Why God Exists (Updated with Q and A at the end)
Created on: September 7th, 2006
Why God Exists (Updated with Q and A at the end)
WARNING: My comments are NSFW. Please evaluate and vote based on the merits and quality of the YTMND not based on your religious standpoint. If you have an objection, post below and I will address it in the YTMND at the end.

Add a comment

Please login or register to comment.
<< 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 >>
September 7th, 2006
(0)
*******************************************************************************************All you upvoters, check out the rebuttal site: http://whygoddoesntexist.ytmnd.com *****************************************************************************************************
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Life can come from things that aren't alive. carbon+water = life
September 7th, 2006
(0)
I'm sick of fighting all these X-tian whackjob YTMNDs. I'll just one it and add this: YTMND is an entertainment site, stop flooding it with your Christian bs.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
nope, take your christian BS elsewere...
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Though I completly disagree with your final interpretation, this page was well put together/sourced/etc.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
First year philosophy student, ftl. Your proposition fails, in that yes, causality is a universal scientific law, but the fact that the universe must necessarily have a cause does NOT in any way entail the fact that it's an omniscient, omnipotent, omnibenevolent being that exists necessarily and is the creator of all contingent things. Life can come from non-life, too, putz. Loss.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Very nice YTMND, unfortunately, you're backing into yet another cubby hole. What caused "God"? Can anything come from beyond the universe? If so, why only "one God"? And what keeps the "Universe" existing suspended in "non-existance"?
September 7th, 2006
(0)
VERY WEEL DONE BRAVO!
September 7th, 2006
(0)
5 for NEDM
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Lol, internet. Please give me facts, kthxbai.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
how does that prove the existence of god? sorry.. i too am able of writing college level philosophical research papers. it doesn't mean i can prove or disprove the existence of god however.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
well how could god exist if youre saying that you cant make life from nothing. for god to exist someting must have made god and so on and so on .
September 7th, 2006
(0)
ololololll using youtube is 4 f*gz mirite mirite
September 7th, 2006
(0)
So we live in the natural, knowable, logical world and God lives in the unnatural, unknowable, illogical world. Brilliant work Einstein.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
The flaw in this is, in your own argument in the "square-circle" analogy where God existed outside the laws of the world he created and thus could make them as he wished. This brings up the fact that if there is a super-natural outside of our 'natural' then it is also outside of the reality we perceive, and thus not following the cause and effect line of events Taking this further if we still assume there was a first cause, we then have to throw out the arbitrary laws by which you define it.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Amazing!!!
September 7th, 2006
(0)
*************************************************************************** ****************All you upvoters, check out the rebuttal site: http://whygoddoesntexist.ytmnd.com *************************************************************************** **************************
September 7th, 2006
(0)
If God doesn't need a creator, then neither does the universe. You fail.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Poland hates religion on YTMND. Also, everything in the universe since has come to be from a previous source since the singularity, a lot of which hasn't been influenced by intelligence, ie, the sun forming from a mass of gasses collapsing and heating up. So, who's to say that the actual cause of the universe itself is intellegent? Your going to a religious answer of a diety before trying to find an actual answer.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
*Continued* thus in the supernatural, there is no law stating life cannot be created by non-life, or intelligence from non-intelligence. essentially you are throwing away the laws of the natural pertaining to the supernatural in one location and imposing them on it in another to come up with your perfect mental creation: God
September 7th, 2006
(0)
there are so many things wrong with that i dont know where to start
September 7th, 2006
(0)
1.) Does not provide evidence to Christian God. 2.) The idea of the prime mover has been around since Aristotle. . . Yet he believed in pagan gods. 3.) The big bang was not necessarily the beginning of existence, it may have been the beginning of this "generation" of the universe. 4.) life can come from non-life (abiogenesis, look into it). Intelligence can come from non-intelligence. Perhaps you've heard of evolutionary engineering?
September 7th, 2006
(0)
But if everything happened by chance (as many presume or think, stuff like Big Bang etc.) then what are the chances that the Sun (which is located in the right place, not too far, or not too close to the Earth) is placed right where it is now? probably 1 in a googol. It seems like that was meant to be there. Same thing can be said about almost anything. It sounds like this was planned out, doesn't it?
September 7th, 2006
(0)
No one really doubts the fact that the universe began at a point. Ever heard of string theory? There's different theories about how the universe began, but the theory that God created everything is a work in progress....
September 7th, 2006
(0)
So God is MATH? UGGGGH no wonder I never understood him...>____
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Guess what? People who already believed this are praising you, people who didn't are arguing against it, and you are changing the views of nobody, making this ytmnd completely pointless. Meanwhile, there's a very large chance that nobody has come close to the actual truth of how the universe came into being. In summation, All Hail Discordia.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Well, whipping out my modern physics... Because god is not known, he both exists and doesn't Thanks Schrodinger! Anyway, I am not a religious person, but this is thought provoking and you certainly have a point.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
thanks for proving my existance, lol
September 7th, 2006
(0)
AngryDriver: Just because something extraordinarily unlikely happens doesn't mean it was intentionally set into motion. Given enough time, everything that can happen, no matter how unlikely, will happen.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
This is a ripoff of the cosmological argument (see Thomas Aquinas). You should consider crediting him. Since you seem to be into such questions of epistemology, consider looking into the Ontological Argument (Anselm). Finally, if you're actually interested in fair arguments, look at J.L. Mackie's Problem of Evil which is a logical proof against the Judeo-Christian conception of God, although not a general notion of God.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Your logic is completely flawed. This is absolute horse dick. You're using a circular explanation to place God as the First Cause... God is the first cause because He is God? No way man. You claim to follow the scientific method, but there's nothing scientific about your argument. Why isn't the universe the first cause? There was nothing before it right? And nothing can't cause something according to your logic.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
awesome.i belive for sho.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
2nd best ytmnd ever
September 7th, 2006
(0)
I'd like this if it were an original idea, but it's not. You take things we "know" for "fact" like three-dimensional space, linear time, etc, and then add in something completely unrelated: Causality. 20000 years ago, fire was (probably) magic. 2000 years ago, electricity was magic. 200 years ago a butane lighter was magic. Imagine what you "know" is the "magic" of "God" will be the humdrum-ho-hum of everyday life tomorrow.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
It is flawed and proves no such thing as a god. Who said the universe just came to being? Endless room and time probably has always been. And big bangs, followed by star and sh*t, probably happens many times over. After all energy is everlasting. It only changes form. This was a waste of time.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
*************************************************************************** ****************All you upvoters, check out the rebuttal site: http://whygoddoesntexist.ytmnd.com *************************************************************************** ***************************************************************************************************** ****************All you upvoters, check out the rebuttal site: http://whygoddoesntexist.ytmnd.com *******************************************************
September 7th, 2006
(0)
you do not need intelligence to create intelligence, it can happen by chance in infact only be chance which means god cannot possibly exist.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
delete thx bye.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
felt like i was watching a powerpoint at school. very informative though!
September 7th, 2006
(0)
2 Big, Fat, Faulty assumptions: 1) Intelligence cannot be created from non-intelligence: there was intelligent life at the genesis of the universe? It came to be over billions of years, and though "infinitely" unlikely, it is a statistical necessity when the size of the universe is taken into account. 2) Assumption that current scientific understanding of the universe is complete and impeccable. Being religious, you call the unexplained "supernatural," or god instead of waiting for science.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
denied
September 7th, 2006
(0)
lol, this is horrible! right so um god made women out of mans rib like in the bible and it took him 7 days and it just dawned on god, "Hey, I feel like creating life today!"
September 7th, 2006
(0)
I like it.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
You had me until the part after the credits. "Where did God come from?" is a completely legitimate question.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Any text-based YTMND lasting longer than 15 seconds automatically gets a 1. Plus, this is complete BS anyhow.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
say that you believe in the process of evolution and the big bang. even though all creation radiated from a single infinitely dense point in space, what created that point? say that point was created from the collapsing of the entire universe into a single point. this would suggest a cycle. but when did this cycle begin? how was it started? even believing god is essentially a watchmaker and created the universe and then sat back and watch still proves that an intelligent being was in fact responsible.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Geometry was defined by us, not divine intervention. The reason why a square circle can't be made is because their definitions are contridictory. God's power is restricted by our definitions. Very God-like.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
*************************************************************************** ****************All you upvoters, check out the rebuttal site: http://whygoddoesntexist.ytmnd.com *************************************************************************** **************************
September 7th, 2006
(0)
The first few sentences made me hopeful that this would be worthwhile. This only led to dissapointment upon finding it to be simply an argument based on the fact that existance occurred. Thanks man, up until now I hadn't really noticed that I existed.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
hi. You have only proven (and very well!) that we do not really totally understand the nature of our reality, our universe and life. There may be something beyond us. (most likely) However, You have NOT proven that God is ALIVE by using the "non-life cannot create life" statment. Thats just wrong. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller-Urey_experiment Please read about this. It was a simple experiment where inorganic molecules preceded organic molecules. Ie. the building blocks of life, from non-life.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
http://eltonjohnhomage.ytmnd.com/
September 7th, 2006
(0)
You realize ther is a contest for a million bucks to prove the existance of god.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Okay, well answer me this. Biologists and chemists have proved that the primordial ooze could have spawned life, as they took the inorganic ingredients around since the planet was first created and the result under conditions much like those around Earth's beginning produced organic matter that presumably over timeless years could evolve into intelligent life. (source: http://www.accessexcellence.org/WN/SUA02/primordial_soup.html) How do you justify "life cannot be created by non-life?"
September 7th, 2006
(0)
*************************************************************************** ****************All you upvoters, check out the rebuttal site: http://whygoddoesntexist.ytmnd.com *************************************************************************** ***************************************************************************************************** ****************All you upvoters, check out the rebuttal site: http://whygoddoesntexist.ytmnd.com *******************************************************
September 7th, 2006
(0)
I could think of SO many arguments to this. You're just saying "God was first and that's that". I could also apply the same logic as yours, and say that the Big Bang was the "First Cause", and that nothing preceded that. As for the intelligence thing: how many monkeys can write college papers? Well guess what! We evolved from monkeys! It's called EVOLUTION...it's EXTREMELY slow...monkeys didn't just start giving birth to humans being able to write college papers...man oh man...
September 7th, 2006
(0)
I'm gonna 1 this now before seeing it and then probably 2 it once I see it. Purely to piss you off. Stop making these sites.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Your logic is very flawed.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
life came from proteins right, and proteins are abiotical, right?
September 7th, 2006
(0)
umm, in the end, there is an argument of "who created god" and you answered, he is the first cause and nothing created him. so, what if that singularity was the first cause and not god?
September 7th, 2006
(0)
not a bad effort. but if you know all those terms how could you make such a simple logic error? good circulare reasoning
September 7th, 2006
(0)
There are two kinds of people: those who say to God, "Thy will be done," and those to whom God says, "All right, then, have it your way."
September 7th, 2006
(0)
You assume too many things in your proofs.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
*************************************************************************** ****************All you upvoters, check out the rebuttal site: http://whygoddoesntexist.ytmnd.com *************************************************************************** ***************************************************************************************************** ****************All you upvoters, check out the rebuttal site: http://whygoddoesntexist.ytmnd.com *******************************************************
September 7th, 2006
(0)
btw, i think its awful that all you downvote this. i'm not very religious, but come on. can't we all just get along?
September 7th, 2006
(0)
This is the most intelligent argument i've seen on YTMND as to the existence of God, but I would say that it's fundamentally flawed in a couple ways. Firstly, just because humans are complex and intelligent organisms, it does not mean that we were created by any sort of God; imagine the size of the universe, and all of the things in it - well, with that in mind, and through the chaotic (entropic) nature of the universe, humanity easily could have arisen on it's own through the process of evolution.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Evolution, ironically, is not a theory mutually exclusive of religion as people so often make it out to be. Another flaw I found in your argument was that of the entropic universe - sure, it is entropic, and with our universe seeming to be somewhat flat it's the way the universe is going to die. But as the universe gets smaller and smaller, entropy decreases. The conservation of matter states that energy is never lost, only transferred.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
He's basically saying, "I have proof that your beliefs are wrong." I feel that those who disagree have the right to disagree and put up their reasoning. Nothing to do with "getting along."
September 7th, 2006
(0)
M-theory n*gg*. Science has explanations for where this universe came from now, and what there was before it started. And since when is it impossible for non intelligence to form into intelligence? Who says non-life cannot become life? You are jumping to a conclusion when you say that only an intelligent force could create the universe. The "who created God question" is valid, as indicated by causality itself. YOU are the one who assigned God first cause. You use logical fallacies in your explanations.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
I'm looking forward to your proof that Jesus was God.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
i don't downvote. i vote with my head and my brain tells me that you aren't here to have fun and make ytmnd but rather to preach to the unwashed.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Chaos is not something that is exclusive to our universe, but other possible universes as well. From a quantum mechanical standpoint, a universe which exists must have some sort of observer within it, otherwise it will eternally be a wavefunction and not collapse into reality.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Keep up the good work.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
*************************************************************************** ****************All you upvoters, check out the rebuttal site: http://whygoddoesntexist.ytmnd.com *************************************************************************** ***************************************************************************************************** ****************All you upvoters, check out the rebuttal site: http://whygoddoesntexist.ytmnd.com *******************************************************
September 7th, 2006
(0)
As such (depending on the definition of "observer") only those universes which contain observers will actually exist, which could be taken to mean only those universes which contain life at any point in their existence will collapse from their wavefunction. (Which is essentially the same as the strong anthropic principle). As to the idea that "time" itself had a beginning.. Well, why did it have to? If you can believe that God is omnipotent how hard is it for you to consider that time had no beginning?
September 7th, 2006
(0)
You make the claim that life cannot create life and that non-intelligence cannot create intelligence, and expect us to accept them as common knowledge, but why is this such a necessity? To accept that life cannot come from non-life basically requires belief in God, which is a point of debate throughout your whole YTMND. the proof of a point cannot rely on accepting that point itself as true. For all you and I know, the universe did come from non-intelligent non-life...
September 7th, 2006
(0)
And this is where FAITH comes into play. Faith = Ability to Believe
September 7th, 2006
(0)
..and since this outside force has no basis for comparison within the universe that it created, it cannot be accepted as intelligent or alive in any of the ways we view these concepts. On the other hand, I respect the effort and thought you put into this, and therefore give it a solid 3 despite your unfounded and unsupported generalizations.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Lol, flawed logic. Phail. Also, c*cks.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
this fails
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Very intelligent, thought-out, and well-done. I'm actually surprised this is rated so high - usually YTMND'ers are quick to downvote stuff like this. Anyway, though it does not prove the existence of a "Christian" or whatever God, it does prove the existence of SOMETHING intelligent that, even if not around now, created the universe we know now. Which, you all have to realize, is all that really matters. So 5, and favorite'd, for you.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Mooh.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
You did not provide solid logic for the existance of god. Failure!
September 7th, 2006
(0)
You didn't change my viewpoint but it looks like a lot of effort was put into this.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
guys u dont get it god wants us to persue him so we can get to know him better (just think no one has been able to figure out what REALLY happened, hes had the answer right before us, u just havent got it yet. if u follow him and listen to what he is teaching, youll find out who god really is) ...if he lets u understand what he did, whats the point of trying to make you love him if u no mostly about him.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Music stops after a while. I applaud your effort in making this though. Most people are probably switching to their porn window after 10s and don't even bother.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
God may exist but nobody really knows. The Univserse did come from somewhere, a little sphere. This sphere expanded very rapidly creating the universe that we have today aka the big bang. The question that we're trying to prove is how did that happen. Well sicentists don't know, they can only explain what happened after that and that's all based on theory. IMO I do not believe in God because I cannot sense him with any of my 5 senses therefor he does not exist. I see you put a lot of effort into this but
September 7th, 2006
(0)
I think your answer to "who created god" goes against everything you point out.you say everything that existes must be caused by something and if god exisests something must of caused him these conflictions is why this argument goes on. you make a good point but so do the ainti god advocates the truth is we will never know if god exists or if theres a hevan or a hell. the best thing that humans can do is make EARTH hevan and live good honest lives.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
to many people, like me, he does not exist.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Prove to me that non intelligence cannot create intelligence.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Good job making it. I disagree completely with it, but I can appreciate the time and work put into it.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
I didn't watch the whole thing, sorry, it's just too long. The slooow buildup and title cards reek of f*ggy short film. Also, no god exists.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
"guys u dont get it god wants us to persue him so we can get to know him better" Actually, I talked to him yesterday and he said that he just wanted to be left alone.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Tits or gtfo
September 7th, 2006
(0)
*************************************************************************** ****************All you upvoters, check out the rebuttal site: http://whygoddoesntexist.ytmnd.com *************************************************************************** ***************************************************************************************************** ****************All you upvoters, check out the rebuttal site: http://whygoddoesntexist.ytmnd.com *******************************************************
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Failed logic.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
wow, you're right. this is literal fact.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
I mean, honestly, what makes you think YOUR ytmnd is worth sitting through compared to everyone else's? It's getting to the point where most top 15 are 30 seconds long. I do have other sh*t to do on the internet besides ytmnd
September 7th, 2006
(0)
1'd Please show me your PHD in Physics before you preach bullsh*t.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
If God can exist without prior cause, so can the big bang.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
4 for effort
September 7th, 2006
(0)
That's the best argument I've ever seen put together. However you will not sway me to believe in the God which you described. You described a sentient god, capable of the rational decision to begin the universe. I believe that god is space, time, and matter, all of which are linked through the undiscovered fundemental foundation of existence. My qualm is that you portray god as "Him" and though you do not make this comment but that people believe that men, specifically jesus christ, mohammad, and Moses...
September 7th, 2006
(0)
*************************************************************************** ****************All you upvoters, check out the rebuttal site: http://whygoddoesntexist.ytmnd.com *************************************************************************** ***************************************************************************************************** ****************All you upvoters, check out the rebuttal site: http://whygoddoesntexist.ytmnd.com *******************************************************
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Props on design, but very flawed logic. No basis for asserting that life or intelligence can't arise independently, and the "outside of natural law" quality of anything preceding the Big Bang removes it from the bounds of casuality. If the points you cited were all that was necessary to prove God, Hawking, who used theory to predict subsequently discovered phenomena like black holes, would have announced his "proof" of God. God's existence- either way- is unprovable, and a matter of faith.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Im not the most intellectual person but that you have your opinion. That's about it.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Time never began. Time is a dimension. By definition, dimensions have no beginning and no end. Also, the universe began when a singularity which ALREADY EXISTED expanded due to a large amount of energy. That singularity was the result of a collapsed previous universe, seeing as time and space are infinite. Please address these issues.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
*************************************************************************** ****************All you upvoters, check out the rebuttal site: http://whygoddoesntexist.ytmnd.com *************************************************************************** ***************************************************************************************************** ****************All you upvoters, check out the rebuttal site: http://whygoddoesntexist.ytmnd.com *******************************************************
September 7th, 2006
(0)
You'r my hero for a day, god bless.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
...were in contact with an omniscient being which created existence in a manner which has been proven false. Theists everywhere hate science for attacking their claims on a homo-centric set of beliefs. It ignorant to do so if "god" is everything. There are things smaller than the smallest know subatomic particles and perhaps things smaller than that. They exist everywhere and comprise all matter, define our concept of time and build our concept of space... that is what god is and that is everything.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
amen to that
September 7th, 2006
(0)
*************************************************************************** ****************All you upvoters, check out the rebuttal site: http://whygoddoesntexist.ytmnd.com *************************************************************************** ***************************************************************************************************** ****************All you upvoters, check out the rebuttal site: http://whygoddoesntexist.ytmnd.com *******************************************************
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Hey zonalzero, tell me why I should seek Gods love.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Intelligence CAN come from non-intelligence (btw, you offer no operational definition of intelligence), and life CAN come from non-life. You assume that these are correct, but give no proof. single-celled organisms have been shown to result from a collection of particles with sufficient energy, also, intelligence comes from electrical pulses.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Ill give you a two for me leaving out some words in my comment.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
*************************************************************************** ****************All you upvoters, check out the rebuttal site: http://whygoddoesntexist.ytmnd.com *************************************************************************** ***************************************************************************************************** ****************All you upvoters, check out the rebuttal site: http://whygoddoesntexist.ytmnd.com *******************************************************
September 7th, 2006
(0)
circular reasoning
September 7th, 2006
(0)
4, for NEDM appearance. but sorry, no. there is no god for you or for anybody. when you die, your just gonna rot in the ground.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Very creative and interesting arguement. 5 stars for you sir!
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Here's something that I found interesting: spend a moment thinking about how you would describe a large meteor impacting Earth, as seen from space, if you lived roughly 2000 years ago in a time when astronomy placed a flat Earth at the center of the universe... then read Revelation 8:8-9.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
your lack of knowledge of the second law of thermodynamics is offensive, to put it mildly. also, by causality, wouldn't something have to exist before god? gg
September 7th, 2006
(0)
If there IS a God, there's a heaven. If there's a heaven, I'd like to know how I'm supposed to get there. Do they have an Amtrak station?
September 7th, 2006
(0)
How are you sure that life can't come from unlife, and intelligence can't come from unintelligence?
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Your first assumptions were fine, but you began to make some other ones that were completely out of the blue and went by so fast and without any real backing that it was obvious you did not want them to be thought out. Intelligence cannot come from non-intelligence. You cannot a) prove this and b) there are examples of expanding intelligence (ie humans discovering more about the universe) but there is no evidence of it being unable to happen. Life cannot come from non-life. Same deal.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
its sad that the people who one this can't find eternal peace because they don't believe.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
horrible. this doesn't even deserve to be debunked
September 7th, 2006
(0)
The reason I bring it up is because John is describing a scientific concept that wouldn't be understood for another 1500 years when man gained a more thorough grounds in science.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Not proof enough for me. I also don't believe you proved yourself at all when you said that God didn't have to be created by something/someone previous, since God is absolutely NOTHING like Washington and there would be no way to compare them. I still do not particularly believe, I remain agnostic.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
THIS MAKES ME THINK.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
I created the universe. Prove that I didn't.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
*************************************************************************** ****************All you upvoters, check out the rebuttal site: http://whygoddoesntexist.ytmnd.com *************************************************************************** ***************************************************************************************************** ****************All you upvoters, check out the rebuttal site: http://whygoddoesntexist.ytmnd.com *******************************************************
September 7th, 2006
(0)
*yawn* See, the whole thing about belief is that it is personal. Trying to convince other people one way or the other is gayer than two dudes barebackin'. Plz stop kthxbai
September 7th, 2006
(0)
not much of a ytmnd. it's the same patronizing religious bullsh*t that I come to ytmnd to avoid. they've asserted that life CAN come from non-life when carbon, nitrogen, hydrogen and oxygen (elements religious nuts don't believe in) coalsce to from bubbles that can form a sort of proto-life. Also, saying that all arguments against your ideas are flawed is just you being a dick. downvote. nice music, though.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
^ keep spamming, maybe someone will listen :)
September 7th, 2006
(0)
I think you're confused. You've proven the existance of a pre-existant force. Not God. God is a completely false theory based on old meaningless books and folklore. Your definition of God has absolutely no bearing on society or life. Your theory is Atheist at heart.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
1) You put forth that intelligence cannot have come from non-intelligence, yet all life evolved from non-intelligence (microbes, which became from the random assembly elements). The same can be said about life coming from non-life. 2) You put forth that asking where God came from is unreasonable, because it would be considered the first cause. Yet it is just as reasonable to consider the big bang the first cause, and go from there. Unlike religion however, science refuses to settle for that.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
So, why couldn't the Big Bang be the first cause? Why must God be the cause to set the chain reaction in motion? You never explained why you think the Universe can't be infinately repeating.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
I love the first cause theroy, though I remember the problem my philospohy teacher showed us in it, it's circular. It uses beliefe that all actions have causes to prove that there is a cause. That is like saying that all people will eventually die. While it is PROBABLY true, philospohy denies it because it is not concrete. Best arguement for it though.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
There's seriously gotta be some sort of record I'm breaking for most comments in one day.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
People can go to church if they want to masterbate to jesus. Many people (including myself) come to ytmnd to be entertained.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
i was going to give you a 2 for including NEDM but i object to this whole thing where you are so insecure about your religion you have to go and explain all these reasons why it is true. if it's true just go ahead and believe in it and let the rest of us go in peace.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
2006-09-07 00:47:15 SinisterCRX 5 stars Wow, thats crazy, I have used the exact same reasoning in the past! The problem is it confuses people and they tell me well God just doesn't exist. 2006-09-07 00:47:15 Khaotic 5 stars Voted 5 ♠Passed♠ 2006-09-07 00:49:21 rylasasin 3 stars you don't get it do? 2006-09-07 00:49:48 Chichiri 1 star KCA. Yawn. 2006-09-07 00:49:59 clydefr0g 1 star if god existed.... he would have smited you a long time ago 2006-09-07 00:5
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Atleast you're not talking about the christian god specifically, which is good. I assume you know the God that you mention here is actually the Flying Spaghetti Monster. *tip: read The Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, it's filled with lot's of interesting theories you might like*
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Slideshow.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
lol, subliminal FTW!
September 7th, 2006
(0)
lol, you forget quantum physics... some believe the universe is cyclical process which, when it reaches the "end" it is actually just repeated with a new "beginning" and never really "began" ... just because our current universe was caused by something doesn't mean it is god... you just want to believe it is...
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Logic FTW! Well done, my sibling.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
-1 crappy music. -1 making me think outside of class. -2 NOT FUNNY
September 7th, 2006
(0)
No...I dont come to YTMND to hear bullsh*t. FYAD.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
5'd because you managed to address a complex subject without being preachy or demaning. BUT! I question (because I can)your assertations of the pre-universe causality needing to be intelligent/alive. Do gamets have intelligence? Do the creation of sequential viral elements or combusion require that viruses/fire be alive?
September 7th, 2006
(0)
"Please evaluate and vote based on the merits and quality of the YTMND " OK!
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Life can and did come from non-life, take a Organic Chemistry class and you'll learn that. Take the bullsh*t explanations somewhere for kids.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
I disagree with the ideas that non-intellegence cannot create intellegence, or that life cannot come from things that are dead. Also, I still believe that God cannot be proved either way. However, excellent work.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
September 7th, 2006
(0)
religion needs to stay off of ytmnd.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
SInce when did YTMND become the new version of the pamphlets I throw away on my campus?
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Create your own website and stop putting this crap on YTMND.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
why does it matter if anyone but, yourself beleives in god?
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Your logic is flawed, you seem to think that God is above the causal nature that you use to explain his existence. There is no reason you cannot have "an infinite regression of causes." You are prematurely "drawing the line heah." You stop regressing when you get the answer you want, which is that God exists. You fail. Try again.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Your started out pretty good with your logic and then went downhill with pure speculation. I do believe somewhat in a creator of the universe, but I am secure enough to say that i dont know what it is, whether it is intelligent or not, and what kind of power it has. you however, need a god to stick onto to feel comfortable. 2'd for uninternesting and taking science into bullsh*t philosophy.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
only fallacy is that "non-intelligence can not cause intelligence" which is really a matter of opinion. If evolution-type-stuff is true, intelligence really did come from non-intelligence.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
this is a common proof of god, but u did a good job
September 7th, 2006
(0)
""Why can't the Big Bang be the First Cause" But what caused the big bang, and everything before that?" What caused God? Sorry, "GOD DOESNT NEED A CAUSE!" isn't a sufficient answer.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
well done.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Welcome to the internet. You have your opinion; others have theirs. Due to the ignorance of people you will NEVER get them to see things the way you do. Just because you decide to back it up with facts doesn't make the next person automatically believe it. you get three stars for effort, but it needs more funny.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
lol, bullsh*t with swiss cheese holes.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
You make a strong case. But, life cannot come from non-life? That's not entirely true. It CAN happen, it's just incredibly unlikely. As for causality, what caused god? You're using faulty logic. Something significant like god would also need a cause. If not, then why would the universe's creation need a cause?
September 7th, 2006
(0)
STFU and GTFO.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
OK. At first I thought, alright this is pretty good. You did a great thing with this. I don't believe in religion but still, its some fine work. Then you answered a question proving yourself wrong. Q: "So who made god?" A: "...God is the First Cause, Nothing came before..." THERE! THERE IT IS!!! YOU JUST SAID SOMETHING COULD EXIST WITHOUT A CAUSE, your entire other reasoning was EVERYTHING MUST HAVE A SUFFICIENT & PRIOR CAUSE!!! You just proved that either a cause created 'god' or (continued...)
September 7th, 2006
(0)
I want to see the look of your faces when you die and realize it was just BS.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Religion, in a world of evidence and judgement based on proofs, is like a good ytmnd fad; slowly dying as people become aware that they have individual thought, and that everyone sins, and everyone dies, and no one can do anything to change it. And that's how I like my reality; with a side of cold hard truth.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
you proved all your reasoning and logic wrong... Good job, but you no... While everyones at this, I think I'll take a shot at explaining my religion.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Plus two stars for beliving in God. Minus three stars for using this arguement.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
First Cause argument... I love it. Philosophy FTW!
September 7th, 2006
(0)
you are an idiot. 1. we have already shown that life forms from non-life. 2. Because something has cause doesn't mean it has sufficent reason. (colladerall effect) 3. you drew out one tiny argument over the course of 5 minutes, for which i could sue you for stealing of my life. 4. this is not a reason to believe god, because then who made god? if the universe can't be static, as predicted by the steady state theorum, why can god be? you are very far from proving the existance of any supernatural bein
September 7th, 2006
(0)
You're f*cking stupid.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
where are your objections? where are your objections? where are your objections? where are your objections? where are your objections? where are your objections? where are your objections?
September 7th, 2006
(0)
very nice editting if you put it to use in something funny youll probably get a top site really quickly, btw nobody comes to ytmnd for philosphical stuff so even trying to start something like that here gets a no. It's like if you sit down at a movie and they show you a different movie than the one you payed for admission.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
"I want to see the look of your faces when you die and realize it was just BS."
September 7th, 2006
(0)
I don't see any preaching that the Christian 'God' exists or that the Christians have it right, I just see a solid scientific theory on the existence of a supernatural being that created life. Quit getting your panties in a twist.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
After watching the flash movie here http://www.tenthdimension.com/flash2.php I have concluded for myself that what we call "God" is in fact the singularity of the 10th dimension.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Doesnt exist, you lose good day sir. Has any scientist yet proposed the idea that the universe happens in cycles? What if the universe is gonna end some time in a big collapse, then bang again? 2 stars, 1 for nedm and one for a pretty good ytmnd, despite the god fanboysim.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
i had no problem with your arguments except for the following: why does God, that is, as written of in the bible, have to exist? it seems to me that your argument would suggest a supernatural un-caused cause, something we might describe as a 'god' or god-like. however, if you are, in fact, speaking of the christian god, no where in the bible can we find any evidence of any of the events you described actually taking place. in fact, the bible would suggest the opposite, earth before the universe.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Whoah, that made me beleive in god even more! I like hoe it's Religion-neutral
September 7th, 2006
(0)
For all you haters 2 and 1ing because you disagree with his argument: you are no better than downvoters. Regardless of how you think he's wrong, the site was impressive and had an actuall ARGUMENT with THOUGHT put into it.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
I like the use of fads to try and sway the weak minded.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Your "First Cause" does not have to be the conscious entity that you believe god to be a "First Cause" could simply be an event suck as a big bang or something else.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
it was a beautifully done ytmnd, though, and a nice break from the normal worn-out fads weve been using for so long. thank you.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
FLAW- If matter and space are more that 1 dimentional, than why would we assume time is too? We are assuming that the "begining" acctually was the "begining" and not just a point in time where all matter was condensed into one object, prior to the "big bang". Perhaps, time is circular, amd we will eventually return to that one ball of matter after most of the energy has declined and the universe starts to contract. What if there was no begining of time, like there is no begining of a circle. you dumbf*ck.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
(Another thing, you're only trying to gain support for your stupid theory, not actively encourage any learning or objectional rationalization.)
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Totally Fav'd. It's amazing how someone would think on a level of science that would include these teachings of Religion. I find it frustrating that some people wouldn't even THINK that one could support the other in some ways, or atleast include both in to a theory. Very nice, by the way.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
5'd for n64 kid
September 7th, 2006
(0)
The problem with the Causality principle in this particular case is this: If "God" created the universe and therefore was the cause of the universe, what caused HIM? Unanswerable, and because it cannot be answered, it effectively disproves the theory's relevance. If "God" does not have a cause, it renders the original principle of the concept (Cause/Effect) irrelevant. Very good YTMND. 5*
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Even if you can prove god, the beleif in god is harmful... Can anyone say holy war, crusade, jihad? Shiites and Sunnis fighting? Christians trying to get their anti-sins passed into law...
September 7th, 2006
(0)
now see, i believe god exists, but i also believe in the big bang theory. I can do this because i believe that god created the big bang which in turn created everything we know. see?
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Also, I highly respect your attempt to use scientific methods to prove God instead of the intangible crap most people throw around.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Woah, wait. He exists outside matter and beauty and blah, blah, blah...? Why does he then follow the natural laws? What's to say he IS unintelligent or alive? He is exempt from causality but not the others you brought up to dtermine his characteristics? I give you no vote, as you obviously put a good deal of effort into this and properly cited everything despite clearly being mentally impaired.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
FSM 4EVER!
September 7th, 2006
(0)
My ONLY issue about it is that your two statements pertaining intelligence and life are flawed. First and easiest, life can infact come from nonlife, as is self evident as there was no life at the time of the big bang and there is life after the big bang. Intelligence is LARGELY over emphasised in intelligetn beings, as all it is is electrons firing in a certain pattern to better allow a creature to respond to its environment.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Thank God (lalw pun) that some people can still think objectively. Also slick presentation.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
This is so flawed its stupid.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
You are without a doubt clever, but how do you know that this "First Cause" isn't simply the big bang? Also, if the law that there is a prereqisite for something cannot be destroyed by the "Because he's god" anwser you gave. This is the christian belief that god can prove your point because he's all-powerful coming into play. You basically made your entire argument null with that. 2 for effort.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
It seems it might be wise to make it more clear just how completely not restrained by Nature the First Cause is. Still, a 5.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
a monkey could write all of shakespeare's plays given infinite time. Therefore, an intelligent universe can be created given infinite time.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
So you've proven that something created the universe. But you haven't neccesarily proven that it was God who created the universe. WHICH God, anyway? There are many religions with many Gods. The Christian God? What in your animation proved that the Christian God created the universe? Something created the universe, yes, but you can't prove WHAT it was.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
^^ you. watch http://exploitsofnothing.ytmnd.com/
September 7th, 2006
(0)
One man who founded something about science 400 years ago made a *hypothesis* and you are presenting it as fact. If this were true, then something would have been needed to create god. Your statement that "Life cannot come from the unliving" is based in theory. And even if what you were saying was true, how does it prove that there is a magical all-powerful diety that burns you up when you masturbate? You also cited Wikipedia. +1 for NEDM however.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
You forgot one thing - F*CKING SCIENCE. Causality is simply a logic tool, not an explanation of the origins of the universe. Oh - and if you need some help, let me point you somewhere; www.youareabigf*ckingidiot.com/bigbangtheory. Don't quote or talk about Hawkins without prior knowledge of his various universe creation theories. And your God still doesn't exist. You're faith and dedication is worthless, worm-food.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
a monkey couldn't write shakespeare given infinity... not if it would evolve ^_^
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Thats some good logic sheeeeiii.... right there.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Absolutely retarded. This proves nothing at all.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
5
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Idea: The creation of the universe is beyond human comprehension, and trying to figure it out is just an attempt to resolve something we can't possibly figure out. These "conclusions" comfort us, so we keep on making new ones when old ones get shot down. Sound good?
September 7th, 2006
(0)
booooring
September 7th, 2006
(0)
definately a 5 for the time and effort, but if a question such as "Who created God?" is founded in ignorance than a question such as "Who/what created the universe/time ect..?" is also founded in ignorance. I do not claim there to be a god, or no god...i dont know but i dont think this proves anything. IMHO the universe cycles as does anything, it begins and eventually ends...with the big bang and a collapse to the pre-big bang form infinitely. Just as there are infinite universes.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Good thing we have an entire natural explanation for the development of the structured universe we see today... Design Argument = Poor Logic
September 7th, 2006
(0)
You've convinced me! Zoroaster exists! All hail Zoroaster!
September 7th, 2006
(0)
As an atheist, I enjoyed this breath of fresh air. Kudos to you for actually trying to intelligantly discuss the logic of theology. However, -2 for some shakey logic +1 to compensate for over-zealous atheists.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
there are a couple of things that are wrong. 1. intelligence does noit have to be created by intelligence. for instance, evolution. the creatures we evolved from were not smart, but we emerged from them anyway. 2. life does not have to be created by life. for instance, before the first bacteria, there was no life; just carbon. by some sequence, these carbon molecuels bonded with other molecuels to form living organisms. voila, life from not-life. other than that, that's a very interesting hypothesis.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
These are all very old and very flawed arguments. In particular, your mangling of the 2nd law is gruesome even by fundie standards. Now I have to learn how to flash so I can present a decent refutation.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
5.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Ok while I'm not to happy about religion and YTMND, I will give you this 5 for your efforts. A well put together YTMND. To me God = higher power (I'll buy that). No religion has it right!
September 7th, 2006
(0)
4. - Error: The cause and effect method you use applies to the universe. The all the sudden it doesn't work anymore when we're talking about God.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
5'd for explanations.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
4 stars though, for the effort.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Wow, if you had any intelligence you would realize there is no God.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
3. - Error: A lot of sceintists believe that the universe will collapse on istelf after expanding slowly becoming colder as atoms drift further apart (their vibrations from contact is basically heat).
September 7th, 2006
(0)
"Totally Fav'd. It's amazing how someone would think on a level of science that would include these teachings of Religion. I find it frustrating that some people wouldn't even THINK that one could support the other in some ways, or atleast include both in to a theory. Very nice, by the way." While having faith is useful to science, trying to use science to prove faith is a poor idea, since a more plausible, simpler, and non-mystical way can come about.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
"non-intellegence cannot create intellegence" you're an idiot
September 7th, 2006
(0)
fuels my gay
September 7th, 2006
(0)
2. - Error: You must ALSO believe in creationism for this to work. Seeing as God can't just be term for something outside the universe. You've added rules that have no bases and use standard circular logic.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
I mean, saying that before the universe there was god is simple yes, but what if a universe similar to our own existed, and simply went into blue shift (caused by the gravity of all the mass in the universe pulling everything back in) caused all the matter to crunch into another singularity that would spawn our universe (which in turn will gain its own super singularity to spawn another). This certainly is simpler based on the astronomy we know about so far, then to claim a god (any god) did it all.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
can't... wait... for... the... funny:(:(:(
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Dhaos endorses. The truth is simple: following logic, it all points towards God. However, since there is no giant flashing sign, atheist will deny it on their own cards. It is not that they don't see proof for God; it is that they are unwilling to give up their sinful nature. This does not apply to all atheist though, but rather those who deny God fervishly after being slammed with this rebuttle.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
religion creeps me out.. needs more poland. three for you!
September 7th, 2006
(0)
tmtigd, why can't god be used as a turn for something outside the universe that created ours? It's not the traditional western sense, but so what?
September 7th, 2006
(0)
An interesting theory I heard recently is that the difference between Atheists and Agnostic is that Atheists do NOT want God to exist, because they are uncomfortable having someone watching everything they do. I always thought it was weird when people would just yell and curse when I asked if they believed in God, and what is their reasoning behind their decision. Now for the hate PMs to arrive.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
dhaos this that this YTMND counts as a rebuttal slamming aetheists? XD Has he even read any of the counter-statements that point out how horribly flawed this YTMND's logic is?
September 7th, 2006
(0)
and by turn i mean term
September 7th, 2006
(0)
*************************************************************************** ****************All you upvoters, check out the rebuttal site: http://whygoddoesntexist.ytmnd.com *************************************************************************** ***************************************************************************************************** ****************All you upvoters, check out the rebuttal site: http://whygoddoesntexist.ytmnd.com *******************************************************
September 7th, 2006
(0)
God lives in Poland.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
To end the "What caused the Big Bang" it was caused by unnatural amount of mass being packed into a small area (YOu really can't define "small" in this case) when too much gets in, well uh... BANG! Thus the Universe was made with Molecules still floating around like greased lightning, hitting each other. Fast speed = Sticking together = 1 trillion years later = planets! My logic might be flawed (Someone will show it) But I don't give a damn. 0 d for now
September 7th, 2006
(0)
You fail. +4 for lol, subliminal but -3 for bad logic. So many holes that if i tried to point them out no one would read my comment. Have a GREAT day.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Read "The Blind Watchmaker" by richard dawkins. He addresses this theory and disproves it
September 7th, 2006
(0)
because Filth, the definition for deities is not simply a higher authority or power than humans. It must be anthropomorphic.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Proof by logic is a flawed argument as logic is of human creation and thus inherently flawed. The argument for God is identical to the argument against God which seems paradoxical though this has already been confronted via "Which came first, the chicken or the egg" and/or "If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it does it make a sound" as well as such famous stories as "Oedipus Rex".
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Very good, nice time and effort. I like the after part stuff.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Filth. I was being sarcastic as for a second I thought the author was going to pull his ytmnd from the downward spiral it was exponentially gaining speed in. For a second, I thought God was going to be a theory, not an fact.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Still doesn't prove that "God(s)" exist(s). And also does not take into account beliefs of non christians, who believe in a different Creator, or Creators in the plural. There is zero proof that there is a man or being that created the universe, merely that the universe was created by some unknown force. You're yet another close-minded christian zealot who thinks that their beliefs are the only ones worthwhile. You fail.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Average rating of 3.14 at this time indicates that 62.8% of YTMND users are retards. Better than most of the world, but still not great. Stop trying to turn people into weakminded fools, *ssh*l*e.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Wow- you put it strait. I appreciate that you've stuck up for my and tons of other's beliefs in an actual intellegent manner. I see tons of people denoting this and no matter how many big words they use it all came down to "Well I'm an athiest so it doesn't matter" or "Well its wrong just because." I'm sick of these kinds of excuses that lack logical reasoning which I feel you ARENT going to find much of here at YTMND. N E ways thx again!
September 7th, 2006
(0)
Very nicely thought out. It's good to have an intelligent YTMND once in a while.
September 7th, 2006
(0)
+1 for NEDM
<< 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 >>