Don't forget the ai dating prospective matchs ai

"compete with AI" if a women see AI as competition its over

@@paprikagamesNot what he meant. It’s more the fact that AI will remove a lot of guys from the dating pool leaving significantly less opportunities for dating.

amazing. can’t wait for when the AI girls and ghost men start dating each other!

​@@steamyninja8881 imo the dudes who want to date AI being removed from the dating pool sounds like a win

I need a wife

​​@@Elitemekoggleyou need a ghost

​@@Elitemekogglebro find something you enjoy doing and makes money and stop trying to force it

Lol femcel

Theres even more shitty women

She wouldn't be put in one because she's fine. She's taking care of herself.

@@bec7080 she is far from fine

@@Tyius420 as someone who, not for anything like this but a bipolar episode, was in a subacute mental health hospital I learned while there just from talking to nurses that as long as you are taking basic care of yourself and not trying to harm yourself or anyone else they consider you ok. You can think you are the Queen of England and as long as you are not trying to actively harm yourself or others it doesn't matter. I don't but I could go around telling everyone that I'm a magical fairy and as long as I'm not trying to jump off anything to fly they don't care

They were never gone

Too many people would be in them. There are people who think Covid wasn’t real.

And if that were true every square inch of the planet would have a ghost on it. Just imagine all the bug ghosts piled up around you at all times

@@swankshire6939 now that you said that it's probably best that we can't see them.

According to some, only the rational souls of human beings have an immaterial subsistent form.

Bustin' makes me feel good lol

An invisible man sleeping in your bed alright. Better start bustin'.

😂

Disney Princess larpers wanting bad boys.

No they said its NOT that

they specifically said it was not mapping aaron bc the same stick figure moved from the edge of the bed to on top of him 😂😂 maybe charlie was talking over that part and you didn’t hear it? 😅

​@@morganferguson6378no, there's no reason to think it was the XLS scanning Aaron because Charlie was not speaking when they said that. 👍😂

@@Creamy-1988 i was just tryna give them the benefit of the doubt and be nice 😔😩😂😂

@@morganferguson6378 unfortunately you really can't do that online. People say things just to lie just to get a response. Be easy my friend. 👍

Why do you think their poop decks had to be so clean? 😂

@@swankshire6939 🤣🤣🤣

Barnacle Bill would agree.

noah where are you

Check out Aristotle's unmoved mover argument, it claims to prove that a singular personal entity stands at the front of a causal chain while being non-derivative subsistent existence itself.

Why is believing in an immaterial order considered irrational?

Whenever you have a causal chain, it starts with one entity. That entity would need to be subsistence existence and the uncaused cause that is consistent with the Trinitarian Christian God.

It would have to be an entity at the front of the causal chain instead of an infinite regress of causes and effects. It would be subsistence existence, the uncaused cause that is consistent with the Trinitarian God of Christianity.

@@lukeulibarri3924 I was only suggesting an alternative, but unfortunately this is a topic that's just outside of our knowledge (perhaps the answer could be outside human logic, even it's something physically possible). It's something so complex that's not even clear how to use Occam's razor (picking the most simple explanation) to choose between the cosmological argument (the existence of an uncaused cause) and the existence of an infinite regress (there are cyclic universe theories compatible with it, like the Big Bounce). At first sight it might seem the infinite regress is more simple because it doesn't need an uncaused cause, but infinity itself is also a complexity. I know the idea of a infinite regress is not intuitive, but the causality exception the cosmological argument makes for the "uncaused cause" is also logically challenging (since it assumes the first cause is exempt from causality rules).

@@pedrostormrage Yes you are correct that infinity is complex, but the distinction here is that numbers (even infinite ranges) are abstract universals whereas we presumably live in a world of finite energy and matter. Personally, I have found that dualistic arguments are a better foundation for arguing the point. This is coming from someone who had deep doubts about my faith before realizing that the prevalent arguments for an immaterial aspect of reality are not even the most convincing. Unfortunately it is the more obscure and forgotten arguments that are the most convincing in my opinion.

@@lukeulibarri3924 I mean, everything in math is abstract, so it's up to the sciences to figure out whether those abstractions can be used to model natural phenomena or not. What we can observe (matter and energy) is finite (because of the conservation of mass-energy), but what we can't observe (like dark matter and dark energy) is just an unknown (there are only indirect signs they could exist, like more gravity than matter can account for, and a faster universe expansion than expected). Even if we could observe some kind of infinite phenomenon, the measurements we can make would still be finite (making it challenging to recognize it as infinite). It is a fascinating topic, but it's also frustrating that it's outside of our knowledge (at least for now, I guess). I have a very conflicting relationship with faith in general. On one side, it is (ultimately) a gamble (which I don't like), and also I just don't feel the need for it (I'd rather just be authentic to myself, and try to find meaning with things like love, learning, and so on). On the other side, I understand it can be a way to fill gaps you can't easily fill otherwise (like hope, comfort, and a sense of belonging). In the end, the gaps we try to fill are still the same (it's just that people can go different ways about doing it).

Did you know that believing science and an immaterial order is not mutually exclusive?

rip mom and rip zues

Who said that?

@@jessetheanimenerd3304 I totally miswrote my thing. It said basically the opposite of what I meant 😂

I don't know. It makes more sense to me that the universe was created with an intelligent design as opposed to random chance, but you do you.

@@VOXivero but we’ve demonstrated the mechanisms that random chance uses. And we have evidence, if not counter evidence to intelligent design

@@brodude1260 I'm sure there is a detailed explanation that supports the idea of random chance for the creation of all things, and I also think there is reason to believe in a higher power, but in the end I suppose it is just a matter of preference on beliefs for everyone.

I would strongly recommend checking out Aristotle's unmoved mover argument that shows the necessity of a singular personal entity that stands at the front of a causal chain. It claims to debunk the notion of an impersonal universe appearing without prior causation.

absolutely disagree. i dont believe in heaven or hell but youd be stupid not to think living beings have a soul, its literally the energy flowing through our bodies keeping our hearts beating. you could assembly a meat puppet perfectly and shock it as much as you want like frankenstein, but it will not come to life. because life itself is an energy we cannot garner nor comprehend. but i dont believe in fairy tales written by other human beings in order to provide comfort for the unknown.

He did

You are trying to use logic against religious people. Doesnt bode well, they are too dumb to think criticaly.

I believe God exists in a dimension outside of time, where he always has been and always will be. This universe exists within time. It appears to have a beginning and an end. I don't think this universe has always been or always will be around.

Check out Aristotle's unmoved mover argument, it claims to prove that there is a personal entity that stands at the front of a universal causal chain.

i agree with you completely, my beliefs are pantheistic. i believe in what i know, and what we have, and im thankful for it. i believe some things simply are not our business, we're too simple to understand them. were just merely lucky to experience this life.

Stop acknowledging donations and people's generosity?

@@hophopbhoppfor the edited video? Yes

@@hophopbhopp yeah dude why would I be interested in listening to them I’m not the one being thanked 😂 I’m not talking all chat interaction just that repetitive shit

It's like 0.5% of the video. You can surely just appreciate supporters of him and wait a few seconds.

getting mad over not even 2 seconds of Charlie saying "Ey, thanks XY for the sub"? That's so ridiculous. Why don't you just download the video and edit it yourself. Then you can watch it without the shoutouts

Keep thinking that Something had to make this all happen

@@breathofthestars7043 yeah something not someone 🤡💀 how can you claim something had to create something in order for it to be created if in order to exist it needs to be created? So clearly that defies all laws of nature but opposes it in order create something? I’ll help educate you but you’ll have to pick up on curiosity and find the deeper meaning for yourself rather than just accepting things for how they are: Matter of Mass, The Gravity of Mass, And The Energy Of Mass

@@tuii_11 there has to be a creator of everything

@@breathofthestars7043 if there is then who created that creator? Lmao it’s such an easy concept yet some reason you point your fingers at a deity? How can you claim there is a higher power or being that created everything yet it took billions to trillions of years just for our solar system to develop, the more logical explanation is things exist over time and nothing just disappears instead everything has energy that spreads out even when burning a flower you might thing it’s gone and vanished from our realm but it’s simply energy being spread out back into the world. You do realize all planets also slowly lose energy making it smaller & weaker till they become an exploding star just like how you’ve been told the sun will blow up in a billion years, everything relies on the mass of matter, the gravity of matter and the energy of matter and if there was such a god that ascends the laws of nature and reality such as sending their child to our realm to “guide” us only to be killed and resurrected only to suddenly vanish? You do realize when a law is in place it is IMPOSSIBLE to defy it such as the laws of physics and nature. If a god can easily defy their own laws they have in place then there is no order or responsibility they’re just playing pretend, you cannot defy these laws of nature and if it were possible for a god then that leaves a door open up to humanity to exploit because if there is a way for them then there is always going to be a way, it doesn’t make sense if the only exception is rules for thy but not for me. I’d also like to mention IF there was a god, they could be killed just like any other being.

No use tryna explain it to him just gotta pray god finds his way into this man’s life and everyone else of this nature