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 Jesuit Order 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
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
@Back7sword yeah no kidding haha. I was like where the hell is that sound coming from. I stopped the video and listened to see if it was around my house and finally realized it was from the video.
We assume animals doesn't have consciousness, but how exactly did we come to that conclusion? It sounds like it comes from religion, as they believe that consciousness is equal to have a soul - and they don't believe animals have souls.
The end of the clip is quite telling! The 'sigh' at the very end was the moment the white flag of defeat was raised... Incidentally, I am not suggesting the interview was an opponent to Dawkins, I am merely pointing out the fact that she (for an infinitum of a moment) was left stupefied by Dawkins closing thoughts on the matter.
I'd just like to point out that this is a cable-access news show, not a network show. It's probably not a good representation of Canadian news shows in general.
@tml4873 Yes, I saw that. I was referring more to the quality of the show and the interviewer (who frankly seems a bit drunk in this clip). In that sense The Hour was much better. I thought Strombo did a great job.
When you realise how big the universe is, the more rediculous the whole god concept, and the bible, really is. The fact god puts all his time into this one little planet out of trillions and trillions of others...We're so small that we really don't mean anything. That's something a lot of people can't handle knowing...
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
if it was 19 Muslim hijackers on 911 they would NOT done it BECAUSE of religion. They would have acted to fight back against their enemy. Their faith would have simply given them the courage to carry out their mission. There is a difference. Dawkins was diasappointing here, this is not his area of expertise and he should have stfu rather than play to the gallery. It gives him no credit.
They would not have thought they had an enemy so pernicious as to justify their horrendous acts had they not been indoctrinated by religion. Arabs and Afghans had no reason to commit those acts other than in the defense of their 'Muslim Brothers' abroad. In fact, until that point, America had been quite helpful to Afghans in their resistance against Russian invasion...and were great trading partners to Arabia.
Do you honestly think that taking the doctrine of Jihad both seriously and literally had nothing to do with 9/11? There is no secular variable that explains their actions better. Even the ones that seem secular are often laced with religion.
Example: They openly dislike US bases in their country,.. except they don't say country, they say 'holy land'. It's not just that we're in their backyard, they honestly see us as infidels, sub-humans, worthy of only death, conversion, or enslavement.
No it's not.I "Allah U Akbar" is the equivalent of a christian saying "praise the lord" (in thanks for whatever). The "death prayer" is "I testify that there is no god but allah and that muhammad is his messanger" in Arabic of course. Quite a bit longer and not so media freindly I think.
You do understand that evolution doesn't have a goal? Animals simply adapt to their own environment via natural selection.
For humans, at the time we became able to communicate via speech, it was the "best" option. Those, who could communicate with each other via voice better than the others had a cutting edge over the other humans, and so, they passed on their genes. This, of course, doesn't mean that other animals would develop towards vocal communication, too.
Well, actually we could probably set up human selection process so we allow the species that sound like they are communicating with humans to reproduce and after many generations, we could breed a species that can talk to humans. But in terms of natural evolution, yeah it's unlikely that cross species communication will come about naturally.
Wish Carl Sagan were with us to add a bit more depth to this current struggle for reason. Dawkin's is feisty and I'm glad he's around but he lacks the breadth and sense of wonder Sagan could instill in people.
Well yes, self serving humour aside, that is what we are all doing or trying to do all the time if you take Darwin's theory of evolution by the literal interpretation.
There just isn't room for anything other than mistakes and self interest serving with "natural selection" by trial and error with the human species.
Rubbish HitchensFavorite. Only a simplistic and misguided view of evolution would view it as "mistakes and self interest". The products of evolution are the wonders and mind-boggling complexities of the natural world. Living things are the most complicated things we know about in the universe, so in the interactions between living things within an environment, the emergent phenomena will necessarily be incredibly complex. The mechanism of evolution is simple, the results are anything but.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
woah i didnt know dawkins had such a comprehensive knowledge on the participants of 9-11! Who is he to determine that they did it for religion? or that they were faithful muslims? maybe they committed the acts out of anger and not for the religion or for God? Maybe they were just criminals? How can religion be held responsible for the acts committed by people who dont follow the religion? maybe human secularism should take the blame for crimes committed in big city's ? ha ha ha dawkins u dink!
It is just ludicrous to propose that universe is friendly to life, carbon based life that we know. Universe indeed is a very hostile place to life. There is no life form outside earth that we know of, and if we take these earthly life forms a few hundred miles away from earth they all perish. A friendly universe to life should look like Star Wars/Star Trek universes where in every corner there is a life form. If you found that in our universe then I'll agree that it is friendly to life.
This again proves my point that universe is NOT friendly to life, otherwise life would have been abundant everywhere. I oppose the argument that this universe somehow was created with you and me in mind to support all life forms. It was not; life just happened to come to existence.
it's relatively friendly, as per the anthropic principle - it's possible to concieve of universes with crushing gravity, or almost no gravity at all, and they wouldn't support life. It's possible to concieve of weak and strong nuclear force constants at high and low extremes that wouldn't even allow for the existance of atoms. Most of the universe is extremely hostile to life, but not all of it, and that suggests some aspect of the anthropic principle may be in action
the universe has the properties that are "friendly" to life, because these are the properties that life that we know has developed in;
if the universe had different properties, we would be life developed within these other properties, and would say that those are the properties "frienldy to life"
He has a very Western worldview, taking the same over-abused example of the twin towers and using it generally against religions. The hypocrite West has found the perfect reason to again abuse the world: "Some among you have destroyed two towers so we must change all your belief system".
You obviously have no idea what you're talking about. Blaming religion for religious atrocities is a "very Western worldview" and "the perfect reason to again abuse the world"?
First of all, religion is not an Eastern phenomenon and Dawkins spends much more energy criticising typically Western beliefs than any other.
Second, no foreign nation is being abused in the name of atheism. And if you think American foreign policy is decided by atheists, you should pay more attention to the news.
Yeah she does seem really inarticulate. Did you see video one where he was talking about Darwinian Natural selection and she just blurted out, "From Origin of the Species?" I was thinking, "Whoa, this lady isn't the sharpest tool in the shed."
He forgot the 4th option/amendment to the 3rd option in the end : That there may be other forms of possible life in other universes with different constants, which are not necessarily carbon-based, but instead consist of arrangements of other materials which make sense given the constellation of nature-constants in a particular universe different from our own..
I like that edit to his statement. In other lectures he states he believes that non carbon or even non physical life could exist. But he tends not to deal with physics as he's primarily a biologist.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Science demands a designer, there is no other logical answer. Atheism seems to be nothing but denial. No evidence supports accident over design as far as we can see.
to be honest i dont see most atheism as being denial; personally i can understand the perspective that 'accident' is preferable over design. why does science demand a designer?
Science only demands answers. To say otherwise is to contaminate it with belief. That is far from being the same as fact. Tell us, what evidence favors design? You've only study immense odds of conditions being favorable for not only life but the formation of the planet to see what a wonderful cosmic accident we are. I know you can twist that into "God did it", but tell me...who made god and who made his creator and theirs too while you're at it. Who designed the designer?
L love Dawkins but one mistake he constantly makes, is to assume that people are smart and that they understand when he talks about science. He needs to learn how to speak in laymans terms.
You are wrong there. His thoughts are extremely easy to grasp. I think the best attribute of Dawkins is that everybody can understand him. He is able to speak of complicated, intellectually hard and abstract issues in an easily understandable fashion. No wonder he is a professor of public understanding of science. He is such a brilliant public speaker; the best in the whole world at the moment in my opinion. Fortunately he frequently participates in public discussions outside university.
He thinks humans are inwardly good and others oriented. I don't know what dream land he comes from but I see the exact opposite when I look at humans.
Wars atleast 90% of violence and war is because of religion and the rationality of it. God didn;t say write this book , we did and were enforcing all our views of god onto others with violence and i can bet you all religions are wrong on the communication with god.
Did you know hittler thought that the german people were the descendants of the atlanteans capable of incredible magic. He even sent people to find the ruins of atlantis to back up his belief. He also watched wagner's the ring hundreds of times which is all about norse mythology. A religious person is someone who describes the world in supernatural stories. For instance shamans, christians, scientologists, mormons and matrix fans.
Hitler thought that there were certain people in the world who were descendants of the ancient Aryans, people who he thought of as "perfect Germans". He didn't think that the Germans were capable of magic; he thought that the Aryans were a perfect race of people that, when bred with each other, would produce a perfect group of people. He wanted to kill everyone else and have the Aryans be the only race of people on Earth, which he thought would make for a perfect world. No magic involved.
And he believed the Aryan race began in Thule a mythical sunken landmass that they held by the nazi party to be the origin of the atlantis myth. That's mythology he believed it. Hitler was therefore Religious. Just like Tom Cruise.
Let's look at the myth itself. It's an origin myth therefore religious. If it'd been something like sasquatch the first question would be natural or supernatural? If sasquatch were supernatural that would be religious just like believing in faeries. As people who believe in fairies do rituals to appease and call favor from a supernatural source. Leave a tooth get a quarter. Eat a cracker go to heaven. Kill the jews reclaim your aryan heritage. it's all religion.
Don't be so daft, it was a joke. Back to your original statement and why I replied with what I did. The last hundred years has seen more wars fought over religion than any other purpose. Just because we didn't join in the fight does not mean it did not happen. If you want to get down to it, even war fought for other reasons boils back down to the politics religion in a lot of cases. I will grant you, most wars have nothing to do with religion at all but it makes a good excuse to fight.
jeAh7: "He thinks humans are inwardly good and others oriented."
I think he is trying to compromise by stating a necessary illusion, because most people are really not ready to hear or to become properly 'indoctrinated' by scientific truth.
It's really a way round the dilemma of why the universe has formed a particular way - because one set of laws, suddenly every explanation is possible, because there's a universe built on every imaginable (and unimaginable) outcome.
It gets foggy as it leads to anomalies like, 'So there's a universe without time? One where a multiverse is impossible?' etc.
I'm surprised the religious haven't jumped on the multiverse idea as it does to some extent reconcile the God's knowledge/free will paradox.
the problem isn't that scientists like dawkins are not intelligent or articulate enough to explain the world to people. the problem lies in the people and their inability to understand or comprehend the world around them or the exquisite explanation that science offers.
I don't think it's an inability to understand, in my opinion it's the general publics complete apathy towards all things scientific....unless they have a built in mp3 player.
I really think it's more of a problem of ignorance and missunderstanding besides the propaganda and dumbing down of people via the media and authority figures.
there is a reason why everyone is ignorant but i strongly believe that ignorance and stupidity are the biggest contributors of religious ideaology and perpetuation no matter what the cause is.
Dawkins is the king of atheists! Long live King Richard
huwrj 2 months ago
"C.S. lewis's arguments are pathetic"
LOL
itislupus08 4 months ago
55555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555
cheatdath 4 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 Jesuit Order completely altered the education system to suit their Evo-Hoax agenda to discredit the Bible. They cant have a Satanic society of 'Do as Thou Wilt' if people still follow the Bible
SpencerBenedict2nd 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
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 6 months ago
How about 3,000.......
chicagonative17 7 months ago
worst. interviewer. ever.
maxw12345 9 months ago 2
@maxw12345 why?
ekbowler 6 months ago
Finaly someone that managed to put the way i think into the right words. Thank you Dawkins!
HemaFTW 1 year ago 2
Bloody truck reversing!!
Back7sword 1 year ago 7
@Back7sword yeah no kidding haha. I was like where the hell is that sound coming from. I stopped the video and listened to see if it was around my house and finally realized it was from the video.
greyfoxx07 11 months ago
We assume animals doesn't have consciousness, but how exactly did we come to that conclusion? It sounds like it comes from religion, as they believe that consciousness is equal to have a soul - and they don't believe animals have souls.
simonwedege 1 year ago
LOL!!!
The end of the clip is quite telling! The 'sigh' at the very end was the moment the white flag of defeat was raised... Incidentally, I am not suggesting the interview was an opponent to Dawkins, I am merely pointing out the fact that she (for an infinitum of a moment) was left stupefied by Dawkins closing thoughts on the matter.
Dawkins is just splendid!!
ndugumuzana 1 year ago
I think he was pissed off that they matched him up with such a Duff. My Science that women is retarded.
natzeeejesus 1 year ago
multiverse guys multiverse...
Battery9876 1 year ago
I'd just like to point out that this is a cable-access news show, not a network show. It's probably not a good representation of Canadian news shows in general.
inf0dump 1 year ago
@inf0dump He was also interviewed on The Hour, a national show, and was treated very much the same.
tml4873 1 year ago
@tml4873 Yes, I saw that. I was referring more to the quality of the show and the interviewer (who frankly seems a bit drunk in this clip). In that sense The Hour was much better. I thought Strombo did a great job.
inf0dump 1 year ago
i love Canadian newscasts and interviews. So neutral.
ericleb01 2 years ago 9
If there's one thing we Canadians are good at, its bland neutrality
Nemesis000000 2 years ago 6
@ericleb01 the true north strong and free! I love canada above all other countries! and i'm not even canadian
Chaaarge 2 years ago 2
There is a fucking crane going backwards through the whole video. You can feel the *bleep* *bleep* from time to time.
Fucking creationist cranes trying to screw up the show. FUCK YOU.
Owneador1337 2 years ago 6
When you realise how big the universe is, the more rediculous the whole god concept, and the bible, really is. The fact god puts all his time into this one little planet out of trillions and trillions of others...We're so small that we really don't mean anything. That's something a lot of people can't handle knowing...
weepaul666 2 years ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
if it was 19 Muslim hijackers on 911 they would NOT done it BECAUSE of religion. They would have acted to fight back against their enemy. Their faith would have simply given them the courage to carry out their mission. There is a difference. Dawkins was diasappointing here, this is not his area of expertise and he should have stfu rather than play to the gallery. It gives him no credit.
hornetobiker 2 years ago
They would not have thought they had an enemy so pernicious as to justify their horrendous acts had they not been indoctrinated by religion. Arabs and Afghans had no reason to commit those acts other than in the defense of their 'Muslim Brothers' abroad. In fact, until that point, America had been quite helpful to Afghans in their resistance against Russian invasion...and were great trading partners to Arabia.
jcantlie 2 years ago
They were "indoctrinated" by American interference in their world my friend. Do some research.
hornetobiker 2 years ago
Do you honestly think that taking the doctrine of Jihad both seriously and literally had nothing to do with 9/11? There is no secular variable that explains their actions better. Even the ones that seem secular are often laced with religion.
Example: They openly dislike US bases in their country,.. except they don't say country, they say 'holy land'. It's not just that we're in their backyard, they honestly see us as infidels, sub-humans, worthy of only death, conversion, or enslavement.
analubalitious 2 years ago
@analubalitious
Are you psychotic or simply unable to take in new information?
hornetobiker 2 years ago
I don't see how what I said implies either
analubalitious 2 years ago
You are true fodder for the mass media.
hornetobiker 2 years ago
And you are true fodder for the disciples of Mohammad. Tell me what acts in Afghanistan or Arabia perpetrated by the Americans justify 9/11?
jcantlie 2 years ago
The last words they spoke was "allah ahkbar".
Dawkins was not disappointing.
hunga224 2 years ago
@hunga224
"The last words" REPORTED - by those responsible.
Baaaa.
hornetobiker 2 years ago
I was under the impression that all muslim suicide bombers shout "allah ahkbar".
Maybe it's not true then.
hunga224 2 years ago
@hunga224
No it's not.I "Allah U Akbar" is the equivalent of a christian saying "praise the lord" (in thanks for whatever). The "death prayer" is "I testify that there is no god but allah and that muhammad is his messanger" in Arabic of course. Quite a bit longer and not so media freindly I think.
hornetobiker 2 years ago
@hornetobiker
I seem to have upset some undemocratic bitches.
Wonderful.
hornetobiker 2 years ago
what if after millions of years every animal have evolved so much that they could speak too :D
JaniLPU 2 years ago
You do understand that evolution doesn't have a goal? Animals simply adapt to their own environment via natural selection.
For humans, at the time we became able to communicate via speech, it was the "best" option. Those, who could communicate with each other via voice better than the others had a cutting edge over the other humans, and so, they passed on their genes. This, of course, doesn't mean that other animals would develop towards vocal communication, too.
Kuvajokeri 2 years ago 4
Well, actually we could probably set up human selection process so we allow the species that sound like they are communicating with humans to reproduce and after many generations, we could breed a species that can talk to humans. But in terms of natural evolution, yeah it's unlikely that cross species communication will come about naturally.
molesniper666 2 years ago
Yes, the last time I thought about breeding a species like that was exactly an hour ago before I read this comment.
I should have used the word "natural selection", not "evolution", probably.
Kuvajokeri 2 years ago
I would not doubt it.
conquizto696 2 years ago
Studio 4 should better block the noise from outside!
Sith10rd 3 years ago 5
Wish Carl Sagan were with us to add a bit more depth to this current struggle for reason. Dawkin's is feisty and I'm glad he's around but he lacks the breadth and sense of wonder Sagan could instill in people.
CatDMacLeod 3 years ago 3
Thank god for Richard Dawkins.
tobbelobbe666 3 years ago 6
Hehe, funny.
Oracurax 3 years ago
I don't like this whole replacing religions claim to be the source of morality with humanism...
Its still another group of peoples self serving beliefs, even if it is supposed to nurture people into being "good natured" and then benefit us all.
Heard it all before! Avoid that part of the argument and you'll appeal to more people.
HitchensFavorite 3 years ago
LOL
hotamali 3 years ago
Well yes, self serving humour aside, that is what we are all doing or trying to do all the time if you take Darwin's theory of evolution by the literal interpretation.
There just isn't room for anything other than mistakes and self interest serving with "natural selection" by trial and error with the human species.
Its all looking like another religion I tell you!
HitchensFavorite 3 years ago
Rubbish HitchensFavorite. Only a simplistic and misguided view of evolution would view it as "mistakes and self interest". The products of evolution are the wonders and mind-boggling complexities of the natural world. Living things are the most complicated things we know about in the universe, so in the interactions between living things within an environment, the emergent phenomena will necessarily be incredibly complex. The mechanism of evolution is simple, the results are anything but.
Slabbers 3 years ago
If I were a female I'd buy some of Dawkins' sperm and impregnate myself with it!
saxquiz 3 years ago 2
"If I were a female I'd buy some of Dawkins' sperm and impregnate myself with it!"
What the.....?!?
stalwartatheist 3 years ago
You mean to tell me that you wouldn't!? Come on man, tell the truth!
saxquiz 3 years ago
No I wouldn't! If I were female, I'd use my charms to seduce him and get impregnated the old fashioned way.
stalwartatheist 3 years ago 4
Easy now tiger, he could find some way to use stem cells to cure your paralysis, or brain damage!
baalChrist 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
the only reason why dawkins doesnt kill or rape is because a fetus could over power that bookworm piece of shit
mladibosnjaci 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
woah i didnt know dawkins had such a comprehensive knowledge on the participants of 9-11! Who is he to determine that they did it for religion? or that they were faithful muslims? maybe they committed the acts out of anger and not for the religion or for God? Maybe they were just criminals? How can religion be held responsible for the acts committed by people who dont follow the religion? maybe human secularism should take the blame for crimes committed in big city's ? ha ha ha dawkins u dink!
mladibosnjaci 3 years ago
allah akabar.... i believe that made them religious.
BlueCrystalGem 3 years ago
god's watchin'! Don't kill and rape!
leeroynaggins 3 years ago 6
Yeah better wait til he goes on a coffee break >_>
megamarsvin 3 years ago 5
ha ha that rymed for god sake!
chadmaveric 3 years ago 2
It is just ludicrous to propose that universe is friendly to life, carbon based life that we know. Universe indeed is a very hostile place to life. There is no life form outside earth that we know of, and if we take these earthly life forms a few hundred miles away from earth they all perish. A friendly universe to life should look like Star Wars/Star Trek universes where in every corner there is a life form. If you found that in our universe then I'll agree that it is friendly to life.
bkh72 3 years ago 3
I more or less agree and disagree whit you.
Yes the universe is EXTREMELY hostile toward multi cellular life(as we know it).
But single cell organisms such and bacteria has shown that they are able to survive i trip through space unprotected by anything else then a meteore.
However though we have looked into outer space whit telescopes such as Hubble, its not all that precise, it can´t see details below a certain seize.
So life might exist out there, we just haven´t discovered it yet.
Erikjust 3 years ago
This again proves my point that universe is NOT friendly to life, otherwise life would have been abundant everywhere. I oppose the argument that this universe somehow was created with you and me in mind to support all life forms. It was not; life just happened to come to existence.
bkh72 3 years ago
it's relatively friendly, as per the anthropic principle - it's possible to concieve of universes with crushing gravity, or almost no gravity at all, and they wouldn't support life. It's possible to concieve of weak and strong nuclear force constants at high and low extremes that wouldn't even allow for the existance of atoms. Most of the universe is extremely hostile to life, but not all of it, and that suggests some aspect of the anthropic principle may be in action
andrewsurtees 3 years ago
the universe has the properties that are "friendly" to life, because these are the properties that life that we know has developed in;
if the universe had different properties, we would be life developed within these other properties, and would say that those are the properties "frienldy to life"
lolwtfomfglol 3 years ago
This lady is not the sharpest knife in the drawer
GuyaRicanMC 3 years ago 3
the only reason I don't rape mt dog is bc I know God is watching.
zoskiaist 3 years ago
You must be one fucked up person.
uni4dfx 3 years ago 2
Of course god exists.... Dawkins is god.
Lodskins 3 years ago 13
'uhh.. we care about... fellow man.. but.. ahh. there's genocide and... how many designs of the universe...' what a moron
squigglesy 3 years ago
is she stupid or is she so contemptable of her audience she assumes that they are stupid?
damovox 3 years ago
He is well put together, she is not a good interviewer.
1n354a 3 years ago 3
Can we say: "Right over her head?"
VenomOXP 3 years ago 5
Fanny Kiefer has to be one of the worst interviewers I've ever heard ... or is this show aimed at children or something ??
thedavejayshow 3 years ago 5
I was thinking the exact same thing, you can never be sure whether she is asking a question or just making a statement.
and i don't think she knows either!
indigoba 3 years ago
He has a very Western worldview, taking the same over-abused example of the twin towers and using it generally against religions. The hypocrite West has found the perfect reason to again abuse the world: "Some among you have destroyed two towers so we must change all your belief system".
PeacefulCritic 3 years ago
You obviously have no idea what you're talking about. Blaming religion for religious atrocities is a "very Western worldview" and "the perfect reason to again abuse the world"?
First of all, religion is not an Eastern phenomenon and Dawkins spends much more energy criticising typically Western beliefs than any other.
Second, no foreign nation is being abused in the name of atheism. And if you think American foreign policy is decided by atheists, you should pay more attention to the news.
thekure42 3 years ago 7
Richard Dawkins is my hero.
Cman138 3 years ago 45
Sometimes you can see Dawkins hold back "Holy sh*t - you're daft!" Is this interviewer for real?
carfullofasians 3 years ago
The interviewer seems awfully inarticulate, and looks confused when listening to the answers.
gundaetiapo 3 years ago
Yeah she does seem really inarticulate. Did you see video one where he was talking about Darwinian Natural selection and she just blurted out, "From Origin of the Species?" I was thinking, "Whoa, this lady isn't the sharpest tool in the shed."
villainousturtle 3 years ago
bit harsh
happyorangeanimation 3 years ago
He forgot the 4th option/amendment to the 3rd option in the end : That there may be other forms of possible life in other universes with different constants, which are not necessarily carbon-based, but instead consist of arrangements of other materials which make sense given the constellation of nature-constants in a particular universe different from our own..
ZarathustraDK 3 years ago
I like that edit to his statement. In other lectures he states he believes that non carbon or even non physical life could exist. But he tends not to deal with physics as he's primarily a biologist.
ratholin 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Science demands a designer, there is no other logical answer. Atheism seems to be nothing but denial. No evidence supports accident over design as far as we can see.
warriorprince1010 3 years ago
to be honest i dont see most atheism as being denial; personally i can understand the perspective that 'accident' is preferable over design. why does science demand a designer?
happyorangeanimation 3 years ago
Science only demands answers. To say otherwise is to contaminate it with belief. That is far from being the same as fact. Tell us, what evidence favors design? You've only study immense odds of conditions being favorable for not only life but the formation of the planet to see what a wonderful cosmic accident we are. I know you can twist that into "God did it", but tell me...who made god and who made his creator and theirs too while you're at it. Who designed the designer?
jcatlett1976 3 years ago
who, at this point, does not realize that 911 was staged event? not to diminish Dawkins' accurate and excellent statements.
zoskiaist 3 years ago
L love Dawkins but one mistake he constantly makes, is to assume that people are smart and that they understand when he talks about science. He needs to learn how to speak in laymans terms.
LJBrit 3 years ago
You are wrong there. His thoughts are extremely easy to grasp. I think the best attribute of Dawkins is that everybody can understand him. He is able to speak of complicated, intellectually hard and abstract issues in an easily understandable fashion. No wonder he is a professor of public understanding of science. He is such a brilliant public speaker; the best in the whole world at the moment in my opinion. Fortunately he frequently participates in public discussions outside university.
Wittgensteinsocrates 3 years ago 42
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Dawkins really does not understand human nature.
jeAh7 3 years ago
What do you mean? What is human nature? What an old-fashioned term. I think Dawkins is one of the most sensible persons ever.
Wittgensteinsocrates 3 years ago 3
He thinks humans are inwardly good and others oriented. I don't know what dream land he comes from but I see the exact opposite when I look at humans.
jeAh7 3 years ago
Wars atleast 90% of violence and war is because of religion and the rationality of it. God didn;t say write this book , we did and were enforcing all our views of god onto others with violence and i can bet you all religions are wrong on the communication with god.
JackassVanessa 3 years ago
Most major wars fought in the last century have not involved religion.
jeAh7 3 years ago
Did you know hittler thought that the german people were the descendants of the atlanteans capable of incredible magic. He even sent people to find the ruins of atlantis to back up his belief. He also watched wagner's the ring hundreds of times which is all about norse mythology. A religious person is someone who describes the world in supernatural stories. For instance shamans, christians, scientologists, mormons and matrix fans.
ratholin 3 years ago
Hitler thought that there were certain people in the world who were descendants of the ancient Aryans, people who he thought of as "perfect Germans". He didn't think that the Germans were capable of magic; he thought that the Aryans were a perfect race of people that, when bred with each other, would produce a perfect group of people. He wanted to kill everyone else and have the Aryans be the only race of people on Earth, which he thought would make for a perfect world. No magic involved.
Pjl1192 3 years ago
And he believed the Aryan race began in Thule a mythical sunken landmass that they held by the nazi party to be the origin of the atlantis myth. That's mythology he believed it. Hitler was therefore Religious. Just like Tom Cruise.
ratholin 3 years ago
Belief in a myth is not synonymous with religion. If I believe in sasquatch or the tooth fairy, it doesn't make me a religious person.
As for Tom Cruise, that guy got sucked in by a cult that claims to be a religion.
Pjl1192 3 years ago
Let's look at the myth itself. It's an origin myth therefore religious. If it'd been something like sasquatch the first question would be natural or supernatural? If sasquatch were supernatural that would be religious just like believing in faeries. As people who believe in fairies do rituals to appease and call favor from a supernatural source. Leave a tooth get a quarter. Eat a cracker go to heaven. Kill the jews reclaim your aryan heritage. it's all religion.
ratholin 3 years ago
You don't read much do you?
jcatlett1976 3 years ago
I'm going to assume that you're replying to me. I read plenty, do you?
jeAh7 3 years ago
Ok, perhaps that was a bit presumptuous of me. I apologize. I unfortunately can't read because I am left handed.
jcatlett1976 3 years ago
jcatlett1976: "I unfortunately can't read because I am left handed."
I'm a lefty. are you saying I can't read?
either you do not deserve to be left handed, or perhaps, you should be deprived of your stupidity for writing such jibber jabber.
trickmastermonkey 3 years ago
Don't be so daft, it was a joke. Back to your original statement and why I replied with what I did. The last hundred years has seen more wars fought over religion than any other purpose. Just because we didn't join in the fight does not mean it did not happen. If you want to get down to it, even war fought for other reasons boils back down to the politics religion in a lot of cases. I will grant you, most wars have nothing to do with religion at all but it makes a good excuse to fight.
jcatlett1976 3 years ago
Maybe you should stop watching the news and actually go outside and meet people.
tykittaa 3 years ago
jeAh7: "He thinks humans are inwardly good and others oriented."
I think he is trying to compromise by stating a necessary illusion, because most people are really not ready to hear or to become properly 'indoctrinated' by scientific truth.
trickmastermonkey 3 years ago
"the great spy camera in the sky"
Lol
CommonSense90 3 years ago 4
but why is the multiverse explanation satisfying, because you're left without an explanation for the multiverse?
Aphex217Twin 3 years ago
In terms of explaining the constants.
PR0GRAMMING 3 years ago
It's really a way round the dilemma of why the universe has formed a particular way - because one set of laws, suddenly every explanation is possible, because there's a universe built on every imaginable (and unimaginable) outcome.
It gets foggy as it leads to anomalies like, 'So there's a universe without time? One where a multiverse is impossible?' etc.
I'm surprised the religious haven't jumped on the multiverse idea as it does to some extent reconcile the God's knowledge/free will paradox.
PurushaDesa 3 years ago
yea I love that trash trunk backing up sound at the 5:00 marker. hehe
lancejujitsu 3 years ago
lol, yea i had to pause it to make sure there wasn't a truck outside
acillatem87 3 years ago
yea.. I totally pulled my headphones out and looked around. And the funny thing, I work on the 5th floor.
lancejujitsu 3 years ago
LOL @ 7:41!
Love that noice.
PR0GRAMMING 3 years ago
Dang all that beeping! How long does it take yo' mama to back up? Yes, I just made a "yo' mama" joke. Thank you.
modemmack 3 years ago 3
Well done. But, honestly, you're a newscast right? can't get a bit of silence? Oh well, it is Canada after all.
TheAbsurdHero 3 years ago
"Like, why are we here?"
[sips coffee]
klutchxxx 3 years ago 5
This interviewer is terribly unenthusiastic.
ScarletandCreme32 3 years ago 8
the problem isn't that scientists like dawkins are not intelligent or articulate enough to explain the world to people. the problem lies in the people and their inability to understand or comprehend the world around them or the exquisite explanation that science offers.
niginit 3 years ago 13
I don't think it's an inability to understand, in my opinion it's the general publics complete apathy towards all things scientific....unless they have a built in mp3 player.
DeadMindWorking 3 years ago 11
I really think it's more of a problem of ignorance and missunderstanding besides the propaganda and dumbing down of people via the media and authority figures.
there is a reason why everyone is ignorant but i strongly believe that ignorance and stupidity are the biggest contributors of religious ideaology and perpetuation no matter what the cause is.
niginit 3 years ago 5
I think your both right.
kjg28 3 years ago 2
ignorance is the ultimate afrodesiac(lol).
niginit 3 years ago
Yes, kjg, they are both right. Inability plus apathy towards understanding leads to acceptance of the easiest answers.
LucidFlight 3 years ago
Faskinating! ;) Thanks for posting this!
johnclavis 3 years ago
Haha, I think the Multiverse theory just flew over that interviewer's head! :)
Masenko 3 years ago 6