AsapSCIENCE Attempts to Explain God's Existence with Math

In this video we respond to AsapSCIENCE's video "Can Math Prove God's Existence?", where they attempt to demonstrate that math can be used to assert the likelihood of God existing or not existing. The video is unclear in it's intention which we also address at the end of our response. It is also worth noting that if they were attempting to debunk the usage of math to prove gods existence then the points we made were essential to doing that properly and our video stands for that purpose. Let us know what you think in the comments. Enjoy :)

Source Video:

Argument from design debunk:

Book review: How Not To Be Wrong

Thanks for watching!
Subscribe for regular videos!
Like this video and share it around!

Thanks again for watching
- R & J

[TheRationalChannel]

Hi everyone, Sorry if anyone has any issues with our audio balancing. We fixed it in an earlier edit but then had to redo some things and forgot to rebalance some of the audio.  
Also if anyone has any queries regarding their intent we address that at the end of the video.  
R

[williambarnes]

1:01 If I am not a wizard, then each time I shuffle and deal out a deck of cards, the likelihood of any particular deal is 52 factorial, or 1 in
But I did deal a deck of cards and get a particular deal that was improbable. Therefore I am a very likely a wizard. Also dealing cards is a lot more unlikely than their proposed one in four billion billion. So not only am I a wizard, I'm vastly more powerful as a wizard than their god is.

[kassidybunde]

Let's just put a random number to prove that I am right

[PureCarbon]

I'm starting to suspect that these "science" channels aren't actually science channels.

[Teakeh]

I think it's far more likely that I'm a sex god and all the women love me.

We'll put that probability at 1/10. The specifics don't matter, just as long as we can agree it's more likely than not.

[theImprobableSteve]

A third option that could be included at the end, could be that ASAPSCIENCE were paid to advertise book that they only skimmed through - looking for something that would give them the most views and therefore more money. I say skimmed, because it seems like they didn't fully understand the concept. I'm genuinely shocked that ASAPSCIENCE would produce such a poorly thought out video.

[Ideal]

I love bloop.
He promises me cookies.

[kylealandercivilianname]

As a Christian myself I have to say good rebuttle I myself watched the original video and even I saw the flaws in there arguments. We theist don't accept every argument for Gods existence since we can understand that many are just plain wrong. (Ex: Irreducible complexity) I've also recently had to abandon the Kalam argument because it's first premise has been shown to be false in physics. I recently watch the debate William lane Craig vs Sean Carrol and Craig made a failed response to Carrol rebuttal of the Kalam argument. That debate made me abandon the Kalam argument. And just for the record I don't base my beliefs on cosmological arguments so it wasn't a problem for my core belief system.

[tamircohen]

I completely agree with your final point. Their argument is essentially: (insert literally anything) is likely to create humans if it existed. Therefore exists. I've never heard a worse argument for the existence of God and believe me I've heard some bad ones. This is very disappointing coming from a channel that I respected for making science easily accessible and understandable.

[SamTheMan]

Another good one guys... I always look forward to your stuff!!! :-) (Why did the audio quality 'shift, ' with the addendum?)
ASIDE: While watching this vid, my notifications were turned off for you! I went to another tab, checked out AsapS and found I was subscribed but had no notifications assigned. I clicked their 'Bell, ' and a new type of 'dialog box' appeared; it had many more alternative notification options. I selected all, hit save and returned to your video. I refresh (F5) when I refocus on a tab (some crazy habit from DOS 1.1 I think, maybe Unix... I can't stop doing it, I even tried putting a piece of tape over the F5-F8 keys :-D ) when your vid started up again, your 'Bell' lost the 'highlight' lines and I had to reengage notifications. Weird huh?
I received notification for this one... now I'm gonna need investigate if I missed anything from you!?!?! :-) Go check out AsapS's channel and see if your interface provides the same 'extended dialog box;' would ya??? :-)

[Nerobyrne]

OMG WOW!
"I made up two numbers! Look, one number is bigger! Therefore God exists!"
seriously guys, I have never heard this argument before, but now I am totally convinced that the deity worshipped by most people on earth exists!

[DeadHeadAnimation]

Wow! That was a fantastic breakdown! I love ASAP, and I hope they do better next time. Great vid!

[theriffwriter]

"Let's start by assuming" (my favorite part of that video) that there's a 83.6% chance that for every year that video remains online, the collective I.Q of humanity will decline by 13 points.

[RevJR]

"Let's just imagine that Bayesian arithmancy is cool and let's just make up those numbers."
-ASAPScience

[janecasper]

When that video came out I didn;t even click on it, thanks for saving me the trouble. Good looking out fam.

[trevorlunn]

After watching the original AsapSCIENCE video my money is on the first option, with the acknowledgment that their caveats should have been clearer. Then for amusement I tried (and yet again failed) to sing along with their new periodic table song.

Sidebar: If Bloop creates a multiverse cosmos where "humans create concious simuations" he would include a spell checker.

[gabrieljordan]

As an atheist and electrician I study math and religion once in a while just for fun but I can only honestly say while they isn't any concrete evidence to back up ASAPScience claims - at least they're attempting to use logic and reasoning rather than just saying "Because the Bible says so" .

[petrelwonderbug]

Thank you for making this video, AsapSCIENCE really screwed up on this one.

[noctiel]

The original video intended to be an example of the Bayesian method.

[joshuathompson]

I came into this video a bit skeptical of it, but I am glad to say I am pleasantly surprised.