Comments by "Taxtro" (@MrCmon113) on "Does God Exist? 4 New Arguments | 5 Minute Video" video.

  1. Prove what? He failed to make an argument that has been refuted thousands of years ago. Instead he showcased an astounding lack of comprehension of every scientific discipline and philosophy. If he had at least stated Aquina's version of the argument, he would have spared himself some of the embarrassment.
    2
  2. Matt I cannot prove that there are not pink unicorns. But I can explain why it is foolish to believe in them. The same is true for all possible, but improbable things.
    1
  3. This argument, and it is only one, was refuted thousands of years before we knew anything about the Big Bang or chemistry or evolution. The argument, this moron fails to state clearly, goes as follows: There is something moving / complex / thinking, therefore there must have been a motion / creator / thought to preceed it. The first motion, creator / thought, is god. It is clear why even ancient philosophers instantly saw through this infantile attempt to reason, since the introduction of god just adds another motion / thought / complex thing to be explained. We can explain a watch with a watchmaker, but we cannot explain it ultimately thus, because it would require a watchmaker - maker, a watchmaker-maker creator, the creator of the watchmaker-maker creator and so forth ad infinitum. If you allow this regress to be stopped at any point and the watchmaker-maker, ie god, to be uncreated, then you must also allow the same for the watchmaker. We distinguish between designed and natural things and design can, by it's very nature, never be an ultimate explanation. That is the central flaw in deism.
    1