Comments by "Moon Shoes" (@moonshoes11) on "Professor Dave Explains" channel.

@alexalke1417 It’s not even a theory.
234
do better.
9
I learned about all this from Breaking Bad. ;)
6
Happy holiday!
4
@30:55 “If I had a nickel for every time that happened, I’d have two nickels. Which isn’t a lot of nickels, but it’s sure strange it happened twice.” Doofenschmirtz
3
I have two souls.
3
@karmachameleon326 I utilize them both almost equally :)
3
Why not choose a different god or any other more likely explanation?
3
Hello there. :)
2
@hardboiledaleks9012 Science shows us that space and time, resulted from the Big Bang. We can’t investigate what was “prior” to the Bog Bang, or even if “prior to” is an accurate question since time was a result of the Big Bang. So, it’s not even a theory. It’s at best a hypothesis with no supporting evidence. Is there any way to “prove” a god?
1
@hardboiledaleks9012 Also, from what we observe…our only examples of consciousness result from a physical brain. So, energy, then the laws of physics, then chemistry, then biology, then physical brains, and later…consciousness. So that god hypothesis would require both time and consciousness to exist in ways we have never observed and cannot currently investigate.
1
@hypericacea Faith is not,part of the scientific method. So we don’t use it. But it’s good that you recognize faith is unreliable. Which is why we don’t use it.
1
@hypericacea Here is what you need; Some way to differentiate an imaginary thing from a thing that exists in reality. You might not ever be able to prove unicorns and leprechauns exist, right? But if you can’t demonstrate they exist in reality, then what reason is there to believe they are not strictly imaginary?
1
@MathiasVIKING0403 Sounds like special pleading. Consider this; Energy cannot be created or destroyed. We have evidence Energy exists. We also have evidence for the existence of quantum fields. What we don’t have evidence for such an agency or consciousness existing. In fact, every example of consciousness we can demonstrate, results from a physical brain. Now, if we compare the two models, model A (God) has no evidence, and model B (quantum fields and energy) do exist… Which model is better?
1
@TheWordImmanuel Do,we have any reason to conclude there was ever a state of nothing? As far as we know, energy and quantum fields have always existed. And we have evidence they exist today. So, your dichotomy is false. It isn’t God or nothing. It is something versus God. And imaginary beings cannot create anything as far as we know.
1
@MathiasVIKING0403 It’s a shame you can’t follow. Which is a better model to explain the phenomenon, one with evidence or one without? Being pedantic only does you a disservice. And if you’re going to use prophecy, you’re going to have a difficult time. Whatever prophecy you’re referring to isn’t a prophecy which would be considered evidence. Vague claims written after the fact aren’t prophecy. And you’d still need to explain and demonstrate the mechanisms, which you can’t. Archeological locations don’t help either.. I can show you NYC, but that doesn’t mean Spider-man is real.
1
@MathiasVIKING0403 I’m sure that is frustrating. I sometimes wonder if the number of replies in a short time create some flag they use to remove comments. It happens. Sorry it does. I did get your response on claims of prophecy. Which are of course more claims, not evidence. And how you think NY proves strider-man. ;)
1
@MathiasVIKING0403 Don’t pretend you have some access to special knowledge I’m not already aware of. The timing of my response isn’t relevant. Fallacious arguments might convince you, but they’re still fallacious. No, claims of prophecy are not evidence. They are claims which require evidence. So your “prophecy” claim doesn’t cut it. Apparently, you don’t even know what a claim is.
1
@MathiasVIKING0403 My question about the better model is a failure on your behalf, not mine. Besides, I clarified it for those,of,you who are too slow to follow. In ANY comparison between two hypotheses, which is a better model….the one with evidence, or the one without evidence? By better model, if you do t already understand it means “better model to explain the phenomenon” then you simply aren’t qualified to have this discussion. Try to remember: Real magic is fake. Fake magic is real. The same applies to your God.
1
@MathiasVIKING0403 More of your comments should be removed. Lol.
1
@MathiasVIKING0403 Is Net York city evidence that Spider-man exists? Yes or no?
1
@MathiasVIKING0403 Show me evidence for any prophecy, and I can debunk it. But you didn’t provide a single fulfilled prophecy. And you can’t. And what about NYC? Evidence of Spider-man?
1
@MathiasVIKING0403 Are you still struggling with the compression of asking which is a better model, one with evidence and one without? What is the purpose of such models? Look, Marty, you’re the one who believes in magic.
1
@MathiasVIKING0403 It’s strange you think prophecies cannot be debunked. Pack a lunch, you’re about to be schooled. Hindu prophecies can be found in various texts, including the Bhagavata Purana and the Bhavishya Purana, and some Hindus also believe that dreams can contain prophecies. You don’t think Muslims claim prophecies in The Holy Quran? “For the Son of Man is going to come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and will then repay every man according to his deeds. Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.“ (Matthew 16: 27, 28). Are those people still alive today? Or did they die two thousand years ago? You apparently don’t value truth, or whether or not you hold true beliefs. That’s what you just acknowledged.
1
@markeviston8077 I’d sure like to know how you ruled out natural causes. And why one should conclude there was ever a state of nothing.
1