he is right about the fact that much of the spiritualism is about proof and relatives, at least in the UK, as I know of. However that is certainly not true everywhere. Brazil, for instance, has a massive community of spiritism and many books writen on it. The philosophy has a growing influence in the USA.
In Brazil, there are mediunistic sessions which aim to help the disincarnated spirits, not simply relatives of participants, but stranger spirits.
you were talking about scientific questions. well, have a read on Chico Xavier. Some of his books, claimed to have been writen by automatic writing, do contain information regarding science. So perhaps the spirits do talk about science.
I sugest that if the spirit world exists, the good spirit world must be governed by purpose. a message must then always have a purpose. There is no purpose in talking about science to those who needs emotional help. the messages must have the purpose of helping.
@setnoset there was an experiment on people claiming to perform automatic writing. 5 people, 3 of which were covertly (and subconsciously) influenced during the day. Those 3 actually wrote things to do specifically with those visual and audio clues that they didn't know they experienced. the other 2 write the usual nonsense. The conclusion of that single experiment link it with other subconscious phenomena like sleep walking. Would love to see more experiments like it.
@setnoset carried out by the American Society for Psychical Research I believe, and features in a number of psychology papers pertaining to subliminal influence.
It's really refreshing to listen to someone who actually makes sense, but so many times it's a loners fight against herds of zombies! Stay strong, know when you are wrong!
at 2:58 dawkins asks a surprisingly stupid question, what derren said right before was quite clear, as dawkins is a clever guy his question really surprised me
Alot of generalisations there..... some of it is interesting and possibly true, but I do believe that people can be "psychic" and can give very real information.....i guess there are degrees in everything...people may make claims and generalise in anything... the proof is in the pudding and the eating.
@iAzurisa No he isn't closed-minded. He simply asks for explanations that make sense. Like most scientists, he's curious as to how and why things are the way they are. Can you offer any evidence or explanation for the supernatural/tarot cards etc? We've been waiting a long time...with open minds and ears. Without evidence or explanation for something, there is no call to think of it as true, open-minded or no.
@lewisrain There is a difference between being open minded and searching for an answer to explain an observation and it's another to outright dismiss it as bullshit. How can you be so sure that people aren't being abducted by Aliens? How can you be so sure that reincarnation isn't real. Atheists believe in a certain world view and anything that contradicts the paradigm is dismissed as bullshit without doing any research into it.
@iAzurisa We cannot be sure that people aren't being abducted by aliens. But, in the absence of any evidence, we are certainly not obliged to regard it to be true. Who is sure that reincarnation isn't real? I never even implied that. But if you make such a proposition and you wish to persuade others, do the research yourself and bring real evidence. Atheists DO do research into it! It's called science, a profession with a very, very high incidence of atheism! Testing things IS open-minded!
@lewisrain Testing things is open minded believing or disbelieving in things is close minded and foolish. Atheism is regarding whether you believe or disbelieve something. Agnostic deals with facts and knowing. Believing or disbelieving in reincarnation is pointless but to say I do not know if reincarnation is real is correct. There are certain observations that point to reincarnation as the concept to explain the perceptions but we need more evidence to say that we know reincarnation is real.
@lewisrain Synchronicity... Carl G. Jung. This principle implies that the Psychic inner world and the outter, time and space material world of events interact and inform each other with energy. So with the cards you use a net of symbols which coincidentally are going to appear then you make the reading utilizing intuition as you do with the symbolic material of your dreams. The same card hardly has the same meaning and it allows for intuition to provide meaning, an answer.
@lewisrain if you turn on the tv on a talk show, turn the volume up then close your eyes you can realize how your mind is gonna go crazy with images to give you a representation of that noisy interaction. That's mind's nature. The images which you find in altered states like asleep are manifestations of your psychology interacting with, broadly speaking, ¨energy¨. The unconscious material manifests in patterns and those patterns have Meaning.
@lewisrain So yes, Atheist people tend to ignore. There are psychological studies. I agree that some people scam and get money. I believe in science. I've found that people who called themselves atheist tend to believe they know all and ignore things which are just part of nature like what I explained which of course you had ignored the fact of the existence actual scientific approaches. Sometimes atheism is a pretext to stay only on daylight let's not forget the fact that it obscures the stars.
@lewisrain Artificial daylight made by culture, with culture we gain knowledge of our elders but we also got deletions and distortions. My advice to everyone is keep that skepticism high but to everything especially to what you see on the media. We live in obscure times of disinformation.
@iAzurisa couldn't be the opposite. he often says how he is actively looking for the 'truth' and finds 'what is the truth?' a fascinating question. I can assure you he would not have reached the place he has had he been a closed minded prick!
@GodTheHypothesis Yes because Richard Dawkins created the computer? He is an arrogant little fuck who is clearly waging a war on religion because he was raised in a religious home. You don't need science to refute religion you just need common sense.
Well he wasn't raised in a religious home....so not sure where you pulled that from. I didn't say Dawkins created the computer. I implied that most scientists are just as "closed minded" although I'd prefer to say "lacking gullability" and there's a good reason for that....they care what's actually true!
@GodTheHypothesis He was raised an anglican. Yes most scientists are just as domgatic as any other human at the end of the day. Instead of disbelieving everything that's considered supernatural why don't they actually research into it. They dismiss it simply because it contradicts the current paradigm not because it's illogical. For example even today doctors will outright deny that marijuana has anything to do with curing cancer yet studies have proven that in fact it does cure cancer.
That's just ridiculous though- look at how many times in history that scientists have come to accept new facts. Things that would've been considered supernatural before. They dismiss supernatural things because the evidence is always terrible- perhaps you should suggest what evidence you're thinking of. And once again, I'd like to see an article in a reputable journal showing that marijuana cures cancer. Sounds like a brilliant cure. If it's true.
@JAZZiKiNZ Extremely smart dude? Doubt it I mean he starts talking about physics yet he's a biologist. He claims that evolution disproves intelligent design, how does it? It's quite plausible that God wrote the code for the program and just hit enter. Alot of real philosophers don't take Dawkins too seriously, he's a joke.
He's always quite careful to say he's only repeating what physicsts say, it's not like he's pretending to have expertise. Well the main meaning of intelligent design in the US is really just creationsim, that's why he claims it disproves it. The intelligent design people aren't trying to persuade people that God acted through evolution, they're trying to say evolution didn't happen- so you're misusing the term. If god wrote the code, why did it take 3 billion years for humans to arise
@GodTheHypothesis It taking 3 billion years for humans to arise does not disprove that there is an architect. It's quite plausible that "God" just hit enter and let the program run by itself. By intelligent design I thought it meant that there was an inteligent creator and creationism would fall into the confines of intelligent design. I don't think I can post any links but just google marijuana cures cancer. Do you really think the FDA will approve it? All they care about is a profit.
Of course it doesn't "disprove" it. The idea of God has been so carefully developed so that it's impossible to disprove it. (same with the flying spagetti monster). It makes it look rather unlikely that humans were the actual intention though- why not write a program that lead to humans earlier? Yes well the FDA is american. Most civilised countries have socialised health care nowadays and actually ARE interested in what cures people. I'm not gonna bother searching google,show me it.
@GodTheHypothesis The FDA and any pharmaceutical company don't care about curing cancer or aids all they care about is making a profit. Should be pretty obvious by now. Look at the whole Tamiflu vaccine. Donald Rumsfeld was actually a share holder in Gilead sciences. The only bad effects of weed is psychosis but it's only triggered in people who have underlying psychosis or schezoprenia. Apart from that it has alot of beneficial properties.
@GodTheHypothesis There was a Harvard study done that proves marijuana actually prevents lung cancer and a few other studies have shown that people who smoke weed are less likely to get brain tumors rather than people who don't smoke.
Ok well I DID search for it and found hundreds of people claiming that harvard did a study, but no actual study- and no studies which would surely follow such a big conclusion.
@iAzurisa I'm sorry to tell you but religious people who believe in dogma are the close minded ones, accepting what they're told and regarding everything else as false even when presented with evidence. most sceptical, scientific people are open minded. if you gave me some solid valid evidence against evolution, the big bang and some supporting god and creationism I would quite happily change what I believe.
@DrunkenDweorg I'm not in anyway religious or a creationist. Btw just to let you know the big bang and evolution are not facts and can never be purely a fact. How do we know that we are perceiving an accurate picture of reality inside our minds? Evolution is a theory that gives meaning to certain observations and is the most logical theory to explain what we observe but it can never be a fact. Infact there is probably no such thing as facts only theories to give meaning to what we observe.
@iAzurisa I never said you were religious or a creationist, I also never said evolution or the big bang are fact. I do however think that religious people are close minded and also believe that evolution and the big bang are more plausible than what creationists believe. My beliefs may not be fact but they do offer the best and most evident explanation and until I'm given a more plausible explanation with scientific backing I will continue to believe what I do.
@DrunkenDweorg Why believe though? As Aristotle once said, "The mark of an educated mind is to entertain a thought without accepting it." When you believe something you pretty much attach your ego to it and if someone insults this belief then you have to defend it because it's like they are insulting you personally. Patriotism, religion it's all just so pointless. Ofcourse humans need to believe in things though as their beliefs determine how they live their life I guess. Seems pathetic though.
@iAzurisa Why believe though? if I didn't believe in anything then I'd be a vegetable. I guess I could just not care about things and put them out of mind but that would be ignorant... or bliss I'm not sure really. you do have a point I give you that but I believe what I do because of the information I've been presented with and no matter how hard I try or how little I don't think I could clear my mind of my beliefs and not believe anything (scientific or religious)
Dead-to-the-spirit deluded "God Delusion" author & blithering fool scientist goon Richard Dawkins another "leader" given 2 the profane masses is another useful idiot 4 Jesuit machinations
Jesuitical; pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuit Order completely altered the education system 2 suit their Evo-Hoax Agenda to discredit the Bible
Papal Rome cant have their Counter Reformation 2nd Dark Age DESPOTISM until Bible is destroyed
These 6 parts should have been broadcast as a programme in its own right. But never mind, 50 years of Songs of Praise more than attone. At least Last of the Summer Wine finally gave up the ghost- the only sitcom with a mortality rate.
@SRLWidget It was a recording for a TV show, they probably wanted him reiterate the core of the conversation more concisely so they could potentially include it in the show.
That's actually not how tarot cards "work" XD They've got a misconception.
The idea behind tarot cards is that they use symbols and imagery to speak to your subconscious mind. These pictures invoke strong emotions and lead you to make certain choices based on those feelings. In essence, the cards tell you what you already know.
but even with this explanation, yes, they're right. Tarot cards are pretty useless.
I think Richards questions to the dead spirits shows the scientific way his mind works, like what do you eat, do you go to parties, what is god like, etc. Wouldn't it make more sense to ask the cosmological, ontological and metaphysical questions? Why are we here? Who are we? What is real? Shouldn't we send a poet or a philosopher rather than an evolutionary biologist?
@achlysism I sincerley doubt that a poet or philosopher is in any position to ask the most important cosmological questions. Questions like "Who are we?" "why are we here?" do not even deserve and answer. They have, as Dawkins points out, as much merit as the question "why are unicorns hollow?". I believe that a physicist would be the best person to send in this incredibly hypothetical situation.
Awwwwwww fuck me not Peter Popoff again.... Faith Healing doesnt work? Miracle Water and Miracle Manna. When the fuck will somebody finally see him as a fraud and throw him in jail forever?
The guy Richard's talking about at 9.02 is the preposterous Peter Popoff.
Unbelievably, despite a thorough debunking by James Randi, Popoff is still making millions promising "Supernatural Debt Cancellation" to the gullible faithful in exchange for 'seed gifts' (= incrementally increasing amounts of your money).
Search 'Peter Popoff' in YouTube for the Randi piece - it's cringeworthy.
Aaah, Peter Popoff, he is one of these faith healer sort of guys, that was the guy who was unmasked.
Actually he's making MILLIONS. And he's selling 'biblical bread' that he claims is cooked per instructions in Ezekiel (Which I doubt, because then the bread would have to be cooked over human shit.)
...I think you're in charge of your own fate and if it is pre-determined a pack of cards is not going to tell you it. One makes their own life, at least one hopes so. Wonderful interview!
I don't think it's that your fate changes but more so that you can only tell so much each reading. My god I would hope we have more than 5 things in store for us in the future! Fate doesn't change (unless you know your fate which you can change) but events happen nonstop in life unless you are one boring person!
Psychics should be put in prison. 'You're blocking the energy' is they're answer for everything. 'Why does the earth go round the sun?', 'Dude, you're blocking the energy i can't answer that.'
I think Richard is talking about Peter Popoff, a Christian evangelist "healer", when he mentioned Randi. And if I remember correctly, Popoff did receive a rather large hit to his credibility from the revelation.
@MisterTTG Exactly, I just watched that James Randi video a couple hours ago, thought I would check and see if anyone else commented on it here. Popoff makes me sick. He also busted Uri Geller.
Why not? He needs to be called out on his homosexuality. Mr. Dawkins more than anyone should see the pointlessness in being a homosexual and why this Brown individual is a genetic disaster.
That's obscene. He did not choose to be gay. And if you do think people choose to be gay, I'm no longer talking with you. The jury is out on that- it is not a choice.
And how is he a genetic disaster? He's a very skilled and successful man, far more so than you and me. Should he not talk to infertile people either just because they can't reproduce naturally? What a load of shit.
If everyone in the world was a homosexual, no procreation. Don't talk about using alternative methods. Why do you need to do anything extra to have the same result as someone else? That means you are inferior because you are not as efficient. And we don't even need to talk about humans. We can talk about wild animals. If each animal of a certain species were homosexual, they would become extinct. Something is wrong, and pointless, if that's the result of your "preference."
@SinSeared Except not everybody in the world is homosexual, dipshit. Homosexuality has been exhibited throughout the entire animal kingdom, no species has ever died out due to it.
Derren Brown offers far more to the world than you ever will my friend. Since you're so keen to talk about procreation, my only advice for you is - never do it. You are a stain on humankind and not worthy of ever bringing another life in to the world.
Fuck you. It was obviously a scenario. You have a problem with reading comprehension? Exhibited? no shit, no ones denying that. Its a defect to control the population. A DEFECT. And what does he do? Entertain? Oh yes, that's offering the world a fuck lot. I'm currently a student of engineering. I guarantee I'll do more useful things than this queer. And yes I definitely will procreate. Enjoy your adopted kids you fucking faggot.
@SinSeared I'm not gay champ, good effort though.
Homosexuality does not control the population you fucking idiot. Anyone who phrases a statement like, "I'm currently a student of engineering" has obviously been dealt a short card intellectually so I shouldn't be too hard on you.
You will contribute absolutely nothing to the world other than a couple of ugly little malformed kids, enjoy your life.
not that I am advocating for it, but it always amazed me how in America tarot card reading is legal but brothel houses are not. it seems to me selling lies is a lot more damaging than selling sex
@zaleblackwell yup, its like a symbolic roorschack test, or however you spell it... seems like an obvious thing... why does derren pick at silly reasoning rather than examining what is actually going on, psychologically?
I still use tarot cards.If I still get the same suggestions from the cards two times in a row, then I would consider it something to focus on. Most of the times, I will get repeating cards, or cards that share the meaning .
I don't think that the spirits guide the cards or any occultist bullcrap like that.
I think that the cards represent subconscious archetypes which are subconsciously manifested and shuffled... Or something like that.
@Zaleblackwell "Or something like that" In other words you haven't got a clue what they represent. Of course through pure probability alone one would expect certain cards to repeat again. You have almost talked yourself out of tarot cards, admit it. If it is just for fun, that is one thing, but to actually believe in any validity is asinine
@clay10h good fucking observation, he does have heated debates with people frequently, he is logical and right on most of his points but it does seem like he's all ways fighting a battle, high five for you!
@Donald6309 Look up the word "irony" in the dictionary.
Although im not defending the "stand up for an hour" philosophy, dawkins almost always stands up in his interviews, and the cameraman loves the zoom button lol.
Coincidentally (although I admire both of them, and enjoyed watching this interview) while they were talking about psychic mediums not taking their "readings" anywhere meaningful, in this interview it seemed, at times, like they were repeating each others points all to often....
@pumpkinman321 well put-i was going to say something about how people misuse irony, oftentimes mistaking it for coincidence, strangeness, or otherwise unlikely circumstances.
@Donald6309 If you want an explanation, it could be the standing position looks beter when showing short clips from the interview, as they would have to do in the final edit of the programme.
@AtheistApe5 Doesn't if you go by the existentialists' definition of the word. For Sartre, for example, life is the sum of our choices; our fate is not pre-determined by any kind of transcendental force, but on the contrary written and invented only by ourselves, from minute to minute, from choice to choice.
@AtheistApe5 If your fate changes from minute to minute then there is no accuracy in readings but random statements with no value .. accuracy.This is not how a skillful liar/psychic/whatever would do it.
The best of them all is the old fashioned loop onto itself. Just like the bible "You can only see/speak god if you first believe in god". Go and try to tackle that statement its like a dog chasing its tail. So in this particular case you can say "Every time you do a reading your fate changes"...
It's like an Heisenberg's Uncercertainty Principle for psychics. The procedure of messurement influences the messured thing itself. Or it is just plain garbage ...
@blinkboy2008 right... because they couldn't afford two chairs in their production budget and it just so happens that whenever dawkins does these interviews chairs are magically missing.
What Richard Dawkins describes at the end, happened to Peter Popoff. As to whether not that was James Randi who uncovered that charlatan, is not known to me.
5:36 what a great moment !!!
eternal000sunshine 1 week ago
Who is Dawkins talking about, the "phsycic" that was unmasked on US tv with the voiceover of the earpeice? Can anyone help me? ty
2012felixx 2 weeks ago
he is right about the fact that much of the spiritualism is about proof and relatives, at least in the UK, as I know of. However that is certainly not true everywhere. Brazil, for instance, has a massive community of spiritism and many books writen on it. The philosophy has a growing influence in the USA.
In Brazil, there are mediunistic sessions which aim to help the disincarnated spirits, not simply relatives of participants, but stranger spirits.
I pose the question: is that mere trickery?
setnoset 2 weeks ago in playlist Derren Brown Interview - Richard Dawkins
you were talking about scientific questions. well, have a read on Chico Xavier. Some of his books, claimed to have been writen by automatic writing, do contain information regarding science. So perhaps the spirits do talk about science.
I sugest that if the spirit world exists, the good spirit world must be governed by purpose. a message must then always have a purpose. There is no purpose in talking about science to those who needs emotional help. the messages must have the purpose of helping.
setnoset 2 weeks ago in playlist Derren Brown Interview - Richard Dawkins
@setnoset there was an experiment on people claiming to perform automatic writing. 5 people, 3 of which were covertly (and subconsciously) influenced during the day. Those 3 actually wrote things to do specifically with those visual and audio clues that they didn't know they experienced. the other 2 write the usual nonsense. The conclusion of that single experiment link it with other subconscious phenomena like sleep walking. Would love to see more experiments like it.
balala00 2 weeks ago
@balala00 do you mind giving me details plz; do you know where i can find a paper about that?
setnoset 1 week ago
@setnoset carried out by the American Society for Psychical Research I believe, and features in a number of psychology papers pertaining to subliminal influence.
balala00 1 week ago
There is no such thing as a bogus psychic, they are simply called psychics.
Olidude13 3 weeks ago
@Olidude13 Real talk.
Zeph100 3 weeks ago
It's really refreshing to listen to someone who actually makes sense, but so many times it's a loners fight against herds of zombies! Stay strong, know when you are wrong!
Michaelogoe44 3 weeks ago
why are they standing up?
MsPrincessCaroline 3 weeks ago
over 30 cold readers disliked this
xismxist 4 weeks ago
at 2:58 dawkins asks a surprisingly stupid question, what derren said right before was quite clear, as dawkins is a clever guy his question really surprised me
danspivey91 1 month ago
How was the guy that was exposed?
tjd1985 1 month ago
what happened to part 4? :(
AtomicFuse1 1 month ago in playlist More videos from richarddawkinsdotnet
@AtomicFuse1 im assuming you're british too? blocked in this country
danspivey91 1 month ago
@danspivey91 yup - it's annoying how they decided to block only 1 out of 6, bloody idiots!
AtomicFuse1 1 month ago
they should both join the scots guard, they've been standing up for about 3 weeks now.
joshwa12341 1 month ago 5
Anyone else notice how awkward this interview gets right here?
superfob54 1 month ago
Alot of generalisations there..... some of it is interesting and possibly true, but I do believe that people can be "psychic" and can give very real information.....i guess there are degrees in everything...people may make claims and generalise in anything... the proof is in the pudding and the eating.
amazingari 1 month ago
Oh, God. There's a couch right there!
byeo9001 1 month ago
I still do Tarot readings. Even if there's nothing spiritual or mystical about them, the imagery can be a good catalyst to sort out one's thoughts.
TuahShinguru 2 months ago in playlist Derren Brown Interview - Richard Dawkins
5:32 gay
hjenkinz 2 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I honestly dislike Richard Dawkins, he's such a fucking close minded prick.
iAzurisa 3 months ago
@iAzurisa No he isn't closed-minded. He simply asks for explanations that make sense. Like most scientists, he's curious as to how and why things are the way they are. Can you offer any evidence or explanation for the supernatural/tarot cards etc? We've been waiting a long time...with open minds and ears. Without evidence or explanation for something, there is no call to think of it as true, open-minded or no.
lewisrain 3 months ago 33
@lewisrain There is a difference between being open minded and searching for an answer to explain an observation and it's another to outright dismiss it as bullshit. How can you be so sure that people aren't being abducted by Aliens? How can you be so sure that reincarnation isn't real. Atheists believe in a certain world view and anything that contradicts the paradigm is dismissed as bullshit without doing any research into it.
iAzurisa 2 months ago
@iAzurisa We cannot be sure that people aren't being abducted by aliens. But, in the absence of any evidence, we are certainly not obliged to regard it to be true. Who is sure that reincarnation isn't real? I never even implied that. But if you make such a proposition and you wish to persuade others, do the research yourself and bring real evidence. Atheists DO do research into it! It's called science, a profession with a very, very high incidence of atheism! Testing things IS open-minded!
lewisrain 2 months ago
@lewisrain Testing things is open minded believing or disbelieving in things is close minded and foolish. Atheism is regarding whether you believe or disbelieve something. Agnostic deals with facts and knowing. Believing or disbelieving in reincarnation is pointless but to say I do not know if reincarnation is real is correct. There are certain observations that point to reincarnation as the concept to explain the perceptions but we need more evidence to say that we know reincarnation is real.
iAzurisa 2 months ago
@lewisrain Synchronicity... Carl G. Jung. This principle implies that the Psychic inner world and the outter, time and space material world of events interact and inform each other with energy. So with the cards you use a net of symbols which coincidentally are going to appear then you make the reading utilizing intuition as you do with the symbolic material of your dreams. The same card hardly has the same meaning and it allows for intuition to provide meaning, an answer.
strokedude 5 days ago
@lewisrain if you turn on the tv on a talk show, turn the volume up then close your eyes you can realize how your mind is gonna go crazy with images to give you a representation of that noisy interaction. That's mind's nature. The images which you find in altered states like asleep are manifestations of your psychology interacting with, broadly speaking, ¨energy¨. The unconscious material manifests in patterns and those patterns have Meaning.
strokedude 5 days ago
@lewisrain So yes, Atheist people tend to ignore. There are psychological studies. I agree that some people scam and get money. I believe in science. I've found that people who called themselves atheist tend to believe they know all and ignore things which are just part of nature like what I explained which of course you had ignored the fact of the existence actual scientific approaches. Sometimes atheism is a pretext to stay only on daylight let's not forget the fact that it obscures the stars.
strokedude 5 days ago
Comment removed
strokedude 5 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@lewisrain Artificial daylight made by culture, with culture we gain knowledge of our elders but we also got deletions and distortions. My advice to everyone is keep that skepticism high but to everything especially to what you see on the media. We live in obscure times of disinformation.
strokedude 5 days ago
@lewisrain btw it's a coincidence that you also like Shinzen Young :P
strokedude 5 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@iAzurisa What does that make you for fucks sake? Talk about pot calling kettle black !
JohnS1704 2 months ago
@iAzurisa couldn't be the opposite. he often says how he is actively looking for the 'truth' and finds 'what is the truth?' a fascinating question. I can assure you he would not have reached the place he has had he been a closed minded prick!
SweetMintPie555 2 months ago
@iAzurisa
Yeah, damn those close minded scientists that produced the computer you wrote that on....
GodTheHypothesis 2 months ago 3
@GodTheHypothesis Yes because Richard Dawkins created the computer? He is an arrogant little fuck who is clearly waging a war on religion because he was raised in a religious home. You don't need science to refute religion you just need common sense.
iAzurisa 2 months ago
@iAzurisa
Well he wasn't raised in a religious home....so not sure where you pulled that from. I didn't say Dawkins created the computer. I implied that most scientists are just as "closed minded" although I'd prefer to say "lacking gullability" and there's a good reason for that....they care what's actually true!
GodTheHypothesis 2 months ago
@GodTheHypothesis He was raised an anglican. Yes most scientists are just as domgatic as any other human at the end of the day. Instead of disbelieving everything that's considered supernatural why don't they actually research into it. They dismiss it simply because it contradicts the current paradigm not because it's illogical. For example even today doctors will outright deny that marijuana has anything to do with curing cancer yet studies have proven that in fact it does cure cancer.
iAzurisa 2 months ago
@iAzurisa
That's just ridiculous though- look at how many times in history that scientists have come to accept new facts. Things that would've been considered supernatural before. They dismiss supernatural things because the evidence is always terrible- perhaps you should suggest what evidence you're thinking of. And once again, I'd like to see an article in a reputable journal showing that marijuana cures cancer. Sounds like a brilliant cure. If it's true.
GodTheHypothesis 2 months ago
@iAzurisa tbh mate he has the right to be arrogant... hes an EXTREMELY smart dude. Far more smart (and real) then Jesus and 'genuine' (lol) mediums
JAZZiKiNZ 2 months ago in playlist Derren Brown Interview - Richard Dawkins
@JAZZiKiNZ Extremely smart dude? Doubt it I mean he starts talking about physics yet he's a biologist. He claims that evolution disproves intelligent design, how does it? It's quite plausible that God wrote the code for the program and just hit enter. Alot of real philosophers don't take Dawkins too seriously, he's a joke.
iAzurisa 2 months ago
@iAzurisa
He's always quite careful to say he's only repeating what physicsts say, it's not like he's pretending to have expertise. Well the main meaning of intelligent design in the US is really just creationsim, that's why he claims it disproves it. The intelligent design people aren't trying to persuade people that God acted through evolution, they're trying to say evolution didn't happen- so you're misusing the term. If god wrote the code, why did it take 3 billion years for humans to arise
GodTheHypothesis 2 months ago
@GodTheHypothesis It taking 3 billion years for humans to arise does not disprove that there is an architect. It's quite plausible that "God" just hit enter and let the program run by itself. By intelligent design I thought it meant that there was an inteligent creator and creationism would fall into the confines of intelligent design. I don't think I can post any links but just google marijuana cures cancer. Do you really think the FDA will approve it? All they care about is a profit.
iAzurisa 2 months ago
@iAzurisa
Of course it doesn't "disprove" it. The idea of God has been so carefully developed so that it's impossible to disprove it. (same with the flying spagetti monster). It makes it look rather unlikely that humans were the actual intention though- why not write a program that lead to humans earlier? Yes well the FDA is american. Most civilised countries have socialised health care nowadays and actually ARE interested in what cures people. I'm not gonna bother searching google,show me it.
GodTheHypothesis 2 months ago
@GodTheHypothesis The FDA and any pharmaceutical company don't care about curing cancer or aids all they care about is making a profit. Should be pretty obvious by now. Look at the whole Tamiflu vaccine. Donald Rumsfeld was actually a share holder in Gilead sciences. The only bad effects of weed is psychosis but it's only triggered in people who have underlying psychosis or schezoprenia. Apart from that it has alot of beneficial properties.
iAzurisa 2 months ago
@GodTheHypothesis There was a Harvard study done that proves marijuana actually prevents lung cancer and a few other studies have shown that people who smoke weed are less likely to get brain tumors rather than people who don't smoke.
iAzurisa 2 months ago
@iAzurisa
Ok well I DID search for it and found hundreds of people claiming that harvard did a study, but no actual study- and no studies which would surely follow such a big conclusion.
GodTheHypothesis 2 months ago
@iAzurisa that statement was a joke
fells1999 3 weeks ago
@iAzurisa I'm sorry to tell you but religious people who believe in dogma are the close minded ones, accepting what they're told and regarding everything else as false even when presented with evidence. most sceptical, scientific people are open minded. if you gave me some solid valid evidence against evolution, the big bang and some supporting god and creationism I would quite happily change what I believe.
DrunkenDweorg 2 months ago
@DrunkenDweorg I'm not in anyway religious or a creationist. Btw just to let you know the big bang and evolution are not facts and can never be purely a fact. How do we know that we are perceiving an accurate picture of reality inside our minds? Evolution is a theory that gives meaning to certain observations and is the most logical theory to explain what we observe but it can never be a fact. Infact there is probably no such thing as facts only theories to give meaning to what we observe.
iAzurisa 2 months ago
@iAzurisa I never said you were religious or a creationist, I also never said evolution or the big bang are fact. I do however think that religious people are close minded and also believe that evolution and the big bang are more plausible than what creationists believe. My beliefs may not be fact but they do offer the best and most evident explanation and until I'm given a more plausible explanation with scientific backing I will continue to believe what I do.
DrunkenDweorg 2 months ago
@DrunkenDweorg Why believe though? As Aristotle once said, "The mark of an educated mind is to entertain a thought without accepting it." When you believe something you pretty much attach your ego to it and if someone insults this belief then you have to defend it because it's like they are insulting you personally. Patriotism, religion it's all just so pointless. Ofcourse humans need to believe in things though as their beliefs determine how they live their life I guess. Seems pathetic though.
iAzurisa 2 months ago
@iAzurisa Why believe though? if I didn't believe in anything then I'd be a vegetable. I guess I could just not care about things and put them out of mind but that would be ignorant... or bliss I'm not sure really. you do have a point I give you that but I believe what I do because of the information I've been presented with and no matter how hard I try or how little I don't think I could clear my mind of my beliefs and not believe anything (scientific or religious)
DrunkenDweorg 2 months ago
@DrunkenDweorg And personally I think the most logical theory is that consciousness creates reality.
iAzurisa 2 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 2 the profane masses is another useful idiot 4 Jesuit machinations
Jesuitical; pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuit Order completely altered the education system 2 suit their Evo-Hoax Agenda to discredit the Bible
Papal Rome cant have their Counter Reformation 2nd Dark Age DESPOTISM until Bible is destroyed
SpencerBenedict2nd 3 months ago
Kids don't wanna ever find out Santa is fake. Ever!
SacredSocietyAP 3 months ago
1:25 Derren cold read me through the computer lol i have a scar on my left knee from an accident when i was young :o
jonanice 3 months ago
Why didn't she blow the whistle, why didn't she spill the beans? Classic Dawkins.
Soothsayer88 3 months ago in playlist Derren Brown Interview - Richard Dawkins
wow, you people talk about the fact their standing way too much. Listen, dont watch
musefan31 3 months ago
These 6 parts should have been broadcast as a programme in its own right. But never mind, 50 years of Songs of Praise more than attone. At least Last of the Summer Wine finally gave up the ghost- the only sitcom with a mortality rate.
moppettshow 3 months ago in playlist Derren Brown Interview - Richard Dawkins
camera man: sorry guys, need a break, camera's too damn heavy wtf
teokiatuan2 3 months ago
OMG i have a scar on my left knee. He must know me because of dead people. it makes me sad that people believe this stuff
minionofantichrist 4 months ago
I could listen to both of them talk to hours.
dakotawint 5 months ago 3
great vid
roblesterfilms 5 months ago
Lol at Derren finishing up by reiterating what he had said earlier with all the stuff Richard corrected him on.
SRLWidget 5 months ago
@SRLWidget It was a recording for a TV show, they probably wanted him reiterate the core of the conversation more concisely so they could potentially include it in the show.
strangestdude 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
watch?v=o9ktS2U53Qg Write "Logical Evidences for Islam" and watch it...
Why is there A Cretaor? Why is there a religion? Why Islam is the true religion?
shncsr 5 months ago in playlist Derren Brown Interview - Richard Dawkins
At the end, he talks about Peter Popoff.
TadRaunch 5 months ago
@Donald6309 sofas are for fat people + sex. and these two are not fat or gonna have sex
REPCLONE 5 months ago
That's actually not how tarot cards "work" XD They've got a misconception.
The idea behind tarot cards is that they use symbols and imagery to speak to your subconscious mind. These pictures invoke strong emotions and lead you to make certain choices based on those feelings. In essence, the cards tell you what you already know.
but even with this explanation, yes, they're right. Tarot cards are pretty useless.
carnivalchaotic 6 months ago
@achlysism I hope you're just idly musing, but I see your point.
crocswsocks 6 months ago in playlist Derren Brown Interview - Richard Dawkins
I think Richards questions to the dead spirits shows the scientific way his mind works, like what do you eat, do you go to parties, what is god like, etc. Wouldn't it make more sense to ask the cosmological, ontological and metaphysical questions? Why are we here? Who are we? What is real? Shouldn't we send a poet or a philosopher rather than an evolutionary biologist?
achlysism 6 months ago
@achlysism I sincerley doubt that a poet or philosopher is in any position to ask the most important cosmological questions. Questions like "Who are we?" "why are we here?" do not even deserve and answer. They have, as Dawkins points out, as much merit as the question "why are unicorns hollow?". I believe that a physicist would be the best person to send in this incredibly hypothetical situation.
Fahrenheit1407 6 months ago
Thank you for posting this, richarddawkinsdotnet.
writersblock26 7 months ago
Doublethink
malvashane 7 months ago
imagine if both had a baby with each other. damn thatd be one awesome baby
Pennyinmouth 7 months ago 5
Awwwwwww fuck me not Peter Popoff again.... Faith Healing doesnt work? Miracle Water and Miracle Manna. When the fuck will somebody finally see him as a fraud and throw him in jail forever?
ImAnotherZang 7 months ago
The guy Richard's talking about at 9.02 is the preposterous Peter Popoff.
Unbelievably, despite a thorough debunking by James Randi, Popoff is still making millions promising "Supernatural Debt Cancellation" to the gullible faithful in exchange for 'seed gifts' (= incrementally increasing amounts of your money).
Search 'Peter Popoff' in YouTube for the Randi piece - it's cringeworthy.
bongopigbo 8 months ago 2
Its not hard to stand up for an hour, you fat lazy bastards. lol.
6hundred3score6 8 months ago 5
James Randi piece there talking about was a TV Evangelist.
dilwich123 9 months ago
@dilwich123 Specifically Peter Popoff.
Sadslab 9 months ago
@Sadslab Correct Sir!......Should rename himself Peter Ripoff ;)
dilwich123 9 months ago
The video compilation "UFO Disclosure, Revelations & the 2012 Connection" ON
YOUTUBE is a disclosure of major lies and with held
information regarding life outside of Earth. The footage contains statements
from astronauts, American presidents, military personnel, politicians plus
credible news footage. The compilation contains revelations regarding
awareness of life beyond Earth along with it's current and ongoing presence
which is being hidden from the public + more.
Freedomloveandtruth 9 months ago
Aaah, Peter Popoff, he is one of these faith healer sort of guys, that was the guy who was unmasked.
Actually he's making MILLIONS. And he's selling 'biblical bread' that he claims is cooked per instructions in Ezekiel (Which I doubt, because then the bread would have to be cooked over human shit.)
TheSkunkCat 9 months ago
Great, can we just do that one more time? :)
inufanrb 9 months ago
dawkins got it wrong, it wasn't a psychic randi exposed it was faith healer peter popoff.
mancltymagics1 9 months ago
Humanity needs to grow up.
BeardedBill86 9 months ago
Derren Brown is a total doll.
fedorajoe 9 months ago
how can 31 people STILL not get it after watching this!?
PDodds77 9 months ago
Richard Dawkins and Derren Brown in the same room talking about James Randi?
*drools*....
Joe22c 10 months ago
...I think you're in charge of your own fate and if it is pre-determined a pack of cards is not going to tell you it. One makes their own life, at least one hopes so. Wonderful interview!
WallpaperViolence 10 months ago
I don't think it's that your fate changes but more so that you can only tell so much each reading. My god I would hope we have more than 5 things in store for us in the future! Fate doesn't change (unless you know your fate which you can change) but events happen nonstop in life unless you are one boring person!
darlingdino 10 months ago
How does Fate & Freewill coincide in religion.
There can't be both surely?
STARSMember0823 10 months ago
@STARSMember0823
you have the freewill to change your fate
kester1time 10 months ago
The sofa must be broken...haha!
D3admaus 10 months ago
Psychics should be put in prison. 'You're blocking the energy' is they're answer for everything. 'Why does the earth go round the sun?', 'Dude, you're blocking the energy i can't answer that.'
jimjimthehumanbin 11 months ago
You're a good man, Derren Brown.
AnuYagi 11 months ago
I think Richard is talking about Peter Popoff, a Christian evangelist "healer", when he mentioned Randi. And if I remember correctly, Popoff did receive a rather large hit to his credibility from the revelation.
MisterTTG 11 months ago 2
@MisterTTG Exactly, I just watched that James Randi video a couple hours ago, thought I would check and see if anyone else commented on it here. Popoff makes me sick. He also busted Uri Geller.
66Nwolf 4 months ago
darren just hypnotized richard XD
nextblain 11 months ago
Gives new meaning to the phrase....'thinking on your feet' :)
MorganLaFayeIreland 11 months ago 22
I HATE people who fake to be psychics to take advantage of peoples grief
TheLordSod 1 year ago
the radio psychic Dawkins is talking about is Peter Popoff. You can search him on YouTube and find the original radio interception video
Plausiblesarge 1 year ago
I admire Richard Dawkins ability to stand up for hours on end during interviews.
genericmember1 1 year ago
everything they say remind me a lot of my visit to the local scientologist church
BaroqueRockinBeats 1 year ago
them dam channel 4 content searching trolls...
aschris87 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Derren Brown is a faggot.
SinSeared 1 year ago
@SinSeared
Yes, he is gay. But there's no reason to say it like that.
maximum411 1 year ago
@maximum411
Why not? He needs to be called out on his homosexuality. Mr. Dawkins more than anyone should see the pointlessness in being a homosexual and why this Brown individual is a genetic disaster.
SinSeared 1 year ago
@SinSeared
That's obscene. He did not choose to be gay. And if you do think people choose to be gay, I'm no longer talking with you. The jury is out on that- it is not a choice.
And how is he a genetic disaster? He's a very skilled and successful man, far more so than you and me. Should he not talk to infertile people either just because they can't reproduce naturally? What a load of shit.
maximum411 1 year ago 4
@SinSeared Explain why Dawkins would "see the pointlessness in being a homosexual"
Aardvarked88 11 months ago
@Aardvarked88
If everyone in the world was a homosexual, no procreation. Don't talk about using alternative methods. Why do you need to do anything extra to have the same result as someone else? That means you are inferior because you are not as efficient. And we don't even need to talk about humans. We can talk about wild animals. If each animal of a certain species were homosexual, they would become extinct. Something is wrong, and pointless, if that's the result of your "preference."
SinSeared 11 months ago
@SinSeared Except not everybody in the world is homosexual, dipshit. Homosexuality has been exhibited throughout the entire animal kingdom, no species has ever died out due to it.
Derren Brown offers far more to the world than you ever will my friend. Since you're so keen to talk about procreation, my only advice for you is - never do it. You are a stain on humankind and not worthy of ever bringing another life in to the world.
Aardvarked88 11 months ago 2
@Aardvarked88
Fuck you. It was obviously a scenario. You have a problem with reading comprehension? Exhibited? no shit, no ones denying that. Its a defect to control the population. A DEFECT. And what does he do? Entertain? Oh yes, that's offering the world a fuck lot. I'm currently a student of engineering. I guarantee I'll do more useful things than this queer. And yes I definitely will procreate. Enjoy your adopted kids you fucking faggot.
SinSeared 11 months ago
@SinSeared I'm not gay champ, good effort though.
Homosexuality does not control the population you fucking idiot. Anyone who phrases a statement like, "I'm currently a student of engineering" has obviously been dealt a short card intellectually so I shouldn't be too hard on you.
You will contribute absolutely nothing to the world other than a couple of ugly little malformed kids, enjoy your life.
Aardvarked88 11 months ago 5
Derren makes a good point about the Tarot cards.
MsCread 1 year ago
LOL "the dog misses him"
VenomVapour 1 year ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
0.55 did he honestly just say that?
ItsSTU 1 year ago
0.55 did he honestly just say that?
ItsSTU 1 year ago
not that I am advocating for it, but it always amazed me how in America tarot card reading is legal but brothel houses are not. it seems to me selling lies is a lot more damaging than selling sex
peachybeach 1 year ago
there´s a well lit sofa in the backround att 5:25! please sit!
Lunaticc18 1 year ago 21
@Lunaticc18 try using your ears
monkeycrud 3 months ago
There's something about the way Derren Brown speaks, very captivating!
SuperDayv 1 year ago 5
why does he repeat like 3 minutes from the first video?
TweekDash 1 year ago
2:57 does that make any sense to you?-----typical cold-reader statement^^
MattRiley2 1 year ago
Surely Dawkins can afford 2 cameras...why are doco media people so crap?
aaronsdavis 1 year ago
@zaleblackwell yup, its like a symbolic roorschack test, or however you spell it... seems like an obvious thing... why does derren pick at silly reasoning rather than examining what is actually going on, psychologically?
happyseaurchin 1 year ago
I still use tarot cards.If I still get the same suggestions from the cards two times in a row, then I would consider it something to focus on. Most of the times, I will get repeating cards, or cards that share the meaning .
I don't think that the spirits guide the cards or any occultist bullcrap like that.
I think that the cards represent subconscious archetypes which are subconsciously manifested and shuffled... Or something like that.
Zaleblackwell 1 year ago
@Zaleblackwell it's a way to provoke thought and give perspective
greenelf12 1 year ago
@Zaleblackwell "Or something like that" In other words you haven't got a clue what they represent. Of course through pure probability alone one would expect certain cards to repeat again. You have almost talked yourself out of tarot cards, admit it. If it is just for fun, that is one thing, but to actually believe in any validity is asinine
kdum8 1 year ago
there's a couch right behind Derren...
bareakon 1 year ago
Someone get a.... chair?...or two
XaviNL 1 year ago
It's nice to see Richard not debating with someone
clay10h 1 year ago
@clay10h good fucking observation, he does have heated debates with people frequently, he is logical and right on most of his points but it does seem like he's all ways fighting a battle, high five for you!
TheMightyEuan 1 year ago
I think they stand up to make the viewer feel more involved, I really dont know how to explain that but hey lol
JayDee98765 1 year ago
theyre so clever, mentally they are both sitting on the sofa creating an illusion of comfort but in reality theare both standing.
mikevern69 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The cameraman must be knackered.
MiidiaMenace 1 year ago
The camerman must be knackered.
MiidiaMenace 1 year ago 4
My back aches from watching them stand up for so long.
Soldier957 1 year ago
ironicly they're standing for about an hour while there is a sofa in the background
Donald6309 1 year ago 167
@Donald6309 not ironic
lukewarmpotatoes 1 year ago
@Donald6309 not ironic
lukewarmpotatoes 1 year ago
@Donald6309 haha good point, but how is that irony?
saturdayssonmusic 1 year ago
@Donald6309 Look up the word "irony" in the dictionary.
Although im not defending the "stand up for an hour" philosophy, dawkins almost always stands up in his interviews, and the cameraman loves the zoom button lol.
I love dawkins! :D
TheLordSod 1 year ago
@Donald6309 that is not irony
Coincidentally (although I admire both of them, and enjoyed watching this interview) while they were talking about psychic mediums not taking their "readings" anywhere meaningful, in this interview it seemed, at times, like they were repeating each others points all to often....
....and this is ironic
ArturPiel 11 months ago
@ArturPiel That's not ironic either, try again.
Aardvarked88 11 months ago
@Donald6309
That would only be ironic if they were talking about how horrible it is that people waste furniture.
pumpkinman321 10 months ago
@pumpkinman321 well put-i was going to say something about how people misuse irony, oftentimes mistaking it for coincidence, strangeness, or otherwise unlikely circumstances.
wizzolf 10 months ago
@Donald6309 There is nothing ironic about it.
PsyDanShan 10 months ago
@Donald6309 They're obviously sitting on a psychokinetic sofa.
mellowcowism 8 months ago 3
@Donald6309 If you want an explanation, it could be the standing position looks beter when showing short clips from the interview, as they would have to do in the final edit of the programme.
drummerkid1993 7 months ago
@Donald6309 That's not irony...
LewisFall 5 months ago 7
why is it blocked? it's not like it's on tv at the moment or even on 4od, what's the point just blocking one, it's fucking ridiculous.
liamjd1 3 weeks ago
@Donald6309 that isn't ironic + they couldn't do over the shoulder shots on the sofa and any other shot for an interview is just awkward.
skatejam7 5 months ago
@Donald6309 it's easier to talk while standing, the lungs work better while upright ^_^
emikochan13 5 months ago
@Donald6309 It's because Dawkins only likes to do interviews when naked from the waist down.
123456yum123456 4 months ago 4
there is a cut at 4:33
IBMCs2009 1 year ago
"Your fate changes from minute to minute". Kind of goes against the definition of the word fate, doesn't it?
AtheistApe5 1 year ago 117
@AtheistApe5 I dont think either of these believe in fate.
ste43 1 year ago
@AtheistApe5 don't think they believe in it mate
TheMightyEuan 1 year ago
@AtheistApe5 Doesn't if you go by the existentialists' definition of the word. For Sartre, for example, life is the sum of our choices; our fate is not pre-determined by any kind of transcendental force, but on the contrary written and invented only by ourselves, from minute to minute, from choice to choice.
GODSAWAYONBUSINESS 10 months ago
@AtheistApe5 If your fate changes from minute to minute then there is no accuracy in readings but random statements with no value .. accuracy.This is not how a skillful liar/psychic/whatever would do it.
The best of them all is the old fashioned loop onto itself. Just like the bible "You can only see/speak god if you first believe in god". Go and try to tackle that statement its like a dog chasing its tail. So in this particular case you can say "Every time you do a reading your fate changes"...
JoinFox 8 months ago in playlist Derren Brown Interview - Richard Dawkins
@AtheistApe5
It's like an Heisenberg's Uncercertainty Principle for psychics. The procedure of messurement influences the messured thing itself. Or it is just plain garbage ...
Phaidron 6 months ago in playlist Derren Brown Interview - Richard Dawkins
@AtheistApe5 My thoughts exactly
JobForAMaxboy 5 months ago
I cannot imagine something more intimidating than giving Richard Dawkins a tarot reading.
livvyxo 1 year ago 6
This has been flagged as spam show
@livvyxo "I cannot imagine something more intimidating than giving Richard Dawkins a tarot reading."
I can. Giving a psychic reading of Derren Brown. ;)
TheNeognostic 8 months ago
they have a big light shining on an empty couch...and their standing..
this is a fascinating interview..but..that is just kind of bugging me :>
mfjeff 1 year ago 2
why are they standing?
sjkdec18 1 year ago 2
@sjkdec18 because they have no chairs. next question...
blinkboy2008 1 year ago
@blinkboy2008 legendary lmao
keithb414 1 year ago
@blinkboy2008 right... because they couldn't afford two chairs in their production budget and it just so happens that whenever dawkins does these interviews chairs are magically missing.
sjkdec18 1 year ago
What Richard Dawkins describes at the end, happened to Peter Popoff. As to whether not that was James Randi who uncovered that charlatan, is not known to me.
SamonMarquis