Once technology has moved on to the point where humans can literally achieve immortality and create artificial life forms, would you then consider humans as a race to be gods?
God-like, but not gods, no.
Ask @ArmouredSkeptic
Previous
How do you feel about the Code of Hammurabi? (eye for an eye)
At it's base it makes sense, but there are some problems with it. Life is too complex for it to really work.
Did you know in Ancient Greece, if an architect's building collapsed and killed the owner's son, the architect's son was killed as punishment...?
It's logical, but inhumane.
Did you know in Ancient Greece, if an architect's building collapsed and killed the owner's son, the architect's son was killed as punishment...?
It's logical, but inhumane.
Liked by:
Claret Rimli
i was wondering your take on gamergate you said "Gamergate has evolved into a bit of a mess and has been hijacked by people who want to control the dialogue." can you please elaborate what did you mean by "control the dialogue"?
The movement started off as opposition to inappropriate journalistic practices and a demand for more objectivity in reviews of games by journalists. Mainly it was a response to multiple gaming-news sites telling the gaming community that they don't matter.
The opposition of GG changed the conversation. It is now about female victim-hood and misogyny. Fem Frequency is a really good example. Sarkeesian and McIntosh got into the fight and made it all about vaginas, completely ignoring the fact that an entire community of people were told that their hobby, their identity and their passion is "dead".
The problem is that because #GG is a movement and not an organization, there was no defense for this hijacking. GGers fell for this misdirection and started fighting back against these accusations, essentially letting the anti-GGers win. The goal of the anti-GGers was to hijack the conversation and they succeeded.
The opposition of GG changed the conversation. It is now about female victim-hood and misogyny. Fem Frequency is a really good example. Sarkeesian and McIntosh got into the fight and made it all about vaginas, completely ignoring the fact that an entire community of people were told that their hobby, their identity and their passion is "dead".
The problem is that because #GG is a movement and not an organization, there was no defense for this hijacking. GGers fell for this misdirection and started fighting back against these accusations, essentially letting the anti-GGers win. The goal of the anti-GGers was to hijack the conversation and they succeeded.
Related users
What super power would you want?
The ability to understand and speak every language.
Or metal skin...
Or metal skin...
Liked by:
Claret Rimli
Can you lick your chin, nose, or elbows? Can you lick your junk? :3
No, no, no and no.
Is it reasonable to propose that the first life forms did not perform photosynthesis, but chemiosmosis... a process that does not necessarily require sunlight.
That's likely, as the sun probably couldn't shine through the atmosphere at the time of a-biogenesis
You said you attend Community college but then I see you saying you attend a University... So which is it? Or both? I started at a community college then transferred to a University, is that similar to you? Because a University is not a Community College.
I took some classes in university. History mostly.
I didn't attend a program or get a Bach degree from University.
I didn't attend a program or get a Bach degree from University.
You may be the most respectable atheist on YouTube. I like how you actually back up your claims and provide loads of evidence when responding to some of the retards you hear. I guess overall, you don't just rant about how ridiculous a claim is. Keep up the good work!
Thanks a lot!
Liked by:
Brian Wayne Cope
Liam Fay
you have no problem defeating crazy creationists, like the one guy who keeps "giving evolution a chance" but maybe you should debate a christian who believes in evolution, or someone who is pretty smart. i'm an atheist but i've found christians who are just hard to debate with, so i'd like to see it
I'm not really into debating liberal Christians because they're not the ones trying to get creationism in school and government.
Liked by:
Claret Rimli
Liam Fay
could you mabby do a meet and greet cause i'm also in Ontario and im a big fan
Maybe one day.
I have so many subscribers in the states I think I'll start there.
I have so many subscribers in the states I think I'll start there.
Liked by:
Brian Wayne Cope
how old are you
30
Do you get into serious debates about religion in real life? If so, do you enjoy it? I'd be happy discussing my views on religion with people, but as soon as I say I'm atheist, it stops being a debate and becomes "Why don't you believe in God?!" which gets uncomfortable and is no fun.
I've never been in a religious debate of any kind... ever. I especially avoid it in real life.
I like to think I get into scientific debates that sometimes bring up a creationist hypothesis...
I like to think I get into scientific debates that sometimes bring up a creationist hypothesis...
If you have a friend who is homophobic and keeps using lines like "that's so gay" how do you get them to realize that what they are doing is hate speech and is moral wrong? Especially when they claim that they are morally right because god hates gays, it is a sin, etc...
I don't know that saying things are "gay" is really that big a deal, but I get what you're saying about the homophobic thing. It's more an attitude than a language.
Really, the only way to change someone's attitude is to educate them.
Really, the only way to change someone's attitude is to educate them.
Liked by:
Brian Wayne Cope
SayWeCanDie
Do you think humans are still evolving? We kinda stopped natural selection (wich i think is a great thing). We built our enviroment to suit our needs so we dont have to evolve to fit in anymore... In nature, change never occures when unessesary. So what will become of us? Are we done?
Every offspring is an evolution from it's parents.
I think you mean "Are we evolving to a measurable degree like from ape to human?"
No, not right now.
Little changes, like our baby-toes are receding, our wisdom teeth are impacting, but those aren't extreme evolutionary adaptations.
We are smart enough now that we can change our environment to better suit our body, we don't NEED to change our body to better suit our environment anymore.
If anything, we'll evolve into the obese couch-potatoes like in the movie Wall-E.
I think you mean "Are we evolving to a measurable degree like from ape to human?"
No, not right now.
Little changes, like our baby-toes are receding, our wisdom teeth are impacting, but those aren't extreme evolutionary adaptations.
We are smart enough now that we can change our environment to better suit our body, we don't NEED to change our body to better suit our environment anymore.
If anything, we'll evolve into the obese couch-potatoes like in the movie Wall-E.
Liked by:
Brian Wayne Cope
Shinigami
Ever considered going up against a Catholic apologeticist? You seem to focus on batshit crazy Creationists, not anyone with any sort of education. I'd be really interested to see that video.
I could, yes, but I find them too boring to sit through...
Liked by:
Brian Wayne Cope
What do you think is the best/worst subject that children should learn in education?
History... Children need to learn history. If nothing else, everyone needs to know and understand history.
The worst...? French? I don't know. Every subject my school taught seemed to serve some sort of purpose.
Gym, wood-working, Metal-shop, math, drama, communications, German, health, auto... I can't think of one that wasn't useful in some way.
The worst...? French? I don't know. Every subject my school taught seemed to serve some sort of purpose.
Gym, wood-working, Metal-shop, math, drama, communications, German, health, auto... I can't think of one that wasn't useful in some way.
Liked by:
Brian Wayne Cope
I read recently somewhere in here you said there was no such thing as evil, just "bad" people. What's the difference between "bad" and "evil"? And by what standards do you determine a person's badness? How do you classify things that are traditionally believed to be "evil" if evil does not exist?
"Bad" is pretty easy to quantify as it is pretty objective. It has to mean more than just "anti-social" (to the point of being harmful to society).
A person who kills people is bad because that action is harmful to society.
A person who hurts himself is bad because he's being harmful to his own survival.
A person who steals is bad because he's harming the economy (and individuals).
The idea of evil implies that there is a purpose behind these behaviors that goes beyond anti-social ideas. It implies that there is some kind of selfish need to harm others for no reason.
The person Alfred described in The Dark Knight who wanted to see the world burn, that man was evil... but those kinds of people don't really exist. There is nobody I can think of who is famous for being bad for no reason other than to see the world burn.
A person who kills people is bad because that action is harmful to society.
A person who hurts himself is bad because he's being harmful to his own survival.
A person who steals is bad because he's harming the economy (and individuals).
The idea of evil implies that there is a purpose behind these behaviors that goes beyond anti-social ideas. It implies that there is some kind of selfish need to harm others for no reason.
The person Alfred described in The Dark Knight who wanted to see the world burn, that man was evil... but those kinds of people don't really exist. There is nobody I can think of who is famous for being bad for no reason other than to see the world burn.
Liked by:
Brian Wayne Cope
Liam Fay
If a skeptic begins, a priori, with skepticism, how does he then create evidentiary criteria for God's existence? In short, how does the skeptic do theology? If he claims there is "no evidence" for God's existence, would not that imply he has an idea of what such evidence ought to be?
Not necessarily, but there should be some form of quantifiable evidence. Something that only a god could do. If a god did it, then there should be physical and recordable evidence of his existence.
For example, DNA code having a language and that language being a verse from the bible or something. The moon's craters re-arrange to spell YHWH, or a person appearing an disappearing in a recordable environment.
The miracles of the bible are great examples, but they supposedly happened in the eyes of only a select few. If they happened more often and happened in front of more people and could be recorded for science, then I would start thinking more seriously about the idea of a god being possible.
For example, DNA code having a language and that language being a verse from the bible or something. The moon's craters re-arrange to spell YHWH, or a person appearing an disappearing in a recordable environment.
The miracles of the bible are great examples, but they supposedly happened in the eyes of only a select few. If they happened more often and happened in front of more people and could be recorded for science, then I would start thinking more seriously about the idea of a god being possible.
Did you study in a university?
No... community collage...
I had the grades, but not the money.
I had the grades, but not the money.
Liked by:
Havah Eisenmann
"the light we are seeing from them was created between 1 thousand and 45 billion years ago." It's quite weird since time began about 13.7 billion years ago.
I meant light-years... fucking... FUCK!
Liked by:
Brian Wayne Cope
Havah Eisenmann
Claret Rimli
Are the colours shown in the hubble pictures art or do we know for fact, that for example the eagle nebula has this golden-brownish colour?
The Hubble photos are 100% real. Absolutely no changes made.
There may be a little bit of distortion in the colour, but that has more to do with the distance the light had to travel to get here than it does the photo-sensor on the telescope.
There may be a little bit of distortion in the colour, but that has more to do with the distance the light had to travel to get here than it does the photo-sensor on the telescope.
Liked by:
Claret Rimli
I was going to enter text here but I have a small penis :(
Sorry. I don't want your question then.
Liked by:
Brian Wayne Cope
Huge fan of your show, love how you can debate in such a humorous and factual way. I'm currently studying paleontology at university and just wanted to know what your favorite dinosaur or prehistoric animal is? :)
Thanks a lot!
I'm kinda boring. I am a T-Rex fan.
Though Spinosaurus is a close-second. I wish we knew more about it... it almost doesn't seem possible!
I'm kinda boring. I am a T-Rex fan.
Though Spinosaurus is a close-second. I wish we knew more about it... it almost doesn't seem possible!
Liked by:
Aidan Simpson
On a scale of 1 to 1 million, how certain are you that there is no god
On a scale of 1 to 10 I am about a 3, but that's not why I am an atheist.
I am not an atheist because I am sure there is no god, I am an atheist because I am a skeptic and I am not convinced that a god of any kind exists.
I am not an atheist because I am sure there is no god, I am an atheist because I am a skeptic and I am not convinced that a god of any kind exists.
Are the stars in the nightsky still there or are we observing remnants? Somehow it scares me to think they are gone... dunno why though
Both. Some are still there, some are dead.
Either way, the light we are seeing from them was created between 1 thousand and 45 billion years ago.
Either way, the light we are seeing from them was created between 1 thousand and 45 billion years ago.
Next
