|a flaming monkey - 2010-09-24 |
|Scynne - 2010-09-24 |
This man has never read any philosophy, nor theology. I'd put on it.
I stomped around outside Spinoza's house in Rijnsburg. I did so respectfully though.
|Mike Tyson?! - 2010-09-25 |
You can tell this guy totally stands by his explanations.
"Adding comments has been disabled for this video."
|urbanelf - 2010-09-25 |
I'm guessing there's a 5th step that ties it all together.
Suppressed premise in the syllogism functioning as an aide-memoir. That's your 5th step, I swear it.
|Blue - 2010-09-25 |
Maybe the universe always existed because it's eternal and doesn't need to have been created because it's MAGICAL! That's a satisfying answer, isn't it?
As much of a leap as that might be God is one unnecessary leap further.
|memedumpster - 2010-09-25 |
The Universe : Infinite Stupidity in Infinite Combinations, the Movie, the Game, the Remake II : Before the Beginning.
Proof God exists.
|IrishWhiskey - 2010-09-25 |
"All finite things experience heat-death, so we would already have experienced heat-death, so the universe couldn't have always been existing because (thirty seconds of nonsensical word salad involving repeated uses of the words 'obvious', 'clearly' and 'preponderance of evidence')".
What's worse is even if we accept that gibberish as true, it in no way helps the overall argument.
|Rum Revenge - 2010-09-25 |
Note his argument that, if the universe were old, humanity would have achieved a higher state of enlightenment by now.
They probably have, but do you think those folk want to come hang out here?
|StanleyPain - 2010-09-25 |
"Science can't immediately explain everything about everything, therefore GOD IS BEHIND IT ALL!!!!"
|Frank Rizzo - 2010-09-25 |
That's ok, neither did he. This is the crocoduck of ontological arguments.
|exy - 2010-09-25 |
So much for atheism. I'll see you guys in church.
|pastorofmuppets - 2010-09-25 |
How not to start off a proof of god's existence: declare that it requires infinite regress.
| Register or login To Post a Comment|