Atheists CANNOT Explain This Secret Code Seen in Creation

answeringatheists.org/ - The Secret Code of Creation by Dr. Jason Lisle.
From the #AnsweringAtheists Easter conference at the Ark Encounter, sponsored by PureFlix.com/answers.
Visit Dr. Lisle's ministry at biblicalscienceinstitute.com/.
We are streaming more sessions from this conference. See bit.ly/2Uq8pgm for details.

[@proteanalias]

"Atheists CANNOT explain" is, more often than not, followed by something absolutely explainable but misunderstood or unknown to the individual presenting.

[@waldoman7]

Usually a 5th grader could explain it to them

[@proteanalias]

@@waldoman7 the part that bothers me the most is the fact that the ignorance is a choice most of the time. Some of these people are genuinely intelligent (or charismatic enough seem that way) but just blinded by their need to oppose non-believers. It's a sad thing to see.

[@Futt.Buckerson]

I can't wait until they do a video on 10/3. How can atheists possibly explain infinitely repeating numbers w/o an infinite god?! 😆

[@waldoman7]

@@Futt.Buckerson definitely a checkmate. I once saw a church sign asking "if evolution is real why don't mothers have six hands?" and was amused by how much more sense it would make if you replaced "evolution" with "creationism". Evolution isn't attempting to fulfill any kind of inteligent/human design/desire.

[@Futt.Buckerson]

@@proteanalias I think it's more a matter of the need to feel special, more than countering non-believers. I also feel this is why things like flat-earth are so prevalent now. As religion becomes more transparent via science, people try to marry the two into some sort of argument for "see, we're special!" Apologetics in general isn't a technique to bring people to the church, it's to keep the followers from doubting their own faith. Hence why apologetic arguments seem silly to non-believers: it isn't designed for us. And I think the most effective way to interact w/ such people is epistemology. Pinecreek is my favorite epistemology guy on YT, very entertaining and lots to learn from him.

[@KevinKurzsartdisplay]

As a kid, I remember being endlessly interested in fractals and I told my whole family about it. Last year or maybe 2 years earlier, I discovered an app that lets you endlessly explore the Mandelbrot set, it kept me entertained for a long time.

[@BlueBobbin]

thats so cool, what was the app called?

[@christopher9196]

I think it was from the Google banner one week last year!

[@KevinKurzsartdisplay]

The app is called “Retinamandelbrot”, I know I posted this comment earlier but my reply mysteriously disappeared.

[@losningen3665]

"belief in God is associated with lower scores on IQ tests"

[@us3rG]

God is reality, everything else is man made fantasy ​@@losningen3665

[@renzrose9050]

I have been a scientist for decades. This is why I scoff when people say science disproves religion. When you see these things, you will become a believer in Him, a disbeliever in science, or realize science points to Him.

[@user-cg9gh1di6d]

Amen

[@philhart4849]

Ah , the logical fallacy of special pleading for the God of the Bible! May the Flying Spaghetti Monster have mercy upon your immortal soul.

[@user-ol6kb1qf6j]

​@@philhart4849u scream reddit mod

[@user-on3wh6wu9n]

@@user-ol6kb1qf6j "u scream reddit mod" Huh?

[@GameCreatorOfGod]

@@philhart4849 fallacy ? great word, but I see this is the only language you non believers know. I see in your own language. I see you all use words that make you fell smart and try to use them to prove nothing. We all see through it. I read many Atheist's books all full of words to confuse people that sound smart. But all conclude to nothing in any argument. I never once in my life found a Athests Dna book. Ever.

[@celestejohansen]

Math over the years has caused me to shed many tears, all in frustration! This is the first time math has caused me to shed tears of awe and appreciation for the beauty of God! Thank you for sharing this

[@kathrynnielson5689]

Same!!

[@mistafizz5195]

Believe in Christ all you want but fractals don't prove the existence of god in anyway. I would know I actually studied math. Whoever can discover the existence of god using just math would've won a Nobel prize already.

[@mistafizz5195]

I'm not surprised most of the comments here talk about struggling with math. It makes perfect sense honestly.

[@oncesavedalwayssaved240]

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​@@mistafizz5195The Bible is proof for God. Call it circular reasoning, but the proof of the Bible is the Bible. Also the Word of God is infinite: "O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!" (Romans 11:33) KJV The Bible says you can know 100% you're going to Heaven, if you die today. Don't believe the Bible? The Bible says, faith comes by *hearing* the Word of God being preached. Once you've heard it, you can either accept or reject it, but at least you've heard what the Bible says. It may even make you a stronger atheist 👉Search, The Bible Way to Heaven

[@losningen3665]

"belief in God is associated with lower scores on IQ tests"

[@kristinamullen4066]

As a visual artist, I'm mesmerized by the beauty of these forms.It's interesting that humans have used these forms and shapes throughout time, in their jewelry, pottery, textiles, buildings, etc.They seem to be innate in our imaginations.

[@bettyweir3075]

Thought of hippie-era paisley right away. Also the scarves!

[@knottynate6876]

Human beings are the only thing in the known universe that can see beauty in creation and appeciate it's likeness reflected by us in art. This is proof we are made in God's image I believe.

[@puppiesarepower3682]

Nature ends up using these forms as well, but science rejects the observation as coincidence. Yet they have no issue in stating that 97% of our universe is an unexplained unicorn force called dark energy.

[@logiticalresponse9574]

' the the only

[@logiticalresponse9574]

@@puppiesarepower3682 8

[@SatisfyingWhirlpools]

“I’d rather have questions that can’t be answered than answers that can’t be questioned.” -Richard Feynman

[@dansmusic5749]

"You said a mouthful, there.", to quote another wise man.

[@dr.bonniewoodruff1906]

I'm 81 years old and I have no questions that need to be answered for I know how the world is going to be and why it has been like it has been. Man is searching for life and Destiny why am I here and what the future hold for me. So life has really many questions and it seems that no answers can be found but I found all the answers and I know where I am bound.

[@philodox7599]

I would much rather have answers that can’t be questioned…. Are you crazy? You would honestly rather believe that god exists rather then KNOW for sure that god unquestionably exists?

[@radrook7584]

@@philodox7599 %Theophobia can impels atheists to do incredible mental gymnastics in order to avoid the obvious, because the obvious terrifies them.

[@radupavel5481]

question away sir. questioning is good. apathy is the enemy.

[@shannonnichols3415]

Makes the term “Cardiologist” more memorable!❤️ I’m terrible at math and my brain shuts down when anyone starts talking about numbers, 😮so I don’t “get it” enough to take a test on it! However, when you showed the illustrations and explained that part with the shapes & repetition, and then the spiral & so on, I do at least get the concept! That’s more than I could have ever imagined before! Thank you for bringing this to us! Many blessings in Jesus name Amen 🙏 🇺🇸✝️

[@chuckdee1189]

Same with me, my mind shutdown once numbers start adding up

[@mistafizz5195]

Believe in Christ all you want but fractals don't prove the existence of god in anyway. I would know I studied math. Whoever can discover the existence of god using just math would've won a Nobel prize already.

[@rickys.6498]

We KNOW how to explain this, atheists know how to explain this. And it's NOT a secret code, nor a code. And there is NO creation, it's not a "creation" of a god. Mandelbrot set is absolutely not a proof of the existence of god, it does not prove the existence of god at all. It has nothing to do with god it's off topic. God don't exist and jesus don't exist, sorry.

[@willarddavis7938]

ur

[@losningen3665]

"belief in God is associated with lower scores on IQ tests"

[@jtmag3638]

I love this. I’ve spent so much time trying to make sense of the world around me and my place in it. I’ve been agnostic, pessimistic, self centered and selfish in my thought process for years. It’s far easier to just have faith. Like a suffocating heavy blanket being lifted from my heart. Faith sets the mind free, free to experience joy in each moment as it passes. Thank you for your content doc. ❤

[@lukeevans9505]

Easier, because it does not require you to think or learn...

[@marius-9333]

@@lukeevans9505 that's called ignorance. Ignorance on your part. Ignorance and arrogance to make such a statement.

[@danielcaulliez6572]

I love what you say

[@GarrettFemister]

@@marius-9333Why don’t you do a KZbin video showing why this is “ignorant or arrogant”? Because people disagree w your view on subjects, doesn’t make them either of those things. I’d love to see the opposite reaction of this video in such detail by a non-believer.

[@rootyroot]

@@marius-9333Ignorance because your emotions say so?

[@robh3007]

The most incomprehensible thing about the universe is that it is at all comprehensible -Albert Einstein When I consider the heavens, the work of your fingers, the moon and the stars which you have set in place, what is man that you are mindful of him? The son of man, that you should visit him? Psalm 8:3,4

[@F15CEAGLE]

Maranatha.

[@youaresomeone3413]

The son of man is actually the "sun" of man meaning literally the actual sun.

[@VintageBait]

😭😭🤧

[@ClaytonBigsby93]

@@youaresomeone3413 perhaps you can surmise that interpretation as acknowledgement of it having dual meaning, but your comment neglects the actual meaning of the reference, and you are absolute incorrect in that claim. Son of Man is a direct reference to Christ.

[@thesphider8298]

It isn't comprehensible. Humans just know how to sustain elaborate delusions.

[@Psalm-yg6yi]

There's three things I'm bad at. #1. Math #2. Athletics.

[@onepunch9203]

🤣

[@siefoote]

This is literally like the written Word of God. Same Word, but the more you go to it and hear from Him and receive of Him from it, the more you get and the more you get and the more you get. ❤

[@OslerWannabe]

Fractal geometry exists, it's beautiful, and useful. That is what we see in it. But how is it God gets credit? His fingerprints are nowhere on it, because he has no fingers, no hands, no arms, no existence. You BELIEVE he exists. But Belief occurs in the absence of evidence, the absence of proof. 85% of mathematicians are atheists. Benoit Mandelbrot himself was an atheist.

[@tsmith3286]

@@OslerWannabe Where did human life originate? Don't assume I am asking this because I do or don't believe in God, it's just a literal question.

[@richardgregory3684]

@@tsmith3286 Humans evolved from an earlier primate ancestor. Next?

[@lethalsub]

The largest postive real value that lies within the set is 1/4.

[@alexdrake8079]

​@@richardgregory3684 Don't remember my ancestors ever coming from apes because our genetics don't show that we ever reproduced through apes since you can't change the genetic code after conception. So when did the first ape give birth to a human being then? Because reproduction pretty much contradicts this theory you're telling us

[@kilagiltner1572]

Our God is awesome His thoughts and ways are above and beyond ours

[@davezanin1863]

Amen, Praise God

[@philhart4849]

The God of the Bible is merely a fiction.

[@dylancooper3984]

You are right!! I’m thankful for Jesus! Thankful for His sacrifice and mercy!

[@seanstack180]

This is what visuals are like on psychedelics. This is kind of what thoughts are like as well when you’re in a thought loop. The understanding and emotional experience of the infinite becomes more tangible. Hard to describe typically with words but the fractals of this Mandelbrot set really help paint the picture!

[@Buf037]

People also report seeing 4 dimensional geometry which in a sober state the human mind cannot comprehend. Psychedelics truly are one of the greatest wonders of the world

[@Kanzu999]

@@Buf037 They might report it, but they would never be able to actually see 4 dimensional geometry. In fact even if they had the experience, they wouldn't be able to tell whether or not they saw 4 dimensional geometry, because no one knows what it looks like. Having said that, psychedelics certainly are incredible, and I've had many amazing experiences with them. And certainly I've seen indescribably complex and beautiful geometry, especially with DMT. It's absolutely mind-blowing. Psychedelics can potentially be so otherworldly that I'm not surprised some people might interpret their experience as having 4 dimensional geometry, but thinking about that in terms of physics and math, and the fact that we can't even imagine what 4 dimensional geometry would look like, I've never even considered it as a possibility that I could experience 4 dimensional geometry. I would rather say that closed eye visuals start feeling kinda 2 dimensional when you're on lower doses, and then as you increase the dose, you start adding depth, so that it becomes 3 dimensional, while at the same time, the visuals will also become more clear and complex. And when I say complex, I don't just mean in the sense that there might be more complex geometry or colors, but it also becomes much more complex in how you experience your visuals. In a sense, the visuals can become manifestations of our own thoughts and feelings. While I do think there is a danger in people sometimes being too fast to accept what they experience as being true while under psychedelics, I also don't have a doubt that psychedelics can greatly help us understand our own minds, and also consciousness and the brain in general.

[@darkness3308]

Kind of like the fractals you see with a good crack to the noggin.

[@NA-gd3sd]

You don't "see" dimensions, you experience it.

[@darkness3308]

@@NA-gd3sd Granted, all of you may be right you don't see dimensions (without the help of some LSD), But keep in mind we are still looking at fractals here in this video, and those you can see.

[@Shkunk1]

In engineering classes we used 'J' to represent imaginary numbers rather than using 'I'. We referred to them as jimaginary numbers.

[@achtsekundenfurz7876]

49:31 _LOL_

[@nephilimshammer9567]

Jamariquie

[@billmarshall3082]

"Jamanji" ?

[@plat2716]

In math class we called them complex numbers. Which is what they're called.

[@hueyiroquois3839]

I always figured that engineers did that as an excuse to say "bj".

[@Snoil]

As an aspie, with an IQ that has me mostly working with atheists (Im sure most know what I mean here, no denigration of anyone is ok) this might help me talk more openly. We are commanded to share the word, which I have not been any good at-thank you for the help!

[@AFRoSHEENT3ARCMICHAEL69]

Yeah brain IQ has nothing to do with God which is experienced in the Heart. That's why the word Earth is a anagram for hEart. It's Heart. Hear t. He art. The Romans called it Terra. Terahertz is Trillions is Try is Triangle. Torah, Torus, Taurus, Tau Rho, Two. Plus none of you or most of you don't understand why the Greek alphabet is the Alpha and Omega and really all alphabets and numbered systems which are also originally gnostic symbols tied to whatever showed up and then those pyramids. Naw mean? Art bridges the gap between the material and the spiritual aka the 5D 6D Twilight zone.

[@AFRoSHEENT3ARCMICHAEL69]

The Christogram Chi Rho is pronounced exactly like Cairo the capital of Egypt. It's the X symbol that comes from the sign of the cross OR what we know call the Chladni Figures. Xmas? It's Ten. The One&zerO. The A and 0. Ask them where the ratio of the musical strings come from. This X comes from the 2:1 octave in the center or middle. Where'd all that go down? the center east? Anyways what else has a 2:1 ratio? Water H2O. Also the color violet has a 2:1 ratio. I realized this from an Epiphany hence the name epiphysis gland which is your Pineal gland. The name of the place Jacob saw was called Peniel meaning God face to face talking about your bodies center.

[@gantz4u]

Tell them they hold blind faith in the big bang theory because of the effectiveness of the math model in natural science. They are indoctrinated into a theory. That got proven wrong when the James Webb looked and proved their math model is wrong. Big bang never happened.its ober. Big bang is just as a goofy religion as any other creationist theory from their own perspectives. Then tell them to go listen to Neil degrasse Tyson feed you bread crumbs about more dimensions and what a 3 dimensional creature looks like from the perspective of a 2d creature. Its the Rogan episode. I thought Tyson was a fraud until I realized 90% of the stuff he says is from the perspective of some high ranking quantum phycisist tasked with trying to teach a pre school shapes and colors. The Rogan episode he speaks midwit tier. I think the CIA is on board. is it religion? is it aliens? is it multi dimensional? is it time travelers? and the answer is nobody knows. We dont know.

[@davezanin1863]

Praise God, spread it

[@mistafizz5195]

Believe in Christ all you want but fractals don't prove the existence of god in anyway. I would know I actually studied math. Whoever can discover the existence of god using just math would've won a Nobel prize already.

[@NickFrom1228]

In the mid 1980s I attended a lecture at a university that was given by Dr Richard Voss from IBM. He approached the explanation of fractals in an interesting way. First he discussed brownian motion and stochastic systems then talked about fractals and specifically fractal geometry and its relation to nature. What came out of it was how fractals are perfect for describing nature. We think in 3 dimensions but the fractal dimension of nature is something like 2.3 if I recall. His examples were fascinating but the one in particular that was amazing is the nile river. For thousands of years, the egyptians have recorded the flood stage of the nile river. He took these measurements and assigned them to musical notes. When you listen to these played on a piano, you are certain you are hearing a composed song yet there is a "random" nature to it. I doubt he is Christian but he was demonstrating this perfect tie in between nature and math. I've left out a ton of what he presented but if this isn't the creation of an extremely intelligent being I don't know what would be. There is so much more to fractals than what can be discussed in a reasonable time. Dr Lisle covers the Mandlebrot pretty well but there is soooooo much more and it all points to God. Truly amazing stuff. Back in that day he recommended a book called "The Fractal Geometry of Nature" by Peitgen and Saupe (stretching my memory here) but it was good. A little bit on the technical side to check it out of a library or something if you don't plan to write code to generate fractals.

[@losningen3665]

"belief in God is associated with lower scores on IQ tests"

[@NickFrom1228]

@@losningen3665 Interesting. Also interesting that some of the people scoring highest on the IQ tests believe in God so...

[@losningen3665]

@@NickFrom1228 Yes, but it's a stark reality that individuals with high IQs are often isolated, and it drives them to seek companionship. It's not that they are inherently drawn to religion, but rather, they find themselves in a world that often fails to understand or appreciate their intellect. This isolation can make them more susceptible to grasping for any source of connection, and religion is one of those avenues, though it may not truly resonate with them on a fundamental level. It's frustrating to see so many bright minds driven to this predicament by societal inadequacies.

[@PKerslake1]

Unfortunately I am agnostic. Your anecdote about the Nile river does more to convince me of a divine creator than my research to date. Thank you.

[@UberL33TmonkeyMan]

What's cool to me is that this beauty exists in just a 2 dimensional plane. I'd like to see what happens when you add a 3rd plane and see what the set looks like in 3D.

[@sinclairj7492]

I know we can’t imagine it but think of ♾D

[@bobbun9630]

The Mandelbrot set is inherently two dimensional, since the mathematical basis is simply whether or not each point in the complex plane (a two dimensional mathematical structure) converges to a specific value when it's used as a repeated input to a complex valued function. There isn't really a true three dimensional analog to the complex plane, though there is a four dimensional analog (the set of quaternions) and a three dimensional "slice" could be chosen from a similar processing of quaternion space and examined. Yes, if you don't know the math that's probably gibberish--can't really be helped. It's probably worth mentioning that the Mandelbrot set isn't the pretty part most people think of. The set is just the solid black region. All the fancy coloration is just programmers making artistic decisions about how to color the surroundings. Usually it's colored in bands based on how many iterations the program made before deciding that a particular point is not in the Mandelbrot set.

[@jamesarthurreed]

There are videos on this platform that show that the 2D Mandelbrot set (x, y) is a subset of a 3D set (x, y, z) set to z=0, and there are videos that address the fact that imaginary/inverse numbers are the effect of things existing in a 3D or greater space with ties to periodicity (repetition over time). Tying these two concepts together, the images generated are as fascinating as they are beautiful. I won't spam these comments with links, but if you search for these terms, you should find what you're seeking.

[@EelkodeVos]

Look at Veritasium's video. It shows how these sets look like in 3d. Not at all what you'd expect!

[@xAxMxWx]

Yeah! The James guy is right one of those math channels like mathologer or numberphile did a video on exactly what u want to see :)

[@theboombody]

When I first found out about time dilation it freaked me out way more than finding out about fractals. This world is full of some very DEEP mysteries. No question about it.

[@iriskeniafernandez]

Tell me more

[@iriskeniafernandez]

@@acbulgin2 this is fascinating

[@theboombody]

@@iriskeniafernandez Another weird mathematical thing is it's super easy to find the area of an ellipse, and we have a nice easy simple closed-form formula for it. But finding the circumference of an ellipse is insanely difficult and we still don't really have a simple closed-form formula for it, even after centuries of searching.

[@alitlweird]

@@theboombody 😲

[@lloydwaycott8178]

Hi theboombody, did you see a youtube video on time dilation? If so could you recommend it to me? Cheers.

[@MrJoehayter]

Francis Schaefer's "The God Who is There", and Michael Heiser's "The Unseen Realm" are two books that do thoroughly answer and solve the issues posed in this thread. Read or audiobook The Unseen Realm first to thoroughly understand that the Bible was written for us, and not to us. Heiser's PhD in ancient Semitic languages really sold me on taking the time to go through his book, then over the years I went through it 8 more times because it is just that good. Helping me to understand the reality and brevity of my disposition, that I know nothing as I ought to know and yet I get to be known by His knowledge. I think Paul was agnostic, save the knowledge of God.

[@wspek]

How does Heiser's "Unseen Realm" compare to his "Demons"? For me the latter was highly technical and I kinda gave up. Maybe too soon.

[@losningen3665]

"belief in God is associated with lower scores on IQ tests"

[@Balzdeepinurmama]

I’m an atheist. Looking at te title and listening to just the first 15 minutes I can say this means absolutely nothing. For 1, atheists not being able to explain something does NOT equal “god exists.” 2. Even IF his little math show proved a god existed, it would ABSOLUTELY NOT prove te Christian god. That has already been disproven. So we’re back at start wondering what a god would want from us and withholding belief in any specific god until we have reason to believe in a specific god.

[@josephlong944]

Close towards the end he says “I’m writing a book” my thought was “how in depth does he go”😂 . Seriously though,this was/is absolutely amazing. Thankyou

[@hacerclic1020]

Thanks for this great presentation! It reminds me again how excited I was to learn about fractals and the Mandelbrot set back in the 80s. One of the first computer programs I wrote was to graph the Mandelbrot set. I spent hours zooming in and exploring the fascinating details. But we need to have a talk about Romanesco broccoli. It is actually wonderful when prepared correctly.

[@infiniLor]

Broccoli can be delicious!! 😉

[@billmount6704]

Yes, if this guy hadn't already totally blown his credibility, his comment about the broccoli would've sunk him.

[@infiniLor]

@@billmount6704 oh, ok, wow.

[@billmount6704]

@@infiniLor He’s babbling total nonsense about both the nature of reality and the desirability of Romanesco broccoli. He’s completely unworthy of attention.

[@notmyworld44]

Yes, but does it stink like the regular kind does?

[@debbieforsyth2015]

TRUTH and Wisdom

[@jwhitman2447]

truth and "wisdom" are subjective.

[@debbieforsyth2015]

@jwhitman2447 Everything is subjective but in this regard the facts about the science of this matter proves Wisdom and truth of a Creator.

[@denisezdansky9877]

I enjoyed this immensely. I studied mathematics in college, but never looked at in this way. Thank you so much!🙏

[@tufflucal4037]

Hello, Denise Zdansky. You seem to like what you see in this video, but I'm so confused of the ignorance and the lack of open mindedness here! Hi, I'm a traveler and I've been watching your world for quite some time. Although I'm a bit shy, I don't mind to pop my head out from time to time! So a question to you all then, are you open minded?

[@tufflucal4037]

@flx ? No. But I like a conversation.

[@masonhyde9411]

​@@tufflucal4037 What were your thoughts on the presentation, as an outsider?

[@tufflucal4037]

@masonhyde9411 Hello, thanks for your question. I see groups of monotheistic people trying to understand the reality around them. That a creator can only produce iterated shapes and patterns in nature. However, what people should also understand is that putting the numbers and formulas in a computer is different in nature or reality. For instance, a snowflake might have a fractal like set, but zoom closer, you see the individual ice crystals themselves and even closer, the atoms too. On a computer, you do not see that, because it's perfectly artificial. Of course, I see things on Earth, primitive. You have much to learn, but that's not a bad thing, especially for any natural growth and evolution of a young intellectual race. Unfortunately, Earth does not have this natural process. There's a lot that your people do not know. A chat for another time. ✌️ 👽

[@violetangelflame1]

This is amazing......I recognized it as a fractal but I had no idea where they came from.

[@willbart1236]

As an agnostic, I found this video fascinating. He got one thing wrong in the very beginning though. The Mandelbrot set does not prove biblical creation. It simply does not disprove it.

[@tommy5797]

If one can see the Bible as poetic as well as informative, the meanings change for the Individual.

[@Mr11justin11]

I was an agnostics until I was 38 years old. People that accept Jesus very early on, say in a Church going Christian family, usually aren't grounded very well. Not one writer of the Old testament or new testament ever claimed "the Bible says". I remember rejecting the book of James, fully understanding that he did not preach the gospel of Christ and him crucified. He taught a works orientated belief system. 2 years later I found out that Luther also rejected the book of James for the same reason. Genesis 15:6 States that Abraham was justified by his faith in what God told him concerning having a great multitude of offspring. He had no children at that time and yet the book of James states that Abraham was justified when he did the works of offering up his son. In Acts 21 we see that the judaizers had no problem with James but they had a huge problem with paul. Paul taught me Grace by faith from the book of galatians. I was a little surprised when I found out that Luther was also taught Grace by Faith by Paul but his realization came from reading the book of romans. Same author! same concept. They washed in the blood believer does not need the ten commandments for the same reason that a driver of a Buick doesn't need a buggy whip. At any rate scriptures are plural and anyone who says that James is just balancing out Paul's teaching doesn't have a clue.

[@ryckless1]

He got more than one thing wrong.....

[@jee6213]

@@tommy5797 "If you pretend X means Y, it makes sense" - basically what you said

[@DEMIxGODxSHADOW]

Wait he can't prove or disprove God? I thought some one finally was able to do it, and it was some one who believes the earth is a couple hundred thousand years old and evolution is wrong. Man wrote the Bible, edited it because some words of God were wrong, and God wrote the universe assuming it wasn't some cosmic coincidence.

[@cathrynholland8149]

Wow when he zoomed in my mind was blown and then again and then blown some more. Glory be to our creator who is infinitely beautiful and beyond our comprehension. It saddens me that the world believes we live in an accidental world that came from nothing.

[@meta7517]

How are you so blown away by fractals, the Mandelbrot set is an old hat at this point. It's just a selected set of complex numbers represented as a geometric figure. It has nothing to do with some invisible man in the sky, it's just visualized maths, and as maths is a rational, organized way of describing reality, it results in an organized structure if you visualize a set of complex numbers. Nothing godly there. Man, Americans and their terrible education system...

[@cathrynholland8149]

@@meta7517 Did you not see how beautiful it was? 😊 No coincidence. I'm not from America by the way. And I don't think God is an invisible man in the sky. He is infinitely everything at its purest form ✨ I'm not sure you understand the Mandelbrot if you think that it is a selected set of complex numbers. It is one of God's patterns 💚 arohanui

[@meta7517]

@@cathrynholland8149 math is beautiful. But it is not gods pattern. Math is man-made. Just a way to describe the world we live in. It's beautiful because it's visualized numbers. That has nothing to do with god.

[@bonysminiatures3123]

its an image of budha

[@jimmykudo5836]

Amazing lecture. He explained the concept of Vedanta without even realizing it, and that's genius.

[@Playitalready]

Well all math came from Vedas. but I'm curious to know what he said that explained the concept of Vedanta?

[@atharv-gautam]

​@@Playitalready BS.

[@Playitalready]

​@@atharv-gautamEinstein quotes disagree with you, as does the tons of detail, sources, & evidence I've found that proves my last comment, & how all the major religions, sciences, proven prophecy, etc. directly or indirectly came from the 5 Vedas, which I show in my book & unfinished videos. I'd provide them here, if you sounded more nice & open minded, & if youtube's AI stopped removing the wrong comments. Just stay tuned. Vedas even correctly predicted that their spiritual, merit based Varna system would get distorted into a birth based system.

[@mikeaveli2993]

With or without the aspect of religion this could be the best video on the Mandelbrot set I've ever seen. And I've seen a few. Very good job explaining the details in an easy to understand way.

[@erkl8823]

Yeah I don't think it's fair to tie it to a particular religion, but the concept of The Creator is intricately intertwined *into* it.

[@dongclee]

I agree. Though I am not a religious person, I enjoyed the presentation very much. I have to say that his was the best presentation I have ever watched on Mandelbrot set.

[@RMF49]

There’s one where the Mandelbrot set actually computes pi that’s cool.

[@RMF49]

@Juan Ramon Silva Parra Yes especially such a tiny formula.

[@Valkonnen]

The guy is trying to negate what we can actually see in the gradual progression of evolution and adaptation. His religion has made him delusional and sick from fear . These people cannot be trusted in their decision making. It's sad that people need to believe in something so badly, and we have tens of thousand s of completely different religions, yet they are each so limited.

[@azaas]

The only thing this video instilled into me, was awe and respect towards the beauty and wisdom of the scientific method :3

[@cameronhill8279]

Scientific method was invented by Judeo-Christian values :)

[@pedrorodriguessavini5603]

@@cameronhill8279 Judeo-Christian values prevented humankind from getting a better understanding of the universe around them all through the Middle Age. Great scientific minds were killed by the Church on the grounds that what they proposed didn't correspond to sacred scriptures, even though we now know they are true. Nicolas Copernic is one example. The scientific method is the opposite of faith, it doesn't require believe because it relies on proof.

[@trumanyoung1345]

@@cameronhill8279 No, it wasn't

[@cameronhill8279]

@@trumanyoung1345 What did then?

[@vutruongquang3501]

​@@cameronhill8279 Imperialism and history, as well as human's greed for more control over new land

[@FelipeSantos-fz5ii]

God bless you! Thank you so much for this exceptional video. I'm a seminary student here in Brazil, and I'm glad that I spent time watching how the glory of God is everywhere.

[@jaysea1553]

it never ceases to amaze me just how easy it is to lead sheeple down the garden path your invisible sky wizard is a fantasy made up by man in his image

[@noelwbray]

I hope everyone who watches this video watches it all the way through to the very end before drawing conclusions because Dr. Jason Lisle's logic is very sound, very sound indeed. He also quotes people who believe in naturalistic processes have to say about math and such. So I say once again, before you draw conclusions about this video, please watch it all the way through.

[@carlosbecerril3317]

His logic is not sound. Not at all 😂😂😂

[@EFWgaming]

It's like discovering the concept of infinity and just going "it's God" I'm a christian but this is pretty bad "evidence" for God

[@aguyontheinternet8436]

yeah as a mathematician I watched the whole thing through. Very unconvincing, you actually start to see it as deceiving once you understand axioms.

[@DSanto-bk6oq]

This is a great example of “the God of the gaps”…in other words, if we haven’t yet found the answer to a question, it must be God. Over the years, we’ve found answers to many questions that were once thought to be unanswerable. The Bible is a beautiful book, but was written by ancient people a long time ago. I don’t believe it is meant to be taken literally and is certainly not meant to be a science textbook. This is my belief, but I respect your right to believe what you want to as well.

[@Dan-eh9px]

There is an infinite amount of answers. Science attempts to catalogue irreducible complexity and then use human thinking to interpret what those facts mean. I would say the most ignorant people are scientists because they think they have awareness that they do not. At the end of the day it is the human mind and not the scientific method that gives us all of our insights. Data can only serve to trigger the mind it literally means nothing on its own without our interpretation.

[@caviestcaveman8691]

Yep

[@caviestcaveman8691]

They aren't really logical people

[@Bekky-pz2qy]

Nope

[@rossclark9155]

Cha-ching.

[@rookandpawn]

6:02 The Mandelbrot Set 14:00 Plotting the Mandelbrot set 14:50 Seeing the emerging patterns 16:20 Exploring the set 38:00 Discussion - Numbers, Concepts, Complexity and God 48:20 Fractals in the Universe and God

[@ethelredhardrede1838]

Which disprove Ken Ham's lies that complexity requires a god. Its math, no god needed.

[@stephenhays]

@@ethelredhardrede1838 you make no sense at all! Numbers prove there is one true God!

[@ethelredhardrede1838]

@@stephenhays Saying that does not make it true. The principles of math are independent of gods or men.

[@sdays59]

@@ethelredhardrede1838 You're a fool to believe that. People's intelligence prove God's existence. What humans and animals create are incredible, and these creations ironically has nothing to do with them. They've merely discovered what already exists.

[@ethelredhardrede1838]

@@sdays59 Matt. 5:22 Whosoever shall say Thou fool, shall be in danger of hellfire. The rest of your post is just fact free assertions in denial of evidence. I bet you think there was a Great Flood. When do you think that happened?

[@cricketbug7390]

Absolutely Brilliant! Thanks for sharing!

[@jemsurfer3905]

What fascinates me is that even power fractals are asymmetrical, and odd are symmetrical. The complete opposite of cartesian graphs, where even powers produce symmetrical shapes.

[@waldoman7]

"There IS NO ATHIEST EXPLANATION for this amazing thing I'm about to show you." They always say before talking about a mixture of stuff a 4th grader could explain and just meaningless gibberish

[@stspy212]

Most of what these types say is quite literally made up on the spot. It's disgusting. Say no to cults, kids.

[@MrAquinas1]

@@stspy212 Yes, say no to the psychologically desperate cult of religion hatred.

[@taleladar]

There's no better application of the expression, "It is what it is." It's not that the laws of mathematics require a mind to exist. But a mind is required to discover, comprehend, and appreciate them.

[@roems6396]

Hence, why math is discovered, and not created.

[@Lighthousepreserve]

Your platitude which means nothing. Say thst when you enter a 747 that just evolved?

[@taleladar]

@@Lighthousepreserve Uh. Okay. Whatever. You make so little sense right now, I'm wondering who you even meant to reply to.

[@brianp6859]

@@roems6396 But the reality that math represents could not be so mathematically perfect unless it was created, just not created by us.

[@TheFirstBrizz]

@@brianp6859 you have no way to prove your assertions while you maintain the burden of proof.

[@Sundayschoolnetwork]

Truly fascinating! Romans 1:20-22 comes to mind for atheist scientists, "For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood from His workmanship, so that men are without excuse. For although they knew God, they neither glorified Him as God nor gave thanks to Him, but they became futile in their thinking and darkened in their foolish hearts..."

[@artemisnite]

HIS eternal blah, blah... How convenient for the patriarchy that gawd just happens to be THREE MALES. 🤣 And... Crusades, Inquisitions, witch hunts, tRUMPISM... Don't EVEN talk to me about "DARK HEARTS."

[@Sundayschoolnetwork]

@@artemisnite God created man AND woman in His image. Furthermore, Jesus included women in his earthly ministry. And he came to earth because of those sins you mentioned. None are righteous. We need a Savior.

[@houtbay9]

Gods *invisible* qualities .... can be clearly seen.... contradiction right there?

[@houtbay9]

@@mmiller5359 What a clumsy, jealous, sadistic, petty, and cruel thug this so-called lord is

[@lilblackduc7312]

@@mmiller5359 3 seconds after you die, discuss it with the Almighty. (Good luck with that ;-)

[@ajoef-avet5889]

I made fractals as a kid in the 70's using the Spirograph drawing kit. Nobody here seems to remember this entertaining child activity.

[@stacycaudill]

I remember it!

[@marvingeorge8856]

I must ask, are you still drawing that fractal? Since they are infinitely repeating, surely you must have devoted your life and even your bloodline to continue drawing this fractal until the end of time.

[@user-cg9gh1di6d]

I do. Infact my gkids also have done them! They're still selling kits with paint ect!

[@theeggtimertictic1136]

I do ... I still have mine! I didn't know they were fractals 😊

[@normanholditch4504]

Yeah, got all explanation of the maths stuff and all that, but really wanted to hear to the same degree of investigation of how and why this is a sign of divine creation, very much lacking in that department. By the way atheists can explain the Mandelbrot set, as wrongly suggested in the title, and so could deists, theists and others if they were to take off their blinkers.

[@algorev8679]

Thought that too and the fact this video exists is astounding. There is a large enough number of videos on this site that explain exactly why the set behaves like this. If just 'something is pretty and strange' is a criterion for the existence of god, then that's a desperately low requirement of evidence to accept all the consequences of a religion.

[@neutrino78x]

"By the way atheists can explain the Mandelbrot set, as wrongly suggested in the title, and so could deists, theists and others if they were to take off their blinkers. 4 " Well, yes. It's theoretically impossible to have objective, scientific proof of God, ok. It's not in the physical plane of existence. Science deals with what can be objectively measured and verified through experiment, therefore it cant tell us if there is a God. So therefore if you say "it's impossible for there to be a spiritual higher power", you've left science and are now dealing in metaphysics and philosophy. You made an unscientific statement. A scientific instrument cannot detect God, only a mind can. Because Mind is the most fundamental element of existence. Even atheists who have a NDE, when they see the being of light they "just know" that it is God. One said that she experienced this and said "how is this happening? I don't believe in any of this." And it replied to her "you are my child. Welcome home." Most human beings just look up at night and see plenty of evidence for God. We don't claim it to be scientific evidence, just subjective evidence. All I ask is that you don't lump us all in with the fundamentalists. The guy in the video may very well be, but I'm not, and I see evidence of God all around me, and this is part of it.

[@algorev8679]

@@neutrino78x Absolutely, and anyone is absolutely free to believe what they want, whatever anybody will say. The issue is when someone starts deforming facts to fit what they believe, like this guy in the video. At any rate, I wouldn't have expected much more of an event that claims to "prove that genesis is true in a literal sense", but this is still disappointing. Christianism is neither a good or bad thing (whatever those terms mean), but fundamentalism, whatever its source, is a plight. It wasn't pretty watching this video.

[@harroldhenderson]

"Why does the physical world obey the mathematical laws?" 52:44 LOL! Real smart guy here. God = nature = math?

[@mick55]

@@algorev8679 ..........y'all trying too hard to find whats right in front of you. Creation is no mystery.

[@DavidVonR]

I have a mathematics degree and I consider myself a Christian. I love the beauty of math and science. Fractals like the Mandelbrot set appear in a branch of physics called dynamical systems and chaos theory. The strange attractors associated with the Lorenz system is another example of a fractal. Lorenz showed that convection in the atmosphere could be described by a set of non-linear differential equations, and when you plot these equations, you get the fractal pattern of strange attractors. Fractals appear all over the place in math and physics.

[@ralphjune9798]

so easily explainable from a science POV then!

[@TanyaRadic]

This proves we live in God's matrix

[@vaibhavsati538]

@@TanyaRadic No it doesn't

[@06wrx_]

@@TanyaRadic idk how it proves that. somebody’s brainwashed and grasping for straws.

[@theTavis01]

Isn't is amazing how EVOLUTION creates so many fractals, David?

[@bonnielucas3244]

The older I get, the more the Bible sounds perfect. I wish I could help more people, with my very limited ability. Have served the Lord best I can for 38 years. Creation is beyond astonishing. Oh Lord, our Lord, how excellent is Thy Name in all the earth.

[@F15CEAGLE]

Maranatha.

[@Chaturanger]

Read exodus 21. Your bible endorse slavery. Perfect morality?

[@davezanin1863]

Amen, praise God

[@mistafizz5195]

Believe in Christ all you want but fractals don't prove the existence of god in anyway. I would know I actually studied math. Whoever can discover the existence of god using just math would've won a Nobel prize already.

[@jamon283]

Philosophy student here. This is called rationalism. This conference is the religious equivalent of an atheist saying that there is no soul because neurosciences have proven that we are nothing more than our brain. Empiricism and rationalism are two opposite philosophical world vies. Using math, reason and logic you can reach the conclusion that there has to be a God, but, on the other hand, if you focus only on what you see, on factual data and experimental knowledge, you'll reach the conclusion that there is no God. So the question arises: which is more real? The path of reason or the path of senses? Rationalists are the one who see the first as the real one, and they'll even go on to try to make sense of the empirical world through their rationalistic vision, distorting reality in order to make them accord with the world we live in. On the other hand, empiricists present a vision where we are nothing more than what we can see and experience, they give a depressing vision of the world because the only thing empirical knowledge gives us is the feeling of being small an unimportant, it's an inhumane vision. You might be tempted to choose one or the other, as the guy in the video has done, but you should know this is an old debate and most modern vision take account of both rationalism and empiricism. Take his arguments with a grain of salt, since he has entered philosophical terrain without acknowledging it and presenting his view as the correct one without realizing that his arguments are in the terrain of philosophy and not science, they are metaphysical and he shouldn't be presenting them as factual, since they are just an interpretation of the world.

[@MrDillon744]

Been fascinated by fractals since I was in high school. Not to say I did well in math class but this was one of my first instincts as I grew to understand the meaning of what I was seeing. A thought really well explained by this man.

[@technodrone313]

trying to tie it into some made up sky god is really well explained?

[@supermonkeyball7488]

@@technodrone313 "Not to say I did well in math class" explains it. If you can only understand math and the natural world through some incomprehensible, mysterious force, then you don't actually understand it. It's closer to a lack of an explanation since you can't explain how it actually happened, just that god "made it happen."

[@MrDillon744]

@@supermonkeyball7488 ITS ALL JUST STRINGS MAAANNN

[@CTimmerman]

@@MrDillon744 Strings, branes, tubes... All forms of Pasta.

[@MrDillon744]

@@CTimmerman May the sauce be with you

[@1906Farnsworth]

4:57 Wrong, members of a set need not have any common characteristics. They can be chosen with complete arbitrariness. 45:42 If God has authority over all the universe, then it would be perfectly possible for mathematics to be different in different places. To assume other wise is to limit God. You assume properties of God on faith then reason from them. It's just faith with more steps.

[@jayceejm]

And there is no reason to believe that mathematics IS different in different places. Have you seen the size of the universe? What you call God limiting God "here" is called structure and order "here". And no believer in God claims that we can believe without an ounce of faith. We accept that that will always be in place and to be honest....I kinda like that God has opted to not to "make it plain". Those who just don't want to "see" can be free to do just that. Don't think you can prove God does not exist so that does leave us both believing something we can't prove.

[@1906Farnsworth]

@@jayceejm Agreed. No evidence about math being different. No evidence about God either. Of course you can't prove that God does not exist. This is a basic element of logic: one can't prove a negative.

[@neutrino78x]

"f God has authority over all the universe, then it would be perfectly possible for mathematics to be different in different places." Yep. We haven't discovered such places yet. Even if we did, God making a different mathematics there would also be evidence that God exists.

[@1906Farnsworth]

@@neutrino78x No, there can be no evidence for the existence of God. Suppose you find evidence for a being of great power. You would need to verify that it was evidence of INFINITE power. How does one differentiate between power that is finite, but so huge that we cannot measure it and power that is truly infinite. Further, how to verify that God is eternal? One would need to wait forever to confirm this.

[@silach5025]

Now that makes perfect sense. I'm glad that there are people with common sense.

[@mistafizz5195]

Believe in Christ all you want but fractals don't prove the existence of god in anyway. I would know I actually studied math. Whoever can discover the existence of god using just math would've won a Nobel prize already.

[@joshsmith2071]

I"m amazed that when you zoom in it gets even more complex. I don"t understand how that"s possible but its possible with God. It makes me think of the scripture that says " so far as the heavens are above the earth my ways are above your ways and my thoughts are above your thoughts"

[@ppheanix]

I found this amazing pattern in 1990 when studying software programming (as well as the Julia Set) I used to run the program on my PC XT (10 MHz turbo speed) -- took several hours to appear Later, I found a program that ran automatically and on my PC AT-486 at 10 MHz (faster than the XT) The spiral also appears on a corn cob

[@verigone2677]

In my College Abstract Mathematics Class in 1998, we explored the Mandlebrot among many others, we affectionately called Mandlebrot the Cauliflower Fractal because when flattened on a slide, the outside edge of the cauliflower looks a great deal like the edge of the mandlebrot. I couldn't get the whole way through this guy's presentation because he kept taking the achievements of man away from us in his explanation of the Mandlebrot trying to extend divinity upon it. Humans discovered Cardioids in mathematics and learns how to apply them, and numbers are a concept of Ratio that when numbers are whole can be used for counting as well. Cardioids are applied by humans and are observed throughout nature because any spiral shape of movement with one dominant opposing force will form cardioid patterns...kind of like because we came from a big bang and gravity exists, cardioidal motion is at the root of everything we find in the universe...

[@rebeccaw68]

@@verigone2677 Key word "discovered".

[@verigone2677]

@@rebeccaw68 no matter the origin of something, be it divine or mundane be it fleeting or eternal, learning about it is ALWAYS discovery. Mathematical concepts are NOT signs of divinity, they are merely tools for analyzing patterns, creating better tools, and planning for the future. The cardioid has NO meaning outside of a cartesian diagram, and in every instance of a natural cardioid being discovered it is self evident that the atomic structures would make those shapes. When applied to social science analysis, cardioids and similar derivations are useful in normalizing data sets to discover the impacts of multivariate stimuli across socio-economic boundaries. It is even more disingenuous to behave like you can't just use the complex number set without context for each of those numbers being used. If one is looking at something designed, the patterns of each constituent part are perfectly engineered for their specific purpose, using the best materials locally available to its creator. The inconsistency of patterns observed in a designed item would be self evident from surface observation in most cases, and easily identifiable under more scrutiny. However when you observer the natural universe, the patterns maintain consistency throughout and have direct route of repeated physical processes from just after the Big Bang to Today...no magic, just Motion, Gravity, Light, and matter in a field of Extraplanar matter and energy not evidently, directly interactable....maybe your God still live in the anti-matter, but I wouldn't bet on it. Please stop looking for a benevolent sky daddy and use your book to discover what was truly fucked up about the people of the past and the people of the present and do your best to be a force for good...become your own sky daddy. Religion is a psychological coping mechanism created by man to deal with the enormity of thought. It allowed them to compartmentalize thoughts about what they have seen but do not understand. Without that compartmentalization they would probably have become very easy prey, as that kind of thought on its own generates dopamine. Eventually, these religious ides become campfire stories that are shared and in the sharing become collective instead of individual. Later, they are corrupted and used to command. This cycle of religiosity is a natural evolution of a mind of thought and dreams. One with time to contemplate and no distractions will create patterns where none actually exist in order to make their internal world view and what they see co-exist. We were eating all kinds of plants and fungi that could do all kinds of crap to our brains, we would then rationalize and contemplate those things...this process started before we could speak a true language, and potentially started around the time we began making cave drawings or began forming words. Add on top of that dreams and well, its not hard to see where the idea of God came from, why it was important for the establisment of civilization, and why it is also the source of so much conflict. If it were truly divine, would it not be even more self evident than the nose upon your face?

[@rebeccaw68]

@@verigone2677 lol, you still believe something came from nothing, or chaos? Try this: just for once, be totally objective, try your best not to allow your mind to be in opposition and ask God to reveal Himself with as much sincerity as you can muster and see what happens. If God does not exist you'll get nothing, but if He does, you'll experience something that will be very different. You have nothing to lose, just try it.

[@verigone2677]

@@rebeccaw68 why does it have to come from nothing to not be divine. We have no idea what the entire cycle of a universal expansion is. It is very likely that the nature of black holes and dimensional behaviors of Dark Matter and Energy serve as an never ending universal state cycle system. Just like all matter and energy changes state in the observable universe, it must also change state from existence to non-existence by an as of yet unknown physical phenomenon. Then again, any does it have to come from anything, your terrestrial existence and inablity to conceptualize 4th or 5th dimensional universalities prevents you from understanding the nested cyclical nature of matter and energy. Logically speaking there MUST be a period where the Universe exists and where it doesn't, interdimensional mathematics suggests that all possible configurations of the entire universe exist simultaneously. I had my revelation at the age of 17, and it pushed me away from worship of a God. The book so venerated for its divine love yet contains only contradictory paths for life that are supposed to be simultaneously good, yet both paths only lead to strife. Either be the sword of god and bring retribution to your oppressors, or allow yourself to be subjugated...there is no middle ground in Christianity where the working class rise to a position of self determination in the law. Instead they demand you maintain your lesser station, because that way you get all your rewards in heaven... Do you know why that is? If you don't question your worth here, where it really matters, you aren't competing with those who hold unequal power. If all of the poor rise up against the rich, the rich lose everytime...EVERY TIME. Every single Abrahamic faith is equal parts exploration of mystery, and subjugation of the working class to the abject slavery and serfdom.

[@lordquintus1419]

“Could you believe it’s beautiful? No you couldn’t” on repeat for 1 hour

[@majorslayer3546]

and that the end you go against the scientific method and just assume that it points towards you premade beliefs.

[@citizenguy]

Quintus says, "I'm an animal with no soul and no purpose in life. I like to bully people who believe in religion." On repeat for his troll comments.

[@lordquintus1419]

@@citizenguy sure do :)

[@bztube888]

Saying somebody who just bullied basically all living things outside his/her church, saying they have no soul.

[@dariorivellini2159]

@@citizenguy bullies are the absolute worst. I heard in prison they bully pedophiles and that’s just unchristianly as hell. And I can’t believe they just allow the woke left to bully Nazis online when they’re free to have that belief. It’s not like it’s causing anyone harm just by being a nazi. Not to mention they bully Christians now too! The 65% of Americans that are Christians are the real bullied minority. Lettuce prey for they/them.

[@BrianCrossland]

The beginning of this video where he describes his frustration as a child is how I feel in undergrad. Funny, but also helpful to hear

[@JK23111]

Here from Redeemed Zoomer's video

[@solarmax11]

The very first wonder I could remember is about astronomy. This was before I was put in school or taught any religion. Everything we see are all so beautiful. And then there's music....

[@dr.bonniewoodruff1906]

Go to KZbin and see the title, God's Creative Design on the piano.

[@rebeccaw68]

Yes! I am amazed by polyphonic overtones in one note. I did not know I until experimented with my voice that I could make several sounds simultaneously because a tone is not simply one sound. Even that fascinates me!

[@dr.bonniewoodruff1906]

@@rebeccaw68 The piano note is 'One' tone. The string instrument like violin is more levels of sound. The voice is the ultimate levels of sound more capable then any instrument producing a tone. That is why I love to add the string instrument sound with the piano sound on a digital keyboard, and then if you sing with that combination, that is the ultimate... combining all.

[@rebeccaw68]

@@dr.bonniewoodruff1906 So, so beautiful.

[@thisis_batcountry]

and then there’s the Beatles

[@rphjacobs9197]

I wonder if creation was not in a ‘fallen’ state…. Would we see more perfect fractals in nature?? When all is redeemed will we see nature in more perfect ‘infinite’ fractals??? Therefore no more decay or degeneration… only eternity. The beauty of it all is hard for me to express.

[@TheAngryAtheist]

If nothing died, nothing would live. Decay and degeneration are necessary components of living. With our current birthrate, wed be shoulder to shoulder with everyone within like 3 or 4 generations. It would be utter chaos.

[@rphjacobs9197]

@@TheAngryAtheist … I understand your thinking… and yes… that’s exactly true in the world in which we now live. But if you saw through my eyes from my perspective you would see things so differently. Don’t close your mind to all possibilities. The more I learn the more I realize how shallow man’s understanding is. We see through a glass dimly… but not forever.

[@TheAngryAtheist]

@@rphjacobs9197 oh no, my mind is open friend :) i just try not to consider everything thats possible, because theres only so much time in a day. I try not to consider things just on the basis that it feels better to me. Heck, id love to be able to fly at will, but humans cant fly, so i wouldnt waste time considering flying humans as a possibility, regardless of how open my mind is... whats the saying? Be open minded, but not so open that your brain falls out. Cheers!

[@rphjacobs9197]

@@TheAngryAtheist …. Gotcha! And humans can fly. And there was a day a man thought about flying…. Also, sometimes that ‘feels better to me’ is an intuitive confirmation. Sometimes not.. 😉 Blessings!

[@TheAngryAtheist]

@@rphjacobs9197 well, humans can sit in machines they build that can fly lol. So yea you got me! But lets be real, i was talking about superman type flying. Yep, i cant disagree there. For me, its not good enough, but i understand why its good enough for others Cheers!

[@suruxstrawde8322]

Yeahh- the very idea that complex fractals would be assumed to be proof of a higher being is an innately pack animal instinct based conception. Fractals can also be used to prove how complexity can create itself with no outside intervention since it's already a thing in nature known as emergent patterns. What also is an emergent pattern? Landforms, planets, flowers, bones, hurricanes, and finally-- consciousness. Since it's a product of smaller parts that grows to have a bigger influence, it proves fractals are a visualization of happenstance.

[@xellotathschosen910]

Thanks for this comment, these people cannot comprehend what infinity means.

[@dariunperkey4649]

I vote you debate this guy

[@suruxstrawde8322]

@@dariunperkey4649 I am mostly familiar with debate tactics, personally I think it's the argument equivalent of the scientific method. And should be a common critical thought protocol in order to guide peoples minds toward clever solutions.

[@SpencerBoatkey]

@@xellotathschosen910 Can you?!

[@blakeavila4409]

@@xellotathschosen910 How can infinity exist in a physical universe? Are you not a naturalist? Do you think the universe is eternal?

[@gigimalvassora9682]

the correct title: "believers use fractals to captiously hook the idea of god as truth"

[@philhart4849]

I am not stupid enough to be a believer. Also, my own truths bear no resemblance to the truths propounded by Answers in Genesis.

[@quietguy-rx6kv]

Here's the thing - it is a graphical representation of a mathematical set. There is nothing in there that requires God. This is another example of somebody who takes God as a given, and takes something that he sees in the world and uses that to justify that belief. Consider for a moment - early in the video he's counting the number of branches in tendrils coming off the buds, pointing to two tendrils near to one another and getting excited about how "the" bud in between them has a number of branches equal to the sum of the two to either side of it. But he plainly ignores other buds that were in between; by his own description, there are an infinite number of those buds. How many other mathematical formulas are out there that result in graphs with high levels of complexity, but which we don't perceive as "beautiful"? Does he get excited by any of those? I saw a comment in the live chat to the effect of "what we know about science can't explain how the universe came into being, so it follows that God did it". That is not the logical conclusion. Just because we don't understand how the Universe came into existence, it is does not automatically follow that God did it; it only means that we don't know. It's generally referred to as the "god of the gaps" fallacy. Consider - two thousand years ago, we didn't know what caused lightning, volcanoes, earthquakes and disease. Setting aside the insurance phrase "act of god", do we invoke God as the cause of those events? Another comment I saw was "you don't have to believe in the Bible for it to be true". But the converse is also true: just because you believe the Bible doesn't make it true.

[@darylldufu9324]

Hi, no disrespect whatsoever but I do have some thoughts about your thoughts. Firstly, with regard to what you said about the buds he might not have said it that way but it was clear at least to me that he was talking size wise in the sense that the two “big”tendrils had their branch numbers adding up to the brand number of the smaller tendril between them and i’m pretty sure that this does go on infinitesimally given the fractal nature of the set. Him possibly not describing it the best or not doesn’t take away the fact that this exists. Secondly, beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder something i’ve come to learn the more i appreciate art. That doesn’t take away from the fact that what he’s saying about the Mendelbrot set is true. Truly there may be people out there who find the graphical representation of this set not beautiful at all and that’s their right however his excitement about this particular set doesn’t negate the complexity of other sets and in fact the complexity of other sets does in fact show that God’s complexity goes far beyond one dimension and can be seen in any way whatsoever. Similar to how beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder God’s complexity is seen in different ways at different levels by different people. I understand that you may not believe in God and to be honest that’s your right regardless of whether i agree or not and i doubt i’m answering or responding to everything you’ve said but just as you said just because we believe in the Bible doesn’t make it true. Similarly just because you don’t Believe in God doesn’t make Him false or a lie. In truth we may not get an answer to this in our life times but if for nothing at all wouldnt it be safer to believe in God and realise at the end of the day there isn’t a God than to live your entire life thinking there isn’t a God only to realise that there is one? CS Lewis said something once about how we shouldn’t see our faith through the lenses of our world but to rather see the world through the lenses of our faith and i believe that’s what science is meant to do. I love math and science and I do believe they show God in the physical world the same way this set shows the underlying complexity in numbers that we may not see but looking at this set with the mindset that God ultimately governs the natural laws of our universe helps you to see the beauty in Him and in this and I understand you may not appreciate that. As for the fallacy you described I see the way by which mountains and volcanoes are formed to yes he acts of God. I did geography to an appreciable level and those collisions and tectonic movements are wonders and acts of grace through which God made/makes those mountains and valleys. Science showing us how something came to be doesn’t mean that God didn’t make said thing through that process. I’m sorry if you feel offended by anything i’ve said but just felt like i needed to say what I believed and felt

[@dibdap2373]

So ultimately it's down to the individual to choose what he believes.

[@Salara2130]

@@darylldufu9324 "Similarly just because you don’t Believe in God doesn’t make Him false or a lie. In truth we may not get an answer to this in our life times but if for nothing at all wouldnt it be safer to believe in God and realise at the end of the day there isn’t a God than to live your entire life thinking there isn’t a God only to realise that there is one? " yes, it doesnt make him false. you cannot disprove him (yet). But that's not the standard i have for things i build my whole worldview on. And no, it wouldnt be safer. Because which god should you choose to believe in from the tousands that were already believed in?

[@meloney]

@@darylldufu9324 in science, one part of the method is falsification. One can't falsify God. That makes it kinda impossible to take it serious in science. People tend to use God as the answer when things can't be explained. That's biased.

[@Soril2010]

@@darylldufu9324 What you mention halfway through is Pascal's Wager I've always found it silly. Presumably God would know your thoughts and so know if you've just been doing mental lip service to get into heaven, conversely any good deed by an Atheist is not with the selfish intention of securing eternal paradise in heaven and so they might actually have a better chance of getting in if they live a good life without expecting anything in return. Eg. If a devout religious person gives his life to save another person he 'knows' he will not die and will life forever in heaven. If an atheist does it he 'knows' he faces total oblivion, that his one and only life will end forever. It's more of a perceived sacrifice.

[@joseh3564]

"We serve a God who is beautiful and makes beautiful things." AMEN 🙏 and ALLEUIA!!!!

[@scamchan]

Except we still have children born with birth defects.

[@BumpyRyder]

which god is that?

[@gammafishhh51]

God also makes ugly things... and evil things too.

[@DM_21]

Yes and Amen! God is the giver of all good things. The enemy comes to steal, kill, and destroy.

[@ab-zg8pt]

@@gammafishhh51 hush! The devil make things evil ... wait, wasn't the devil made by god? Oh, I guess god works in mysterious ways, it's his plan lol

[@duaneking273]

I love numbers and that infinite trail def is super intriguing. As crazy as this sounds it reminds me of reading the Bible. As you come to one of those spirals you thinks its about to stop, and you’ve gone as far as possible, then all of a sudden it branches off into another trail. That describes how a person feels when they make a new discovery in the Bible and think you’ve come as far as you can go and then bam!!! A New Spiral!!

[@Sundayschoolnetwork]

Love that analogy!

[@RMF49]

Yeah nice

[@meta7517]

Yes that sounds crazy because it is. The bible is a fictional storybook and has nothing to do with the visualization of complex numbers.

[@duaneking273]

Repent and Believe. Fear God and depart from your wicked ways.

[@meta7517]

@@duaneking273 God is dead. We killed him. Because we invented him. Why would people know what are wicked ways and what not.

[@williamwilliam4944]

Pure math major here. Let's break this down. 5:00 "...a collection of elements with a common defined property" Not necessarily. Some sets contain elements which have a common property, some don't. The only assured common property of all elements in an arbitrary set S is that they are all contained in S. 5:15 "In most sets, some numbers are included while others are excluded" I am being pedantic here (admittedly) but it doesn't make sense to say "most sets". There are an infinite number of sets. You can't have "most of" infinity. 6:26 "...remains small..." Again, being pedantic, but it's the set of complex numbers which don't diverge under that formula, beginning with zero. "Remaining small" is sort of subjective. 16:52 "...the main part of the Mandelbrot Set is a perfect cardioid" Maybe I'm assuming what his argument will be, but this is something that is perfectly, and easily, explained. 18:05 This pattern of number sequences also isn't a mystery to mathematicians. 20:10 "...and it doesn't lose complexity, it actually gains it..." And? This is how all fractals work. 20:21 "...I'm gonna suggest to you that this shape tells us something about the way God thinks" How exactly? Aren't you the one who proposes that God has never revealed himself to anyone and is impossible to conceptualize? Are you just asserting that God's thought process is comparable to fractals? How do you know how, or if, God thinks at all? 20:32 "...God is responsible for numbers" Nope. Numbers are a human invention, created to describe perceived physical phenomena. 20:33 "...and so it makes sense, in a Christian worldview..." Why not any other theistic worldview? Why not a Muslim worldview or a Hindu worldview or a Nordic worldview or an ancient Greek worldview? Hell, you haven't shown why this doesn't make sense in a SECULAR worldview. 20:36 "...that when we explore and study numbers, we find intelligence." How is this intelligence? Do you consider all patterns "intelligence"? Furthermore, again, numbers are a human invention. Of course, when we create a structure by infinitely iterating a PATTERN, we will expect PATTERNS to emerge. 20:44 "...not only intelligence, but infinite intelligence, 'cause this thing repeats infinitely." But... we iterated the function infinitely. What's your point? How is this evidence of any intelligence besides human intelligence? 21:44 "...that exists in the mind of God..." Source? Even if Christianity is true, do you have any sort of demonstration that this shape exists in the mind of God, or is it just something you feel would make sense? This is laughably lacking in rigor. 26:35 "Who would've imagined that such beauty would be built into numbers?" You realize beauty is subjective, right? This is not an argument. 29:55 "...is there something special about that formula?" No. There are infinitely many fractals and Julia sets. The Mandelbrot Set is simply the set of all complex numbers for which the Julia set for z^2 + c is path-connected. If you want more information, research it yourself. 34:44 "What causes the beauty in fractals?" Subjective human opinion? 34:54 "What causes the complexity in fractals?" We iterated INFINITELY. Why are you so surprised that complex structures emerge from infinitely iterated functions? 35:00 "The complexity increases as you zoom in..." No it doesn't. The fractal is the fractal. It is infinitely complex everywhere. 37:33 This whole section on "beauty" is completely meaningless and demonstrates nothing. 39:04 "The complexity is 'built' into math" Previously you stated that the math and the computers merely revealed the complexity that already existed but didn't create it. Now you are saying the complexity is a property of math itself. This is a contradiction. 39:17 "Mathematics is the study of the relationship between numbers" This is extremely reductive and mostly wrong. 39:28 "...some of these things that are very basic are hard to define, aren't they? Like consciousness..." What? Consciousness is very basic?? 39:50 "Numbers are a concept of quantity" Still a shaky definition. It depends on how you define "quantity". 40:54 "...the concept, that's not something we created" Not entirely true. Sure we may not have created the quantities of physical objects in nature, but 'quantity' as a concept is a result of human perception, intuition, and classification. 41:16 "Where do laws of math come from?" Laws of logic, derived from philosophy (which have been amended over the years; see Godel's Incompleteness or the Turing Machine Halting Problem), coupled with a set of axioms that were (mostly subjectively) defined. Asking where the laws of logic come from is a much more fruitful question. Study epistemology. 41:29 "Did laws of math evolve?" If you're asking "did laws of math change over time?", then yes. 41:45 "Will that work for math?" Why does it matter? Math is not a physical object (as you yourself said), subject to its environment, under threat of death. 41:47 "Did 7 used to be 3 but it evolved?" Again, completely irrelevant. Evolution is a process that applies to living beings in a physical world. In terms of numerals, 7 used to be VII and was changed. In terms of the concept of the number itself, sometimes 7 IS equal to 3 (for example, in the set of integers modulo 4). Lastly, the concept of equivalence is also subject to a set of axioms which mathematicians defined. Nothing is true in math or philosophy or any medium, except under a set of axioms.

[@sanchalshrirame7168]

As someone else has commented, this video here does seem to be a classic case of "God of the Gaps".

[@lightoftheworld6578]

hmm, this comment intrigues me. Hopefully you won't mind if I look at all your points and give my take on them? I might leave a partial comment and edit in the rest over time, I'm finding myself to do much research on this topic. You seem to be much more literate in math than me, so I'll skip / concede all points before 20:10. Apologies in advance if you feel like I'm "cherry picking" points. 20:10 your point, if I'm correct, seems to be that this fractal getting infinitely more complex doesn't matter because that's how all fractals work, and from my understanding you are correct. I would like to pose a question, however. How are fractals infinitely complex? How as in, what made them like that? Did a human design a fractal to look like that, or have they always looked like this? I can't remember a good timestamp but I believe he makes this point a lot of different ways in the video. 20:21 ok, here's where my low-quality understanding of the Bible is gonna haunt me. And yes, I know quoting "an old book that was probably made up" is a mortal sin on the internet, forgive me. I should also clear up that I've only seen this entire video through once. Honestly I saw your comment and just felt a burden to answer as much as I could, maybe spark a discussion. ANYWAYS, 20:21 . If I can be lazy and just copy what you wrote for a second... "...I'm gonna suggest to you that this shape tells us something about the way God thinks" "How exactly? Aren't you the one who proposes that God has never revealed himself to anyone and is impossible to conceptualize? Are you just asserting that God's thought process is comparable to fractals? How do you know how, or if, God thinks at all?" This is an interesting one. I don't know if God has ever FULLY revealed himself to anyone, as I don't believe the human body / mind could withstand that. But we won't focus on that point, as to me it's not *quite* the point you're making. First off, I feel like you are jumping the gun a little bit. This is subjective, but "suggest to you.... tells us something" doesn't sound to me like an assertion. It sounds like a possibility that Dr. Jason is entertaining. As you somewhat said, I don't think anyone knows how God thinks or operates. what I can tell you, however, is that if we look at what we can confidently say is the Word of God (the Bible), we can get an idea of how God thinks actually. And, God has revealed Himself in some fashion to many people throughout the Bible. The easiest example I can point to, actually, is Jesus Christ. Jesus, being the Son of God and also being One with God, can probably give us some examples. Low and behold! There's Matthew, Mark, Luke and John! Four separate accounts of this Man. I think the parables Jesus speaks in can give us good insight, perhaps. All of his parables seem fairly simple on the surface, but "zooming in" if you will we find an infinite abundance of wisdom. On the surface, the parable of the seeds makes sense, right? If the seed lands in bad soil, or rocks, etc., they die. But if the seed falls in good soil, they live and produce a bunch more seeds. Yeah, that sounds like basic gardening to me. I played Stardew Valley and that's how it worked. But when you ask "what's the actual point to that?", it could mean an infinite number of things depending on perspective. It could literally just be speaking about seeds. It could be talking about Christians. It could be talking about Churches. It could be talking about businesses, animals, any living thing, even by definition of "living" (like with businesses). Jesus' speaking seems to be ambiguous, although one could argue there is a more "ideal" meaning to his words (perhaps, Christians in this example.) Now, let's connect. How does a 2000 year old dude that keeps being painted incorrectly in churches, that said some maybe interesting things here and there, have to do with the the question at hand? Well, it shows that if nothing else, Jesus' knowledge seemed to be infinite. Everything He predicted seems to have come true at least once, even the exact time day as things such as His death. That seems statistically unlikely, if I may. And, we know that Jesus is the Son of God, and that Jesus is God (in human form). TL;DR: We know something about God's understanding and how God thinks because of Jesus and the Bible. 20:32 Yes and no. Yes, God didn't "create" numbers. He didn't say 'this shall be one, and those things, two" and it was so. We decided numbers would be called numbers. We decided "one" would be a single thing. We decided "single" would mean "one" in most contexts. However, whatever you would have called them, and however you would have spaced them out, (assuming reasonableness) this specific graph would have been created somehow. Let me touch on the parentheses there. Dr. Jason says at one point that the universe operates in a specific way regardless of what humans make of it. Somewhere he gives an example of an architect trying to disobey these laws of math and numbers to build a structure, and how that would not work out very well for the architect. You can look at an your water bottle and call it whatever you want, however you want, write it down using whatever letter or number or symbol you want, but at the end of the day you have yourself "one" water bottle. So, Yes and no. God didn't "create" numbers. But there will only ever be "one" of yourself no matter how you want to write it down. I can't change how the universe works and now there is multiple of you. We can change word definitions all day long and go in a circle, but I'm rambling at this point. Reading that back, all that was more directed at the first half of the comment so I'll add this: Let's put aside if God is responsible for numbers or not. They were "created to describe perceived physical phenomena", in your words. And I ask you, how did that phenomena come into being? Did ancient Greece run a poll and they decided "yeah that exists"? Is our perceiving it making it up. Dr. Jason did an excellent job at dismantling this point, so I won't dive deep into it, but any way you frame it, something created it. Whether it was a God, a space jelly, or an explosion of stars, SOMETHING made it. Personally, the evidence points to a God with infinite understanding. 20:33 I notice you didn't explain how it DOES make sense in any other worldview. I would genuinely be interested to see if you can make sense of it in a reply, I'd love to hear it from a math major. Seriously. I love math and numbers, probability and statistics has been one of my favorite courses in college so far and I'm a PSYCHOLOGY major. Speaking of that psychology degree later.... 20:36 + 20:44 you somewhat left out the part where he says "patterns", I notice. You make the point of "again, numbers are a human invention", which I feel like I have answered previously. And to be completely honest, unless you ask further, I feel like my pervious paragraphs have answered both of your points. No matter how we define numbers, this set existed in some form before humans did. Therefore it's impossible for humans to have created such an intricate pattern. 21:44 read above 26:35 "beauty is subjective, right?" here comes that psychology major I talked about, Mr. William. Beauty is... somewhat subjective. Infact, I could even concede that MOST beauty is subjective. However, assuming a "normal" brain if I can call it that without offending a billion people... There is a baseline level of beauty that all humans share. For example, patterns. In some capacity, or at the very least in some form, patterns appeal to everyone. There is something in the brain that just likes it when things look nice and flow well. Do these particular patterns in some or even all areas of the Mandelbrot set appeal to everyone? *Probably* not. However I doubt that even you could say that nothing you have seen in this presentation wasn't at least in ONE aspect, beautiful. Even in grayscale, as Dr. Jason mentions later in the video. My comment is so long I need a part two! My goodness.

[@lightoftheworld6578]

Alright, part two. 29:55 I mean, kind of. I concede this is "subjective", however I find it quite special how "well" this set seems to work in it's intricacy and beauty. You look at many other fractals and they just repeat themselves, like ferns and ice. But this set is the first fractal I've learned about that is THIS unique. How many patterns there are! It's not just a shape that repeats but what other fractal has seahorses and elephants among other things! And I'll raise the question, since you mention other fractals: What's not to say they aren't beautiful? What's to say there isn't another fractal even MORE beautiful and interesting and "intelligent" (weird word to use) than this? Or have humans just not created one yet, hmmmm? 34:54 read above 37:33 uh... ok, I guess. I'm sorry you got nothing from it. 39:04 "Previously you stated that the math and the computers merely revealed the complexity that already existed but didn't create it. Now you are saying the complexity is a property of math itself. This is a contradiction." This is probably the only thing that I'm just going to straight up point to what you said and say "no, you are wrong". I can't even completely discern what you're trying to say here. If you're saying that "he said we created math, but complexity is part of math, and he's saying that the complexity existed before math", then I think you misunderstood what he was trying to say. I'll refer to earlier points. Actually, I'll refer to what you said earlier: "Numbers are a human invention, created to describe perceived physical phenomena." So in a sense math is man-made, but it's based off of the universe. The universe wasn't man made. Math, depending on how you look at is, is either man-made and / or made by the universe and it's just something we have to explain. If you're saying anything else, you're have to clarify for me please. 39:17 I'm not a math major, I have no comment. The definition Dr. Jason gave worked for me. 39:28 not sure what you mean, Listen to what he said directly following it, and / or please let me know in a reply what you mean. 39:50 Forgive me if this sounds rude, but this sounds like you're grasping at straws to be honest. Amidst some of your genuinely good questions and comments, this just seems silly to mention. You do you, though. 40:54 debatable. This comment is getting so long that my laptop has started to lag, so I'll leave this one. Apologies for leaving one unanswered. 41:16 interesting answer you have, honestly. It falls perfectly in line with the type of answer Dr. Jason predicted one would have. I find it humorous that some of your answers have ideas of what Dr. Jason should study to "enlighten" himself with. I didn't know you were an expert in those fields as well, Mr. William. Although, for all you tell him to study those works, it personally seems to me like you have done very little to study "his" field. That is, the Bible. Study Genesis ;) 41:29 No, that's not what he's asking. Evolving is different from changing, however they ARE similar. Either way, the laws have always been constant. Our UNDERSTANDING of the law has changed, however. Your last two points I will leave due both to the previously mentioned stuttering of my laptop and also because they don't make much sense to me, please elaborate in a reply. I have one last thing to note. 16:52 "Maybe I'm assuming what his argument will be, but this is something that is perfectly, and easily, explained." I don't know if you were writing this comment mid video, but, whatever was "perfectly, and easily, explained", seems to have no explanation. Oh well. No hate, nor disrespect, Mr. William. As I stated in the very beginning, your comment intrigued me. I would love to hear a reply from you. And despite my formalities, I'm only 19, so don't worry. I'm not some old guy with nothing better to do than harrass someone in a comments section.

[@williamwilliam4944]

@@lightoftheworld6578 it seems youtube deleted my original reply. Although I would love to type another essay-length comment, I am consumed by laziness. Would you like to discuss this over a call? Discord maybe?

[@lightoftheworld6578]

@@williamwilliam4944 over call is great! KZbin deleted my reply as well, it doesn't like seeing discord profiles in the comments, even when you space it out. In any case, It's the same as my name. Six thousand eighty-nine. Let's see if that works. (And if I butchered writing the numbers as words, I apologize 😅)

[@geremiasalvo3406]

Mindblowing indeed.... phantastic presentation!

[@cozmcwillie7897]

This phenomenon was mentioned in 1917 by a French mathematician called Gaston Julia, he published them as the 'Julia Sets': although he could only guess at what they looked like, he never saw them, as modern computers were necessary. From here you could say they were moved fractally by Professor Mandelbrot.

[@sizzleshnizzle9484]

Well actually the mandelbrot set is a map collaboration of the Julia sets. All of the Julia sets can be found within the mandelbrot set somewhere

[@dr.bonniewoodruff1906]

Very well said! That is why knowledge can be shown almost if not instantly for us to have today because of the high-tech....PC etc.

[@birdsflowers2289]

@@dr.bonniewoodruff1906 I found this very interesting. As an artist I utilize this all the time in less intricate ways. I was always poor at math. Imagine my shock when an adult Ed. Teacher observed that I had algebraic thinking in my designs. This floored me because I was merely told I was "hopeless" in grade school and they sort of gave up on me. I was never trained as an artist, but discovered I enjoyed early American puzzle purse paper designs , origami and scherrenschnitte...and Bible study.

[@dr.bonniewoodruff1906]

​@@birdsflowers2289 I was told the same, and God put me into a desire... directing me towards the sciences of outer space, latest discoveries, and music by the age of 2-3 years old and the Bible, witnessing the Hand of God through my life starting by the age of three. Then, from my birth 1940... so many miracles in my life... with me still pursuing my studies in all these areas, especially in music until 2005, where God had me write, "God's Creative Design on the Piano (Music, using the Spiritual application with God's number system, and God's color system). By then, knowing above PhD in music theory, adding the rest blew my mind, but all in the right direction... completing the picture. He is doing that with you, too. Currently God has me writing a fictional story, because it is real through my life called, "Sky Pilot Mystery Series or a Novel. I hope to finish it this year 2022. Thank for your message to me. God bless you!

[@birdsflowers2289]

@@dr.bonniewoodruff1906 Blessings to you for sharing with me 🥰

[@the_spiritual_hulk7449]

This was soooooo fascinating, I love the work you did in this and the presentation🖤🖤

[@bethstaley467]

I could have easily been turned away from this by his comments on dinosaurs and humans appearing 2 days after the universe came into being, but I'm glad I watched it. He explains the math well, and the graphic are amazing. Or maybe Mandelbrot is just amazing. Either way, this is worth a watch regardless of one's religious beliefs.

[@TotalSkeptic]

Wow, less than a minute in and his dad tells him we don't believe in dinosaurs, we believe in the bible. I guess facts aren't necessary in order to be the founder of a biblical science institute either.

[@ChannelMath]

I wonder what an atheist like Wigner would say to this misuse of his words? Of course, you could just look it up since he obviously addressed the religious take on these particular thoughts of his. However, to nobody's surprise, you seem to have not seen his replies, or maybe omitted them on purpose. You could also actually study how the math creates these shapes, so that they become no more mysterious than the fact that 2+2=4. But you won't do that either, because, as we all know, you're not really interested in learning anything here

[@ralphpierroii4626]

The question is not the how, but the why. Math itself is a problem for those with a viewpoint that claims the universe happened randomly. Why would all these rules for how things work be in place to govern literally everything that exists? Why can nothing exist outside of those rules? Not to mention the many holes in any version of macro evolution- if we find a chihuahua and a great dane, fossilized in 10000 years, and dogs have been extinct for long enough that general knowledge of them has passed away, what would such a theory suggest was the reason for their extreme differences? Could a theory emerge that the older chihuahua bones are proof of a canine that evolved from a rat, seeing as they have so many similarities? “Then, as the animals adapted to their environment, and became more successful within their biosphere, they evolved, growing larger and better adapted, hence the much later date of the great dane fossil.” Sound familiar? This thought process a gross oversimplification of reality, based on a theory of what could have happened, if everything in the universe “just happens”, in a way that we can relatively easily explain- but, we have to ignore the faults in our logic, to hold to these theories.

[@spinosaurusstriker]

@@ralphpierroii4626 your argument started to decay when you claimed that most people believe the universe was created randombly, nobody who believes in the big bang of other theories believes that, at least i, believe that the origin of the universe as a whole is unknown, but the universe as we know it works the way it does because of the law of physics, nothing random, now if you want to believe that the laws of physics are made by a god then thats on you to prove.

[@spinosaurusstriker]

@@ralphpierroii4626 And also you misunderstand evolution greatly, you assume that every scientist would claim that every species was a succefull one, but you can clearly see various examples of species that scientist pointed out being too specialized to survive and explain why they don't exist anymore, if they found fossils of dogs they would point inmediatly that all of them belong in the same family, it would just be a mistery on why they were too diversified and some looked malnourish until its discovered one with a collar, then the articifial breeding would be speculated, because you know, evidence its important.

[@lauraandrews1676]

@@spinosaurusstriker so where do the laws of physics come from? They are so precise and ordered that you can build skyscrapers and massive airplanes with the confidence that those laws will remain constant. Why?

[@spinosaurusstriker]

@@lauraandrews1676 you are seeing things in the wrong order , a snowflake looks the way it looks because of how the molecules of water work , the molecules aren't working that way to make the snowflake ,and the laws remain constant because there is anything to suggest they would need to change ,at least in normal circumstances. If you want to know were do the laws of physics come from ,its unknown at least for me but that doesn't mean you can automatically claim to be the result of whatever whitout proof ,just like you wouldn't believe a man saying that George bush lives in his house whitout anything to back it up , the task is to prove god first ,then we can use it to explain things .

[@JamesJones-zt2yx]

Listening to this I can't help thinking of the Kronecker quote: "God created the integers. All else is the work of man."

[@stephaniecontreras8259]

This is one of the greatest videos i have ever seen in my entire life.

[@blackkman1324]

THANK YOU Answers in Genesis FOR HELPING MORE ATHEIST COME OUT!!!

[@peter5.056]

Well, as an Atheist, you're absolutely right. I could never explain this to you.

[@oldrrocr]

but I'd bet he could easily explain to us how he makes money spouting this sh!t.

[@lukpo1997]

You don't have the time, neither the crayons

[@jaclynkeng]

That’s funny I didn’t pay anything to listen to his teaching of a mathematical equation that you curse at…thank you for reminding me math is now racist.

[@nyeebie]

@@oldrrocr I didnt pay to see this

[@ABL_wuz_here]

@@oldrrocr I mean no duh a video that gets views will gets revenue

[@chuglyc]

I’m blown away…LOVED THIS.

[@rab1183]

The separation of science and spirituality has been holding back progress in both fields, I think. Reality without a doubt involves both.

[@Brainrot_Thunder]

Science is the stude of material world, the spiritual one does not exist and there is no proof of it

[@elu9189]

"who created numbers?" We don't know if they were "created" in any sense of the word. But your argument is basically "where did this come from? You don't know? Therefore God." Which isn't an argument. Not knowing is a million times better than making up a God to explain mysteries.

[@taramarielmt]

This is an impressive illustration of Olympic level mental gymnastics

[@GodArmy7711]

Grow up Tara, be an adult. Stop browsing content you care nothing for and learn to possibly use your time more wisely. You can be more than an internet troll if you simply put your mind to it. I believe in you Tara, you can do it! 🙂

[@mistiroberts1576]

I'm only 3:47 into this and its already awesome

[@a.renato4912]

An alternative title would be "One More Proof We're Living in a Simulation"

[@DarkOne7777]

TBH makes most sense. Full on Matrix

[@jayschwartz3203]

I went to share this with myself, and in the process,my finger slid across the dislike symbol.

[@voidzennullspace]

As a mathematician and an artist, I thoroughly enjoyed this video

[@technodrone313]

Hell yeah!!! Satan gave us some great math!!

[@voidzennullspace]

@@technodrone313 Huh?

[@technodrone313]

@@voidzennullspace Satan created fractals duh. What this guy is talking about in the video. HELL YEAH!!

[@voidzennullspace]

@@technodrone313 Okay

[@jtavegia5845]

this is a stunning presentation and even as a math major I find it breathtaking.

[@jonnodean]

It's a very good presentation! But doesn't do what he's saying in proving god

[@justinernest2363]

Same

[@justinernest2363]

@@jonnodean the idea is that a secular world view cannot account for mathematics...

[@jonnodean]

@@justinernest2363 Yes it can? Why does maths only exist if there is a creator

[@justinernest2363]

@@jonnodean it's because numbers and in essence mathematics is conceptual and only exists in a mind, and the properties that numbers possess is related to the mind which it comes from. Numbers are eternal and never changing and essentially that is the character of God.

[@thenextdoor696]

The presentation is beautiful. I've always agreed to Science + Religion to be necessary for truth to be revealed. I've always looked at the geographical and archeology side of science + religion but this presentation has added a mathematical aspect to my knowledge.

[@strezko]

Religion is thinking something is true without evidence, so where exactly is the science in that?

[@thenextdoor696]

@@strezko Science is knowing through repeated testing of hypothesis. Religion is knowing without needing proof, the Bible has all that is needed. Many archeological findings have been assisted by the Bible. Often times things are found accidentally then are matched up with almost exact location described in the Bible. The Bible talks about Leviathans and Behemoths and disregard it as crazy mythical talk but then we still accept that dinosaurs existed, creatures that best compare to these creatures. Now recent times we find in the Grand Canyon that preserve dinosaur finds found next to cows and frogs, all buried in the same layer. Are we to expect that these animals that we still see nowadays and creatures that we say were extinct millions of years ago... Proceed to say that "science" proves that they were from millions of year ago yet that cannot be repeatedly tested with any kind of hypothesis. Is a theory, not science. Believing without proof, we just take the word of "experts" and admit that they must be right. If you believe in science then you must be able to test it and prove it without deniability. That is why we don't argue so much about the Law of Preservation because is observable and testable. Believing in things we can't proof is religion... So tell me, how can you prove to me anyone that things like believing that world is really millions of years ago when extinct dinosaurs are found in the same layer of mud as common everyday day non-extinct creatures? Point is Bible has always been a tool to find truth and with science we can always prove ourselves that we can still uncover things that we couldn't explain before. Quantum science funnily enough turns everything that a determinist believes upside down but not for Christians.

[@strezko]

@@thenextdoor696 yup religion is thinking something is true without evidence, you agreed on that, case closed, it’s literally the opposite of science.

[@strezko]

@@thenextdoor696 I would like to see evidence that dinosaurs are found in the same layers of rock as cows are. So please present it.

[@houtbay9]

Can science and religion actually co-exist? Will science ever agreed that horses can fly, that snakes can talk?

[@williamwilliam4944]

42:03 "...laws of math have always been the way they are." False. 42:08 "Were laws of math created by people?" Yes. 42:15 "...because if we created them, we could've created them different." Yes, we could have, by choosing different axioms and rules of logic. However, that wouldn't be practical, since the math in that case might not reflect physical phenomena, which is, after all, why math was invented as a study in the first place. 42:48 "The planets, the way the planets orbit, they obey mathematical laws." No, they obey physical laws, described by mathematics. Furthermore, these physical laws were created to describe the motion of the planets, not the other way around. 43:20 "...the universe is constantly changing" So? Math can't arise from a dynamic system? Without change (movement, etc), we wouldn't have created math in the first place, since a thought itself is a physiological change. 43:45 "The universe has 3 dimensions of space..." False. Many physicists agree that the number of spatial dimensions is larger than 3. 44:26 "They stem from the mind of God" You're doing a lot of suggesting and not a lot of demonstrating. What is God? Please define God and provide evidence of his (its?) existence. Then, demonstrate that it is indeed your God, and it does have a mind. Next, demonstrate what it means for a concept to "stem" from a mind, and finally, demonstrate that the laws of math stem from the mind of God, whatever that means. 44:45 "Laws of mathematics are conceptual, universal, invariant, exceptionless entities." Which 'Laws' are you referring to? Are you referring to mathematical truths in general? In which case, you are wrong on 3 of the 4 counts. Mathematical truths are indeed conceptual. They are not universal, since they may not apply under different axioms. They are not invariant, since they DO change with time. They are not exceptionless either. For example, 2 + 2 = 4 under standard integer addition, but 2 + 2 = 1 under integer addition modulo 3. It also depends on how you define +, but that's another conversation. 44:52 "...characteristics make sense in the Christian worldview, where mathematics is a reflection of the way God thinks..." I don't think this is even true. Where in the Bible does it state that mathematics is a reflection of the way God thinks? Isn't God's thinking impossible to comprehend? 45:23 "God's thoughts are conceptual / God is omnipresent / God does not change with time / God is sovereign" Do you have evidence of these claims? How do you know the nature of God's thoughts? God does not change with time, but his morals do, since he once allowed slavery and now doesn't (Colossians 3:22-24, Ephesians 6:5-8, 1 Timothy 6:1-2, Titus 2:9-10, etc), made the 10 commandments (twice) to revert his own old law, etc? Or perhaps this infinitely moral being still condones slavery? How do you know anything about God? Because a book told you, and you believe everything you read? 45:29 "None of those properties of laws of mathematics would make sense in a secular or naturalistic worldview" Why not? Surely something can exist conceptually in a secular worldview. 45:42 "...but how could you possibly know that?" It is derived from the axioms. No God needed. 45:59 "You assume the laws of physics are the same there, you assume the laws of mathematics are the same there." No, we KNOW the laws of physics are the same there. Not an assumption. And again, what do you mean by "laws of mathematics"? Like, the commutative law? 46:03 "How do they know that? Have they been there?" Do you need to go somewhere to know something about that place? If you see that your neighbor's house is on fire, do you need to enter the house to know that it's on fire? Does a detective need to be at a crime scene while the crime is happening to determine what happened? 46:06 "It's in the Christian worldview that God is sovereign over the entire universe..." How do YOU know THAT? Seems like special pleading. 46:14 "All mathematicians assume that the laws of mathematics are the same tomorrow as they were yesterday." What laws?? Plus, mathematical truths are derived, not assumed. There is no assumption needed, unlike Christianity. 46:30 "How can you know anything about a future you've never experienced from a secular worldview?" How can you know it from a Christian worldview? We both have axioms. If I throw a ball in the air, I can know with the same degree of certainty as you that it will fall back down. We create models which describe natural phenomena, withstand scrutiny, and have immense predictive power. Is the knowledge absolute? No! No knowledge is absolute. But it's the most reasonable method we have of determining truth. This is why physical laws change so often (contrary to what you believe); more accurate models are discovered. Einstein's relativity being used in place of Newton's model of gravity is a classic example of this. 46:38 "...because I know God" No, you don't. 46:40 "...and he's told me some things about the future." Like what? How do you know it was God? Were those things reliably accurate? Were they peer reviewed? Did they survive scrutiny? How do we determine which voice in which person's head is actually God? How do we know you aren't just making this up? Or delusional? Or confirmation biased? 47:12 "Laws of mathematics existed before people" No, they didn't. First of all, you're arguing for physical laws, not mathematical laws (which you still haven't defined, anyway). Secondly, physical laws were CREATED to describe things like planetary motion. The planets don't move the way they do because of these laws. The laws are the way they are because the planets move that way. 50:40 "Why do fractals occur in math and the physical world?" It's almost like.... math was created..... to describe the physical world..... 52:43 "The physical universe obeys mathematical laws" NO! Math DESCRIBES the physical universe! Not the other way around!

[@awstenmielke2474]

thanks for showing me this argument explained this way. i had similar feelings like something just isnt being explained right here and you explained it perfectly and cleared up my confusion. im also using this info to do further research for debating my chrisitian friends, so thanks again!

[@williamwilliam4944]

@@awstenmielke2474 no problem!

[@jigsawjason1984]

If you seriously think laws of math haven't always been the same, how exactly in supposed 50million b.c.. can 1+1= 900?? Ok Boomer.....

[@williamwilliam4944]

@@jigsawjason1984 you are clearly demonstrating your ignorance here. First of all, the statement "1+1=2" is not a mathematical law. Secondly, the statement "1+1=900" can be true, under different axioms, under different definitions of + or =, under different frameworks. For example, 1+1=900 under integer addition modulo 2. You are taking your measly high school math education and arguing as though you're a mathematician. Did you even bother to research the sources I presented?

[@bryanburton6087]

@@williamwilliam4944 Dammit. Michael ran away after getting owned only one time. I was hoping for more amusement from him. Oh, well. Loved reading your thoughts. Very interesting. Thanks for sharing. Peace

[@conradvd7262]

Show this to someone who wants to know why they should take math in school.

[@DiffEQ]

THIS is definitely not a reason to take math in school. Math is used to determine things, not loosely affiliate things that are real and imagined.

[@MMMM-sv1lk]

I showed this to my nephew, he ran away from home... 😭😢 Guess it backfired.

[@DeezNuts-gl6nx]

@@DiffEQ You have a very pedestrian view of math. Math is the language of the universe. The Fibonacci spiral is proof of that. So yeah, you can take math to determine things but you also need math to understand things such as why your dna is a unique genetic code. It’s very good that you’re retired because I wouldn’t trust you to run a bath let alone build anything

[@Minister-Peter-V1-Church]

@@DiffEQ Heres some maths for you Obstacles to the formation of life on primitive earth would have been extremely challenging. Even a simple protein molecule is so rich in information that the entire history of the universe since the Big Bang wouldn't give you the time you would need to generate that molecule by chance. Even if the first molecule had been much simpler than those today, there's a minimum structure that protein has to have for it to function. You don't get that structure in a protein unless you have at least seventy-five amino acids or so. First, you need the right bonds between the amino acids. Second, amino acids come in right-handed and left-handed versions, and you have to get the left-handed ones. Third, the amino acids must link up in a specified sequence, like letters in a sentence. Run the odds of these things falling into place on their own and you find out that the probabilities in forming a rather short functional protein at random would be one chance in a hundred trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion. That is a ten with one-hundred and twenty-five zeros after it. And that would only be one protein molecule, a fairly simple cell would need between three-hundred and five-hundred protein molecules. When you look at those odds and evidence, you can see why, since the 1960's, scientist have abandoned the idea that chance played any significant role in the origin of DNA or proteins

[@Minister-Peter-V1-Church]

@@DiffEQ and that's not taking into account that we need rna. Dna. And proteins all to exist at the same time perfectly coded for each other for one to exist. They are symbiotic.

[@Dubbadizzo86]

As an atheist, I can tell you this did NOTHING to convince me otherwise. It does not follow that just because something cannot be explained by an atheist means the argument defaults to "It must've been God". It just simply remains unexplained. You don't get to automatically and conveniently insert your favorite god as the answer whenever a gap in human knowledge appears. Muslims do this with Allah too. So you're just like them. You're making an "argument from ignorance" fallacy. "Argument from ignorance (from Latin: argumentum ad ignorantiam), also known as appeal to ignorance (in which ignorance represents "a lack of contrary evidence"), is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false or a proposition is false because it has not yet been proven true."

[@jhp999jhp]

I don't even think it's a gap in our knowledge. The mandelbrot set just looks the way it looks, nothing special about it

[@epalegmail]

@@jhp999jhp It doesn't just "look the way it looks". You can mathematically prove (without the concept of god) everything the man said in the video. Of course there is still nothing special or godly about it. Still looks amazing though.

[@jhp999jhp]

@@epalegmail Yes I agree. There is nothing special/godly about it and that is what I mean by "it looks the way it looks". It looks that way because there is a formula underlying the structure, not because a god made it look that way. The structure logically follows from the formula. I think the original commenter meant something like: "The structure is beautiful, and atheists cannot explain this beauty, but that does not mean there is a god involved." And I argued that it isn't even a gap in our knowledge, because the structure just looks this way because of the formula

[@Asachara]

u dont understand that "god" is just the force of nature/ether/consciousness/energy. all gods are one...its groups of people that want to think otherwise.

[@timroeder8741]

Can you imagine the reaction of these people if we applied their standard to criminal law?..... When accused of murder, Mr. Smith says that he didn't do it. The judge then asks Mr. Smith who DID do it. He replies that he doesn't know. The judge then concludes that he's guilty because he can't answer the question, so therefore any other conclusion is correct. How ridiculous is that.

[@nemono-won2045]

Its better have some questions that dont have answers... Than to have all the answers that CAN'T be questioned...

[@Fuzcapp]

As with almost every You Tube video, the title overstates the case, but this was interesting even if just to see how the Mandelbrot set is formulated and the role of fractals in natural design.

[@davidfarrar2454]

"The science book told me lies" What irony!

[@ArcherMVMaster]

While using science for investigating 😂

[@j.r.mocksly5996]

@@ArcherMVMaster So everything called science in human history was factually correct? Like when science said flies spontaneously spawn, lead is perfectly safe, asbestos is perfectly safe, making hats with mercury is fine.... need I go on? There's good science & scientists and bad "science" and "scientists" that only care about upholding the orthodoxy of the day and are immune to facts or the scientific method itself, if it dares defy them!

[@dr.bonniewoodruff1906]

True!

[@CashJohnston]

Just “filter” out the stuff that doesn’t fit

[@paulbishop940]

To be honest the maths is way beyond me, but it does seem to reflect the macro and micro scale of everything around us and within us. Both outward into the Universe and inward into the hidden micro world. Truly fascinating. To see a world in a grain of sand and heaven in a flower as Blake said.

[@normpeplow3813]

I agree. These things boggle my mind.

[@bienne777]

The first time I heard about mathematics being explained clearly and effectively understood what it is and how it works in the physical world and conceptual world and the universe 😊

[@Tonihaddock]

This gave me chills

[@ivantheteribul]

Just take a point called Z in a complex plane, Let Z1 be Z^2+C, Z2 is Z1^2+C, Z3 is Z2^2+C, and so on. If the series of Zs will always stay Close to Z and never trend away, That point is in the Mandelbrot Set.

[@huntermccaskill3938]

The sun is a mass of incandescent gas, a gigantic nuclear furnace where hydrogen is turned into helium at a temperature of billions of degrees

[@DIFFbros]

I’ve seen this discussion before. Unfortunately the entire thing is built on a false premise. The Mandelbrot set is not infinite complexity built from a finite equation, but rather it is infinite complexity from an infinite equation. The set is created from multiple iterations on a single simple equation. The more you iterate the equation the more complex it is. We can never actually have an infinitely complex set because we can never actually iterate the equation infinite times.

[@landsgevaer]

Norman Wildberger will agree with this.

[@ruprecht9997]

All hail the holy power of recursion.

[@wilmafudd9293]

ARE YOU THE PONYTAIL GUY FROM GOODWILL HUNTING?

[@hudibrad]

@@wilmafudd9293 why are you yelling?

[@wilmafudd9293]

@@hudibrad YOU CAN NOT YELL ON A COMPUTER.

[@cutbyoccam1948]

Wow, 4.5 min in... Yeah atheism cannot explain the secret code in numbers. That is true. Mainly because there is no secret code in numbers. Numbers are human constructs to describe reality just like words. There is no secret code in the word tree. Tree is a word we made up to describe that big brown thing growing out of the ground with thinner brown things growing in all directions etc.

[@eyden1562]

I mean.. I expected the Fibonacci sequence and how it's found literally everywhere in the natural world... That would be more likely to explain some sort of divine reasoning behind things. This was interesting, but by no means did it convince me of God. 🤷‍♀️

[@they_fw_lei]

because you still believe that God is some dude floating in the sky. God doesnt have an appearance. God is omnipresent, omnipotent, and omniscient. Its a cosmic being. Something before the big bang that we cannot comprehend. We can see its effects through out nature and the cosmos but we cannot observe the entity. Its like a black hole, you can see its effects but not see beyond the horizon of it. What Im trying to say is that there is proof of a higher being. Such as in the big bang where a being had to quite literally observe the particles for them to have some sort of reaction to then expand rapidly after. (Quantum physics and the state of observation) and several other feats such as in this video and more that you can check in your own time.

[@archockencanto1645]

Or golden ratio

[@rmh_223]

@@archockencanto1645 same thing

[@archockencanto1645]

@@rmh_223 Oh you're right, I had forgotten.

[@archockencanto1645]

@@rmh_223 Also, WEF will not win.

[@tmlen845]

When you zoom in the Mandelbrot set, you have to choose more precise coordinates (more decimal digits), and run more iterations of the formula. With that you are actually creating the additional complexity youself.

[@liammcclelland3200]

That’s an artifact of computation. The mathematics has the complexity built into it

[@jeffclarkofclarklesparkle3103]

Maybe you weren't listening? This was covered. It always existed within the set you just made it visible through a tool.

[@amoiix6820]

I think it is important to remember that in the perceivable universe each point in the space-time continuum is unique and that there is no perceivable example of any arithmetic action. The entirety of numbers and number actions is theoretical and exclusively in the realm of the conceivable.

[@Marsbonfire007]

So what you're saying is that you still don't believe. Right?

[@Voicist]

AMOIIX - what's your point? I ask that genuinely.

[@dennisholliday2454]

"Space-time continuum" ....hmmmm I think someones been watching a little too much Star Trek.....LOL/JK

[@Marsbonfire007]

@@Voicist Just answer the question.

[@abeklassen4822]

AMEN BROTHER!! Spot on! 👍

[@billionairegenius]

This was so interesting. 👏👏👏👏

[@cesiahsatterlee3093]

Amazing. I’m an artist and not a math person but I was blown away!

[@elizabethgroenewald2858]

Me too.

[@jaysea1553]

l am an artist to and l am telling you straight this is nonsense

[@thederpyunicorn306]

@@jaysea1553 Explain?

[@Dubbadizzo86]

@@thederpyunicorn306 It does not follow that the existence of fractals is somehow evidence of creation. It's nonsense.

[@jhp999jhp]

It is BECAUSE you are an artist that you are blown away. For a mathematician this is nothing but logic (except for the god part, that's just delusional)

[@randomshit65]

“We need to filter” basically means take in what is convenient and disregard everything that doesn’t follow my beliefs

[@GummiSammi]

A scientist advocating literally "selection bias"... shake head.

[@GIVEMELEE]

Thats all religions includeing atheism in a nutshell

[@younggrasshopper3531]

Like what? Enlighten me

[@neutrino78x]

Which is what you do as an atheist also. We all do that. Since this is unknowable, neither is irrational. Now where he's talking about evolution didn't happen, I'm with you there. That's knowable. We definitely evolved from lower forms of life. But fundamentally, whether there is a God or not is unknowable, so that's different. Either answer is equally rational.

[@Lazzyrus]

@@GIVEMELEE Atheism isn't a religion tho

[@brendawilliams8062]

A wonderful testimony.

[@muddyboots7753]

I knew it...I knew God was a mathematician. As God is absolute, numbers never change, they are absolute. If there is an error in calculation, it comes from human mistakes. Numbers are always right. Even the cheapest calculator will always produce the right answer. An awesome God we have

[@bonysminiatures3123]

except its budha