Intelligent Design; I want to ask Richard Dawkins "Are YOU hallucinating"?

[x234gm]

Things like father son relationships are merely general similarities that you would expect to find in any culture or religion, just like almost all religions believe in gods, spirits or an afterlife. It's the differences that are significant. While Hindus and the ancient Greeks worshipped multiple gods, the whole basis of Christianity and Islam is that there is only one true god, so those religions are definitely not just the same god with different names..

[buttedheads]

@x234gm Yes I see that one or two of the similarities can be easily writen off as coincidence. However there are too many coincidences IMHO

[solemiochef]

Your sincere belief that all gods, are one and the same is nice. But as you said yourself, it is Your conclusion. Mr. Dawkins' conclusion, and mine, is that they are all inventions of man. You are entitled to your conclusions. Dawkins to his.

I also found it amusing that you criticized Mr. Dawkins', even calling his honest answer as rude... yet you suggest that you will state your opinion "slowly" so that he can follow along. As usual, all the religious have to offer is hyprocisy.

[xcannabiscom]

@solemiochef I just wanted to know if Dawkins is hallucinating. As rude as he is, so far he has not answered.

[solemiochef]

@xcannabiscom The question you want to ask is in itself insulting. You might as well as ask "What are you? Studpid?" Is it any wonder that he does not bother to reply?

If you bothered to learn beyond what youtube snippets have to offer, you would know that there is no empirical evidence that supports ID and mountains that support Evolution. That in itself answers the question of who is halllucinating.

[xcannabiscom]

@solemiochef Well Dawkins is certain everyone who believes different than atheism is hallucinating. But when it comes down to it, he agrees ID is possible. So is it possibly Mr. Dawkins is hallucinating? I think so. I would like his answer, but you're right he will probably never answer.

As for "piles of evidence for evolution". I don't think evolution is beyond creationism. I don't think they are in disagreement. I just think there is something obvious about Intelligent Design.

[solemiochef]

@xcannabiscom Understanding something is possible and believing it to be reality are two different things. If you thought for a moment, you would realise that understanding a god could heal you of appendicitis and believing he will... are two very different things. Paricularly if you act on that belief. Sorry, you comments make no more sense than your original offerings. You are too busy trying to make Dawkins look bad and not trying to understand his point.

[xcannabiscom]

@solemiochef Arguing with you is not my point, and it is not productive. I didn't say anything about god healing me. I am talking about intelligent design. No need to set up a straw man argument to prove some point that you want to make. If you want to ask me if I believe god can heal me, then just ask me. But that is not a point I even brought up. Your arguments are no more effective than Dawkins arguments.

Belief is belief. You believe that there is no god. I believe that there is.

[solemiochef]

@xcannabiscom Obviously arguing is not you point. It only leads to exposing you as a someone who has no idea what they are talking about. I dont care if you believe god can heal you or not. The point is that Believing something and acting on that belief are two different things. I understand that you are not interested in even trying to understand anything that calls into question your belief in superstition. That's why your posts are devoid of thoughtful comments.

[xcannabiscom]

@solemiochef Just because Im not going to play into your straw man arguments. I have no intention on debating you about claims that I have not even made. If you have to stoop to that position, offering the ideas of others and presenting them as my own to some how debunk my theory, well it's obvious you have lost ground here and are trying desperately to recover.

I came from atheism/agnosticism to creationism. I've heard it all, and in fact used it all before. You're argument is weak.

[solemiochef]

@xcannabiscom LOL Rhetoric is all you have. All I have pointed out is that understanding that anything is possible and acting on that understanding are two different things. This simple observation demonstrates how silly your original point is. You wrongly assumed that you GOTCHA'd Dawkins, when all you really did was demonstrate your ignorance. Now, instead of just admitting you were wrong... you are trying to obscure the facts. Why not try addressing the argument? The answer? You can't.

[xcannabiscom]

@solemiochef I think it's very important for you to fight the matter. Which is ok. Your words are personal attacks, not facts. I will not only debate the facts, I have in fact demonstrated them. The personal attacks that you have offered are not material for a proper or constructive debate.

[solemiochef]

@xcannabiscom Understanding that anything is possible and believing something to be true are two very different things. Particularly if you act on your belief. Understanding a god could cure you of appendicitis is one thing... but believing he will and avoiding, and denying tried and true science is idiotic.

If you spent as much time trying to understand Dawkins and Science as you do trying to pole holes in science you might actually learn something. And learning is the end of superstition.

[xcannabiscom]

@solemiochef Belief that there is no God, is no more provable than there is a God. With exception to the proof in intelligent design. You keep responding in a way that you believe I reject science. I don't. I just don't accept that it is remotely possible that human life came to be by accident. I believe adaptation is real. But that doesn't explain everything. So you have beliefs, and I have beliefs. Who is hallucinating? Both of us? Belief is belief.

[xcannabiscom]

Youtube has disabled embedding of this, so I have uploaded an embeddable version on my website, see the description for more info.

[helasmoh]

You are right brother, the only difference is that God do not accept the we make idles or images of any kind to Him, this is the first commandment. Whenever humanity stray away from God's teachings God send another messenger to put us back on track. In the Quran Allah ordered us to believe in all God's messengers and make no discrimination between any of them. Each nation will be judged according to its book because they all came from the same God.

[DasKrabbe]

Dude...really? 7 parts? Don't you have some buildings to blow up in the name of your god?

[medevil13]

i wrote a book about unicorn and they are similar to all the other holy books.They all are the same because it is bullshit.All the bullshit is the same."Dont you see the similarities very specific similarities I wrote about the unicorn"all of this is the same

[TheNewAlias]

dude u ever heard of a shaver?

[truckcompany]

Congrats for strawmanning. Richard Dawkins point was not to show how similar these Gods were.

[AirplaneRider]

@chrisuk19yootube heh, odd, it was a reply to me

sorry about the confusion

[AirplaneRider]

@chrisuk19yootube You're the one that believes in supernatural boogymen.

I bet you haven't a clue as to the origins of the particular god you believe in. I'm willing to bet big money on that. Religion is the most foolproof scam in all of history and all gods have been created by men. That is a simple and unambiguous fact.

[HanKSN101]

u lost me at ...  0:60

[AirplaneRider]

Yahweh is not the same god as Apollo and Thor. They were all created the same way, by men making up BS, but they are clearly different gods.

[skubersteve24]

william dembski is the research professor of philosophy and director of the center for cultural engagement at the southwestern baptist theological seminary at Fort Worth, Texas. BIAS!!.

watch dembski's debate with christopher hitchens from last year. where he suggests a more deitist view rather than a theist. tho he is a proclaimed christian.

the likeness u assert between gods of various religions proves only that religion is also subject to adaptation and has in fact Evolved.

[xcannabiscom]

@skubersteve24 you make being a deist out to be something bad or embarrassing. When has "one size fits all" ever been good for everything and everyone? I think you have a problem with there being a god, and therefor everything you say has BIAS. So what?!

[skubersteve24]

@skubersteve24 thats a gud point. i do believe there is something spirtual out there. in the past i would of agreed with u completely. tho im skeptical of anybody who tells me they understand the spiritual side of things. i think there is substance in ur argument. tho i am very weary of who i give credibility to and sorry to say mate, i cant see any logical path to god. i wish there was

[skubersteve24]

@skubersteve24 Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.

- Charles Darwin, naturalist and author (1809-1882)

[skubersteve24]

just answer one question. if god exists, would IT (i highly doubt god would have penis, so stop saying 'he') have to be more complex than DNA??

[skubersteve24]

if god exists and says he gave us freewill, then why punish bad deeds? and if he is guiding us through life, then that is not freewill.

[skubersteve24]

oh and dawkins in fact DOES believe that an intelligent designer may be possible. he merely claims there is no proof. u should really research a bit. if ur familiar with the works of michio kaku who suggest string theory is in fact the kind of 'pyhsiology' of an I.D, and dawkins does not dispute this.

[xcannabiscom]

@skubersteve24 But there IS proof and I included it in this video. Listen to the top scientists that comment on this video, and also check the links in the description. Thx!

[skubersteve24]

@xcannabiscom NONE OF THAT IS PROOF. it only suggest an improbable probability. and it is only your interpretation of anothers view. and u say science cant duplicated dna. mate how would you know? would u have guessed 20years ago, that scientists would be growin human body parts from stem cells??

and again urve avoided the question......ive checked ur links and its the same crap iv been reading for the last 3 years. there is no PROOF.

u need to look up the definiton of the word PROOF.

[skubersteve24]

you know that there is more evidence backing the existence of aliens and ufo's than there is for god or jesus.

[xcannabiscom]

@skubersteve24 Who says God/Jesus aren't aliens?

[skubersteve24]

@xcannabiscom could be. but dont assume so.

[Gonzo707]

@xcannabiscom Because those aliens would have had to have come from somewhere or be created by something- they would not be the "uncaused cause" or the "supreme being."

People use god(s) to explain what created the universe and to claim what the meaning of all life is. If we one day found out that ancient super-sophisticated aliens seeded life onto earth and created what eventually became the human race, it still wouldnt answer those questions religious people try to answer with their gods.

[agronoxdt]

So essentially what you are saying is one god set out to confuse all of humanity by revealing himself to hundreds of different cultures, in different ways, with different stories, at different times. Knowing it would result in the massive death tolls which have plagued humanity since the beginning of religion. Considering the results, that is extremely evil of god. And you want to worship this guy? You are a delusional idiot.

[xcannabiscom]

@agronoxdt No that is not at all what I am saying. Which your statement is going to prove my next point.

Humans get things wrong without the help of an outside force all the time.

For example, if you get 20 people in a room and tell them a story, and a week later you ask them to repeat that same story, instead of getting one story by all people, you will get 20 different stories because everyone is going to get their own version of it the way that they see it.

[agronoxdt]

@xcannabiscom Well that leads me to another point. What you are saying is eyewitness testimony cannot be trusted.. ALL RELIGION RELIES ON EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY. ALL RELIGION IS BASED ON WHAT PEOPLE CLAIM. ALL RELIGIOUS BELIEF IS BASED ON CREDULITY, So what was your point again? All religions are based on fanciful ideas and have absolutely no basis in reality. So until evidence is presented to suggest otherwise I shall (as well as the growing population) have no more respect for your incredulity.

[skubersteve24]

i find it hard to imagine that ne body cld believe that 2000+ year old stories about a man dying, coming back to life, and then walking on water, are actually true...

i mean, i dnt rule out ID, in fact i think it culd be true, but if it is then this being would of had to of evolve over time. i mean with life on earth i think there was more than likely, an out side source

but id sooner say alien ancsestors than gods pets.

its less arrongant

[xcannabiscom]

@skubersteve24 We all deal with the evidence differently.

[skubersteve24]

i think dawkins is arogant in all his answers haha

but i compare it to the tone u wld take if sum1 u knew refused to believe that the stars were'nt fairies.

oh and all 2000 year old stories arnt proof, oh bearded man

dawkins duznt refuse the 'possibility' of a ID.

he believes there is no 'proof' backing ID.

and he is rite.

[xcannabiscom]

@skubersteve24 Dawkins says there is no proof backing it, however the video that I show before dawkins last remark describes EXACTLY what he said "could be" evidence of intelligent design. But after analyzing the complexity of DNA, of course it's intelligent. A DNA molecule can hold 3 billion characters which set out the ability for it to replicate and create complex structures. Ya thats no accident. Watch the videos listed in the description please, there are 7 of them in the series.

[skubersteve24]

@xcannabiscom u frend, r a hyprocrite. u say dna is so complex that 'of course it's intelligent'. well then u'd agree that if god existed, he would have to be so much more complex, there for 'of course it's intelligent' and must have a creator also. when u trace dna back thru time it is blatantly obvious that living beings had a simple (and logical) beginning. all things begin simple and progress into complexity. i challenge you to give one example that doesn't.

[xcannabiscom]

@skubersteve24 Science can not and has not duplicated God's work in creating a molecule like DNA out of mud or elements. Without using DNA, science can't duplicate it the way evolution suggests.

That to me intelligent design holds way more credibility.

[DasKrabbe]

@xcannabiscom

Actually, we have created DNA. Even put our own created DNA into a cell and made synthetic life.

[Telamnar]

OK, I typed in your suggested search and the top site that showed up was answers in genesis.

You don't want that to happen.

Fortunately, the second result (at raccoonbend(dot)com) is a handy-dandy refutation of the idea that chinese characters are related to genesis.

Google has pwned you.

Regarding intelligent design: it is the argument from ignorance. Just because we don't know how something happened doesn't mean god must have done it.

Furthermore, the definition of information that they...

[Telamnar]

...use is inconsistent (look the term up! wikipedia is your friend! So is talkorigins!).

Finally, you use of 'Expelled' is not a good sign. In that scene, Stein asked Dawkins what he thought evidence for ID would look like. Dawkins described it. However, no such evidence has been found. Information in the genome does not count as evidence, because information does not prove the existence of a designer (seriously).

[xcannabiscom]

@Telamnar  Yeah getting a one sided answer on this doesn't exactly command some sort of superior knowledge on the subject, however I have saw those sites too. I don't agree with them.

[Telamnar]

@xcannabiscom If you want more hilarity, there's a video on youtube ('hebrew fail at the creation museum') pointing out a similar mistake.

It's impossible to know if they're lying or mistaken, of course, but seriously - any old testament scholar worth his salt knows some hebrew. I recall a thread on a skeptic website where people who knew other languages (I think there was even a guy who knew sanskrit!) came in and commented. No-one had anything good to say.

The linguistic argument is bad.

[Telamnar]

You probably shouldn't tell a muslim that all the hindu gods are the same as allah - he'd probably take offence!

There are a few problems with this assertion you're making:

-The Abrahamic religions in particular specifically state that all other religions are false, that all gods other than theirs are false. That specifically includes hinduism, a culture that has historically had a lot of contact with islam.

The fact that many religions agree on something doesn't make it true or false.

[Telamnar]

(con'td) Religions are often prone to error, especially with regards to a primitive understanding of the universe around us. Many different religions assert that the earth is flat and at the center of the universe (or have in the past). That doesn't mean it's true.

-Imagine a room whose contents you do not know. You ask several people what's inside. Some say a chair, others a table, others a ball on the floor. If people are looking at the same thing (God) and getting answers that are...

[Telamnar]

...different to begin with, and getting more so as time goes on (There used to be one christianity. Now there are over 30,000 sects. Islam is even more divided.) then why are these answers reliable? If I had a room and asked ten people what was inside, and they all said 'A dog!' and described the same one, and then more people came and said 'yep, a dog!' then you'd have something.

As it is the characteristics of any deity that could fit all the religions are pretty sparse. If you include...

[Telamnar]

...universalist unitarianism on the list, god doesn't even have to exist at all!

Ecumenicalism feels good. The problem is that before too long statements that attempt to define god in any way start to become vague to the point of uselessness.

[xcannabiscom]

@Telamnar  "You probably shouldn't tell a muslim that all the hindu gods are the same as allah - he'd probably take offence!"

Thats their choice.

[Telamnar]

@xcannabiscom Your response is brilliant, witty, and devastating to my point.

Seriously.

P.S.: You forgot an apostrophe.

[imsocool7222]

He knows this stuff, he's a professor at Oxford. Oxford has the best reputation of any college in the world.

[Alexdurrant7]

You can either attribute the similarities to a shared real god or to plagiarism. I assert that plagiarism/borrowed elements is more likely.