Dawkins has claimed, “As for religion … nobody wields a sharper bayonet than Sam Harris.” Harris debated Craig on 7th April. In his opening statement in that debate, Harris declared that Dr Craig is “the one Christian apologist who seems to have put the fear of God into many of my fellow atheists.” After that debate, the atheist website Debunking Christianity reported: “Bill (Craig) has once again showed himself as the best debater of this generation.” ROFL LMFAO WOOT WOOT!!!
if i go to dawkins house and camp out side his home for a couple of weeks i am sure he will show up...
i dont think u can do the same for god...you should be be worried which god might show up, u might have chosen the wrong one....my bet is on Thor...i saw him in a movie !!!!
I started out watching as a skeptic, but the narrator's performance is really spot on. 'Dawkins fairy stories'--he has the effete condescending tone down and everything!!!
Damn, you respond quickly! I believe in a creator of this universe. I also believe that Jesus was an extraordinary man who cared for the weak and vulnerable and so fort. Whether or not he was God`s son I can`t know for sure, of course. I believe in scientific truths, but I also believe there`s another dimension that we are yet to fully discover. This dimension may perhaps be touched by some through praying, meditation etc. I don`t have all the answers. I just choose to believe there`s a God : )
im disappointed that richard dawkins religion has so many followers around the world. we're living in the age of reason and science, now. when will you believers realise that richard dawkins cannot scientifically exist?
@AcAwSk8Vids Atheism is the rejection of a claim that a god exists. it is not a religion. Would you say the rejection of the belief that vampires exist a religion of antivampirism?Why do you theists always attempt to drag us atheists down to your level of ignorance. We don't beleive your claim . You provide no evidence for that claim .
@emailpobox666 Atheism rejects intelligent design. Atheists claim to believe in science... So far so good? As an atheist, however, how can you be sure there is no intelligent design when modern science can`t rule it out? In fact, most modern scientists believe that an intelligent design is the only explanation available to us at this time. Perhaps you should start calling yourself an agnostic instead? Even Antony Flew, perhaps the greatest atheist of the former century, has acknowledged this.
@ghae1 "can you be sure there is no intelligent design when modern science can`t rule it out. No I can Not. "most modern scientists believe that an intelligent design is the only explanation available to us at this time." This is Patently False, unless you consider modern 5th century. You confuse agnosticism and atheism.I am an agnostic atheist. I do not believe but it would be ingenous of me to say there definately is not a god. I would have to rely on faith to make tha assertion
@emailpobox666 And yet the theists assumption is more probable than yours? You know why? Because you don`t have any. You obviously don`t believe in the intelligent design of the universe. But what alternative do you offer? I honestly think its both arrogant and surprisingly dumb to believe that there is nothing more than meets the eye. Have you ever seen a thought? Does it therefore not exist?
@ghae1 I do not assume. I require evidence not faith. Which of the thousands of rekligions do you have faith ?The alternative is logicaand reason. it has served mankind well "surprisingly dumb to believe that there is nothing more than meets the eye" Of cource it is but to assume amgic as an answer is more dumb ( sorry for using this but it fit)
@emailpobox666 Okay, so you are then a "weak atheist"? An atheist who does not rule God out? You believe there is a possibility that God exists, but you are just not convinced? Or perhaps you`re convinced that there is nothing but the very things you can see and explain? Would you define a thought as "magic"? I am btw raised in a christian home, and therefore I am a Christian. And yes, if I were born in India I would probably have been a Hindu.
@ghae1 If that is what you wish to call me then so be it. I do not claim omnicience.I can not claim something on faith when all the knowledge is unavailable. What I can say is that there has been absolutely no evidence for your claim that a god exist.. "Would you define a thought as "magic"? . I don't know what you mean.Do you consider Harry Potter magic?Houdini?
@emailpobox666 My point is; If you can`t prove that a thought exists, does it therefore not exist? Millions of people claim to have been in communication with the supernatural. Are they all nuts, because they can`t prove it happened? I have never been a strong believer, but I have always tried to respect worldviews from an ethnocentric view. As far as to the fact that there are no conclusive evidence of a God, I must agree. That`s why it`s called faith, my friend ; )
@ghae1 "Millions of people claim to have been in communication with the supernatural. " science has proven man ability to self delude. Our world our minds are based on evaluating and discovering truths. if there is no evidence for a belief then it's OK to have it just not OK to act on it
@ghae1 "you`re convinced that there is nothing but the very things you can see and explain" Most certainly not.I just don't claim that an acient book provides me all the answers
@emailpobox666 I have never claimed that the bible provides us with all answers? Far from it! Did you seriously just ask me if Harry Potter is magic? I believe the writer of this book is J.K Rowling, and I don`t think the books of Harry Potter were meant as anything but entertaining. Houdinis tricks are proven to be tricks and not magic. I am, unlike you, open to the idea that I don`t understand everything, and that there indeed might have been a creator of this universe.
@emailpobox666 I believe the old testament to be mostly mythical, and I also look at the Bible as more of a symbolic book, than anything else. I don`t throw the answer "God did it" at all the unknowns either. I`m just open to the idea that God is real, and that he created this universe. I don`t see you having a better answer to the matter? I believe there are incredible amounts of things we don`t understand, and that they may never be revealed in their fullest.
@ghae1 Society ddi it. Np God needed. Actually if you think about it it's something to be proud of our Human accomplishment of morality rather than it being imposed on us by a God.
@emailpobox666 So morality is something that changes from year to year by society? There is no ultimate right and wrong? How do you imagine Morality coming into the picture, exactly? Through evolution? Even the greatest atheist of the former century agrees on the fact that an intelligent design is necessary for the creation of the universe. His name is Antony Flew. Look it up. We can go back and forth speaking about evidence for the existence of God.
@ghae1 The answer is yes. Was stoning a disobedient child morally correct like maybe 2000 years ago? is it wrong now. I ca go on and on but I think I made my point
@ghae1 " Even the greatest atheist of the former century agrees on the fact that an intelligent design is necessary for the creation of the universe." Nice appeal to authority. Except is its incorrect. 93% of the national academy of science are atheist
@emailpobox666 Other than millions of people having claimed being in communication with God, no. You don`t have any evidence for the fact that thoughts exist either. But they still do.
@ghae1 " I don`t see you having a better answer to the matter? " I Don't Know. I don't know has made the computer you are using . IDK has extended your life span. god did it explains/accomplishes nothing
@emailpobox666 That`s just ridiculous. Some of the greatest scientists to have ever lived were theists. They believed in a God, and at the same time developed some of the most complex ideas and things ever shown to man. You don`t have to be an atheist to ask questions.
@ghae1 What is ridiculous . the red herring that you just threw at me. What was the punishment perhaps 300 years ago for not believing in god? Could it perhaps be a life saving assertion . i know I would pass for a theist 300 years ago
@emailpobox666 Disbelief in God by Academics Discipline % Physics 40.8 Chemistry 26.6 Biology 41.0 Overall 37.6 Sociology 34.0 Economics 31.7 Political Science27.0 Psychology33.0 Overall31.2 This is from the recent studies(U.S) by Ecklund and Scheitle. The existence of God is, however, not a falsifiable hypothesis...it must at this time be accepted or rejected on faith alone. As an atheist, you choose to not believe in God/intelligent design. I, on the other hand, do.
@ghae1 93% of the members of the National Academy of Sciences are atheists.And while nearly 14 percent of the U.S. population who responded to the GSS describe themselves as "evangelical" or "fundamentalist," less than 2 percent of the RAAS population identifies with either label.
@ghae1 ".it must at this time be accepted or rejected on faith alone." I think you should omit the phrase at this time. since science deals with the natural world and your god "exists" in the supernatural world it will never be answered by science. I choos e to believe in things that can be demonstrated that can be proven. You choose to believe in the opposite.
@ghae1 continued.. I can respect a deist but if you choose a specific god to worship you open our self to all kinds of criticism. Do you worship Jesus/Yahweh???
@ghae1 I do not wish to debate the study just keep in mind for a country which at the time of the study only 4% of the population is considered atheist I find it comforting that there is a 700%-100% increase in atheist belief among scientist
@AcAwSk8Vids So you discount all his videos books pictures family and documents. and physical presence.It seems to me your the perfect theist. Someone willing to ignore evidence and accept a story. Good luck with the critical thinking skills
Dawkins doesn't exist. If he did, he wouldn't allow bad things happen to good people. And he would give me money when I pray to him. And love me more than everyone else because I'm the best.
Given that this matches Dawkins argument I think this is fantastic! There are people who are good at arguing both sides of this argument! Dawkins is an exception to this. He is not a philosopher.
That argumentation is seriously flawed!! To say that evolution does not answer enough because it cannot explain how life was created and how the universe began is like saying an umbrella does not work because it doesen`t protect you from a meteor shower. It answers more than superstition ever could, and as long as it does, I will continue to use an umbrella, while a religious person is denying that the unbrella shelters form the rain and holds a napkin over his head instead. Wake up!
The main problem with getting people to accept abiogenesis and evolution is that it is quite difficult to understand. You got to have a certain amount of knowledge and intelligence to understand these processes. Religion simply says: God created the Universe, life, and humans, and that is that. Since religion does not require knowlegde og intelligence, it will continue to appeal to people too dumb and too ignorant og simply too lazy to understand evolution. It is just so simple and convenient.
The main problem with getting people to accept evolution as explanation for existence is the perennial question, "Where did it come from?"
At some point you must admit that there is no reasonable answer to this question; that reality itself by definition cannot contain such an answer; and that, in truth, any theory which looks beyond reality for an answer is infinitely more probable than one which remains within the confines of space and time.
@TheAtheistviking You are a water bug in a pond, looking for answers to the origin of said pond, and of your fellow water bugs, yet refusing to consider the possibility that rain or streams might exist.
I can't tell if trolling or just stupid. Are these guys trolls, or are they are seriously trying to compare Richard Dawkins, Barrack Obama, themselves etc. to unicorns, fairies, gods, demons and other mythological creatures?
This is simply the best! Those who don't like it don't like truth, since this hacks away at their hypocrisy and folly. They claim to accepting nothing by faith, but, in actuality, they do accept some things solely on the basis of faith.
@Trolovski What stupidity are you talking about? This dialogue is anything but stupid, it's incredible well done. You may want to look up the definition of satire.
The soldier of darkness that I am. Drinking blood to quench our beast. The ignorant sheep are my slaves. It was a long time ago... When I sold my soul to the devil. He shall kill their god and become their new god. Those who refuse, shall be eaten alive. Dragged into the shadows of Hell. Empty Abyss, void of nothingness. Deep inside, devoid of all holy light. I shall serve Satan forever in darkness. As a faithful Demon by his throne. Surrounded by the filth of departed angels.
How are we here by chance? If there is Law and Cause and Effect then there is no room for chance. So unless your a voodoo scientist or creationist of some sort saying poof/chance we just came into being. We are dealing with science and LAW!. chance is not science nor LAW!. See evolution and law run it all. Not chance if you believe in natural laws and chance then you are contradicting your self.
I have no clue how a so called reasonable man such as Dawkins believes in chance, is he ignorant of Cause and Effect? Yes I would say so. He also does not explain why chance and luck are real nor what it can do and how chance and luck did this all. See in the end there is no chance and luck or God only LAW! God is unknowable.
@bitemefuc1212 if god is unknowable then how do you know he exists? If you want to consider the cause and effect argument then who or what created god? And why do your deeds and flaws have cosmic significance? It's absurd.
@FallofDarkness55 Well you just answered your own question he is unknowable. Also, who created god? Well if you read correctly I said there is no chance nor god only natural law. All i'm saying is if you believe in chance then you are leaving out a CAUSE. The reason why chance can't be the cause he because I see no evidence of chance. Look at the God Delusion Dawkins proposed that everything is run by natural law. That is very correct but then he can turn around and say chance is real.
@bitemefuc1212 We are here by chance via evolution and physical laws. The Earth is in the Goldilock's zone in the solar system. If the Earth was closer or further from the sun, life wouldn't exist and therefore you wouldn't be here to ask the question " is he ignorant of Cause and Effect?". The Earth is one planet out of trillions of planets in the observable universe. So yes we are here by chance.
@bitemefuc1212 I take it you are a strict determinist? If so, it seems that the hardest thing for people to grasp about the idea is that one has no choice, but to be as if one actually had choice...
I don't get it. I mean, it's slightly amusing, the parody is not the cheapest, but it's not great either. Many parallels just make no sense, when you spend a second thinking abou them ("My main objection is simply this: people are following delusional Dawkins who is telling them what to think and believe, when they should be following me"). ... hm ok... (?!)
Religion is a interpretation of the unknown without facts or evidence, plagiarized writings and misinterpretation of everyday events trying to find some hidden meaning within the words, if the bible is the word of god then why do people have to pull it to pieces thinking there is hidden meaning, wouldn't you think if it was the truth it would unquestionable and easily read and understood, but it's not for it was written by men to control men and holds no definitive answers to any questions.
this is an absurd attempt at parody that does nothing but display the ignorance of the creators. the difference between God and Dawkins is DEMONSTRABLE EVIDENCE that can be replicated time and time and time again without fail. having said that i i will admit that the impression is pretty good : ) looking forward to the hate that will surely follow... Peace
@0Hydrogen0cats It kind of has a point though, at least comparing it to many of the arguments of Dawkins God delusion. I especially liked one of the last points, that "people are following delusional Dawkins who is telling them what to think and believe, instead of me." But it is also extremely humorous, so lighten up.
@griffithomi yeah i admit that it is obviously intended to be comedic and perhaps my reaction was a little OTT. but i think that my anger came from the risk of this actually being taken seriously as an attempt to justify making a claim to the existence of a supernatural Deity.
@griffithomi throughout the day prior to commenting on this video i had been watching many creationist idiots attempt to pedal their pseudo-scientific bullshit so i was not perhaps in the best frame of mind to make a rational and objective comment. but i do admit that this particular brand of comedy is not directed at me so perhaps i am not best placed to comment.
@seanstrnad By believing that Human beings are the only creatures with free will. We see this through common experience. Humans tend to do things like help the sick and dieing, protect the weak, etc.
@seanstrnad By believing that Human beings are the only creatures with free will. We see this through common experience. Humans tend to do things like help the sick and dieing, protect the weak, etc.
If you want to better understand this fake evolutionary controversy, then I suggest you watch Ben Stein's: Expelled - No Intelligence allowed. Really well made and guaranteed to entertain and expose the truths. A download link for a HQ copy can be found at: ht tp: // conspiracy hub. com / details_torrent.php? it=4580&ht=1
loved this video specially this argument ´´If richard dawkins created the books, then who created Dawkins´´
asking ´´if god creted life then who created god´´? is an invalid question it is like asking if ´´the egiptians created the pyramids then who created the egiptians?´´
@sankeman2004 I consider the question of the validity of evolution to be irrelevant to the question of the validity of Christianity. Many Christians believe Evolution to be a well reasoned theory that is currently our best explanation for the vast number of species that we see in the world. Francis Collins is one such Christian. If you want to find out more about how Evolution and Christianity fit together, his website says it better than I ever could.
@ormris But if a Being uses evolution to create, then death is not a problem but the primary component that drives out the weak. How can Christians reconcile this with their faith?
@seanstrnad All things still die, even if the death is a process of driving out the weak. But many other species, to a lesser degree than humans, do protect those that are weak or unhealthy. And the fact that Humans have the gene that allows intellect on our level, something that no other species is known to possess, thus allowing us to understand the benefits of helping the poor, sick or dieing.
So now you admit there are missing links......finally. So, because you admit that there are missing links, what evidence is there to say one thing turned into another?
I would like to see this remarkable whale skeleton. I suspect that the bones listed are infact only interpreted to be such, but I will judge after seeing the evidence
To all Dawkins TrueBelievers out there : You claim to have photographic evidence of Dawkins - so what? You are forgetting that just because something LOOKS like Dakwins, doesn't mean that it IS Dawkins. Making stupid arguments like that puts you on par with those disgusting @#$%& creationists, who insist that something IS designed just because it LOOKS designed.
100 years after his death, there's not going to be much evidence that Dawkins ever existed - let alone 2000 years later. Who's going to bother preserving his inane rants for posterity ?
But for Christ , we have more sources than for many Roman emperors- the most powerful men in the world at that time.
Its all about reasonable doubt. I can't find a reasonable doubt for someone who has a birth certificate, documented life history by contemporaries (people who lived with him, which the Bible does not, Mathew Mark Luke and John were not written by their namesakes but added later), and I'm sure if you got picky you could use DNA evidence. I can easily find reasonable doubt for a magic being with no evidence that has withstood questioning. So your analogy falls apart under scrutiny.
If this was funny, I could take it as a joke, But the fact that it is analagous to some Christian viewpoints depresses me.
I've a neutral point of view regarding Dawkins I can take or leave what he says and if anyone has a valid point regarding his words then I listen objectively.
Unlike some 'Christians' who are scared of him because they' fear reason exposing their irrational beliefs.
well he is indistinguishable from many that I have seen at any rate.
also RE: 'Dishing it out
I notice you did not feel the need to TURN THE OTHER CHEEK
and were more than happy to THROW THE FIRST STONE
I would expect nothing less from a fake christian
if REAL Christians still existed, or even if they did only HALF of what Jesus said then I WOULD STILL BE ONE, But it's all the 'FAKE CHRISTAINS' who put me off.
Just in case you think I am quoting that amusing idiot Crowley.with his:
'Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law'
or perhaps I am quoting the Wiccan rede:
'An it harm none, do what thou wilt '
maybe Francois Rabelais
DO AS THOU WILT
But I think I prefer St. Augustine of Hippo in the "seventh treatise of the Epistles of St. John' who wrote 'Dilige, et quod vis fac' meaning 'Love, 'and do what you will'
I guess that 'The Dawk' must really piss off christians with his pesky rational examination of their bronze age beliefs. After all, if there's one thing that religion cannot tolerate, it's honest objective inquiry.
When the bible was written they could not understand why the sun rose and set every day, or what caused changing of the seasons or the tides of the sea. So in their ignorance, they said 'Oh God did it'.
The fact that such primitive beliefs still persist is a cause for shame.
I'd prefer for my argument to be a 'strawman' (which it isn't) .
Than to be the victim of your theological predecessors and be placed inside a giant strawman (wickerman) and burnt because of someone elses religious delusions.
Can you see how we advance IN SPITE of your various Beliefs ?
@AsDeadAsDillinger It is a shame that you are so emotionally attached to Richard Dawkins that you can't handle the slightest criticism of him without flying off the handle.
It is a shame that you are so emotionally attached to 'Ickle-Baby-Jesus' that you can't handle the slightest criticism of him without flying off the handle.
I think "Dr." Terry Tommyrot should reconsider his title as Dr. and the cover of his book, as both seem to contradict what Tommyrot are trying to say.
Richard Dawkins is using all his intellectual might to avoid being intimate with himself. He is delusional. He is Pinocchio. If he falls, he's going to fall hard.
Such a clever video! I gotta hand it to you, it is enjoyable to see Dawkin's own arguements thrown back at him. Also, technically it is even HARDER to believe that the first cell was created randomly, than it is to believe that one of Dawkin's books was created randomly. It just can't happen.
I also find it interesting that Dawkins claims that people who believe in God are plain idiots, he is calling a lot of people he has never met stupid. Not exactly an educated guess from my standing
Statistically, people who believe in God are less intelligence, on average by about 45 IQ points, and that's a rather startling difference.
Also, cells were not created randomly. Evolution is not a random process, there are a large number of variables at work in natural selection, and each follow scientifically derrived laws of nature. If you got your head out of your ass and improved yourself, that is, read some science books, you'd understand this.
@CayleyBeiseker Interesting statistics, can you please direct me to your source material?
As for cells, you are correct, as you assert, they were not created randomly.
However, you are incorrect on your definition of evolution. Evolution claims that random mutation alone can account for increased functionality in the genome, of which natural selection removes the less 'successful'. There is no other mechanism by which genetic code can 'increase'. The DNA exists from the moment of conception.
it's hard to grasp what u don't understand..so, naturally, u deem it unbelievable. the same thing would occur if one was to go back in time and tell a roman soldier about our F-16 jets. u deem abiogenesis absurd, because u don't understand it. but, one thing u sure do understand is the easy way out..just proclaim an all powerful, magical, transcendent god being is responsible for the complex things u can't wrap your mind around..it's ok, we'll leave it to the expert scientists.
"the first cell was created randomly" - it really can't happen. AND IT DIDN'T HAPPEN THIS WAY!!! watch this and educate yourself: watch?v=3H0RXDrfyZc&feature=related
I don't recall Dawkins EVER claiming that the bible is a result of random changes of letters in old texts or something of the sort. It's ID level crazy to suggest it..
You apparently do not wish to understand evolution because this would crush your creatard worldview.
Religitards are indeed regional idiots, having a big gap of ignorance when it comes to existential questions, although it has to be said that the mind disease of Abrahamic religion has been known to invade areas such as morality with totalitarian inspiration.
Don't forget to go on your knees and pray for me. Your god likes likes it when you bend over.
@arunarun704 You say "fuck religion" and call its followers "retards" and forget to release the Caps Lock key, then you call yourself a "decent" atheist?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
are you Christians fucking retarded? Dawkins is just another person who wants to express his logical reasoning, now you idiots make a video dedicated to shooting down his points with 'Dawkins does not exist' that argument is so weak
Dawkins has claimed, “As for religion … nobody wields a sharper bayonet than Sam Harris.” Harris debated Craig on 7th April. In his opening statement in that debate, Harris declared that Dr Craig is “the one Christian apologist who seems to have put the fear of God into many of my fellow atheists.” After that debate, the atheist website Debunking Christianity reported: “Bill (Craig) has once again showed himself as the best debater of this generation.” ROFL LMFAO WOOT WOOT!!!
RosesTimes 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Pearl Trees Of Life [a vast Biblical resource tool]
[3 w dot] pearltrees [dot com][forwardslash] awhn
Freely you have received, freely give...
AWHNNOH 2 weeks ago
if i go to dawkins house and camp out side his home for a couple of weeks i am sure he will show up...
i dont think u can do the same for god...you should be be worried which god might show up, u might have chosen the wrong one....my bet is on Thor...i saw him in a movie !!!!
kcido14 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@kcido14 That was just an actor portraying Thor. The real Thor is much taller
emailpobox666 2 weeks ago
I started out watching as a skeptic, but the narrator's performance is really spot on. 'Dawkins fairy stories'--he has the effete condescending tone down and everything!!!
InternetDickhead 3 weeks ago
@InternetDickhead I couldn't agree more. I am an atheist and i really like Dawkins' books, but this is just too good to not like :D
BogiSkora 3 days ago
This is incredibly funny! You should also watch Richard Dawkins reading hate-mails. Classic!
ghae1 3 weeks ago
Damn, you respond quickly! I believe in a creator of this universe. I also believe that Jesus was an extraordinary man who cared for the weak and vulnerable and so fort. Whether or not he was God`s son I can`t know for sure, of course. I believe in scientific truths, but I also believe there`s another dimension that we are yet to fully discover. This dimension may perhaps be touched by some through praying, meditation etc. I don`t have all the answers. I just choose to believe there`s a God : )
ghae1 3 weeks ago
who designed the dawkins!? just tell me that before i accept your silly, pseudoscientific fairytales.
AcAwSk8Vids 4 weeks ago
im disappointed that richard dawkins religion has so many followers around the world. we're living in the age of reason and science, now. when will you believers realise that richard dawkins cannot scientifically exist?
AcAwSk8Vids 4 weeks ago
@AcAwSk8Vids Atheism is the rejection of a claim that a god exists. it is not a religion. Would you say the rejection of the belief that vampires exist a religion of antivampirism?Why do you theists always attempt to drag us atheists down to your level of ignorance. We don't beleive your claim . You provide no evidence for that claim .
emailpobox666 3 weeks ago
@emailpobox666 Atheism rejects intelligent design. Atheists claim to believe in science... So far so good? As an atheist, however, how can you be sure there is no intelligent design when modern science can`t rule it out? In fact, most modern scientists believe that an intelligent design is the only explanation available to us at this time. Perhaps you should start calling yourself an agnostic instead? Even Antony Flew, perhaps the greatest atheist of the former century, has acknowledged this.
ghae1 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ghae1 "can you be sure there is no intelligent design when modern science can`t rule it out. No I can Not. "most modern scientists believe that an intelligent design is the only explanation available to us at this time." This is Patently False, unless you consider modern 5th century. You confuse agnosticism and atheism.I am an agnostic atheist. I do not believe but it would be ingenous of me to say there definately is not a god. I would have to rely on faith to make tha assertion
emailpobox666 3 weeks ago
@emailpobox666 And yet the theists assumption is more probable than yours? You know why? Because you don`t have any. You obviously don`t believe in the intelligent design of the universe. But what alternative do you offer? I honestly think its both arrogant and surprisingly dumb to believe that there is nothing more than meets the eye. Have you ever seen a thought? Does it therefore not exist?
ghae1 3 weeks ago
@ghae1 I do not assume. I require evidence not faith. Which of the thousands of rekligions do you have faith ?The alternative is logicaand reason. it has served mankind well "surprisingly dumb to believe that there is nothing more than meets the eye" Of cource it is but to assume amgic as an answer is more dumb ( sorry for using this but it fit)
emailpobox666 3 weeks ago
@ghae1 There are two choices for atheists 1 agnostic atheism 2 gnostic atheism. Do you understand this concept?
emailpobox666 3 weeks ago
@emailpobox666 Okay, so you are then a "weak atheist"? An atheist who does not rule God out? You believe there is a possibility that God exists, but you are just not convinced? Or perhaps you`re convinced that there is nothing but the very things you can see and explain? Would you define a thought as "magic"? I am btw raised in a christian home, and therefore I am a Christian. And yes, if I were born in India I would probably have been a Hindu.
ghae1 3 weeks ago
@ghae1 If that is what you wish to call me then so be it. I do not claim omnicience.I can not claim something on faith when all the knowledge is unavailable. What I can say is that there has been absolutely no evidence for your claim that a god exist.. "Would you define a thought as "magic"? . I don't know what you mean.Do you consider Harry Potter magic?Houdini?
emailpobox666 3 weeks ago
@emailpobox666 My point is; If you can`t prove that a thought exists, does it therefore not exist? Millions of people claim to have been in communication with the supernatural. Are they all nuts, because they can`t prove it happened? I have never been a strong believer, but I have always tried to respect worldviews from an ethnocentric view. As far as to the fact that there are no conclusive evidence of a God, I must agree. That`s why it`s called faith, my friend ; )
ghae1 3 weeks ago
@ghae1 "Millions of people claim to have been in communication with the supernatural. " science has proven man ability to self delude. Our world our minds are based on evaluating and discovering truths. if there is no evidence for a belief then it's OK to have it just not OK to act on it
emailpobox666 3 weeks ago
@ghae1 If you believe god will protect you from a venomous snake, it's OK to have these thoughts just not OK to test them.
emailpobox666 3 weeks ago
@ghae1 "you`re convinced that there is nothing but the very things you can see and explain" Most certainly not.I just don't claim that an acient book provides me all the answers
emailpobox666 3 weeks ago
@emailpobox666 I have never claimed that the bible provides us with all answers? Far from it! Did you seriously just ask me if Harry Potter is magic? I believe the writer of this book is J.K Rowling, and I don`t think the books of Harry Potter were meant as anything but entertaining. Houdinis tricks are proven to be tricks and not magic. I am, unlike you, open to the idea that I don`t understand everything, and that there indeed might have been a creator of this universe.
ghae1 3 weeks ago
@ghae1 You god in the bible advocate genocide, murder of women and children rape slavery and child abuse . Do you agree with these teachings?
emailpobox666 3 weeks ago
@ghae1 I don't understand everything. I just refuse to throw the answer "God did it" at all the unknows
emailpobox666 3 weeks ago
@emailpobox666 I believe the old testament to be mostly mythical, and I also look at the Bible as more of a symbolic book, than anything else. I don`t throw the answer "God did it" at all the unknowns either. I`m just open to the idea that God is real, and that he created this universe. I don`t see you having a better answer to the matter? I believe there are incredible amounts of things we don`t understand, and that they may never be revealed in their fullest.
ghae1 3 weeks ago
@ghae1 Society ddi it. Np God needed. Actually if you think about it it's something to be proud of our Human accomplishment of morality rather than it being imposed on us by a God.
emailpobox666 3 weeks ago
@ghae1 You diminish our accomplishment by ascribing it to a mythical creature
emailpobox666 3 weeks ago
@ghae1 You also have no evidence for this belief
emailpobox666 3 weeks ago
@emailpobox666 So morality is something that changes from year to year by society? There is no ultimate right and wrong? How do you imagine Morality coming into the picture, exactly? Through evolution? Even the greatest atheist of the former century agrees on the fact that an intelligent design is necessary for the creation of the universe. His name is Antony Flew. Look it up. We can go back and forth speaking about evidence for the existence of God.
ghae1 3 weeks ago
@ghae1 The answer is yes. Was stoning a disobedient child morally correct like maybe 2000 years ago? is it wrong now. I ca go on and on but I think I made my point
emailpobox666 3 weeks ago
@ghae1 Morality evolved with the formation of societies
emailpobox666 3 weeks ago
@ghae1 " Even the greatest atheist of the former century agrees on the fact that an intelligent design is necessary for the creation of the universe." Nice appeal to authority. Except is its incorrect. 93% of the national academy of science are atheist
emailpobox666 3 weeks ago
@emailpobox666 Other than millions of people having claimed being in communication with God, no. You don`t have any evidence for the fact that thoughts exist either. But they still do.
ghae1 3 weeks ago
@ghae1 Which god The is a holy man in India claiming to be a living god and millions agree . Is he a living god?
emailpobox666 3 weeks ago
@ghae1 " I don`t see you having a better answer to the matter? " I Don't Know. I don't know has made the computer you are using . IDK has extended your life span. god did it explains/accomplishes nothing
emailpobox666 3 weeks ago
@emailpobox666 That`s just ridiculous. Some of the greatest scientists to have ever lived were theists. They believed in a God, and at the same time developed some of the most complex ideas and things ever shown to man. You don`t have to be an atheist to ask questions.
ghae1 3 weeks ago
@ghae1 deists*
ghae1 3 weeks ago
@ghae1 What is ridiculous . the red herring that you just threw at me. What was the punishment perhaps 300 years ago for not believing in god? Could it perhaps be a life saving assertion . i know I would pass for a theist 300 years ago
emailpobox666 3 weeks ago
@emailpobox666 You speak of moral norms developing in societies, and not of ultimate morality. That is not the answer to my question.
ghae1 3 weeks ago
@ghae1 What exactly is your question?
emailpobox666 3 weeks ago
@emailpobox666 Brb, mate. Manchester United game soon. I`ll answer the rest of your questions when I get back from a bud : )
ghae1 3 weeks ago
@ghae1 There is no ultimate morality.
emailpobox666 3 weeks ago
ghae1 3 weeks ago
@ghae1 93% of the members of the National Academy of Sciences are atheists.And while nearly 14 percent of the U.S. population who responded to the GSS describe themselves as "evangelical" or "fundamentalist," less than 2 percent of the RAAS population identifies with either label.
emailpobox666 3 weeks ago
@ghae1 "It appears that those from non-religious backgrounds disproportionately self-select into scientific professions.
emailpobox666 3 weeks ago
@ghae1 ".it must at this time be accepted or rejected on faith alone." I think you should omit the phrase at this time. since science deals with the natural world and your god "exists" in the supernatural world it will never be answered by science. I choos e to believe in things that can be demonstrated that can be proven. You choose to believe in the opposite.
emailpobox666 3 weeks ago
@ghae1 continued.. I can respect a deist but if you choose a specific god to worship you open our self to all kinds of criticism. Do you worship Jesus/Yahweh???
emailpobox666 3 weeks ago
@ghae1 I do not wish to debate the study just keep in mind for a country which at the time of the study only 4% of the population is considered atheist I find it comforting that there is a 700%-100% increase in atheist belief among scientist
emailpobox666 3 weeks ago
@emailpobox666 i fully agree! just like the lack of evidence for a dawkins.
AcAwSk8Vids 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AcAwSk8Vids So you discount all his videos books pictures family and documents. and physical presence.It seems to me your the perfect theist. Someone willing to ignore evidence and accept a story. Good luck with the critical thinking skills
emailpobox666 3 weeks ago
Dawkins doesn't exist. If he did, he wouldn't allow bad things happen to good people. And he would give me money when I pray to him. And love me more than everyone else because I'm the best.
EliasCrowe 1 month ago
Comment removed
deborahknight20 1 month ago
Given that this matches Dawkins argument I think this is fantastic! There are people who are good at arguing both sides of this argument! Dawkins is an exception to this. He is not a philosopher.
Totalbollocks88 1 month ago 2
@Totalbollocks88 "Dawkins is an exception to this. He is not a philosopher." Good for him.
PifflePrattle 1 month ago in playlist Favorite videos
Seriously, This sounds like the bunch of arguments dawkins always puts up.
sgtsolo1 1 month ago
@sgtsolo1 These are the exact same arguments that Dawkins puts up.
DaUnstoppableForce56 1 month ago
@DaUnstoppableForce56 tell me about it...
sgtsolo1 1 month ago
Hahahah, it sounds EXACTLY like him. this is great! :D
sgtsolo1 1 month ago
That argumentation is seriously flawed!! To say that evolution does not answer enough because it cannot explain how life was created and how the universe began is like saying an umbrella does not work because it doesen`t protect you from a meteor shower. It answers more than superstition ever could, and as long as it does, I will continue to use an umbrella, while a religious person is denying that the unbrella shelters form the rain and holds a napkin over his head instead. Wake up!
TheAtheistviking 1 month ago
BAHHAHAHAHA! Nice! In the end ether one of us is right (God/Evolution) or both are wrong (Allah......fuck)
Crazyredemu 1 month ago
This is a parody. Atheists need to be able to laugh at themselves.
squamish4244 1 month ago
If the Bible is so wrong; How does it speak of genetics, DNA, & the finonacci sequence long before man ever knew they existed.
skillitt1 1 month ago
@skillitt1 The unbelievers ignore that, apart from never having bothered to read it.
deborahknight20 1 month ago
The main problem with getting people to accept abiogenesis and evolution is that it is quite difficult to understand. You got to have a certain amount of knowledge and intelligence to understand these processes. Religion simply says: God created the Universe, life, and humans, and that is that. Since religion does not require knowlegde og intelligence, it will continue to appeal to people too dumb and too ignorant og simply too lazy to understand evolution. It is just so simple and convenient.
TheAtheistviking 1 month ago
The main problem with getting people to accept evolution as explanation for existence is the perennial question, "Where did it come from?"
At some point you must admit that there is no reasonable answer to this question; that reality itself by definition cannot contain such an answer; and that, in truth, any theory which looks beyond reality for an answer is infinitely more probable than one which remains within the confines of space and time.
omicronsoftware 1 month ago
@TheAtheistviking You are a water bug in a pond, looking for answers to the origin of said pond, and of your fellow water bugs, yet refusing to consider the possibility that rain or streams might exist.
omicronsoftware 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I can't tell if trolling or just stupid. Are these guys trolls, or are they are seriously trying to compare Richard Dawkins, Barrack Obama, themselves etc. to unicorns, fairies, gods, demons and other mythological creatures?
Trolovski 1 month ago
Comment removed
Trolovski 1 month ago
ROFL!!! so funny, guys!!!! I wonder "where can dawkins be?' heheheh
madenew000 2 months ago
This is really super well done. Thank you and congratulations!
Seems like Brittish humor at it's best.
mtwseneca 2 months ago in playlist Favorite videos
This is simply the best! Those who don't like it don't like truth, since this hacks away at their hypocrisy and folly. They claim to accepting nothing by faith, but, in actuality, they do accept some things solely on the basis of faith.
ookma7 2 months ago
If you (Dawkins believers) are going to try to argue with those who believe in God please get your spelling and grammar correct.
@monoke1000 you're not your
Chamkey123 2 months ago
" ppl are following a Dawkins... When they should be following me..." lmao
trashbash2001 3 months ago
I sure hope Dawkins has seen this. I'm sure he laughed his ass off. It's hilariously good.
trashbash2001 3 months ago
@trashbash2001
I am sure he laughed he ass of at incredible stupidity, just as he laughed at Bill O'Reilly's ''logic''.
Trolovski 1 month ago
@Trolovski What stupidity are you talking about? This dialogue is anything but stupid, it's incredible well done. You may want to look up the definition of satire.
blaser322 1 month ago
Wow this is retarded.
nyscholartist 3 months ago
brilliant.
Sage80 3 months ago 15
Hahahahaha the flying spaghetti dawkins, I don't believe in that.
MrItchyElbow 3 months ago
/watch?v=3H0-zMPlLJc
"There's probably no Dawkins. Now stop worrying and enjoy Oct 25th at the Sheldonian Theatre"
Jesrael1986M 3 months ago
Wow, this video just became much more relevant.
starshkr46 3 months ago
"slimy custard man" haha
selious04 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
TheDarkLordLucifer 4 months ago
WHAT IS THIS
bubskees0607 4 months ago
@bubskees0607 Another essay in order to satisfy the illusions of believers!!!
MultiEvil85 4 months ago
Brilliant! Any idea who composed this?
TheSkinner002 4 months ago
How are we here by chance? If there is Law and Cause and Effect then there is no room for chance. So unless your a voodoo scientist or creationist of some sort saying poof/chance we just came into being. We are dealing with science and LAW!. chance is not science nor LAW!. See evolution and law run it all. Not chance if you believe in natural laws and chance then you are contradicting your self.
bitemefuc1212 5 months ago
@bitemefuc1212 'Chance' is a human construct which we apply to things for which we can not compute the outcome of.
TheDcac 4 months ago
lol, hilarious!
jewyjewington 5 months ago
I have no clue how a so called reasonable man such as Dawkins believes in chance, is he ignorant of Cause and Effect? Yes I would say so. He also does not explain why chance and luck are real nor what it can do and how chance and luck did this all. See in the end there is no chance and luck or God only LAW! God is unknowable.
bitemefuc1212 5 months ago
@bitemefuc1212 if god is unknowable then how do you know he exists? If you want to consider the cause and effect argument then who or what created god? And why do your deeds and flaws have cosmic significance? It's absurd.
FallofDarkness55 5 months ago
@FallofDarkness55 Well you just answered your own question he is unknowable. Also, who created god? Well if you read correctly I said there is no chance nor god only natural law. All i'm saying is if you believe in chance then you are leaving out a CAUSE. The reason why chance can't be the cause he because I see no evidence of chance. Look at the God Delusion Dawkins proposed that everything is run by natural law. That is very correct but then he can turn around and say chance is real.
bitemefuc1212 5 months ago
@bitemefuc1212 We are here by chance via evolution and physical laws. The Earth is in the Goldilock's zone in the solar system. If the Earth was closer or further from the sun, life wouldn't exist and therefore you wouldn't be here to ask the question " is he ignorant of Cause and Effect?". The Earth is one planet out of trillions of planets in the observable universe. So yes we are here by chance.
FallofDarkness55 5 months ago
@bitemefuc1212 I take it you are a strict determinist? If so, it seems that the hardest thing for people to grasp about the idea is that one has no choice, but to be as if one actually had choice...
MyContext 3 months ago
atheists are the most vile creatures walking the planet.
mrtadreamer 5 months ago
@mrtadreamer LOL! We are more moral than you. What is this nonsense about holy wars?
FallofDarkness55 5 months ago
I don't get it. I mean, it's slightly amusing, the parody is not the cheapest, but it's not great either. Many parallels just make no sense, when you spend a second thinking abou them ("My main objection is simply this: people are following delusional Dawkins who is telling them what to think and believe, when they should be following me"). ... hm ok... (?!)
MrSinke23 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
For all British viewers please sign this e-petition @
epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/2036
TheJonesyboyo 5 months ago
Trash.
XlXKrampusXlX 5 months ago
Religion is a interpretation of the unknown without facts or evidence, plagiarized writings and misinterpretation of everyday events trying to find some hidden meaning within the words, if the bible is the word of god then why do people have to pull it to pieces thinking there is hidden meaning, wouldn't you think if it was the truth it would unquestionable and easily read and understood, but it's not for it was written by men to control men and holds no definitive answers to any questions.
Geoffreyinoz 5 months ago
this is an absurd attempt at parody that does nothing but display the ignorance of the creators. the difference between God and Dawkins is DEMONSTRABLE EVIDENCE that can be replicated time and time and time again without fail. having said that i i will admit that the impression is pretty good : ) looking forward to the hate that will surely follow... Peace
0Hydrogen0cats 5 months ago
@0Hydrogen0cats It kind of has a point though, at least comparing it to many of the arguments of Dawkins God delusion. I especially liked one of the last points, that "people are following delusional Dawkins who is telling them what to think and believe, instead of me." But it is also extremely humorous, so lighten up.
griffithomi 5 months ago
@griffithomi yeah i admit that it is obviously intended to be comedic and perhaps my reaction was a little OTT. but i think that my anger came from the risk of this actually being taken seriously as an attempt to justify making a claim to the existence of a supernatural Deity.
Peace all :D
0Hydrogen0cats 5 months ago
@griffithomi throughout the day prior to commenting on this video i had been watching many creationist idiots attempt to pedal their pseudo-scientific bullshit so i was not perhaps in the best frame of mind to make a rational and objective comment. but i do admit that this particular brand of comedy is not directed at me so perhaps i am not best placed to comment.
0Hydrogen0cats 5 months ago
@seanstrnad By believing that Human beings are the only creatures with free will. We see this through common experience. Humans tend to do things like help the sick and dieing, protect the weak, etc.
ormris 6 months ago
@seanstrnad By believing that Human beings are the only creatures with free will. We see this through common experience. Humans tend to do things like help the sick and dieing, protect the weak, etc.
ormris 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Zeus will save you if only you close your eyes and ask him to.
seanstrnad 6 months ago
@onesweetasuzy sure they are.
robocock100 6 months ago
richard dawkins is probably a pen-name that some guy in some random place on earth uses.
Danielezerable 6 months ago
@onesweetasuzy all this circumlocution... why don't you just say, FAITH!
it is no brainer, though...
sankeman2004 6 months ago
This is absolutely retarded.
GodisDead775 6 months ago
Nice Dawkins impersonation. That's about it.
manmadesounds 6 months ago in playlist Android WL
@onesweetasuzy all you write seems to me as, "bla bla... RED HERRING... bla bla bla... AD HOMINEM... bla bla bla bla... ARGUMENT FROM IGNORANCE...
have a nice life!
sankeman2004 6 months ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
Harold Camping was RIGHT about May 21, click on my channel to see...
youneekk 6 months ago
If you want to better understand this fake evolutionary controversy, then I suggest you watch Ben Stein's: Expelled - No Intelligence allowed. Really well made and guaranteed to entertain and expose the truths. A download link for a HQ copy can be found at: ht tp: // conspiracy hub. com / details_torrent.php? it=4580&ht=1
greghar2003 6 months ago
loved this video specially this argument ´´If richard dawkins created the books, then who created Dawkins´´
asking ´´if god creted life then who created god´´? is an invalid question it is like asking if ´´the egiptians created the pyramids then who created the egiptians?´´
Answerquestions1 7 months ago
bamboozled creationists, i have a question: what do you consider as a missing link?
sankeman2004 7 months ago
@sankeman2004 I consider the question of the validity of evolution to be irrelevant to the question of the validity of Christianity. Many Christians believe Evolution to be a well reasoned theory that is currently our best explanation for the vast number of species that we see in the world. Francis Collins is one such Christian. If you want to find out more about how Evolution and Christianity fit together, his website says it better than I ever could.
ormris 6 months ago
@ormris But if a Being uses evolution to create, then death is not a problem but the primary component that drives out the weak. How can Christians reconcile this with their faith?
seanstrnad 6 months ago
@seanstrnad All things still die, even if the death is a process of driving out the weak. But many other species, to a lesser degree than humans, do protect those that are weak or unhealthy. And the fact that Humans have the gene that allows intellect on our level, something that no other species is known to possess, thus allowing us to understand the benefits of helping the poor, sick or dieing.
griffithomi 5 months ago
well, richard dawkins has been recorded and photographed at least since the 80's, so cgi is probably not the answer here...
whatever, the voice alone made it hilarious
holuaia 7 months ago
So now you admit there are missing links......finally. So, because you admit that there are missing links, what evidence is there to say one thing turned into another?
I would like to see this remarkable whale skeleton. I suspect that the bones listed are infact only interpreted to be such, but I will judge after seeing the evidence
Forceofbubbles 7 months ago
To all Dawkins TrueBelievers out there : You claim to have photographic evidence of Dawkins - so what? You are forgetting that just because something LOOKS like Dakwins, doesn't mean that it IS Dawkins. Making stupid arguments like that puts you on par with those disgusting @#$%& creationists, who insist that something IS designed just because it LOOKS designed.
Jesrael1986M 7 months ago
100 years after his death, there's not going to be much evidence that Dawkins ever existed - let alone 2000 years later. Who's going to bother preserving his inane rants for posterity ?
But for Christ , we have more sources than for many Roman emperors- the most powerful men in the world at that time.
Jesrael1986M 7 months ago
1,803 atheists have no sense of humor.
HelenaXVI 7 months ago
Its all about reasonable doubt. I can't find a reasonable doubt for someone who has a birth certificate, documented life history by contemporaries (people who lived with him, which the Bible does not, Mathew Mark Luke and John were not written by their namesakes but added later), and I'm sure if you got picky you could use DNA evidence. I can easily find reasonable doubt for a magic being with no evidence that has withstood questioning. So your analogy falls apart under scrutiny.
JustinJustice22 7 months ago
Dawkins = "Slimy Custard Man".
LOL!
Redshield666 8 months ago
@Cowboy144
'emotionally attached to Richard Dawkins' ?
If this was funny, I could take it as a joke, But the fact that it is analagous to some Christian viewpoints depresses me.
I've a neutral point of view regarding Dawkins I can take or leave what he says and if anyone has a valid point regarding his words then I listen objectively.
Unlike some 'Christians' who are scared of him because they' fear reason exposing their irrational beliefs.
as for Dawkins, he's just some guy, that's all
AsDeadAsDillinger 8 months ago
@AsDeadAsDillinger
LOL! It's easy dishing it out, isn't it? Not so nice getting it back!
EdwardCurrent can take this one and shove it up his gay ass, wot?
Brilliant video!
Redshield666 8 months ago
@Redshield666
EdwardCurrent IS a real christian isn't he ?
well he is indistinguishable from many that I have seen at any rate.
also RE: 'Dishing it out
I notice you did not feel the need to TURN THE OTHER CHEEK
and were more than happy to THROW THE FIRST STONE
I would expect nothing less from a fake christian
if REAL Christians still existed, or even if they did only HALF of what Jesus said then I WOULD STILL BE ONE, But it's all the 'FAKE CHRISTAINS' who put me off.
AsDeadAsDillinger 8 months ago
Comment removed
djmackey11 8 months ago
this is stupid
you are monkeytards
djmackey11 8 months ago
Just in case you think I am quoting that amusing idiot Crowley.with his:
'Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law'
or perhaps I am quoting the Wiccan rede:
'An it harm none, do what thou wilt '
maybe Francois Rabelais
DO AS THOU WILT
But I think I prefer St. Augustine of Hippo in the "seventh treatise of the Epistles of St. John' who wrote 'Dilige, et quod vis fac' meaning 'Love, 'and do what you will'
AsDeadAsDillinger 8 months ago
Bien fait :)
a2j93 8 months ago
I guess that 'The Dawk' must really piss off christians with his pesky rational examination of their bronze age beliefs. After all, if there's one thing that religion cannot tolerate, it's honest objective inquiry.
When the bible was written they could not understand why the sun rose and set every day, or what caused changing of the seasons or the tides of the sea. So in their ignorance, they said 'Oh God did it'.
The fact that such primitive beliefs still persist is a cause for shame.
AsDeadAsDillinger 8 months ago
@AsDeadAsDillinger
Strawman!
Strawman!
Does whatever you want it to do!
NaprTuber 8 months ago
@NaprTuber
I'd prefer for my argument to be a 'strawman' (which it isn't) .
Than to be the victim of your theological predecessors and be placed inside a giant strawman (wickerman) and burnt because of someone elses religious delusions.
Can you see how we advance IN SPITE of your various Beliefs ?
Don't say 'Do whatever you want to do'
you should say 'Do what thou wilt'
May your God go with you !
('cos I want him out of here)
AsDeadAsDillinger 8 months ago
@AsDeadAsDillinger It is a shame that you are so emotionally attached to Richard Dawkins that you can't handle the slightest criticism of him without flying off the handle.
Cowboy144 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Cowboy144
It is a shame that you are so emotionally attached to 'Ickle-Baby-Jesus' that you can't handle the slightest criticism of him without flying off the handle.
AsDeadAsDillinger 8 months ago
I think "Dr." Terry Tommyrot should reconsider his title as Dr. and the cover of his book, as both seem to contradict what Tommyrot are trying to say.
MrSir98 8 months ago
fantastic!!!!!
imdbstar 8 months ago
I very much like boobies.
MrDelusionalPenguin 8 months ago
I have both top comments? AWESOMESAUCE!
I don't think that happened by chance. lol
dougmoerhoffman 8 months ago
I felt Richard Dawkin's touch when I was studying Evolution...
wickedthalia 8 months ago
Creationists are jealous of Dawkin's good looks.
ClamCrunchy 8 months ago
Yes it's a mildly amusing bit of satire, but that's all it is!
tranceman22 8 months ago
Fantastic video. Well done. It's about time someone did this!
jeepsterrr 8 months ago
@Ician100 Why? Satire too much for you?
CarlosMarti123 9 months ago
I believe in Dawkins and the Slimy Custard Man!
ExN1hilo 9 months ago
Richard Dawkins is using all his intellectual might to avoid being intimate with himself. He is delusional. He is Pinocchio. If he falls, he's going to fall hard.
trumanwiz 9 months ago
@trumanwiz Whoa what are you angry about, circumcised?
JstNEarthling 9 months ago
Such a clever video! I gotta hand it to you, it is enjoyable to see Dawkin's own arguements thrown back at him. Also, technically it is even HARDER to believe that the first cell was created randomly, than it is to believe that one of Dawkin's books was created randomly. It just can't happen.
I also find it interesting that Dawkins claims that people who believe in God are plain idiots, he is calling a lot of people he has never met stupid. Not exactly an educated guess from my standing
areading12 9 months ago 10
@areading12
Statistically, people who believe in God are less intelligence, on average by about 45 IQ points, and that's a rather startling difference.
Also, cells were not created randomly. Evolution is not a random process, there are a large number of variables at work in natural selection, and each follow scientifically derrived laws of nature. If you got your head out of your ass and improved yourself, that is, read some science books, you'd understand this.
CayleyBeiseker 8 months ago
@CayleyBeiseker Interesting statistics, can you please direct me to your source material?
As for cells, you are correct, as you assert, they were not created randomly.
However, you are incorrect on your definition of evolution. Evolution claims that random mutation alone can account for increased functionality in the genome, of which natural selection removes the less 'successful'. There is no other mechanism by which genetic code can 'increase'. The DNA exists from the moment of conception.
Forceofbubbles 8 months ago
@CayleyBeiseker
Read my book and convert to my beliefs or you're inferior.
See Theists and Atheists aren't so different after all!
NaprTuber 8 months ago
@areading12 sorry, did you say, cell had arranged in a random accident? Thank you for such a simple way to detect that you are wrong
theWHYing 8 months ago
@areading12
it's hard to grasp what u don't understand..so, naturally, u deem it unbelievable. the same thing would occur if one was to go back in time and tell a roman soldier about our F-16 jets. u deem abiogenesis absurd, because u don't understand it. but, one thing u sure do understand is the easy way out..just proclaim an all powerful, magical, transcendent god being is responsible for the complex things u can't wrap your mind around..it's ok, we'll leave it to the expert scientists.
itzahazylife 7 months ago
@areading12
"the first cell was created randomly" - it really can't happen. AND IT DIDN'T HAPPEN THIS WAY!!! watch this and educate yourself: watch?v=3H0RXDrfyZc&feature=related
I don't recall Dawkins EVER claiming that the bible is a result of random changes of letters in old texts or something of the sort. It's ID level crazy to suggest it..
Jacksilver2 7 months ago
@areading12
Hah, you think this is clever?
You apparently do not wish to understand evolution because this would crush your creatard worldview.
Religitards are indeed regional idiots, having a big gap of ignorance when it comes to existential questions, although it has to be said that the mind disease of Abrahamic religion has been known to invade areas such as morality with totalitarian inspiration.
Don't forget to go on your knees and pray for me. Your god likes likes it when you bend over.
ParaParagon 6 months ago
@areading12 maybe you should open another book.
robocock100 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I love this parody. Very, very clever.
blaser322 9 months ago
haha silly religious people
SexyPugs 9 months ago
I wonder if Dawkins saw that?
oh, sorry there is no Dawkins ;))
oleh2007 9 months ago
youtube.....watch?v=RRPTDiZcl4c
NadNareek 9 months ago
Why is William Hague interviewing him?
DisInfoWars 9 months ago
FUCK RELIGION....THERE IS NO GOD....
ONLY RETARDS CAN BELIEVE IN IT.
I am a decent atheist. But these mockers really irritate me....
arunarun704 9 months ago
@arunarun704 You say "fuck religion" and call its followers "retards" and forget to release the Caps Lock key, then you call yourself a "decent" atheist?
CarlosMarti123 9 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
are you Christians fucking retarded? Dawkins is just another person who wants to express his logical reasoning, now you idiots make a video dedicated to shooting down his points with 'Dawkins does not exist' that argument is so weak
kennyyee69 9 months ago
@kennyyee69
Dude...it's a parody. It's not an argument.
TheDreamMechanic 9 months ago
@kennyyee69 LOL Then atheists accuse us of being serious.
CarlosMarti123 9 months ago
@kennyyee69
Do you even understand what a parody is?
NaprTuber 8 months ago
hilarious!
oleh2007 9 months ago 3
No matter how often watch this after all this years. The way he pronounces "You think they're all lying??? (o_O)????" always cracks me up again.
DerEchteSenf 9 months ago