Share Video

Download Video: Click Here (save as ***.flv) | Real Player or any FLV Player Required

Permalink:

Embed Code:

LtZerge Says:

Oct 19, 2009 - You pose an interesting question. Time is merely an observable quantitative measurement. Time may actually be infinite, and not have a beginning or end (same said for the universe), so it's hard to say (that doesn't mean time itself is invalid though, that would be an absurd argument ignoring its purpose) What defines beginning? some say 'when the universe as we understand it occurred, or the big-bang'. When do we start the stopwatch?

LtZerge Says:

Oct 19, 2009 - And by that measure, we can look at time as operating as sort of integer depending where it's placed so it can operate. It may be viable to go ahead and label a "pre-this, post-this" timescale much like the BC-AD scale. But, rather, a post bang-prebang scale. In order to establish this, however, we'd have to know to fair certainty when the bigbang occurred to state this "0" for BC and AD to operate.

LtZerge Says:

Oct 19, 2009 - Then the question arises: Can we examine the pre-bang universe? wouldn't it just thus be an infinity? From that stance, I can say time "began" either infinitely ago, or when the big-bang / "examinable universe" started. I'd say the ladder; It's much more reliable to base time on the measurable and continuing existence which is the post-bang existence.

LtZerge Says:

Oct 19, 2009 - It's there as a video response to this video. or just this: /watch?v=fB2CRx4lh5sfeature=response_watch

devote Says:

Oct 21, 2009 - WTF... ADS next to this vid for some creationist BS... sad...

PeteTStarr Says:

Oct 21, 2009 - Although the person who left a long reply to you was probably better, I would just like to reply: Why do you assume time had to begin? If the universe is always there then surely time is always there too, yes? Is there any reason it had to begin somewhere?

havvyweponsman Says:

Oct 21, 2009 - 1:41 beautiful ;_;

StairChicken Says:

Oct 23, 2009 - What about the argument that coloured wings would be used to attract mates? The wings themselves originating as tufts on the arms and crest. Therefore the one with larger wings would mate passing on its genes and eventually the wings would grow. They are also superior to the membrane used by creatures like Pterodactly as they do not tear in amongst the twigs and branches of forests so they could live in these forests and then they eventually would be able to glide and eventually fly.

jimzy61 Says:

Oct 23, 2009 - we all need to understand that the argument between theism and atheism is something that will NEVER be resolved. everyone has their own ideas. i think that the music i listen to is good, yet i don't assume that other music is bad, because its really hard to believe that the millions of people who listen to rap are wrong. i know its not the best example, but neither atheists nor theists can make a dent in the others point of view even if one is truly correct, but we don't know for sure who is.

vpcoleen Says:

Oct 25, 2009 - I disagree; at one point, everyone believed that the sun revolved around the earth. When the idea was proposed that the earth actually revolved around the sun, it was widely rejected until eventually, enough scientific knowledge was collected to prove the truth. I think it is the same with theism and atheism. Someday the truth will be undeniable.

andnoreligiontoo Says:

Oct 29, 2009 - It's not reasonable to suggest this will never be resolved. 400 years ago we still thought the Earth was the centre of the universe and hadn't even dug up a single dinosuar bone. To compare the argument to the like or dislike of music is nonsense since no one is arguing as to whether music is true. Atheists make dents in theist arguments daily and they are constantly cowering into the shadows with their fairy tales, I take it you never watched the video above?

andnoreligiontoo Says:

Oct 29, 2009 - Yes because the universe is visibly expanding and therefore expanding away from something. Scientists, among them Stephen Hawking has postulated that a huge explosion created this outward movement which is predicted will contract back again at some point in time.

PeteTStarr Says:

Oct 29, 2009 - You misunderstood me. I didn't mean why couldn't the universe have always have existed as it does now. Even if the universe is constantly expanding and contracted, which is not so certain any more, then matter always exists. What I'm saying is that the universe, as in anything that exists, changes, but there's no reason to assume that matter came from nothing.

rocamik Says:

Oct 30, 2009 - it would take 1,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 for evolution to make a sponge considering 90% of mutation is usually harmful to the organism...duh

antonc81 Says:

Nov 1, 2009 - why does everyone relate creationism v evolution with theism v atheism. These are two different arguments. Plenty of theists and deists around the world find creationism just as laughable as any atheist. It is only (mostly American) evangelists that seem to think that the only way to believe in a deity is by literal interpretation of scripture.

DJuggz06 Says:

Nov 3, 2009 - very well put together mate!

Tyrtamus Says:

Nov 4, 2009 - 90% of mutation is usually harmful? lolok

baxtar1963 Says:

Nov 5, 2009 - If you want an explanation of how this universe came into existance please look up the seminar by Lawrence Krauss righ here on you tube. He is as good as Stephen Hawking. He gives scientific reason why something could have came from nothing. Must see.

ThinkingBetter Says:

Nov 5, 2009 - antonc81, yes, it's a sad development in the USA that Christianity has become anti-evolution. The trend pushes the more educated people out of Christianity. Religion is much about business in the USA incl. selling books, selling music, selling preachers, radio stations, corrupt televangelists etc. The "success" of creationism in the USA is a derivative of the lack of proper education. Most Americans don't actually understand evolution.

MelleB90 Says:

Nov 11, 2009 - WOW YOU ARE SO SMART.

needparalegal Says:

Nov 16, 2009 - Does having a southern accent automatically make you stupid? This is my latest hypothesis.

argh523 Says:

Nov 18, 2009 - lol :)

needparalegal Says:

Nov 18, 2009 - I only listen to physics lectured in a machine synthesized voice. If your Krauss speaks with a human voice I am not interested.

needparalegal Says:

Nov 18, 2009 - What is it that makes you want to believe in a "God" without any evidence? I find that a mystery we may be able to solve with current psychiatric science.

antonc81 Says:

Nov 18, 2009 - I don't, but I can live with those that do as long as they don't try to mix their beliefs with science. I find this the typical Christian stance in my country. My point was that if we are to present ourselves as the side of reason it is doubly important that we don't obfuscate the argument by mixing issues.