12:25 interviewer should've simply suggested that ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny. it's not a hypothesis to be disproved, it's simply a representation of our vestigial features and development over time.
@HandiCripple666 They wouldn't dare knight an such a vocal 'atheist'. The religious community, which is sadly growing in the UK because of immigration, would go nuts. Creationism is on the rise in the UK. Check out the Dawkins documentary 'Faith School Menace'.
@HandiCripple666 its funny and ironic how Salman Rushdie who wrote against other religion got knighted, but a person who has contributed more to science than Rushdie did to literature and freedom of speech,doesnt get the honor may be because its against the religion of the royal family/predominant religion of the nation?
"Dead-to-the-spirit deluded "God Delusion" author & blithering fool scientist goon Richard Dawkins another "leader" given to the profane masses is another useful idiot for Jesuit machinations"-C.O.
Jesuitical: pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuits completely altered the education system to suit their Evo-Hoax agenda to discredit the Bible. They cant have a Satanic society of 'Do as Thou Wilt' if people still follow the Bible.
ATLASofCREATION dot c O m ... Atheism Exposed.. See also Video on youtube *EVOLUTION DECEIT* and *COLLAPSE OF EVOLUTION*, both are documentaries made from the books of the same author as of ATLASofCREATION dot c O m, Adnan Oktar(Harun Yahya). Also Visit AQIDAH.COM, type *DARWIN* in search and read the article. Evolution is a deviant Aqeedah first started by Mutazilah(and Sufis etc) dating 1000 years before Darwin. Darwins contemporary called it *Muhammden Theory*.
Yes. I wasn't being racist by singling out Maori as pests, we're talking about history, it was 500 years later that Europeans also became pests. One thing that frustrates me about NZ is that you can't talk about the Maori past without being called racist. Maori history is very whitewashed.
@GoodW0lf Dude im maori and I feel exactly the same way, we were cannibals, I accept that but so many deny it. Also maori like to bitch a lot about how the whiteman took our land, try to claim customary rights on everything its rediculous. We should be greatful that whitemen were not cannibals like us lol
@mehico33 Lol I wasn't even going to mention the cannibalism. But in reality you guys did a lot better out of European settlement than the Australian Aborigines.
@ProjectDecade they brought some pest species. Considering that they (Maori) directly caused the extinction of several major animals including the worlds biggest eagle, you might consider the maori to be a pest too. But rats, dogs and pigs I THINK. I'm pretty sure we Europeans brought cats and possum and deer and a lot more.
it must be tiresome for him constantly talking about a simple, and obvious scientifically proven theory like the theory of evolution, youd think in 2010 it would not be such a novel concept to so many.
@tubestick00 ATLASofCREATION dot c O m ... Atheism Exposed.. See also Video on youtube *EVOLUTION DECEIT* and *COLLAPSE OF EVOLUTION*, both are documentaries made from the books of the same author as of ATLASofCREATION dot c O m, Adnan Oktar(Harun Yahya). Also Visit AQIDAH.COM, type *DARWIN* in search and read the article. Evolution is a deviant Aqeedah first started by Mutazilah(and Sufis etc) dating 1000 years before Darwin. Darwins contemporary called it *Muhammden Theory*.
@RawSwedishMeatball the concept and method by wich it happens is extremely simple, and seems quite obvious once you truly understand it... it may seem confusing to you. thats probably your inability to understand, which most people dont have to stuggle with. im sorry to hear your unable to comprehend simple concepts.
@tubestick00 ... the concept is simple, but the method? you are extremely slow in the head, the slow process of natural selection in species being effected by geology, weather,compeeting species and other forms of selection is not a simple thing, if it were, then we wouldt need for people like richard dawkins, its just thick headed that evolution is an easy thing to learn, yeah, if you leave evolution at "the natural selection of species", then its simple...
@RawSwedishMeatball it sounds complicated when you dont want to hear it, or dont fully understand it. but really its extremely simple. it just happens all by itself. its simple. end of story. if you think its complicated and confusing that is just you.
@tubestick00 i never said it was confusing, but the evolution is not simple, the concept it, not the action of it, and if you know so much about evolution, why are you naot a phd in biology and evolution? its enourmously idiotic to say that evolution is easy, that everyone can understand its concept, then why is evolution still considered a theory in some countries? idiot, you dont have a phd, you dont know about evolution, if you did, you wouldt find the origin of life simple...
@tubestick00 and by the way, i didnt need RD to explain it to me either, and what do you mean that i dont want to hear it? im a student in biology, im sure that i want to hear it, but saying evolution is simple is like saying black holes are easy to understand, the concept and the method of how black holes work is easy! its fucking ridicoulus
@tubestick00 in sweden, which has one of the best educations of the world, it takes 4 years to study to become a evolutionary biologist, and you think thats fucking easy ? that unbelieveble, do some research, get to know some simple terms in evolution like alturism, and then tell me its simple.. idiot
@RawSwedishMeatball listen you massive waste of space..i do not want to argue with you about this. i cannot be bothered. if you think the mechanism by which life evolves is an extremely complex process (which IS what you are saying, so dont say its not) thats fine.
im telling you its not. i dont care about your opinion of the world educational standards compared with sweedens. i think you'll find the process of evolution and the concept itself takes up little of this degree.
@RawSwedishMeatball its likie anything, you can continue to learn and explore the finer and more uncertain cutting edge parts of any subject. the process of evolution itself is not complicated. the feilds of genetics and biology are complicated, and the areas of evolution that cross over into these feilds are complex. your mother is also a fat whore, and your a sub human laughing stock. this proves further evolution and how simple you are
@tubestick00 ... its stupid to state that anything is easy unless you continue to learn about the subject, dont you find that yourself? thats just wrong and ignorant, the natural selection processes in nature are almost infinite and these processes take a long time to learn, its like saying math is easy when you only know about + and -, and in what field does evolution part from biology? to understand biology is to understand evolution, which you clearly dont
@tubestick00 the infinite variables of natural selection through different selection processes aint hard enough for you? then, why dont you give lectures at a major university?
@RawSwedishMeatball the infinate variables involved in natural selection only make predicting what will happen in the future impossible to determine. the past is where the research lies, and all one has to do is observe what happened. if your going to speculate as to what specific environmental factors caused specifc selections in history, it is also difficult and always debatable. this does not strengthen your point that the process of evolution is difficult to understand.
@tubestick00 we can easy determine in labs whats will happen to an organism if we go trough experimental procedures, and it has been done. we can determine what CAN happen in the future, and your statement "specific environmental factors caused specifc selections in history, it is also difficult", thats whats difficult with evolution, and thats what ive been talking about, you even state it urself, to say that u understand the process of evolution when you only think its (next comment box)
@RawSwedishMeatball "the natural selection of species" is an easy way of describing evolution, yet it does not show the entire picture of it, and this is what ive been saying, if you dont agree i know that you are trying to dismiss it somehow, but evolution is not simple, the concept is!
@RawSwedishMeatball trying to determine what cause the different selection processes are difficult to predict, yet you think evolution is easy? thats retarded, evolution is dependent on the different selection processes to work, you say that these a difficult to predict and determine, yet you say, the very basis of evolution is simple? does not make any sense what so ever!
@RawSwedishMeatball it is scientically proven theory, that creatures evolve. its the concept i was talking about in the first place, when you started this ridiculous debate with me. read my original comment, which it appears alot of people agree with and stop trying to slowly change your position and make me forget what we are talking about originally. that wont happe. anything can be infinatley complex when studied closely. the cocept of evolution is simple. end.end. end. goodbye meatball
@tubestick00 hah, you have yet prove though that your point of view of evolution is simple, you merely try to point it towards the uneducated version of evolution which is "the natural selection of species", that sound simple, yes, but to truly understand how species evolve to survive certain habitats is not simple, you just dont want to back down and agree that you were wrong, you have not put forth any evidence, while i have, and you still argue for something that i have agreed on (nextbox)
@RawSwedishMeatball which is the concept of evolution is simple, but the method which it manifests itself in is not, you have clearly not understood anything i have written since you go back to the concept of evolution, which i already agreed on with you...
@RawSwedishMeatball see, now meatball you must stop trying to manipulate the history of this debate. its all here for anyone who want to read it, not that i'd expect anyone to care. my comment was expressing mild frustration at how the theory of evolution is a novel concept to so many, even today in 2011. you then come out of nowhere with this bizarre need to proove that evolution is infact extremely complex demanding i am wrong. it, like anything is complex upon close exam.
@tubestick00 no, i only commented that evolution is not simple, and should not be looked at as if it is, since it it hoow life evolve and have evolved, i have not tried to manipulate the subject anyway, my first comment i said clearly, that the concept of evolution is simple, but the method of it is not, but you continued to argue towards is simplicity, so i stayed and tried to reason with you, i never tried to manipulate the subject, thats its not only "the evolution of species"
How could some of the scientists permit themselves to make a claim that would necessitate knowledge as extensive as the scheme of the universe, when their knowledge of the total scheme of being is *close* to zero, when confronted with a whole mass of unknowns concerning this very earth and tangible, lifeless matter, let alone the whole universe?
@tubestick00 Many new questions in regard to almost every principle mentioned by Darwin have arisen. For example, it is asked whether the appearance of a new organ or for that matter any other organic change, always results from the use of that organ and the attempt to adapt it to one's environment or it may be due to mutation or any other cause?
The acquired qualities are hereditable as a principle or genetic investigations have rejected this theory?
@tubestick00 The organic changes, whatever may be their cause, are always aimed at survival and evolution or sometimes they may be due to the inconsistency with the environmental conditions and may culminate in death and extinction?
Natural selection is or is not like artificial selection which leads the existing generation to evolution?
What is called science by the *science-worshippers* of the present age and regarded by them as equivalent to the sum total of *reality*, is simply a collection of laws applicable to a single dimension of the world. The result of all human effort and experimentation is a body of knowledge concerning a minute bright dot comparable to the dim light of a candle-surrounded by a dark night enveloping a huge desert of indefinite extent.
All praise is due to ALLAH, the Lord of the Universe
@1tabligh while your candle analogy is quite right... everything else you've said strange. what do you mean by "artificial selection leads the existing generation to evolution?"
@tubestick00 We find that the wild animals and plants are alike and of average type, whereas the artificial selection gives the animals and plants more variety and leads them to better evolution. There are many other questions of this sort. Anyhow, in spite of all the objections raised to discredit it, the theory of evolution has been accepted by the scientists as an objective principle of natural sciences. At the same time it is also certain that prominent and unbiased naturalists
@tubestick00 do not consider this theory to be final and incontrovertible. The way to further scientific investigation is not closed. All that they say is that the scientific inquiry has not so far discovered any new principles which may take the place of the principle of evolution.
Now it may be said that if an unbiased investigator carefully examines the results of the observations in regard to the genesis of the living organisms, he will come to the FOUR conclusions.
@freiheitsalv A lot of Christopher Hitchens' stuff is repeated in slightly different ways. Watch 2-3 of his debates and you'll start to notice that he re-uses his material. This is true of all debaters I'm sure, though Hitch has the rare ability to make it fresh and interesting every time. All of this to say that it's in most of his debates and probably all of them which mention free will, though probably phrased slightly differently.
What a great story at 2:00
8bobthebuilder 2 weeks ago
The ultimate oxymoron, Bright and stupid in one person
Rogerlowrey2222 2 months ago
aaaauuuugh!!!! i can't believe he was in my town and i missed him
CareFreeWherever 3 months ago
@CareFreeWherever oh... how can you keep on living?
sinachiniforoosh 1 month ago
@dpthomas37 He taught me at Masters level. A really good professor.
deanosumo 3 months ago
@ 9:46 "Zippidee dooo daaaah"
Noxshus 4 months ago
12:25 interviewer should've simply suggested that ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny. it's not a hypothesis to be disproved, it's simply a representation of our vestigial features and development over time.
truthslap 4 months ago
Sir Dawkins? Has he FINALLY been knighted? If so, it's about time. If not, dammit lady, get on it! He's earned it!
HandiCripple666 4 months ago 2
@HandiCripple666 They wouldn't dare knight an such a vocal 'atheist'. The religious community, which is sadly growing in the UK because of immigration, would go nuts. Creationism is on the rise in the UK. Check out the Dawkins documentary 'Faith School Menace'.
TheFestivelights 4 months ago
@HandiCripple666 its funny and ironic how Salman Rushdie who wrote against other religion got knighted, but a person who has contributed more to science than Rushdie did to literature and freedom of speech,doesnt get the honor may be because its against the religion of the royal family/predominant religion of the nation?
sushanalone 4 months ago
Our planet is graced by people like Sir Dawkins
sonykroket 5 months ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
"Dead-to-the-spirit deluded "God Delusion" author & blithering fool scientist goon Richard Dawkins another "leader" given to the profane masses is another useful idiot for Jesuit machinations"-C.O.
Jesuitical: pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuits completely altered the education system to suit their Evo-Hoax agenda to discredit the Bible. They cant have a Satanic society of 'Do as Thou Wilt' if people still follow the Bible.
SpencerBenedict2nd 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ATLASofCREATION dot c O m ... Atheism Exposed.. See also Video on youtube *EVOLUTION DECEIT* and *COLLAPSE OF EVOLUTION*, both are documentaries made from the books of the same author as of ATLASofCREATION dot c O m, Adnan Oktar(Harun Yahya). Also Visit AQIDAH.COM, type *DARWIN* in search and read the article. Evolution is a deviant Aqeedah first started by Mutazilah(and Sufis etc) dating 1000 years before Darwin. Darwins contemporary called it *Muhammden Theory*.
AbuRaad7373 5 months ago
@ProjectDecade
"But aren't ALL humans pests by that logic?"
Yes. I wasn't being racist by singling out Maori as pests, we're talking about history, it was 500 years later that Europeans also became pests. One thing that frustrates me about NZ is that you can't talk about the Maori past without being called racist. Maori history is very whitewashed.
GoodW0lf 6 months ago
@GoodW0lf Dude im maori and I feel exactly the same way, we were cannibals, I accept that but so many deny it. Also maori like to bitch a lot about how the whiteman took our land, try to claim customary rights on everything its rediculous. We should be greatful that whitemen were not cannibals like us lol
mehico33 6 months ago
@mehico33 Lol I wasn't even going to mention the cannibalism. But in reality you guys did a lot better out of European settlement than the Australian Aborigines.
GoodW0lf 6 months ago
@GoodW0lf Thats also true, although its mainly because we held our own in battle (...or that we were easy to fool into signing things lol)
mehico33 6 months ago
@mehico33 If there were more Maori like yourself, we could all move on and achieve a lot of good things and not have to ignore the past.
GoodW0lf 6 months ago
@ProjectDecade they brought some pest species. Considering that they (Maori) directly caused the extinction of several major animals including the worlds biggest eagle, you might consider the maori to be a pest too. But rats, dogs and pigs I THINK. I'm pretty sure we Europeans brought cats and possum and deer and a lot more.
GoodW0lf 6 months ago
@ProjectDecade LOL SAME and I love richard dawkins videos!
0800dickheads 8 months ago
@ProjectDecade The Maori brought the first mammals here.
GoodW0lf 8 months ago
@GoodW0lf The Maori were the first mammals there. Well, except for three species of native bats.
acr08807 6 months ago
Keep up the good work, Richard
bigbadbananaboy 1 year ago
COOLLLLL
rafaelwaa 1 year ago
it must be tiresome for him constantly talking about a simple, and obvious scientifically proven theory like the theory of evolution, youd think in 2010 it would not be such a novel concept to so many.
tubestick00 1 year ago 63
This has been flagged as spam show
@tubestick00 ATLASofCREATION dot c O m ... Atheism Exposed.. See also Video on youtube *EVOLUTION DECEIT* and *COLLAPSE OF EVOLUTION*, both are documentaries made from the books of the same author as of ATLASofCREATION dot c O m, Adnan Oktar(Harun Yahya). Also Visit AQIDAH.COM, type *DARWIN* in search and read the article. Evolution is a deviant Aqeedah first started by Mutazilah(and Sufis etc) dating 1000 years before Darwin. Darwins contemporary called it *Muhammden Theory*.
AbuRaad7373 5 months ago
@tubestick00 you find the fact of evolution simple? hmm...
RawSwedishMeatball 2 months ago
@RawSwedishMeatball the concept and method by wich it happens is extremely simple, and seems quite obvious once you truly understand it... it may seem confusing to you. thats probably your inability to understand, which most people dont have to stuggle with. im sorry to hear your unable to comprehend simple concepts.
tubestick00 2 months ago
@tubestick00 ... the concept is simple, but the method? you are extremely slow in the head, the slow process of natural selection in species being effected by geology, weather,compeeting species and other forms of selection is not a simple thing, if it were, then we wouldt need for people like richard dawkins, its just thick headed that evolution is an easy thing to learn, yeah, if you leave evolution at "the natural selection of species", then its simple...
RawSwedishMeatball 2 months ago
@RawSwedishMeatball it sounds complicated when you dont want to hear it, or dont fully understand it. but really its extremely simple. it just happens all by itself. its simple. end of story. if you think its complicated and confusing that is just you.
tubestick00 2 months ago
@tubestick00 i never said it was confusing, but the evolution is not simple, the concept it, not the action of it, and if you know so much about evolution, why are you naot a phd in biology and evolution? its enourmously idiotic to say that evolution is easy, that everyone can understand its concept, then why is evolution still considered a theory in some countries? idiot, you dont have a phd, you dont know about evolution, if you did, you wouldt find the origin of life simple...
RawSwedishMeatball 2 months ago
@RawSwedishMeatball i never needed richard dawkins to explain it either.. he's here to help people like you.
tubestick00 2 months ago
@tubestick00 and by the way, i didnt need RD to explain it to me either, and what do you mean that i dont want to hear it? im a student in biology, im sure that i want to hear it, but saying evolution is simple is like saying black holes are easy to understand, the concept and the method of how black holes work is easy! its fucking ridicoulus
RawSwedishMeatball 2 months ago
@tubestick00 in sweden, which has one of the best educations of the world, it takes 4 years to study to become a evolutionary biologist, and you think thats fucking easy ? that unbelieveble, do some research, get to know some simple terms in evolution like alturism, and then tell me its simple.. idiot
RawSwedishMeatball 2 months ago
@RawSwedishMeatball listen you massive waste of space..i do not want to argue with you about this. i cannot be bothered. if you think the mechanism by which life evolves is an extremely complex process (which IS what you are saying, so dont say its not) thats fine.
im telling you its not. i dont care about your opinion of the world educational standards compared with sweedens. i think you'll find the process of evolution and the concept itself takes up little of this degree.
tubestick00 2 months ago
@tubestick00 stupid, ask any biologist about evolution and they will say its complicated, and they are educated and you are not, end of story
RawSwedishMeatball 2 months ago
@RawSwedishMeatball its likie anything, you can continue to learn and explore the finer and more uncertain cutting edge parts of any subject. the process of evolution itself is not complicated. the feilds of genetics and biology are complicated, and the areas of evolution that cross over into these feilds are complex. your mother is also a fat whore, and your a sub human laughing stock. this proves further evolution and how simple you are
tubestick00 2 months ago
@tubestick00 ... its stupid to state that anything is easy unless you continue to learn about the subject, dont you find that yourself? thats just wrong and ignorant, the natural selection processes in nature are almost infinite and these processes take a long time to learn, its like saying math is easy when you only know about + and -, and in what field does evolution part from biology? to understand biology is to understand evolution, which you clearly dont
RawSwedishMeatball 2 months ago
@tubestick00 the infinite variables of natural selection through different selection processes aint hard enough for you? then, why dont you give lectures at a major university?
RawSwedishMeatball 2 months ago
@RawSwedishMeatball the infinate variables involved in natural selection only make predicting what will happen in the future impossible to determine. the past is where the research lies, and all one has to do is observe what happened. if your going to speculate as to what specific environmental factors caused specifc selections in history, it is also difficult and always debatable. this does not strengthen your point that the process of evolution is difficult to understand.
tubestick00 2 months ago
@tubestick00 we can easy determine in labs whats will happen to an organism if we go trough experimental procedures, and it has been done. we can determine what CAN happen in the future, and your statement "specific environmental factors caused specifc selections in history, it is also difficult", thats whats difficult with evolution, and thats what ive been talking about, you even state it urself, to say that u understand the process of evolution when you only think its (next comment box)
RawSwedishMeatball 2 months ago
@RawSwedishMeatball "the natural selection of species" is an easy way of describing evolution, yet it does not show the entire picture of it, and this is what ive been saying, if you dont agree i know that you are trying to dismiss it somehow, but evolution is not simple, the concept is!
RawSwedishMeatball 2 months ago
@RawSwedishMeatball trying to determine what cause the different selection processes are difficult to predict, yet you think evolution is easy? thats retarded, evolution is dependent on the different selection processes to work, you say that these a difficult to predict and determine, yet you say, the very basis of evolution is simple? does not make any sense what so ever!
RawSwedishMeatball 2 months ago
@RawSwedishMeatball it is scientically proven theory, that creatures evolve. its the concept i was talking about in the first place, when you started this ridiculous debate with me. read my original comment, which it appears alot of people agree with and stop trying to slowly change your position and make me forget what we are talking about originally. that wont happe. anything can be infinatley complex when studied closely. the cocept of evolution is simple. end.end. end. goodbye meatball
tubestick00 2 months ago
@tubestick00 hah, you have yet prove though that your point of view of evolution is simple, you merely try to point it towards the uneducated version of evolution which is "the natural selection of species", that sound simple, yes, but to truly understand how species evolve to survive certain habitats is not simple, you just dont want to back down and agree that you were wrong, you have not put forth any evidence, while i have, and you still argue for something that i have agreed on (nextbox)
RawSwedishMeatball 2 months ago
@RawSwedishMeatball which is the concept of evolution is simple, but the method which it manifests itself in is not, you have clearly not understood anything i have written since you go back to the concept of evolution, which i already agreed on with you...
RawSwedishMeatball 2 months ago
@RawSwedishMeatball see, now meatball you must stop trying to manipulate the history of this debate. its all here for anyone who want to read it, not that i'd expect anyone to care. my comment was expressing mild frustration at how the theory of evolution is a novel concept to so many, even today in 2011. you then come out of nowhere with this bizarre need to proove that evolution is infact extremely complex demanding i am wrong. it, like anything is complex upon close exam.
tubestick00 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@tubestick00 no, i only commented that evolution is not simple, and should not be looked at as if it is, since it it hoow life evolve and have evolved, i have not tried to manipulate the subject anyway, my first comment i said clearly, that the concept of evolution is simple, but the method of it is not, but you continued to argue towards is simplicity, so i stayed and tried to reason with you, i never tried to manipulate the subject, thats its not only "the evolution of species"
RawSwedishMeatball 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@tubestick00 The atheist Delusion!
How could some of the scientists permit themselves to make a claim that would necessitate knowledge as extensive as the scheme of the universe, when their knowledge of the total scheme of being is *close* to zero, when confronted with a whole mass of unknowns concerning this very earth and tangible, lifeless matter, let alone the whole universe?
1tabligh 2 months ago
@tubestick00 Many new questions in regard to almost every principle mentioned by Darwin have arisen. For example, it is asked whether the appearance of a new organ or for that matter any other organic change, always results from the use of that organ and the attempt to adapt it to one's environment or it may be due to mutation or any other cause?
The acquired qualities are hereditable as a principle or genetic investigations have rejected this theory?
1tabligh 2 months ago
@tubestick00 The organic changes, whatever may be their cause, are always aimed at survival and evolution or sometimes they may be due to the inconsistency with the environmental conditions and may culminate in death and extinction?
Natural selection is or is not like artificial selection which leads the existing generation to evolution?
1tabligh 2 months ago
What is called science by the *science-worshippers* of the present age and regarded by them as equivalent to the sum total of *reality*, is simply a collection of laws applicable to a single dimension of the world. The result of all human effort and experimentation is a body of knowledge concerning a minute bright dot comparable to the dim light of a candle-surrounded by a dark night enveloping a huge desert of indefinite extent.
All praise is due to ALLAH, the Lord of the Universe
1tabligh 2 months ago
@1tabligh while your candle analogy is quite right... everything else you've said strange. what do you mean by "artificial selection leads the existing generation to evolution?"
tubestick00 2 months ago
@tubestick00 We find that the wild animals and plants are alike and of average type, whereas the artificial selection gives the animals and plants more variety and leads them to better evolution. There are many other questions of this sort. Anyhow, in spite of all the objections raised to discredit it, the theory of evolution has been accepted by the scientists as an objective principle of natural sciences. At the same time it is also certain that prominent and unbiased naturalists
1tabligh 1 month ago
@tubestick00 do not consider this theory to be final and incontrovertible. The way to further scientific investigation is not closed. All that they say is that the scientific inquiry has not so far discovered any new principles which may take the place of the principle of evolution.
Now it may be said that if an unbiased investigator carefully examines the results of the observations in regard to the genesis of the living organisms, he will come to the FOUR conclusions.
1tabligh 1 month ago
Interviewer "Welcome Richard Dawkins"
Dawkins "Cheers sheep fucker"
myjizzureye 1 year ago
@myjizzureye Good news hes writting a book for 12 year olds, with luck it might be written in Orstralian.
MrDynasport 1 year ago
@MrDynasport BBaahhhh ha ha ha....get it (^.o)
myjizzureye 1 year ago
There is no free will..
TodaysThought 1 year ago 2
@TodaysThought ''Of course we have free will, we have no choice. '' -Christopher Hitchens
Nerd042 1 year ago 7
@Nerd042 lol! XD when did he say that?
freiheitsalv 6 months ago
@freiheitsalv A lot of Christopher Hitchens' stuff is repeated in slightly different ways. Watch 2-3 of his debates and you'll start to notice that he re-uses his material. This is true of all debaters I'm sure, though Hitch has the rare ability to make it fresh and interesting every time. All of this to say that it's in most of his debates and probably all of them which mention free will, though probably phrased slightly differently.
Nerd042 6 months ago
Can't believe I missed seeing him. Urgh.
qzchris 1 year ago
@qzchris
Yeah i'm hitting myself too
percyth11 1 year ago
At 1:08 Richard blinks F*ck You in Morse code.
JQisAwesome 1 year ago 39
Lovely interview. Thanks
niginit 1 year ago 2