Deano! Downvote and no comment? Driveby! That's gangsta.

I'm with deano because this whole, "the atheist religion is the best." Shit is old.

not sure if he's trying to say that smart people are athiests, but anyhow i decided to go agnostic rather than athiest, because not just the argument but even the answer is a waste of time.

great. Deano doesn't explain his downvote, and gorgonheap doesn't even understand the video and downvotes for the wrong reason.... leaving me on 9 votes, i.e. one vote away from my goddamn star.

THANKS GUYS!!!!!

anyone care to throw me a frickin bone here?

Ha ha!
Sorry. I was going to comment, then got distracted. Anyway I'm back. I was hoping this would have a grain of humour but it just seemed a bit shouty and condescending. Also he seems to be having a go at a very specific demographic. Maybe THAT'S the humour, but overall I found it a turn-off. The Zaire post was ok though.

This will definitely go front page though, it's only been 15 hours and it needs only one vote.

I think some people miss a large part of why the atheist vs. theist debate is important. A lot of social issues hinge on peoples theistic beliefs i.e. abortion, sex ed, policies in the middle east, stem cell research, gay marriage... I'd just like to see public policy set using reason and rationality rather than what it says in the bible.

Regardless if this guy says something funny or not, his voice is SUPER annoying. I imagine you could torture a man more by blasting a tape of this guy talking for an hour in a small locked room.

"and gorgonheap doesn't even understand the video and downvotes for the wrong reason"
Who the hell are you to call my reasons into question? It's a crap video, that's my opinion, I'm sure as hell entitled too it. I don't throw a fit when my vids get downvoted. People have different tastes, you'd do well to get used to it. You still got on the front page bro. And now you got your star. kuddos.

I think this qualifies as gay rights propoganda.

gorgonheap i don't mind the downvote, i just don't think you got the point.
if you downvoted in error because you didn't get the point, that's still valid, it's maybe john safran's fault for not explaining himself clearly. i was just like "damn, i only need one vote!" that's all. if you actually did get the point, then your comment doesn't make sense, so i just misunderstood your comment, and I am sorry.

"I'd just like to see public policy set using reason and rationality rather than what it says in the bible."

I totally agree with you on this one theaceofclubz, and I am a Christian. Far too many people on both sides make their decisions without actually researching them. I'm pretty sure that's what the video is getting at too, it's not just Christians who argue a point without thoroughly investigating it for themselves.

Upvoted for his accent.

As for the whole atheist / theist (or, more often that not, Christians) debate, i've spent way too much time reading Fark's flamewars to really care about either side. The vocal majority from both side is nothing but loud-mouthed, holier-than-thou , arrogant and crazy bastards.

Religion (or the lack thereof) should be a strictly personnal matter.

(I apologize for the grammar/spelling, english and me aren't the best of friends)

Mildly funny, but you don't really need to actually be smart to not believe in some fanciful myth. Even if someone can't explain the inner workings of the big bang, they can be reasonably sure that the universe wasn't hatched from a half goddess/half snake egg, or perhaps was an egg that was cracked by the ax of Pan Gu, or even popped into existence by an invisible all-knowing, all-seeing wizard.

No, you don't have to be particularly smart to not believe in these things. You just have to not be gullible.

Did it ever occur that perhaps you might find a slightly more erudite exposition of the arguments at a place other than Fark?

Safran's argument is based on the curious idea that in order to claim to be an atheist, you must understand "The Big Bang" theory and be able to defend your understanding versus the competing theory of Genesis.

This is, of course, not true. Every thinking person should, by default, assume that a thing does not exist until they have evidence it does. Everyone should be an atheist, by default, until someone can show you that god exists.

Back to Safran's Liberal Arts Major. She may not understand the physics behind the Big Bang theory, but until someone can prove to her of the existance of God, she should assume the neutral position of atheism.

I may pay attention to this guy -- once he hits puberty.

BrightOne, your scientific doctrine is just a doctrine, that's the point he's making. Prove to me that the universe is scientific, because until you do, my personal doctrine says to assume it's magical and mysterious. It's not because I am gullible or I don't think, it's because I thought about it A LOT and came to the conclusion that science is always changing its mind, while god smiles down on your efforts to discover him.

Now, you might not understand that, but I thought about it. And I studied astrophysics. And I read "A Brief History of Time" and "The Elegant Universe" and understood more than half of it

Your dogmatic assumption that the universe runs on pure logic is as faith based as my own assumption. You don't need to be a scientist to know that the world is wonderful, beautiful and amazing. And science can't measure wonder, beauty or amazement yet...

We all just get a firm hunch and then find a clever person's words to cling to, whether it's Dawkins or not. We don't understand, so we pretend to understand, and convince ourselves by repeating our doctrine on the internet over and over, as if typing it out makes it true.

"I'd just like to see public policy set using reason and rationality rather than what it says in the bible." -- yea i'd agree with that. As to the whole "is there a god argument" i dunno, and i dont think we'll understand the answer even when we prove it.


by the way you are right, he does have an annoying voice

oh, and nice one for getting your star.

I've enjoyed the comments. They are better than the video itself. :>

beware, the downvote rampage can now begin!

i think people that know what atheist means and says that's what they are - then they usually will be able to give reasonable arguments why it's not likely a god exists. i would anyway. also, they'd generally be able to say why religions can be bad. i do like this guys delivery though. he's right about brief history of time, but that's just physics. downvote simply because i disagree with him on this one.

whoa, my post with the most downvotes is also the one that gave me downvote privileges! look out downvoters, i'm clicking ur links

the way i see it, he is attacking SMUG, UNINFORMED ATHEISTS ONLY.

if you aren't a humanities student with an arts degree and a penchant for controversial beliefs without doing the research to back them up, then you need not be offended.

he is not down on atheists or atheism, or religion, or people who debate atheism, he just doesn't respect flaky philosophical fashionistas. can't we all agree on that?

that was funny as hell.

The neutral position is agnosticism. I personally think anyone who claims to know one way or the other is as arrogant as Einstein when he said, in explaining his distaste for quantum physics, that god does not play dice with the universe.

*downunder

Adding video to channels (Downunder) - requested by maatc.

*dead

This published video has been declared non-functional; embed code must be fixed within 2 days or it will be sent to the dead pool - declared dead by jacobrecker.

Awarding Gratefulmom with one Power Point for fixing this video's dead embed code.