Re: Re: (Answering) 5 Questions for Atheists 

The best argument Christians have is "nuh-uhh... I haven't looked into it enough to understand it so therefore all of science must be wrong".

Many word combos notable. "Aryan, Kent Hovind kinda guy".

The Nazis burned Darwin's books. Their racism was not based on his theory. Rather, it came from current ideologies of the time.

Are you an animal? "I asked him a question, and I reminded him that the way I ask it makes it a stupid, dumb, moronic question."

Dude casually implied insects are not animals.

Kent Hovind in fact does have a doctorate. It's not worth the paper it's printed on, so it's as good as not actually having a doctorate. His dissertation has no abstract, and the introduction is a brief biography. IIRC it starts off with, "Hello, my name is Kent Hovind". It's a joke.

Is he a cabbage ? He certainly seems to have the thinking ability of one. Whilst he is prepared to diss well founded science, he believes in a clay man, a rib woman and a 6 day creation ! Pure nonsense.

You're ignoring the far more plausible natural explanation: we evolved from clay and magic breath blown by sky father. That makes us special compared to animals because they only evolved from the sacred air, not the tiny rocks.

1:32 "because why would you make up your own definition obviously man is not a mineral or uh Celestial body or an insect". So he thinks insects aren't animals? Would that be in the "colloquial" sense, or that defined by a dictionary or in a formal biological definition. This is the problem of being home schooled by one's evangelical Uncle Ebeneezer. I don't know, maybe he did attend school but was too busy dreaming of Maise-Lou to be paying attention to the teacher. I can't blame him. Maisie-Lou was mighty purdy, though my heart was set on Susie-May, and I dint lern much about the gospels none cos I was a dreamin of her sweet kisses.

When he talks about us killing animals for food I'm reminded of a classic George Carlin bit... "We kill cows, because we're hungry. we kill bugs, because they're pests. We kill lions, because it's fun. We kill people, because they're pests, AND because we're hungry.., AND because it's fun." People will justify whatever the fuck they want for whatever the fuck reason they want. Religious people, you need to stop claiming that we don't do this shit to people because we absolutely do, and every individual will choose their own reason(s) for killing or not killing regardless of what it is they are killing or not killing.

6:08 so….. a lion isn’t an animal? Polar bears? Sharks? Any predator?? Next he’s gonna say snakes are not animals 🫣😉

Ah, I love that guy. He called Hitler an evolutionist and then agreed with a quote from Mein Kampf.

Dude thought you meant "objectively wrong" in the moral sense, and then proceeded to, objectively incorrectly, claim that he could call it objectively morally wrong.

This guy offers Kent Hovind as "superior"! Figures.

The 'not sees' thought Eugenics would produce the perfect human.

Oh dear.. always the hitler card being played. Boring & sooo wrong

When the conversation feels like it's going around in circles, yeah usually nothing can be gained from it.

"Most evolved" would just mean "latest". Newborns are the "most evolved" humans. The "most evolved" life would be single-celled given how quick their generations are. Just useless term.

Hatdude : "I didn't mean Animals when I said 'animals'." Everyone else : "What do you mean by 'evolution' then?"

In the Book of Ecclesiastes it says man is an animal but he's too vain to admit it.

Thankfully your hairstylist made sure we can tell who's who.

Someone should remind this guy that genocide existed before Darwin.

There's also no such thing as "more" or "less" evolved. Everything is equally as evolved as everything else. Just differently.

Why are your eyebrows not dyed?

these people sound like it's thier first attempt at argumentation. It's quite childlike.

When ar3 you coming to the UK? Even here we will regret Trump getting back into the Whitehouse. Anyone who's not a billionaire will deeply regret another Trump presidency.

WhoTF *_is_* this guy?! I've seen a few other responses to him. I would like to checkout his channel. (Fret not: I shall be perfectly civil, if I even engage (comment) _at all..._ ) (A few minutes later, self-edit:) Never mind. I found his channel: Baptist Joshua. Okey-doke, Josh... It'd help if he'd actually _argue_ for his positions, instead of merely asserting 'em...

It's such a common trick to use the phrase "taken to its natural conclusion" to justify deranged misinterpretations, same with slippery slope. They have this fantasy of the worst possible outcomes of their straw man view of us then vomit it out and try to justify it with a bucket load of fallacies. Then again I shouldn't be surprised that people who don't understand even the basics of logic and science wouldn't understand harder tools like those.

He doesn't have a doctorate and claims to have multiple

Dr. Doom has more of a right to call himself "doctor" than Kent Hovind; and he's fictional.

As per usual, this person's argument is: "Unless my god is real, then THESE are the reasons for things that happen in the world." Like ok, then so be it.

Evolution doesn't use "race" in the way people have attempted to classify people groups in the first place. There are surprisingly few genetic differences in all humans outside our African homeland, and there still exists a rich diversity there even now. Different ethnic groups evolved in the ecological niche whee they settled (or ranged). It made that group more fit for that niche. It didn't make any group "better" than any other group universally, nor did it imply any group was "worse" or "lower" than any other universally. It just means that some ethnic groups fare better in a niche where if another group went to that same niche now, they'd be less well adjusted.

It's always "that guy" that wears a ballcap indoors and makes sure he wears it while making a video. Is that to keep the sun out of his eyes or the rain off of his head? I'm thinking that is part of the goober uniform.

Human history has more than one case of people using generally nice idea to justify racial segregation. And American Christian should be extremely careful in this discussion, in order to not provoke some undesirable analogies.

You are VERY WRONG London.... yer Kent Hovid voice was damn good.

Love his hi-quality crinkled tarp backdrop.

Even if we didn't evolve from a non human as he put it, we would still be f'n animals.

God is and always has been a man made invention. Saying that a god exists and writing stories about what god says and what god does is not evidence. You need to provide something more than words.

Science has proven that plants can and do feel and communicate with each other. No one eating food on this planet is free of bloodshed on their hands regardless of animal or plant.

Oh, he was censoring himself? I thought he had stomach problems.

One correction: Hitler or at least his message was anti-evolution. He promoted creationism. (Arguments about his "real" beliefs fill books.) So his "but Hitler!" fails both ways. *He's closer to Hitler than we are.*

Yep I got 2% Neanderthal DNA in me.

Luftwaffe : "Jesus is my copilot!" Jesus : "Lulz dude I'm not licensed!"

Aryans are actually the predecessors to modern Iranians. Aryan. Iranian. Same difference. LOLOLOLOLOL

Congratulations on the hater! 🎉

American history building We where pro Jews like Ford was.

Moral arguments for god feel the strangest. My opinions don’t change observable fact.

Is it okay to kill bugz?? plants? bacteria? viruses??

I like Trump, he makes me laugh without even trying.. He's like a stoned version of Zaphod.

But wait Kent got his diploma from Cracker Jack U.

DO NOT DYE YOUR EYEBROWS. do you know who kingcobrajfs is? that dude dyed his hair, his eyebrows, his mustache, and looked so unhinged 😂

If he's not an animal, what is he? A plant? A bacteria? A fungus? Choices are kind of limited...

Hahahshaha it took me _forever_ to realize he's trying "Photoshop" images to "represent" _you_ 😂🤣🤣

Don’t worry about a persons age when recognizing boomer mentality .

Is the tarpaulin backdrop also the one the fundie makes his victims stand on?🤨

The person who "applied" evolution to societal forms was Herbert Spencer a long discredited British philosopher

"Is killing animals wrong?" Presenting a complex issue as a simple question with a yes or no dichotomy suggests a bad faith actor to me. However, it's not even "wrong" to kill humans from time to time. The frequency of those exceptions varies from country and state to country and state, exactly as expected if morality is objective. Oh, shi......

You're hilarious, good sir. You just got yourself a subscriber.

If you're gonna make up your own definitions for words, go one step further and make up your own language. Or theists can go back to Aramaic.

nahhh that kent hovind impression was accurate

He convinced me that he knows virtually nothing about any of the topics he opined upon.

But what if a fact leads to a thought you dont like? Or a different way, that you wish it would be, is way better? Reality just... caves to our individual preferences. Right?

so he plausibly thought "nonhuman animal" bacause that's what "coloquial sense" would be.. in which case it's a pointless question

Kinda funny - you both have the same cadence, it's like you're talking to yourself 😆

Your wife's eyelash mascara. Slather a nice layer of black mascara on them brows my man. Perfect. lol ;)

0:58 Dude, could you chill? It sounds like you cut him off right before he was going to explain it. 1:44 How is it even possible to give you the same criticism twice in a minute because you did the same impatient thing one after another? 1:58 Oh. I thought he meant animal like in "a beast". 2:51 Based. 5:00 Lol. Lmao.

I've always wondered this "Is killing animals wrong?" question... I mean, vegans can make decent arguments to support the idea it could be wrong, but what the hell are they talking of? I mean, the question is simple, but what's their end goal here? I eat meat and I understand that it upsets some people, but not all atheists are vegans and not all vegans are atheists. (That's not actually a fact but a bold assumption, correct me if I'm wrong.) Do I think killing animals is wrong? Yes and no. If you do it for fun, I'd say, nope, I don't think that's right thing to do. It's actually a bit scary thought, raising the question when the killer is moving across that arbitrary nonsensical line of yours between animal and human? If I feed myself with it, if I control the size population to more sustainable (even from human hegemony perspective), if I protect something I love, I'd say it's not wrong. The problem with the meat industry is more in the conditions of their life, not so much their death (even if it should be more merciful kill). And I've never heard a decent argument that the death would wrong. We all die. It's what makes the time we got worth what it is. But back to the core idea: what's the point of this question? Misrepresent us somehow? Make us look like something devilish like socialists and progressive? I'm not socialist and I think more of my atheist friends identify something else than socialist. Any ways, why they make the question is interesting. I came back again and again to this "is killing animals wrong" question and specifically "cats kill for fun" (paraphrasing, hopefully not misrepresenting anything). So? F'ng? What? Nature is cruel.

I really don't understand too much about evolution and such, but wouldn't Josh benefit more from long walks and a healthy diet, then he would making you-tube videos?

This guy seems just a little too interested in the Austrian with a funny mustache had to say. And the dead dude was no example of his master race, he was short, dark complexioned and definitively not nordic looking. And funny thing, most Germans at the time were Catholics, with some protestants sprinkled in.

Just one more theist tool to regurgitate consistently debunked talking points. It's seriously getting old hearing the same ol bs, just repackaged within varying levels of arrogance and snark.

they keep bringing up the german painter but he was actually a gawd believer…. awkward…

I do agree that some people are less evolved than others. Glaringly obvious.

It is concerning that when he hears evolution, he automatically thinks the natural follow through is the most blatant racist idea imaginable.

When did Beaver Cleaver get a RU-vid channel?

Also plenty of wars have been fought because of the bible and religious. So why not apply the same logic there? In fact do they not believe because people died for there believes in the bible that this proofs the bible? If that is true, then why would the same not apply to Germans dying over there idea of evolution? Why always the inconsistency in logic.

❤ as usual you come out on top! Its tragic when people don’t realize they are better off keeping their mouth shut.🤐and their nose clean 🤧

I think this one was pissed off with Logicked too 😂😂 (think it was Logicked)

Have you ever listened to what somebody says, and it is just so stupid and so ignorant that it just leaves you speechless? This video has left me commentless. And I am not using stupid or ignorant in an ad hominem sort of way. I'm using it by the dictionary definition of the words. I do not know how you get through these videos sometimes, London. You are a more patient and tolerant person than I.

-"Ignoring all nuances, are Nazi okay too?"-

The existence of apologists is the best proof for evolution. No real god would create someone like that, much less a tri-omni one.

Another thing you can do if you are reacting to yourself is to speed up the video to 1.25X (or higher as long as it's clear). That would then allow us to understand that you at 1X speed is the current you and the sped up one is the recorded/reacted to one.

This guy is one giant argument from personal incredulity, not to mention an outright liar. He constantly makes up atheists that he has talked to, so much so that I am worried about our strategic straw reserves.

That Kent Hovind impression was pretty spot on.

He reveals his ignorance when he implies that insects are not animals. It's like talking to a middle schooler.

The guy keeps saying Aminal or Amanil.

As a gen xer it saddens me how backwards and closed minded people of my generation are. As i noticed as of late love yourvids keep up the great job i agree totally in what you say

Just use an eyebrow pencil. ✌🏼

I'm sure that guy thinks that Christians are better than Heathens.

Hey, not all of us gen xers are that old. Im not even 50 yet damnit! 🤣

dunning kruger is the norm for apologists

I think your first point was all that was needed. Just because someone misunderstands the science or uses it for bad reasons has nothing to do on whether something is true or not.

I have 97 percent Neanderthal on 23 and me lol

12:51 marjorie taylor greene has at least 27%

My eyebrows died. They got better.

The bue tarp makes it look like a hostage video.

It's interesting that over time there develops overlapping forms of sapiens. I wonder how long until a new form of sapien shows up that are different than homo sapiens on the planet at the same time with us.

What most theists get wrong about evolution is that there is no "end goal" in mind. Evolution simply fills whatever niche an environment has for survivability. That means that intelligence may not even be selected for. Just look at the movie, "Idiocracy" for an example.

ive got haters and i dont even make videos

use eyebrow pencils you dont need to dye

Also… insects..are animals