You mean you are fired up to back up the blatant lies ,creulty , torture , rape ,paedophillia and fraudulence that is organised religion ? And presumably evil non-believers such as myself will be fired up for eternity in hell after my death by the flames of hell . The murderous , totalitarian , intolerant arrogance of religious people and their organisations never cease to amaze and disgust me .
Top Ten reasons individual's can label themselves Christian. 10 - You vigorously deny the existence of thousands of gods claimed by other religions, but feel outraged when someone denies the existence of yours. 9 - You feel insulted and “dehumanized” when scientists say that people evolved from other life forms, but you have no problem with the Biblical claim that we were created from dirt. 8 - You laugh at polytheists, but you have no problem believing in a Triune God. 7 - Your face turns purple when you hear of the “atrocities” attributed to Allah, but you don’t even flinch when hearing about how God/Jehovah slaughtered all the babies of Egypt in “Exodus” and ordered the elimination of entire ethnic groups in “Joshua” including women, children, and infants! 6 - You laugh at Hindu beliefs that deify humans, and Greek claims about gods sleeping with women, but you have no problem believing that the Holy Spirit impregnated Mary, who then gave birth to a man-god who got killed, came back to life and then ascended into the sky. 5 - You are willing to spend your life looking for little loopholes in the scientifically established age of Earth (few billion years), but you find nothing wrong with believing dates recorded by Bronze Age tribesmen sitting in their tents and guessing that Earth is a few generations old. 4 - You believe that the entire population of this incestuous planet with the exception of those who share your beliefs - though excluding those in all rival sects - will spend Eternity in an infinite Hell of Suffering. And yet consider your religion the most “tolerant” and “loving.” 3 - While modern science, history, geology, biology, and physics have failed to convince you otherwise, some idiot rolling around on the floor speaking in “tongues” may be all the evidence you need to “prove” Christianity. 2 - You define 0.01% as a “high success rate” when it comes to answered prayers. You consider that to be evidence that prayer works. And you think that the remaining 99.99% FAILURE was simply the will of God. 1 - You actually know a lot less than many atheists and agnostics do about the Bible, Christianity, and church history - but still call yourself a Christian.
@@ryananon779 Yeah I'm highly skeptical of all of that! That sounded highly suspect! It didn't really sound like he did anything that wrong! Women will cry rape at the drop of a hat or if you touch them wrong or come on to them and they aren't attracted to you so who the fuck knows what actually happened! This is why have very little interest in even talking to any woman or asking any woman out or show any sign that I'm attracted to her!
This guy is ruthless, people need to be shocked into reality,being a Christian myself for years, we used to go into fight or flight mode, listening but protecting the belief part of the brain
It should be noted that Bertrand Russell held the beliefs of Leninist "communism" to be a religion. Christopher Hitchens holds that the present Ruler of North Korea is the Son, and his late father the Father, the gods of the religion he's imposing upon that country.
Yvonne is infuriating, refuting my disbelief so arrogantly. I was a Soldier for 33 years. I don’t believe in her fairy tales. She quotes literature. I lived the life. I do not believe in any organized religions beliefs. You David are correct. If you ever need a name to add to refute such stupid claims like Yvonne’s claim. Use mine! Thank you.
As a matter of fact, I consider "football" both in the British and the American kind, to be a bad 'religion'. Cricket, as a game at the international level, is desperately boring. But as a religion, I quite admire the idea that some behaviour "just isn't cricket". I dare say that watching people you know playing cricket is quite an enjoyable pastime. I prefer the term "theism", and dislike that definition of religion, for two reasons. Buddhism is a religion, and *_does not_* require a god. Furthermore, the _Buddha,_ the Enlightened One, held that being born again to die again was too much agony, and he would find out a way to stop it and attain the state of Nirvana, the peace of nothingness. My own best "spiritual advisor" was fond of Schweitzer's work, which included the difference between "Life denying" and "Life affirming" views. Buddhism is a strong member of the first of these classes. My other reason is that I think modern lay people think "religion" is a way to be "good people". The ancient beliefs that we call religions of the Norse, Greek, Roman, Egyptian, and Babylonian kind, had gods and goddesses that were NOT good examples. But if we could officially declare that religion so defined _does _*_not_* need a God, we'd improve matters.
I lost a lot of respect for this platform because his previous speaker Ridley was just stating things that were not facts at all. Things about Islamic faith and even misquoted Voltaires joke as Sartre being serious.
@@minhearg8331 because there is a creator. The creator is God. God is immortal, Think of it like numbers there is no start or ending. It seems silly to me that a random thing in nothing exploded and now we’re just living on a rock and we’re humans with thoughts, feelings, and emotions. There is clearly a creator. I’ve watched videos, read books and articles about the Big Bang and I’m still Christian. Obviously not everything in the Bible is true bc it was written by several men. I believe in the holy trinity. I also believe that depending on how you act on earth you will either go to heaven or hell. Of course there’s no evidence if that’s true but that’s what I believe because it just make sense. It would be weird if we just lived in experience life for no reason and just disappear forever when we die. If you were genuinely a good person I believe that you will go to heaven. We can just be dead forever and boom that’s the story.
@@vega066 You think it is silly that 'a random thing in nothing exploded' but you believe in an immortal being with no starting or ending. Lmfao you are an embarrassment.
In '73 I prayed hard for the NY Mets to win the World Series. They didn't and that was the point I realized prayer has no affect. Some time after that, I realized god does not exist.
D. Silverman I got a good idea for you. 1) Get a guy to dig a deep hole get a coffin spend only 1 night in the hole after it being covered just from sunset to sunrise I DARE YOU. It will give you Time to introspect .Then you will stop blabbing which is devilish.
Just because you haven't seen spirits yourself and been in spirit yourself doesn't mean others ha ent you choose not to believe it is your own choice that doesn't mean it isn't real
I wonder if David got his lawyer license revoked after he was recently terminated from American Atheists for allegations of sexual assault and stealing funds from the organization.
mytuber81 maybe he was beginning to accept the bible and saw sex with his slaves or taking the possesions of the unbelievers, as acceptable religious behaviour. doesn't mean his statements here are in any way invalid though.
His use of cell phone to debate turns me down. I would have favored him speaking from memory with a few papers to outline his thoughts. Maybe I'm old fashion but using a cellphone brings down the quality of the debate. He's just reading. Not debating.
True, but we need some sort of labels to create order in the "human" (which is a label itself) domain or else everything is nothing and that's too high level for our physical beings to operate.
DOES GOD EXIST? attention: David Silverman The evidence is derived from the notion that the things we see around us are ‘contingent’ or merely ‘possible’. The idea here is that a contingent thing is something that may either exist or not exist; its nature does not guarantee that it exists. Although all the things we experience directly are indeed contingent, there is also something else that exists necessarily, in other words, whose very nature guarantees that it exists. Since a contingent thing on its own merit could either exist or not exist, it must have some external cause that made it exist - like ‘tipping the scales’ in favor of its existence rather than its non-existence. As an illustration, take a person A. A is contingent, meaning that A is the sort of thing that could easily have failed to exist. In fact, at one time A did not yet exist, and in the future A will cease existing, that proves A is not necessary. So there must have been a cause, maybe his parents, who brought him into existence. The aggregate whole of all contingent things - in other words the physical universe - is also contingent. After all, everything in the universe is contingent, so taken all together as one thing, it too must be contingent. Thus it also needs an external cause, just like A who needs an external cause to exist. Since that external cause has to be outside the whole aggregate of contingent things, it cannot itself be contingent. So it is necessary. Hence there is a necessary external, uncaused, uncreated existent which causes all other things to exist! And this, of course, is God When you look around and think, ‘All of this could have failed to exist; why is there something, rather than nothing?’ you are asking a good question. The answer to the aforesaid question is that not everything can be contingent; that is, not everything could have failed to exist. There must be something that just has to exist, to explain why everything else has wound up existing. INFINITE REGRESS: The problem of infinite regress is the reason why someone or something necessarily exists and not everything is contingent. Not everything has a cause - there has to be one causeless thing or being to start all causes. Some people say that God cannot exist because we can simply ask, “who created God?” and “who created the creator of God?” ad perpetuum. This is the “Standard Infinite Regress” that is being referred to in the question. But the Principle of Infinite Regress can be viewed in a different light. This means that if everything is created or caused, you will never stop asking who created or caused this being, who created or caused things, and so on. The buck has to stop somewhere; otherwise, we do not have a solution with the problem of infinite regress. There has to be one necessary being that was never created or caused. So God is the necessary, non-contingent being that has no cause or beginning. He is the first and uncaused cause of everything. The buck stops with God. Like falling dominoes that cause other dominoes to fall, He is the first being outside of the domino system which created the series of events we call as the history of the cosmos. We also know that the universe never existed forever and that it is contingent. The cause of the cause is above and beyond that of the universe - all time, space, matter and energy. So we have a cause that is timeless, spaceless, immaterial and extremely powerful. What can fit that description? Two things - God and abstract objects. But abstract objects such as numbers and shapes and equations cannot make anything. They do not have causal powers, but God has. So God created the universe and everything in it.
@@eligostheexalted In the Age of computers there is a new miracle found in the Quran: That is a balanced number of words: 1. The word Angel repeats the same as the word Satan 88 times. 2. The word al-hayah (life) equals the number of al-mawt (death), 145 times. 3. The word hereafter is repeated as much as the word world 115 times 4. The word yaum hari in the singular is 365 times, the Arabs themselves use 354 days per year. 5. Women have the right to inherit, have the right to own wealth, in contrast to Europe 1400 years ago. So what do you think of how beautifully God plans
Surah Fussilat (41), Verse 40: إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يُلْحِدُونَ فِي آيَاتِنَا لَا يَخْفَوْنَ عَلَيْنَا أَفَمَنْ يُلْقَىٰ فِي النَّارِ خَيْرٌ أَمْ مَنْ يَأْتِي آمِنًا يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ اعْمَلُوا مَا شِئْتُمْ إِنَّهُ بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ بَصِيرٌ {40. Indeed those who distort Our Verses are not hidden from Us. Is he who is hurled into the Fire better? Or he who comes secure on the Day of Resurrection? Do what you will. Indeed He the creator of universe (swt) is All-Seer of everything you do.}
Brilliant man. However, my hatred for abortion has nothing to do with religion as I am an atheist. I just take the ‘controversial’ opinion that murdering a child is wrong. 😂
And forcing a woman against her will to be an incubator to another potential being I find disgusting. If that baby is born and needs a blood transfusion and it can only come from the father. Guess what the father had the right to refuse that baby the blood and let it die, because he has body autonomy. You advocate against a woman from keeping her body autonomy. Forcing her into a potentially life threatening and incredibly painful process of giving birth or surgery. All while knowing society outcomes for these low income females goes to shit got them and that females will then resort to breaking laws, becoming criminals, back yard abortions.
@@mattc3510 I am also in favor of a massive overhaul in parental support, especially in the low-income communities. There are a great many things that need to be fixed. & it isn’t forcing a woman against her will to be an incubator, it’s understanding that there is another human life inside of her that deserves the right to live as much as she does. Contraceptives, birth control, & more than anything education need to be ramped up so that abortion isn’t even an issue. Abortion is an incredibly complex & complicated issue, & there isn’t one true right answer. Being able to talk about these things is essential.
For a random example: "The word religion has multiple meanings."- hmm.. Not really any more meanings than the average word. Do you know how I know this? Because I was just studying the difference between religion and spirituality. When you say that anyone can be religious, you are disrespecting religious people. You say that the definition of religion is a set of beliefs revolving around a god or gods. Sure... That is the most obvious aspect,... But it is not a substantial or satisfactory definition to anyone with an IQ above 50. The actual word God is Roman, and initially meant a supernatural deity or deity's. At the same time though a lot of pagan beliefs maintained and ultimate God like the Vikings "all father". This is a tangent I don't want to go down though. Anyways, Religious practices have much more to do with literature and communal practices than personal beliefs. It's about organization and community revolving around an *ideal* , not an arbitrary imagined thing.
I just refuse to believe that any mentally correct person can really deep down believe there actually is any such God. I understand that it gives people a path In life but it is based on something false surely that can never be a good path. It should even be debated in such an intelligent way. David was awesome
Seriouslt, these are the arguments. Science deals with naturalist phenomena not with metaphysicl ones. Can scientific analysis be applied on morality, pain, suffering, good and bad? Rhetoric, claps and confirmation biased all that leads to simpleton arguments.
Josef stalin and Lenin both were magnificent personalities , very kind and merciful and peaceful because they were atheists. Silverman never tell lies he always speaks truth.
@@HarryNicNicholas what about those giants Josef stalin and Lenin. Why they believed in survival of fittest. They were after Rosoow, and Marx who supported the atheist ideology. Though they were against capitalism. Now capitalists or west is using this ideology of atheism.
find out what atheists belive cos you clearly have no idea, or have been told by a "believer" what an atheist is, the whole point of atheism is to doubt the crap that people tell you and FIND OUT FOR YOURSELF.
Christians who follow purely the "word of God" are essentially under totalitarian control, dictatorship of God. Atheists can choose whether they want that or not, but in my example, Christians, are forced under it unless they leave their religion. I think force and violence can be used reasonably in certain scenarios. It doesn't take theism nor atheism to require the exertion of violence or force since those exist outside of an conceptual world view. If someone physically attacks you it doesn't matter whether you're religious or not, your most simple and first line of defense is counter-violence or counter-force.
I see a slight problem in this argument... Mr. Silverman seems to think all religions are godsentric... Maybe he should take a closer look/study into Buddhism... Is it a religion? Very much so... Does it have a god? No.. just a human who ended the cercle of life...
weaseldragon true... But that's my problem.. he takes the stand of God believing religions as religions.. but Buddhism is a leading religion of the world and older than abrahamic religions... (Unlike saying foodball could be a religion)... His whole argument of "I think all religion is faults" can be taken down...
Dimitri Karunaratne He stated explicitly that if your religion doesn't involve gods and supernatural dogma he's not talking about you. How could he be any clearer?
The subject "this house believes the world cannot thrive without religion" not god... But religion... Buddhism being the 2nd oldest modern day religion and the the largest global religion (taking athist out) representing 7% of the global population... The house does not stipulate religion is Abrahamic only...
it doesn't matter. Buddhism has not met their burden of proof so it show go out with the other religions. Or can you demonstrate empirically that Buddhism is true.
Surah Fussilat (41), Verses 41-42: إِنَّ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا بِالذِّكْرِ لَمَّا جَاءَهُمْ ۖ وَإِنَّهُ لَكِتَابٌ عَزِيزٌ . لَا يَأْتِيهِ الْبَاطِلُ مِنْ بَيْنِ يَدَيْهِ وَلَا مِنْ خَلْفِهِ تَنْزِيلٌ مِنْ حَكِيمٍ حَمِيدٍ {41. Indeed those who disbelieved in the Reminder (the Qur’an) when it came to them-and indeed, it is an honourable, invincible book. 42. Falsehood cannot approach it-neither from its front, nor from its back. A revelation from the All-Wise, worthy of All-Praise.} meaning those who disbelieve in the Qur’an are not hidden from Allah (swt) and they will receive their punishment. This Qur’an is protected and preserved, and nobody can produce anything like it. There is no way to corrupt it, because it has been sent down by the Lord of the worlds. He is Wise in all that He says and does, Praiseworthy in all that He commands and forbids.
While the speaker makes good points about how religion is used to create divisions and a sense of the superiority/saved or "the other" between people, he actually presents one key assumption that undermines his whole argument. He claims that if anyone would produce a sufficiently impressive physical miracle, he would "quit his job" and assumably would not longer be an atheist. However, this notion of "Man testing God (or His prophets) is a persistent theme in the Old and New Testaments and was the reason Christ continually refused to do miracles on demand to establish his credentials with the priests of his day. Muhammad, 600 years later, also explained that even though Christ performed many miracles, the priests were neither satisfied, convinced , "willing to give up their jobs", or even do the actual job they were hired to do, which was lead the people to righteousness. For this reason, Muhammad did not offer similar proof because he rightly pointed that when Jesus did these things it changed neither people's mind nor hearts - so what's the point? For example, if the speaker had his wish come true, and having found that this imaginary God somehow met his criteria, what would that prove? Perhaps that this speaker was arrogant? That he was a "materialist" in the traditional sense that nothing matters but physically tangible matter and energy? Also, what if after seeing this overwhelming proof, the speaker walked around the corner and explained to a random person what had just happened. As a random person, even a person of faith, would we even believe him? Should we believe him because he was a well-known (former) skeptic? Should we believe him because he thought up a clever test for God? If this was a powerful miracle that many people witnessed, should we believe that this speaker actually was the one that set that miracle in motion? As for everyone else who did not see it, there will always be questions and doubts. You get back to the point presented by the speaker: "You cannot prove that something does not exist (or a miracle never happened)" On the other hand, there are many good philosophical arguments for the existence of a Creator as the cause the universe, that have nothing to do directly with religion. I would refer you to this line of argument presented in various ways in the writings and commentary on the Baha'i Faith. The irony of the Creator example is that you can logically conclude there is a Creator, but there is nothing in the physical universe that unambiguously and comprehensively explains the reality, or even the will, of such a Creator. So again, when the speaker asked for PHYSICAL proof to demonstrate the existence of a supernatural (non-physical) reality - well that slo seems silly. We need to employ observation, abstract and reflective thought, reason and logic to conclude there is a Creator (i.e., the universe didn't spring into existence from nothingness), -only then can your arguments be in an area (human thought) in which everyone can participate and come to a reasonable consensus. Again, the speaker is castigating in religion that human tendency to try to "concertize" or "humanize" a physically transcendent concept - but that is just the priests and cultural archetypes doing a really poor job - they are better off saying to just leave that topic alone. The core of most faith traditions actually do not even try to describes the Creator. Their prophets are like mirrors reflecting the light of the Sun (like spiritual illumination and social progress). They always refer to Mirror that came before them, and predict another Mirror that will come in the future based on the needs of humanity. Another analogy is that the teaching of these messengers are like the lamp in a lantern. If the light appears in one lantern for awhile and then fades from view, only to appear in a totally new lantern, the question becomes: Are you a lover of the light or a lover of the lamp? The speaker rightful asserts that most religionists are lovers of just the lamp, long after the light has returned elsewhere.
Oh Dear..You all are products of Allah's manufacturing industry..How can a product think about its Creator..impossible..imagine can all the cell phones of Apple companay or samsung Companay can think more than there provided capacity..Can those cell phone after debating with eachother can even imagine that human have vains and blood runs in these vains...your all discussion is just time wasting..
His argument style is shoddy at best He refers to God and then jumps to a completely unrelated superman,ghosts, magicians lol no one has worshipped ghost or magicians there not considered gods nor do they have religious followings. He also can’t seem to grasp basic concepts like ghosts are not Supreme beings or creators of anything. The fact that people find this man a leading light is just baffling. He also compares God to Santa clause, God is one, eternal absolute,he begets not nor was he begotten. There is none like unto him... something that has ironically been proven by this man who could not bring forth a single comparison with these characteristic.😀
It is a theory indeed, but a pretty solid one and the big bang theory is accepted by many religious scientists anyway. Besides, scientists are not scared to admit when they are wrong, which all the religious believers are.
Yes, the "big bang" is just a theory but the difference is the "BBT" is backed up by mountains of data and the bible has nothing to offer in the way of empirical evidence. That means Christianity isn't even a theory, it's a unsubstantiated claim. When you assert a claim you have the burden of proof to prove that claim or admit your position is illogical.
The only evidence that I'm aware of that could be direct evidence of the big bang is that the universe seems to still be expanding, but that is hardly proof. If there is more that I am unaware of please, enlighten me.
@@Devin_Stromgren there IS more than you are aware of apparently- the difference between proof and evidence. He didn't say he had proof of the big bang, he said he had data supporting it, also known as evidence. In addition to the evidence you yourself admitted, the fact that the universe is still expanding, and the evidence of the microwave background radiation Alex pointed out, there is the fact of black holes, which demonstrates that singularities are not just possible, but factual. Is there even any evidence supporting the possibility that a god COULD exist?
@@Darkfury234 That's a very old question. I will say, come up with something better. That's not the definition of God. God is the one who no one has ever seen, nor it is like anything that we can see or imagine. We can only come close to knowing God through various prophets, Adam, Ibrahim, Moses, Jessus and Mohammed. God is not a creation.
@@ahmadkarimi1691 yes and your reply is also an old one, if god is not a creation then how come you expect the universe is a creation. How can you be so sure that the so called prophets are not liars with hidden political or economic motives and how can you tell that those prophets were in their right mind, Today if someone claims that they have seen or talked with a god/ghost/angel then any rational person will immediately take him to mental hospital rather than start worshipping him right, but that is not the case in olden days our ancestors were ignorant and has very less knowledge about their surroundings(nature) so they believed those delusional prophets. If God is the one who no one has ever seen, nor it is like anything that we can see or imagine then we dont need to worship him/her/it.
geez you're just a troll. Do you have any evidence that "god" is even real or are you just gonna stick to lame scare tactics? Present an argument, show some evidence, if god is really on your side you it shouldn't be hard. lol
the Bible is the evidence,,,,but u never took the time to study,,,,u rather listen to these idiots ur parent probibly never even guided u properly,,,,lost soul
Sorry, the bible is far from proof. In fact if your position is that the bible is a real and accurate account of history then you would also have to provide evidence for that. (Spoiler Alert) It's not, stars formed before planets which makes Genesis factually wrong, there wasn't a global flood because other civilizations have recorded history before, during and after the "flood" was supposed to have happen, there is zero evidence that the Israelites were ever slaves in Egypt, the world is definitely not flat. On a moral side it promotes owning people as property (slavery), women inequality, intolerance to gay people, and a moral foundation that is subject to change if your "god" deems it so. If that's the proof for a benevolent "god" then you have f-ed up values, my man. You should go somewhere quiet and think about your life. lol Oh and baby genocide, really? What part of "god's" plan needed baby genocide. It's silly you are even hear defending it. You should be ashamed, geez. Not only do you believe in a savage religion but you don't even have any good evidence to believe in the first place. That makes your believe an illogical position. It's a shame you don't study your bible. I could bring you up to speed if you want. :)
Believing in 'fairy-tales' is not unique to the religious: if you believe that worldwide 'secularity' would bring peace to the planet, then I wonder about Mao Tse Tung, Pol-Pot, and Joseph Stalin; to say nothing about criminal regimes all around the world, which do not claim to carry out their deeds in the name of God. Who believes in fairy-tales? Has this guy never heard of 'human nature'?
OR there is a god but he/she/it is far away and is unaware of all the conflict, violence, and suffering that has been taking place for centuries all around the world, OR this god knows what is happening but is being prevented from doing anything about it, OR this god knows what is happening but is too weak to do anything about it, OR this god knows what is happening and is able to end to all conflict, violence, and suffering but refuses to do anything about it. In which case, he/she/it would be a depraved sociopath lacking Love and Wisdom.
OR i am god and you are god and it is up to each and every one of us to make Earth a Heavenly place to Live. If you can see other possibilities, then please present them, for all to see, that we may learn together.
The brain saw that life was uncertain and insecure, so thought invented the I, the me, the so-called self, the True Self or Higher Self. Then the self invented god. Then the brain worshipped god. There is god and then there is God. god is the invention of the I, the me, the self, the so-called True or Higher Self, which is the invention of thought, which is the reaction of the past conditioning of the brain. So the I, the me, the self/Self is worshipping itself. god is an escape from what is, the isness, the fact, the act, the actual, what is actually taking place from moment to moment, free of any interpreter or censor, making you irresponsible to all that is taking place in the world today. god is inattention. god is fear. When the brain is set Totally Free of the the I, the me, the self, the so-called True Self or Higher Self, then and only then is there God. God is Love, Peace, Joy, Kindness, Goodness, Beauty, Creativity, Feeling, ExperiencING, Wisdom, Truth. God is being in Communication, Communion, Relationship with everyone and everything, in each and every moment of daily life. Then and only then is there Heart, Soul, Spirit, for the very first time in daily life.
Or there is the possibility that God is all powerful and all knowing but does not end suffering on this earth because of a combination of respect for the free will he gave us, and in the long run the suffering during life is irrelevant. What would matter would be the afterlife.
Great work Silverman....Yvonne Ridley at 60 could speak off the top of her head for the most part and yet you have to read from your phone. Good evening indeed lol
Put your damn phone down and give an adult presentation. WTH? I can’t even imagine trying a jury trial, as I do for a living, with my phone in my hand to read from. Embarrassing.
Let's imagine that our physical reality is like a puzzle being put together. Would you expect a single puzzle piece to somehow show you that something/someone had designed the puzzle? Or is it possible that you just have a lot of hubris and refuse to accept the concept that there's something greater than you that you are not able to perceive and control? I wonder why faith is called faith. It is because it requires proof? Is it because it requires supernatural changes or events? Is it because they're declaring that they can prove god? Lol.. The angels have wings because they take themselves lightly.. How much money does this a-hole make? It's unfortunate that I can put this person to shame even though he's the professional.
Just talking from the conceptual idea, maybe to win the debate but there are many things to bring on the board of questions from science, from history, from anthropology etc. He has said Ridley, a brain-washed but I think he is a real dogmatic mind.
