Atheists debunk confused Christian apologist Frank Turek. The SciPhi Show 4

Christian apologist Frank Turek says he doesn't have enough faith to be an atheist, but he really doesn't have enough knowledge. In this video, leading atheist thinkers Alex Malpass and Dan Linford join host Phil Halper to expose Turek's never-ending errors, especially concerning infinity and cosmology. How many mistakes can a Christian apologist make in 8 minutes? Place your bets.
Timeline:
00:00 Introduction
2:37 infinity
10:12 The SURGE argument and the 2nd law
22:39 expanding universe
28:41 radiation
42:08 Galaxy seeds
49:51 Einstein
1:02:43 Creation ex nihilo

[TheAnalyticChristian]

I greatly enjoyed this video, and I’m a Christian! Thank you very much for making it. It was light hearted yet informative. Please make more like this. Thank you!

[edvardm]

I simply love this channel. Malpass is my favorite philosopher (while highly intelligent, still very kind to opposing interlocutors) and then these physicists joining these discussions are superb as well. Really love these <3

[edvardm]

I don't hate most theists, but Turrek I cannot not to. He is _so_ arrogant, speaking about subject he obviously does not know nor understand almost _anything_ about. Very well done, gentlemen. We needed this

[lreadlResurrected]

Words never uttered by a theist: "I don't know". Instead, "I am satisfied with God's mysterious nature." It is the ultimate disingenuous obfuscation of the actual state of affairs.

[DeconvertedMan]

Theists: Infinity can't be a thing!
Also theists: God exists forever!
O_o;

[johnwick]

It's so funny to see the EVERY SINGLE TIME apologists absolutely sure about the scientific stuff that they use for apologising whereas the scientists who came up with those theories saying otherwise

[eagle]

The problem is that Turek does not know much about the topics he is speaking on while thinking he has a firm understanding. He also speaks to a church audiences that are also scientifically illiterate and accept him as some sort of expert.

[superchelseafc]

The “recent” trend in apologetics seems to be that you take a very unintuitive subject, e.g. time, infinity, the universe, quantum physics, and then you throw some jargon around and then slip god somewhere into a vague syllogism, but it’s really all just an act of slight of hand. They get people debating on the meanings and implications of pretty advanced topics all while distracting from the fact that god was shoe-horned into an abstract topic without any justification. And then youll watch a 2 hour debate where the apologist just continues with this strategy of bantering jargon while never addressing anything of actual substance.

[andystewart]

Another great video! Loving this series!

[matsciguy-lh]

A long overdue exposure of Frank Turek. Thank you!

[danielduvana]

This complete smackdown was wonderful to watch, laughed a lot!

[J]

Excellent, thanks.
In regards to an infinite past, Dan Linford (and yourself) nail it 7:39.
I'm often reminded of this:

Could the past be infinite? - Richard Carrier:

"All arguments against a past infinity of time commit the fallacy of circular reasoning, e.g. "if the timeline began infinitely long ago, we would have reached this point in time infinitely long ago" presumes that the timeline "began" which is exactly what isn't the case if time is past-infinite. If time is past-infinite, then all points in time exist, which means our point in time exists, too".

[beny]

I get fed up with apologists/theists ‘debunking’ atheism by just believing they’re right.

[michaelcarroll]

I still don't understand why you don't have a regular podcast.i watch your videos over, and over, and over again. I appreciate how your guests, you host, and you are are able to dumb it down for someone that only has an highschool education. Thank you for making my fascination fun! Your host, show guests, and you are very much appreciated!

[TheWeb]

Was looking forward to another episode in this series - oh and Frank is on, that will be fun, gonna grab some popcorn 😊

[somersetcace]

Among the many problems, the false dilemma between something created the 'universe` or it `created itself out of nothing` is nonsense. It's conflating a very specific scientific model, with a dogmatic belief that the energy contained in the BB just popped into existence out of nothing. As unlikely as that strawman is, even `that` makes more sense than an inexplicable being with no tether to reality whatsoever. Starting with the answer and then looking for things to apply it to, is not rational.

[HarryNicNicholas]

i like roger penrose joke about infinity "if the universe is infinite, then i can't reach my chair, over there" (reaches out and touches chair). you just have to put the "start of time" somewhere near "now".
i've always said that frank is a carnival act, he plays three card monty with words.
so, god doesn't require use of energy?
20:00 you said it for me, what if the battery has infinite energy. am i right, did sean carroll say that entropy might just go on forever, that there isn't an upper, or even lower limit, it just has a direction?

[FlockOfHawks]

Drank a coffee at each glitch - gonna move some mountains now 😎

[trigonzobob]

I enjoyed this much more than I thought I would. Probably 'cuz it was really scientists debunking Turek. Plus I made a beer run and played the drinking game and had two pints. Thanks!

[HarryNicNicholas]

1:05:00 "nothing" - if god created the universe he either created it out of "nothing" (ie there was no existing universe, this universe is totally novel) or he created it out of a universe he had lying around, i don't think the theist has much to boast about, they are stuck with the same situation as the atheist. it was created out of nothing or it already existed in another form, same as us.

when it comes to turek vs vilenkin i like the early tom jump with his "naturalistic pantheism", it sounds like vilenkin is doing much the same, the universe is created by nature, quantum mechanics, in the same way as a god would, but with no mind at he helm. which reminds me, even if "god did it" we would still have to find out _how_ even god were real we still have to do the ACTUAL physics.