'In the beggining, human created God'. I own that book, my cousin translated it to Lithuanian. Proud to be an atheist, and have my whole family atheistic.
In the beginning Adam and Even loved the world and made for themselves a beautiful garden. But one day a serpent, let’s call it religion, tempted them and said “I can give you a much better world. But first you must deny this world and when you die you can live forever with me in heaven” They agreed and their garden fell to ruin and the universal language of science was lost to them. Instead they and their descendants dreamed of heaven and became cruel and ignorant.
The plain fact is that intelligent christian beliefs have been shaped by evolutionary theory. It was Thomas Huxley that pushed Darwin on, to in a sense, give him the moral conviction to publish. The old order fell away, the anglican hold on the universities colapsed under the weight of scientific thought. This is the story of the birth of a new order of rationlism, the Victorian revolution. It is the process of modernisation theat shaped the 20th Century. Dawkins says EVIDENCE or else!!
for those who believe that there is no god. i would like them to tell me..how mankind came about? and where were they before their birth? and where will they go after death?
Humanity came about through evolution, but for a look at the origin of life itself, see abiogenesis.
Now for what happens after death? There is no way of knowing. There may be some form of existence beyond the flesh, or there may not be. Even if there isn't, it's nothing to be afraid of. After all, you were once dead before you were born, did that bother you? It didn't bother me.
There are 122,000 google hits for 'scientists refute darwin', so one can't view them all. I have looked at some however, including the 7-part 'Scientists Present Proof of Intelligent Design' on Youtube. I agree it's interesting. One must bear in mind, however, that not one of these scientists or philosophers of science is questioning evolution. What they are challenging is Natural Selection, the mechanism by which Darwin thought was the driving force behind evolution.
A common thread in The God Delusion is Darwinism and Evolution, which Dawkins treats as fact in the origins of life. If anyone takes an objective view on the theory of Evolution and does some investigating of their own, Darwinism is being discredited, even by prominent scientists, one reason is what we know about DNA. In Darwin's defence he didn't have the equipment to study DNA as we do now. My point is, why does Dawkins embrace Darwinism so fervently when it is being continually refuted?
it can be a very good thing for SOME people, a great transformative force. We each have to find whichever path suits us. For some, like Mr. Dawkins, this leads away from religion, and for others, it leads TO religion. The world would be a better place if people of ALL beliefs put more emphasis on being a force for good than on getting others to agree with your beliefs.
I completely agree, unfortunately thought people continue to try and push their religious views on everyone. Be this in laws, or dictating how people live their lives, etc.
But, we're lucky that people are not allowed to stone people for simply being who they are now-a-days because of laws.
I agree partly with what you say but I do not think that even if religion brings some people to be happier that that is a good enough reason for them to believe. There is a great George Bernard Shaw quote about this
'The fact that a believer is happier than a sceptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality'
That's true only if religious belief is equated with something like drunkedness, which is an assumption based on prior disbelief and nothing more. If you don't believe in religion, then fine. I don't belief in religion either. But I DO believe that people should be able to live their lives as they see fit within the confines of the law, even if other people think it's "odd" or "wrong".
I do think believing in an invisible man in the sky or that the earth is only a few thousand years old despite all the scientific evidence or that children should be taught that said invisible man created the earth by clicking his fingers rather than evolution is at least equated with something like drunkenness. In my opinion it is far far worse.
Well, you're entitled to your opinion. But in the end, it IS an opinion, just as my beliefs are. And, for the record, I agree with you on the whole young-earth idea.
Did you really read the book? The book explores the 'God delusion' - just because religion can be used as a force for good does not mean or prove that a God exists. We don't need God to be nice to each other and we certainly don't need her to explain the cosmos to us.
There is an argument used in the modern philosophy of religion: if God existed, how do you know he would act in the way you assume he would (example: how do you know he would've provided evidence for his existence at all). Dawkins seems to be assuming that in order for any higher power to exist, he must exist as a particular religion says he does. I disagree, and belong to no organized religion. His argument is that religion can be a very negative thing, which is true, but I would also say that
and fear, when many religious people that in order for morality to be moral it can't be done just to follow rules or out of fear, but that it must be motivated by a goodness of will. Also, his belief that in order for God to exist, the Universe would have to have been created in a certain way. Many people who believe in a higher power do not believe in an instantaneous creation of everything in complete form.
I agree with some of his points, even though I have a different position than he does. I do believe in a higher power, though the higher power I believe in isn't a supernatural, anthropomorphic being, but something more like the Tao, something that is instrinically tied to Nature. My problem with Dawkins is that he uses arguments that only really apply to some religious people and applies it to all religious peoplem, such as his belief that religious morality is only validated by ancient books
The God theory is indeed a science question. To give up this very plausible theory is not reasonable. Call your god matter,or substance but these are just words that could mean god when thought of as a beginning for how life started. Its really not reasonable to be an Atheist because reason tells us that there has to be a beginning somewhere. Dawkin's would be a lot more effective in removing faith if he had something to offer people other then nothing. The God of Creation is a rational belief.
Deist. Dawkins point needs mot to offer anything in place of religion. His point is that instead of nothing religion has no place. Truth is what he offers, and religion is most certainly NOT truth.
The God theory is indeed a science question. To give up this very plausible theory is not reasonable. Call your god matter,or substance but these are just words that could mean god when thought of as a beginning for how life started. Its really not reasonable to be an Atheist because reason tells us that there has to be a beginning somewhere. Dawkin's would be a lot more effective in removing faith if he had something to offer people other then nothing.
particularly the bit about the dinosaurs. he completely butchers an easy to understand scientific study to represent an idea it clearly has nothing to do with...
and then all his subscribers and viewers say "Wow, you have the holy spirit in you"
"OH MY GOSH the holy spirit is strong in this one"
"You make Atheists look so dumb"
LMAO right. HE BUTCHERED the study, completely misunderstood it, and a 12 year old could see it.. despite load of praise for intellectual prowess. ROFL
I know what you are saying. His friend Chris Hitchens covers the Greeks. Dawkins is not a liar for leaving out the Greeks. His book is not about a historical philosophy. I would be certain however that if you wrote to him he would love as much information as possible. He may have the luxury to spend more time on other philosophies in later works.
i just find it stupid since im pretty open about my atheism (i call myself both atheist and agnostic) so i find it stupid but i see where your comming from plus i dont live in the bible belt
Well, some of us do, and it gets tiring. So tiring. And Creationists. They don't only live on YouTube making one star movies. They give me the creeps.
he is a genious but what we need are people to help us counter their selfish actions, disproving them is the easy part countering their theocrasy is the hard part
hes a great scientist fantastic but whats the point of making a book attacking religion it just sounds stupid, why? he's an evolutionary biologists why should he care honestly as an agnostic i honestly dont give a shit unless religions being forced down my throat
Surely you care if innocent children are being tortured, mutiliated and killed in the name of one God or another? We are the lucky ones. Millions are going through terrible suffering. We all should play our part.
tezkingkong is correct. Dawkins is such a dangerous cult leader. Ideas like free thinking, analyzing the evidence for claims, facing life bravely and with a sense of wonder are such dangerous Hitler-like ideas.
I'm pretty sure, just a guess, of course, but I'm pretty sure faraz1729's statement was intended as sarcasm. I don't understand how that wasn't clear.
Because sarcasm is not clear when written down. Also religious people say such daft things it could quite easily have been said by a religious person in all sincerity.
His voice is so expressive and enchanting...he gently pulls me into this wonderful desire to want to know more about the universe through science...hearing him speak also reinforces my feeling of empowerment I get from being atheist.
Al successful cult leaders possess the ability to "enchant"& mesmerise the insecure.Merely hearing this guy speak reinforces your "feeling of empowerment"Remember Hitler?...
Haha...you're right...he's totally like Hitler...Dawkins wants to kill a bunch of people-especially the ones with darker skin pigmentation, 'cause everyone knows they're racially inferior, it's called Social Darwanism (can you hear my sarcasm yet?)
Your comment is nothing I haven't heard before; quite a pathetic rebuttle. Putting someone who simply does not believe in the supernatural like Dawkins in the same category as a fanatic, like Hitler or insert any name or group of people that have rejected REASON and RATIONALITY and have made it their goal to harm others all for the sake of their beliefs (such as torture, rape, killing, etc....y'know, like what the Christians and Muslims have done many a time).
By the way, fanatisism isn't just a religion thing. I assume that you yourself are not such a religious fanatic that you want to kill/rape/torture/do some non-consensual act towards someone who doesn't believe in the same set of tenets you do, right? We all know there are numerous accounts of it in the bible, so that would be your own sense of right and wrong, which believe it or not, atheists can have as well.
Of course I did; that's because you have chosen to reject your ability to think critically think. You're defending and deriving your sense of morality from a book full of contradictory stories that have encouraged fanaticism. By the way, I'm a woman...or in Christian theology property.
You've really worked yourself up over my casual comment haven't you?.Did I gently pull you "into this wonderful desire to want to know more about the universe through" God & the Bible ??.You don't sound so enchanted now !!
Wow !! you are such an expert on Christianity, what Seminary did you attend?? What's more amazing is how much you know about Me !!..Can you hear My sarcasm yet??...
He is just a well-spoken biologist. He also possesses courage to confront the delusional on a calm plane, the best way to deal with delusion. That way they can't get all snippy about how evil or satanic or baby-munching atheists must be.
This man singlehandedly helped me become an outspoken atheist after decades of hiding my true feelings. I owe you Doc. I owe you big time. History books will praise you and give you your just due. Love TGD. My son(16) just finished it and agrees. But then we raised him to be a freethinker and not a delusioned theist.
" ....derived from the Babylonian myth of Uta-Napisthim and known from the older mythologies of several cultures." Could the other older cultures be your ancient Egyptians and Greeks??
If Prof. Dawkins manages to get a few ancient scriptures a little inaccurate, it wouldn't matter to anyone that knows that it is all a fairytale anyway. Waste of energy to even talk about it. Might as well discuss Greek Mythology. Same thing in an atheistic eye.
Might be fun to talk about in a historical manner, however, I still stand behind the bigger picture of the huge waste of energy and time that studying ancient fairytales can be. I would rather spend my time learning about nature and its wonder through science.
u r a legend Richie, keep it up mate, about time we stood r ground and have r say, the religious sheep have had it their way for far too long, i notice how they get pissed off when we have r say but for millenia it has been ok 4 them to spout their unproven, ancient, backward scriptures.
This book is truly a masterpiece. It has been translated into Persian by Iranian atheists. Of course our government does not allow such kind of books to be published, but we -Iranian Atheists-, try to spread the word in private. I have read The God Delusion twice actually, once in English and once in Persian. A must read for everyone wants to clean his mind from the Virus of Religion.
with "god" you mean the god of (paganist) religious belief. as you are a "humane materialist", in the question of a "godhead", i recommend (pantheist?)authors matinus,1890-1981,denmark - and walter russell,1871-1963(friend of twain). they might match your "intellectuality",possibly.they give answers for a scientific,logical,independent view.find out.
'In the beggining, human created God'. I own that book, my cousin translated it to Lithuanian. Proud to be an atheist, and have my whole family atheistic.
NightwishLover2012 9 months ago
In the beginning Adam and Even loved the world and made for themselves a beautiful garden. But one day a serpent, let’s call it religion, tempted them and said “I can give you a much better world. But first you must deny this world and when you die you can live forever with me in heaven” They agreed and their garden fell to ruin and the universal language of science was lost to them. Instead they and their descendants dreamed of heaven and became cruel and ignorant.
ritchloui 11 months ago
Problem Mr Dawkins is there is no good in you.
AntG72 1 year ago
The plain fact is that intelligent christian beliefs have been shaped by evolutionary theory. It was Thomas Huxley that pushed Darwin on, to in a sense, give him the moral conviction to publish. The old order fell away, the anglican hold on the universities colapsed under the weight of scientific thought. This is the story of the birth of a new order of rationlism, the Victorian revolution. It is the process of modernisation theat shaped the 20th Century. Dawkins says EVIDENCE or else!!
garethg1964 3 years ago
for those who believe that there is no god. i would like them to tell me..how mankind came about? and where were they before their birth? and where will they go after death?
farafinden 3 years ago
Have you read the book yet?
versanil 3 years ago
no i havent n i don tthink its necessary...have you?
farafinden 3 years ago
Yes I do think it is necessary because
a) this video is about the book
b) the points you bring up are covered in the book.
It's an interesting read, regardless of what your stance is on religion, go take a look.
versanil 3 years ago
Humanity came about through evolution, but for a look at the origin of life itself, see abiogenesis.
Now for what happens after death? There is no way of knowing. There may be some form of existence beyond the flesh, or there may not be. Even if there isn't, it's nothing to be afraid of. After all, you were once dead before you were born, did that bother you? It didn't bother me.
SonicPsycho 2 years ago
For those who believe there IS a god, I would like them to tell me how GOD came about.
archdeaconj 2 years ago
I dare you to google "scientists refute darwin"
ATBINTC 3 years ago
I could suggest a lot of websites, Youtube videos, books, scientific papers etc. for your enlightenment. Would you "dare" to read them?
archdeaconj 2 years ago
Please, I am interested in your resources.
ATBINTC 2 years ago
There are 122,000 google hits for 'scientists refute darwin', so one can't view them all. I have looked at some however, including the 7-part 'Scientists Present Proof of Intelligent Design' on Youtube. I agree it's interesting. One must bear in mind, however, that not one of these scientists or philosophers of science is questioning evolution. What they are challenging is Natural Selection, the mechanism by which Darwin thought was the driving force behind evolution.
archdeaconj 2 years ago
A common thread in The God Delusion is Darwinism and Evolution, which Dawkins treats as fact in the origins of life. If anyone takes an objective view on the theory of Evolution and does some investigating of their own, Darwinism is being discredited, even by prominent scientists, one reason is what we know about DNA. In Darwin's defence he didn't have the equipment to study DNA as we do now. My point is, why does Dawkins embrace Darwinism so fervently when it is being continually refuted?
ATBINTC 3 years ago
it can be a very good thing for SOME people, a great transformative force. We each have to find whichever path suits us. For some, like Mr. Dawkins, this leads away from religion, and for others, it leads TO religion. The world would be a better place if people of ALL beliefs put more emphasis on being a force for good than on getting others to agree with your beliefs.
Ashiman12 3 years ago 2
I completely agree, unfortunately thought people continue to try and push their religious views on everyone. Be this in laws, or dictating how people live their lives, etc.
But, we're lucky that people are not allowed to stone people for simply being who they are now-a-days because of laws.
bhig3 3 years ago
I agree partly with what you say but I do not think that even if religion brings some people to be happier that that is a good enough reason for them to believe. There is a great George Bernard Shaw quote about this
'The fact that a believer is happier than a sceptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality'
ChrissyChiChi 3 years ago
That's true only if religious belief is equated with something like drunkedness, which is an assumption based on prior disbelief and nothing more. If you don't believe in religion, then fine. I don't belief in religion either. But I DO believe that people should be able to live their lives as they see fit within the confines of the law, even if other people think it's "odd" or "wrong".
Ashiman12 3 years ago
I do think believing in an invisible man in the sky or that the earth is only a few thousand years old despite all the scientific evidence or that children should be taught that said invisible man created the earth by clicking his fingers rather than evolution is at least equated with something like drunkenness. In my opinion it is far far worse.
ChrissyChiChi 3 years ago
Well, you're entitled to your opinion. But in the end, it IS an opinion, just as my beliefs are. And, for the record, I agree with you on the whole young-earth idea.
Ashiman12 3 years ago
Did you really read the book? The book explores the 'God delusion' - just because religion can be used as a force for good does not mean or prove that a God exists. We don't need God to be nice to each other and we certainly don't need her to explain the cosmos to us.
versanil 3 years ago
There is an argument used in the modern philosophy of religion: if God existed, how do you know he would act in the way you assume he would (example: how do you know he would've provided evidence for his existence at all). Dawkins seems to be assuming that in order for any higher power to exist, he must exist as a particular religion says he does. I disagree, and belong to no organized religion. His argument is that religion can be a very negative thing, which is true, but I would also say that
Ashiman12 3 years ago
and fear, when many religious people that in order for morality to be moral it can't be done just to follow rules or out of fear, but that it must be motivated by a goodness of will. Also, his belief that in order for God to exist, the Universe would have to have been created in a certain way. Many people who believe in a higher power do not believe in an instantaneous creation of everything in complete form.
Ashiman12 3 years ago
I agree with some of his points, even though I have a different position than he does. I do believe in a higher power, though the higher power I believe in isn't a supernatural, anthropomorphic being, but something more like the Tao, something that is instrinically tied to Nature. My problem with Dawkins is that he uses arguments that only really apply to some religious people and applies it to all religious peoplem, such as his belief that religious morality is only validated by ancient books
Ashiman12 3 years ago
The God theory is indeed a science question. To give up this very plausible theory is not reasonable. Call your god matter,or substance but these are just words that could mean god when thought of as a beginning for how life started. Its really not reasonable to be an Atheist because reason tells us that there has to be a beginning somewhere. Dawkin's would be a lot more effective in removing faith if he had something to offer people other then nothing. The God of Creation is a rational belief.
DeistReality 3 years ago
Deist. Dawkins point needs mot to offer anything in place of religion. His point is that instead of nothing religion has no place. Truth is what he offers, and religion is most certainly NOT truth.
nolobede 3 years ago
The God theory is indeed a science question. To give up this very plausible theory is not reasonable. Call your god matter,or substance but these are just words that could mean god when thought of as a beginning for how life started. Its really not reasonable to be an Atheist because reason tells us that there has to be a beginning somewhere. Dawkin's would be a lot more effective in removing faith if he had something to offer people other then nothing.
The God of Creation is a rational belief.
DeistReality 3 years ago
Was this the guy who played Cpl. Peter Newkirk in "Hogan's Heroes" and hosted "Family Feud." he sure looks different.
TrueNovice 3 years ago
particularly the bit about the dinosaurs. he completely butchers an easy to understand scientific study to represent an idea it clearly has nothing to do with...
and then all his subscribers and viewers say "Wow, you have the holy spirit in you"
"OH MY GOSH the holy spirit is strong in this one"
"You make Atheists look so dumb"
LMAO right. HE BUTCHERED the study, completely misunderstood it, and a 12 year old could see it.. despite load of praise for intellectual prowess. ROFL
ultimategoobah 3 years ago
watch every video by VenomFangX.
zebrasw7 3 years ago
and how he removes all the comments that disagree with him. its amusing.
ultimategoobah 3 years ago
Venomfangx is a waste of drivespace...
nolobede 3 years ago 4
True!
dannera1234 3 years ago 2
Comment removed
dimthelight 3 years ago
The greatest book of modern times for me. God is not great is another that must be read.
bonangusacdc 3 years ago
Comment removed
dimthelight 3 years ago
I know what you are saying. His friend Chris Hitchens covers the Greeks. Dawkins is not a liar for leaving out the Greeks. His book is not about a historical philosophy. I would be certain however that if you wrote to him he would love as much information as possible. He may have the luxury to spend more time on other philosophies in later works.
bonangusacdc 3 years ago
god doesnt exist :)
awesome11991 3 years ago 3
i just find it stupid since im pretty open about my atheism (i call myself both atheist and agnostic) so i find it stupid but i see where your comming from plus i dont live in the bible belt
hornedbeast91 3 years ago
Well, some of us do, and it gets tiring. So tiring. And Creationists. They don't only live on YouTube making one star movies. They give me the creeps.
k87jury 3 years ago
he is a genious but what we need are people to help us counter their selfish actions, disproving them is the easy part countering their theocrasy is the hard part
hornedbeast91 3 years ago
hes a great scientist fantastic but whats the point of making a book attacking religion it just sounds stupid, why? he's an evolutionary biologists why should he care honestly as an agnostic i honestly dont give a shit unless religions being forced down my throat
hornedbeast91 3 years ago
Surely you care if innocent children are being tortured, mutiliated and killed in the name of one God or another? We are the lucky ones. Millions are going through terrible suffering. We all should play our part.
bonangusacdc 3 years ago
Comment removed
dimthelight 3 years ago
I agree with you.
bonangusacdc 3 years ago
tezkingkong is correct. Dawkins is such a dangerous cult leader. Ideas like free thinking, analyzing the evidence for claims, facing life bravely and with a sense of wonder are such dangerous Hitler-like ideas.
faraz1729 3 years ago
What's wrong with wanting proof? You should never believe what you're told without questioin.
SPAG22 3 years ago 9
I'm pretty sure, just a guess, of course, but I'm pretty sure faraz1729's statement was intended as sarcasm. I don't understand how that wasn't clear.
Archaneus 3 years ago
Because sarcasm is not clear when written down. Also religious people say such daft things it could quite easily have been said by a religious person in all sincerity.
SPAG22 3 years ago
Actually, very good point. I have seen comments by religious people even worse.
Archaneus 3 years ago
His voice is so expressive and enchanting...he gently pulls me into this wonderful desire to want to know more about the universe through science...hearing him speak also reinforces my feeling of empowerment I get from being atheist.
anulay 3 years ago
Al successful cult leaders possess the ability to "enchant"& mesmerise the insecure.Merely hearing this guy speak reinforces your "feeling of empowerment"Remember Hitler?...
tezkingkong 3 years ago
Haha...you're right...he's totally like Hitler...Dawkins wants to kill a bunch of people-especially the ones with darker skin pigmentation, 'cause everyone knows they're racially inferior, it's called Social Darwanism (can you hear my sarcasm yet?)
anulay 3 years ago
Your comment is nothing I haven't heard before; quite a pathetic rebuttle. Putting someone who simply does not believe in the supernatural like Dawkins in the same category as a fanatic, like Hitler or insert any name or group of people that have rejected REASON and RATIONALITY and have made it their goal to harm others all for the sake of their beliefs (such as torture, rape, killing, etc....y'know, like what the Christians and Muslims have done many a time).
anulay 3 years ago
By the way, fanatisism isn't just a religion thing. I assume that you yourself are not such a religious fanatic that you want to kill/rape/torture/do some non-consensual act towards someone who doesn't believe in the same set of tenets you do, right? We all know there are numerous accounts of it in the bible, so that would be your own sense of right and wrong, which believe it or not, atheists can have as well.
Later. =)
anulay 3 years ago
What??.. Are YOU OK ??
tezkingkong 3 years ago
Sorry Analy,You lost Me boy...
tezkingkong 3 years ago
Of course I did; that's because you have chosen to reject your ability to think critically think. You're defending and deriving your sense of morality from a book full of contradictory stories that have encouraged fanaticism. By the way, I'm a woman...or in Christian theology property.
anulay 3 years ago
You've really worked yourself up over my casual comment haven't you?.Did I gently pull you "into this wonderful desire to want to know more about the universe through" God & the Bible ??.You don't sound so enchanted now !!
tezkingkong 3 years ago
Wow !! you are such an expert on Christianity, what Seminary did you attend?? What's more amazing is how much you know about Me !!..Can you hear My sarcasm yet??...
tezkingkong 3 years ago
He is just a well-spoken biologist. He also possesses courage to confront the delusional on a calm plane, the best way to deal with delusion. That way they can't get all snippy about how evil or satanic or baby-munching atheists must be.
saxmanchiro 3 years ago 3
This man singlehandedly helped me become an outspoken atheist after decades of hiding my true feelings. I owe you Doc. I owe you big time. History books will praise you and give you your just due. Love TGD. My son(16) just finished it and agrees. But then we raised him to be a freethinker and not a delusioned theist.
saxmanchiro 3 years ago
Comment removed
dimthelight 3 years ago
Please point out where he lies. I think you should give us a specific 'for instance'. Your statement needs clarifying.
saxmanchiro 3 years ago
Comment removed
dimthelight 3 years ago
Yep, go ahead.
saxmanchiro 3 years ago
Comment removed
dimthelight 3 years ago
What page and paragraph?
saxmanchiro 3 years ago
Comment removed
dimthelight 3 years ago
I read re Noah:
" ....derived from the Babylonian myth of Uta-Napisthim and known from the older mythologies of several cultures." Could the other older cultures be your ancient Egyptians and Greeks??
saxmanchiro 3 years ago
Comment removed
dimthelight 3 years ago
If Prof. Dawkins manages to get a few ancient scriptures a little inaccurate, it wouldn't matter to anyone that knows that it is all a fairytale anyway. Waste of energy to even talk about it. Might as well discuss Greek Mythology. Same thing in an atheistic eye.
saxmanchiro 3 years ago
Comment removed
dimthelight 3 years ago
Might be fun to talk about in a historical manner, however, I still stand behind the bigger picture of the huge waste of energy and time that studying ancient fairytales can be. I would rather spend my time learning about nature and its wonder through science.
saxmanchiro 3 years ago
Comment removed
dimthelight 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
watch every video by VenomFangX.
zebrasw7 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
watch every video by VenomFangX.
zebrasw7 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
watch every video by VenomFangX.
zebrasw7 3 years ago
why? VFX is lame in his little head lol....
Well, you SHOULD watch them, and have a laugh!
dannera1234 3 years ago
I suggest not wasting your time...though I did have some laughs, that is true.
ultimategoobah 3 years ago
and then watch all the people respond to him and own him. it's entertaining.
ultimategoobah 3 years ago
He doesn't lie. Obviously there are many things ommitted but that does not make him a liar. He spends the correct amount of time on each subject.
bonangusacdc 3 years ago
Fantastic book. His theories on the origins of religion and of morality are superb.
Excellent.
miseriaykretek 4 years ago 3
Comment removed
dimthelight 3 years ago
great book, loved reading it, was sad when i finished it.
daztot 4 years ago
u r a legend Richie, keep it up mate, about time we stood r ground and have r say, the religious sheep have had it their way for far too long, i notice how they get pissed off when we have r say but for millenia it has been ok 4 them to spout their unproven, ancient, backward scriptures.
daztot 4 years ago
very good book!
Sure2Vers191 4 years ago 5
very good book!
Sure2Vers191 4 years ago
This book is truly a masterpiece. It has been translated into Persian by Iranian atheists. Of course our government does not allow such kind of books to be published, but we -Iranian Atheists-, try to spread the word in private. I have read The God Delusion twice actually, once in English and once in Persian. A must read for everyone wants to clean his mind from the Virus of Religion.
Bikhodayi 4 years ago 16
Stay strong! Free speech perseveres!
Lacolith 4 years ago 2
I like the book. Thank you Mr. Dawkins.
TheLogicalTheist 4 years ago 4
with "god" you mean the god of (paganist) religious belief. as you are a "humane materialist", in the question of a "godhead", i recommend (pantheist?)authors matinus,1890-1981,denmark - and walter russell,1871-1963(friend of twain). they might match your "intellectuality",possibly.they give answers for a scientific,logical,independent view.find out.
henrynold 4 years ago
one of the most compelling books ever created, it makes me proud to be an atheist!
spunkeez 4 years ago 14
TGD is a very well-written book. The last chapter is a brilliant description of science - you'd have to read it to see what I'm talking about.
DannyDaWriter 4 years ago 5
I'm about halfway through The God Delusion, and am quite enjoying the book.
Facecageworshipper 4 years ago 4
Same here. The chapter I'm currently reading: "The roots of religion".
leporidus 4 years ago
Oooh, theres a VERY interesting part in that chapter about cargo religions. I finished the book, and I thought it was excellent.
Facecageworshipper 4 years ago
Oh, spoiler alert! :-)
leporidus 4 years ago