof of all.
    4
  10. Yes they are. That's what you get after four billion years of evolution. There was even primitive life, only 500 million years after the earth became habitable.
    4
  11. Faith is believing in things which don't exit. If they did exist. Then there would be no need for faith.
    3
  12.  @doloresmartinez2434  You can only have one or the other. There's no hybrid version. You either believe in proven science, or the words of ignorant people in some old book.
    3
  13. Actually, it's a pain in the @rse. Either provide evidence for your god, or shut up. It's as simple as that.
    3
  14. “There are some things you can’t share without ending up liking each other.” J.K. Rowling.
    3
  15. Professor of what exactly. Astrophysics?
    3
  16. Correct. It's Epistemology, 101. If you can't provide evidence for your claim that god exists. Then there's no reason to take any notice of what you say.
    2
  17.  @bankhead1  You already failed. So the embarrassment ain't with me. As I said, get back to me when you realise where you initially went wrong.
    2
  18.  @ashowofhands9813  It happens all the time. It's possible to create a whole fake universe, that somehow seems real. Just take Harry Potter, for example.
    2
  19.  @herbb6813  Fantastic news. So this isn't an echo chamber after all. There's some other free-thinkers in the chat.
    2
  20. Saying that the theory evolution is wrong and yet some old book written by ignorant people is right. Is the most ridiculous thing anybody could ever believe.
    2
  21.  @therealalexmullins  Correct that's the way Epistemology, and truth claims work.
    2
  22.  @OG213LA  Yes. By the same measure, Harry Potter is real too.
    2
  23. Do you know what a "theory" represents in the discipline of science?
    2
  24. Wot like jebus to dat cross?
    2
  25. Have you since increased your knowledge beyond that of a seven year old? Why not read the book "A Universe From Nothing", if you haven't.
    2
  26. Really. A garden with a sinning tree and a vicious snake. Doesn't seem like much of a paradise to me.
    2
  27.  @quentinrawlins4876  Maybe because, one is real and the other isn't. Surely, that's the perfect reason?
    2
  28. How can thinking people still fall for the Teleological Argument? That nonsense was debunked a long time ago.
    1
  29.  @DxBlack  There are many vestigial organs in animals that now don't serve any purpose, but still exist. All signs of gradual evolution. Why would any so-called designer make something with such superfluous imperfections? This creationist BS is all nonsense.
    1
  30. And there's me thinking is was farting pixies.
    1
  31.  @bankhead1  Who made the mirror. Your supposed god? Also, just one word, Epistemology. Look it up. If you knew anything about it in respect to truth claims. Then you'd realise that I don't have anything to prove in this matter, especially to you. Get back to me, when you understand this.
    1
  32.  @bankhead1  "without opinion". What does that mean?
    1
  33.  @OldSchooled  Is that a serious question. We have their paintings for starters. There are also photos which were taken of the two artists. Both also have living relatives, sharing their DNA.
    1
  34.  @bankhead1  Look, dude. You got nuthin@ You've already proved you know nothing about how truth claims work. Once you prove you understand how they do. Then it might be worth continuing the conversation. Until then, I'm just wasting my time.
    1
  35.  @bankhead1  The proof is all on you, pal. Whatcha got?
    1
  36. ​ @OldSchooled  It looks like there really is no hope for you. You're too far gone. Nothing is going to satisfy you of anything. It reminds me of those conspiracy theorists, who will never be satisfied by the simplest answer. There'll always looking for some complicated answer, rather than the one with all the evidence to support it. There are mountains for evidence for the existence of the two artists. There is even film of Monet painting from 1915. Was that faked too. Van Gogh paintings are some of the most valuable in the world. Not bad for someone who you say never existed. Just what amount of evidence, if any would satisfy you? "We have evidence of God's design within us in how intricately our bodies function." If that's the case, then why does the body have vestigial structures, which through evolution no longer have any use. For example, why do whales have rudimentary legs, and humans a tail bone. Your arguments are so weak, and easily debunked. It's hard to know if you're being serious, or not.
    1
  37.  @bankhead1  You can hold your own if you like. Give me any question, and will answer it. Assuming it makes sense. Statements from you such as, You choose to deny and cant prove God don't exist." Prove you know nothing about truth claims, and the burden of proof. So what's the point of answering questions from somebody who can't even ask a valid question. Let alone understand any answer given.
    1
  38.  @Basbhat  You're right, science can't always be trusted. That's why its open to constant refinement as new evidence is discovered. Unlike some old book written by ignorant people, who didn't know any better.
    1
  39.  @555atU  Darwin succeeded, actually. His ideas still stand up to scrutiny today.
    1
  40.  @rickfromthecape3135  However, there's only one side which can provide evidence to prove it claims. The one based on, logic, reason and facts.
    1
  41.  @bankhead1  No. You're bankrupt, pal. You got nuthin'. "You can't disprove God", just shows how ignorant you are. However, you probably think that's some kind of virtue. At least, you can never be wrong, because you'd never know what's right. So you win every time in your head. Have a nice day.
    1
  42.  @bankhead1  "You'll never be able to deny a creator." Yep, you still don't get it. proof is what counts, not lack of it. You're right in wanting to terminate this conversation. It's just a waste of time. Have a nice day, as ignant Muricans like to say.
    1
  43.  @555atU  The fact that Darwin didn't know of the existence of DNA, make his theory more compelling. Although, it wasn't necessary to understand heredity. Mendel took care of that. You can breed animals based on their discernible qualities. You don't need to know about their DNA. Humans have been doing this for thousands of years, to produce animals with desired features. No theory is not subject to refinement. That's the whole point of science. To modify our understanding, as new knowledge emerges. Of course, Darwin had doubts. When you've made such a profound discovery, it would be wrong not to. What if he had been wrong? His career would have been finished. He even held off publishing his findings, but was forced to by others like Wallace, who were about publish their version of the theory also.
    1
  44.  @bankhead1  Look, pal. You're just embarrassing yourself, and it's painful to watch. Once again, have a nice day.
    1
  45.  @OldSchooled  "feelings to cloud their judgment or ability to reason." No. It's you who think some old book has the answers to everything. How about your old book containing useful information, such as to cure cancer in children. However, all we have is pointless nonsense. "You yourself are close-minded to any type of evidence". All that does, is show that you don't understand what being open to the scientific method is like. I am open to any idea, as long as there is evidence support it. The problem is that your old book, stops you from accepting new ways of thinking. Even when the nonsense in your old book contravenes them. "One day that will not be the case though. You will stand before the One Who created you and make your case to Him." I'm not interested in your baseless threats. Isn't your supposed god meant to be a loving one? Yet you want to promote his/her/its vengeful side. I see that you're running away. However, this is something to expect, when you know that the evidence is not on your side. Evidence which make your alleged god more irrelevant every day. If the god of the gaps gets any smaller, it will disappear for you too, at some point.
    1
  46.  @julietruesdell.371  What has god-bothering got to do with your countries constitution. Are you saying that man-made law is above that of your supposed god? Well, actually it is because your country had separation religion and state. "Knock and you shall find." Find what exactly? When your old book contains something of value, like a cure for cancer in children, then I might be interested. Until then, you can have your old book, and I'll take science, which will find the answer to save those children from a short life.
    1
  47. Compare that to the millions of words science has to say on the subject.
    1
  48.  @rw8614  “Blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.” That's better known as "faith". Faith is simply belief in things which don't exist. If they existed, then there would be no need for faith.
    1
  49.  @rw8614  Are you familiar with this maxim? "Onus probandi incumbit ei qui dicit, non ei qui negat –".
    1
  50.  @rw8614  Whatever dude. Maybe, you'll agree with the following though? ALL religion is mental illness, and the sooner a cure is found, the better for humanity.
    1
  51.  @ashowofhands9813  Except that he's not a scientist of any description. Just a lawyer, who knows nothing about the subject in question.
    1
  52.  @SSGADMURRAY  Again. Somebody who doesn't know what a theory represents. Theories supported by the scientific consensus have the highest level of certainty of any scientific knowledge; for example, that all objects are subject to gravity or that life on Earth evolved from a common ancestor. Still confused?
    1
  53.  @ericseitzler81  I probably know more about your old book, than most of those who pretend to believe in it. That's usually the way it is. It's because those who believe in reason, logic, and facts to determine truth. Tend to do their research. Of course, the unknown men (women were kept illiterate), who wrote the book were ignorant. All people a couple of thousand years ago knew almost nothing about the world and their surroundings. It wasn't their fault. They just didn't know any better. Darwin worked on his theory of evolution for several decades, before publishing his evidence. This was just a century and a half ago. This was already in the post-enlightenment era, where great advances had been made in the field of science. Since then his theory has been tested and improved upon constantly, and will always be, as new facts are uncovered. Still after all this. Darwin's theory still holds true. Along with Newton, his theory of evolution are probably the greatest contributions to the advancement of knowledge in human history.
    1
  54.  @herbb6813  Sometimes, I wonder why I bother commenting here. The level of ignorance is staggering.
    1
  55.  @icanreadthebible7561  Macro evolution is a slow process. However, we now have a long list of examples which have been found in the fossil record.
    1
  56.  @kal_eide  I've never considered that evolution is a natural process amongst living things, because there is no evidence that this isn't the case. Would you expect a rational person, to except an alternative fairy tale explanation, for which there is zero proof at all?
    1
  57.  @herbb6813  There have been thousands of gods invented by humans. Any atheist just believes in one less god, than the believer.
    1
  58. Hearing voices other than your own private, internal one, is never a good sign.
    1
  59.  @arielmarbury467  If you didn't believe in god. Then what went wrong. You'd have been better staying as you were. How can anybody have a relationship with an imaginary friend, for which there is no evidence? If you'd been born in India, you'd now be a Hindu instead, and we wouldn't be having this conversation.
    1
  60. Why didn't you find Buddha instead? You weren't in an American jail by any chance?
    1
  61.  @Jamesw829  BS. Why aren't you a Hindu. Could it be because you weren't born in India?
    1
  62. There's archaeological evidence for human going back at least ten thousand years. There are even cave paintings made by humans from thirty thousand years ago.
    1
  63.  @alexandremenguy5071  I have no idea what you're talking about. Can you write that in English next time?
    1
  64.  @eugene3484  Which biochemist (it's one word). What's his name?
    1
  65.  @eugene3484  Is that 90% of the Nobel Laureates, who won in the field of science? The ones, who specialise in using logic, reason and facts to determine truth. You know you're on a hiding to nowhere with this one, don't you?
    1
  66.  @eugene3484  "Professor" Dave. LOL. Professor of Nothing, more like.
    1
  67.  @eugene3484  "Stan's"?
    1
  68.  @lynncantrell2782  "most scientists believe in God". BS. Most scientists are too smart to have imaginary friends. They're also too busy trying to increase human knowledge, to be dreaming about angels either.
    1
  69.  @OOTurok  Yes, human do design things using intelligence. It's just that god-botherers try and pretend that the universe was designed by some imaginary being, for which there is zero evidence.
    1
  70.  @johngraves9237  You're asking too many questions here. The beauty of science is that we don't have all the answers, but at least we are trying to find explanations which make sense. Not from some old book, which tells us nothing. A good place to start would be to read the book, "A Universe From Nothing". As for living organisms. We can surmise as to how they came into being. Life is a rare event, as our planet is so far the only one known to have life on it. If we knew of another example, then maybe, through comparative biology. We'd have a better understanding of how living things come into existence. There could even be non-carbon based life elsewhere. With Silicon offering an alternative.
    1
  71.  @gs6205  If Hawking was a "dummy". Then I'd hate to think what it makes you.
    1
  72.  @maow9240  There are many religious scientists, and less that actually practise their beliefs. Why would there be? "Evidence is subjective". Wrong, scientific evidence is objective. How could it not be? "Science is self correcting". Correct, but that doesn't mean that the original conclusion was wrong. New evidence may complement and add new depth to any theory. "doesn't mean they aren't using reason, logic, or facts." Of course they are. Why wouldn't they be? The techniques and technology used in science improves all the time.
    1
  73.  @christopherharlan6594  "Faith" is simply the belief in things which don't exist. If they did, then you wouldn't need faith. If something's real, then you should be able to provide evidence for that existence. If you can't then there's no reason for anybody else to believe in your claim. It's a simple as that.
    1
  74.  @christopherharlan6594  I don't have to prove anything to you. You're the one making a claim that your god exists. So it up to you to prove it. That's how Epistemological truth claims work. And so, yet another person who doesn't know how to think, is dealt with.
    1
  75.  @michaelbrowder5251  Who is?
    1
  76.  @michaelbrowder5251  Darwin developed the Theory of Evolution. Although, he didn't give every example possible to demonstrate it. If you want an answer to that beginner's question. Then why not ask Richard Dawkins, Mike. He's answered it on several occasions. However, you obviously don't know how to use the internet, do you?
    1
  77. Why not read "A Universe From Nothing". It might expand and revise your thinking.
    1
  78.  @Basbhat  Your old book was written by ignorant, unknown men (women were kept illiterate", who didn't know any better. It contains proof of nothing. Science, on the other hand, is concerned with nothing but proof.
    1
  79.  @helixmoore7636  Do you know how much de@th and suffering god-bothering, has caused since it was invented? It's more than any other human activity. Just watch the news and you will see it every day. This doesn't affect those doing the fighting, but innocent people too. Yet you have the cheek to say I shouldn't bother about what others believe?
    1
  80. Believe or know?
    1
  81.  @stu7161  You KNOW nothing. You're just guessing. He knows nothing about Evolution, either. Maybe, he should stick to the law?
    1
  82.  @stu7161  The thing is that I DON'T believe what I want. I believe what there is evidence for. You know, the way rational people do. No adult fairy tales, or imaginary friends for me. And until god-botherers can provide some proof for their beliefs. That's the way it's gonna stay.
    1
  83.  @stu7161  I have no idea what you're on about, dude. Dawkins would make his assessment based on the evidence. "There is no point in presenting to you evidence of something you've already convinced yourself cannot possibly exist". Wrong, provide the evidence, and I will have no option but to accept it. The problem is that this god-bothering thing is de@d in the water. In the 100,000 years since modern humans have existed. Not one person has been able to provide one single piece of evidence for the existence of gods, which eventually became one god. However, in the case of the Nazarene is now three, or is that one? It's also not a case of not trying, as many have spent their life in pursuit of it. There's also a big incentive in it. Imagine suddenly being the most famous person in the World, and all the praise you'd get. Maybe, there'd even be a Nobel Prize in it as well. Until then, I'll leave them to their quest. Let's just say that I'll believe it when I see it.
    1
  84. It's amazing how naïve some people can be. Why would anybody want or need an imaginary friend. Why not get some real ones instead?
    1
  85.  @patsy4959  Keep wasting your time. Your god watches whilst children die of cancer and starvation, and does nothing to help. Kids that will never grow up to have children of their own. Either your god is an uncaring monster. Or he/she/it doesn't exist. Which of those two options is the correct one?
    1
  86. Proof of what exactly. That there are artefacts left by people a couple of thousand years ago?
    1
  87.  @Luxlowe  Why are there still people who think that evolution isn't real? Do they know how much evidence there is to support the theory? A huge mountain, and there's more confirmation coming each day. All these deniers achieve is to show how wilfully ignorant they are of facts and evidence. The amazing fact is that Darwin made the correct conclusions over a century and a half ago. Although he did a lot of research to formulate his theory.
    1
  88. Nonsense. Firstly, why not prove your god exists?
    1
  89.  @melvaldepenas4972  Not another one. This is getting boring. "Onus probandi incumbit ei qui dicit, non ei qui negat –".
    1
  90.  @melvaldepenas4972  I am what? Are you going to prove your alleged god exists, or not? We're waiting.
    1
  91.  @melvaldepenas4972  I guess you ain't gonna prove your alleged god exists then?
    1
  92. Do you know when Darwin wrote "On The Origin Of Species". And more importantly, do you even care?
    1
  93.  @philrolland7251  That geezer had nuthin'. They never do. There's a Nobel Prize waiting for anybody who can prove jebus and his dad exist. "hypothesized upon and most of these things were believed to be untrue until they weren't.". That's the way it works. If you make a claim that something exists, such as a god. You need to provide evidence for that claim. There is no reason for me to believe it, until you have done so. "Arrogance and ego". How does that exist in the scientific method. Any theory is up to scrutiny constantly. If there is any consensus that the theory is in error, then it will be modified. Science is a collective effort. Not, what's written in some old book.
    1
  94.  @philrolland7251  The problem for you is that we've landed a man on the moon, since that old book was written a couple of thousand years ago, and a lot more besides. If we took notice of just old books, we'd all be still living in the dark, with just candles for illumination. If you think your old book has all the answers, then why don't you live the way people did then. Or are you too attached to modern medical care, and driving around in your own car. Your donkey awaits. Oh, and don't wear mixed fibres. Apparently, that p!sses off your god, more than anything.
    1
  95.  @aeternafortuna1644  God-botherers can't disprove evolution, even if they tried. For starters, they're ignorant of science, and the use of logic, reason and facts to determine truth. Modern humans have existed for about 100,000 years. Isn't it odd how this supposed god only became interested in giving these so-called prophets, or should that be profits, what was on his/her/its mind, only about 3,000 years ago. That's in the last 3% of human existence, and just like buses, three come along one after the other. Where was this supposed god, the previous 97% of the time. You can smell the BS a mile away.
    1
  96. Modern humans have been around for about 100,000 years. God only bothered to get involved in the last few thousand of them. And then three times in a row. The same as buses. Nothing, and then suddenly a few all at once.
    1
  97. The two are incompatible. You either believe in reason, logic, and facts as used in science, or you don't.
    1
  98. As though he knew anything.
    1
  99.  @cliffgardner5717  Nobody created god. As he/she/t doesn't exist. However, if a supposed god did exist. Then that would be a valid question.
    1
  100.  @Lacey_Face  The story is just a ridiculous fairy tale. Why would any sane person even give it kennel space?
    1
  101.  @jennifercockfield3218  You're invoking Pascal's Wager. This was debunked a long time ago. There's no point in believing something just for the sake of it. Especially, when there is no reason to. Do you expect me not to challenge bad ideas?
    1
  102. Nice to see somebody using their brain to think logically.
    1
  103.  @kirkhuneycutt4227  So he knows nothing about the subject of evolution then? They always trot out these so-called academics, who have no expertise in the area they're professing on. That's maybe, because nobody who studies evolution for a living, would ever content that it wasn't true.
    1
  104.  @kirkhuneycutt4227  Yeah, the last person to be pontificating, about the highly complex, and intensely researched science of evolutionary biology.
    1
  105. You've obviously never studied biology have you?
    1