Joseph-(UK) | Math Proves God | The Atheist Experience 26.19

Подписаться 413 тыс.

Просмотров 83 тыс.

50% 1

The Atheist Experience 26.19 for May 8, 2022 with Matt Dillahunty and @Forrest Valkai.
Call the show on Sundays 4:30pm-6:00pm CT: 1-512-686-0279 or use your computer to save on long-distance charges: tiny.cc/calltheshow
► Don't like commercials? Become a patron for ad-free content & more: / theatheistexperience
► Podcast versions of the show may be found at:
www.spreaker.com/show/theathe...
► Atheist Experience merch can be found at: bit.ly/aenmerch
► Become a RU-vid member: / @theatheistexperience
► Join our discord:
tinyurl.com/TheACAdiscord
► Chat room rules:
atheist-experience.org/chat-ru...
► The most up to date Atheist Experience videos can be found by visiting
atheist-experience.com/archive/
-------
WHAT IS THE ATHEIST EXPERIENCE?
The Atheist Experience is a weekly call-in television show in Austin, Texas geared at a non-atheist audience. The Atheist Experience is produced by the Atheist Community of Austin.
The Atheist Community of Austin is organized as a nonprofit educational corporation to develop and support the atheist community, to provide opportunities for socializing and friendship, to promote secular viewpoints, to encourage positive atheist culture, to defend the first amendment principle of state-church separation, to oppose discrimination against atheists and to work with other organizations in pursuit of common goals.
We define atheism as the lack of belief in gods. This definition also encompasses what most people call agnosticism.
VISIT THE ACA'S OFFICIAL WEB SITES
www.atheist-community.org (The Atheist Community of Austin)
www.atheist-experience.com (The Atheist Experience TV Show)
► More shows and video clips can be found in the archive:
www.atheist-experience.com/arc...
► DVDs of the Atheist Experience can be purchased via:
www.atheist-community.com/prod...
NOTES
TheAtheistExperience is the official channel of The Atheist Experience. "The Atheist Experience" is a trademark of the ACA.
The views and opinions expressed by hosts, guests, or callers are their own and not necessarily representative of the Atheist Community of Austin.
Opening Theme:
Shelley Segal "Saved" www.shelleysegal.com/
Limited use license by Shelley Segal
Copyright © 2011 Shelley Segal
Copyright © 1997 Atheist Community of Austin. All rights reserved.

Опубликовано:

11 май 2022

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 931

@marasmusine 2 года назад

Joseph is the puddle of water marvelling at the infitesimal chance that it fits in the hole exactly.

@cartesiancircle 2 года назад

Hail! Douglas Adams ✌️

@DonXardas 2 года назад

@@cartesiancircle he is way too underrated.

@parkercollins7946 2 года назад

I’ve not read the book, but that way this puddle line made me laugh, I think I need to read it.

@DonXardas 2 года назад

@@parkercollins7946 yes.

@martylawrence5532 2 года назад

A puddle of water is highly variable. It can get bigger with rain or get smaller with evaporation. It can be thimble-sized or as big as Lake Superior. The analogy you draw is absurd compared to the extreme, extreme, extreme fine tuning of over 122 constants and measurements in chemistry and physics of 10^40 to 10^120 each of needed precision. It shows OUR realm is supernatural and God's would be the natural part of all existence. Fits intelligent design entirely. A puddle of water? LOL!

@SamIAm-kz4hg 2 года назад

The caller says he will use math, but then says "it seems to me...". That's not math. That's you using un-math.

@3inherjar 2 года назад

But, by his definition of maths....

@deanmoncaster 2 года назад

Non maths

@brucebaker810 2 года назад

but if he has a greek letter as a placeholder for "seemingness to him"... Ora general "seemingness to" symbol. Plus the id of that which is being seemed to. The seemer? Seemee?

@theboombody 2 года назад

Math does not go by inductive reasoning or evidence. It only goes by proof and deductive reasoning. Inductive reasoning is specific to general, and deductive reasoning is general to specific. ONE counterexample disproves a claim. A million examples doesn't prove anything. That said, I definitely believe in God. Just can't prove him mathematically.

@beircheartaghaistin2332 2 года назад

@@theboombody If it can produce consistent results, it's still a good tool to make predictions. Also, what are you defining as 'proof'... because you can use maths without any reference points for any of the numbers. I definitely don't believe in God.

@NastyLittleBagginses 2 года назад

I can prove mathematically that it is statistically impossible for this caller to exist, simply by starting with the conclusion and working backwards.

@pabrielgomez8563 2 года назад

Me too.

@somersetcace1 2 года назад

Exactly! Backwards logic at its worst.

@grahamsmith5396 2 года назад

I can prove by mathematical calculations that.....uhm....ah.... what was the topic? Atoms or math?

@bortiz11 2 года назад

Damn, what's the probability that someone among thousands would care about my response and, further, be able to prove that I exist outof the atoms that may or not have been able to exist in this or another dimension, by one or another deity of natural process? 🤔 What a question!

@NastyLittleBagginses 2 года назад

@@bortiz11 Is this... uh... "question" your way of asking for help for your meth addiction..?

@landsgevaer 2 года назад

Did this guy try to calculate the probability of humanity inventing a god? That literally happened thousands of times already, and counting. Certainly more often than the number of times god could have created humanity. 😉

@haudace 2 года назад

Holy shit this is such a good argument to turn these dumbasses on their heads. You believe in probabilities right? Soooooo other societies invented weird supernatural beliefs, what are the chances yours is as incorrect as the others?

@13shadowwolf 2 года назад

The probability that humans created god is about equal to the combined creativity of humanity over time, multiplied by the number of seconds humans have spent thinking about such things. It doesn't matter how low someone wants to claim the odds are, eventually someone was going to come up with it. If the odds are 1 in a trillion, but you roll the dice 100 trillion times... you're gonna get that 1 in a trillion many times over.

@ffsno9078 2 года назад

@@13shadowwolf plus there have been about 18 billion people so far, (every person ever born wether living or dead right now) or there abouts. If the odds are 1 in 1 million then we should have 19,000 gods? If my math is right. So yeah this caller is wrong

@marasmusine 2 года назад

@@ffsno9078 And as soon as _anyone_ has a god idea and is able to communicate it, that idea is going to spread memetically.

@ffsno9078 2 года назад

@@marasmusine point taken.

@mg-ew2xf 2 года назад

I've calculated it and the odds of a god existing are infinitesimally small therefore this proves there is no god. I will not be showing my math.

@michelleespino9814 2 года назад

I wish my college homework was that easy!!

@Catfive1975 2 года назад

You don't need to show your maths but you do need to throw about some science terms that you don't understand. Pick a random Law of Thermodynamics or a garbled version of Schrödinger's Cat a part of your proof.

@madwonko 2 года назад

This Forrest guy is my new favorite co-host.

@delboyt4882 Год назад

Same here, he is very knowledgeable, great addition.

@PlatonsArm 2 года назад

I actually wrote a poem about this some 18 years ago. ”The chance we’d exist is so small, that they invoke a god, making one improbability to the power of another.”

@lucofparis4819 2 года назад

I like that. Thanks for sharing.

@Brammy007a 2 года назад

wrong..... the chance we exist is 1:1. You are unclear on how probabilities work.

@PlatonsArm 2 года назад

@@Brammy007a How’s your imagination doing?

@Brammy007a 2 года назад

@@PlatonsArm Just fine, thanks. Would you like to chat about something serious or are you just flapping your gums?

@tye64 2 года назад

@@Brammy007a You seem to have miss read the lyrics. "The chance we'd (i.e. we would) exist is ..." not "The chance we exist". Yes, the later is 1:1, but PlatonsArm was talking about the probability pre-resolution. Hope that clears things up. :)

@MilesDavisKDAB 2 года назад

The odds of any arrangement of a deck of cards is 52! :1 which is a tiny number yet everything I shuffle a deck of cards it happens. I also want to say Forrest is a great addition to the team. Real scientific knowledge is needed to deal with callers like this.

@beircheartaghaistin2332 2 года назад

His channel is wonderful. And he has the patience of a Saint.

@idontwantahandlethough 2 года назад

@@beircheartaghaistin2332 Right? lol I'm a pretty patient person, but Forrest's ability to not lose his mind is remarkable.. I don't think I'd last 5 minutes on one of these calls

@brucebaker810 2 года назад

It's not 52:1. The odds of that particular sequence of 52? start in suit order. Move the AS down 1. Then another. Etc. That's 52 arrangements...and only 1 card moved.

@brucebaker810 2 года назад

@@paulgemme6056 You are, literally, polluting right now. Do you see it as a Ministry? My dad was a missionary. To a country. Not a video-sharing site.

@MilesDavisKDAB 2 года назад

@@brucebaker810 52! Means 52x51x50x49......x1. 52! is a very big number. Look it up

@nickman287 2 года назад

His argument reminds me of one of the times probability was used in court to wrongfully accuse people of a crime. They multiplied the chances of a blond woman being with a black man with a specific brand of car on that day in that location. The chance of it not being them was supposedly very small, but it still was not them who did the crime.

@DiffEQ 2 года назад

Give credit where due: Knotted Doughnuts and Other Mathematical Entertainments (278 pages, 1986) But this has no bearing on what the lunatic is ranting about. In one case, there is an actual misapplication of probability determination of a REAL, KNOWN EVENT. In the other case, it's a nut job trying to apply probability to determine the unknown.

@ngotemna8875 2 года назад

@@DiffEQ Yeah I think it's more likely that he saw the Vsauce2 video Kevin makes really cool math and probability videos as of late.

@bobthebox2993 2 года назад

The chance of it not being them was very small because it was miscalculated, not because the chance was actually very small. They calculated it as "if we take a random innocent couple, what is the chance that they happen to meet the full description of the criminals" which was very unlikely and made them being innocent seem almost impossible. However, the probability they should have calculated was "given that a couple matches the full description of the criminals, what is the chance that they are the criminals" here, the answer is 1/[the amount of couples matching the description]. Which, if I remember correctly, was 1/7 for this particular case.

@nickman287 2 года назад

@@bobthebox2993 thanks for the clarification, details were fuzzy, I heard about the case ages ago.

@theboombody 2 года назад

Reminds me of the plot to My Cousin Vinny.

@UngoogleableMan 2 года назад

"tHe pRoBabaBiLitY iS sO sMaLl!!?!". Okay, what's the probability of a god doing it? Oh we can't calculate that probability. So it's either "very small chance of occuring naturally" vs "UNKNOWN probability of a god.". "Very small" beats out "unknown" every time.

@UngoogleableMan 2 года назад

@Tonka Truck it didn't come from anywhere. The only people saying the universe came from nothing are theists saying god poofed it in to existence. In my understanding, a natural universe always existed and the big bang that created our current observable universe is just one part of it, and that is the majority consensus among physics.

@TheDeath138 2 года назад

@Tonka Truck There are many theories on that, but the one I subscribe to says that it was already there, but it was all in a compressed form until the big bang released it. Now where did god come from? Did the universe shit it out? If out of nothing, nothing comes, then surely god must follow these same rules.

@jaclo3112 2 года назад

The concept that everything was made from nothing is a theistic worldview...creatio ex nihilo. Even if you add gods into the mix, you still have to show how those gods made matter. Did they shit it out, Einstein?

@orangetiger8942 2 года назад

The biggest problem with the folks who want to argue that the odds that the universe would be the way it is now is that they assume it had to end up this way. They don’t grasp that the universe does not have humans as it’s end all, be all goal. They don’t understand organisms (especially humans) adapting to the environment they find themselves in. Therefore the environment had to be created so humans could be in it.

@theboombody 2 года назад

Well, even if this caller wasn't the brightest, he still among the top 0.000001% of the brightest organisms that ever existed on this planet. So you can only ridicule him so much. He's much closer to your level of intellect than a prehistoric fish is, for instance.

@paulgemme6056 2 года назад

2 Corinthians 4:4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

@huffdaddy3845 2 года назад

It's always entertaining when believers start spouting probabilities for things there is no way to calculate. Also, incredibility improbable events occur all the time. The very nature of something very improbable occurring means it wasn't impossible or else it couldn't have happened.

@amtlpaul 2 года назад

@Macysond "I'm not the one being ridiculous, you are!"

@puckerings 2 года назад

Every single specific possible hand of cards is incredibly unlikely in isolation. Getting exactly the 3, 7, 9, King of spades, the 4, 6 and Queen or hearts, the 8, 10, Jack and Ace of diamonds and the 6 and 9 of clubs has precisely the same probability as getting the 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, Jack, Queen, King and Ace of spades. Most people don't think of it that way because of the arbitrary value placed on the latter. So every single time a hand of bridge is dealt, four EXTREMELY unlikely hands are dealt. Every single time. Extremely unlikely events are trivial, they happen constantly every single second of every day.

@fredbohm4728 2 года назад

@Macysond The ultimate nonsense is what theists spout all the time. Atheism has nothing to do with naturalism. Theists like to lie all the time. Another sock puppet account?

@ragg232 2 года назад

@Macysond cool story bro

@John-uk8eo 2 года назад

@Macysond You are correct 💯% Ook, How many genders are there?

@MizzouRah78 2 года назад

I wish Forrest was a permanent addition. He's polite, well spoken, and highly educated.

@paulgemme6056 2 года назад

2 Corinthians 4:4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

@MizzouRah78 2 года назад

@@paulgemme6056 "Is man merely a mistake of God's? Or God merely a mistake of man?" -Friedrich Nietzsche

@paulgemme6056 2 года назад

@@MizzouRah78 God/Jesus Christ doesn't make mistakes. Man makes mistakes (sins) every day. That's what we need God's/Jesus Christ's Grace and Mercy.

@MizzouRah78 2 года назад

@@paulgemme6056 Oh yeah? How do you know that? Or that "he" exists, evidence of miracles, or if there is such a thing, that you even believe in the right one?

@MizzouRah78 2 года назад

@@paulgemme6056 And I'm not sure where you derive your morals from, but all christians have to go on is the Bible and that is an atrocity.

@randolphphillips3104 2 года назад

Wait, he knows the state of the universe at the moment time started. Can't wait until he publishes his research. Definitely Nobel Prize worthy. /sarcasm

@inyobill 2 года назад

So depressing that the state of commentary today requires a sarcasm disclaimer. No dis to you, I just say I believe I understand. I have read comments that that I read to be absolute irony, and the commenter is dead serious, and vice versa.

@bobgarrett7134 2 года назад

@Randolph Phillips The state of the universe the moment time started was an expansive state. Most folks understand this. Many Nobel Prizes are won. None by you.

@randolphphillips3104 2 года назад

@@bobgarrett7134 What part of "sarcasm" confused you? Also, the initial state at the start means "what was there at the instant expansion started, and there are many hypotheses but, the math breaks down into infinites slightly before that initial point. NOBODY actually knows for sure, as several states could have lead to our current universe.

@bobgarrett7134 2 года назад

@@randolphphillips3104 Most people on Earth---over 85% of us---know God caused the expansion and nothing else could possibly have caused it. No "state" could have caused an infinitesimal point in reality called the singularity to appear out of nothing, create the spacetime continuum, and expand into the universe. Only an almighty and transcendent being could possibly make anything like that happen, so there's your answer. Most people understand this. Some don't want to understand it.

@randolphphillips3104 2 года назад

@@bobgarrett7134 Citation Needed. Both for your 85% knowing something for certain (considering you are claiming knowledge it is impossible, at this point, to know), and for any evidence of what you claim to know (bible not evidence, as it is the claim and has no reference to method or state of the universe prior to the formation of water that gawd supposedly started with).

@artistjoh 2 года назад

I am always amazed by the arrogance of an uneducated person who is so unaware of how little he knows on a subject and chooses to argue with someone with an education in the field. I

@mb3775 2 года назад

Joseph is a case study for the Dunning Kruger effect. He clearly thinks he's much smarter than he is.

@lucofparis4819 2 года назад

It's nothing to do with intelligence in of itself. The Dunning-Kruger effect is a bias regarding how people estimate their ability at a task. It's not restricted to intelligence related skills. It also applies to people's ability at grammar for example.

@yuuseir3391 2 года назад

Yes, he has investigated the big bang. In his shed, I presume.

@skullduggerysmiles8393 2 года назад

Remind me not to get into an argument about physics with Forrest. The caller has an improbable amount of hubris.

@jamespriddy8275 Год назад

I just discovered Forrest tonight. Man…..AM I MPRESSED! I’m so glad AE has procured a real biologist to compliment this site. Listening to him talk, define, and address so many issues in language I can follow is just great. And obviously well educated in his field. And, as always, we can see Matt’s wheels turning, and making mental notes for future reference.

@hkk3656 2 года назад

God was "created" by man. God NEVER wrote a single word. Man might say god "inspired" them what to write. Thus again its man telling you this. Seems an all powerful god would tell us himself what was expected of us, not the nonsense that's in the Bible.

@jaflenbond7854 2 года назад

The Bible is the Sovereign God telling imperfect, suffering and dying human beings what to do so they could live and exist on earth forever...... so, why are you degrading the WORD of GOD as just a worthless and useless book, just a book of lies, myths, fictions and fairy tales?

@georgeaguilar6996 2 года назад

It would work, because if God himself showed, the human heart would still rejects his word and laws since man hates any law's because man lives lawlessly, so it wouldn't change anything if he showed up. In the book of Revelations, in the end times people are aware that God is the one behind many of the supernatural plagues but it says.... quote, Revelation 16:7-9 And I heard another from the altar saying, “Even so, Lord God Almighty, true and righteous are Your judgments.” Then the fourth angel poured out his bowl on the sun, and power was given to him to scorch men with fire. And men were scorched with great heat, and they blasphemed the name of God who has power over these plagues; and they did not repent and give Him glory. And great hail from heaven fell upon men, each hailstone about the weight of a talent. Men blasphemed God because of the plague of the hail, since that plague was exceedingly great.

@hkk3656 2 года назад

@@georgeaguilar6996 And where did you get your information from. Yourself and man written Bible. Funny god doesn't say a word. You proved my point.

@freakyzed8467 2 года назад

@@georgeaguilar6996 huh. Well, that's a lot of assertions.

@curbroadshow 2 года назад

@@georgeaguilar6996 man doesn’t live lawlessly at all, man has developed far better morals than the god concepts as described in the wholly babble.

@greenjelly01 2 года назад

The Numberphile channel has some very interesting videos on probability and randomness, about how it is difficult to even define randomness properly. Look up Bertrand's paradox. That is why it is so funny to see these callers talk like they understand probability... it is like a child talking about building a spaceship out of cardboard to go to the Andromeda galaxy.

@theboombody 2 года назад

Probability is difficult. Anyone who can go through Buffon's needle problem has my respect.

@paulgemme6056 2 года назад

2 Corinthians 4:4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

@matthewr9506 2 года назад

My brain hurts after hearing this

@rookmaster7502 2 года назад

Just imagine what the caller's brain must feel like, endlessly obsessing over the probabilities of his existence! Poor fellow. He needs help.

@grantm6514 2 года назад

The fine tuning ones always start with the assumption that the universe is exactly this way *for us to be here* (because a book says so), and thus they can't believe that so many unguided processes could interact over such a long time with so many variables to achieve this specific result by chance. It's a whole lot easier to accept once you cast aside the idea that the goal of everything was *our* lives on *this* particular planet in this solar system in this galaxy. I feel extremely fortunate to be the blob of stardust I currently am, but I don't for a moment feel that if I didn't exist the last 13.7 billion years of physics and chemistry doing their thing would have been a failure.

@inyobill 2 года назад

"I don't understand it it, therefore god", yah, no, I'm with you, Grant.

@conscienceaginBlackadder 2 года назад

* What % of possible universes synthesise self-replicating complex structures ? * Why do any possible universes do that at all ?

@inyobill 2 года назад

@@conscienceaginBlackadder That is an active area of speculative research. We don't know. To say "god" because we don't know is silly. When lightning wasn't understood, they said "god". When eclipses weren't understood, they said "god". That dodge has been thoroughly exhausted.

@bobgarrett7134 2 года назад

@@inyobill Lightning and eclipses were always easily understood. Even cavemen could make fire by concentrating the sun's rays with a Nile Perch eye lens, or by creating sparks with flint. They were innovative enough to know what lightning is because they could create static electricity themselves. Nuclear fusion and quantum physics are a lot more complicated Delbert. Life is a lot more complicated. The cosmological constants required a million times more precision and thought. They're not haphazard stats. Don't be a simpleton.

@inyobill 2 года назад

@@bobgarrett7134 "Lightning and eclipses were always easily understood", complete and utter nonsense. That comment can be dismissed out of hand by anyone with a smidgeon of history education. Electricity has only been understood for a couple of centuries, an essential element to understanding lightning, how thunderstorms produce the strong potentials to induce lightning is not even today 100% understood (it's not "god").

@funjuror 2 года назад

Forrest is excellent.

@zoggdawg8141 2 года назад

Id like to see where this caller got his math. Discovery Institute probably.

@lnsflare1 2 года назад

And the probability of there being a magical being behind all natural processes is zero, until you at least prove that magic actually exists first.

@Brammy007a 2 года назад

Joseph simply does not know how probabilities work. If you go to the beach and grab a handful of sand...... what is the probability that in all the grains of sand on the beach you are holding those and only those grains? The answer is that it is a malformed question. You have a numerator but no denominator............ the odds against predicting AHEAD OF TIME that you'd be holding those grains are astronomically low. The odds of you observing those grains AFTER the fact are 1:1.

@kevinw.6177 2 года назад

Dang... I am finding so many great ways to explain this concept in these comments.

@billmcdonald4335 2 года назад

Doesn't 'setting the odds' count only _beforehand?_ I mean, the chances _against_ something that has _already_ occurred are zero, if I understand the situation correctly. So if that's true, the fine-tuning argument goes away, doesn't it? Odds only count if the outcome is yet to be determined; the probability of an atom forming is 1, coz they're _here._

@twowardrobeswardrobes1536 2 года назад

Yeah. Reading out last weeks lottery numbers is not as impressive as correctly predicting next weeks lottery numbers.

@TheSufferBrothers2 2 года назад

@Macysond Actually, yes and no. Certainly, it's meaningless to apply probability factors such as variables into past events, which is the error this guy is making. For instance, when calculating the probability of the universe as we know it manifesting in a way that this planet we live on would support life as we know it, it's pretty straightforward. Let's take the standard formula applied in probability mathematics P(A) = n(A)/n(S), where: P(A) is the probability of an event “A” n(A) is the number of favourable outcomes n(S) is the total number of events in the sample space It gives us a probability factor of 1/1 that the universe as we know it manifesting in a way that this planet we live on would support life as we know. The chances are exactly 1/1. This is a fact.

@i1337Thinker 2 года назад

@@blarglemantheskeptic You know what's an interesting thought? If (a big if) there is more than 1 universe, what if it is dependent on whatever the others provide in terms of physics or quantum mechanics? Would be interesting.

@TheSufferBrothers2 2 года назад

@Macysond It is. You didn't know, but I doubt that is enough to make it remarkable.

@TheSufferBrothers2 2 года назад

@@blarglemantheskeptic All good points, that's why it's an accurate probability factor of the universe "as we know it". I was specific about that for a reason. In probability maths, "favourability" is a defined term, much like "theory" in science. In probability, favourable outcomes can be anything from how often heads comes up when you spin a coin, to how often a person gets lung cancer after smoking for three decades. It simply distinguishes the events being investigated from other possible events within the sample space so that you can provide relative numerical values to the likelihood of those events and scrutinise the numbers - pretty important when you're trying to apply maths to probability. The sample space is 1. As you say, we only know for sure of one universe, so we have to work within a sample space of 1. If multiverse or were to ever develop beyond hypothesis (and I'm hot saying it couldn't), the formula would be solved to a different value, because in that case it would be applied to a different sample size. This isn't controversial or anything.

@TheTruthKiwi 2 года назад

It is almost infinitely more likely that the universe originated naturally and wasn't poofed into existence by some omnipotent entity from another dimension.

@curbroadshow 2 года назад

Almost infinitely?

@TheTruthKiwi 2 года назад

@@curbroadshow Yeah. We can't say with 100% certainty because no one actually knows what existed or occurred prior to the Big Bang but we can say what was most likely from what we know and have observed so far.

@curbroadshow 2 года назад

@@TheTruthKiwi I’m not disagreeing with you, I’m just questioning your phrase ‘almost infinitely’. You can’t have an almost infinity, it’s either infinity or it isn’t. Sorry, I was just being pedantic 😄

@TheTruthKiwi 2 года назад

@@curbroadshow Haha, yeah, it's just a figure of speech man. :) Not Technically correct I know but I think you understood what I meant.

@curbroadshow 2 года назад

@@ookeekthelibrarian "And Saint Attila raised the holy slide rule up on high, saying, 'O Lord, bless this thy slide rule, that with it thou mayst confuse thoust enemies with holy mathematics, in thy mercy.'

@BitchspotBlog 2 года назад

"I don't have much time to get through this..." and then he wastes a lot of time wandering around saying irrelevant garbage. He keeps running around like "probability" is a magical spell. He doesn't know anything about it, he has no clue how to actually calculate any of it, but he just wants that to be true.

@rabbitss11 2 года назад

Forrest Valkai is one of the few co-hosts who can nail the faults in a callers argument with clarity and confidence, a lot of Matt's co-hosts come off as being a bit woolly and let the callers off the hook over and over again

@kellydalstok8900 2 года назад

7:48 Forrest asks: “How do atoms form?” An ad interrupts with Bob Dylan singing: “The answer is blowing in the wind.”

@TheCheapPhilosophy 2 года назад

The probability of rains for today was less than 10%, yet, it is raining! Unless he could demonstrate IMPOSIBILITY, anything that COULD happen WILL eventually happen, given enough samples and/or time, at least once. And that is all you need to have the "right" universe.

@robinvan1983 2 года назад

these people must be the target audience for casino's

@rookmaster7502 2 года назад

Not really. Casinos don't like customers who spend too much time standing around indecisively, worrying about the odds. They prefer the impulsive types.

@zoggdawg8141 2 года назад

I doubt it. Casinos dont like people who can use logic and the maths.

@freakyzed8467 2 года назад

@@zoggdawg8141 well, as the caller didn't use logic or math properly, I would say the pit boss would LOVE him showing up.

@zoggdawg8141 2 года назад

@@freakyzed8467 Oh silly me. I thought the op was about the hosts.

@grahamsmith5396 2 года назад

Matt:"Get to the FUCKING POINT ALREADY!" Caller: " Existence of atoms are mathematically impossible by my back of a napkin calculations" Forrest: "I can explain how your wrong, in an easy and fast way to help you along in the discussion"

@lnsflare1 2 года назад

"Things have physical properties that interact with one another in consistent manners, therefore GAAAAAAWD."

@donaldcook2484 2 года назад

Matt is so incredibly intelligent. Forest is a great addition to the show. The combo is unbelievable and unbeatable.

@atum497 2 года назад

Matt is a pseudo scientist

@valivali8104 2 года назад

@@atum497 has Matt ever claimed to be scientist? Has Matt ever lied about his education or past and current professions? Even if Matt was pseudo scientist, what does it has to do with his arguments? If pseudo scientist says that Earth orbits sun, does that means that heliocentrism is false? If pseudo scientist says that you fall and (likely) die if you jump from skyscraper, does that means that you will either fall down nicely like feather or fly like Superman if you jump? 🤦‍♀️ If your only counter-argument against someone's argument is ad hominem, you lost...

@atum497 2 года назад

@@valivali8104 No, but he consistently uses science to back up his claims. In my opinion if an individual is unsure about a thing why speak about it

@valivali8104 2 года назад

@@atum497 so he isn't pseudo scientist... Do you demand that a) Matt starts to read minds to know if someone is going to make arguments he can’t answer? b) this show has to have scientists from every possible field in every episode or show has to be canceled? c) only professional experts can make arguments, even when someone don’t have to be expert to show how caller is wrong? Because you seem to think like that - or hate Matt...

@atum497 2 года назад

@@valivali8104 I like Matt! It's just I don't agree with his ideology. I believe that if an individual is unsure about the existence of God or a god why disbelieve?

@jwmmitch 2 года назад

I was listening to this in the car. When Forest said "and that's the basic way things happen all the time" I had a long pause. I thought wow, the caller is speechless... then the pause continued and I thought wow, this is the longest mic-drop silence of all time! Then I glanced at my phone and saw it was just buffering a commercial lol

@michaelanderson7715 2 года назад

This man is from my part of the UK; Northern Ireland. I'm glad I have no further association with him.

@youareawesome5236 2 года назад

I knew he was from Ireland, he kept saying Potatoes which is always a dead giveaway.

@michaelanderson7715 2 года назад

@@youareawesome5236 Northern Ireland, not Ireland. Therefore wrong (already inane) connection.

@youareawesome5236 2 года назад

@@michaelanderson7715 Wait. Have the Irish forgotten what a joke is? Fair enough.

@MrMarcusIndia 2 года назад

@@youareawesome5236 Yeah, no... The whole Northern Ireland / Republic of Ireland thing isn't really a joke. There's a reason people get tetchy about it.

@freakyzed8467 2 года назад

@@MrMarcusIndia the Irish a are great! Think they are so special then almost die off cuz potatoes got sick!

@brooktu4249 Год назад

No disrespect to Matt who is quite the boffin himself, but when Forrest gets a roll going he's very impressive. It's a real pleasure to watch him work, and quite the education in it's own right.

@MichaelJohnson-kq7qg 2 года назад

People just don't understand probability. The probability of something happening that has already HAPPENED is always 100%>

@dirtydish6642 2 года назад

Nice to see these two co-pilot these calls. Forrest can definitely hang with Matt on his level.

@paulgemme6056 Год назад

The blind leading the blind.

@stellis69 2 года назад

Why don't the tens of thousands of mathematicians the world over reach the same conclusion as the caller?

@freakyzed8467 2 года назад

@@ookeekthelibrarian keep that Holy Slide Ruler off the knuckles! Hurts like holy hell!

@matthewtenebre 2 года назад

It amazes me that, even when their ability to speak intelligently on a topic has reached its limit, they then continue talking while making unjustifiable claims instead of listening to the people who are capable of continuing to speak intelligently on the respective topic. And not only that, effectively trying to present completely fallacious arguments against what the highly educated people are saying.

@starfishsystems 2 года назад

Rationalization is like that. It begins with a profound emotional dependency on an unproven claim - either wishful or fearful thinking, it's the strength of irrational drive that matters - and then the building of a soothing justification for sustaining that dependency. That's why the justification invariably falls down when we challenge it rationally, and why that seems to matter so little to the claimants. Why should it? They were never invested in reason to begin with. Their investment is in emotional conviction.

@MasterSpade 2 года назад

That is the power of = Indoctrination.

@stankochman2558 2 года назад

Lot of that going around.

@matthewtenebre 2 года назад

@@starfishsystems This couldn't be more true. I would only add that there is huge component that really compounds this issue relating back to level and quality of education as well.

@patrickmenard4222 2 года назад

@@starfishsystems I read a lot about religion, and find it fantastically well put, the way you wrote this. It bears repeating. Applies to other domains, too. People *feel*, they don't *THINK*.

@Chupilunatico 2 года назад

Awesome Forrest, as always! This program was great, but now it’s excellent!! What a combo!

@paulgemme6056 2 года назад

2 Corinthians 4:4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

@juneisraelaquino9636 Год назад

@@paulgemme6056 Bible verses don't mean shit until the god that is invoked within them are proven to be real. You're just blowing hot air out of your ass.

@paulgemme6056 Год назад

@@juneisraelaquino9636 The truth (bible verses) means everything to those who have received the gift of God (eternal life - to know God/Jesus Christ). Our Maker, Redeemer, Savoir, Friend. Jesus is the King of Glory! Jesus Christ is the Prince of Peace! Those who don't know him will never have the peace that passes all understanding.

@juneisraelaquino9636 Год назад

@@paulgemme6056 You speak of this Jeebus as if you know for a fact that he is all these things and that he really said all these things... When you have not even fundamentally proven that this hippie, idiot rabbi even existed in historicity. You are just parroting these superstitious nonsense that were shoved down your throat as if they make the slightest sense. Do you actually believe that atheists have never heard the same drivel you just spewed out?

@paulgemme6056 Год назад

@@juneisraelaquino9636 When one is thirty for fresh pure clean water, they do not need it to be shoved down their throat. They drink it freely, giving thanks to the who has given it to them. Jesus Christ is the living water. When one drinks in the power of his word they will never thirst again. No religion needed. Just faith, faith plus nothing.

@davidkillens8143 2 года назад

He initially attempted to overwhelm by huge numbers. In the US there have been a handful of BIG lottery winners. If you calculated the probability that all of the top ten would win, the numbers are huge. But the point is, it did happen.

@TheDeath138 2 года назад

Hell the chances of even winning the lottery is 1 in 176 million. Any given person literally has a better chance of being struck by lightning than winning the lottery.

@GRAHFMETAL 2 года назад

Creationists should watch scientific videos demonstrating the size of the known universe before they say things like "what are the chances?"

@freddan6fly 2 года назад

Or a real science channel like like Fermilab or PBS Space Time explaining that the universe is at least 500 times larger in each direction.

@theboombody 2 года назад

Aliens might exist, but we have zero evidence of them. We have as much evidence for angels as we do extraterrestrials. One is thought scientifically feasible, and the other is not. But zero evidence for both. Teleporting from heaven is ridiculed, but traveling at near light speeds, or even faster than light speeds is thought as possible with sufficient alien technology. No evidence of either.

@GRAHFMETAL Год назад

@Stone Blue What does that have to do with what I said?

@sparki9085 6 месяцев назад

"unlikely things happen, therefore god!" Thats not math, thats personal incredulity

@krishnav5122 2 года назад

You must use your brain before you use math. Some people forget this.

@freddan6fly 2 года назад

The caller don't know any mathematics.

@owenoulton9312 2 года назад

Actually, Joseph is wrong right out of the gate. Hydrogen (sticking with the most abundant isotope, protium) is not one neutron and one proton, it is one electron and one proton with *_NO_* neutrons. When you toss in a neutron, you're talking about deuterium (a.k.a. _heavy_ Hydrogen), the other stable isotope, which makes up 0.0156% of hydrogen atoms on Earth.

@thatguyrich9822 2 года назад

Hey Joseph, what are the odds that an all-powerful supernatural entity would spontaneously come into existence?

@Sealedservant 2 года назад

@Slavery is Freedom, War is Peace something like god would always have to have existed cause the question of what existed before whatever will go on forever, therefore something had to exist for all eternity. If god exists then what makes you guys think you’ll be able to comprehend his existence? What makes you guys think science can comprehend a god? All science does is describe what god made in specific ways. Science actually doesn’t know shit. Example: take the Big Bang theory for instance. The Big Bang has never been irrefutably proven, it’s just a theory that everyone went with because scientists can’t and/or won’t find another explanation for our existence. So if the Big Bang has never been proven then how do we know anything else is true like the laws of physics and evolution? All that originates from an event that has no solid proof for

@Sealedservant 2 года назад

@Slavery is Freedom, War is Peace I say “HE” because god is referred to a male in the Bible and “father” as god is called is also implied that he is a male

@Sealedservant 2 года назад

@Slavery is Freedom, War is Peace well it’s said whoever wrote it was actually god or some kind of spirit speaking through that person

@Sealedservant 2 года назад

@Slavery is Freedom, War is Peace I do believe In the supernatural, I’ve experienced that myself multiple times with no scientific explanation able to be found. Idk how many gods there are or which one is truly responsible for creating everything, all I “KNOW” is that god does exist. I have my own irrefutable proof for a god but unfortunately I cannot share it on the internet, only in person

@Sealedservant 2 года назад

@Slavery is Freedom, War is Peace because the phenomenons happened in my house in my room and specific things were done that extremely limits scientific explanations and I’ve examined what else it might be and they failed to explain what happened. I’m kind of a science guy myself and used to be atheist so I know to look for every possible explanation for something and admit when there is none. Why do I need a science team to confirm something for me? Why do I have to rely on someone’s else supposed knowledge to confirm something when I can use my own common sense? Stop relying on random scientists all the time

@TheToscanaMan 3 месяца назад

Joseph doesn't know what he is talking about but he doesn't stop talking.

@kyotokitsune 2 года назад

I've Joseph's argument so much. This is the first time I've heard that kind of response. Usually I do hear about life forming, so I give them that it's possible that the probability of it happening is large, but when you have about trillions of trillions of planets, the chances of life forming is going to be good. But I think this response is much better and makes much more sense. You simply can't determine probability without knowing all of the possibilities. So thank you very much.

@RozzieBass 2 года назад

As unlikely as it is for an atom to form, they are all over the place! Now I need this caller to tell me the probability of an intelligent creator forming.

@MunkyDrag0n 2 года назад

By the caller's logic, every person who has ever won the lottery must have cheated because winning the lottery is very unlikely due to chance.

@gibran6190 2 года назад

He’s right. I’m about to cheat and win the lottery right now.

@emordilap 2 года назад

I have calculated the odds of this particular universe coming into being are 1 in 1 to the 40th power.

@peterbartley9155 2 года назад

The likelihood of a universe occurring without an intelligent creator is nearly 100%

@nuoiptertermer4484 2 года назад

It IS 100% The universe means everything. It doesn't even make any sense to talk about it having an intelligent creator.

@amontrealpaul226 2 года назад

Do we even have the information required to calculate the probability of the universe coming into being as it is? All I know is that highly improbable things happen all the time because of the sheer numbers involved. For example, the reason that people win the lottery on a regular basis despite the chances of any one person ever winning the lottery being so minute is becsuse millions play the lottery every week.

@ksdogg 2 года назад

So if your happy to accept infinitesimally small probabilities happen. What if you found your watch was being worn by someone else when you went to Spain on holiday? Their excuse was the wind blew the watch through the window of their house and onto their wrist then they went to Spain also where you met them. Their argument was ''you can't calculate the probability of that happening, you don't know how many universes their are for such an unlikely event to take place'' It's not gonna wash it it. Yet when it comes to the origin of life, probabilities are just swept under the carpet by the atheist. It's special pleading.

@amontrealpaul226 2 года назад

@@ksdogg It is not improbable for the wind to blow my watch to Spain. It is impossible. But I am curious- how would I know that it was my watch?

@ksdogg2629 2 года назад

@@amontrealpaul226 LOL how can you calculate it's impossible? and no not necessarily to Spain directly and it doesn't have to be just the wind, it could be birds picked it up and carried it. I think You are in Montreal so it could be blown by the wind to some dude down the road who also went to the same restaurant in Spain for example. The point is it's a series of events that led to what we call the unlikely and therefore not believable, but the treat the origin of life any different is fallacious.

@twowardrobeswardrobes1536 2 года назад

@@ksdogg There is no way of calculating the probability and, even if we could, it’d be irrelevant anyway. That’s not ‘brushing it under the carpet’ and it’s not special pleading (you should look up the definition of that btw) it’s pointing out that such arguments are useless. We have a base of 1 universe and life exists in it. We could assert that life was inevitable based on that same base of 1.

@bernierasmusson9257 2 года назад

@@ksdogg Maybe the clumsiest analogy ever made.

@stansolo4138 2 года назад

the odds he's talking bollocks is high

@johnferrandino4666 2 года назад

Forrest compliments Matt so well.

@paulgemme6056 Год назад

The blind leading the blind.

@AitoNitram 2 года назад

The odds of the big bang happening might have been small, the odds of our solar system developing and our planet ending up so calm and protected were small, the odds of creatures coming to life and adapting was small and the odds of us, humans being here now were small. But if all of this happened somewhere else and the results were other intelligent beings capable of thought wouldn't they also be questioning why they are here, why they are alive and what the meaning of things are. I feel like it's obvious. If nothing develops nothing happens, if an intelligent being develops it will contemplate it's existans. We aren't here for a reason, but naturally we'll feel like it simply cause we can.

@DubstepCherry 2 года назад

YES exactly. It's a mystery to me why so many people struggle with this.

@billsherman6129 2 года назад

I'm always impressed by Forrest's knowledge and the way that he can turn anything into a teachable moment. Matt is quite sharp too! On the other hand, after watching several of these videos, it does seem to me as though both Forrest and Matt do occasionally interrupt a caller's discussion a bit more frequently than they probably should. On the third hand, I can see why they'd want to get to the caller's point so that videos don't get to be too long, or get unnecessarily bogged down with a caller's disclaimers, etc.

@davishall 2 года назад

I feel the same way sometimes. Like I almost always get the points they are trying to make, but forcing the caller to answer multiple questions about the structure of atoms just seems a bit excessive. A lot of their interruptions seem to be trying to get the caller to their point faster, but Forrest and Matt can also be very guilty of not being succinct.

@JoseDiaz-ef1xs 2 года назад

I wonder why these people (theists) can't believe the world was created by a thing that supposedly always existed. If it's possible that this ghost (god) has existed forever, then why can't the universe have existed forever?

@landsgevaer 2 года назад

They think they can fight science with its own tools by jumping on the Big Bang wagon, claiming it says that the universe had a beginning, whereas it says nothing of the sort.

@eskolini 2 года назад

Forrest owns Joseph and Matt ist constantly facepalming - love it!

@superflea72 2 года назад

I haven’t seen Forrest on here before…very impressive guy!

@michelleespino9814 2 года назад

You should check out his videos… reacteria really cool

@allstarwatt7246 2 года назад

Even if his math was correct, there would still be no way of knowing which God it might be. People have created thousands of different Gods throughout history, and it could be any one of these.

@valivali8104 2 года назад

Or highly advanced alien civilization which destroyed itself while creating universe, or anything similar...

@kellydalstok8900 2 года назад

@@valivali8104 Even those aliens needed to come from somewhere.

@valivali8104 2 года назад

@@kellydalstok8900 as needed any god(s) who created anything.

@iveseen1 2 года назад

Forrest has no trouble sorting out the fallacies with Matt ,a top team.

@paulgemme6056 Год назад

Forrest has a lot of trouble knowing the truth.

@iveseen1 Год назад

@@paulgemme6056 That being said ,at least he finds it.

@paulgemme6056 Год назад

@@iveseen1 So far from knowing the truth. Jesus Christ is the truth, and he (Forrest) has not found him. If he did, he would jump for joy and proclaim the truth to everyone he could. No religion needed. Just faith, faith plus nothing. Atheists only offer death. Jesus Christ offers life - eternal life - knowing him. Jesus Christ is our only hope - a living hope.

@iveseen1 Год назад

@@paulgemme6056 Faith is the reason people give when there is no evidence, anything can be proclaimed by faith, that's why there are so many religions, they too have their faith and truth ,why should should yours be special.?For me its about the journey not the destination, helping others ,giving support and not for subsequent reward. Cheers Mick.

@paulgemme6056 Год назад

@@iveseen1 It is about the journey, but also about the destination because the spirit/soul of man is eternal. What is of the flesh is flesh, what is of the spirit is spirit. There is a spiritual journey/world as well as the material world. No religion needed. Just faith, faith plus nothing. Peace be with you!

@arsenic1987 2 года назад

13:32 - Yep. He has reached a confusion. =)

@cps_Zen_Run 2 года назад

There is only One possible state for Nothing. Almost Infinite possible Something states. The surprise is not that there is something, it would be if there were Nothing. Either way, supernatural deities aren’t required.

@tomitstube 2 года назад

great point by matt, "probability" needs set determinates. you can't calculate probability with unknowns.

@paulgemme6056 2 года назад

2 Corinthians 4:4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

@tomitstube 2 года назад

@@paulgemme6056 your invisible sky daddy isn't real champ....

@uncleanunicorn4571 2 года назад

It's like Computing the probability of getting any hand of cards after a good Shuffle. Any deck of cards seems highly improbable, yet inevitable.

@Oxus21 2 года назад

Given infinite time and infinite space, even something that is only infinitesimally likely to occur is guaranteed to occur.

@post1305 2 года назад

Probability is irrelevant unless you know how many chances you have at it. ie….if something has odds of 100/1 and you only get one chance at it then you probably won’t get the result. However, if you have 100 chances at it, then the likelihood is much higher. And if you have 500 chances, it then becomes much more likely to happen than not…….so, saying that the odds of a universe happening is x to 1 is meaningless when you don’t know how many chances it had to start. And anyway…..I’m an atheist and I met God and he told me that he is too. Probably.

@post1305 2 года назад

@Macysond I stand corrected. Thanks for clearing that up so thoroughly. .

@freakyzed8467 2 года назад

@Macysond hello, month old troll account with nothing useful to add.

@hughmongous5089 2 года назад

@Macysond says the guy that doesn't understand sarcasm lol

@post1305 2 года назад

@Macysond - let me try to explain this to you. With any probability there are two numbers required. Take a roll of a dice for example. The odds of rolling a 6 are 1 in 6 (or 1/6) right? Yeah….but there’s 2 numbers there, a 1 and a 6. The 6 represents the amount of possible outcomes and the 1 represents the amount of rolls you have. The chance of rolling a 6 if I had 2 rolls would be 2 in 6 (2/6) or 1 in 3 if you prefer. Twice as likely because I have double the amount of rolls. If I have 6 rolls, my probability becomes 6/6 which is 1. This means it’s very likely that I will roll a 6 but not a certainty because this is a probability not a definite. However, if I have a 1000 rolls you could pretty much say that rolling a 6 would almost certainly happen. So…….when people say that the chance of the universe just popping in to existence is 1 in a trillion (let’s say for example), they have assumed that there was only ever 1 chance at it happening. We have no idea how many actual chances there may have been. It maybe that there was a trillion chances and while most of them failed just 1 of them succeeded. So, I would say that the amount of chances is actually very relevant indeed. If you don’t think so, then why don’t you bet me all your money on me rolling a 6 on a dice? I won’t tell you how many chances I have at it since you say that is irrelevant anyway.

@post1305 2 года назад

@@hughmongous5089 - and also….just to be clear…..sarcasm is basically when you say the opposite of what you actually mean. So….nice to meet you anyway. (For example)

@garybaltiejus7248 2 года назад

Everybody is entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts (Ricky Gervais)

@roysmallian2046 Год назад

Yes, I have to concede Forrest is very bright. Matt has a wealth of experience in the business he has chosen to follow.

@paulgemme6056 Год назад

The blind leading the blind.

@mike5556 2 года назад

I can prove that laying out 52 playing cards from a standard deck reveals an Infinitesimal unlikely combination. Yet there it is.

@frogandspanner 2 года назад

9:24 "Primal energy". What is that? There is no such thing as energy, just forms of energy. Kinetic energy, photon energy, ..., but no primal energy.

@cartesiancircle 2 года назад

Yes you've got to insert the word 'energy' into any explanation otherwise how would you be taken seriously in the church of woo.👻

@freakyzed8467 2 года назад

@@blarglemantheskeptic maybe it's the sequel to Primal Rage, a popular arcade game I used to play back in the 90s.

@frogandspanner 2 года назад

@@blarglemantheskeptic Please elucidate for this retired Physicist/ComputationalChemist. I assume it is the inspiration imbued through certain rock bands.

@landsgevaer 2 года назад

The funny thing is that there is a decent argument to be made that the total energy of our universe, and everything in it, is zero.

@frogandspanner 2 года назад

@@blarglemantheskeptic I am saying tthat there is no such things as _energy_. There is something we call _kinetic energy_ , among others, but not _energy_ , although it is often used as a name for the set {KE, GPE, EPE, mass ...} or its members.

@Leszek.Rzepecki 2 года назад

I don't understand why creationists have such poor understanding of math and statistics... especially in the UK where secondary education isn't too bad. I think, though, that even in the UK, such topics as applied here are more avoided than openly discussed. But they always come across as so confused. I guess they just grasp at straws to find rational-sounding justifications for irrational beliefs - suggests the problem-solving power of rationality isn't lost on them.

@freakyzed8467 2 года назад

You should see it here in the US. We have an entire political party dedicated to destroying public schools.

@Leszek.Rzepecki 2 года назад

@@freakyzed8467 Yes, I worked a couple of decades in the US and tangled with creationists there. I still follow US news, and though we're not in the direct firing line, it's appalling that the Republicans have become the American Fascist Party. At the rate they're going, they'll replace the stars and stripes with swastikas, and that isn't good news for anyone, your side of the pond or mine.

@ufade2 Год назад

The mental gymnastics are astonishing...

@kuromyou7969 Год назад

I haven't watched Axp in the past few months. I find the Dillahun-timer a great addition.

@OriginalBernieBro 2 года назад

What is the probability that a God will reveal itself to all mankind within the next … minute? 0.00%

@stephenjackson7797 2 года назад

You are not a mathematician when you say "infinitesimally small" the way he did. If you understand probability, understand the nature and levels of infinity, and understand what a "zero probability event" is, you never say "infinitesimally small " (or even "infinitesimally large") in the manner he is using them. No matter how small you get, you are just as "far away" from infinity's perspective from a "zero probability event" as any other non-zero positive number is. So, there's an "infinitesimally large" gap between countable "measure zero" and uncountable "greater than zero measure" infinity. No matter how long you spend accumulating countable "zero probability events", you never get any closer to uncountable infinity. He (and Matt sometimes...) confuse these things. So he can be mathematically dismissed for illegally jumping the unjumpable gap from countable infinity to uncountable infinity, trying to use countable events to do so.

@JO-ch3el 2 года назад

I'm impressed! Usually they can't answer question 1 but this guy has really thought about almost everything, confused as he may be 😁

@pizzagogo6151 2 года назад

I call it the lottery paradox, he realises the chances of him winning the lottery is incredibly small BUT he forgets that someone, nearly always, does- there’s no point in discussing probability of the universe happening; because we are 100% certain it did 😮. So now comes down to what evidence his god did it- but he’s still stuck on the first point.

@vladtheemailer3223 2 года назад

Maybe this time we will get real arguments and not just gubberish or someone repeating the same thing over and over again.

@jaflenbond7854 2 года назад

hahahaha, what kind of real arguments do you wish for?

@amontrealpaul226 2 года назад

Some hope!

@amontrealpaul226 2 года назад

@@jaflenbond7854 what have you got?

@jaflenbond7854 2 года назад

@@amontrealpaul226 I got nothing for you.....you don't need anything......

@jaflenbond7854 2 года назад

@Samael huh? What? Why should I not be here? what about you? why are you here?

@Itsjojorose 2 года назад

I mean isn’t the probability of the universe and everything existing 100% since it exists?

@ericwilliams1659 2 года назад

No, the example that comes to mind. I pick a card, that card is 7 diamonds. Was the chance of picking that card 100%?. Well that depends on how many cards total are in that deck. If there was only one card to start, than the chance is 100%.

@jamesick 2 года назад

no that's like saying rolling a dice on a 6 has a 100% probability just because it landed on a 6.

@JJ-qo7th 2 года назад

Nice to see "Primal Energy" is making the rounds again, yeesh.

@40thCapeRifles 2 года назад

...damn it, I had SUCH HOPE when he started.

@primus7776 Год назад

"The Cosmos has no mandate to make sense to evolved Mammals" My Hamster has parallel cognitive limitations, but he gets food, shelter, water, care, love, indulgence and tolerance for his noisy nigh-time wheel spinning antics. Conclusion: I am God to my Hamster. But he's mistaken....just like this guy.

@EpicWinNoob Год назад

I love when people like this add "and it's been such s long time" because it we're taking about odds the more time you have to test against those odds the more likely the result of going to happen

@shanewilson7994 2 года назад

The odds of any rain drop hitting the antenna of my car is extremely small, and yet it happens all the time when it rains at my place.

@billmcavoy5056 2 года назад

The best way to be wrong on any subject matter, is to start with a conclusion and only seek data to support that conclusion. Look for falsifiable data, not conformation data. And FFS - learn what the terminology you use ACTUALLY means.

@FourDeuce01 5 месяцев назад

Joseph should show his math so we can all see how likely god is.

@spectreskeptic3493 2 года назад

It is probability, not possibility that matters when it comes to evaluating/justifying belief. ~ John Loftus

@dodo1opps 8 дней назад

Joseph was trying to go all "John Lennox" on them.

@hstick3131 2 года назад

It probably is incredibly unlikely that we exist to be fair to Joseph, but we wouldn’t be here to think about it otherwise

@stultusvenator3233 Год назад

The chance is 100% we are here aren't we.

@cocacoda 2 года назад

I mean just the odds of those 3 talking, everyone's parents had to meet and their parents and their parents and know english and be alive at the same time etc etc.... That's super improbable. Yet here we are.

@freddan6fly 2 года назад

Is "it seems to me" a new field of mathematics that I never heard of in school?