Жыл бұрын
Жыл бұрын
Жыл бұрын
Пікірлер
@soniaaldea1110 3 күн бұрын
At least one that is honest the other two are sick men
@Nexowl 5 күн бұрын
Stop It, Get Some Help
@mitchv.7492 5 күн бұрын
WTF are you smoking/taking as meds bruh ? Go see your doctor...
@kenbo111 6 күн бұрын
This is absolutely hilarious!!
@Swoodivarius 9 күн бұрын
This is hilarious I love it. Actual god-tier troll
@ouroboris 9 күн бұрын
I have learned that if I say what I actually think about a video, KZfaq will censor me for being a big ol' meanie. Suffice to say that I find the musings of this particular KZfaqr to be nonsensical and insipid in the extreme, and not worthy of one's time.
@nxtrx. 9 күн бұрын
I watched 3 minutes and I feel like I lost braincells.
@murkwell17 10 күн бұрын
Lmao what a dummy
@Sam-gp1nm 10 күн бұрын
How would the bones of an animal this size support the weight of it without cracking?
@HowardGeorgeStirrup 5 күн бұрын
I imagine that everything was bigger, meaning that even cells and molecules etc to scale. I am also supposing that this could have been a world before ours. There are myths of Titans that were not made by Intelligent Design but rather mutants, made by fallen angels. The story goes that they didn't stop growing and eventually went to war/ate each other as their hunger couldn't be satisfied. ...It is all unknown and possibly unknowable but we can follow the scientific method to verify the theory of Bio-Geology for ourselves 👍
@josieann5031 10 күн бұрын
This is a prime example of "batshit crazy".
@overthehill370 20 күн бұрын
I'm stunned how ignorant Howard is and how he can't grasp quite simple science. His confidence couldn't be more misplaced! Howard...if you change the position on earth of the Foucault pendulum and the drift varies with latitude that couldn't be stronger evidence for a globe. I completely understand Craig's frustration because he knows what he's talking about and you're completely clueless. I can only assume you love the sound of your own voice so much that you don't care you're talking total bollocks.
@HowardGeorgeStirrup 20 күн бұрын
@@overthehill370 it's that it is inexclusive evidence Geoff. It's not that I don't understand pal, it's that I am not convinced.
@overthehill370 20 күн бұрын
@@HowardGeorgeStirrup No Howard, you don't understand. It's obvious from your questions in the video that you haven't understood the mechanisms at play. If you did understand you wouldn't ask those questions and you would be convinced. That's why there is worldwide scientific consensus that earth is an oblate spheroid. Much of the tech you use on a daily basis only works because the earth is a globe. That you don't understand how it works is obvious as you can't answer simple questions about things like GPS and have a poor grasp of how gravity acts on bodies. The fact that you are not convinced doesn't make a jot of difference to what's actually true. eg Satellite systems across the world work perfectly whether you are convinced that satellites orbit the earth or not. QUESTION: How does the American GPS provide your phone with an accurate location absolutely anywhere on earth? Explain the method used. We all rely on this tech all the time and the essence of how it does this is very simple, however I bet you don't understand how it works. You just know that it does.
@overthehill370 2 күн бұрын
@@HowardGeorgeStirrup If you understand that the Foucault pendulum swing varies with latitude then why are you not convinced? Every test we ever make (like photos from space!) make it obvious that the earth is roughly spherical. How many lunar eclipses show the shadow of a flat earth on the moon!? Clue....none.....ever. The only shape that can cast the same curved shadow whatever direction the sunlight is coming from is a sphere. Why can't Australians see the pole star on the clearest nights? If you understood these things you would have no choice but to be convinced. That's how reason works. To understand the evidence and not be convinced is to be irrational. So, either you don't understand the evidence or you are being irrational. Which is it?
@mrkaziggo 21 күн бұрын
Inderdaad very interesting. Many thanks for your explanation today at the Jalon Market.
@HowardGeorgeStirrup 21 күн бұрын
@@mrkaziggo It was a pleasure meeting you, thanks for watching and making a comment!
@overthehill370 22 күн бұрын
Howard: Your efforts to dismiss the worlds expertise with out of focus, over-exposed, completely crap photos/videos of planets off your iPhone was completely laughable. This science-educated viewer can instantly see that you haven't got a fucking clue. When you're ignorant of the subjects you're trying to get a handle on you need to go away and study more! We've known much of the stuff that was being explained to you for a very long time. You're never going to understand basic cosmology if you don't take the trouble to learn about the wealth of evidence we have for the current scientific consensus. We don't send spacecraft to distant planets by blasting them into space and hoping for the best. Nobody will be consulting you for advice! In this video it's obvious you are completely clueless about basic science. Go and study, you need help from qualified people who DO understand what they are talking about.
@HowardGeorgeStirrup 22 күн бұрын
@@overthehill370 you really should check these things for yourself Geoff. You can observe Venus flickering in the blue sky with just the naked eye and you can test the effect of moonlight, with 2 glasses of water, a thermometer and a magnifying glass. *Don't be a "science denier"!
@overthehill370 21 күн бұрын
@@HowardGeorgeStirrup Craig explains exactly how Venus reflects the sun's light to earth in the video above (About 1h 25m onwards). If you can grasp what Craig explains you'll become less ignorant. Craig nails it when he describes your ignorant take on Venus based on your iPhone pics (!) as "The most moronic bullshit ever...this is clearly out of focus fucking nonsense". I really shouldn't have to tell you this but......an iPhone is not the right tool for examining distant planets. We have things called telescopes. Albedo is a measure of how reflective an object is. Venus has the highest albedo of all the planets in our solar system (0.7) which is why it's bright. ie Venus reflects about 70% of the light falling on it. The earth is about 0.3 and the moon a mere 0.1. Venus reflects light in phases just like the moon. Partly lit and partly in shadow. It doesn't 'emit' light! Now to your daft 'cold moonlight' claims, popular amongst flat-earthers without scientific expertise. I already know that moonlight is scattered/reflected sunlight. YOU need to learn about the different ways heat is transferred. Radiation, conduction and convection. Then you might understand why 'cold moonlight' claims are, to quote Craig "the most moronic bullshit ever". An important part of the scientific method is endless testing to check findings. "Cold moonlight" claims do not pass this test. answersresearchjournal.org/flat-earth-prediction-moonlight-cooling/. Only one of us is a science-denier Howard. Hint...it's not me!
@nelsona3440 25 күн бұрын
Interesting.... Great work...
@HowardGeorgeStirrup 24 күн бұрын
@@nelsona3440 Thank you 💌
@tets4316 26 күн бұрын
Hi Howard 😏 these boys actually let U speak 👍
@brianshuker-wstf 27 күн бұрын
Great video Howard hope you and your family are all well ? It's all for the money m8
@HowardGeorgeStirrup 26 күн бұрын
@@brianshuker-wstf Hey Brian I'm glad that you like it, everyone is great here thanks. I hope that you and all your loved ones are well and enjoying the summer weather. (It's uncomfortably hot here!) ..."The love of money is the root of all evil". It amazes me the amount of people that are more interested in fame and fortune than being concerned about the potential consequences. It seems so short sighted to disrespect the Creator and encourage people to not believe. Because if us believers are mistaken, we try to live a constructive lifestyle and when we die no problem. Although if these KZfaqr atheists are mistaken, they are promoting an unhealthy/sinful lifestyle and shall suffer for it in the afterlife. (Big risk for small superficial gains!)
@drummingtildeath 27 күн бұрын
If you make a primary observation of Venus you'll get the same results that it will flicker which proves that it makes its own light, therefore higher dimension and Lucifer. I feel like the reasoning broke down somewhere near the end.
@Loveyou-bb9bg 28 күн бұрын
Don't use white table sold, but instead use celtic sold, it's loaded with minerals it's good for your body and brain!
@HowardGeorgeStirrup 28 күн бұрын
@@Loveyou-bb9bg I am going to order some next week, it looks great and not pure white/bleached...thank you!
@iyoutome 29 күн бұрын
thanks for sharing... I've been working with the 60 repeating numbers for quite some time, but have not seen this... 🙏❤
@HowardGeorgeStirrup 29 күн бұрын
@@iyoutome That's awesome, I don't believe in coincidences. I have another 2 videos coming out soon, that are also related to this. One about mandalas from results of multiplication and division, as well as one about patterns that appear in numbers and nature. I hope that you get to see them, I would love to know what you think!
@iyoutome 29 күн бұрын
@@HowardGeorgeStirrup I look forward to it brother!.. Have you noticed the 369 aligns with the 18 degrees of the pyramids?
@HowardGeorgeStirrup 28 күн бұрын
@@iyoutome no, can you explain to me, or is there a video that I can watch and learn from?
@sstratford123 Ай бұрын
HGS is the biggest nut that has gone so far down the rabbit hole, it’s sad! I hope you can’t influence anyone with your psychotic delusions.
@truthbespoken333 Ай бұрын
I see the hand symbols they are using in your thumbnail pictures ( horns & more ) hmm…wonder why they would do that? Oh they have a God alright…not Atheists, Satanists. I love your ‘About’ section! 🙏🏼
@thetruthinourskies333 Ай бұрын
Our children are in big, big trouble if this is where they’re heading…to this mindset… the name says it all “heathen-talk” with a hint of bloodiness in the symbol. They always show their true colors, If we stop & look. NO THANK YOU.
@thetruthinourskies333 Ай бұрын
Glad to come aboard this ship. Pls stop come by to see me as well….Liked & Subbed ✅ LoveJoyBliss! ✨✨
@HowardGeorgeStirrup Ай бұрын
@@thetruthinourskies333 Likewise, thank you!
@thetruthinourskies333 Ай бұрын
@@HowardGeorgeStirrup Stop by my other house when you can, it’s all one word but you know we have to play the game, truth be spoken 3 3 3 😅
@billy9144 Ай бұрын
This is the dumbest shit I've ever seen. Learn the basics of angles. The planets aren't in perfect alignment you dumb idiot.
@TheBinaryUniverse Ай бұрын
Garbage
@HowardGeorgeStirrup Ай бұрын
What part of this functional mathematical mechanism is "garbage", why do you think so and how can you support your claim? I challenge you to try to convince me with a sound and valid argument.
@thetruthinourskies333 Ай бұрын
Numbers don’t lie, people do however, and they parrot their lies onto the children. What are your facts to dispute this video?? Waiting……
@TheBinaryUniverse Ай бұрын
@@thetruthinourskies333 You have put forward a hypothesis and it is up to you to prove it. This is the scientific method. You have not proved a thing. There are many assumptions and beliefs in your presentation.
@tets4316 Ай бұрын
Yeah Howard because once they found a frozen dragonfly a million years old or something & it was just the same as present dragonfly
@cygnusustus Ай бұрын
No, in fact, it wasn't. Educate yourself.
@cma4023 Ай бұрын
All three of these people are actors. Am I watching an NYU film school homework assignment?
@HowardGeorgeStirrup Ай бұрын
@@cma4023 I cannot speak for the hosts of the show but I can demonstrate that I am sincere. Look through the videos on my channel, you shall see a consistency over many years and I have been honest in multiple interviews about my intentions and reasons for trying etc. *I have also published evidence and a testimonial on my website. ...If you are still not convinced, then I challenge you to point out one thing that I have done, that has a negative influence on people's search for truth! Thanks.
@occupiedaustralia9952 Ай бұрын
Very good point Howard . I'm really surprised that the guy hadn't or didn't know much about The golden Ratio. I've heard it described as the thumb print of God actually. I wonder if you could describe evolution as a terrestrial big bang ?
@HowardGeorgeStirrup Ай бұрын
That is a good comparison, I find it hilarious that Jimmy admitted that he doesn't know much about it, yet could still confidently dismiss it without any further inquiry. ...If we let someone mistaken talk for themselves long enough, eventually they will show their confirmation bias and lack of logic!
@drummingtildeath Ай бұрын
I think Howard's largest reasoning failure is that he continually presents evidence that isn't conclusive. It's all evidence that *could* mean something is true, but it could also have other explanations so it doesn't provide any safe conclusions. He does this with pretty much every piece of 'evidence' he presents.
@HowardGeorgeStirrup Ай бұрын
Take a good long look into the mirror and stop projecting! ...I always provide reproducible evidence and challenge people to provide counter evidence or at least alternative explanations. As I never get more than deflection, ad hominem insults and at best arguments from incredulity, I have even been known to put my money where my mouth is and offered to pay for counter evidence. Try harder pal, it's weak and pathetic to keep spamming my videos for years with unsupported claims 🙄🥱😴
@Theo_Skeptomai Ай бұрын
Hello. I am an atheist. I define atheism as suspending any acknowledgment as to the reality of any particular god until sufficient credible evidence is presented. My position is that *_I currently have no good reason to acknowledge the reality of any god._* And here is why I currently hold to such a position. Below are 11 facts I must consider when evaluating the claim made by certain theists that a particular god exists in reality. To be clear, these are not premises for any argument which _concludes_ there to be no gods. These are simply facts I must take into account when evaluating the verity of such a claim. If any of the following facts were to be contravened at a later time by evidence, experience, or sound argument, I would THEN have good reason to acknowledge such a reality. 1. I personally have never observed a god. 2. I have never encountered any person who has claimed to have observed a god. 3. I know of no accounts of persons claiming to have observed a god that were willing or able to demonstrate or verify their observation for authenticity, accuracy, or validity. 4. I have never been presented withany _valid_ logical argument, which also introduced demonstrably true premises that lead deductively to an inevitable conclusion that a god(s) exists in reality. 5. Of the many logical syllogisms I have examined arguing for the reality of a god(s), I have found all to contain a formal or informal logical fallacy or a premise that can not be demonstrated to be true. 6. I have never observed a phenomenon in which the existence of a god was a necessary antecedent for the known or probable explanation for the causation of that phenomenon. 7. Several proposed (and generally accepted) explanations for observable phenomena that were previously based on the agency of a god(s), have subsequently been replaced with rational, natural explanations, each substantiated with evidence that excluded the agency of a god(s). I have never encountered _vice versa._ 8. I have never knowingly experienced the presence of a god through intercession of angels, divine revelation, the miraculous act of divinity, or any occurrence of a supernatural event. 9. Every phenomenon that I have ever observed appears to have *_emerged_* from necessary and sufficient antecedents over time without exception. In other words, I have never observed a phenomenon (entity, process, object, event, process, substance, system, or being) that was created _ex nihilo_ - that is instantaneously came into existence by the solitary volition of a deity. 10. All claims of a supernatural or divine nature that I have been presented have either been refuted to my satisfaction or do not present as _falsifiable._ 11. I have never been presented with a functional definition of a god. ALL of these facts lead me to the only rational conclusion that concurs with the realities I have been presented - and that is the fact that there is *_no good reason_* for me to acknowledge the reality of any particular god. I have heard often that atheism is the denial of the Abrahamic god. But denial is the active rejection of a substantiated fact once credible evidence has been presented. Atheism is simply withholding such acknowledgment until sufficient credible evidence is introduced. *_It is natural, rational, and prudent to be skeptical of unsubstantiated claims, especially extraordinary ones._* I welcome any cordial response. Peace.
@HowardGeorgeStirrup Ай бұрын
@@Theo_Skeptomai I believe that you are agnostic, because I disagree with your definition of atheism. I also think that worldview is inconsistent and that your bias towards the credible evidence that has been presented to you, is why you claim to have no good reason to believe in a Creator... 1. You cannot observe something that is outside of our physical space and time. *Yet you believe in the BigBang which goes against every experiment and observation ever made. 2 & 3.If someone did claim to have observed a higher dimensional being, it would be in a dream or hallucination. Either way secondary information that cannot be verified. *Yet you believe in abiogenesis. 4 & 5 & 6 & 7. There are thousands of logical arguments and everything observed in nature necessitates a cause. *Yet you believe the opposite, that something can come from nothing. (Order from randomness) 8. You may have experienced many supernatural events but not realized because of preconceived ideas and confirmation bias. *Yet you believe in theoris like gravity and evolution, which have never been demonstrated or experienced. 9. You were not there in the beginning, so why would you expect to see anything come into our physical reality from an exterior/higher dimension? *Yet you ignore the mathematical proof 0 ^ 0 = 1 which is a reproducible calculation in the language with which our universe is made from. 10. You should look into the open source investigation "Bio-Geology" for evidence of Divine Intervention, the Globe Lie investigation for proof of a Devil and the mathematical proofs in Phi, Pi and results of multiplication and division for evidence of Intelligent Design. *Yet you believe in unfalsifiable claims of BigBang and the formation of Earth and life from a primordial soup etc. 11. The definition that most people have for "God" is a Creator outside of our space and time that designed and maintains everything we experience. *Yet you believe in scientific theories that have opposition/different conclusiona between scientists and philosophers. ...To be honest, I appreciate your efforts to explain your position and I hope that you are making inquiries with good faith and the honest quest for knowledge. Because if you are not willing to follow the evidence but maintain faith in what you want to believe by ignoring evidence, then this is a waste of our time. I ask you to look into the information that I suggested in my response to you 10th point. You can find references on my website and I am open to see if you have counter evidence or better explanation to the information. Thank you for making a comment!
@Theo_Skeptomai Ай бұрын
@HowardGeorgeStirrup Thanks for your detailed, cordial, and heartfelt response. While I am agnostic, my comment defines and speaks to my rational position of _atheism,_ not my position of _agnosticism._ But I will define that position as well. My position of agnosticism is that I haven't sufficient knowledge or available information to justify changing my _default_ position of atheism. I am curious as to why you disagree with my definition of atheism - to suspend any acknowledgment as to the reality of any particular god until sufficient credible evidence is presented. Care to explain why you disagree?
@HowardGeorgeStirrup Ай бұрын
@@Theo_Skeptomai I disagree with the modern definition as it is an attempt to appear skeptical, while actually enabling ignorance and arrogance. Theism is the belief that a Creator is necessary, atheism is the belief that a Creator is not necessary. Gnosticism is the belief that we can know and demonstrate for certain that a Creator exists, while agnosticism is the position that we might not know enough to be able to be convinced. (A lack of belief/confidence/certainty) ...For an atheist to claim "A lack of belief" is misleading and dishonest, as although they don't believe a Creator is necessary, they do believe in indemonstable "scientific" theories like the BigBang, abiogenesis, evolution, outerspace and gravity etc. *Please watch the video called "The Mathematical Model of the Universe" and let me know what you think about that information and if it supports the information and claims of this video. Thank you!
@Theo_Skeptomai Ай бұрын
@HowardGeorgeStirrup Hi again! I suggest you counter the very definition of 'atheism' each of them presents. I believe the differences will be merely sematic, anyway. The major difference between my own _approach_ to atheism, and let's be honest, _every other_ atheists' approach, is that I separate the _belief_ of the atheist from the _position_ of atheism. I would _state_ this position of atheism again if I thought that you didn't already know my own definition better than I. And you also know my _argument_ concerning this position - that when it comes to the truth of the claim made by certain theists [that a particular god exists in reality], one either ACKNOWLEDGES the truth of this claim (theism) - or one DOESN'T (atheism). You also understand that I call upon the Logical Law of Excluded Middle to defend this proper dichotomy (theism/atheism). Even though you disagree with my definition and argument, you _understand_ it. And to be very honest, you are the ONLY person who DOES understand it. I have never found agreement even among _atheists_ with my definition and argument. On the other hand, you could champion it if I went MIA. Where I differ from all other notable atheists (Matt Dillahunty, Aaron Ra, Seth Andrews, Paulogia, Rationality Rules, GM Skeptic, Alex O'Connor) and unknown atheists I encounter, is that I state I _believe_ no gods to exist in reality as opposed to _lacking_ a belief that one does. The problem I find with "lacktheism" [not my term but applicable] is that it states only what an atheist _doesn't_ believe rather than what he or she _does_ believe. It is not my lack of _belief_ that that aligns with my position of atheism, but the lack of _sufficient credible evidence._ The emphasis ought to be on the lack of evidence, not the lack of belief. Granted, these notable and unknown atheists are far more intelligent than I. In addition, I am quite certain that my Aspergers (and this is not an excuse, but rather a realization) lends my definitions and distinctions to appear odd to those without such disability. But, what I lack in social normality, I make up in raw and rugged handsomeness. I have to tell and report three "very short, appropriate, and for God's sake [yes, my therapist is a Christian], funny jokes" for my weekly therapy assignment. Tell me if that one qualifies. As always, I welcome your feedback.
@HowardGeorgeStirrup Ай бұрын
@@Theo_Skeptomai thank you for your comment, I really like the term "lacktheism" and will probably be using it in future philosophical arguments. I would really appreciate to get your feedback on my other video about Phi, called "The Mathematical Model of the Universe". As it may cause you to cahnge your position, or you may have alternative explanations that I haven't considered. Thank you!
@DivinoFractal Ай бұрын
🌀🤍⚜️
@occupiedaustralia9952 Ай бұрын
Well done Howard good stuff mate .
@HowardGeorgeStirrup Ай бұрын
Thanks Kieran, I have another 2 episodes coming soon 😎
@occupiedaustralia9952 Ай бұрын
@@HowardGeorgeStirrup look forward to it Howard.
@juliohilario4569 Ай бұрын
Buen trabajo ! , la próxima en español Gracias ❤
@HowardGeorgeStirrup Ай бұрын
@@juliohilario4569 Muchas gracias, la semana que viene sale la versión española gracias a mi socio Carles Meru de "Divino Fractal" ✊
@Lee-lq9xt Ай бұрын
Love all your work, Howard! Grateful to see a post 🌻 -Lee
@HowardGeorgeStirrup Ай бұрын
Thank you Lee I really appreciate your support, I plan to upload more new videos soon!
@DurpVonFronz Ай бұрын
Nice work Howard!! Been a while man, glad ur back making vids :)
@HowardGeorgeStirrup Ай бұрын
Thank you, I have more videos coming soon!
@suzannelonnettestewart8715 Ай бұрын
This is interesting.
@HowardGeorgeStirrup Ай бұрын
Thank you, please check out the video called "Bio-Geology The Harp Shaped Stone Phenomena" ❤ It is the easiest way to participate in the open source investigation and obtain your own geological findings to help verify the theory. *There are now renowned Chiropractors, Doctors, Cardiologists and Geologists who have also come to the same conclusion, that the majority of pebbles/smooth stones are petrified organs!
@greenlanternseven Ай бұрын
Attention: research Le Fountain Bleu in France and see the petrified creature s of ancient past ...fascinating
@HowardGeorgeStirrup Ай бұрын
Thank you, I just saw the forrest with the stones that look like elephants and even some of the statues appear extremely realistic.
@Face0fBased 2 ай бұрын
It's funny, youtube kick this video off yeah
@HowardGeorgeStirrup 2 ай бұрын
They have given me many strikes for other videos, yet this seems to be safe as it was a courtroom hearing perhaps. *It's one of my favorite reuploads :)
@codyjoco 2 ай бұрын
I tried watching a debate with this dude trying to prove dragons, then came to his channel to see if everything he says is so silly. Yup, it is! And I have no idea why Howard would repost Armin & Forrest owning him on AXP, unless he has a humiliation fetish...
@HowardGeorgeStirrup 2 ай бұрын
"Why do atheists ignore reproducible evidence, to maintain faith in theories?" (They didn't address the 2 facts that I brought up, instead they resorted to ridicule to deflect from them!)
@codyjoco 2 ай бұрын
@@HowardGeorgeStirrup When you use the term "theory," it’s important to clarify its meaning, as it varies by context. In everyday usage, a theory might suggest something speculative or a guess without supporting evidence. However, in the context of science, a theory is a robust explanation for why things work or how events happen. Scientific theories are based on ideas that can be tested and are not speculative or based on mere guesses. Additionally, we need to define "faith." In a theistic sense, faith is a belief and trust in something based on evidence, but without total proof. In conclusion, your question appears to misinterpret the nature of scientific inquiry. Scientific theories are not matters of faith; they are continually tested and challenged based on reproducible evidence. Atheists or scientists do not maintain faith in theories; instead, they rely on empirical evidence and the scientific method. Faith, which involves belief without complete proof, does not apply to scientific theories because science seeks to disprove or refine theories with the best available evidence. Applying faith to science would counteract its goal, as science always seeks the most accurate and evidence-based explanations.
@bobby9192 2 ай бұрын
@@HowardGeorgeStirrupy’all keep using the word “theory” but I’m not sure if you know what it means
@HowardGeorgeStirrup 2 ай бұрын
@@bobby9192 😴
@HowardGeorgeStirrup 2 ай бұрын
@@codyjoco you also just ignored the 2 facts that I presented and resorted to making a long winded assumption. Please address the 2 reproducible primary observations, instead of deflecting like the hosts of the Atheist Experience did!
@ChristianAvalosAntiTP 3 ай бұрын
REFUTADO Y EXPUESTO POR CHANTA Y MENTIROSO
@HowardGeorgeStirrup Ай бұрын
Tu eres el mentiroso 👎
@ThreeGuysOneBucket 3 ай бұрын
A found a rock vaguely in the shape of a man taking a shit. It fits in the palm of my hand. Tiny men took shits tens of millions of years ago, and they could fit in the palm of your hand. Wow.
@lewisjones2825 3 ай бұрын
We should not be confusing the surface-tension of water that makes it globular with the gravity that makes it stick to a globe
@HowardGeorgeStirrup 3 ай бұрын
I agree and we shouldn't maintain faith in gravity without demonstration, while we can demonstrate things like the surface tension on water. I couldn't agree more! 👍
@waleedmohamed3326 3 ай бұрын
You guys should have answered the questions. I think those were genuine because I once had those questions too ( not that I'm a flat earther). But, I had humble people who answered them for me.
@HowardGeorgeStirrup 3 ай бұрын
I am a globe skeptic because I couldn't prove curvature when I tried using the scientific method. Now I have found many verses in the Bible and over 50 in the Quran, that describe earth as contained, geocentric and level. I think that FE map and the globe are psyops. There is more than the physical to our reality, I believe that earth is 7D/7 dimensional shape that only the Creator knows. *If you disagree, I would love to know what convinces you that we are on a globe and how that doesn't conflict with Islamic cosmology.
@waleedmohamed3326 3 ай бұрын
@@HowardGeorgeStirrup I don't think KZfaq comments are the right channel for that discussion. If you want to have a respectful conversation that we can publish on KZfaq then let's have a zoom conversation.
@HowardGeorgeStirrup 3 ай бұрын
@@waleedmohamed3326 I would love to, do you have a channel that would host and if need moderate the conversation?
@j4bee768 3 ай бұрын
Obviously flat .
@Pirate-kk2nk 4 ай бұрын
Love the idea😂
@Pirate-kk2nk 4 ай бұрын
Hey my friend have you received my email
@HowardGeorgeStirrup 4 ай бұрын
I will look now 👍
@Seafarer-Ade 4 ай бұрын
Howard is so dumb he genuinely thinks people believe him when he says he was once a Freemason...
@scottrogers3722 4 ай бұрын
watching a debate of yours from 2 years ago, was kinda hoping you had realized how dumb this all is by now lol, that was kinda stupid of me I suppose.
@HowardGeorgeStirrup 4 ай бұрын
I have been asking for counter evidence since 2017 pal, I can't believe people like yourself think that is so wild, for theists to follow the scientific method and be skeptical about things that atheists preach but cannot demonstrate.
@scottrogers3722 4 ай бұрын
@@HowardGeorgeStirrup lol you mean you've ignored counter evidence since 2017 pal.
@HowardGeorgeStirrup 4 ай бұрын
@@scottrogers3722 cite an example pal 🙏🏼
@scottrogers3722 4 ай бұрын
More qualified men then me have shown you the truth, it would be pointless for me to try and debate the subject with you, you are dug into you way of thinking clearly. good luck, maybe ill check on ya in another 5 years lol
@HowardGeorgeStirrup 4 ай бұрын
@@scottrogers3722 you cannot cite even one example of anyone providing counter evidence, yet you have the audacity to make claims against someone that is providing evidence. I have nothing more to say to you, you have exposed yourself as a fanatic with blind faith. Goodbye!
@longjunior7638 4 ай бұрын
they're not defending cm but they're educating you on child marriage
@HowardGeorgeStirrup 4 ай бұрын
It's not in the Quran bro, they preach man made hadiths. This is the power of evil infiltrating, just like the Bible has been corrupted, Islam has been overloaded with perversions from scholars and hadiths that tell us how to interpret an already clear message and "his-story" to try and normalize what is inherently wrong. 🙏🏼 Trust your heart and eyes, not their lies! (Natural sciences and common sense over scientism and philosophy, as the devil is in the details).
@longjunior7638 4 ай бұрын
@@HowardGeorgeStirrup No that's not true. how come all scholars agree on the conditions of marriage which is compatible. according to Ijmaa, marriage is eligible when the following criteria has been met. 1) no harm 2) physical maturity 3) mental maturity 4)social acceptance 5) consent from the woman and her father. Hadiths are not corrupted, even weak Hadiths are more authentic and reliable compared to the bible.
@HowardGeorgeStirrup 4 ай бұрын
@@longjunior7638 Nowhere in the Quran, does it mention or support child marriage. You and the scholars that preach otherwise have been fooled, or are purposely misleading people with man-made perversion. It's disgusting that you defend something that goes against free will and morality. ...I hope that you reflect on what I am saying and change your position 🙏🏼
@longjunior7638 4 ай бұрын
@@HowardGeorgeStirrup bro what are you talking about. Where i have i said i supported child marriage? you must be disingenuous and pathetic liar. I explicitly stated the scholarly beliefs that are consistent with Quranic teachings. if u can't read, hope you can next time!