possibly the caller was talking about the war against the nazi mindset. ie,killing the handicapped and those that were considered inferior. the nazi labeled such people as "useless eaters" which means they ate up food resources but didnt contribute anything back to society so as such should be killed.which in a warped way is survival of the fittest via force.
"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.
In a million years, we will all be black, loud, drug-abusing, losers because in our society, that is what reproduces many times more than the hard working, intelligent, consumer.
@420simpson they would have a better argument saying einsteins work caused hiroshima but than again, it doesnt show his work was wrong, thats the thing creationists dont realize, they think if they dont like something, it must be wrong.
AJ seems more enlightened than FOX. When Dawks is on FOX, some fathead like O'Reily or Hannity wouldinterrupt him every minute to toss their theocon inspired ignorance in
also some asshole tried to blame WWII on darwinism? pick up a history book and look at all the atrocities committed in the name of your chosen faith, grow up, educate yourself and stop propagating a bullshit belief on everybody...
@krinoable yeah, as if a 1000 years of Christian antisemitism or German racism, chauvinism and militarism had nothing to do with WW ll, They all got their bad ideas from a biology textbook
reading all of these pathetic defenses of the Judeo-Christian-Islamic tradition makes me sick. Here you have a man who has dedicated his life to understanding a topic you barely consider and all you do is vomit out whatever crap was fed to you in your nurture-lacking childhood. Heres some advice read a little of Hannah Arendt on the Banality of Evil and learn how disgustingly evil it is to be an inconsiderate, ignorant, dogmatic and conformist little tool....
Richard Dawkins on Intelligent Design: "Total non-starter". I am glad he makes it so clear there cannot be a creating God, and yet life is no less beautiful for God's absence! Some might even argue that WE are God!
Topics: DEADLY ARGUMENTS NOW ADDED For The Creationism-Evolutionism Debate (See Subchapter 10.2.2.), The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balanceddiet1.yolasite.com
See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
@warriorprince1010 How do you know, you have never studied Science. Science does not use magic, voodoo or desinger gods. Science demands a natural explaination.
@warriorprince1010 Law of KINDs? Yes! Dogs make dogs. Apes make apes. That is why humans are still apes. And all apes are still monkeys. And all monkeys are still primates. And all primates are still mammals. And all mammals are still tetrapods. And all tetrapods are still vertebrates. You can't outgrow you ancestry.
@warriorprince1010 It is NOT based on accident. Go learn more...then come back with something else to say about it. Right now you sound like an ignorant fool.
Haha at 03:44 you can hear Dawkins audibly *sigh* As if to say ''oh for fuck's sake not this shit AGAIN'' I do feel sorry for him getting asked retarded questions like this so often.. I do wonder how someone with internet access (And therefore, access to alot of the world's knowledge) can still be religious
@warriorprince1010 No evolution is not based on chance at all, things that interfere with natural selection for example the extinction of the dinosaurs by an asteroid impact is chance. But evolution itself is NOT CHANCE, the species that were adaptable after the asteroid impact adapted to the changing world and thrived.
This is one of the best interviews of Dawkins that I have seen. In therms of the interview being balanced and intelligent with the reporter asking questions that allows Dawkins to express his opinion rather than the reporter trying to force HIS opinion onto Dawkins as if any reporter could successfully debate an academic such as Dawkins. I was truly surprised by the quality of this interview and makes me disappointed in the other national and international news channels.
05:20 Why Dawkins believes the invention of Penicillin and advancement in Medicine to be anti Darwinian?
They are very Darwinian because they help with the survival of the human species.
We live in Darwinian society-those that have easy access to sufficient resources reproduce more than those that work hard to obtain sufficient resources. Of course "sufficient" is a relative term and depends on the local social and geographical environment.
Dawkins's views on evolution of society are so wrong.
@gespilk Advancements in Medicine means that individuals with genetic predisposition to diseases have about the same probability of surviving and reproducing as a genetically "superior" individual. In the long run, natural selection is therefore slowed down, and genetic drift might make a larger percentile of the population be predisposed to diseases, and might make our species as a whole more dependent on medicines. So it's anti-darwinian because it slows down natural selection :-)
@gespilk Professor Dawkins is talking about natural selection within a single species, not natural selection among competing species. The mechanism for this is that individuals with superior genome survive, those with inferior genome die off.
If medicine and technology advances to the point where any individual born can survive long enough to reproduce, natural selection within the species would halt. You would still have mutations, genetic drift and sexual selection, but no natural selection.
With risk to repeat I say,We live in a Darwinian society - those that have easy access to sufficient resources reproduce more than those that work hard to obtain sufficient resources.Of course "sufficient","resources","hard work" are relative/wide terms and depends on the local social and geographical environment.
Also,"Natural selection never stops".What changes are the evolutionary pressures in the society. Even if"dying before reproduction"is removed from the list we added new ones.
@gespilk I think the snag in this argument is that Darwin never spoke of societies. He was a naturalist and wrote purely on the genetic selection of natural creatures. "Darwinian society" doesn't actually have anything to do with Darwin. Society makes it possible for people with one trait just as successful at breeding as most others, thus slowing the weeding out of certain genes. This is why it is "anti-Darwinian." As in: doesn't fit inside Darwin's theory.
i will never understand why people think 'survival of the fittest' is about killing off the weaker. it's about ability to adapt. altruism and co-operation are imperative to survival *as a species*
it's not about killing off your own. such is the way to destruction
@noeszigi - and those are the ones whose genes get passed on. it's got nothing to do with strength, but ability to adapt to the environment. if that *requires* strength, then so be it, but for the most part, it doesn't
@mardastheEitheist LOL, I think I saw that muslim scholar in Al Jazeera instructing viewers on how to beat their wives with toothbrushes. Sounds like a The Simpsons episode, but is true. They are such a double faced bastards.
@HugeShoeBox Not a single thing you said makes a lick of sense. I always try to avoid insults, but this is just a statement of fact... you are one dumb m.f.
I like the expression: "We know from the Qur'an/Bible/Tora that..... therefore evolution is wrong." A person beginning with this expression asks for a punch in the face since there is no point to reason with'em.
Atheists think that the heart is not for pumping blood. Atheists think that eyes are not for seeing. Atheists think that ears are not for hearing. Atheists think that noses are not for smelling. Atheists don't just ignore what's staring them in the face, they ignore their face! Is the mouth not for speaking, eating, drinking, kissing? Atheists don't think that penises are meant for vaginas; I think they were made for each other. Thank the Lord God!
@HugeShoeBox "Atheists think that the heart is not for pumping blood. Atheists think that eyes are not for seeing. Atheists think that ears are not for hearing. Atheists think that noses are not for smelling." Ummm....we actually DO believe all this stuff.
"WW2 was caused by Darwinian evolution according to him. Belief in a creator will prevent such things."
So it seems you'd rather let the voices of 7th century dessert men dictate who is and who isn't in "god's special club" and wage war accordingly?
Jesus Christ, this is what happens when children are fed fairy tales their entire life. They become adults with the ignorance of a child without the accompanying innocence.
The problem isnt that people dont understand it, the problem is that people dont even want to understand it. Im going to study biology in few years, and yes, the common man doesnt know exactly what evolution is. It is complicated. But everyone should be able to understand the basics of Natural selection, and what evolution actually explains.
The details of how Evolution works are complicated but the idea is simple and even obvious. I remember the first time I heard about it, I was only about 10. I was told that the reason that northern rabbits turned white in winter was because those that didn't got eaten. Then the white rabbit had babies that inherited the trait.
That seemed so obvious to me that I never considered it might not be true and as it turns out it IS true. Mutation is trickier.
@warren52nz Yeah, but let me just show you an example of the hard parts. Natural selection kills of the weakest ones. So that means the ones most suitable for the enviroment survives. BUT, there is a mistake there. And that is. Say you want to bhreat a dog with long teets. Then you take the dogs (in the spiecy) with the longest teeths and put them in a breathing program. However, why does the teeths grow after the first breathing generation. Thats the hard parts.
@gulbirk Sorry I can't quite understand your point. If you select dogs with longer teeth and breed them you will soon get dogs with long teeth.
The one important thing to understand about Evolution is that it's been going on for over 3 BILLION years! If you try to understand how long that is, you may start to see how powerful Evolution can be. Look at the variety of dogs from just a few hundred years of selection (not natural selection of course but you can see how much they can change).
@warren52nz Yes I know, I was simply asking do you understand why? Most people answer natural selection, but thats kinda just half the answer. That was my point, after 100 generation one would expect that at best, all the dogs would have just as long teeths as the best ones from the first generation. Its complicated biology, but the answer lies in the double helix.
What?!! You call that an interview?!! Where's the shouting? Childish name calling? Sure, I got to hear the guest's point of view, but where's the fun in that?
The chasm between Riz Khan's line of questioning and Fox's Bill O'Reilly is an indictment on the state of the American public's philosophical and intellectual nous. Fox Network is dumbing down America! Oh how the mighty have fallen.
@skworq Not necessarily. Sure, Fox is pursuing fear mongering at the cost of intelligent reporting, I won't deny that. I even LIKE Fox, a statement you won't hear much. Having said that, most Americans are smarter and better educated than you think, and I feel that if we openly contest the nonsense being presented as information, it will fade away. All we need to do is stay educated and persistent.
@andyhello23 Sorry Andy, but it is you that has been fooled. Understandably, you may have spent your whole life investing in this wacky promise of an afterlife, communicating through clenched whispers with nobody but yourself. That would be embarrassing, so I can understand why it's so hard for theists to even remotely question their faith, even in the light of overwhelming facts supporting atheism, and entirely refuting biblical creation stories. Question is, would you like to know the truth?
For the first time in an interview with Richard Dawkins, I didn't find myself shouting 'CRETIN' at the interviewer.
This man should do a more 'in depth' interview with the good Professor and broadcast it again on Al Jazeera. It may go some way to showing the Islamic world that there is a viable alternative to what they learnt by rote as children.
@pervious1 Who would've thought a primarily Muslim program would have been capable of such an open and mutually respectful discussion. This is how intelligent debates are done, without the drama.
fantastic presenter, great information, all well presented. easily 10 times better than CNN or FOX, and that's coming from an unbiased view to begin with to be honest.
@kantastisk Al Jazeera has a well earned reputation for being well informed, uninterested in bias and careful about their interview selections. I've almost never watched them due to lack of interest, but after watching a few interviews like this, I can see why they hold that reputation.
@GoodAvatar It's just that I've heard there are noticeable differences between the English and Arabic versions of the channel. Please see Dawkin's own website and do a search for Al Jazeera, read the top article: "Ardi proves Darwin wrong". I'd give you the link but I think there's some "no links"-policy on youtube comments.
If someone thinks that evolution is a theory that can't be proved at all (I think even house-trained cats and dogs are examples for natural selection and evolution), but a book written by some guys over a thousand years ago without a reasonable base is the one and only truth, well "god" bless you ;-)
When I was ten, my parents gave me the Life book, "The Wonders of Life on Earth." I didn't know it at the time, but just the *pictures* in that book profoundly affected the way I would one day view the world. It's where I met Darwin, dinosaurs, fossils, geological epochs, and my cousins, the great apes. It took 25 more years, but eventually I became an atheist.
All my special things from my childhood (mostly books) were put in a box and have been lost. How I wish I still had that book!
Dawkins comment that we wont be around 20 million years from now seems rather illogical, surely we'll develop our technology far beyond the wildest dreams we have now, we could be able to colonize the whole galaxy even move to others seeing as we're the only species to actually develop some kind of technology, its quite possible that we'll be around until the end of the universe if it even has an end.
@Uteko95 it's not completely illogical, it doesnt matter about the state of technology, a meteorite could smash into the earth within the next few years killing everyone. There could be a worldwide nuclear war or an new virus epidemic. You are only limited by your own imagination the number of possible ways the human race could end. We just can't predict what is going to happen.
@Uteko95 That's what I want to believe too, but for that to happen, first of all we need to abolish religion or it won't let us move on to the next step, because most common religious people won't see a point in colonizing space. They think their god will end the world and take them and they'll always be existing eternaly in some paradise. Also, I don't think colonizing space will make the bible books look too good. They're not ready for that change and our societies probably never will...
I work with some of the best tecnology around, factory automation,
It's quite unlikely that any electronic equipment can last even 15 years without serious repairs, and we need at least 100.000 years to even consider space travelling.
The only solution would be to launch 1 trillion micro spaceships containing DNA and a micro envirement to allow it to survive.
BUT, for what reason ?, when a man dies, its the same as the universe is dead for him.
"it is indeed amusing that some still believe in nonsense like Adam and Eve"
-
Monogamy is a religious fetish... Marriage is a religious fetish... Yet the good little religious faggots want to conform to the tyranny of the monogamy meme, get married and stick with one corn hole forever and ever... And I thought my jokes were bad...
Evolution of mammals can only occur with heterosexual relationships...
All credit due to Al Jazeera for a respectful and intelligent interview. Credit due also, of course, to Dawkins for such pointed, concise, and unassailable answers.
I wish I'd been taught about it earlier, it quickly made biology fascinating to me and explained to me lots of things about myself that I had no idea about. And there's no reason evolution shouldn't be comfortable alongside religion, I know loads of Christians and Muslims (although less Muslims) that have no problem accepting it.
Isn't that a splendid sample of the very beginning of the evolution process?
Wouldn't he be an extremely precious specimen for any biology lab? For those scientists who are involved in the brain biogenesis. To have that live yet, extremely prehistorically frozen creature, at the dissecting table and learn, learn, learn. It's equal in value to the imaginary time machine can't be overestimated.
regarding his comment at 5:30. You don't abandon the darwinian process by supporting vaccinations and medicine. Our intelligence is part of darwinian evolution. The tools we develop to improve our survival are all part of the process.
Al jazeerah clearly has a far better standard in journalism than their American counter parts. No wonder they get much flack from the U.S. media. They don't want us to watch a better put program.
@Darw1n1st I agree, with the FOX show, O'Reilly is trying to defend his intelligence and when O'Reilly asks a question, he would cut-off Prof. Dawkins' from answering completely.
@Darw1n1st Actually this is an American version of Al Jazeera. The interviewer is in Washington. The original Al Jazeera was extremely biased against the west and Israel in their reporting. Calling Israel baby killers while continually praising Hezbollah. Far from neutral reporting. Now they have different English and Arabic sections that are editorially distinct, with their own brand of news catering to respective audiences. This change came about because of criticisms of their biases.
Good interview. Compare it with the one on CNN with that idiot Bill O'Reilley!
The caller was a complete idiot. "We know that God created Adam and that Evolution is nonsense" - well how do you "know" that when all the evidence is the exact opposite?
I have to say, as a student of evolutionary biology myself, I would have answered many of those questions differently. For example, Dawkins replies to the caller by saying he doesn't know what he's talking about. This was no doubt a means of telling him that Darwinism has nothing to do with WWII. But to be more direct, why not say that scientific theories do not attempt to tell us how to live our lives? Nor do they extend sociopolitical agendas such as those held by Hitler.
@CosmosFan1 Dawkins has been in enough of these debates to know when not to presume the intention of a question and answer on that basis. Abdul says WW2 came about because of darwinian theory. We know what this retard is implying, but Dawkins takes the question literally and responds directly without getting sucked into a nonsensical argument about social darwinism or the like...
Good interviewer. He didn't waste a second, kept the questions coming & asked a few really well put questions - I've seen a lot of people ask Dawkins much stupiider questions.
@nicHoju Riz is awesome at his job. I liked him since his BBC contract.no bullshit, covers a lot in given time and doesnt allow his beliefs to affect the conversation.
@nicHoju Damn, no lie! This guy was an awesome interviewer. As a side note, it's hilarious, though it must be frustrating, that Richard Dawkins continually answers the same obvious, dumbass question. To a man with his level of training, education and experience, it must feel like the painter explaining for the millionth time that there IS a color called red. It must feel like the mathematician who patiently instructs idiots that you CAN add 1 and 2 together. Basic facts shouldn't be dismissed.
@snackynak That's a common misconception, World Focus a show that until recently aired daily on PBS, got most of their content/reports from Al Jazeera. Another reason why they're good is because they show both sides of war. In a US broadcast you hear terms like collateral damage, etc, but they actually show those things unfiltered instead of sugar coating and perpetuating a false image.
i hate how evolution is always taught with respect to fossils. things in biology and chemistry are much more convincing like transposons, nanobes, and amino acids.
if kids knew transposon as easily as the word evolution we'd all be better off. it's not that hard a word, it's only 1 letter longer than evolution.
And sometimes I'm disappointed in how the guys like Dawkins or Hitchens don't nail questioners as hard as they could, who probably go home assuming he was right all along.
The Muslim caller was referring to the fallacy popularized by Ben Stein in "Expelled," that Hitler would not have come into power without Darwin's theory. A simple rebuttal is that animal husbandry expresses the idea of Nazi-like eugenics better than Darwin, and religion was a nurse crop for his cruel dogma.
I never said anything about an infinite universe. But because you think that I did, here's some schoolin'.
The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics applies only to closed systems which would obviously exclude an infinite system. Thus an infinite universe is not refuted by a law which HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS FUCKING CONVERSATION.
Fantastic interview and interviewer, i concur with thebrassdubliner. I also liked the way that he acted as a non-bias interviewer able to controll the flow of conversation without imposing his own views.
Definatly the best TV interviewer I've seen question Dawkins. Intelligent, articulate, fairly well informed and holy crap....Polite! Go Al Jazeera, pay attention FOX!
oh my god, dawkins on al jazeera, he is trying to start world war 3? do they love our nutters that much? the iranians are gonna use him for anti western propaganda!!
still, not nearly as dangerous as david shayler on al jazeera, hope thats not on youtube
As Christopher Hitchens said ..."the debates over" ....there is no controversy over the fact of evolution.
darkstar8043 1 month ago
The presenter of this show is a class act, rare to see in these kinds of "debates" on tv.
OnkelStein 2 months ago
"Abdul from Scotland" is an idiot.
OnkelStein 2 months ago
possibly the caller was talking about the war against the nazi mindset. ie,killing the handicapped and those that were considered inferior. the nazi labeled such people as "useless eaters" which means they ate up food resources but didnt contribute anything back to society so as such should be killed.which in a warped way is survival of the fittest via force.
glennjridge 3 months ago
@mardastheEitheist Fitting for the two-faced religion of choice in that region.
Khyrid 3 months ago
Compare this awesome interview to the O'Reilly Factor
MrSmashman1981 4 months ago
Comment removed
3623acd315 4 months ago
I was preparing for a fuck-fest of stupidity, but this beats Fox news any given day.
hcnuup 4 months ago 3
Boys! BOYS!!!
splinterbyrd 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Dead-to-the-spirit deluded "God Delusion" author & blithering fool scientist goon Richard Dawkins another "leader" given 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
In a million years, we will all be black, loud, drug-abusing, losers because in our society, that is what reproduces many times more than the hard working, intelligent, consumer.
GladiatorGT 5 months ago
lol....evolution started world war two. haha. thats like saying the science of color and light waves cause the civil war
420simpson 5 months ago 13
@420simpson gravity is going to kill our sun
ThanksDoctorThoctor 5 months ago
@420simpson they would have a better argument saying einsteins work caused hiroshima but than again, it doesnt show his work was wrong, thats the thing creationists dont realize, they think if they dont like something, it must be wrong.
wearestarstuffsagan 3 months ago 3
AJ seems more enlightened than FOX. When Dawks is on FOX, some fathead like O'Reily or Hannity wouldinterrupt him every minute to toss their theocon inspired ignorance in
DawnOfTheDead991 6 months ago
also some asshole tried to blame WWII on darwinism? pick up a history book and look at all the atrocities committed in the name of your chosen faith, grow up, educate yourself and stop propagating a bullshit belief on everybody...
krinoable 6 months ago
@krinoable yeah, as if a 1000 years of Christian antisemitism or German racism, chauvinism and militarism had nothing to do with WW ll, They all got their bad ideas from a biology textbook
DawnOfTheDead991 6 months ago
reading all of these pathetic defenses of the Judeo-Christian-Islamic tradition makes me sick. Here you have a man who has dedicated his life to understanding a topic you barely consider and all you do is vomit out whatever crap was fed to you in your nurture-lacking childhood. Heres some advice read a little of Hannah Arendt on the Banality of Evil and learn how disgustingly evil it is to be an inconsiderate, ignorant, dogmatic and conformist little tool....
krinoable 6 months ago 2
@mardastheEitheist how many people in the arabic world who watch al-jazeera arabic also watch its english language one? I guess only a few?
TheAtheistHindu 7 months ago
Richard Dawkins on Intelligent Design: "Total non-starter". I am glad he makes it so clear there cannot be a creating God, and yet life is no less beautiful for God's absence! Some might even argue that WE are God!
bobinhk1 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@warriorprince1010
I repeat:
What is an invisible designer ?
.
And what the fuck is "invisible accidents in science" ?
Duhhhhhhhhhhhhh..................
tellnet 7 months ago
@warriorprince1010
I asked you:
What is an invisible designer ?
Address the question.
tellnet 7 months ago
@tellnet
What is a non-existent designer? Its like saying what is x times 0, or 2 times 0, or 4,000,000 times 0. 0.
An invisible object, is something that in non-existent to the eye, but may, or may not be existent in reality.
Read the Quran. It proves Gods existence.
FreeSoul790 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@FreeSoul790
1. The question was "What is an invisible designer "
NOT "What is a non-existent designer"
Duhhhhhhhhhhhh ....
2. The Quran does NOT "prove god's existence".
Duhhhhhhhh...
Do you enjoy advertising your abject ignorance ?
tellnet 6 months ago
@warriorprince1010
What is an invisible designer ?
A character from Harry Potter perhaps ?
Arrah begorrah, and sure Harry Potter is a true story, so she could not have been involved there.
Must be a new branch of science - Invisibledesignerology.
tellnet 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NEW BOOK FOR DEBATES AND GOVERNANCE
Topics: DEADLY ARGUMENTS NOW ADDED For The Creationism-Evolutionism Debate (See Subchapter 10.2.2.), The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balanceddiet1.yolasite.com
See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
etc.
TheServiceWeb 7 months ago
@warriorprince1010 How do you know, you have never studied Science. Science does not use magic, voodoo or desinger gods. Science demands a natural explaination.
gregrutz 7 months ago
gregrutz 7 months ago
@warriorprince1010 You didn't watch the video, did you?
gregrutz 7 months ago
@warriorprince1010 It is NOT based on accident. Go learn more...then come back with something else to say about it. Right now you sound like an ignorant fool.
skippy13312000 8 months ago
Haha at 03:44 you can hear Dawkins audibly *sigh* As if to say ''oh for fuck's sake not this shit AGAIN'' I do feel sorry for him getting asked retarded questions like this so often.. I do wonder how someone with internet access (And therefore, access to alot of the world's knowledge) can still be religious
richiemadd 8 months ago
@warriorprince1010 No evolution is not based on chance at all, things that interfere with natural selection for example the extinction of the dinosaurs by an asteroid impact is chance. But evolution itself is NOT CHANCE, the species that were adaptable after the asteroid impact adapted to the changing world and thrived.
ClanSnowRaven 8 months ago
@mardastheEitheist Not really. I occasionally watch Aljazeerah in English. It does accept criticism sometimes.
Sometimes they don't though.
lotr450 8 months ago
This is one of the best interviews of Dawkins that I have seen. In therms of the interview being balanced and intelligent with the reporter asking questions that allows Dawkins to express his opinion rather than the reporter trying to force HIS opinion onto Dawkins as if any reporter could successfully debate an academic such as Dawkins. I was truly surprised by the quality of this interview and makes me disappointed in the other national and international news channels.
Pwn00b 9 months ago
Who would have thought that Al jazzerah would have 1,000x the journalism standards than fox news.
Steelmoon17 9 months ago
nice, respectful and insightful
Heeman1119 9 months ago 9
05:20 Why Dawkins believes the invention of Penicillin and advancement in Medicine to be anti Darwinian?
They are very Darwinian because they help with the survival of the human species.
We live in Darwinian society-those that have easy access to sufficient resources reproduce more than those that work hard to obtain sufficient resources. Of course "sufficient" is a relative term and depends on the local social and geographical environment.
Dawkins's views on evolution of society are so wrong.
gespilk 9 months ago
@gespilk Advancements in Medicine means that individuals with genetic predisposition to diseases have about the same probability of surviving and reproducing as a genetically "superior" individual. In the long run, natural selection is therefore slowed down, and genetic drift might make a larger percentile of the population be predisposed to diseases, and might make our species as a whole more dependent on medicines. So it's anti-darwinian because it slows down natural selection :-)
jouassou 9 months ago
@jouassou
How is dependence on medicine bad for the natural selection? It is irrelevant.
As long as medicine/technology helps us to survive better and longer then it is good for our natural selection.
Your view is the same as Dawkins's.
We already have symbiotic relationships with other living organisms. The next step is to have such relationship with technology, medicine, etc.
Natural selection never stops. We are becoming invariant to the influence of the environment.
gespilk 9 months ago
@gespilk Professor Dawkins is talking about natural selection within a single species, not natural selection among competing species. The mechanism for this is that individuals with superior genome survive, those with inferior genome die off.
If medicine and technology advances to the point where any individual born can survive long enough to reproduce, natural selection within the species would halt. You would still have mutations, genetic drift and sexual selection, but no natural selection.
jouassou 9 months ago
@jouassou
With risk to repeat I say,We live in a Darwinian society - those that have easy access to sufficient resources reproduce more than those that work hard to obtain sufficient resources.Of course "sufficient","resources","hard work" are relative/wide terms and depends on the local social and geographical environment.
Also,"Natural selection never stops".What changes are the evolutionary pressures in the society. Even if"dying before reproduction"is removed from the list we added new ones.
gespilk 9 months ago
@gespilk I think the snag in this argument is that Darwin never spoke of societies. He was a naturalist and wrote purely on the genetic selection of natural creatures. "Darwinian society" doesn't actually have anything to do with Darwin. Society makes it possible for people with one trait just as successful at breeding as most others, thus slowing the weeding out of certain genes. This is why it is "anti-Darwinian." As in: doesn't fit inside Darwin's theory.
NucularRobit 8 months ago
i will never understand why people think 'survival of the fittest' is about killing off the weaker. it's about ability to adapt. altruism and co-operation are imperative to survival *as a species*
it's not about killing off your own. such is the way to destruction
GodsArePeopleToo 10 months ago
@GodsArePeopleToo or that some species fit better for the time inviroment they live in it is actually pretty simple
noeszigi 8 months ago
@noeszigi - and those are the ones whose genes get passed on. it's got nothing to do with strength, but ability to adapt to the environment. if that *requires* strength, then so be it, but for the most part, it doesn't
GodsArePeopleToo 8 months ago
Probability (chance) has a large role in genetics and therefore has a large role in evolution as well.
hvrtguys 10 months ago
Al Jazeera is an excellent news channel - well done Qutar
c5869y 10 months ago
@mardastheEitheist LOL, I think I saw that muslim scholar in Al Jazeera instructing viewers on how to beat their wives with toothbrushes. Sounds like a The Simpsons episode, but is true. They are such a double faced bastards.
LesPaul2006 10 months ago
@LesPaul2006 thats the Shariqa channel not Al jazeera. Shariqa is based in the UAE.
akkadianarab 8 months ago
What a good interview. I'm used to the classic American "tide goues in tide goes out" interview. This is refreshing.
LesPaul2006 10 months ago
an excellent and respectful interview,
paulspydar 10 months ago
Chance is actually a large part of evolution.
hvrtguys 10 months ago
@hvrtguys Not really. Survival is a large part of evolution.
LesPaul2006 10 months ago
@hvrtguys Nope, not really, take a few biology classes.
PrivateJoker17 10 months ago
I wish america had a news station with the same standards of ethics as Al Jazeera
dsdougharty 11 months ago
I could watch Dawkins pwning irrationality and blind faith all day.
KaliberKing 11 months ago
Abdul in Scotland is a retard.
CrazyMunky84 11 months ago 2
@HugeShoeBox Not a single thing you said makes a lick of sense. I always try to avoid insults, but this is just a statement of fact... you are one dumb m.f.
northwestindie 11 months ago
I like the expression: "We know from the Qur'an/Bible/Tora that..... therefore evolution is wrong." A person beginning with this expression asks for a punch in the face since there is no point to reason with'em.
ahmedeox 11 months ago
Atheism is a religion- godless.
sungl0 11 months ago
@sungl0
No it isn't.
JonathanTheAlchemist 11 months ago
Atheists think that the heart is not for pumping blood. Atheists think that eyes are not for seeing. Atheists think that ears are not for hearing. Atheists think that noses are not for smelling. Atheists don't just ignore what's staring them in the face, they ignore their face! Is the mouth not for speaking, eating, drinking, kissing? Atheists don't think that penises are meant for vaginas; I think they were made for each other. Thank the Lord God!
HugeShoeBox 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@HugeShoeBox "Atheists think that the heart is not for pumping blood. Atheists think that eyes are not for seeing. Atheists think that ears are not for hearing. Atheists think that noses are not for smelling." Ummm....we actually DO believe all this stuff.
ahmedeox 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@thatamazinggeek "Genghis Khan was an evolutionist as well:) That dude was worse than the Nazis."
Agreed. But be careful not to stick Hitler into the Atheist category, he was a Catholic. Here's a humorous take on the evidence:
watch?v=YP_iNCGH9kY
warren52nz 11 months ago
Al Jazeera is gaining my respect. They are also doing an amazing job on covering the current disasters in Japan.
cromos 1 year ago
I'd say modern medicine is all part of natural selection. Our advanced minds have equipped us to survive better.
backwoodsninja 1 year ago
"Abdullah from Scotland"
"WW2 was caused by Darwinian evolution according to him. Belief in a creator will prevent such things."
So it seems you'd rather let the voices of 7th century dessert men dictate who is and who isn't in "god's special club" and wage war accordingly?
Jesus Christ, this is what happens when children are fed fairy tales their entire life. They become adults with the ignorance of a child without the accompanying innocence.
AziMeX 1 year ago 2
I was expecting very poor quality tv when I clicked this video... I'm pleasantly surprised.
Laudrengen 1 year ago
@Laudrengen The title is misleading. This is an American version of Al Jazeera. The interviewer is in Washington DC.
dangle66 1 year ago
The problem isnt that people dont understand it, the problem is that people dont even want to understand it. Im going to study biology in few years, and yes, the common man doesnt know exactly what evolution is. It is complicated. But everyone should be able to understand the basics of Natural selection, and what evolution actually explains.
gulbirk 1 year ago
@gulbirk "(Evolution) is complicated..."
The details of how Evolution works are complicated but the idea is simple and even obvious. I remember the first time I heard about it, I was only about 10. I was told that the reason that northern rabbits turned white in winter was because those that didn't got eaten. Then the white rabbit had babies that inherited the trait.
That seemed so obvious to me that I never considered it might not be true and as it turns out it IS true. Mutation is trickier.
warren52nz 11 months ago
@warren52nz Yeah, but let me just show you an example of the hard parts. Natural selection kills of the weakest ones. So that means the ones most suitable for the enviroment survives. BUT, there is a mistake there. And that is. Say you want to bhreat a dog with long teets. Then you take the dogs (in the spiecy) with the longest teeths and put them in a breathing program. However, why does the teeths grow after the first breathing generation. Thats the hard parts.
gulbirk 11 months ago
@gulbirk Sorry I can't quite understand your point. If you select dogs with longer teeth and breed them you will soon get dogs with long teeth.
The one important thing to understand about Evolution is that it's been going on for over 3 BILLION years! If you try to understand how long that is, you may start to see how powerful Evolution can be. Look at the variety of dogs from just a few hundred years of selection (not natural selection of course but you can see how much they can change).
warren52nz 11 months ago
@warren52nz Yes I know, I was simply asking do you understand why? Most people answer natural selection, but thats kinda just half the answer. That was my point, after 100 generation one would expect that at best, all the dogs would have just as long teeths as the best ones from the first generation. Its complicated biology, but the answer lies in the double helix.
gulbirk 11 months ago
What?!! You call that an interview?!! Where's the shouting? Childish name calling? Sure, I got to hear the guest's point of view, but where's the fun in that?
dghansen85 1 year ago 16
@dghansen85 This isn't fox lol.
homsarshat 6 months ago
Wow, Abdul is trying hard to sound smart... fail.
TheAbruptChin 1 year ago
The chasm between Riz Khan's line of questioning and Fox's Bill O'Reilly is an indictment on the state of the American public's philosophical and intellectual nous. Fox Network is dumbing down America! Oh how the mighty have fallen.
skworq 1 year ago 2
@skworq Not necessarily. Sure, Fox is pursuing fear mongering at the cost of intelligent reporting, I won't deny that. I even LIKE Fox, a statement you won't hear much. Having said that, most Americans are smarter and better educated than you think, and I feel that if we openly contest the nonsense being presented as information, it will fade away. All we need to do is stay educated and persistent.
GoodAvatar 1 year ago
haha peopel calling this moron an intellect, wtf.
His debating skills are calling people names, and he openly says he will not debate someone who knows what they are talking about.
He has conned all you people period.
andyhello23 1 year ago
@andyhello23 Sorry Andy, but it is you that has been fooled. Understandably, you may have spent your whole life investing in this wacky promise of an afterlife, communicating through clenched whispers with nobody but yourself. That would be embarrassing, so I can understand why it's so hard for theists to even remotely question their faith, even in the light of overwhelming facts supporting atheism, and entirely refuting biblical creation stories. Question is, would you like to know the truth?
skworq 1 year ago 2
Good interview, as opposed to the normal drivel you get with Bill O'reilly et al.
ZepFreak01 1 year ago 2
Abdul from Scotland... not a very smart young man.
caviper1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
jesus secret - watch video at jagball22
jagball22 1 year ago
For the first time in an interview with Richard Dawkins, I didn't find myself shouting 'CRETIN' at the interviewer.
This man should do a more 'in depth' interview with the good Professor and broadcast it again on Al Jazeera. It may go some way to showing the Islamic world that there is a viable alternative to what they learnt by rote as children.
pervious1 1 year ago
@pervious1 Who would've thought a primarily Muslim program would have been capable of such an open and mutually respectful discussion. This is how intelligent debates are done, without the drama.
DamienZshadow 1 year ago 4
fantastic presenter, great information, all well presented. easily 10 times better than CNN or FOX, and that's coming from an unbiased view to begin with to be honest.
yozeroz 1 year ago 3
oh, I thought it would be Dawkins talking *about* Al Jazeera.
kantastisk 1 year ago
@kantastisk Al Jazeera has a well earned reputation for being well informed, uninterested in bias and careful about their interview selections. I've almost never watched them due to lack of interest, but after watching a few interviews like this, I can see why they hold that reputation.
GoodAvatar 1 year ago
@GoodAvatar It's just that I've heard there are noticeable differences between the English and Arabic versions of the channel. Please see Dawkin's own website and do a search for Al Jazeera, read the top article: "Ardi proves Darwin wrong". I'd give you the link but I think there's some "no links"-policy on youtube comments.
kantastisk 1 year ago
Poor Abdul ...
If someone thinks that evolution is a theory that can't be proved at all (I think even house-trained cats and dogs are examples for natural selection and evolution), but a book written by some guys over a thousand years ago without a reasonable base is the one and only truth, well "god" bless you ;-)
Jokus2509 1 year ago 5
This is a very interesting insight into how Dawkins thinks.
tjb2k3 1 year ago
@hornerc1
I Agree. A lot of Christians are imbeciles...
cpynch 1 year ago
When I was ten, my parents gave me the Life book, "The Wonders of Life on Earth." I didn't know it at the time, but just the *pictures* in that book profoundly affected the way I would one day view the world. It's where I met Darwin, dinosaurs, fossils, geological epochs, and my cousins, the great apes. It took 25 more years, but eventually I became an atheist.
All my special things from my childhood (mostly books) were put in a box and have been lost. How I wish I still had that book!
Astrobrant2 1 year ago
@Astrobrant2 I googled "The Wonders of Life on Earth" and the second link has listings for it. :) Nothing stopping you from getting another copy! :)
nerdlass 1 year ago
@nerdlass I might just do that for nostalgia sake, but I still regret having lost my first edition.
Astrobrant2 1 year ago
much better than that o reily asshole
SlaytanicMayhem 1 year ago
Thanks for posting. Dawkins, as ever, brilliantly convincing.
TooManyGoldfish 1 year ago
Dawkins comment that we wont be around 20 million years from now seems rather illogical, surely we'll develop our technology far beyond the wildest dreams we have now, we could be able to colonize the whole galaxy even move to others seeing as we're the only species to actually develop some kind of technology, its quite possible that we'll be around until the end of the universe if it even has an end.
Uteko95 1 year ago
@Uteko95 it's not completely illogical, it doesnt matter about the state of technology, a meteorite could smash into the earth within the next few years killing everyone. There could be a worldwide nuclear war or an new virus epidemic. You are only limited by your own imagination the number of possible ways the human race could end. We just can't predict what is going to happen.
soulfunkcity 1 year ago
@Uteko95 That's what I want to believe too, but for that to happen, first of all we need to abolish religion or it won't let us move on to the next step, because most common religious people won't see a point in colonizing space. They think their god will end the world and take them and they'll always be existing eternaly in some paradise. Also, I don't think colonizing space will make the bible books look too good. They're not ready for that change and our societies probably never will...
TRYCLOPS1 1 year ago
@Uteko95
I work with some of the best tecnology around, factory automation,
It's quite unlikely that any electronic equipment can last even 15 years without serious repairs, and we need at least 100.000 years to even consider space travelling.
The only solution would be to launch 1 trillion micro spaceships containing DNA and a micro envirement to allow it to survive.
BUT, for what reason ?, when a man dies, its the same as the universe is dead for him.
saintpine 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@CoolDojo9000
"it is indeed amusing that some still believe in nonsense like Adam and Eve"
-
Monogamy is a religious fetish... Marriage is a religious fetish... Yet the good little religious faggots want to conform to the tyranny of the monogamy meme, get married and stick with one corn hole forever and ever... And I thought my jokes were bad...
Evolution of mammals can only occur with heterosexual relationships...
SirWinstonChurchill 1 year ago
That guy came form Adam and that explains why he has an appendix. Adam's designer was a really funny guy wasn't he?
sondano 1 year ago
@kendrawhisp Dogs have done OK in an artificial world.
gamesbok 1 year ago
@sorabji1 well said
xstoneboyx 1 year ago
@sorabje1 well said
xstoneboyx 1 year ago
All credit due to Al Jazeera for a respectful and intelligent interview. Credit due also, of course, to Dawkins for such pointed, concise, and unassailable answers.
sorabji1 1 year ago 42
teaching creationism next to evolution is like teaching alchemy with chemistry and demonology with pharmacology.. Astrology with astronomy! Madness.
chrisplus23 1 year ago
Al Jazeera is a good place for Richard Dawkins...
SirWinstonChurchill 1 year ago
@kendrawhisp
Well even though natural selection has come to an end, man is perfectly capable of putting in practice many other forms of selection.
saintpine 1 year ago
@saintpine Man is also able to become the selector!!!!! :D
TRYCLOPS1 1 year ago
I wish I'd been taught about it earlier, it quickly made biology fascinating to me and explained to me lots of things about myself that I had no idea about. And there's no reason evolution shouldn't be comfortable alongside religion, I know loads of Christians and Muslims (although less Muslims) that have no problem accepting it.
Xinadium 1 year ago
That caller at 6:01 min...
Isn't that a splendid sample of the very beginning of the evolution process?
Wouldn't he be an extremely precious specimen for any biology lab? For those scientists who are involved in the brain biogenesis. To have that live yet, extremely prehistorically frozen creature, at the dissecting table and learn, learn, learn. It's equal in value to the imaginary time machine can't be overestimated.
Peace.
MrJurekGG 1 year ago
regarding his comment at 5:30. You don't abandon the darwinian process by supporting vaccinations and medicine. Our intelligence is part of darwinian evolution. The tools we develop to improve our survival are all part of the process.
soloman81 1 year ago
Insofar as darwinism cannot sit well with religion, then so much the worse for religion.
yatter1 1 year ago
google Doe's Account. mindblowing.
elantriv 1 year ago
In the media Al Jazeera is being portrayed like it's some rogue television station in the middle east supporting al-Qaeda. Pretty silly no?
GBXS 1 year ago 3
Comment removed
MrJurekGG 1 year ago
Due to mans control over every living been, and open borders, natural selection has come practically to a stop.
so I really doubt that we will see any difference due to natural selection.
saintpine 1 year ago
Al jazeerah clearly has a far better standard in journalism than their American counter parts. No wonder they get much flack from the U.S. media. They don't want us to watch a better put program.
Darw1n1st 1 year ago 40
@Darw1n1st I agree, with the FOX show, O'Reilly is trying to defend his intelligence and when O'Reilly asks a question, he would cut-off Prof. Dawkins' from answering completely.
Catz1985 1 year ago 6
@Catz1985 O´Reilly?.............intelligence? you used them in the same sentence, shame on you brother
yatter1 1 year ago
@yatter1 But...but....so did you!
jimjamgumbob 1 year ago
@Darw1n1st Actually this is an American version of Al Jazeera. The interviewer is in Washington. The original Al Jazeera was extremely biased against the west and Israel in their reporting. Calling Israel baby killers while continually praising Hezbollah. Far from neutral reporting. Now they have different English and Arabic sections that are editorially distinct, with their own brand of news catering to respective audiences. This change came about because of criticisms of their biases.
dangle66 1 year ago
@dangle66 Are these broadcast in the Middle East? Subbed or doubled in arabic or farsi?
ahmedeox 11 months ago
Al Jazeera English maybe, The arabic version is totally different
AustrianAtheist 11 months ago
Good interview. Compare it with the one on CNN with that idiot Bill O'Reilley!
The caller was a complete idiot. "We know that God created Adam and that Evolution is nonsense" - well how do you "know" that when all the evidence is the exact opposite?
TheRadicalLiberal 1 year ago 7
Please listen to the song I wrote about Dawkins. In the search type in ' 1 GOD MORE KANSAIMAGIC'
kansaimagic 1 year ago
I have to say, as a student of evolutionary biology myself, I would have answered many of those questions differently. For example, Dawkins replies to the caller by saying he doesn't know what he's talking about. This was no doubt a means of telling him that Darwinism has nothing to do with WWII. But to be more direct, why not say that scientific theories do not attempt to tell us how to live our lives? Nor do they extend sociopolitical agendas such as those held by Hitler.
CosmosFan1 1 year ago
@CosmosFan1 Dawkins has been in enough of these debates to know when not to presume the intention of a question and answer on that basis. Abdul says WW2 came about because of darwinian theory. We know what this retard is implying, but Dawkins takes the question literally and responds directly without getting sucked into a nonsensical argument about social darwinism or the like...
JezaLoki 1 year ago 4
It always strikes me that believers in the supernatural do not really get what scientific jargon means by "explain".
DoctorPlausible 1 year ago
al jazeera is amazing cuz they let everybody talk.
KamilWow 1 year ago
Comment removed
Hanggud 2 years ago
Comment removed
Hanggud 2 years ago
Good interviewer. He didn't waste a second, kept the questions coming & asked a few really well put questions - I've seen a lot of people ask Dawkins much stupiider questions.
nicHoju 2 years ago 94
@nicHoju Riz is awesome at his job. I liked him since his BBC contract.no bullshit, covers a lot in given time and doesnt allow his beliefs to affect the conversation.
sushanalone 1 year ago 3
@nicHoju Damn, no lie! This guy was an awesome interviewer. As a side note, it's hilarious, though it must be frustrating, that Richard Dawkins continually answers the same obvious, dumbass question. To a man with his level of training, education and experience, it must feel like the painter explaining for the millionth time that there IS a color called red. It must feel like the mathematician who patiently instructs idiots that you CAN add 1 and 2 together. Basic facts shouldn't be dismissed.
GoodAvatar 1 year ago
Classic al-jazeera: An islamic numb nut always gets through to present his barbaric, pedophile point of view
BestestMoron 2 years ago
Al Jazeera is generally pretty well balanced and well interviewed.
burpwind 2 years ago 3
I agree, I was actually shocked. I presumed that al jazeera was the islamic version of fox.
snackynak 1 year ago 2
@snackynak That's a common misconception, World Focus a show that until recently aired daily on PBS, got most of their content/reports from Al Jazeera. Another reason why they're good is because they show both sides of war. In a US broadcast you hear terms like collateral damage, etc, but they actually show those things unfiltered instead of sugar coating and perpetuating a false image.
CrazyDancingBear 1 year ago
note: my last comment is supportive of evolution, not contrary.
opaquetranslucence 2 years ago
i hate how evolution is always taught with respect to fossils. things in biology and chemistry are much more convincing like transposons, nanobes, and amino acids.
if kids knew transposon as easily as the word evolution we'd all be better off. it's not that hard a word, it's only 1 letter longer than evolution.
opaquetranslucence 2 years ago
I love the way this interviewer has actually read Dawkin's book before commenting on it.
Judasbm 2 years ago 2
Such a professional and well done interview! It was a joy to watch
TaintedExile 2 years ago
ILLOGICAL to believe in an uncaused cause Prof Dawkins?? Hoards of philosophers would disagree with you.
t7r9y 2 years ago
Who?
And sometimes I'm disappointed in how the guys like Dawkins or Hitchens don't nail questioners as hard as they could, who probably go home assuming he was right all along.
The Muslim caller was referring to the fallacy popularized by Ben Stein in "Expelled," that Hitler would not have come into power without Darwin's theory. A simple rebuttal is that animal husbandry expresses the idea of Nazi-like eugenics better than Darwin, and religion was a nurse crop for his cruel dogma.
theseanze 2 years ago
@t7r9y
All thought leads back to an arbitrary assumption whether religious or not.
A theist would propose that God caused the beginning. What caused God? The problem of the first cause is not resolved with the insertion of a god.
Being 'self-caused' (meaning, without outside cause) is an assumption of God. Why can't this be an assumption of the universe instead?
CookyCorvid 2 years ago
@CookyCorvid because the secound law of thermodynamics refutes an infinite universe
DeJay14 2 years ago
@DeJay14
I never said anything about an infinite universe. But because you think that I did, here's some schoolin'.
The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics applies only to closed systems which would obviously exclude an infinite system. Thus an infinite universe is not refuted by a law which HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS FUCKING CONVERSATION.
You are so silly. :D
CookyCorvid 2 years ago
44 per cent of Americans believe the world is 10 thousand years old. that is shocking.
peter26london 2 years ago 2
@peter26london Even more think the Federal Reserve is owned by the government -so it does not suprise me.
lipoicacid 2 years ago 2
Is it really lol
mgore90 2 years ago
Good to see professional foreign stations at work. +5, down with Fox
Thomas60 2 years ago 5
wow Al Jazeera this professional and balanced!?!? this should be a model for our western press!
cafse77 2 years ago
Fantastic interview and interviewer, i concur with thebrassdubliner. I also liked the way that he acted as a non-bias interviewer able to controll the flow of conversation without imposing his own views.
TheBigRedTom 2 years ago
Definatly the best TV interviewer I've seen question Dawkins. Intelligent, articulate, fairly well informed and holy crap....Polite! Go Al Jazeera, pay attention FOX!
thebrassdubliner 2 years ago 46
@thebrassdubliner I noticed the same thing :D
LutzDerLurch 1 year ago
oh my god, dawkins on al jazeera, he is trying to start world war 3? do they love our nutters that much? the iranians are gonna use him for anti western propaganda!!
still, not nearly as dangerous as david shayler on al jazeera, hope thats not on youtube
CodeMaker2011 2 years ago
I love this two guys. They're both so nice and so polite.
tibyv8 2 years ago 2
Most Muslims are ignorant of science... they just ignore facts, and use circular logic to try to backup their silly claims.
cpynch 2 years ago 2
Actually the problem with the world is that muslims are not so silly when it comes to science.
cjunk351 2 years ago
@cpynch Thats an idiotic circular logic your using yourself, its also quite assumptive. Think before you generalize.
buraktigin 1 year ago
lol the caller is a typical stupid muslim fundamentalist
105km 2 years ago 3
Why are Muslim so ignorant and stupid?
epsombristol 2 years ago 5