What about the argument how a cell could not have evolved? That it would have had to start as the complete form that it is? I'm not saying "therefore Christ is King." I've just never heard a rebuttal.
What does Hitchens mean at 2:47: "There wouldn't have been a four-headed god?" What about Brahma, the four-headed god? Or Jungian quaternity? In Buddhism, three is good (the three pillars); in China, four=death (四=sì, 死=sǐ); and the five-pointed star represents the five natural elements. Religious significance can be arbitrarily applied to almost any number. Hitchens should have stuck with the idea that religious associations are non-sequitors. Numerology is an intracultural aesthetic.
The creed is a doctrinal statement and it includes references to historical events (suffered under Pontius Pilate). It's inept to compare the Christian claim or outlook with the method of natural sciences. Look at it from the viewpoint of the science of history. When it comes to Jesus in the end it all comes up to whether you trust the eyewitnesses and the chain of tradition or not. It's not per se irrational to trust historical sources. That's where Jesus differs from the Spaghetti monster btw.
@TimotheosCauvin When the bible, even the new testament, proves itself historically inaccurate time after time it is can no longer rationally be considered a historical source
I haven't listened to Dennett much (in ascending order, I've listened most to Dennett, Harris, Dawkins, then Hitchens) but I really like him so far. Just the way he'll critique religion and at the same time so casually use words like "Golly!" and whatnot.
The fact that Religion is so prevalent in our society shows the power of indoctrination. If you truly believed in something like ghosts, or unicorns, you would be derided by just about everyone, even religious people. Both gods, and ghosts have the same amount of evidence to support each other, but since the views of deities have been indoctrinated in our minds from a young age, it's perfectly acceptable to believe in a supernatural being.
JESUS CHRIST, HIS CATHOLIC-UNIVERSAL-APOSTOLIC CHURCH, SACRAMENTS, THE BIBLE, MIRACLES, HEALINGS, ST. MARY APPARITIONS, MESSAGES FROM HEAVEN, SIGNS IN 2011 ARE NOT A MYTHOLOGY BUT THE REALITY !!!
You, mister Hitchens ar are gravely mistaken! We, Slavs, indeed had a four -faced god called Swiatowid before the christians came by and spoiled our fan... That just means we are 33,(33) % more awesome than others! :D
I would love to join these guys as a 5th horseman! Hey guys! Have you got a horse for me? Of course, it would have to be a large horse, like a Clydesdale, since I weigh about 400 pounds. I would even bring a wagon load of beer!
Dead-to-the-spirit deluded "God Delusion" author & blithering fool scientist goon Richard Dawkins another "leader" given 2 the profane masses is another useful idiot 4 Jesuit machinations
Jesuitical; pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuit Order completely altered the education system 2 suit their Evo-Hoax Agenda to discredit the Bible
Papal Rome cant have their Counter Reformation 2nd Dark Age DESPOTISM until Bible is destroyed
I hate how theists think a theory means something is not true. In order for a hypothesis to become a theory it has to work everytime its tested, without fail. It only takes 1 credible experiment to disprove a theory, and many dont know that if you call something a theory its cause it works EVERY time.
people find it offensive to insult their religion because it is based on a belief system... its like being rascist or homophobic or sexist.... thats why people find it offensive and you need to understand and respect that a little bit................
@quuanttum Theres no debate over whether racism, sexism and homophobic behaviour is bad.
Religion, all religions, help spread these barbaric views and at the same time want to hide behind the same veil that they try to tear down. Without critizism of religion there is only slavery of it. No matter how democratic a society is. I dont disagree when with you on how they are offended, but i think its because they preach on matters of fear, life and death warrents religion to be closely scrutinized.
@Dgoosh1000 I agree. Any man that stands in front of a crowd and pretends to be the voice of God, to control the masses, needs to explain themselves. Structured religion is rather serious as they pretend to be the voice of God.
I feel a bit sorry for Dawkins. His views about religion have always been unbalanced and obsessive and it is sad that he begins to look more ridiculous as he gets older. He had an admirable scientific reputation and surely made enough money out of sales of the ridiculous The God Delusion to wannabe intellectuals without making himself a total fool in public.
Dawkin's is a disgrace to science - he has become nothing but an ignorant demagogue and ideologue. He has abused and corrupted his Simyoni "chair" whic is supposed to be for the "public understanding of SCIENCE" and turned it into the Throne of the Self-Appointed Pope of SCIENTISM. Scientism is not science; it is just an ideology like any other - and Dawkins its High-Priest.
Morally insane Bitchens & his sorry ilk are not in agreement with decent thinking people. …evil-minds are busy subverting and perverting youth in the name of ‘gay’ rights, but Bitchens & Dawkins are strangely silent on this subject. What does ‘gay’ behavior really 'encompASS" anyway? All of the following: sodomy, lesbianism, bestiality, pedophilia, pederasty, coprophilia, fetishism, sadomasochism, rape, & murder. In short, everything unnatural,socially destructive,bent,criminal,& abhorrent.
@247custard It's what's gotten him so far. He's so sure that he's right, and he almost always is. The fact that he's a bastard has given him his fame =P. He's incredibly brilliant as well.
lol, Richard Dawkins cracks me up. He looks like a giddy school child throughout all of this. The intellectual persiflage is overwhelmingly fun for him.
@itstonymacaroni I've noted how they all act, too. You're completely right about Dawkins; he's having a ball. Hitchens looks half-interested, half-bored, all between sips of whiskey. Harris looks like he knows he's the youngest man in the room, and is trying to earn his place at the table. Dennett looks like it wasn't his idea to be there, but is trying to contribute.
OMG, i love this! It's so natural, this, let's sit around and complain about shit sort of talk. Young Harris, eager. Dawkins, wry. Dennet, mild. And Hitchens just chillin' with his drink and a cig.
@bridemusiccanada I think one more thing you should appreciate is that you will not see atheists hurting theists based on belief. Simply put, there is no belief system in atheism. We're not going to hurt anyone because we disagree with you. But it's very common place for people of faith to hurt, sue, etc. others on the basis of faith. You can't prove a negative, you can't disprove a negative, you don't try. But at least these people are being productive in educating people to be moral.
if a person says that god is all powerfull and that they could not possibly comprehend it, then why are simple human emotions of grandeur that we all feel used as proof of a higher power?
When people talk about "spiritual experiences" or "spiritualism", they're often incredibly vague. What is a "spirit" and has there been any empirical evidence of such a phenomenon to justify the use of the word? What they're describing is a highly emotional experience, it has nothing to do with "spirits".
@smoothbanana A profound emotion has nothing to do with spirits, so the word "spiritual" has no place here, because it creates the confusion that strong emotions have something to do with the supernatural. Being moved to tears by a beautiful sunrise is an emotional experience, not a spiritual one.
I'm the first person to applaud intellectualism of all kinds... but this meeting is not intellectual. They sit there and whine and complain about religion and all the things they can't do and all the horrible religious people who say mean things about them... I fail to see the point.
i think you've taken it the wrong way i think it's more in the sense of awareness raising..not to mention it's not whining nor is it complaining they're raising interesting topics that are prevalent in all societies.
also it is not uncommon for people with common mind sets to want to listen to others of these mindset...take church for example ;)
@2ndbase21325 You did not listen very well, then. They're discussing the rationale behind theistic argumentation according to their experiences debating religous individuals, far as I can tell.
As a Buddhist, I found this a really interesting and refreshing set of ideas. And it's clear these men are speaking with honesty and sincerity. Anyone who does believe in religion ought to watch the whole thing.
I completely agree with Harris in the beginning of this clip. I'm an Atheist but I truly believe there are things in this universe that are magic...no joke...REAL magic. First of all, what is magic? It is a phenomena that cannot be explained by science. Just study a black hole or just try to imagine a never ending universe. If we traveled trillions of light years then everything that modern science tells us is true could very easily be absolute shit. By our CURRENT standards, there's magic :)
That's incredibly stupid. So were rainbows and earthquakes "REAL magic" 2,000 years ago when we didn't understand what they really were? The universe exists independent of human beings, our understanding of something doesn't change it's vital qualities.
You're the idiot. You clearly didn't understand what I was saying. There was an episode of Star Trek in which the captain of the ship lands on a planet with a primitive culture. The people on that planet thought that the captain was a God because of the TECHNOLOGY that they had. I was just saying that our technology is so primitive that it cannot explain a great deal of phenomena because it is either primitive or we don't even know what's out there. You fool, educate yourself.
There are things out there that are magic to us because we cannot explain them but those things are explainable by scientific means. Since our science has not evolved far enough to explain those things then to us they would seem to be magic but one day, when science has the answer to some of those questions, those things will not be magic anymore because science will have the answer. That's as simple as I can put it so if you're still too stupid to get it then that's your problem.
Sam Harris is the only one of these men who are genuinely dangerous. His Faustian intelligence dwarfs the other 3 old farts and presents a truly counter-traditional order of mind.
@odinisawesome Hitchens, Dawkins and Dennett are all pop-intellectuals. Great soundbites and wonderfully intelligent ways of being unintelligent, but Harris actually understands genuine philosophy and its foundational nature to the important questions in life. He understands and it tries to subvert it. He seems to recognize the wisdom of understanding the difference between absolute and relative yet actively seeks to subvert it.
@abdallahmarsh Are you saying that Harris seeks to pervert, corrupt, and/or overthrow genuine philosophy and the difference between absolute and relative?
It just seems odd that you would say that.
All of these men have a level head on their shoulders, it just seems that Hitchens and Dawkins are better educated, and have been in the business for a far longer amount of time than Harris.
Harris has the youth advantage, and has the potential to be the future of the anti-theist arguments.
@odinisawesome It appears that Harris tries to address mysticism more than the others and in addressing it attempts to redefine it along anti-initiatory lines. I would admit, though, that all of them reduce consciousness to the psychological and by implication, the biological. A call for the "end of faith" is truly an infra-human enterprise.
If by "infra-human" you mean that it is beneath us, I fail to see your point. I have little patience for when people chatter on about how materialism is some how insultingly reductionistic. It's taken almost for granted that we should lie about what humans really are and that dismissing that position on the basis that there is no evidence for it is nihilistic.
It's a bit of a con-game. I'm not convinced "nihilism" isn't anything but a glorified insult.
In this very same video, the humility of scientists is laid out plainly and concisely. Scientists are the first to admit they don't know something, the first to admit when they are wrong, and usually the first to DISCOVER that they are wrong because they question their own answers much more thoroughly than anyone else. You cannot be a scientist without such humility, because the scientific method is built upon it.
All of them say 90% their own words. They also quote, because after all this conversation is about the community.
The long-obsolete scriptures you suggested are in no way useful for intelligent analysis. They were written by people who knew less about the world than we know today. They would never have written these things knowing what we now know.
hitchens ==Canon fanton said that this is like John15 said that and Mathew23 said that,i nearly saw all hitchen,harris and dawckins videos but in reality they dont gv u any answer,i m now watching this conversation 3rd time and found nothing,make notes of their points and at the end u ll find utter disappointment,instead read Sermon of the mount,Psalms,Gita,Quran i find peace in those books,cant explain yet but may b somday i ll b able to explain those feelings
I think that some are afraid of not believing because they have been told ther hole lives that if they don't belive they will go to hell (or something). I known they think about it because they will say any thing to back up ther god even if it is something they made up or is totaly wrong. I know what the readers will say "no WE don't '' well you cant say that because you don't know what they have sad talking to me.
They're all awesome and have amazing (and unique strengths). Hithcens is bold as heck; Sam is Smooth (neuroscience, cognition); Dennet is rationalizing; Dawkins is extremely calculative and mathematical-like (albeit a evo. biologist) in his reasoning. They're all brilliant. Jolly good!
Harris stresses the humbleness of scientists--they'll be the 1st to say they don't know, etc.
But he's sitting next to a biologist who claims that evolution demonstrates that any sort of god is as unlikely as garden-fairies, and who enthusiastically endorses Stephen Hawking's claims that science has answered all the 'why' questions of existence.
What, Mr. Harris, are today's scientists the least bit humble or open-minded about?
I went to public school in England (i.e. private, like a prep school in the US, not like a prep school in the UK of course, which is like an elementary school in the US, only private...clear? Okay, jolly good) anyway, where was I? Oh yes, public school in England...right...I went to public school in England and am therefore extremely clever and important, and can say with some authority, sitting with one's legs crossed does in fact require one to have read Proust...in the original...twice...
Sam Harris referred to the unfortunate de facto virtue of faith when he talked about how "belief without evidence is especially noble." This is exactly the teaching of Jesus. Just look at John 20:29. That's right, Jesus wants us to believe things without evidence, and he thinks this blind faith is better than actually having evidence itself. I think this is absurd. Sure, we can have good reason to believe something if it is logically necessary, but adding evidence to that can never be bad...
Each of the Four Horsemen contributes something truly remarkable to the group. Oh, how I wish I could be in the room. The intelligence displayed is just outstanding. I say that as a devout Christian.
i am a christian. and i ask myself what if i am wrong. that is why i read books on all faiths and lack thereof. it is the reason i read both of christian authors and atheist. i am a truth seeker. these men are very intelligent. and i am enjoying this series.
@gacktxrawr Ask yourself this too, what ever reason do you have choosing your perticular flavor of christianity, as opposed to muslim or hindu or jew or frigging Thor the God of Thunder.
@gacktxrawr as an athiest i like the jesus idea that he was kind so on he preached against what today we would call consumerism and so on i see him as a good moral philosopher that sacrificed his life by seeking ways to make society better i fink to me that is better than to say he was the son of god and so because it shpows how one human being done and said great fings.. buti reject christian institutions and a lot of the bible koz its constantines christianity as opposed to jesus's
@gacktxrawr Although I strongly disagree with your beliefs and think you are wrong, if all Christians acted this way, I doubt I'd feel the need to protest it all.
@gacktxrawr I was once christian and was basically doing the same thing you are... Truth seeking... It is enlightening as you begin to discover the reality of things. I am now an atheist and have never felt so free to enjoy this life and do good things to others. It's a great feeling. Thanks for being open minded and well... keep seeking the truth ! :)
Good. All religious and non-religious people should watch these series and continue in the debate. It will most likely continue forever, or close to it, and I welcome it!
@gacktxrawr That seems like me, Only that I loose my christian dogma. I still have my beliefs in Jesus message. Anyway, Many people probably wouldn't call me a real christian since I don't believe Jesus is entirely what christianity has made him to be, and since I don't belive in the dogmatic term of "god". I recomend you to see the documentary "Hidden Story of Jesus Christ". It's here on youtube, and it's very good.
@gacktxrawr if you ask yourself if you are wrong then it is only because you lack faith. These guys discredit faith all together because they count only on their intellect and "facts" and figures. But at the end of the day facts and figures alone won't confirm right or wrong. Also these guys expect me to ask if maybe i am wrong, but these guys don't question themselves. They think they are right, Well I feel and think I am right in believing in God, even if I dont believe in some interpretations
This is the kind of thing that I don't get. If you listened to their conversation, you know that they question themselves all the time. Why are you using the term 'intellect' like it's some sort of flaw? Why do you have 'facts' in quotations, as if facts are something they made up arbitrarily? These people have derived their beliefs from their observations of the world around them, and when you get down to it, that's what science is all about. What's wrong with that?
@SirKickz Whats wrong with it is that if they really don't know then they are agnostic. These guys "KNOW" there is no God, if they had any doubt in their mind they would be more careful about their blasphamous words. It is no different than religious people that know there is a God. Also what is wrong with it is not that they have unbelief and question it..thats perfectly fine and up to them.. but that they are asserting the atheist agenda worldwide with such disrespect to God.
Well, look. What you have to understand is that these are men who's philosophy is dominated by logic. Logic dictates that one does not invest in a belief unless there is evidence to support it, and these men, as well as myself, have yet to observe any evidence of the existence of any God. So, no, you can say that they don't KNOW that God doesn't exist in the fashion that there is no proof that he doesn't exist (It is logically impossible to prove the negative).
But they refuse to believe in God until proof of his existence has been provided. And, to address your final point, they assert the atheist agenda for two reasons: Firstly, all they do in their books is explain what they believe, and why they believe it. It is the folk of religion who said "we are offended by that, you shouldn't do that," and they said, "fuck off!" Secondly, they will not stay quiet when people use religion to hurt, or get away with hurting, others.
@bridemusiccanada Your proposal is the same as me creating a god, named the Invisible Flying Spaghetti Monster. You can't see him, but he exists. Disprove me. You can't. Do you believe there MIGHT be? YOU SHOULDN'T! But why not? Because there is absolutely no evidence for it. If you believe the bible might be evidence for god, you need to take in the account of every single other religious text out there. Even if you did happen to pick the right god, is he even a good god?
@bridemusiccanada I found this discussion to be very enlightening on how these extremely intelligent people think. They do NOT think alike. I do NOT think that your view is correct in that any of these men are 100% sure that god does not exist. 99.99% would probably be the answer to that. You know something is untrue if you can test it, and it is false. You can certainly postulate that something is untrue, if there is absolutely no evidence for it. Bible exists therefore god exists = not valid.
@bridemusiccanada Maybe they use their intellects and evidence because they work, and faith hasn't ever been shown to provide a single instance of truth. You can tell us when was the first time that faith has ever led man to the truth? Even if there was a God, then faith would be right by coincidence, not by causal connection, since faith is literally the complete disregard and disrespect for rational thinking and evidence.
@gacktxrawr Thank you for saying this. I was exactly where you were two years ago, and trust me, there is plenty of mentally stimulating information and debate and discussion out there. For a person of faith to acknowledge that such information exists, and to willingly search it out is the most important thing. To go on that journey, openly analyze the information, and come up with a logical and well researched/justified reason to remain faithful is the best kind of religious person.
I hope you are a not a christian for long; if my opinion means anything, I will tell you that any belief you hold without a rational or reasonable backing behind it is not a belief you should have, and that christianity in particular is a religion which requires a very great amount of beliefs of this kind.
@juffjaff Don't let those pesky things like reality and facts get in the way of your half-baked ad hominem! I have to giggle when I read someone act with your level of ignorant indifference to what BO does and how he does it. He's not an intellectual heavyweight champion, but he is FAR from being a slouch or an idiot, that much is clear to those of us without biases and prejudices. Put aside your anger, whims, and indoctrination; this will give you the benefit of not being contradictory. =)
I think what I appreciate the most about these gentlemen is the fact that they are having a discussion without interupting each other. They let each other say their piece, and then the next person. I wish more debates/discussions were like this.
This is what gives me hope for humanity! It is very rare in these days of jersy shore/Fox News/Overall Media Stupidity to see people having respectful rational talks without raising their voices.
What I really love about watching this is the mutual respect. Too many times when each of these four men are being interviewed by or debing with religious zealots who raise their voices in order to simulate conviction, they are interrupted and shouted at, and have to raise their voices in turn to make their arguments. There is none of that here. Not only are they letting eachother speak, but they are actually listening to each other.
At 5:00 this guy totally contradicts his whole effort. To say that scientists are always open to accepting their own lack of expertise and will rely on others who are more informed, and then for him to be doing the exact opposite in this entire conversation just reinforced the lack of logic and honesty from this whole brood. None of these guys are open to experts in the area of Catholicism. This is why you never see them (or their sympathizers on the History Channel) defer to Catholic scholars.
@Marxisto1 Simple reason being that Catholicism is not science, that's why they're not open to it. If you want dishonesty and lack of logic, look no further than your own religion. I "was" raised Catholic, had the good sense to drop it like a turd when I was old enough to reason for myself.
@Marxisto1 Simple reason being that Catholicism is not science, that's why they're not open to it. If you want dishonesty and lack of logic, look no further than your own religion. I "was" raised Catholic, had the good sense to drop it like a turd when I was old enough to reason for myself.
Also, the attempt to insinuate that the likes of Hitler, Lenin et al typify mans selfishness (Yes, I know you're hinting that they were atheists, except for Hitler, who was RC!) could easily be counterered
@Jude2Mahoney Let me assist in that countering! Hitler's problem was not selfishness at all, his personal history illustrates this plainly: he spent most of his adult life as a jobless bum. Economic success was not a driving ambition of his at all; he sought power for its own sake, not his own. Selfishness presupposes values that Adolf lacked.
Hitler was quite the opposite of a person with self-esteem. He was a collectivist, an altruist, a mystic, and a thug - a product of Kant and the left.
@1rstbreath You sound like a filthy Objectivist. Do you seriously believe that the Holocaust was a product of Kantian ethics? How deluded you must be!
These guys are completely ignorant when it comes to both the history and the definition of religious terms. To think that anybody mistakes this for noble intellectual debate is simply a joke. Let them try to debate or "discuss" these subjects with some brilliant priests. They would be left spinning like tops. This is why they never do so. Given what is truly happening between them it is most appropriate that they are sitting in a circle!
@Marxisto1 they have. i see you did not watch the full thing. they are not against religion. just like and i "I am not against pharmaceutical companies but i do not like some of the things they do" they are against religious injustice. stop being such a hypersensitive prick
@BladedArrowTBGamer I merely asserted that they are ignorant. Which is still the case. If you look at other speeches you will realize they are against religion. Hitchens says religious must be opposed with hatred. The reason they sometimes try to express an intellectual tolerance for religion is to fool others into accepting their own reasonableness, which doesn't really exist. It's another manipulation which will always occur in those who do not accept an intentional,ultimate truth.
@Marxisto1 well id rather have something opposed with hatred then with blood and violence which ALL religions have. Religion is a plague on the earth. Theres too much prof that denies religion.
@BladedArrowTBGamer Yeah, I'm sure that Pol Pot, Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Idi Amin and the rest would agree with you. Every social effort everywhere has the negative aspects of man's selfishness. To try to make all religion the ultimate culprit is an absurdity which Hitchens has convinced many susceptible minds to both accept and parrot.
@Marxisto1 i never said it was the ultimate culprit for religion truly cannot do anything it is the people behind the religion (Pope innocent who ordered that torture was acceptable form of interrogation during the spanish inquisition). But many christian and muslim dogma is very violent. God is always on your side so you can kill the other in his name
@BladedArrowTBGamer You don't know your terms. Name one Catholic"dogma" that is violent. Go further, name one teaching that is violent? Don't compare Catholicism with Islam, they are completely different things. Dredging up historical popolicies is both useless and intellectually dishonest. YOu have to look at the belief systems because this is what affects the indidividual believer, which is true purpose of religion.
What about the argument how a cell could not have evolved? That it would have had to start as the complete form that it is? I'm not saying "therefore Christ is King." I've just never heard a rebuttal.
RockyMountainPrepper 5 days ago
What does Hitchens mean at 2:47: "There wouldn't have been a four-headed god?" What about Brahma, the four-headed god? Or Jungian quaternity? In Buddhism, three is good (the three pillars); in China, four=death (四=sì, 死=sǐ); and the five-pointed star represents the five natural elements. Religious significance can be arbitrarily applied to almost any number. Hitchens should have stuck with the idea that religious associations are non-sequitors. Numerology is an intracultural aesthetic.
m1x0lyd1an 1 week ago
The creed is a doctrinal statement and it includes references to historical events (suffered under Pontius Pilate). It's inept to compare the Christian claim or outlook with the method of natural sciences. Look at it from the viewpoint of the science of history. When it comes to Jesus in the end it all comes up to whether you trust the eyewitnesses and the chain of tradition or not. It's not per se irrational to trust historical sources. That's where Jesus differs from the Spaghetti monster btw.
TimotheosCauvin 2 weeks ago
@TimotheosCauvin Bullshit. There are lots of eye-witnesses and a chain of tradition for the flying spaghetti monster.
TomFynn 1 week ago
@TimotheosCauvin When the bible, even the new testament, proves itself historically inaccurate time after time it is can no longer rationally be considered a historical source
jsahkljdhkashvbosild 1 day ago
@jsahkljdhkashvbosild Xephera!
ramatirthadasa 2 hours ago
I haven't listened to Dennett much (in ascending order, I've listened most to Dennett, Harris, Dawkins, then Hitchens) but I really like him so far. Just the way he'll critique religion and at the same time so casually use words like "Golly!" and whatnot.
Dethenger 2 weeks ago
The fact that Religion is so prevalent in our society shows the power of indoctrination. If you truly believed in something like ghosts, or unicorns, you would be derided by just about everyone, even religious people. Both gods, and ghosts have the same amount of evidence to support each other, but since the views of deities have been indoctrinated in our minds from a young age, it's perfectly acceptable to believe in a supernatural being.
seanpull 3 weeks ago
You can tell they have a lot of respect for each other. I mean I've never heard Christopher Hitchens, say do you mind, I disagree.
sheyhanabeysinghe 4 weeks ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
JESUS CHRIST, HIS CATHOLIC-UNIVERSAL-APOSTOLIC CHURCH, SACRAMENTS, THE BIBLE, MIRACLES, HEALINGS, ST. MARY APPARITIONS, MESSAGES FROM HEAVEN, SIGNS IN 2011 ARE NOT A MYTHOLOGY BUT THE REALITY !!!
GET READY FOR THE GREAT WARNING NOW!!!
thewarningsecondcoming . com
JezusSlave 1 month ago in playlist The Four Horsemen: Dawkins, Dennett, Harris & Hitchens
Hitchens shows well against even against these heads. (5:41 - 6:56).
ctriamimgons 1 month ago
Then they all got drunk and went to a strip bar after
kadees21 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Why are there so many dislikes ? I thought religious people only watch videos which doesn't require them to think
test123ok 2 months ago in playlist The Four Horsemen: Dawkins, Dennett, Harris & Hitchens
Comment removed
test123ok 2 months ago in playlist The Four Horsemen: Dawkins, Dennett, Harris & Hitchens
You, mister Hitchens ar are gravely mistaken! We, Slavs, indeed had a four -faced god called Swiatowid before the christians came by and spoiled our fan... That just means we are 33,(33) % more awesome than others! :D
IAmClockwork 2 months ago 2
I would love to join these guys as a 5th horseman! Hey guys! Have you got a horse for me? Of course, it would have to be a large horse, like a Clydesdale, since I weigh about 400 pounds. I would even bring a wagon load of beer!
BigFatHeretic 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Dead-to-the-spirit deluded "God Delusion" author & blithering fool scientist goon Richard Dawkins another "leader" given 2 the profane masses is another useful idiot 4 Jesuit machinations
Jesuitical; pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuit Order completely altered the education system 2 suit their Evo-Hoax Agenda to discredit the Bible
Papal Rome cant have their Counter Reformation 2nd Dark Age DESPOTISM until Bible is destroyed
SpencerBenedict2nd 3 months ago
I hate how theists think a theory means something is not true. In order for a hypothesis to become a theory it has to work everytime its tested, without fail. It only takes 1 credible experiment to disprove a theory, and many dont know that if you call something a theory its cause it works EVERY time.
516tylerdurden 3 months ago 4
The amount of awesome in that room would have been to much for me!
Skepticktok 3 months ago 12
Dennett looks like Darwin, who looks like God.
ursidius 4 months ago
@ursidius how do you know what 'god' looked like?
ATABOFACID 4 months ago
@ATABOFACID
I went for a pint with him last week.
ursidius 4 months ago
Mind you, so did Darwin!
ursidius 4 months ago
Dennett looks like god!
ursidius 4 months ago
"Francis Collins, my new friend" how many times has The Hitch said this and every time I'm jealous of Francis Collins.
BritishArrow 4 months ago
people find it offensive to insult their religion because it is based on a belief system... its like being rascist or homophobic or sexist.... thats why people find it offensive and you need to understand and respect that a little bit................
quuanttum 4 months ago
@quuanttum Theres no debate over whether racism, sexism and homophobic behaviour is bad.
Religion, all religions, help spread these barbaric views and at the same time want to hide behind the same veil that they try to tear down. Without critizism of religion there is only slavery of it. No matter how democratic a society is. I dont disagree when with you on how they are offended, but i think its because they preach on matters of fear, life and death warrents religion to be closely scrutinized.
Dgoosh1000 4 months ago
@Dgoosh1000 I agree. Any man that stands in front of a crowd and pretends to be the voice of God, to control the masses, needs to explain themselves. Structured religion is rather serious as they pretend to be the voice of God.
quuanttum 4 months ago
6:00 Dennett paranoid Hitchens is going for his booze
hlb101 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I would love nothing more than to have a few beers and a spliff or 7 and a good old deep chat with these boys.
Thanks for posting.
Cheers.
SirGrowalott 5 months ago
people, God(s) do exist- the four gentleman we see.
Killerjosh89 5 months ago
I had a spiritual experience with a cheeseburger the other day.
IntrovertedLuddite2 5 months ago
@IntrovertedLuddite2 I am sure the cheesburger had a different opinion =D
uvitek1 5 months ago
3:42 Dennett makes a good point and rewards himself with a peanut.
fitzyp 5 months ago 2
"Don't mind me; I'm on an errand from god!" Lol
XlXKrampusXlX 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Harold Camping was RIGHT about May 21, click on my channel to see...
youneekk 6 months ago
I feel a bit sorry for Dawkins. His views about religion have always been unbalanced and obsessive and it is sad that he begins to look more ridiculous as he gets older. He had an admirable scientific reputation and surely made enough money out of sales of the ridiculous The God Delusion to wannabe intellectuals without making himself a total fool in public.
fromwilliams 7 months ago
@fromwilliams here's a better question : why leave 3 long and unintelligible comments when you could have just said "hi, i'm homophobic"?
FckdUpRobot 7 months ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
@fromwilliams you said nothing at all in this particular comment..
davyjones21122 6 months ago
@fromwilliams What the fuck are you on about? You are obviously a religious nut.
Ryder31415 5 months ago
Dawkin's is a disgrace to science - he has become nothing but an ignorant demagogue and ideologue. He has abused and corrupted his Simyoni "chair" whic is supposed to be for the "public understanding of SCIENCE" and turned it into the Throne of the Self-Appointed Pope of SCIENTISM. Scientism is not science; it is just an ideology like any other - and Dawkins its High-Priest.
fromwilliams 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Morally insane Bitchens & his sorry ilk are not in agreement with decent thinking people. …evil-minds are busy subverting and perverting youth in the name of ‘gay’ rights, but Bitchens & Dawkins are strangely silent on this subject. What does ‘gay’ behavior really 'encompASS" anyway? All of the following: sodomy, lesbianism, bestiality, pedophilia, pederasty, coprophilia, fetishism, sadomasochism, rape, & murder. In short, everything unnatural,socially destructive,bent,criminal,& abhorrent.
fromwilliams 7 months ago
@fromwilliams Was that your attempt at humor?
GabeTheVirginQueen 6 months ago
I agree with a lot of what Hitchens says but oh isn't he a smug twat!
247custard 7 months ago
@247custard It's what's gotten him so far. He's so sure that he's right, and he almost always is. The fact that he's a bastard has given him his fame =P. He's incredibly brilliant as well.
AgowTisro 6 months ago
@AgowTisro Very true! I'm surprised he only got a 3rd at uni! Maybe he spent all his studying time fighting God.
247custard 6 months ago
This compilation of videos "UFO Disclosure A Global Deception Conspiracy"
ON YOUTUBE is a revelation of major lies and with held knowledge about life
beyond Earth. The footage contains statements from astronauts, American
presidents, military personnel, politicians plus credible news footage regarding
awareness of life beyond Earth along with it's current and ongoing presence which
is being hidden from the public + more.
Futurecop2012C 7 months ago
lol, Richard Dawkins cracks me up. He looks like a giddy school child throughout all of this. The intellectual persiflage is overwhelmingly fun for him.
itstonymacaroni 7 months ago 42
@itstonymacaroni I've noted how they all act, too. You're completely right about Dawkins; he's having a ball. Hitchens looks half-interested, half-bored, all between sips of whiskey. Harris looks like he knows he's the youngest man in the room, and is trying to earn his place at the table. Dennett looks like it wasn't his idea to be there, but is trying to contribute.
Ashiman12 4 weeks ago in playlist More videos from PiroNiro
OMG, i love this! It's so natural, this, let's sit around and complain about shit sort of talk. Young Harris, eager. Dawkins, wry. Dennet, mild. And Hitchens just chillin' with his drink and a cig.
It's all so brilliant.
proprodigySD 7 months ago 2
@bridemusiccanada I think one more thing you should appreciate is that you will not see atheists hurting theists based on belief. Simply put, there is no belief system in atheism. We're not going to hurt anyone because we disagree with you. But it's very common place for people of faith to hurt, sue, etc. others on the basis of faith. You can't prove a negative, you can't disprove a negative, you don't try. But at least these people are being productive in educating people to be moral.
anonynaw 7 months ago
if a person says that god is all powerfull and that they could not possibly comprehend it, then why are simple human emotions of grandeur that we all feel used as proof of a higher power?
heathdcrawford 8 months ago
Sam Harris = Ben Stiller
Protoman85 8 months ago 3
@Protoman85 hahahahahaaha
savant2k 6 months ago
four horsemen: Death, Famine, War, Conquest. Not too appealing to me.
bridemusiccanada 8 months ago
Professor Dennett, did you get my list of toys this year
LondonPride25 9 months ago 42
@LondonPride25 lol
writersblock26 5 months ago
@LondonPride25 lool i was thinking the same when i was watching the first vid, "he looks like farther christmas"
greekpanther1 4 months ago
When people talk about "spiritual experiences" or "spiritualism", they're often incredibly vague. What is a "spirit" and has there been any empirical evidence of such a phenomenon to justify the use of the word? What they're describing is a highly emotional experience, it has nothing to do with "spirits".
juujuuuujj 9 months ago
@juujuuuujj
To be spiritual or emotional are one and the same. The latter just has negative connotations.
smoothbanana 8 months ago
@smoothbanana A profound emotion has nothing to do with spirits, so the word "spiritual" has no place here, because it creates the confusion that strong emotions have something to do with the supernatural. Being moved to tears by a beautiful sunrise is an emotional experience, not a spiritual one.
juujuuuujj 8 months ago
@juujuuuujj Or even by a double rainbow :)
juujuuuujj 8 months ago
@juujuuuujj
I wasn't disagreeing with you :)
smoothbanana 8 months ago
@smoothbanana Yeah, sorry if it sounded too combative :)
juujuuuujj 8 months ago
gacktxrawr - Bravo! I wish there were more like you! Your honest and open to interpretation.
nosdohrnosdohr 9 months ago
Hitchens hand wave at 1:05
shortfuse41 9 months ago
I'm the first person to applaud intellectualism of all kinds... but this meeting is not intellectual. They sit there and whine and complain about religion and all the things they can't do and all the horrible religious people who say mean things about them... I fail to see the point.
2ndbase21325 9 months ago
@2ndbase21325
i think you've taken it the wrong way i think it's more in the sense of awareness raising..not to mention it's not whining nor is it complaining they're raising interesting topics that are prevalent in all societies.
also it is not uncommon for people with common mind sets to want to listen to others of these mindset...take church for example ;)
sebbb888 9 months ago
@2ndbase21325 You did not listen very well, then. They're discussing the rationale behind theistic argumentation according to their experiences debating religous individuals, far as I can tell.
Jornev 6 months ago
As a Buddhist, I found this a really interesting and refreshing set of ideas. And it's clear these men are speaking with honesty and sincerity. Anyone who does believe in religion ought to watch the whole thing.
leconfidant 9 months ago
I completely agree with Harris in the beginning of this clip. I'm an Atheist but I truly believe there are things in this universe that are magic...no joke...REAL magic. First of all, what is magic? It is a phenomena that cannot be explained by science. Just study a black hole or just try to imagine a never ending universe. If we traveled trillions of light years then everything that modern science tells us is true could very easily be absolute shit. By our CURRENT standards, there's magic :)
andyrooney12 9 months ago
@andyrooney12
That's incredibly stupid. So were rainbows and earthquakes "REAL magic" 2,000 years ago when we didn't understand what they really were? The universe exists independent of human beings, our understanding of something doesn't change it's vital qualities.
whiterat83 9 months ago
@whiterat83
You're the idiot. You clearly didn't understand what I was saying. There was an episode of Star Trek in which the captain of the ship lands on a planet with a primitive culture. The people on that planet thought that the captain was a God because of the TECHNOLOGY that they had. I was just saying that our technology is so primitive that it cannot explain a great deal of phenomena because it is either primitive or we don't even know what's out there. You fool, educate yourself.
andyrooney12 9 months ago
@andyrooney12
So you've abandoned your point that things we don't fully understand are magical. Good.
whiterat83 9 months ago
@whiterat83
There are things out there that are magic to us because we cannot explain them but those things are explainable by scientific means. Since our science has not evolved far enough to explain those things then to us they would seem to be magic but one day, when science has the answer to some of those questions, those things will not be magic anymore because science will have the answer. That's as simple as I can put it so if you're still too stupid to get it then that's your problem.
andyrooney12 9 months ago
@whiterat83
You're missing the point. Magic is an attitude, not a thing. There's a reason for the phrase "magical thinking."
People basically thought biology was magic at one point. Same with chemistry and meteorology.
dhx84 9 months ago
Sam Harris is the only one of these men who are genuinely dangerous. His Faustian intelligence dwarfs the other 3 old farts and presents a truly counter-traditional order of mind.
abdallahmarsh 9 months ago
@abdallahmarsh
You can't be serious...
Hitchens and Dawkins have the upper hand. Dennett and Harris? Not so much.
odinisawesome 9 months ago
@odinisawesome Hitchens, Dawkins and Dennett are all pop-intellectuals. Great soundbites and wonderfully intelligent ways of being unintelligent, but Harris actually understands genuine philosophy and its foundational nature to the important questions in life. He understands and it tries to subvert it. He seems to recognize the wisdom of understanding the difference between absolute and relative yet actively seeks to subvert it.
abdallahmarsh 9 months ago
@abdallahmarsh Are you saying that Harris seeks to pervert, corrupt, and/or overthrow genuine philosophy and the difference between absolute and relative?
It just seems odd that you would say that.
All of these men have a level head on their shoulders, it just seems that Hitchens and Dawkins are better educated, and have been in the business for a far longer amount of time than Harris.
Harris has the youth advantage, and has the potential to be the future of the anti-theist arguments.
odinisawesome 9 months ago
@odinisawesome It appears that Harris tries to address mysticism more than the others and in addressing it attempts to redefine it along anti-initiatory lines. I would admit, though, that all of them reduce consciousness to the psychological and by implication, the biological. A call for the "end of faith" is truly an infra-human enterprise.
abdallahmarsh 9 months ago
@abdallahmarsh
If by "infra-human" you mean that it is beneath us, I fail to see your point. I have little patience for when people chatter on about how materialism is some how insultingly reductionistic. It's taken almost for granted that we should lie about what humans really are and that dismissing that position on the basis that there is no evidence for it is nihilistic.
It's a bit of a con-game. I'm not convinced "nihilism" isn't anything but a glorified insult.
dhx84 9 months ago
@odinisawesome
I think he's praising Harris for being the young rebel who may or may not actually accept the attitude of supernaturalism.
Which is to say that abdallahmarsh is some sort of pseudointellectual pop-postmodernist type.
dhx84 9 months ago
This is some of the things carbon along with other atoms do when given a long time to thrive
2CSST2 9 months ago
knowledge....overload...these...peeps...are ....too...fucking...smart...i'm....jelly
Exlemic 10 months ago
Comment removed
samslick90 10 months ago
gangsta
warLock21X 10 months ago
@warLock21X They are, indeed, gangstas.
zaSpeaker 9 months ago
@drunkagnostic
In this very same video, the humility of scientists is laid out plainly and concisely. Scientists are the first to admit they don't know something, the first to admit when they are wrong, and usually the first to DISCOVER that they are wrong because they question their own answers much more thoroughly than anyone else. You cannot be a scientist without such humility, because the scientific method is built upon it.
taicleis 11 months ago
@johnbaptist15
All of them say 90% their own words. They also quote, because after all this conversation is about the community.
The long-obsolete scriptures you suggested are in no way useful for intelligent analysis. They were written by people who knew less about the world than we know today. They would never have written these things knowing what we now know.
taicleis 11 months ago
harris == Fransis colin said
hitchens ==Canon fanton said that this is like John15 said that and Mathew23 said that,i nearly saw all hitchen,harris and dawckins videos but in reality they dont gv u any answer,i m now watching this conversation 3rd time and found nothing,make notes of their points and at the end u ll find utter disappointment,instead read Sermon of the mount,Psalms,Gita,Quran i find peace in those books,cant explain yet but may b somday i ll b able to explain those feelings
johnbaptist15 11 months ago
I love the way Hitchen's uses the word 'terrific'.
BlckSbthMan 11 months ago
I think that some are afraid of not believing because they have been told ther hole lives that if they don't belive they will go to hell (or something). I known they think about it because they will say any thing to back up ther god even if it is something they made up or is totaly wrong. I know what the readers will say "no WE don't '' well you cant say that because you don't know what they have sad talking to me.
koqaz 11 months ago
That one guy has a mean beard
luckycharms8282 11 months ago
They're all awesome and have amazing (and unique strengths). Hithcens is bold as heck; Sam is Smooth (neuroscience, cognition); Dennet is rationalizing; Dawkins is extremely calculative and mathematical-like (albeit a evo. biologist) in his reasoning. They're all brilliant. Jolly good!
johntkooz 11 months ago
Hitchens with his Johnnie Walker Black and Perrier :)
R3APER24 11 months ago
Harris stresses the humbleness of scientists--they'll be the 1st to say they don't know, etc.
But he's sitting next to a biologist who claims that evolution demonstrates that any sort of god is as unlikely as garden-fairies, and who enthusiastically endorses Stephen Hawking's claims that science has answered all the 'why' questions of existence.
What, Mr. Harris, are today's scientists the least bit humble or open-minded about?
drunkagnostic 1 year ago
Sam Harris may be the Judas of this group.
KokotTheMonkey 1 year ago
The average IQ in this room is around 400 (because of the cameraman)
Clorwall 1 year ago
@Clorwall A very lucky cameraman to be able to be in the same room with these four great intellectuals.
Hyourinmaru8 1 year ago
one word: CONSILIENCE!
xNickTheBrickx 1 year ago
i wish i was smart enough to be allowed to cross my legs when i sit
kelldog44 1 year ago 81
@kelldog44 lol
AnonymousComrade 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@kelldog44 XD
AnonymousComrade 1 year ago
@kelldog44 I think you mean secure enough in your sexuality. Don't worry. Sitting crosslegged doesn't make you gay. Sucking dick does.
mrletternumber 10 months ago
@mrletternumber no... pretty sure I meant what I said...
kelldog44 10 months ago
@mrletternumber That's actually such an unnecessary comment.
LittleBabyWheeler 10 months ago
@kelldog44 Is there an entrance exam for the 'Sitting with crossed Legs' society?:-P
comanchio1976 10 months ago
@kelldog44 i am
ivorbigonee 9 months ago
@ivorbigonee me too :)
Sebulon82 8 months ago
I went to public school in England (i.e. private, like a prep school in the US, not like a prep school in the UK of course, which is like an elementary school in the US, only private...clear? Okay, jolly good) anyway, where was I? Oh yes, public school in England...right...I went to public school in England and am therefore extremely clever and important, and can say with some authority, sitting with one's legs crossed does in fact require one to have read Proust...in the original...twice...
AndreGDJ 9 months ago
@AndreGDJ I went to a comprehesive school but I am interested in Proust, I haven't read it but I am waiting for the film version.
mrpamayer 8 months ago
@mrpamayer Hahaha ;)
AndreGDJ 8 months ago
@kelldog44 This made my day dude.
AgowTisro 6 months ago
If you look carefully at certain frames, there is the subtle presence of an Epic Beard.
WillFoShizzle 1 year ago 2
@WillFoShizzle Hahahahaha.. Somewhere in there.
da0217 1 year ago
I suspect that just being in this room would cause ones IQ to increase 10 points
erdnallewen 1 year ago 16
Sam Harris referred to the unfortunate de facto virtue of faith when he talked about how "belief without evidence is especially noble." This is exactly the teaching of Jesus. Just look at John 20:29. That's right, Jesus wants us to believe things without evidence, and he thinks this blind faith is better than actually having evidence itself. I think this is absurd. Sure, we can have good reason to believe something if it is logically necessary, but adding evidence to that can never be bad...
Ledwix 1 year ago
If someone is looking to religion to answer the "why are we here ?" question.....they will be mislead.
00Billy 1 year ago 5
Each of the Four Horsemen contributes something truly remarkable to the group. Oh, how I wish I could be in the room. The intelligence displayed is just outstanding. I say that as a devout Christian.
Scabbersbreath 1 year ago 8
i am a christian. and i ask myself what if i am wrong. that is why i read books on all faiths and lack thereof. it is the reason i read both of christian authors and atheist. i am a truth seeker. these men are very intelligent. and i am enjoying this series.
gacktxrawr 1 year ago 100
@gacktxrawr Ask yourself this too, what ever reason do you have choosing your perticular flavor of christianity, as opposed to muslim or hindu or jew or frigging Thor the God of Thunder.
Tenebrousable 1 year ago
@Tenebrousable actually i do. every day.
gacktxrawr 1 year ago
@gacktxrawr as an athiest i like the jesus idea that he was kind so on he preached against what today we would call consumerism and so on i see him as a good moral philosopher that sacrificed his life by seeking ways to make society better i fink to me that is better than to say he was the son of god and so because it shpows how one human being done and said great fings.. buti reject christian institutions and a lot of the bible koz its constantines christianity as opposed to jesus's
timetochilli 1 year ago
@gacktxrawr
You're not reading enough obviously
Gezab 11 months ago
@gacktxrawr Although I strongly disagree with your beliefs and think you are wrong, if all Christians acted this way, I doubt I'd feel the need to protest it all.
hog129 11 months ago
@gacktxrawr I'm not a christian, but your open-mindedness is a breath of fresh air.
Nerdsugi 10 months ago
@gacktxrawr I was once christian and was basically doing the same thing you are... Truth seeking... It is enlightening as you begin to discover the reality of things. I am now an atheist and have never felt so free to enjoy this life and do good things to others. It's a great feeling. Thanks for being open minded and well... keep seeking the truth ! :)
NarLiv 10 months ago
Good. All religious and non-religious people should watch these series and continue in the debate. It will most likely continue forever, or close to it, and I welcome it!
cornsnoggle 10 months ago 4
@gacktxrawr That seems like me, Only that I loose my christian dogma. I still have my beliefs in Jesus message. Anyway, Many people probably wouldn't call me a real christian since I don't believe Jesus is entirely what christianity has made him to be, and since I don't belive in the dogmatic term of "god". I recomend you to see the documentary "Hidden Story of Jesus Christ". It's here on youtube, and it's very good.
warmsteel 10 months ago
@gacktxrawr
If you're looking for truth, based on what can you possibly identify yourself as a Christian..?
Amsah 10 months ago
@gacktxrawr if you ask yourself if you are wrong then it is only because you lack faith. These guys discredit faith all together because they count only on their intellect and "facts" and figures. But at the end of the day facts and figures alone won't confirm right or wrong. Also these guys expect me to ask if maybe i am wrong, but these guys don't question themselves. They think they are right, Well I feel and think I am right in believing in God, even if I dont believe in some interpretations
bridemusiccanada 8 months ago
@bridemusiccanada
This is the kind of thing that I don't get. If you listened to their conversation, you know that they question themselves all the time. Why are you using the term 'intellect' like it's some sort of flaw? Why do you have 'facts' in quotations, as if facts are something they made up arbitrarily? These people have derived their beliefs from their observations of the world around them, and when you get down to it, that's what science is all about. What's wrong with that?
SirKickz 8 months ago
@SirKickz Whats wrong with it is that if they really don't know then they are agnostic. These guys "KNOW" there is no God, if they had any doubt in their mind they would be more careful about their blasphamous words. It is no different than religious people that know there is a God. Also what is wrong with it is not that they have unbelief and question it..thats perfectly fine and up to them.. but that they are asserting the atheist agenda worldwide with such disrespect to God.
bridemusiccanada 8 months ago
@bridemusiccanada
Well, look. What you have to understand is that these are men who's philosophy is dominated by logic. Logic dictates that one does not invest in a belief unless there is evidence to support it, and these men, as well as myself, have yet to observe any evidence of the existence of any God. So, no, you can say that they don't KNOW that God doesn't exist in the fashion that there is no proof that he doesn't exist (It is logically impossible to prove the negative).
(cont)
SirKickz 8 months ago
@bridemusiccanada
But they refuse to believe in God until proof of his existence has been provided. And, to address your final point, they assert the atheist agenda for two reasons: Firstly, all they do in their books is explain what they believe, and why they believe it. It is the folk of religion who said "we are offended by that, you shouldn't do that," and they said, "fuck off!" Secondly, they will not stay quiet when people use religion to hurt, or get away with hurting, others.
SirKickz 8 months ago
@bridemusiccanada Your proposal is the same as me creating a god, named the Invisible Flying Spaghetti Monster. You can't see him, but he exists. Disprove me. You can't. Do you believe there MIGHT be? YOU SHOULDN'T! But why not? Because there is absolutely no evidence for it. If you believe the bible might be evidence for god, you need to take in the account of every single other religious text out there. Even if you did happen to pick the right god, is he even a good god?
anonynaw 7 months ago
@bridemusiccanada I found this discussion to be very enlightening on how these extremely intelligent people think. They do NOT think alike. I do NOT think that your view is correct in that any of these men are 100% sure that god does not exist. 99.99% would probably be the answer to that. You know something is untrue if you can test it, and it is false. You can certainly postulate that something is untrue, if there is absolutely no evidence for it. Bible exists therefore god exists = not valid.
anonynaw 7 months ago
@bridemusiccanada Maybe they use their intellects and evidence because they work, and faith hasn't ever been shown to provide a single instance of truth. You can tell us when was the first time that faith has ever led man to the truth? Even if there was a God, then faith would be right by coincidence, not by causal connection, since faith is literally the complete disregard and disrespect for rational thinking and evidence.
cirogalli 8 months ago
@gacktxrawr
same here bro.
AceofDlamonds 8 months ago
@gacktxrawr how are you a Christian and a truth seeker. a real truth seeker wouldn't believe unless there was true proof
AlvahWatson1 8 months ago
@gacktxrawr Thank you for saying this. I was exactly where you were two years ago, and trust me, there is plenty of mentally stimulating information and debate and discussion out there. For a person of faith to acknowledge that such information exists, and to willingly search it out is the most important thing. To go on that journey, openly analyze the information, and come up with a logical and well researched/justified reason to remain faithful is the best kind of religious person.
spehizle 8 months ago 2
@gacktxrawr
I hope you are a not a christian for long; if my opinion means anything, I will tell you that any belief you hold without a rational or reasonable backing behind it is not a belief you should have, and that christianity in particular is a religion which requires a very great amount of beliefs of this kind.
magucheapololkop 7 months ago
the real 4 horsemen
White Horse - Red Horse - Black Horse - Pale Horse
h2omanz 1 year ago
@h2omanz One fish, two fish, red fish, blue fish.
cowlark2000 1 year ago
@cowlark2000
lol.... i see you've read the book
h2omanz 1 year ago
Hitchens is such a dominating speaker.
voodoocigam 1 year ago
@voodoocigam
His words are piercing. He is a brilliant speaker.
kisskisskiss121212 1 year ago
Thank's for posting this PiroNiro, this is gold!. Thank you.
GIMMEDANGERX1 1 year ago
I would love to see Bill O'reilly try to debate with these guys! No wait, Bill O'reilly is incapable of debating so it would be pointless anyway.
juffjaff 1 year ago
@juffjaff Don't let those pesky things like reality and facts get in the way of your half-baked ad hominem! I have to giggle when I read someone act with your level of ignorant indifference to what BO does and how he does it. He's not an intellectual heavyweight champion, but he is FAR from being a slouch or an idiot, that much is clear to those of us without biases and prejudices. Put aside your anger, whims, and indoctrination; this will give you the benefit of not being contradictory. =)
1rstbreath 1 year ago
@juffjaff It wouldn't be pointless; it would at least be funny.
aptanalogy 1 year ago
I think what I appreciate the most about these gentlemen is the fact that they are having a discussion without interupting each other. They let each other say their piece, and then the next person. I wish more debates/discussions were like this.
vestrisator 1 year ago 4
SOOOOOOO awesome that this happened on my birthday :D
uraikol21 1 year ago
It's funny that dawkins was avoiding the sun the entire time. Yes sir, they're brilliant.
artyman1200 1 year ago
This is what gives me hope for humanity! It is very rare in these days of jersy shore/Fox News/Overall Media Stupidity to see people having respectful rational talks without raising their voices.
I feel full of spirit ..talk about spirituality.
pinkyush 1 year ago
What I really love about watching this is the mutual respect. Too many times when each of these four men are being interviewed by or debing with religious zealots who raise their voices in order to simulate conviction, they are interrupted and shouted at, and have to raise their voices in turn to make their arguments. There is none of that here. Not only are they letting eachother speak, but they are actually listening to each other.
benben42 1 year ago 3
religion is for those who fear hell, spirituality is for those who have been there. Clever dennet
Darkvaynes 1 year ago 2
if there was a council that ruled the world . .. here they are !
quantum8kid 1 year ago
At 5:00 this guy totally contradicts his whole effort. To say that scientists are always open to accepting their own lack of expertise and will rely on others who are more informed, and then for him to be doing the exact opposite in this entire conversation just reinforced the lack of logic and honesty from this whole brood. None of these guys are open to experts in the area of Catholicism. This is why you never see them (or their sympathizers on the History Channel) defer to Catholic scholars.
Marxisto1 1 year ago
@Marxisto1 Simple reason being that Catholicism is not science, that's why they're not open to it. If you want dishonesty and lack of logic, look no further than your own religion. I "was" raised Catholic, had the good sense to drop it like a turd when I was old enough to reason for myself.
Jude2Mahoney 1 year ago
@Marxisto1 Simple reason being that Catholicism is not science, that's why they're not open to it. If you want dishonesty and lack of logic, look no further than your own religion. I "was" raised Catholic, had the good sense to drop it like a turd when I was old enough to reason for myself.
Also, the attempt to insinuate that the likes of Hitler, Lenin et al typify mans selfishness (Yes, I know you're hinting that they were atheists, except for Hitler, who was RC!) could easily be counterered
Jude2Mahoney 1 year ago
@Jude2Mahoney Let me assist in that countering! Hitler's problem was not selfishness at all, his personal history illustrates this plainly: he spent most of his adult life as a jobless bum. Economic success was not a driving ambition of his at all; he sought power for its own sake, not his own. Selfishness presupposes values that Adolf lacked.
Hitler was quite the opposite of a person with self-esteem. He was a collectivist, an altruist, a mystic, and a thug - a product of Kant and the left.
1rstbreath 1 year ago
@1rstbreath No argument from me there reference Hitler. ;)
Jude2Mahoney 1 year ago
@1rstbreath You sound like a filthy Objectivist. Do you seriously believe that the Holocaust was a product of Kantian ethics? How deluded you must be!
GuyMontag92 1 year ago
These guys are completely ignorant when it comes to both the history and the definition of religious terms. To think that anybody mistakes this for noble intellectual debate is simply a joke. Let them try to debate or "discuss" these subjects with some brilliant priests. They would be left spinning like tops. This is why they never do so. Given what is truly happening between them it is most appropriate that they are sitting in a circle!
Marxisto1 1 year ago
@Marxisto1 they have. i see you did not watch the full thing. they are not against religion. just like and i "I am not against pharmaceutical companies but i do not like some of the things they do" they are against religious injustice. stop being such a hypersensitive prick
BladedArrowTBGamer 1 year ago
@BladedArrowTBGamer I merely asserted that they are ignorant. Which is still the case. If you look at other speeches you will realize they are against religion. Hitchens says religious must be opposed with hatred. The reason they sometimes try to express an intellectual tolerance for religion is to fool others into accepting their own reasonableness, which doesn't really exist. It's another manipulation which will always occur in those who do not accept an intentional,ultimate truth.
Marxisto1 1 year ago
@Marxisto1 well id rather have something opposed with hatred then with blood and violence which ALL religions have. Religion is a plague on the earth. Theres too much prof that denies religion.
BladedArrowTBGamer 1 year ago
@BladedArrowTBGamer Yeah, I'm sure that Pol Pot, Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Idi Amin and the rest would agree with you. Every social effort everywhere has the negative aspects of man's selfishness. To try to make all religion the ultimate culprit is an absurdity which Hitchens has convinced many susceptible minds to both accept and parrot.
Marxisto1 1 year ago
@Marxisto1 i never said it was the ultimate culprit for religion truly cannot do anything it is the people behind the religion (Pope innocent who ordered that torture was acceptable form of interrogation during the spanish inquisition). But many christian and muslim dogma is very violent. God is always on your side so you can kill the other in his name
BladedArrowTBGamer 1 year ago
@BladedArrowTBGamer You don't know your terms. Name one Catholic"dogma" that is violent. Go further, name one teaching that is violent? Don't compare Catholicism with Islam, they are completely different things. Dredging up historical popolicies is both useless and intellectually dishonest. YOu have to look at the belief systems because this is what affects the indidividual believer, which is true purpose of religion.
Marxisto1 1 year ago