Uhhhh Jow Forums?

It's hilarious that you think this way.
>censorship
I don't recall seeing that claim made anywhere, mr. straw man.

If thats not the claim what is it, whats so magic about this banner that not having it makes it an issue

There's no historical evidence for the existence of Jesus besides the bible.

What's so magical about the ability to comment, share, view related videos, control playback speed, and so forth that not having it makes it an issue:

youtube.com/watch?v=BRi-UouACL8

I mean, the video's still up, so who cares?

You've taken the position that every other synopsis is based on facts. You might want to review the implications before digging in.

So historicity is the standard? So there is less historicity for Jesus than Moses? On that note, go ahead and type in "Satan" and see what you get. I'll wait.

Okay so you're complaining about restricted videos or what ever, what does this have to do with the first video. This thread started as a complaint that Jesus doesnt get a little cute banner on google, and now you're talking about this. Im confused

The point is that suppression is a sliding scale, and doesn't have to be full-scale deletion to have an enormous impact.

The screen realestate of these banners would run in the millions of dollars a year based on search volume. Jesus is one of the most searched terms worldwide.

David, Solomon, Moses and Abraham get their wikipedia article shown though, and they are even less likely to have actually existed.

>they are expensive to maintain and can be dangerous
i think i heard that one before

Attached: 1470758972382.png (420x490, 46K)

holy shit

It's not just pulling from Wikipedia, btw. Look at the Rothschild result, and then go to the Rothschild page. The results are curated. You really believe that a low-volume search term like "Rothschild" is curated but one of the most (possibly THE most) search term in all of Google isn't curated?

Oh, gullible goy...

This is the absolute worst hill an atheist chooses to die on.
When you start denying Jesus existed you open yourself up to some 80 iq creationist to unironically defeat you in a debate.
Take my advice. You dont want to use the “Jesus never existed” argument. Its baboon-tier conspiracy twiddling

What. The. Fuck.

>Jesus is one of the most searched terms worldwide.
Just went to Google Trends and it confirms. Jesus gets about 18 times the search traffic as Muhammad and 3x the traffic of Buddha.

I'm sure some degenerate shit like porn hub gets more traffic, but among the religions and philosophies nothing else comes close. If you combine the traffic for "jesus" and "jesus christ" it gets even more lopsided.

No way in hell this is an accident.

>I'm confused
Feigning confusion is a kike shill tactic. Where did you go?

bamp this needs to be seen

>youtu.be/EzfuJYza27Y
you fucking faggots with your phone fagging youtube links, at least present it in the form thats easier for hooktube. i'm not clicking it you nigger.

Giving this video views isn't a bad thing. If it ever gets any traction it will definitely be suppressed and probably removed.

I try not to follow ANY youtube links anymore, whether they deserve views or not honestly.
I did watch it, by searching the hashcode in hooktube,luckily it was the only one that came up (often doing it that way results in multiple videos coming up for some reason, that's the reason for my sperg out)
I agree though, it deserves to be spread.

This is more for lurkers than your poor bait, user.

If you're talking pure "historical evidence," well, there's more historical evidence for Jesus of Nazareth existing than for, say, Alexander the Great or Homer. That's right.

Start your journey here at the most left-wing public forum available today: Wikipedia:

See: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

Then see:

The historicity of Jesus focuses on whether Jesus Christ existed as a real historical person, or whether he is simply a mythological imagination. This article will show that the evidence for the existence of Jesus is overwhelming, as is agreed upon by every professor in every academic institution in every relevant field in the world.[1] In other words, for someone to argue that Jesus never existed (and thus is merely a myth) is to place himself against not only the field of scholarship and the historical record, but even against reason and common sense.
Source: conservapedia.com/Historicity_of_Jesus

Want to go deeper still? Watch:
The Resurrection Argument That Changed a Generation of Scholars - Gary Habermas at UCSB
youtube.com/watch?v=ay_Db4RwZ_M

Attached: Shroud of Turin.png (1292x8757, 3.91M)

I doubt many would argue the existence of a guy named jesus christ, who was persecuted by the kikes. What I would argue is the lack of any sort of evidence of him being somehow related to a higher power in any form other than stories.

Probably a good policy tbqh

Don't bother, anyone who is actually serious about the shroud of Turin not being a hoax is not worth your time.