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
anti-science people disgust me, ALL of them are hypocrites in the extreme, they denie science yet use microwaves, computers, medicine etc. they use the benefits of science but denie it when their childish beleifs are contradicted by cold hard facts
@wearestarstuffsagan -- Science is great for creating material prosperity, understanding the physical world, and can be very exhilarating. It is not moral, and it's not enough for understanding humanity. There is an aspect of human experience that is not rational/empirical.
@brchful i think science can help with morality such as abortion, it can tell us when the fetus would gain the ability to sense pain or if someone who is in a vegitative state is still conscious and can also fill pain but i know that it cant tell us what is moral, nothing can, morality is subjective, there is no absolute right or wrong. also, i didnt say anything about that, i was talking (clearly) about assholes who are against science like creationists and homeopaths
4 years? Shucks, in the U.S., we'd have simply fried him - and got it wrong. But the lack of science in the courtroom is hardly unique. My ex-wife, a reporter who had the court beat, watched an innocent man convicted of bank robbery by a jury and an incompetent public defender because they didn't understand simple geometry. Given the height of the security cameras, and where the robber was standing, the defendant would have to have been a full 6" shorter - but hey, they got a black guy.
@good2freelance....you WANT better justice, well you're RIGHT---make those lawyers & judges go to PRISON for the SAME amount of time as the guy who was forced into unjust prison time.
I went to a xian school from the ages of 10 to 18 using the ACE curriculum. It took all my strength and the invention of an alternate personality as a defense mechanism to retain my identity.
I was able to resist, but i was the exception. Now that i am a father, i have to teach my son to protect himself from superstitions and dillusional thinking (religion).
@chrisofnottingham ok, instead of calling each other ignorant, we have to look at the facts. Every generation has created something special, and every generation wasted the technology on abusing it. To say every single human is from the earth is a uneducated comment. There are such thing as lost people you know, because the fact is, we are all lost.
comments under the video are listed newest to oldest and dose not care if its a reply or not. When you look at the view all the reply's will be under the original comment.
what would also help in reducing falsely accused people in jail is a justice system which is just as rational as atheism. Logic consistency applied to human relationships. So no court of law that protects you from thieves, but has to steal their money from their customers. Take it under threat of force in coercive taxes. Why not have all products and services applied in the same way: as voluntary interactions in the free market, without coercion.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
god doesn't have to exist in order to benefit from believing in one. That is a provable, observable fact..... so put that in your science pipe and smoke it....lol
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Dawkins is a dork, if we are a product of our biology, as I'm sure he agrees, then how can he blame us for what our brains are capable of thinking? Did humans make evolution? and since they didn't, how are we suppose to be held accountable for what evolution has evolved?
free will includes beliefs in god and religions, not to mention that our ancestors did just fine for hundreds of thousands of years with out science, because if they hadn't Dawkins wouldn't be here, so it must of worked!
our ancestors were ignorant, filthy, racist, genocidal, warmongering barbarians.....and without modern science we would still be in the dark ages, and no, it didnt "work" for everyone, it just goes to show that ignorance of where we came from and how utterly pathetic we were has gotten none of us(except the few of us who can rationally use their brain) anywhere......the majority of humanity is ignorant.....and it is people like you who will forever be......IGNORANT!!!!
@TJmarian that's rich!.... but none the less your ancestor did enough right, because they got you here. I think it's ignorant to assume that "you" who has only been around a couple of decades has figured it all out..... oh what! that's really ignorance... and it's f ing funny to laugh at too!...lol
and to be honest, im not very pleased with WHERE they got us....if it hadnt have been for the dark ages, we might be exploring galaxies by now.....so yea.....HERES TO OUR ANCESTORS.....are you proud of religious intolerance, slavery, senseless propoganda, and belief in "magic"?
you are an absolute joke and a reminder that we are not the great race that we delude ourselves to be.....or even have the potential to be
@TJmarian personally I don't give my power away. I live free because I choose so. These are great ideas, but totally without merit. there is a difference from where humanity is, and the opinion of one man who thinks that it should be further along. By what authority or measure do you assume this to be accurate?
@romney27 You do realize that the only thing our ancestors 'did enough right' to get us here is procreate. Which is what every single living thing does. If it doesn't, it cannot survive.
That's evolution for dummies.
Our ancestors without science were ignorant in their tries to explain the world - ergo the horrendous crap that are religious texts. That may be just fine (altough I doubt it was for, say, victims of inquisition), but that's not what humanity should settle for - we can reach higher.
It's history, sweetheart. Seen as the saying Hostoria magistra vita est is, for those of us who like to learn from other people's mistakes, very true, the historical actions of people should be judged. How 'bout some Holocaust now, eh?
And how do you know that their cosmology is accurate? Because it is well similar to modern day scientific explanation? You little hypocrite, don't tell me you 'believe' science on this one! :O
C'mon, think for yourself. Don't just blurt crap out.
@SandraBang lol....I save the feces for the weekend.
a judgmental atheist, now that is novel..... I prefer the moment myself. So let me get this straight, you're for history when it comes to judging others but not when it comes to religion? And you call me the "hypocrite?..... at least I get the irony!
"free will" clearly covers religion and beliefs in gods.... the "crap" in this case is on your shoe.... thus the shit eating grin.
@romney27 I don't think you're making any sense to anyone by now, as little as you we're making before anyways.
Seeing as you either don't get the message one is trying to get across, or choosing to ignore it, and blabbing 'GOD' and 'FREE WILL' and other random crap out as arguments.
And as I said, when we judge religion from an historical point of view, we might as well ban it from all the harm it did.
Go believe you're an idiot out of your own free will, the fact remains - you're an idiot.
"not making sense" lol...I'll take that for your lazy excuse for lack of wit . somethings should go without saying.
Judging from your comments, I thought nonlinear was right up your ally..... If it's over your head just say so. you could always take your show down the sidewalk.(complainer)
Apparenlty we got bigger brains because at some point in the past, having big brains was needed for our survival and to pass on our genes. In our modern world we don't need a big brain for either our survival or to pass on our genes. I just hope our species brain size doesn't shrink over the eons lol
Pronounce bible. And pronounce it correctly. If you do, you're pronouncing a term in short as follows. "Bye-Bull", as if you're telling a bull goodbye. Now say it in it's entirety for what it really means. "Bye-Bull-Shit". Very good class. Thats exactly what you say to that book and its followers. "Goodbye, Bullshit!"
Being raised in a secular home, I am glad to not have been indoctrinated in any form of religious belief. What I thought was interesting about your comment macias is that I know several people just like you. My co-worker was a evangelical christian her whole life, that is until she moved out of her parents house and started working in the real world. When she was actually questioned about her beliefs by people other then her parents, she quickly changed her beliefs as to not look like a fool.
I think that's just as controversial..If your friend was simply conforming to what everyone else around her believed in, just to avoid 'looking like a fool', I think she has issues with simply just thinking for herself and not following along with everyone else (whether they believe in evolution or not, etc.)
@macias9133 That is exactly what we need... but the fact that you picked up the book is that you were "open" to what is against your beliefs. I hope a lot of people would do that and surely we would have a better society.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Psalm 14:1 The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.
Romans 1:20 For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I agree with the scriptures I quoted 100%. Here is a transliteration of those verses:
Psalms 14:1 It takes a fool to say there is no God.
Romans 1:20 God's everlasting power and God-being(ness) have been clearly evidenced in the creation so that men will stand guilty before God for having rejected the clear evidence of Him who brought into existence.
How do you know it wasn't many powers that lead to 1-3? What if life is the product of many higher powers? How do you know it was one Deity and not others?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
you fucking idiot.... dont you know the writers of the bible would come up with ideas on how to protect the bible... you stupid idiot to think people back then are different from people right now.....
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Psalm 14:1 The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.
Romans 1:20 For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
Whover wrote that was clearly not a scientist. Statistically speaking, religious people are bigger fools than scientists (I know, I'm stating the obvious).
Presumptions are all well & good and can be equated w/dreams. One may make assumptions about many things: the toxicity of sodium chloride & how frequent bathing damages the skin. Collegiate tutorials designed to convince our beltless, tattooed & pierced youth that free markets are evil, eugenics is righteous, & that babies are disposable now pass as educational. It's no wonder then that so many people lack purpose & a moral compass.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
omg that weird guy married his ex wifes mum, ew what a skank. isnt this a little too fucked up to feature in a richard dawkins science program? i didnt know people like that existed apart from on rank documentaries on channel 5 at 4 in the morning
Didn't see your comment until now. The models proposed by Pasteur and Darwin was not based on maths! That you use statistics to analyse data in these fields of study now isnt strange but that doesnt mean that the underlying theories are mathematical. They are observation based sciences and math isnt a fact based science (fact= confirmed observations).
Sorry? The fairy tales *I* call religion? As far as I'm concerned all faith based mythologies are "sagas". My comments here originate from a statement about maths being a science.
What I have tried to explain is that mathsis not a science, if we by that mean the study of nature/observations. If we follow the definition of science as given by *that author*, THEN we must also include astrology and any other field of knowledge that is not observation based, which also includes theology. Get it?
No, you are wrong here if we use the most common view that we mean Science = natural Science and the scientific method. Mathematics does not involve the scientific methon and does not study "reality". Mathematical proofs are are not true with respect to reality they are true within the context of mathematics -which does not have anything to do with the "real world science is describing. See "Gödel's incompleteness theorems" for the mathematical proof of this.
Maths is used as a *language* in science. Take away a language and you can't communicate. So what? Note that your exaple also use the language of Chemistry (introduced by Jöns Jakob Berzelius) and also English.
I strongly urge you to educate yourself about the differences between maths and science (i.e. Natural science and the scientific method).
Maths exists just fine without a study of reality. Most researchers in maths that I know do not want their work to be applied. I have many times heard comments of the like "what is the application of a poem" when they talk about what they do. Science can use other languages than math to describe things (Latin is used in biology for instance). However, maths is compact and unambiguous in its definitions and is used for that reason.
Not quite. It is "impossible" to understand it without any knowledge of chemistry, an observation based science. That information is usually given in the mathematical language but you can describe it in e.g. Japaneese instead. But the relationships and reactions will be much harder to see in that case as th total volume of text needed to describe it will be huge (so "right model for right problem"). Also, be very careful about the use of the word "impossible" when you speak about science.
I'm not talking about a scientific theory, the word impossible is quite appropriate. You clearly have no knowledge of science or botany. If you did you would know you cannot describe or understand a plant with out mathermatics.
As a person that have worked (and is working) as a research chemist for the past 15 years I do think I have a better knowledge about this that you. This is clearly also seen in the fact that you have very limited knowledge about the difference between model, reality and description of reality via a model. The idea that you can't descibe a photosynthesis without maths (but ignoring chemistry) is clearly wrong. Maths say absolutely nothing about physical/chemical processes.
Furthermore the equation "E=m*c^2" say nothing physically, it is just a simple statement of relations of variables/constants and you have no knowledge of what it say unless physics is invoced. An it isn't science unless observations can falsefy the statement. To say that you can't describe a plant unless you use mathematics is silly. Have you ever read Linnaeus? (Carl von Linné) If you have please state what language he used.
So there is no equals sign or number two in that equation. I love botany and its swedish. Well friend this is were i stop this argument, you are talking nonsense.
The fact that *you* don't understand it doesn't mean it is nonsense per se.
As stated, maths only describe the relationships of variable/constants in "E=m*c^2". What "E", "m" and "c" are rely on physics, and you can use another language to describe this relationship, maths however, is uniquely well suited to this task.
By the way Linnaeus published in Latin (not Swedish) for the same reason we use maths. It avoids translation mistakes if everyone use the same language.
I do understand this massenergy equivalence equation? I have no idea where you get this fact. I am aware his work was published in latin as was the vast majority of botany at the time. I answered your question Linnaeus was born raised and lived in sweden and so used swedish. Where is this language you will use to explain massenergy equivalence without any form of mathermatics. You would surely be a greater mind than Einstein or a greater magician than Thurston or Houdini.
Linnaeus did not use Swedish in his writing (I asked if you has "read him", and what language he used) also many lectures at that time was given in Latin. And the reason Latin was and is used in biology and medicin is because it avoids "translation mistakes". That is why the language mathematics is used in the physical sciences. By expressing a relationship mathematically you avoid misunderstandings, but it doesn't make the expression "true" in relation to reality. Science is used to check that
Have it dude, if you need to use trick question to "win" its yours. If you think you can have science without maths you are for wont of a less aggressive word retarded.
That you can have science without maths is easy to prove, evolutionary theory and the germ theory of disease to name but two very important scientific discoveries. Both of these are described without mathematical models. So according to you, the scientific community are retarded to describe these theories as sciences. As an active member of that community I have another name for a person that doesnt know the differences between model and reality, and science and maths.
Also (on a more philosophical level) it doesn't matter if you remove the mathematical expression altogether. The reaction in a plant happens irrespective if you are describing it or not so your comment nothing is there is wrong in that respect too. Just because you cant describe it in compact form does not stop it from happening. There is a vast difference between the real world and a mathematical *MODEL DESCRIPTION* of it.
a meaningless statement from you. What do you refere to when you say "wrong"? which part is wrong? NOte two views are given so what on earth are you talking about?
yes it is... LOL then you are calling Statistics, Mathematics, and Computer Science not sciences which is bloody ridiculous if you ask me lol. There are two types of sciences you are referring to empirical sciences and I'm referring to Science as a whole which also includes Formal Science which is what is mathematics falls under. It's a science, thus shown lol, wikipedia it if you need to. You have insulted a lot of my faculty members by insulting their work.
as stated previously this video is about the study of the real world (have you listened to it?) and to refere to maths in that case is simply silly. cf. Gödel is you don't get it.
If you, as you state refere to, Science as formal science (i.e. does not include the scientific method) then you have to include eg. theology and any social science you like. But that is not what is discussed in this video.
You are correct. Science loosely translated could encompass the study of anything. It's the method that distinguishes Science from everything else. As you have correctly stated, induction by use of the scientific method applies to science and mathematics relies on deductive logic.
The problem is the demand for 100% certainty??????? DAMN RIGHT!!!! When will you be willing to admit that, personally, you believe it too 100%? When people are dying because of your conservatism and you stand aside it is partially your fault!!!! Take a stand against conservatism in science!! You know and that is the Rational choice! READ AYN RAND! IF YOU ARE AFTER A RATIONAL JUSTIFICATION!
Esto you got is backwards except witch hunts. Go fuck your jesus faggot. I don't expect a retarded diluted idiot like jesus penis christ to live long.
holywar? lol you can't have holy and a war in the same word ! FREE THINK and do NOT be brain washed ! you think that you are going to heaven and the rest is going to hell ! hahahaha how self absorbed
science never proves anything 100%? so wat its not 100%that the earth is a sphere and that it along w/the other objects in the solar system orbit the sun? i realize science is always open2new findings but come on lets not become ridiculous.
jimmy, the Earth isn't a sphere, DNA testing isn't foolproof (someone else can have the same markers as you), while the planets in our solar system do indeed orbit the Sun they don't do it perfectly (our moon doesn't have a regular orbit around the Earth, it's gradually moving away) & also the Sun is in an orbit of our galaxy.
To contextualize, DNA identity testing has a 1 in approximately 10 billion chance of error, & less for paternity checks. 99.9999% accuracy, but still not 100%.
Richard Dawkins may very well save the human race from religion induced extinction. It may not happen in his lifetime...but my grandchildren and great grandchildren will likely look to Dawkins as we look to Darwin today.
oh dear...i respect mr dawkins dearly...but i have lost a slight bit of respect for him in just discovering that he does/did drive a rover 400. its a very sad day of discovery
Apparently you completely missed the point. Science is a tool, just like a hammer, or a rifle. If you understand how to use the tool it will serve you unerringly and allow you to accomplish things that would be impossible otherwise. If you do not understand how to use the tool but try to anyway, you will likely wind up hurting yourself with it and possibly damage the tool in the process. The case of the handicapped guy wasn't a failure of science, it was a failure of the people using it.
i wish my high school teachers had shown documentaries as powerful as richard's when they were out sick...
tpuemats 1 month 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
anti-science people disgust me, ALL of them are hypocrites in the extreme, they denie science yet use microwaves, computers, medicine etc. they use the benefits of science but denie it when their childish beleifs are contradicted by cold hard facts
wearestarstuffsagan 3 months ago
@wearestarstuffsagan -- Science is great for creating material prosperity, understanding the physical world, and can be very exhilarating. It is not moral, and it's not enough for understanding humanity. There is an aspect of human experience that is not rational/empirical.
That's all some of us are saying...
brchful 3 months ago
@brchful i think science can help with morality such as abortion, it can tell us when the fetus would gain the ability to sense pain or if someone who is in a vegitative state is still conscious and can also fill pain but i know that it cant tell us what is moral, nothing can, morality is subjective, there is no absolute right or wrong. also, i didnt say anything about that, i was talking (clearly) about assholes who are against science like creationists and homeopaths
wearestarstuffsagan 3 months ago
@wearestarstuffsagan -- touche - I assumed that you meant (like Dawkins) that science is moral in and of itself. You're right with the fetus example.
brchful 3 months ago
4 years? Shucks, in the U.S., we'd have simply fried him - and got it wrong. But the lack of science in the courtroom is hardly unique. My ex-wife, a reporter who had the court beat, watched an innocent man convicted of bank robbery by a jury and an incompetent public defender because they didn't understand simple geometry. Given the height of the security cameras, and where the robber was standing, the defendant would have to have been a full 6" shorter - but hey, they got a black guy.
47f0 5 months ago
Too many people suffer from a disorder where beliefs push evidence out of the way.
a1mint 7 months ago 3
That's awesome that guy got himself out of jail, if he had just accepted that his life was over he would have never have gotten out.
Be4TinGyoU 9 months ago
That guy Kevin was a LEGEND!!!
He died of liver failure in 2003 :(
innocent org uk cases kevincallan index
obviously there is a / in place of the spaces
and a ht to the ml at the end, after the
obligatory dot ;)
sponsoredwalk1 1 year ago 2
and I shit meself
I wouldve too lol
BrendanIsCool 1 year ago 2
Terrible what happened to that poor man. We must be careful with science.
drummerkid1993 1 year ago
243 ppl believe the earth is flat.
selearemus 1 year ago 62
@selearemus That's it?
TieXiongJi 1 year ago
@selearemus 245 now, lol
azman5998 1 month ago
GREAT video, another example of why Dawkins ROCKS;-)
robelicit 1 year ago 9
"Kevin was not an educated man, but he began to teach himself - Neuropathology"
That Kevin guy is a legend.
WARSUG 1 year ago 16
@WARSUG ....WELL said.
robelicit 1 year ago
Those lawyers should go to jail for their mistakes.
Serious judges requires serious justice.
good2freelance 1 year ago
@good2freelance....you WANT better justice, well you're RIGHT---make those lawyers & judges go to PRISON for the SAME amount of time as the guy who was forced into unjust prison time.
robelicit 1 year ago
Stupid bible belt. We need bigger tornadoes.
ummnowwhat 1 year ago 8
@ummnowwhat Lol damn that's messed up
HybridD91 1 year ago
@HybridD91 I know it is. I was being sarcastic. Death is a terribly sad fact of life. I don't actually celebrate when innocent people die.
ummnowwhat 11 months ago
I met Alec Geoffries.
Hes a nice guy. Hes was out of his head around the time when he discovered fingerprinting tho. he he. bit of a party animal
Gordonzo17 1 year ago
I went to a xian school from the ages of 10 to 18 using the ACE curriculum. It took all my strength and the invention of an alternate personality as a defense mechanism to retain my identity.
I was able to resist, but i was the exception. Now that i am a father, i have to teach my son to protect himself from superstitions and dillusional thinking (religion).
MrKevMan 1 year ago
legendary that he taught himself this.
DarkKnightBob1o1 1 year ago
With the excuse of loving Science, Dawkins want to put pseudo-science into science.
Texoki 1 year ago
Science is interesting, and if you don't agree you can fuck off.
Protoman85 1 year ago 3
"i shit myself" i bet dawkins loved that!
bcfcmattyp1 2 years ago
how old is this, because scientists proved that intelligent design is fact.
mason510 2 years ago
Really? How did they do that?
Groove2Kill 2 years ago
@mason510 no they did not what the hell are you talking about?
tallsmile28 2 years ago
@tallsmile28 your the only one talking about hell. have fun raising a retard
mason510 2 years ago
looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooool
Eytheeist 2 years ago
@Eytheeist u must be laughing at your small dick
mason510 2 years ago
I think you meant Christian Scientists. And "proved to themselves".
chrisofnottingham 2 years ago
you have no clue where somebody is comming from leaving a comment like that
mason510 2 years ago
Youtube doesn't seem to arrange replies properly unless you go for the 'view all comments' option, then it becomes clear.
chrisofnottingham 2 years ago
Comment removed
mason510 2 years ago
@chrisofnottingham ok, instead of calling each other ignorant, we have to look at the facts. Every generation has created something special, and every generation wasted the technology on abusing it. To say every single human is from the earth is a uneducated comment. There are such thing as lost people you know, because the fact is, we are all lost.
mason510 2 years ago
You seem to be having a different conversation to me.
chrisofnottingham 2 years ago
@chrisofnottingham later
mason510 2 years ago
comments under the video are listed newest to oldest and dose not care if its a reply or not. When you look at the view all the reply's will be under the original comment.
fireflygirl246 1 year ago
what would also help in reducing falsely accused people in jail is a justice system which is just as rational as atheism. Logic consistency applied to human relationships. So no court of law that protects you from thieves, but has to steal their money from their customers. Take it under threat of force in coercive taxes. Why not have all products and services applied in the same way: as voluntary interactions in the free market, without coercion.
governments killed 200M people past 100 years.
modelmark 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
god doesn't have to exist in order to benefit from believing in one. That is a provable, observable fact..... so put that in your science pipe and smoke it....lol
romney27 2 years ago
your dumb
FIGHTFANNERD3 2 years ago 3
you genius precedes you...lol dork
romney27 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Dawkins is a dork, if we are a product of our biology, as I'm sure he agrees, then how can he blame us for what our brains are capable of thinking? Did humans make evolution? and since they didn't, how are we suppose to be held accountable for what evolution has evolved?
free will includes beliefs in god and religions, not to mention that our ancestors did just fine for hundreds of thousands of years with out science, because if they hadn't Dawkins wouldn't be here, so it must of worked!
romney27 2 years ago
our ancestors were ignorant, filthy, racist, genocidal, warmongering barbarians.....and without modern science we would still be in the dark ages, and no, it didnt "work" for everyone, it just goes to show that ignorance of where we came from and how utterly pathetic we were has gotten none of us(except the few of us who can rationally use their brain) anywhere......the majority of humanity is ignorant.....and it is people like you who will forever be......IGNORANT!!!!
TJmarian 2 years ago 3
@TJmarian that's rich!.... but none the less your ancestor did enough right, because they got you here. I think it's ignorant to assume that "you" who has only been around a couple of decades has figured it all out..... oh what! that's really ignorance... and it's f ing funny to laugh at too!...lol
romney27 2 years ago
and to be honest, im not very pleased with WHERE they got us....if it hadnt have been for the dark ages, we might be exploring galaxies by now.....so yea.....HERES TO OUR ANCESTORS.....are you proud of religious intolerance, slavery, senseless propoganda, and belief in "magic"?
you are an absolute joke and a reminder that we are not the great race that we delude ourselves to be.....or even have the potential to be
TJmarian 2 years ago 4
@TJmarian personally I don't give my power away. I live free because I choose so. These are great ideas, but totally without merit. there is a difference from where humanity is, and the opinion of one man who thinks that it should be further along. By what authority or measure do you assume this to be accurate?
romney27 2 years ago
@romney27 You do realize that the only thing our ancestors 'did enough right' to get us here is procreate. Which is what every single living thing does. If it doesn't, it cannot survive.
That's evolution for dummies.
Our ancestors without science were ignorant in their tries to explain the world - ergo the horrendous crap that are religious texts. That may be just fine (altough I doubt it was for, say, victims of inquisition), but that's not what humanity should settle for - we can reach higher.
SandraBang 1 year ago 3
@SandraBang
"victims of inquisition"- man talk about living in the past.
The hindus gave us the numbers 0-9 and their cosmology actually turned out to be quite accurate.... so I don't think your perception is correct.
science also gave us Eugenics, but that doesn't make science evil.
if you believe science then are you not an expression of the singularity as describe in the big bang? I don't see how you're not....
romney27 1 year ago
@romney27
It's history, sweetheart. Seen as the saying Hostoria magistra vita est is, for those of us who like to learn from other people's mistakes, very true, the historical actions of people should be judged. How 'bout some Holocaust now, eh?
And how do you know that their cosmology is accurate? Because it is well similar to modern day scientific explanation? You little hypocrite, don't tell me you 'believe' science on this one! :O
C'mon, think for yourself. Don't just blurt crap out.
SandraBang 1 year ago
@SandraBang lol....I save the feces for the weekend.
a judgmental atheist, now that is novel..... I prefer the moment myself. So let me get this straight, you're for history when it comes to judging others but not when it comes to religion? And you call me the "hypocrite?..... at least I get the irony!
"free will" clearly covers religion and beliefs in gods.... the "crap" in this case is on your shoe.... thus the shit eating grin.
romney27 1 year ago
@romney27 I don't think you're making any sense to anyone by now, as little as you we're making before anyways.
Seeing as you either don't get the message one is trying to get across, or choosing to ignore it, and blabbing 'GOD' and 'FREE WILL' and other random crap out as arguments.
And as I said, when we judge religion from an historical point of view, we might as well ban it from all the harm it did.
Go believe you're an idiot out of your own free will, the fact remains - you're an idiot.
SandraBang 1 year ago
"not making sense" lol...I'll take that for your lazy excuse for lack of wit . somethings should go without saying.
Judging from your comments, I thought nonlinear was right up your ally..... If it's over your head just say so. you could always take your show down the sidewalk.(complainer)
romney27 1 year ago
inded
FIGHTFANNERD3 2 years ago
Apparenlty we got bigger brains because at some point in the past, having big brains was needed for our survival and to pass on our genes. In our modern world we don't need a big brain for either our survival or to pass on our genes. I just hope our species brain size doesn't shrink over the eons lol
MrGem7 2 years ago
is intelligence a factor in evolution?
thegoochieguy 2 years ago
@thegoochieguy
anything that helps or hinders a species to survive is a factor
wildchildcobhc 2 years ago
nope natural selection and genetic mutation :)
B4IRUTUARU16 2 years ago
@B4IRUTUARU16 :
thank you, although my question was retorical
thegoochieguy 2 years ago
ok :) i like filling the gaps
B4IRUTUARU16 2 years ago
That's an absolute disgrace.
You're not gonna call a car mechanic when your toilet is leaky either, right?
Great video, I love Dawkins.
MelleB90 2 years ago 5
"and i shit myself"
gregapage 2 years ago
Pronounce bible. And pronounce it correctly. If you do, you're pronouncing a term in short as follows. "Bye-Bull", as if you're telling a bull goodbye. Now say it in it's entirety for what it really means. "Bye-Bull-Shit". Very good class. Thats exactly what you say to that book and its followers. "Goodbye, Bullshit!"
violentautopsy80 2 years ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
That little girl has vampire teeth lulz
SirPwn4lot 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Atheist Girl vs Christian Girl" - Check it out on my channel.
atheistfriends 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Sick of Christians and Atheists arguing?
atheistfriends 2 years ago
Comment removed
macias9133 2 years ago 90
Being raised in a secular home, I am glad to not have been indoctrinated in any form of religious belief. What I thought was interesting about your comment macias is that I know several people just like you. My co-worker was a evangelical christian her whole life, that is until she moved out of her parents house and started working in the real world. When she was actually questioned about her beliefs by people other then her parents, she quickly changed her beliefs as to not look like a fool.
LegendaryFrost 2 years ago 30
I think that's just as controversial..If your friend was simply conforming to what everyone else around her believed in, just to avoid 'looking like a fool', I think she has issues with simply just thinking for herself and not following along with everyone else (whether they believe in evolution or not, etc.)
shota777 2 years ago
@LegendaryFrost i agree! happens to me to ..
flumberg 1 year ago
@macias9133 happy to hear:) "welcome" i guess hahaxD
MiuraUU 2 years ago
Good for you :)
fistepot 2 years ago
@macias9133 You legend, Dawkins would be happy to hear that.
helpfuljoe 1 year ago
@macias9133 Good for you! Most Bible readers avoid The God Delusion completely and don't even give it a chance.
mercy35687 1 year ago
@macias9133 what in the Mariana Trench, thats a brutal contrast, how did it change your mind?
azmanabdula 1 year ago
@macias9133 That is exactly what we need... but the fact that you picked up the book is that you were "open" to what is against your beliefs. I hope a lot of people would do that and surely we would have a better society.
Thanks for sharing
ajaybalyan 1 year ago
@macias9133 what was your comment?
entehrend 1 year ago
@macias9133 I wanna know too!
rooflee 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Folks - listen to:
Evidence for God from Physics & Astronomy_Lee Strobel
on Youtube
markpianoman 2 years ago
Are Lee Strobes lectures safe for those with epilepsy?
bugblood1978 2 years ago 7
I think that the thing with lawyers is that is not often about whos guilty or not , but its about winning or loosing the case.Just bussiness...
cyberdaemon 2 years ago 6
married....girlfriend's.....mother???
rj12124 2 years ago
hahaha thats what i thought!
thislovefromhell 2 years ago
no he married the girlfriend.
StephaneScot 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Psalm 14:1 The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.
Romans 1:20 For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
markpianoman 2 years ago
What do you think Mark?
June28July 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I agree with the scriptures I quoted 100%. Here is a transliteration of those verses:
Psalms 14:1 It takes a fool to say there is no God.
Romans 1:20 God's everlasting power and God-being(ness) have been clearly evidenced in the creation so that men will stand guilty before God for having rejected the clear evidence of Him who brought into existence.
Maybe that will help you understand.
markpianoman 2 years ago
I don't understand the "clear evidence" part. Care to elaborate?
June28July 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I think you clearly do not want to understand the "clear evidence part."
Otherwise you could "see" evidence of creation all around you!
markpianoman 2 years ago
Please define for me: "Clear evidence".
June28July 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
clear evidence
1. the endless vastness of the universe.
2. the complexity of life forms.....from the very smallest....
3. the very existence of mortal life which could never have developed on its own without the hand of God.
markpianoman 2 years ago
And what traits to you attribute to this higher power?
June28July 2 years ago
How do you know it wasn't many powers that lead to 1-3? What if life is the product of many higher powers? How do you know it was one Deity and not others?
June28July 2 years ago 7
Those are (your) opinions....not evidence.
hutube500 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
you fucking idiot.... dont you know the writers of the bible would come up with ideas on how to protect the bible... you stupid idiot to think people back then are different from people right now.....
lol you un completely evolved ape.
jang4792 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Psalm 14:1 The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.
Romans 1:20 For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
markpianoman 2 years ago
Whover wrote that was clearly not a scientist. Statistically speaking, religious people are bigger fools than scientists (I know, I'm stating the obvious).
kittycatomaniac 2 years ago
What kind of dinosaur did jesus ride?
HardBodyNyC 2 years ago 4
A raptor of course! :)
SsLordMagus 2 years ago
5.57. Is that a joint?
Gallee37 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Presumptions are all well & good and can be equated w/dreams. One may make assumptions about many things: the toxicity of sodium chloride & how frequent bathing damages the skin. Collegiate tutorials designed to convince our beltless, tattooed & pierced youth that free markets are evil, eugenics is righteous, & that babies are disposable now pass as educational. It's no wonder then that so many people lack purpose & a moral compass.
ThingsTerrestrial 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
dawkins is the DEVIL
imafuckwit1 2 years ago
troll fail
Taylor2534 2 years ago 10
Mr Dawkins you are the #1 person I respect the most on this planet. Thank you for existing.
TurkiyeCumhurbaskani 2 years ago 58
Too Right!
UndeadTurk 2 years ago 7
science never ever makes absolute claims.
LOL
St37One 2 years ago
I don't know why you're being downmodded; unless you're being sarcastic.
Science doesn't make absolute claims. You can statistically never be absolute about anything.
chbrules 2 years ago 2
I was quoting the video, and I was enphasizing the irony/contradiction in that statement.
"never ever" is an absolute.
St37One 2 years ago
Its kinda ridiculous what you are saying, its like saying, there is no absolute true and this is absolutely true.
Ryosuke1208 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
omg that weird guy married his ex wifes mum, ew what a skank. isnt this a little too fucked up to feature in a richard dawkins science program? i didnt know people like that existed apart from on rank documentaries on channel 5 at 4 in the morning
fluentinsound 2 years ago
No he didn't marry his ex-wife's mother, he married the mother of the girl he was wrongly accused of killing.
fundiebasher 2 years ago 8
when hes driving, it reminds me of alan partridge
mooglebee 2 years ago
I love Richard dearly, that's why I'm going to forget the fact he was driving a really nasty grey Rover.
stillceaser 2 years ago 5
No math in evolutionary theory and germ theory? What do you think statistical analysis and biochemistry are based on? Grammar and etiquette?
And yes, I am a douche.
DoucheBagster 2 years ago 4
Didn't see your comment until now. The models proposed by Pasteur and Darwin was not based on maths! That you use statistics to analyse data in these fields of study now isnt strange but that doesnt mean that the underlying theories are mathematical. They are observation based sciences and math isnt a fact based science (fact= confirmed observations).
Draugh39 2 years ago
I think Alec is a bit obsessed with dogs.
holydave 2 years ago 2
DOG!
jotoonkid 2 years ago
good on him for his autodiadatic endevors to prove his innocence - would make a good film.
paulaitchison 2 years ago 8
That's an incredible, and frightening, story. Great TV special!
FuzzyDuck 2 years ago
That appeal lawyer looked rather like Jack Thompson.
dafyddoe 3 years ago
draugh39 maths a science are one nothing to do with fairy tales you call religion
tomio145 3 years ago
Sorry? The fairy tales *I* call religion? As far as I'm concerned all faith based mythologies are "sagas". My comments here originate from a statement about maths being a science.
What I have tried to explain is that mathsis not a science, if we by that mean the study of nature/observations. If we follow the definition of science as given by *that author*, THEN we must also include astrology and any other field of knowledge that is not observation based, which also includes theology. Get it?
Draugh39 3 years ago
maths is science, science is maths
tomio145 3 years ago
No, you are wrong here if we use the most common view that we mean Science = natural Science and the scientific method. Mathematics does not involve the scientific methon and does not study "reality". Mathematical proofs are are not true with respect to reality they are true within the context of mathematics -which does not have anything to do with the "real world science is describing. See "Gödel's incompleteness theorems" for the mathematical proof of this.
Draugh39 3 years ago
6H2O + 6CO2+ Light Energy = C6H12O6+ 6O2
take away the maths and there is nothing there
tomio145 3 years ago
Maths is used as a *language* in science. Take away a language and you can't communicate. So what? Note that your exaple also use the language of Chemistry (introduced by Jöns Jakob Berzelius) and also English.
I strongly urge you to educate yourself about the differences between maths and science (i.e. Natural science and the scientific method).
Draugh39 3 years ago
What is maths without science?
What is science without maths?
tomio145 3 years ago
Maths exists just fine without a study of reality. Most researchers in maths that I know do not want their work to be applied. I have many times heard comments of the like "what is the application of a poem" when they talk about what they do. Science can use other languages than math to describe things (Latin is used in biology for instance). However, maths is compact and unambiguous in its definitions and is used for that reason.
Draugh39 3 years ago
It is impossible to explain and understand the inner workings of a plant without mathermatic formula.
tomio145 3 years ago
Not quite. It is "impossible" to understand it without any knowledge of chemistry, an observation based science. That information is usually given in the mathematical language but you can describe it in e.g. Japaneese instead. But the relationships and reactions will be much harder to see in that case as th total volume of text needed to describe it will be huge (so "right model for right problem"). Also, be very careful about the use of the word "impossible" when you speak about science.
Draugh39 3 years ago
I'm not talking about a scientific theory, the word impossible is quite appropriate. You clearly have no knowledge of science or botany. If you did you would know you cannot describe or understand a plant with out mathermatics.
tomio145 3 years ago
As a person that have worked (and is working) as a research chemist for the past 15 years I do think I have a better knowledge about this that you. This is clearly also seen in the fact that you have very limited knowledge about the difference between model, reality and description of reality via a model. The idea that you can't descibe a photosynthesis without maths (but ignoring chemistry) is clearly wrong. Maths say absolutely nothing about physical/chemical processes.
Draugh39 3 years ago
Furthermore the equation "E=m*c^2" say nothing physically, it is just a simple statement of relations of variables/constants and you have no knowledge of what it say unless physics is invoced. An it isn't science unless observations can falsefy the statement. To say that you can't describe a plant unless you use mathematics is silly. Have you ever read Linnaeus? (Carl von Linné) If you have please state what language he used.
Draugh39 3 years ago
So there is no equals sign or number two in that equation. I love botany and its swedish. Well friend this is were i stop this argument, you are talking nonsense.
tomio145 3 years ago
The fact that *you* don't understand it doesn't mean it is nonsense per se.
As stated, maths only describe the relationships of variable/constants in "E=m*c^2". What "E", "m" and "c" are rely on physics, and you can use another language to describe this relationship, maths however, is uniquely well suited to this task.
By the way Linnaeus published in Latin (not Swedish) for the same reason we use maths. It avoids translation mistakes if everyone use the same language.
Draugh39 3 years ago
I do understand this massenergy equivalence equation? I have no idea where you get this fact. I am aware his work was published in latin as was the vast majority of botany at the time. I answered your question Linnaeus was born raised and lived in sweden and so used swedish. Where is this language you will use to explain massenergy equivalence without any form of mathermatics. You would surely be a greater mind than Einstein or a greater magician than Thurston or Houdini.
tomio145 3 years ago
Linnaeus did not use Swedish in his writing (I asked if you has "read him", and what language he used) also many lectures at that time was given in Latin. And the reason Latin was and is used in biology and medicin is because it avoids "translation mistakes". That is why the language mathematics is used in the physical sciences. By expressing a relationship mathematically you avoid misunderstandings, but it doesn't make the expression "true" in relation to reality. Science is used to check that
Draugh39 3 years ago
Have it dude, if you need to use trick question to "win" its yours. If you think you can have science without maths you are for wont of a less aggressive word retarded.
tomio145 3 years ago
That you can have science without maths is easy to prove, evolutionary theory and the germ theory of disease to name but two very important scientific discoveries. Both of these are described without mathematical models. So according to you, the scientific community are retarded to describe these theories as sciences. As an active member of that community I have another name for a person that doesnt know the differences between model and reality, and science and maths.
Draugh39 3 years ago
Also (on a more philosophical level) it doesn't matter if you remove the mathematical expression altogether. The reaction in a plant happens irrespective if you are describing it or not so your comment nothing is there is wrong in that respect too. Just because you cant describe it in compact form does not stop it from happening. There is a vast difference between the real world and a mathematical *MODEL DESCRIPTION* of it.
Draugh39 3 years ago
a meaningless statement from you. What do you refere to when you say "wrong"? which part is wrong? NOte two views are given so what on earth are you talking about?
Draugh39 3 years ago
"and she said you are now under the sentence of 99 years....
and i shit meself"
i understand its quite serious and shouldnt be funny, but that did make me giggle..
Henrythecamel 3 years ago 4
HA! Me too!
cheesuschrist 3 years ago 2
yes it is... LOL then you are calling Statistics, Mathematics, and Computer Science not sciences which is bloody ridiculous if you ask me lol. There are two types of sciences you are referring to empirical sciences and I'm referring to Science as a whole which also includes Formal Science which is what is mathematics falls under. It's a science, thus shown lol, wikipedia it if you need to. You have insulted a lot of my faculty members by insulting their work.
Entertainmentwf 3 years ago
as stated previously this video is about the study of the real world (have you listened to it?) and to refere to maths in that case is simply silly. cf. Gödel is you don't get it.
If you, as you state refere to, Science as formal science (i.e. does not include the scientific method) then you have to include eg. theology and any social science you like. But that is not what is discussed in this video.
Draugh39 3 years ago
You are correct. Science loosely translated could encompass the study of anything. It's the method that distinguishes Science from everything else. As you have correctly stated, induction by use of the scientific method applies to science and mathematics relies on deductive logic.
Spectre11B 3 years ago 2
I wonder if the camera man was hanging at the door outside the car at 3:35. :-)
Ciderman2007 3 years ago
dawkins' license plate looked like "nigga ftw"
frewa43 3 years ago 4
Here is to Jeffries and his eureka moment! and people who believe he is 100% right! That he has something that was absolute proof!
plemke1 3 years ago
The problem is the demand for 100% certainty??????? DAMN RIGHT!!!! When will you be willing to admit that, personally, you believe it too 100%? When people are dying because of your conservatism and you stand aside it is partially your fault!!!! Take a stand against conservatism in science!! You know and that is the Rational choice! READ AYN RAND! IF YOU ARE AFTER A RATIONAL JUSTIFICATION!
plemke1 3 years ago
Esto you got is backwards except witch hunts. Go fuck your jesus faggot. I don't expect a retarded diluted idiot like jesus penis christ to live long.
youtubkicksass 3 years ago
He was being satirical
FeralCr 3 years ago
Eshto, It is the other way around !
holywar? lol you can't have holy and a war in the same word ! FREE THINK and do NOT be brain washed ! you think that you are going to heaven and the rest is going to hell ! hahahaha how self absorbed
nulife799 3 years ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
He was being sarcastic
FeralCr 3 years ago
and you're an idiot
christe68 3 years ago
you have seen the light
christe68 3 years ago
Was Professor Dawkins just driving a Mitsubishi Evolution??.... lol. How fitting.
barkleymoogle 3 years ago 9
science never proves anything 100%? so wat its not 100%that the earth is a sphere and that it along w/the other objects in the solar system orbit the sun? i realize science is always open2new findings but come on lets not become ridiculous.
jimmyti9cer 3 years ago
jimmy, the Earth isn't a sphere, DNA testing isn't foolproof (someone else can have the same markers as you), while the planets in our solar system do indeed orbit the Sun they don't do it perfectly (our moon doesn't have a regular orbit around the Earth, it's gradually moving away) & also the Sun is in an orbit of our galaxy.
To contextualize, DNA identity testing has a 1 in approximately 10 billion chance of error, & less for paternity checks. 99.9999% accuracy, but still not 100%.
catalyst8 3 years ago
in religion the war that is said to be undergone now and n the past is the war against good and evil. its actually war among two evils.
jimmyti9cer 3 years ago
Poor bloke. To lose one's daughter, and then be sentenced for her death. Absolutely horrifying.
paulbottomley42 3 years ago 4
"....And I shit me self"
Hahhaha...aww :(
aversion2k 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
High I.Q. Society for Christians online now! Sunesis Society I.Q. requirement 137! Higher than Mensa! Intellectuals for Jesus! COme join!
noeatingallowed 3 years ago
Richard Dawkins may very well save the human race from religion induced extinction. It may not happen in his lifetime...but my grandchildren and great grandchildren will likely look to Dawkins as we look to Darwin today.
Imaginary God Bless him!
mikrobious 3 years ago 12
oh dear...i respect mr dawkins dearly...but i have lost a slight bit of respect for him in just discovering that he does/did drive a rover 400. its a very sad day of discovery
finchy633 3 years ago
Damn people, rebelling against Science.
Arresting a retard, and sending him to life in prision.
Good thing that retard can read, and educate himself, and finally set himself free.
But 4 years... shit.
LovelyYTRocks 3 years ago
Apparently you completely missed the point. Science is a tool, just like a hammer, or a rifle. If you understand how to use the tool it will serve you unerringly and allow you to accomplish things that would be impossible otherwise. If you do not understand how to use the tool but try to anyway, you will likely wind up hurting yourself with it and possibly damage the tool in the process. The case of the handicapped guy wasn't a failure of science, it was a failure of the people using it.
imnoromeo 3 years ago 14
is Leslie that old woman with the cane he's walking out of the courthouse with?
Thrashaero 3 years ago
"and i shit myself" unexpected LOL
wookieproductions 3 years ago 13