Illogical To Be A Nonbeliever | Josh-MI | The Atheist Experience 927

[@1derb0y]

The "cookie in the cabinet" analogy was very apt. Atheists aren't saying there isn't a cookie in the cabinet, we're saying: show us the cookie.

[@Anonymous-md2qp]

Cookies exist and I have seen and eaten them personally. The claims that theists make are not related to anything that exists. That is why some evidence would be beneficial to their claim.

[@BruceCarroll]

Or, lacking the ability to show me the cookie directly, (perhaps the cabinet is locked), show me some evidence there is a cookie in the cabinet. Is there a receipt for cookies? Evidence that cookies have been baked in the home recently? (Dirty cookie sheet and mixing bowl in the sink, warm oven, cookie crumbs on the counter or floor.) Does the homeowner typically keep cookies in the cabinet? If so, can we verify this, perhaps by asking the homeowner? Lacking such evidence, I might accept the claim anyway because it is a mundane claim, but you certainly haven't demonstrated there is a cookie in the cabinet. You have made a claim and have nothing with which to back it up. There may be a cookie in the cabinet (maybe even several), but the claimant has provided no evidence to support this.

[@jamiee1519]

I want to eat that cookie.

[@billgreen576]

The irony being they cannot even demonstrate the cabinet exists let alone the cookie.

[@desertguy395]

Just so long as it's chocolate chip.

[@Lupinemancer87]

The entire argument can be summed up as: Caller: "I want God to be real." Hosts: "But we don't have evidence that he is." Caller: "But I want him to be real." Hosts: "Can you demonstrate that he is real?" Caller: "No!" Hosts: "Then what evidence do we have that he is?" Caller: "I just want him to be real!"

[@walnutoil100]

prove there is no evidence

[@Jambuc829]

@@walnutoil100 😂 what?

[@briannyob7799]

@@walnutoil100 how can someone prove there is no evidence for something? If someone is claiming that a god exists it is incumbent on them to demonstrate their claim. Can you prove that the Easter bunny doesn't exist? Or perhaps you believe that he does because no one has proven otherwise. 🤔

[@stopmojim]

@@briannyob7799 I believe NHE was making a funny. I cannot prove this however. It is a form of faith based on reading comprehension.

[@hegyak]

@@Jambuc829 Don't mind NHE. Known Troll. Refuses to be logical and rational. EVER.

[@sandyunruh387]

My nine year old granddaughter came to me the other day and asked, "If god made everything, then where did god come from?" That's all I want to say.

[@chriskelly3481]

Good kid 🤷‍♂️👍

[@TheTruthKiwi]

Like many theist callers Josh isn't listening, he's just waiting to make his next ridiculous claim.

[@grantm6514]

Apparently there's a link between religious belief and deafness

[@mistersippi2945]

It’s a dialogue tree. Like an RPG. Except the branches feed back into the roots and fuse, creating a “self-sustaining” tree. It just LOOKS like a dead weird mobius tree, but once you learn the truth about the Divine Tree, from whence all life sprang, you’ll see that it’s green and vibrant “in your heart”. “I’m not so sure...” YOU JUST HATE TREE GOD AND HIS FOLLOWERS! YOU THINK EVERYTHING CREATED ITSELF/ALWAYS EXISTED WHICH IS CRAZY! EVERYONE KNOWS THE ONLY THING THAT CAN CREATE ITSELF/ALWAYS EXIST, IS THE THING I’VE WRAPPED THE ENTIRETY OF IDENTITY AROUND SINCE CHILDHOOD!

[@wildylupous]

@@grantm6514 That's right. Most believers have their ears connected with kind of string and empty space around it.

[@TheTruthKiwi]

@Timothah Molone Daughters can be bought and sold: If a man sells his daughter as a servant, she is not to go free as male servants do. Exodus 21:7 A raped daughter can be sold to her rapist: 28 If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay her father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives. Deuteronomy 22:28-29 Collecting wives and sex slaves is a sign of status: He [Solomon] had seven hundred wives of royal birth and three hundred concubines, and his wives led him astray. 1 Kings 11:3 Used brides deserve death: If, however the charge is true and no proof of the girl’s virginity can be found, she shall be brought to the door of her father’s house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death. Deuteronomy 22:20-21. Women, but only virgins, are to be taken as spoils of war: Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, 18 but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man. Numbers 31:17-18 Menstruating women are spiritually unclean: 19 “‘When a woman has her regular flow of blood, the impurity of her monthly period will last seven days, and anyone who touches her will be unclean till evening. 20 “‘Anything she lies on during her period will be unclean, and anything she sits on will be unclean. 21 Anyone who touches her bed will be unclean; they must wash their clothes and bathe with water, and they will be unclean till evening. 22 Anyone who touches anything she sits on will be unclean; they must wash their clothes and bathe with water, . . . 30 The priest is to sacrifice one for a sin offering and the other for a burnt offering. In this way he will make atonement for her before the LORD for the uncleanness of her discharge. 31 “‘You must keep the Israelites separate from things that make them unclean, so they will not die in their uncleanness for defiling my dwelling place,[a] which is among them.’” Leviticus 15: 19-31 A woman is twice as unclean after giving birth to girl as to a boy: A woman who becomes pregnant and gives birth to a son will be ceremonially unclean for seven days, just as she is unclean during her monthly period. ‘ 3 On the eighth day the boy is to be circumcised. 4 Then the woman must wait thirty-three days to be purified from her bleeding. She must not touch anything sacred or go to the sanctuary until the days of her purification are over. 5 If she gives birth to a daughter, for two weeks the woman will be unclean, as during her period. Then she must wait sixty-six days to be purified from her bleeding. 6 ” ‘When the days of her purification for a son or daughter are over, she is to bring to the priest at the entrance to the tent of meeting a year-old lamb for a burnt offering and a young pigeon or a dove for a sin offering. Leviticus 12: 1-8 A woman’s promise is binding only if her father or husband agrees: 2 When a man makes a vow to the LORD or takes an oath to obligate himself by a pledge, he must not break his word but must do everything he said. 3 “When a young woman still living in her father’s household makes a vow to the LORD or obligates herself by a pledge 4 and her father hears about her vow or pledge but says nothing to her, then all her vows and every pledge by which she obligated herself will stand. 5 But if her father forbids her when he hears about it, none of her vows or the pledges by which she obligated herself will stand; the LORD will release her because her father has forbidden her. . . . . A woman’s vow is meaningless unless approved by her husband or father. But if her husband nullifies them when he hears about them, then none of the vows or pledges that came from her lips will stand. Her husband has nullified them, and the LORD will release her. 13 Her husband may confirm or nullify any vow she makes or any sworn pledge to deny herself. Numbers 30:1-16 Women should be seen not heard: Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. 1 Corinthians 14:34 Wives should submit to their husband’s instructions and desires: Wives, submit yourselves to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord. Colossians 3:18 In case you missed that submission thing . . . : Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything. Ephesians 5:22-24. More submission - and childbearing as a form of atonement: A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 15 But women will be saved through childbearing-if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety. 1 Timothy 2: 11-15 Women were created for men: For if a woman does not cover her head, she might as well have her hair cut off; but if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, then she should cover her head. 7 A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man. 8 For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; 9 neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. 1 Corinthians 11:2-10 Sleeping with women is dirty: No one could learn the song except the 144,000 who had been redeemed from the earth. 4 These are those who did not defile themselves with women, for they remained virgins. They follow the Lamb wherever he goes. They were purchased from among mankind and offered as first-fruits to God and the Lamb. Revelation 14:3-4

[@TheKosmikid]

@Timothah Molone not sure why you’re quoting the bible.

[@hyrolution]

Josh is kinda the perfect theist caller... Just let him talk and you'll see the lack of reason.

[@benedictdonald4338]

Indeed. They do tend to talk themselves into a deep hole...

[@Dave.O]

No, no, no. Many believers will always see what they want to see. Many would view this and believe that the caller won and that the hosts were either illogical or not arguing fairly.

[@hyrolution]

@@Dave.O I agree. And it’s probably true. But it depends on the definition of “perfect theist caller”. Who do you want to reach? Is it entertainment for the atheist viewers, or means to convert theists away from their views? In the first case I think Josh is a perfect caller.

[@gknight4719]

@@Dave.O Yes, most believers are so far down the rabbit hole, they talk out of their arse.

[@skateboardingjesus4006]

Josh is kinda the perfect theist Gobshite, who completely missed the point of Stephen Hawking poking fun at the nonsensical theist presumption of fine tuning, by saying, "If the universe is fine tuned for anything, it's fine tuned for black holes".

[@aporreco]

Its insane how difficult it is for so many theists to understand burden of proof.

[@tsnide34]

True enough, but I think there’s just a gross lack of logical skills with this caller.

[@ProoFzorz]

The burden of proof simply lies on the one who makes the positive claim. In a formal debate, if the Theist claims God exists first, then the burden of proof lies on them. But in a lot of cases, the Atheist might claim that God does NOT exist. Or even claiming that there are no good reasons to believe in any god. The burden of proof then lies on the Atheist.

[@aporreco]

@@ProoFzorz If the Atheist claims that God does NOT exist, then you are correct. In this discussion, the Atheist is not making a claim, he is simply saying that theists have not provided convincing evidence to support their claim of a God existing. Again, this is an extremely basic concept that should not be this difficult to understand.

[@ProoFzorz]

@@aporreco Right. And in order to find whatever argument a Theist puts forth unconvincing, then you would be admitting that we simply don't have the knowledge to know whether or not such a being as God exists. That's true for two reasons. Either the Theist didn't argue his/her arguent correctly. Or the Atheist simply doesn't understand the argument. That leaves you with Agnosticism at best. Only if you an successfully refute a Theist argument and still maintain a disbelief in God, then you remain an Atheist. If you consider yourself an Atheist then you surely must have some justification for it. I'd hope.

[@gknight4719]

This is how they become believers in the first place, understanding stuff is just too hard!

[@LwJohnL]

When someone says they have evidence that a god exists; I tell them, "Present your case without asking ME any questions."

[@mountairyforjesus]

According to your worldview, by what standard do you demand evidence?

[@starfishsystems]

@@mountairyforjesus It's up to the CLAIMANT to present whatever he or she regards as sufficient evidence. The burden of proof is on the claimant. The rest of us can't anticipate or constrain what that proof will look like, we can only evaluate it and see if we agree with the claimant or not.

[@mountairyforjesus]

@@starfishsystems By what evidence do you make the claim that all claimants should have evidence?

[@biekgiek]

@@mountairyforjesus Seriously? You’re just talking in circles. If someone makes a claim, they bear the burden of proof regardless of their worldview.

[@mountairyforjesus]

@@biekgiek That’s a pretty strong demand. You sound like you have some kind of objective basis for making it. Otherwise, your complaint would be self-refuting

[@Locust13]

"It's illogical to think the tides could cause themselves, clearly Poseidon exists" Theistic apologetics have not changed one bit in thousands of years

[@cramerlong2276]

K hewett. There's no such a Group as Theists . I think what bugs me most about people like you . Is your lack of accuracy about what you think you know u have no clue about . All religion is a lie made up by man . Which is what teh Bible already told us 2500 years before you guys arrived

[@t800fantasm2]

@@cramerlong2276 "Which is what teh Bible already told us 2500 years before you guys arrived" The bible is a religion made up by man and written by man.... Religion is a belief in a god, creator or a supreme being... whether it's just you, or in a group....

[@mg-ew2xf]

@@cramerlong2276 and where did your bible come from? A god? Then you're in the Theist group. Since it appears you cant address the original point, how about proving your god for the rest of us?

[@pelgrim8640]

@@cramerlong2276 Read the OP again, it never mentions religions. It clearly refers to God.

[@oggyoggy1299]

@@cramerlong2276 The demon works through you. that much is clear.

[@leslieshand4509]

You don’t have to provide proof to NOT believe something

[@susan67868]

My favourite analogy is still the puddle, who ( being christian ) is baffled and amazed that he fits this pothole in the road so perfectly. lol

[@moizzy1587]

@Fester B Thuggin You seem like a very intellectual person who wants to engage in honest argumentation. If the OPs head is in the sand yours is up your own ass.

[@susan67868]

@Fester B Thuggin Haha, funny old grump.

[@huepix]

@Fester B Thuggin not Susan's analogy, this is from the hitchhikers guide to the galaxy. Every puddle of water fits the hole it is in perfectly, but not by design. Maybe you could point to a firing squad where everyone missed?

[@ryonalionthunder]

@Fester B Thuggin So you feel the puddle ought to be surprised that it fits the hole?

[@CAPSLOCKPUNDIT]

@Fester B Thuggin Later, that same day, the shooters proved their credentials by returning to the range, and drawing a bullseye centered over every bullet hole. Perfect marks all around, in a way not to be construed with logically fallacious argumentation!

[@chrislefler3554]

The more calls I listen to, the more painful they become. It's like the hosts are creating masterpieces on par with the Mona Lisa while the theist callers are struggling to stay inside the lines with their crayons, but they are convinced their work is as good. They have no idea how awful their arguments are. They have no idea how bad they are at reasoning. It's just embarrassing.

[@starfishsystems]

Love it!

[@fritzhaselnuss7852]

these are people who lived inside their echo chambers for all their lives and now step outside. I think its understandable that many of them struggle with come to terms with this level of skepticism directed at them and not being prepared to anything but "amen"

[@scipioafricanus5871]

"...while the theist callers are struggling to stay inside the lines of their crayons, ..." LMAO! this guy.

[@Matthew_Powis]

I think its a good example of the Dunning Kruger effect in action.

[@merbst]

why must the crayons stay inside the lines?

[@basildraws]

God doesn’t seem to care if we believe in him. If he did, he wouldn’t allow all these idiots to keep calling in and maybe he’d send someone that could actually make a decent argument.

[@gknight4719]

hi, Basil, yes, you are correct but god works in mysterious ways! god is like a "small boy" with a magnifying glass burning ants, and we are the ants!

[@darinb.3273]

Genius Basil if God did that you would be able to write such genius statements like that. WOW 🤯🤯🤯.

[@basildraws]

@@darinb.3273 I think you just made my point. Wanna try again? In English?

[@darinb.3273]

@@basildraws Go read the Bible and what I wrote will make PERFECT sense one day. With the mind set you have no amount of words I write (in English) will make sense.

[@basildraws]

@@darinb.3273 I’ve read the Bible many times. I’ve studied the Bible, as well as the interpretations of theologians. I’ve also studied the Torah and the Quran as well as two forms of Buddhism, and some Shinto and Hinduism. The more I studied, the more I found to be contradictory, senseless, or downright disgusting and immoral. Nothing can make what you wrote make sense. No punctuation, bad grammar, confused sentence structure… I’m struggling to find a point. Go ahead, please explain to me how anything in the Bible explains why god allows idiots to “defend” his word publicly, resulting in their own humiliation, exposing their stupidity for the world to see. That’s the gist of my post, which you’ve been so kind to provide a perfect example.

[@oggyoggy1299]

Oh Josh, look at what you’ve done. This is on here forever for all to see.

[@NR-py3to]

Matt had so much more patience back then

[@samdyer1921]

facts

[@CAPSLOCKPUNDIT]

It's a pity that he let it go to waste on this caller.

[@davidsommen1324]

I'd say a bit too much back then, and now perhaps not always enough.

[@TheMissiIe]

Now he'd tell him to "fuck off" in a graceful manner

[@brucetopping248]

I thought the same thing while watching this! He's battle-scarred nowadays and hardened. Listening to this call made me understand why. wading through the intellectually vapid arguments or in many other cases downright bad-faith dishonest arguments must take a toll.

[@BluePhoenix_]

I think he thought the quote "If the Universe was fine-tuned for anything, then it's the creation of black-holes." means Hawking believes in fine-tuning.

[@Jex2112]

“I believe that God exists” “I do not believe your claim, please make your case” “…..” Windows XP shutdown noise

[@elliot7205]

What is the criteria?

[@dannyspitzer1267]

I wonder how much more delusional Josh has gotten since this call

[@marke2452]

He changed his name to Ben Shapiro, and got himself a podcast.

[@WintersunExtras]

@@marke2452 Come on now, Josh isn't THAT despicable and brain-dead.

[@damianedwards2327]

Naw. The caller is just saying God is the existence of Love. It's not visible to the human eye. But we All obviously believe Love exists. So to deny that is extremely shocking. But having that atheist ego to deny that comes with serious, serious consequences.

[@69eddieD]

@@damianedwards2327 Your repeated stupidity is what is extremely shocking.

[@rty1955]

Actually there is a diagnosable mental disorder for this called "shared psychotic disorder" look it up ICD-10 F24

[@bulwinkle]

The Universe is so fine tuned that 99.999....% of it is inimical to life as we know it.

[@Goreuncle]

If you focus on life, they'll move the goalposts to planets, stars, galaxies, etc. Much better to end it by pointing out that they got the whole thing backwards. The universe isn't fine-tuned, it doesn't have a purpose, it just happens to have certain characteristics. Only stuff that's compatible with those characteristics can exist. In the case of humans, we can't survive direct exposure to outer space, but we still need space-time, elements, our local star, as well as our local gravitational and magnetic fields, all of which arise from fundamental characteristics of the universe. There's "fine-tuning" going on, it just goes in the opposite direction.

[@martinsoukup562]

"The Universe is so fine tuned that 99.999....% of it is inimical to life as we know it." Yes, it could be. Fine-tuning doesn't mean there is life everywhere or something.

[@martinsoukup562]

@Doctor Bodhi and death requires life so...

[@martinsoukup562]

@Doctor Bodhi "you miss the obvious point: the vast vast vast VAST MAJORITY of the cosmos is utterly lethal to life, soooo this whole fine tuned for life idea, has a serious problem." Not really. How do you imagine fine-tunning? Because there is nothing about the universe beaming with life. There is also nothing about people being able to survive in space, or on other planets. Please learn what it actually states first because this argument is absolutely not going against fine tuning.

[@martinsoukup562]

@Doctor Bodhi do you know how many different species were supposed to be on earth throughout history? Do you know how many people are there? Do you know we are starting to face the possible dangers of overpopulation? Do you know how easy life so many have? It seems the earth is very much great for life. Just because there are dangers doesn't mean it's not.

[@themadmanescaped1]

I would've hung up when he kept trying to assert your position was something else. He refused to accept that non-belief is not a claim of non-existence.

[@themadmanescaped1]

@Quack Epistemologist Philosophically, I don't care about philosophy. I care about truth. If you make a claim and can't prove it then I don't believe the claim. Simple.

[@pelgrim8640]

@Quack Epistemologist Yes, that is why atheists keep asking for evidence for unjustified god claims.

[@themadmanescaped1]

@@pelgrim8640 it's a 6 day old account. Obviously a troll at this point.

[@themadmanescaped1]

@Quack Epistemologist *yawn*

[@themadmanescaped1]

@Quack Epistemologist *yaaaaawn*

[@Company-59]

You’re so patient with Josh. I admire that. A lot of your work entails education of people that neither want to be educated nor have the mental capacity to comprehend what you’re trying to convey to them. And a lot of them use words like”philosophical” and “logic” and “physical constant” like they never understood their intrinsic meaning. Thank you for your good work. You’re great.

[@coreysmith9497]

uh, there was 0 patience here. Are we watching the same videos?

[@Company-59]

@@coreysmith9497 16 thumbs up are telling me that I, at least, watched the same video as them. Case closed.

[@coreysmith9497]

@@Company-59 lmao. People also agreed to make slavery legal. Just because you have people that agree, does not mean you are correct. 😂😂 🤡

[@SenhorAlien]

@@coreysmith9497 slavery was correct, now it is not. Morals change, standards change. If people agreed that the behavior shown in the video was the definition of patient, then it is patient and you are wrong to disagree. Simple as.

[@wrenlinwhitelight3007]

"Do you believe that god can violate the laws of logic." Caller: No. That's where this conversation ended for me. This podcast made me an atheist last year. Everyone needs to listen to what Matt has to say on this subject.

[@187btokes]

If you're interested, I am curious as to what age you were when you came to this realization, and I would like to ask if you have ever taken a moment to step back from your "normal"perception and thought about if you have or are now without realizing it, going through what I call "the angry atheist" phase. Because i was never was told to or to not believe, I just tkld my father when i was 8 or 9 "dad i don't think the concept of god makes much sense to me", which is when he replied (mot exactly so) "yeah it does not make sense; do you not believe? If not then that is called atheism; I am that". So at a young age i went through that phase of feeling lied to and cheated which lead me to irrationally insult and argue with other kids. Thankfully when i became an adult i had already come to terms with and therefore stopped being "an ageu atheist". Im not of course accusing you LOL, i just like to help discuss with and help new atheist avoid that unproductive sort of engagement where you end up at a party berating some poor catholic or something or other. It was personally very satisfying for me to self identity and remove myself from that poisonous ideology

[@mikekennedy5470]

It's not just matt . If you want to hear smash down arguments goggle Christopher hittchens KZbin. Or burtron Russell ..why I'm not a Christian.

[@YY4Me133]

@@mikekennedy5470 *Bertrand

[@TheDeath138]

@Quinzerrak And what if this hypothetical being scratched its ass and sniffed its fingers? What exactly is your point? That question doesn't change the conversation at all.

[@lightbeforethetunnel]

Why would you end the conversation over that? If a human violates the laws of logic, all they're doing is they're describing something that has no place in objective reality. God does not relate to truth in the same way we do, given God does not technically "believe" or "know" things (words which describe differing levels of psychological confidence we have the proposition is true). God IS the truth, meaning God doesn't have varying levels of certainty. God just inherently possesses the truth value of all truth claims. If God were to engage in contradiction, that would just be God lying... as he would be contradicting the truth value of a truth claim. And, as the Bible says, God cannot lie. If he could, there would actually be no fundamental metaphysic which justifies knowledge claims... meaning that knowledge would not be possible for us. We experience knowledge is indeed possible, meaning there necessarily IS a universal mind which cannot lie (the Christian God).

[@Xerion1]

I'm glad I watched this. It's just logical fallacy after logical fallacy with this young man.

[@donaldcook2484]

Religion and what it has done to the brain is beyond belief!

[@bobs182]

Religion shows that having a brain/mind in which knowing what is logically true is not the predominant trait needed for survival. We are largely instinctual.

[@jonrixbus]

Yes religion is like a form of parasite that takes over your brain. It's hard to get rid of, but not impossible. Once the brain parasite is removed the host can think clearly again.

[@postal_the_clown]

Matt, "Do you have any expertise in the field or are you just parroting what you've heard? Josh, "Whudda ya mean?" Pretty much sums up that one.

[@brucebaker810]

Call was aaawwwk-ward.

[@alexldfrd]

I feel like a lot of people (especially this guy) don't understand the difference between evidence and proof.

[@Mmmmilo]

Do you? I hear nothing from this guy about proof - proof is a mathematical concept. What do you think the difference is?

[@alexldfrd]

@@Mmmmilo the difference is that proof is conclusive, while evidence is supportive.

[@Lik3UhBOSS]

Man I never thought I’d get nostalgic vibes from seeing the show when they hosted it in person… I miss this so much. Fuck this pandemic.

[@boblangford5514]

Here’s a perfect example of skepticism. I really like the Super Nintendo game “Super Punch-Out.” A few days ago, one of my friends said it’s possible to play that game with two players - one player being the boxer you normally are, and the other player being one of the opponents (like Gabby Jay or Bear Hugger). I didn’t believe him when he first told me. I had to see it for myself. So I went home and did the code that he told me to do to make it work, and what do you know, it worked! It blew my mind. Now I believe him, because I now have the proper evidence. If I went home and the code didn’t work, and then he told me, “Oh, you just didn’t have the right mindset to make it work. You have to believe before it works,” I still would have not believed him, because I still hadn’t seen the evidence. Just believing with blind faith is not a good reason to believe. Show me the evidence, and I’ll be convinced.

[@ronthered138]

Josh, sometimes the world is uncomfortable for us. The universe is not in the business of making us feel comfortable. Uncertainty is a part of life. We use reason and EVIDENCE to reduce that uncertainty.

[@SamIAm-kz4hg]

Just the notion that it is "illogical to be a non believer" makes zero sense.

[@katyungodly]

If I am unconvinced in the existence of gods then not believing would be the only logical conclusion. I can't trick myself into being convinced when I am not.

[@SamIAm-kz4hg]

@Fester B Thuggin "Yeah, even a rock is a non-believer." Incorrect. Rocks aren't sentient. Rocks are neither believers nor non-believers. My point is that "belief" quite literally means without enough evidence. We don't talk about a belief in gravity. There is enough evidence to tell us it is something real. "It takes no intelligence to be a non-believer." Still wrong. It takes a certain amount of intelligence to be capable of belief or non-belief. I feel like I'm talking to a monkey here. Were you going to add to the conversation or are you just angry about something?

[@jesushad12gayfriendwhoallb50]

@Fester B Thuggin your right you don’t need to be intelligent to understand burden of proof

[@fredbohm4728]

@Fester B Thuggin It takes no intelligence to be a believer. It requires faith .....the glorification of voluntary ignorance.

[@jesushad12gayfriendwhoallb50]

@Fester B Thuggin wow so you admit you need intelligence to understand principles then your original point is moot.

[@custardavenger]

Same issue with flat earthers. They want to tell you why the earth can't be a globe but are rarely interested in proving it is flat.

[@FourDeuce01]

Josh: “I really think evidence is required for both sides.” First, that’s not thinking, and second, you can’t say where evidence is required until you learn some basic logic.😏 Josh sure is proud of his ignorance and dishonesty.🙈

[@chrisgraham2904]

Evidence is not required on both sides. The one who makes the claim of something's existence has the burden of proof. If you state that you don't believe in unicorns, you have no burden to prove that unicorns do not exist. There is no proof for this statement. If I claim that unicorns do exist, the burden of proof is upon me to provide evidence of my claim.

[@Martin-sp4zf]

It's a team sport. Josh is on the Jesus of Nazareth team. Mahommed plays for Mecca Utd. Jacob backs the Wailing Wanderers. .... .

[@FourDeuce01]

@@Martin-sp4zf They’re all on the losing team, and it’s a shutout.😈

[@alfresco8442]

The degree of projection from these nutters is an absolute hoot. Luckily in the UK they are in a distinct minority and will get told where to shove it if they try foisting their fantasies on others.

[@shinobi-no-bueno]

While that would be nice, I have to admit I would much rather know who is a proper nutter by knowing what they think. Unfortunately here in the US we are all too aware how many are amongst us

[@nevyn_karres]

Sadly in Australia our current PM is a fundi christian, who believes that god has a plan for him.

[@hbar895348]

And fortunately they are generally not politically influential either... I doubt many people would give a flying f*ck if we had an atheist prime minister - but an atheist would probably never get elected as US president

[@chrisking6695]

You have just as many of them in the UK they're just not as vocal as they are in the US.

[@alfresco8442]

@@chrisking6695 Er! No we don't. Religion is really no big thing here and diminishing almost by the day. A 2016 poll found that only 28% believed in God or a higher spiritual power, comprising 20% who believed in a higher power only. That pretty much tallies with church attendance which is now down in single % figures...and still falling.

[@stephenbesley3177]

To argue science is wrong you have to know science because every argument stemming from religion has long been proven to be wrong. There are no new arguments. Religion starts with an answer then looks for the question. It's absurd

[@desertguy395]

When they finally hung up on this guy out of exasperation, he probably thinks he won.

[@PriestApostate]

The whole "never play chess with a pigeon" joke came to mind...

[@devaunplowman2327]

Goodness gracious this man is leaning so far Into ignorance just to dodge giving a logical answer

[@TheTruthKiwi]

"So you think philosophy is dead." "Do you believe that the universe is fine tuned, Steven Hawkings did." 😂😂😂 This guy is something else.

[@Kal-El-38]

The fact he thinks he's using "logic" is hilarious. This is comedy gold. Being a Theist in itself is illogical, trying to justify a belief on faith alone.

[@187btokes]

It always cracks me up when you simply put it similar to how it was presented here; basically just saying "So you have this belief yes? Ok can you please show evidence?". Immediately changes subject

[@FourDeuce01]

"I have always been among those who believed that the greatest freedom of speech was the greatest safety, because if a man is a fool the best thing to do is to encourage him to advertise the fact by speaking." Woodrow Wilson

[@Kal-El-38]

@@FourDeuce01 this is a very good point. However, indoctrination is a powerful thing and unfortunately gets the better of people.

[@Kal-El-38]

@@187btokes Yup, a tactic used by people who say things that they're not even convinced of themselves. Yet they persist with their argument. Absolute, nonsensical behaviour.

[@187btokes]

@@Kal-El-38 my only gripe with the show is that some of the hosts are unnecessarily fucking like overly and ridiculously rude as fuck like I've been an Atheist my entire life and I was not like told to be an atheist I just was able to figure out that that's what it was called when I was like in middle school but I had always held the belief that God was a silly concept and I used to be very mean to other middle schoolers cuz I perceived them as like you know lower than me

[@LincolnWorld]

When they said, "There's a dead body in the trunk of your car" Josh peed his pants thinking, "How'd they know that????" That's a fact! ;)

[@CAPSLOCKPUNDIT]

Three minutes into the video, and all I learned so far is that God is a cookie.

[@aidenmartin6674]

I believe in a Chocolate Chip Cookie God. Any other believers in a different God Cookie are heretics.

[@jpbaley2016]

Until that cookie god is on my tongue, I do not believe in it.

[@CAPSLOCKPUNDIT]

@@jpbaley2016 "This is my body. Take it and eat it in remembrance of me. These are my nuts..."

[@norcodaev]

@@CAPSLOCKPUNDIT Well, if jeebus had milk for blood, I’m in!😋

[@plattbagarn]

16:44 minutes in and that's all I can remember.

[@6MaxSix6]

I see the absence of evidence of beer in my fridge as evidence of the absence of beer in my fridge.

[@Aisatsana1971]

It’s illogical to be a non-believer…proceeds to demonstrate a complete absence of basic logic repeatedly. It’s so infuriating. Please be a troll.

[@cramerlong2276]

Fred *Do you seriously not watch the News at all?* Are you going to say you don't believe teh World Leaders when they are speaking of a One World Global Govt ? What about China beginning to fall ? Russia Rising ?? You not aware of all that ?

[@rimbusjift7575]

@@cramerlong2276 A perfect representation of mental illness caused by religion.

[@jacobjensen3807]

@@cramerlong2276 I don't understand how that's related to Fred's point? What am I missing?

[@CAPSLOCKPUNDIT]

@@cramerlong2276 The empty tomb is just as easily explained by body snatching pixies as by resurrection of the dead.

[@wtfjesus8251]

U reading my mind! 👍🤘😁

[@RaulPerez-jj5jj]

Josh tested them and found himself in a corner and clearly showed his frustration of being in that corner but still tried to justify his fallacies. 😂

[@WTF3602]

Its always a good show when folks call in and ask for justification for not believing 🤣

[@FourDeuce01]

“Do you believe the universe is fine-tuned? Steven Hawking does.” After being told Matt is not interested in discussing other people’s opinions, He tries another example of another person’s opinion.😂

[@tomrodwell9911]

As well as strawmanning Hawkins at the same time

[@FourDeuce01]

@@tomrodwell9911 Religious apologists often try tactics like that. Their goal is to waste time with lame “arguments” that aren’t true and wouldn’t help them prove their claims even if they were true.😏

[@Anthul65]

The universe is fine tuned for what or who? Everything out there want’s to kill you😂😂😂

[@thatguyrich9822]

99.999% of the universe is inhospitable for life, and is trying to kill me every second of every day.

[@beeinthehive]

The whole thing seems pretty obvious if he would stop trying to use magic to explain things. Our universe isn't fine tuned in that sense. Our universe formed and the things within it specifically evolved to fit that particular tune or nature. It's like someone saying "how did the plains of Africa just happened to fit African elephants?". It didn't. Africa didn't form to fit the needs of the elephants, the elephants evolved to fit the form of their environment.

[@philgray1000]

To whom it may concern-the volume on these older reposts is very low. It's quite jarring when another video with normal volume plays. Thank you for your time.

[@doneestoner9945]

Yea, it's very low.

[@annk.8750]

If you're concerned about the beginning of the universe, you need to talk to a cosmologist. It isn't a matter of philosophy or religion, it's a question of facts. Although the answer is still probably going to be unknown, a trained scientist can tell you some of the possibilities.

[@Anonymous-md2qp]

Exactly. Referring to a 2000 year old fictional book written by some sand dwellers isn’t going to get humans any closer to finding answers.

[@dukeemzworth3005]

The Goat herder's Guide to the Universe.

[@enifu]

He's trying to lead into the Kalam Cosmological argument, which somehow posits that God is uncaused and starts the domino fall that is the beginning of the universe.

[@yami-131]

I've heard Matt say the arguments are old and he's heard them many times over the now close to seventeen years he's been doing this, but holy hamburger... they haven't changed one bit!

[@THEEblindman]

believers are convinced there's a cookie in the cabinet without opening the door. Non-believers aren't convinced until the door is open.

[@karegairegi9071]

The scariest part for me is that I'm listening to adults spew this nonsense.... These callers be sounding like confused children & the irony of when their children tell them to call the show is priceless. I honestly be feeling sorry for some of these callers after Matt get through with them. They call in with their college degrees & background in science just to have Matt school them for the entire call smfh!

[@walnutoil100]

No one ever said atheism was mature

[@karegairegi9071]

@@walnutoil100 ~???

[@gabehcuod7017]

@@walnutoil100 Can you prove that claim?

[@isuckharderthanlife5413]

@@walnutoil100 If only you were mature enough to see how blatantly you prove OP's point.

[@mg-ew2xf]

@@walnutoil100 no one has proven a god exists.

[@jasi5534]

I think most christians leave out the "god of the Bible" part when they talk about an atheist who claims that god dont exist.

[@onedaya_martian1238]

Because even listening how blood from a murder was necessary for something, something just sounds stupid from the get go.

[@johnsergei]

"I'm trying to help you, not be stupid in you argument!" I think I might spend the rest of the day teaching a horse to play cello!

[@daniraspahic2625]

My favourite is when Mat says "Jesus....!" as sign of being annoyed....

[@andrewhickey2849]

I love the idea that theism is the lack of disbelief in God. That made me chuckle.

[@davidsommen1324]

Josh is not the sharpest tool in the shed.

[@padresteve619]

Homeboy is on the outside of the shed looking in.

[@seasonedbeefs]

He's not even close to the shed. Way off

[@PrepH420]

I think you are over valuing the sharpness of tools shed. Josh fits right in.

[@anthonylong9067]

He was looking kinda dumb with a finger and a thumb in the shape of an L on his forehead

[@pricklypear90]

That look on Jen’s face when he asked for evidence for non belief

[@nuffflavor]

As usual, when pinned the caller just keeps dodging and ducking.

[@mistylover7398]

If you can dough a 🔧 you can dough a non believers

[@chriskelly3481]

Very few theistic callers actually mull over what they are told. There have been some and I respect their honest consideration.

[@mistylover7398]

@@chriskelly3481 programming maybe.

[@scipioafricanus5871]

Trying to drive Matt tired with his rope-a-dope arguing.

[@mistylover7398]

@@scipioafricanus5871 it's like a toy 🧸 tag a war of arguing. Us vs them and winning is everything at least to the religious to beat non believers at everything.

[@sohu86x]

Josh needs to go back to his middle school classroom and keep learning.

[@johnrichards6080]

Zeus, Krishna, Horus...aliens, faeries, ghosts, mermaids and lizard creatures living in human form. Leprechauns! Santa! You can't prove they don't exist = they exist. So obvious. Thank you Josh.

[@SparkyWaxAll]

Appreciate Matt always explains to his viewers how the theists' rambling are not aligned with logic and/or debating.

[@chriskelly3481]

Poor Joshie. As soon as his script gets upset he's unable to adapt.

[@maxzorin9425]

What a waste... it's like discussing Shakespeare with a cactus.

[@hansj5846]

It's staggering to me that these people don't realise that they are Christians because of their upbringing and not because they've made a rational decision

[@Jo-JoandTaffy]

Right. More people need to realize that all babies are atheists.

[@renemartin5729]

I don't believe in Santa Claus, in the Easter Bunny, in fairies, unicorns, flying teapots, gods, devils, angels or demons.

[@christiananderson4909]

It's a simple lack of belief in one specific claim, that's it. What's so hard to understand about that?

[@melkhiordarkfell4354]

Hard to understand because theists find it hard to think.

[@christiananderson4909]

@@melkhiordarkfell4354 I just don't get some people's inability to understand the basic definition/etymology of the word "Atheism." What is *with* that? The meaning is in the word, FFS.

[@DragonSlayerLuffy]

@Deren Lernsten Literally nothing you just said made any sense whatsoever, that was painful to read.

[@christiananderson4909]

@@DragonSlayerLuffy I swear. . . they actually *try* not to understand. It's exhausting.

[@CAPSLOCKPUNDIT]

@@christiananderson4909 If religious apologists had evidence for their beliefs, they would present it, loud and proud. Instead, they try to perform an end run around their burden of proof, by defining their god into existence or demanding skeptics do their homework for them.

[@Dumbstuffwatcher]

Theists always get thrown off when you don't stick to their script

[@yuuseir3391]

Yeah, with questions like "don't you think that is a miracle ?", and then the reply is: no. Define miracle.

[@TaksSings_n_DrinksMilk]

Every time the caller says “but the thing is though…”, you drink.

[@stevenswitzer5154]

You only need proof to affirm something. I require no proof to say Im not convinced.

[@por15canada48]

Wake me up when an intelligent theist calls in. Looking forward to a long sleep.

[@yuuseir3391]

You know, science never stops, so one day that may occur. Imagine, a logical person that believes in god. Nobody is perfect, so it could be possible.

[@elainejohnson6955]

"Corpse removing pixies"... Funny!

[@24magiccarrot]

The fine-tuning argument is essentially stating that if everything wasn't exactly as it is then everything wouldn't be exactly as it is.

[@laurentmaquiet5631]

That's being dishonnest and simplistic. There is a reason why this argument is studied by many cosmologists. Assuming that physical constants are set in the only way leading to life (arguable assumption). Then it is, in a very scientific term, very strange that the universe ended up precisely in this specific and rare state. It should be (and is) adressed. However it is still an argument from ignorance to use that to "prove" god.

[@24magiccarrot]

@@laurentmaquiet5631 I think you miss the point of the fine-tuning in the argument for a god if you think I am being in any way dishonest or simplistic. The point of the argument is that all the constants in place and all the events that had to happen to allow life to exist on earth are so unlikely that it could only happen if it were planned that way. But if you were to add up all the constants and all the events of an alternate universe the outcome would be equally as unlikely However, assuming that it was even possible for the constants to be changed and celestial events to have been different the outcome would result in something that is equally as unlikely and likely as equally awe-inspiring as what we have now just we wouldn't be here to observe it and ponder the question, by definition if you change anything that happened that resulted in the outcome we have now then the end result would be different. If you look at the end result of any set of outcomes the odds of those events happening in the exact manner they happen, in the order that they happen will be extraordinarily high so the actual conclusion of the argument is if everything isn't as it is then everything wouldn't be as it is.

[@laurentmaquiet5631]

@@24magiccarrot I don't think I miss the point though. As far as we know, we have one universe. Assuming there is only one set among all possible sets that lead to life. It is indeed strange that this is precisely this set we have. And sure, it is obvious that we must be in an universe that allows life to observe it. It is not a refutation in any way of the strangeness I described. There are many refutations possible to this argument, but tossing it aside the way you originally did seems misplaced considering that the values of the physical constants is interresting many cosmologists.

[@24magiccarrot]

@@laurentmaquiet5631 Assuming there was only one configuration for life it isn't remotely strange that we find ourselves in a universe with those configurations as we could only exist in a universe that those configurations exist. We can only exist in the universe in which everything happened as it did the compound effect of even one change would mean you and I wouldn't be having this discussion.

[@laurentmaquiet5631]

@@24magiccarrot And sure, it is obvious that we must be in an universe that allows life to observe it. It is not a refutation in any way of the strangeness I described. It is strange if there is only one universe

[@FourDeuce01]

Some people are hearing-impaired. Josh is listening-impaired.🤤

[@Nevets1073]

I've only in the last year started watching AXP and the other shows that The Line produces here. I used to think that Matt was very rude to people who weren't really equipped to contend with logic. The more of these older clips I see, the less rude I feel Matt has become. It takes a lot to show this level of patience to a person who both refuses to listen to what you're saying and *also* puts words in your mouth. I can't imagine that Josh would be willing to be as patient if the shoe were on the other foot.

[@bruderk4257]

AXP and The Line are two different networks.

[@davidbelway6076]

Belief in god is not something that just comes naturally to people. we are all born non believers. the idea of god or jesus ect.. has to be taught to you from another person. so if you claim that you believe in god keep it to yourself of show me your god. God must be an evil practical joker that lavishes suffering. god watches children die in pain from lack of food all day every day. Well that's what I get from the myths and ancient stories of this creepy spooky thing.

[@walnutoil100]

How does the atheist differentiate between the evil and good objectively?

[@marcusreading3783]

@@walnutoil100 Simple, we look at whether or not an action brings more harm to the world or reduces it. If its the former, its bad, if the latter, its good. Its not that hard.

[@ajclements4627]

@@walnutoil100 Same tired question we’ve all answered dozens of times, get new material already.

[@jacobjensen3807]

@@walnutoil100 There is no objective difference. The only reason christians are uncomfortable with this is because they are taught might makes right, which is a disgusting concept.

[@t800fantasm2]

@@walnutoil100 "How does the atheist differentiate between the evil and good objectively?" Easy, we have brains... You should get one...

[@boneappletea3858]

The problem with desperation is that you'll accept the proposition of absolutes out of it. If it peace of mind is tied to an idea you'll be unable to accept the idea is false or likely false or it will damage ur mental health. The only thing intelligently designed is an idea that u must believe something on faith or else.

[@johnstover9083]

there's a big difference between evidence and proof...

[@MarioRossi-sh4uk]

If "A" implies "B", that doesn't mean that "not A" implies "not B" or that "B" implies "A". Those people fail think properly and to understand simple logic, that's why they don't understand. It's not that they believe, that fact is they don't understand. When you start to place a double negation in your sentence, their brain goes blank, they don't understand and they become angry. They can only think sentences without negations, e.g. there is God, God is good, etc etc.

[@ulrichweiss9912]

The volume on these older clips could be better.

[@loki1066]

If I broke down on a country road and had to ask for shelter for the night and there were two houses. One had a sign that said 'atheists live here' and the other had a sign said ' Christians live here' I would knock on the door of the atheists. Because most Christians sound CRAZY

[@publicenemy1238]

Atheism is the belief that a God cannot and will not ever exist with or without scientific evidence. Atheism is not the belief that their can be or will be the possibility of a god. That's called being agnostic. Their is no such thing as an agnostic atheist because they contradict each other. For an atheist to seek proof is entirely contradictory to atheism. Atheism is a firm stance, their is no maybe in atheism nor do they use science to prove their point. Anybody who studies the sciences would know that science it's self refers to certain phenomenon as God or spiritual. And is not in reference to any biblical or religious dogma. Something atheism refuses to acknowledge. Theirs a reason why atheist s don't rely on science because science proves atheism wrong.

[@markas5]

Matt is such a brilliant debater, being an Athiest if he was still a Baptist Minister I'm sure he would have converted me... lol

[@AJM-timecop]

Always funny when a theist tells an atheist what the atheist believes : )

[@1962LIBBY]

Very clear audio considering josh was in his high school locker

[@smalls9852]

This guy made me cringe so much. All the more respect for these two hosts for sitting through it without snapping.

[@generichuman_]

The part that always gets me when theists propose the fine tuning argument, is if you concede that the universe is fine tuned, their solution to this fine tuning is an intelligent, perfect, universe creating disembodied mind that just happens to exist as a matter of brute fact. It blows my mind how they fail to see that if anything is a candidate for fine tuning, it's God...

[@AlDunbar]

I try to use "finely tuned" rather than "fine tuning" as it is somewhat less suggestive of an entity having done the fine tuning. I get frustrated by the attempts to calculate a very low probability that things could be as they are by coincidence. I mean, the vast number of births on the planet are of non-human animals, but nobody seems amazed when a human gives birth to another human. Suggesting that the constants could be anything other than what they are in absolutely every universe (all one of them) we have measured them in is not exactly rational.

[@weserwin3430]

The burden of proof is on me and you want to see my cookie? Okay, I will gladly open my cabinet door. But if the burden of proof is on you, can I see your God? Will you open your cabinet door?

[@Fernando-ek8jp]

Talk about maximally dense

[@williamtarry4405]

It is not logical to believe in something without empirical evidence supporting its existence. So far, I haven't heard of any empirical evidence supporting the existence of a god.

[@starfishsystems]

Correction, it's not RATIONAL to infer material existence without material evidence. LOGIC refers to the formation of arguments based on arbitrary premises. An argument is logical if and only if it obeys the rules of logic. This assessment is unrelated to evidence but only to the form of the argument. A logical argument is like an algebraic expression, with the variables in the expression being logical premises. Eventually we may plug values into these variables, and these values could well be derived from material evidence.

[@williamtarry4405]

@@starfishsystems good point. Logic is based on strict principles of validity, so there is that bar to clear while forming logical arguments. I'd be interested in knowing about any material evidence currently available to plug into the hypothetical logical argument for the existence of a god. Have a good day!

[@exiled_londoner]

@@williamtarry4405 No, it wasn't a good point, it was nit-picking semantics. It is neither logical or rational to adopt a god-belief in the absence of either empirical evidence or logical premises from which this conclusion can be deduced or inferred.

[@tsg2009]

there's no cookie because I'm stoned

[@tedgrant2]

If you are selling a product, it's up to you to convince the customer to buy the product. The customer has no obligation to prove the product doesn't exist !

[@elliot7205]

Illogical.

[@tedgrant2]

@@elliot7205 Explain

[@zakuzeon7382]

"Theism Update: Fixed a bug where God could, in certain instances, cause instances that could not resolve. Loading God into the program will no longer cause the game to crash."

[@dx1450]

OMFG... if there was ever a caller who refused to listen, it's Josh here.

[@JohnnysCafe_]

That josh is a pain, unwilling to stay on point.

[@CyberBeep_kenshi]

Because he has no point. I bet he is used to talk people into the ground till they just give up. Sad really

[@fritzhaselnuss7852]

@@CyberBeep_kenshi he realizes hes getting owned pretty quick tho which is the reason for him moving the goalpost

[@CyberBeep_kenshi]

@@fritzhaselnuss7852 yupp, they all do

[@MagnumInnominandum]

"I'm a christian"... I'm so sorry. All this guy needs is a cookie.

[@yuuseir3391]

I'm a christian almost sounds like a disease

[@bobwilkinson2008]

@@yuuseir3391 It is

[@user-to9ik7hp7z]

Josh went absolutely nowhere, he never even sniffed a complete line of thought.

[@psychedelichotsauce760]

Logic is Josh's biggest enemy in life

[@colinanglin7418]

It's cute how they clearly all get these "arguments" from the same opinion leaders but keep dropping them like they think they're saying anything original.

[@scipioafricanus5871]

But the thing is, Josh, if you say "but the thing is" one more time, I'm going on a spree!

[@ladyfreedomrocks]

Oh, wow. This was 2 months after I deconverted.

[@stevetarrant3898]

I'm sure this guy got beat up a lot in school.

[@kissit012]

Not enough clearly

[@Jeremy-ql1or]

Pretty sure that is a home-school kid we are listening to.

[@Dsullivann]

He sure got mentally beat up here

[@pellepop100]

While one has to admire the patience it is at the same time certain that this is to no avail. Period

[@sergeyfox2298]

The fine tuning argument is circular. It requires god exists as one of the premises to defend god exists.

[@walnutoil100]

Your evidence is?

[@sergeyfox2298]

@@walnutoil100 theist sees that the earth is fined tuned by intricate laws. These intricate laws stem from some fine tuner. This fine tuner is god. God exists. Therefore, god exists. That's circular. Your "God exists" claim is laden in the idea of the defined fine tuner, which is implicitly God. You use this finer tuner premise which is backed by another premise "god exists" to support conclusion God exists.

[@katyungodly]

@@walnutoil100 trolllll

[@sergeyfox2298]

@Fester B Thuggin given the implicit conditions you imply, you're correct. However, one of the conditions required to make your analysis correct is that God is one of the many conditions. circular thinking. In philosophy, this is a cosmogony you speak of. Mythology tends to construct these mythical worlds.

[@oggyoggy1299]

@@walnutoil100 Is that you, Josh?