Neil DeGrasse Tyson on Disproving God

[Nonpareil]

 No moron, I did not use the ant as a sapient insect in my argument.

I did just say this. That is why I said that the ant needed to be sapient. Otherwise, your argument doesn't work, as it is not an appropriate comparison.

It is at this point that I really have to ask whether or not English is your first language. You seem to be having extreme issues with it.

If you read it again the ant is small and its physical limitations would not allow it to know a human exists.

It would, if the ant were capable of thinking and assessing evidence. Humans are, so unless you want to say that the hypothetical ant can also do so, the parallel doesn't work.

Of course, once you do that, you have to admit that the ant could actually learn what a human is, so the argument fails anyway - but then, that's not my problem, is it? It's not my argument.

How is my statement untrue regarding the universe as part of God?

You have not established it to be true. You do have to actually back up what you say, irontiger, if you want anyone to take you at all seriously.

Before the so called enlightenment of the West, the universe was called Brahman in the East.  The word Brahman (which is different to Brahmin which refers to a person so don't get confused like you usually do) would refer to the universe and God as one.  So basically this universe is a being and that being is God.

And they couldn't establish it to be true either. 

So no one cares.