What the fuck is the turek guy shouting about... He basically says that there is evidence for the big bang, and that it's all true, but that he believes that God created the big bang, but doesn't need to provide any evidence for that whatsoever, because for God evidence is apparently not needed. He makes no sense at all. His logic: I can't explain the beginning of earth, therefore: God. ugh
Anyone who writes a book with a slimy, superior, passive-aggressive title like, "I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist" is already on thin ice with me.
Exactly. I know your first reason very well, I've had LSD and magic mushrooms in the past. So I'm all too aware of how differently your brain can perceive things with the slightest chemical inbalance. But there are even optical tests that show your brain embelishes nature, so you cannot take what you sense as real. But for this debate (religion), I still feel the atheistic side is far superior, even though I admit I'm not capable of knowing. Theistic assumptions are just a step (or many) too far
@russellrummage Correct. The subject of reality could be a long and tedious one if you get into it and most likely you'll end up agreeing that we still have a lot to discover and learn to reach a logical understanding of it.
The atheistic side is ahead -n my view- but only because they can show SOME evidence, while the other have little to nothing
Yet -when it comes to "where the universe comes from"- neither can show evidence. other than assumptions. So... no evidence = no credibility. Simple.
Hitchens is one of my favourite authors, but he doesn't deal with the morality question as well as I'd like.
Humans have a sense of empathy. We cannot state that morality is totally objective, but as far as humanity is concerned, we can agree that human life has some value (to us humans, at least). This means that actions that contribute to our well being are "right" or "moral" because we have already agreed that human happiness is a good thing, on the basis of our humanity.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. The universe did NOT come from nothing. Anyone with the most basic knowledge of the big bang theory knows that the universe was much smaller and denser in the past and at around 13.7 billion years ago it was so tiny & dense that our scientific laws breakdown, known as a singularity. We don't know what the fuck a singularity is, but all we know is that our universe came from a singularity, not nothing.
@Gmmaverick Cheers mate, I'll watch it. A minute in and it seems interesting enough, but I'm a massive science geek so I've probably heard most of it before. Although I'm sure I'll learn something new. Religion is so obviously the most primitive of ideas for existence, yet billions believe it. I suppose it shows how primitive our species still is, regardless of how magnificent theists proclaim us to be. Absolute bollocks of the highest order.
@russellrummage Agreed. But to tell you the truth, I think it's sad. As I see it, people should be taught not to believe anything which they can either = experience first hand, or proven beyond any reasonable doubt. I asked an astronomy professor what happens if ONE digit on the base of the structure of their theory happens to be wrong. His answer: "We could be in big trouble" "It could mean that we created something which doesn't exist at all" "we are very sure, but the possibility is there"
@Gmmaverick Yeah don't worry, on a philosophical level I still believe in model dependant realism. As in everything is based on a model, but there's no reason to assume that model is "true" reality. But I will still accept our current sciences to be our best explanation, even if it is fundamentally restricted by our capacity. But as stated, I accept it as our best explanation, not the truth. Any research into the history of science should teach you to be humble in that way, as we both are.
@russellrummage I got to tell you man... you are the first person -in the world- (and I lived in 15 countries and was in a ship for 5 years meeting people from all over the world constantly) who understands that. I don't doubt there are more, perhaps many. You are the first I come across, and I celebrate that...
@Gmmaverick Likewise sir. People are far too eager to assume they are right, about anything. Of course I don't go round not believing in anything, and the laws of motion (for example) seem as close to truth as you can get. But I do doubt the existence of objective truth, unlike most. Of course I may be wrong, but after researching different scientific theories such as relativity, quantum physics, holographic principle etc, it all points towards things being far stranger than I can even imagine.
@Gmmaverick For example, things point towards our brains being far more intimate with the Universe we perceive than we realize. I'm not into new age shit, but the observer effect is well documented. These thoughts are truly awe inspiring, compared to the primitive argument of a deity. If a deity exists, it is likely us, more likely than a magic man in the sky that's for sure! But I'm just speculating, and that's the point; I know I'm speculating, others seem to "know" they are right....are they?
@russellrummage Can't agree more. I accept you can know. But in a subjective level after experiencing yourself, like it happened to me with OBE. What you can NOT do, is going around trying to convince everybody that's "fact"
2 reasons.
1- YOU experienced it, you can't objectively prove it.
2- By convincing others to believe that's "fact" you are turning them into robots by making them compromise their own reality.
Both sides of this "debate" could be right/wrong. The point is WE DON'T KNOW
@LittleMonsterGirlie To say what you beliefs are -when someone ask you-, is a world apart from going around pretending that "you know" that "who don't agree with you is wrong" and trying to shove it down other people throats.
He's not expressing his opinion. He's pretending that he knows, that whoever don't go along with his belief system, "is wrong" and it's not a secret that religion tries to "convert" nonbelievers.
If you can't see the difference, I'm afraid you have some work to do.
I'm not an atheist, but I just want to point out something: It seems whenever Hitchens debates, his opponents always start personally attacking HIM, and he never once attacks them, only what they believe in ... I think they feel nervous about him, and so try to attack him? :)
And morality comes from the experience of people living in groups and deciding what acts were damaging to the group and banning them. THAT's were it comes from. Morals are in essence unwritten laws. Some have actually become laws..
No need 4 god, yet again.
"Behavior" (good or bad) comes from conditioning of society. Period.
How can he be so stupid ?? "What makes being kind and respectful to others a good thing??" --------- because then they will not be unkind and disrespectful to us in return (and we are guaranteed to 'survive' ............................ I don't understand why Hitchens couldn't have just destroyed this desperate little man.
5:30, if you want to skip the preliminary chatter. 28:30, if you want to skip the shouting of an apparently partly deaf Turek (the only reason I can come up with for his shouting). You're very welcome.
Turek is a moron. He misuses and twists scientist's words like I have never seen before. I am so happy I am educated, or I might be tricked by this blatant stupidity.
When i was listening this idiot (Turek) talk, i was thinking .o0(ow Hitchens going to eat this man alive, here comes to Hitchslaps).
LOTS and LOTS of retarded statements.
But i think he went easy on him :P
Most of the questions were seeking a scientific answer, while Hitchens addressed the underlying reasons of why its a invalid question and motives behind asking such question.
In the mean time given the number of idiot statements that been made, no wonder Hitchens didnt waste time on it.
56 minutes in and that guy, turek, is soo annoying. he attacks atheism for not answering and not being sure of the start of everything bwhile not offering any proof for his god. he just assumes that god did it. idiot
Oh I think this version fails to include Turek's finishing statement where he exploits the death of a soldier in order to "prove "that there is a dog. Truly an awful man.
Ok just finished watching Turek's opening remarks, I haven't even seen Hitches response yet, but my god, he left Hitch sooooo much to work with. The hardest part won't be refuting all that non-sense, but deciding where to start. Ok, sorry *grabs popcorn and clicks play*.......
Also, Turek demands evidence (at 27:00), but gives no evidence for the supposed existence of God. Typical.
lovelaughlive233 1 week ago
What the fuck is the turek guy shouting about... He basically says that there is evidence for the big bang, and that it's all true, but that he believes that God created the big bang, but doesn't need to provide any evidence for that whatsoever, because for God evidence is apparently not needed. He makes no sense at all. His logic: I can't explain the beginning of earth, therefore: God. ugh
lovelaughlive233 1 week ago
The turek guy is so hard to listen to because of his annoying shouting/screaming voice...
lovelaughlive233 1 week ago
If you don't want to listen to the theist guy babble on click this 28:00.
MrYorkshireFella 3 weeks ago
Anyone who writes a book with a slimy, superior, passive-aggressive title like, "I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist" is already on thin ice with me.
NevilleRhysBarnes 1 month ago
Turek = Mr. Special Pleading.
FaganRoberts 1 month ago
I am not an atheist, but geez this wasn't a fair fight lol. Why would Turek put himself in this position?
doubleuevans 2 months ago
@doubleuevans to sell books
MrShysterme 1 month ago
Wow. Either Turek is really angry, or he needs to turn up his hearing aid.
MoriyaMug 6 months ago
One minute into Turek's debate and I had a headache.
You are not a comedian. Please stop.
You also need to use an inside voice.
wohdinhel 6 months ago
Comment removed
lordjonash 7 months ago
Exactly. I know your first reason very well, I've had LSD and magic mushrooms in the past. So I'm all too aware of how differently your brain can perceive things with the slightest chemical inbalance. But there are even optical tests that show your brain embelishes nature, so you cannot take what you sense as real. But for this debate (religion), I still feel the atheistic side is far superior, even though I admit I'm not capable of knowing. Theistic assumptions are just a step (or many) too far
russellrummage 7 months ago
@russellrummage Correct. The subject of reality could be a long and tedious one if you get into it and most likely you'll end up agreeing that we still have a lot to discover and learn to reach a logical understanding of it.
The atheistic side is ahead -n my view- but only because they can show SOME evidence, while the other have little to nothing
Yet -when it comes to "where the universe comes from"- neither can show evidence. other than assumptions. So... no evidence = no credibility. Simple.
Gmmaverick 7 months ago
Hitchens is one of my favourite authors, but he doesn't deal with the morality question as well as I'd like.
Humans have a sense of empathy. We cannot state that morality is totally objective, but as far as humanity is concerned, we can agree that human life has some value (to us humans, at least). This means that actions that contribute to our well being are "right" or "moral" because we have already agreed that human happiness is a good thing, on the basis of our humanity.
Pickle900 7 months ago
I've said it before and I'll say it again. The universe did NOT come from nothing. Anyone with the most basic knowledge of the big bang theory knows that the universe was much smaller and denser in the past and at around 13.7 billion years ago it was so tiny & dense that our scientific laws breakdown, known as a singularity. We don't know what the fuck a singularity is, but all we know is that our universe came from a singularity, not nothing.
russellrummage 8 months ago
@russellrummage That's the funniest thing I ever heard!!!! = )
About those 13.7 billion years... Have you seen this?
watch?v=CEQouX5U0fc&feature=related
Gmmaverick 8 months ago
@Gmmaverick Cheers mate, I'll watch it. A minute in and it seems interesting enough, but I'm a massive science geek so I've probably heard most of it before. Although I'm sure I'll learn something new. Religion is so obviously the most primitive of ideas for existence, yet billions believe it. I suppose it shows how primitive our species still is, regardless of how magnificent theists proclaim us to be. Absolute bollocks of the highest order.
russellrummage 7 months ago
@russellrummage Agreed. But to tell you the truth, I think it's sad. As I see it, people should be taught not to believe anything which they can either = experience first hand, or proven beyond any reasonable doubt. I asked an astronomy professor what happens if ONE digit on the base of the structure of their theory happens to be wrong. His answer: "We could be in big trouble" "It could mean that we created something which doesn't exist at all" "we are very sure, but the possibility is there"
Gmmaverick 7 months ago
@Gmmaverick Yeah don't worry, on a philosophical level I still believe in model dependant realism. As in everything is based on a model, but there's no reason to assume that model is "true" reality. But I will still accept our current sciences to be our best explanation, even if it is fundamentally restricted by our capacity. But as stated, I accept it as our best explanation, not the truth. Any research into the history of science should teach you to be humble in that way, as we both are.
russellrummage 7 months ago
@russellrummage I got to tell you man... you are the first person -in the world- (and I lived in 15 countries and was in a ship for 5 years meeting people from all over the world constantly) who understands that. I don't doubt there are more, perhaps many. You are the first I come across, and I celebrate that...
So, my hat goes off to you = )
Gmmaverick 7 months ago
@Gmmaverick Likewise sir. People are far too eager to assume they are right, about anything. Of course I don't go round not believing in anything, and the laws of motion (for example) seem as close to truth as you can get. But I do doubt the existence of objective truth, unlike most. Of course I may be wrong, but after researching different scientific theories such as relativity, quantum physics, holographic principle etc, it all points towards things being far stranger than I can even imagine.
russellrummage 7 months ago
@Gmmaverick For example, things point towards our brains being far more intimate with the Universe we perceive than we realize. I'm not into new age shit, but the observer effect is well documented. These thoughts are truly awe inspiring, compared to the primitive argument of a deity. If a deity exists, it is likely us, more likely than a magic man in the sky that's for sure! But I'm just speculating, and that's the point; I know I'm speculating, others seem to "know" they are right....are they?
russellrummage 7 months ago
@russellrummage Can't agree more. I accept you can know. But in a subjective level after experiencing yourself, like it happened to me with OBE. What you can NOT do, is going around trying to convince everybody that's "fact"
2 reasons.
1- YOU experienced it, you can't objectively prove it.
2- By convincing others to believe that's "fact" you are turning them into robots by making them compromise their own reality.
Both sides of this "debate" could be right/wrong. The point is WE DON'T KNOW
Gmmaverick 7 months ago
@LittleMonsterGirlie Didn't care for the "size" of your comment, but the content. And responded accordingly.
Gmmaverick 8 months ago
@LittleMonsterGirlie To say what you beliefs are -when someone ask you-, is a world apart from going around pretending that "you know" that "who don't agree with you is wrong" and trying to shove it down other people throats.
He's not expressing his opinion. He's pretending that he knows, that whoever don't go along with his belief system, "is wrong" and it's not a secret that religion tries to "convert" nonbelievers.
If you can't see the difference, I'm afraid you have some work to do.
Gmmaverick 8 months ago
@LittleMonsterGirlie it was a joke sayin that Turek's argument is invalid
LaNDoNx18 8 months ago
I skipped all of Turek's parts.
LaNDoNx18 8 months ago
I'm not an atheist, but I just want to point out something: It seems whenever Hitchens debates, his opponents always start personally attacking HIM, and he never once attacks them, only what they believe in ... I think they feel nervous about him, and so try to attack him? :)
Fupper16 8 months ago 7
For Turek:
I respect the fact that you believe in god. Because I believe that you are entitled to believe whatever you want to believe in.
I expect the same courtesy.
I do not believe there's a god, and I will believe in it WHEN I SEE IT MYSELF.
Meantime I'll appreciate if you keep your beliefs to yourself.
Thank you.
Gmmaverick 8 months ago
For Turek:
And hitchens don't want to be "followed" = YOU DO!
And not knowing where consciousness comes from, is NOT evidence of the existence of a god.
It only makes evident that WE DON'T KNOW. And yes! That "WE" includes YOU!
God exists for you because YOU BELIEVE IT DOES. No more, no less.
If you DIDN'T believe that, god wouldn't exist for you. As simple as that.
And one thing I think you should do, is RESPECT THE RIGHT OF OTHERS TO BELIEVE WHATEVER THEY WANT.
Gmmaverick 8 months ago
For Turek:
And morality comes from the experience of people living in groups and deciding what acts were damaging to the group and banning them. THAT's were it comes from. Morals are in essence unwritten laws. Some have actually become laws..
No need 4 god, yet again.
"Behavior" (good or bad) comes from conditioning of society. Period.
No need for god.
Gmmaverick 8 months ago
Never got what's the point of the discussion of this matter. Neither side can present irrefutable evidence of where the universe comes from.
And Turek this is for you:
Nobody has answer to that question, and YOU are included on that NOBODY.
As for the "authority" who decides what's "right/wrong" = if the outcome of your actions cause more damage than good = wrong.
If vice versa = right. Simple. No need of any god to decide that.
Gmmaverick 8 months ago
How can he be so stupid ?? "What makes being kind and respectful to others a good thing??" --------- because then they will not be unkind and disrespectful to us in return (and we are guaranteed to 'survive' ............................ I don't understand why Hitchens couldn't have just destroyed this desperate little man.
Fyapowar 8 months ago
Uhh such desperate attempts by Turek !
Fyapowar 8 months ago
There's only one thing more baffling than Turek's idiotic "arguments", and that is the question; why does he feel the need to yell?
WalleWildberrie 8 months ago
morality is dictated by society, not by some supreme being. idiot.
JustAUsernam3 8 months ago
Hitchen's gutted Turek's arguments like a fish.
jmlew 9 months ago
Hitchens ate this screaming christian moron alive...
bizarrejapan 9 months ago
Turek is the voice behind the mayor from The Simpsons...
sleepgolfer77 9 months ago
thumbs up if you had to turn down the volume when Turek started talking.
Charlo233 9 months ago 6
damn. turek's voice crackles even my high quality headphones. idk if its the recording or its him.
gamerownage2011 9 months ago
Wow, I cant believe I sat through all of it. Thanks for sharing the video!
puckbender 9 months ago
If there is a god then why he would create a man like Christopher Hitchens, George Carlin and Albert Einstein.
wszq13 9 months ago
His first rebuttal makes my brain hurt from all the stupid Q.Q
4rkadiy 9 months ago
5:30, if you want to skip the preliminary chatter. 28:30, if you want to skip the shouting of an apparently partly deaf Turek (the only reason I can come up with for his shouting). You're very welcome.
M0US3P0T4TO 9 months ago 22
@M0US3P0T4TO - Thank you very much, sir!
Critic863 9 months ago
@Critic863 You mean ma'am - and you're welcome. ;)
M0US3P0T4TO 9 months ago
@M0US3P0T4TO - Oops, my bad <=( But thanks! =D
Critic863 9 months ago
If something can't be created from nothing, how God was created?
mexcar007 9 months ago 5
@mexcar007 The theist response to that is always "God was always there", which of course explains nothing.
emkoirl 9 months ago 4
Who made
mexcar007 9 months ago
Turek is a moron. He misuses and twists scientist's words like I have never seen before. I am so happy I am educated, or I might be tricked by this blatant stupidity.
emperor0013 9 months ago 4
When i was listening this idiot (Turek) talk, i was thinking .o0(ow Hitchens going to eat this man alive, here comes to Hitchslaps).
LOTS and LOTS of retarded statements.
But i think he went easy on him :P
Most of the questions were seeking a scientific answer, while Hitchens addressed the underlying reasons of why its a invalid question and motives behind asking such question.
In the mean time given the number of idiot statements that been made, no wonder Hitchens didnt waste time on it.
davelantor 9 months ago
The audience is fucking insane.
ksthebest 9 months ago
56 minutes in and that guy, turek, is soo annoying. he attacks atheism for not answering and not being sure of the start of everything bwhile not offering any proof for his god. he just assumes that god did it. idiot
realist81UK 9 months ago 19
Oh I think this version fails to include Turek's finishing statement where he exploits the death of a soldier in order to "prove "that there is a dog. Truly an awful man.
InitiumNovum 9 months ago
Ok just finished watching Turek's opening remarks, I haven't even seen Hitches response yet, but my god, he left Hitch sooooo much to work with. The hardest part won't be refuting all that non-sense, but deciding where to start. Ok, sorry *grabs popcorn and clicks play*.......
alueshen 10 months ago
"I think it's impossible to not like Christopher..."
Unless your names Henry Kissinger.
GuitarRookie13 11 months ago 2
Many, many Hitchslaps!
noelectricmonk 1 year ago