@Capelli Media
Your god (or a naturally occurring hereditary genetic condition that leads to otosclerosis) made me completely deaf. Not only am I unfit to be in your god's presence, I can't hear the dialogue in your little video.
Either pray for a miracle to restore my hearing or get subtitles for your presentations. I know which would be easier and more probable. Thanks.

@Flatland

"How do you prove lack of belief in a god or gods. Do I need to take your word for it?"

I suppose you would Flatland, but theists have it easy.

You only have to accept that atheists reject theist claims for the existence of gods.

Atheists are faced with theist claims of belief in unevidenced, universe-creating, omnipotent deities, that desire intimate personal relationships, adulation and worship in exchange for incredible death defying magic powers and immortality as well as having to concede that we are detestable lesser beings doomed to suffer eternal torment and pain if we don't accept these inexplicable and irrational suppositions that defy all natural reason.

Tin... steal away. Jim and Bob are somewhat original, but the idea is built on greater minds (which I stole) - and thus human “knowledge” is passed along....

...in exchange, please let me know what the Extreme-hyper-meganatural expects from us natural beings or does it only rule the supernatural?

And yet another self promoting theist eager for the spoils of YouTube fame and the title of "influencer" invades the atheist forums to promote his own (actually very secondhand) views on his personal delusion of a god.

It's a poor quality production attempting to promote a specific viewpoint using a third party story. Its as interesting as a cow patty in a field of cows.

A poor, witless argument tops off the viewing experience. No stars.

How many clicks and subs did you get, champ, since you self promoted here? Muppet.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
@Capelli Media

The atheist replacement for God is summed up in a single sentence written by Hawking:
"Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing"
That is it .... problem solved - apparently!

The secularists in the popular media loved it, as far as they were concerned the problem certainly was solved.
So just how credible is the atheist claim that God has been made redundant?
And just how 'scientific' is Hawking's replacement for God?

Shall we analyse it?
"Because there is a law of gravity ....

So,
1) If the law of gravity existed, how is that nothing?
AND -
2) Where did the law of gravity come from?
AND -
3) How can a law of gravity exist before that which gravity relates to ... i.e. matter

"the universe can and will create itself from nothing"

4) How can something create itself, without pre-existing its own creation?
(A) could possibly create (B), but how could (A) create (A)? Of course it can't.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This is a highly uneducated exposé, which ignores or dismisses huge quantities of scientific research and written papers written about these matters. Essentially, we don't yet know all of the answers, and that's good enough for now. To say goddidit, is just a presumption, with pretty much no evidence - you know - 'god did it and that's it' - apparently.

The posting misrepresents what scientists say and have said. For example declaring that Hawking merely said: "Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing", misses out all of the written work the man would have made in support of this idea. He would have had reams of words and numbers to explain how he came up with such a statement, (if indeed he did put it like that). So NO . . .
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
@ Capelli Media { That is it .... problem solved - apparently!} . . .
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
is wrong, it's NOT IT, and it's 'MERELY IT - APPARENTLY', to the uneducated and ignorant.

If you want the answers to these questions, Capelli, you probably should get a university education and advanced qualification in astrophysics and cosmology or similar, then enter into discussions with people who know what is known about these matters, (ie. your would-be peers). Then go and do your own scientific research, have your findings discussed at relevant scientific conferences, then published in legitimate peer reviewed journals with recognised authority in the subject areas, then maybe you' ll have the answers you seek. On the other hand, maybe you don't really want any answers unless the only answer that will do you is, goddidit. And that explains nothing very much.

I must admit that I don't know the answers, but nobody really does. However, there are scientists who at least have some clues and ideas about how to go about finding the answers, (and surely pure philosophy is trumped by actual good scientific research?).

My answer to these matters is: "I DON'T KNOW". And that's good enough, since it's the truth.

Mutorc