you never realized that british on tv are just one person in different wigs? C'mon! I mean they allways know everything about every topic, what makes it impossible to debate. Thats your answer, it's just one realy smart brit in different wigs
I don't believe all that Bible thumper bullshit, but Emma Watson might just prove god's existence. What else but a supreme being could make something that beautiful?
@MagnusCattus Sir: To assert that all atheists are people with "a weak constitution, seemingly unable to laugh at themselves" is a sweeping generalization.
It is a bit like saying: "All black men between the ages of 16 and 35 are blessed with a plentiful amount of 'fast-twitch' muscle fibres, and can therefore run the 100 in a fast time." ... or: "All deeply religious, God-fearing American males over the age of 16 are big, tough hard men, full of muscle."
@MagnusCattus Why don't you just STFU ... and refrain from making sweeping generalizations about atheists?
I am sure that SOME atheists are uptight people who take themselves - and life - too seriously, but there are also plenty of atheists who do not come into that category.
Mister, you are a very rude and ill-mannered man. But I am not going to make a sweeping generalization and say that all (or most) deeply religious, God-fearing Christians are rude and ill-mannered.
@TheEctomorph how old are you exactly? oh boo hoo someone said something bad about atheists. how horrible, even though theres thousands of videos deticated to making theists seem stupid. Awww, it offended you? well look at your response, you are exactly who am talking about.
From now onwards, I am not even going to bother reading your pointed, provocative and inane comments on this - or any other - 'You Tube' discussion board.
Like I said in my previous post, you are a bigoted and narrow-minded atheist hater. I'll bet that you are also one of those ridiculously old-fashioned Christians that still believes that Adam and Eve were actual characters in history. You numpty!
@TheEctomorph why are you even responding to me? you already lost, you fell right into a trap. Stop struggle, just gnaw your leg off and be done with it. I still don't care, infact I'm not even reading what you're typing anymore.
@TheEctomorph [Continuing on from my previous 'post' about Christians who make sweeping generalizations about atheists]
I am not into making sweeping generalisations about whole sections of the community - whether they be homosexuals, people of Afro-Carribean origin, Jews, atheists ... or people in any other category.
Bigoted, narrow-minded atheist haters like you make me feel pig-sick, to tell the truth. Fuck off, you repulsive, nauseating c u next tuesday. Do I make myself clear?
yeahhhh, to notice simularities like this you must have some affinty for them both,,,, what kind of sicko are you? haha only joking by the way but please,,,, get out more dude.
I honestly doubt Richard Dawkins is an Atheist, I think he's an Agnostic who sells a lot of books by pretending to be a militant Atheist and convincing a bunch of retards to follow him around and preach his teachings much like Billy Graham or other Mob oriented Evangelists. I don't think he cares one bit about what he says, he just found a nitch market to make loads of cash. Richard Dawkins is hardly a scientist, doubt he's an Atheist, what he is is a business man.
@lion575 Dawkins is an evolutionary biologist. on top of that, he was the Charles Simonyi Professor in the Public Understanding of Science, AKA the guy trying to impart truth and knowledge to the peon masses. what makes you doubt his doubt so much? or are you just trolling? IDK, FTFY
@snowblind420 As a Physicist and Engineer I'd hardly consider an Evolutionary Biologist a Scientist for starters. Not that I am promoting Creation or something like that, just saying that that is more of a Philosophical and Historical background than it is one that derives from Math and Science (I'd put it in the same category as an Archeologist).
@lion575 OMG!!! so you say that darwin didnt conduct his experiments scietificly? idiot! you cant say that the teachings of life is somwthing to be compared to philosophy! its been proven by the process of elimination! im 17, and i know more then a physicist? i think ur country needs a better education system
@RawSwedishMeatball What does the education of Richard Dawkins have to do with Charles Darwin? Darwin Studied Medicine, and yes Darwin conducted scientific experiments using mathematical proofs. What are you referencing having been proven? The US may have the 25th ranked primary education system, but has the highest rated secondary education system in the world. The Schools I attended rank higher than any school in all of Sweden. Who needs to be better educated?
@lion575 Sir: I don't mean to be rude, but judging your spelling ability - which is somewhat limited - and by your overuse of capital letters, I have very real doubts as to whether you are a gentleman with a high IQ. For all I know, you may be telling the truth when you say that you are a physicist and engineer ... but, to be frankly honest, I am not 100% convinced, by any means. Far from it, in fact.
@TheEctomorph If you truly new anything about Physicist's or Engineer's you'd know they think people who care that much about spelling are those with Liberal Arts degrees (which is essentially the same as no education at all). Especially when we are talking about comments on youtube videos. When they do get published and spelling is somewhat of a care .... that's what editors are for.
@RawSwedishMeatball No I'm saying that Richard Dawkins makes a lot of money from book sales by praying on uneducated simpletons who can't think for themselves(much like yourself) and pointing out the similarities between him and Christian TV Evangelists.
@lion575 ... you are slow... saying that a man who actually tries to help people to understand the world a little bit better a predetor is quite amusing, yes he makes money, but thats not his goal, and trying to explain it all in this little box is impossible...
@lion575 "No I'm saying that Richard Dawkins makes a lot of money from book sales by praying on uneducated simpletons who can't think for themselves ..."
Christians, of course, are so selfless, non-competitive and non-materialistic, that they are not in the slightest bit interested in making money, or owning big, expensive houses and flashy motor cars. (I'm sure that you don't really believe that any more than I do ... sir.)
@lion575 I honestly doubt Nicky Gumbell is a Christian, I think he's an Agnostic who sells a lot of books - and makes a great deal of money - by pretending to be a deeply religious, bible-thumping, God-fearing Christian and convincing a lot of gullible people that they will roast in Hell-fire for billions and billions of years - indeed for eternity - unless they "see the light" and accept Jesus Christ as their personal saviour. I don't think Mr Gumbell cares one bit about
@lion575 Actually, I think that Nicky Gumbell is a sincere and bona fide Christian, who genuinely believes in God, Jesus Christ, a Day of Judgement and a Hereafter. (The comments that I made earlier this evening about Mr Gumbell were a flippant response to your remarks about Professor Richard Dawkins, which - in my view - were uncalled for, and in bad taste.)
I firmly believe that this learned gentleman - Professor Dawkins - is a sincere and bona fide atheist, who has no belief
@lion575 [Continuing on from my previous 'post' about Professor Richard Dawkins]
whatsoever in God, Jesus Christ, A Day of Judgement or a Hereafter. Have you any tangible evidence to substantiate your suggestion that the good Professor is not as sceptical about the existence of a Divine Being as he purports to be in public?
@lion575 [Continuing on from my previous post about Mr Nicky Gumbell]
what he says, he just found a niche market to make loads of cash. Mr Gumbel is hardly a philosopher or a theologian, doubt he's a Christian, what he is is a business man.
@MagnusCattus Really? I am an atheist and I laugh at myself all the time. Most other like minded people I know do the same. I really don't think being an atheist has anything to do with it. I think it's more a matter of having a sense of humor.
@shango02005 Do you laugh at atheist specific things though? like how stupid your some of the theories are? Atheists have a higher suicide rate, so I doubt very much they are perpetualy happied than theists.
@MagnusCattus I don't know what you mean by theories. I am an atheist in the sense that I do not believe in a god. There's really nothing else to it. Now, I also describe myself as a skeptic because I am not easily convinced of extraordinary claims without some damned good evidence to back it up. So far, there's been absolutely nothing that makes me doubt my stance on theism. As for atheists having a higher suicide rate, where did you get this information? I've never heard that one before.
@MagnusCattus Okay. I wasn't asking where I could find the info, I was asking where you got yours. I know my way around these here internets. lol Anyway, I did google it and read through a few hits. Youtube won't let me post a link, but the secular humanism dot org hit had some very interesting writing on the subject. It seems that it's more of a human nature and social issue rather than an atheist/theist issue.
@shango02005 oh right, I forget it was a month or so ago, and I honestl don't care I'm not atheist it doesnt affect me any. You avoided it totally. In secular focused, usually atheist countries, the suicide rate is higher, in more theist driver, supposedly less capitalist driven, countries the suicide rate is less. You can read into all you want, I honestly don't care, most theists are wrong anyways so it isn't really an issue for me. I had a fairly strong disgut for atheists, can't blame me-
@shango02005 - for not really bothering researching them much. My disgust is that they claim God does not exist, rather than saying they do not believe in God. It might sound subtle but the implications are serious. There is more than enough evidence to believe in God, none of which has anything to do with "miracles". Those faith healers and the like are simply capitalising on people's gullibility. "sheep skinned and thrown about".
@MagnusCattus The faith healers etc, are laughable at best. I agree with you on that one. I am willing to listen to any evidence you might have. I am not evil, despite what you might believe. Maybe you can convince me. May I ask what religion do you practice? Oh, and I didn't duck your question. I told you what I think. Think is the key word here.
@shango02005 I had never really planned on discussing the evidence to be honest. Its not that I am afraid to, just I really didn't have the patience to discuss this again. I never thought Atheists were evil, no more evil than any theist who doesn't practice what he preaches, and does preach what he practices. I said disgust, there are many a' thing that disgust me. Anyways, oh hell let's just come out and say it, if we did not evolve, that would be creation right?
@MagnusCattus For the sake of argument, we can pretend that evolution is not a fact (which it IS). If we hadn't evolved over a vast span of time, that wouldn't mean that life was created. The only thing that would prove is that we didn't evolve. Then we would search for another explanation for our existence by means of logic, reason, and science. The only reason to believe in a creator is tradition. If you feel you have the patience to enlighten me, please show your evidence.
@shango02005 You said it is fact, thats the end of the dicussion as far as I am concerned. You've been brain washed, but whatever. The golden ratio for one thing. You should go look it up, because to explain it all, and propperly I can't do. From a sequence of numbers called the fibonacci number sequence, you can form with it a series of rectangles into a spiral. Snail shells, flowers, weather patterns, galaxy formations, acorns. On and on. The number sequence itself is translated into a formula
@shango02005 This formula has also been found in nature through and through in a variety of ways. You have to look it up, I just did a very poor job of explaining it, perhaps you might be smarter and will understand it better.
@MagnusCattus I am no expert, but I have read about the Fibonacci sequences. It really doesn't imply a supernatural being, though. That is kind of like looking to the rain gods to explain a thunder storm. It's just not necessary. Just look at how much science has explained in the past 100 years. Science is a method of thinking that tells us there are better answers out there to be found. It is possible that there is a better explanation than evolution. It's just extremely unlikely.
@shango02005 I rest my case. Science points to God, and you deny it. You never will find proof, because you have thrown the idea that there is a God away. A divine signature found in nearly anythiing that is supposed to be creation, and you go "duhhh that doesn't sound like God did it" What is the point to even bothering with this conversation on my end. I could give you irrefutable proof and you would dismiss it.
@danieljliversLXXXIX No its hiding. You should know by now what a person is talking about when they say science. a vague general Idea, of what could possibly be associated. I don't need to go into detail and list every single field and it being in favor against or neutral of my claim. It is just an immature thing to spout off about definitions, infact the only other group I've seen that done consistantly by is feminists. So well done, you are about the same caliber as them. Golf clap*
@danieljliversLXXXIX My use of the word isn't vague or general? Well now I have heard just about everything. I can tell you have no real interest in continueing this conversation, but surely you can at least see I am using only a specific part of science, just as anyone who says the word ever uses it. You should have the sense to filter out what branches don't pertain to what this entire thread is talking about. IT WAS MY WORDS, the way I USED THEM, i was being general and vague.
@danieljliversLXXXIX That guy who calls himself "MagnusCattus" is an obnoxious and insensitive human being, with no manners (like so many deeply religious, bible-thumping, God-fearing Christians).
@MagnusCattus Obviously, we have very different ideas of irrefutable proof is. A number sequence, incredible as it may be, is not proof of God. It has nothing to do with me "Throwing out the idea", either. I don't say there IS NO god, I say there probably isn't. So yeah, I don't think I am the one dismissing irrefutable proof. Shit, you implied that evolution is not fact! lol
@shango02005 Evolution isn't fact, if it was fact it would imply it has been observed every time it has been brought into qeustion. What we have EVER been presented as "observable proof" is the slightest, and most convoluted changes within DNA, the changing about like 2 nucleotides. Ya, evolution is fact, it is sad you actualy bought it. You got sold snake oil.
@MagnusCattus Search for some info about medical stuff , including vaccines , and resistence virus , , educate yourself , research in fossile records , and investigate about the human DNA MAP , wich carries many info of our ancesters and past mutations.. Evolution its a fact , and is the base of modern cience and modern medicine , whos provide a better quality of life for all of us , and extendes life expectancy gradually , and that is FACT.
@EdyMar77 I think you should take your own advice and look at the criticism. THere is no evidence of evolution. Fossils don't mean anything because we don't know if they gave birth to anything other than something that looked exactly like it. If you think we have evidence, then my rebuttle is, if it doesn't look exactly like it, MAYBE it isn't actualy a descendant. Oh ya I know, mind blowing theory isn't it. Shit when to things look different thinking they actualy are, how dumb was I?
@EdyMar77 That was alot of rediculous words you just strong together I must say. Prove we evolved. Right now, forget all these fabricated uses. I want to hear the BEST evidence for evolution. If you can't do that don't waste my time.
@MagnusCattus Changing of 2 nucleotides? Better look again friend, there's more a lot more than two nucleotide differences between individual cells in your body. You clearly don't have a clue.
@MagnusCattus The human genome is about 3.4 billion nucleotide pairs. Between individual humans there is up to 0.5% difference. That accounts for 17 million nucleotide difference between some humans. Before you open your mouth, pick up a book.
@MagnusCattus Redon R., et al. Nature, 444. 444 - 454 (2006), Khaja R., et al. Nature Genetics, advance online publication doi:10.1038/ng1921 (2006)., Or, summed up in terms you can understand: Human genome more variable than previously thought, 22 November 2006 | Nature |. And for fun, a study that suggests diversity even between identical twins: Phenotypically Concordant and Discordant Monozygotic Twins Display Different DNA Copy-Number-Variation Profiles. Bruder et al 2008.
@MagnusCattus Even conservative estimates but diversity between individuals at about .01% which is roughly 3.4 million base pairs. That's between humans, there's even more between species. There's a lot for evolution to play around with.
@richjammcl That isn't anything of the sort, varation of information isn't the qeustion, its increase in information. I've heard, we have recoreded mutations that increase information. IF that is acualy true, how much information was added, and I think the word for information would be nucleotides. That is what I was asking.
@richjammcl Ok you're right, I did mess up, could you please quote source though? I meant was mutations actualy, so I probably got my terminology mixed up. Can you tell me what is the largest INCREASE of information from a mutation we have ever recorded? If it isn't nucleotides than tell me what the propper term would be. I'm honestly asking you because I have no clue where to look for it. I haven't had much luck hunting for anything coherent.
@MagnusCattus fair enough. Mutations are constant, ever cell in your body mutates many times a day, the only reason we don't die before we are born is that the cell has numerous mechanisms to correct the mutations before they kill us. It may be helpful to note that our cells add information in nonmutagenic mechanisms as well. If you're honestly interested, I'll send you a personal message, I don't like being limited to 500 characters.
@richjammcl That didn't really answer my qeustion, infact I think you just made the discussion more convoluded. Don't send me a bunch of PMs if you can at least hear my side and ponder it honestly, if I do have something to say.
@MagnusCattus Well, I just didn't want to pollute the comments section of this video any worse than we already have. I understand what you're saying, you want to know where new genetic information comes from correct? It would be difficult to say what the largest addition is, I'm not aware of anyone keeping a record, but I can give you some examples of how it happens.
@MagnusCattus Seriously? That's the only "observable proof" you have seen? Talk about sad. You should treat yourself to a ninth grade science class. You would learn a lot.
@MagnusCattusSir: It's funny you should say that, because only the day I was thinking EXACTLY the same thing about deeply religious, bible-thumping God-fearing, Christians - i.e. that they are, generally speaking, people with a weak constitution, who seem incapable of laughing at themselves.
@trifulquita15 I was going to give a drawn-out, detailed explanation as to why atheists do not "work for the Antichrist", as well as the actual mythological origins of the Witch, but I think that ChainsawVsGod pretty much had it pegged:
@SeedsOfHatred Many good people are "used" by the Antichrist, likewise many bad people are "used" by Christ. Using the enemy's efforts is the best sabotage and espionage
Oh? So THAT is why i get a massive boner every time i hear Dawkins speak!
18120polls 13 hours ago
To quote Family Guy: Whuuuuuuaaaaaaaaaaat?
NukeemallYB 13 hours ago
on the subject of evolution*
ivoyager 20 hours ago
Didn't watch it, Just wanted to ask, who the fuck would care what Emma blood Watson has to say?
ivoyager 20 hours ago
Same size pictures and head angle. That is all
22ness0hayden 2 days ago
Even if I don't wank, both of them are worthy of one. =)
Cyclopaexan 2 days ago
I DUNNO 'BOUT YOU GUYS SOMETIMES...
ucancallmebaby1 2 days ago
Comment removed
ucancallmebaby1 2 days ago
LOL Richard Dawkins as Hermione Granger....hahahha that would be priceless
MrPsychedelic11 3 days ago
Emma Watson doesn't look like Dawkins at all. She looks like John Malkowich
leconfidant 4 days ago
this is probably the most productive argument Dick has ever had
edktpo 5 days ago
I really liked Richard Dawkings performance in the Harry Potter movies, and Emma Watson sure is a talented scientist.
Mardrommen 1 week ago 7
a masturbation nightmare........
inconsp1cuous1515 1 week ago
Did anyone else think they were in a debate ??
goodwolf359 1 week ago 8
@goodwolf359 yeah, i thought: is emma watson really a creationist?
Dodec84 1 week ago
That was horrifying.
willd3rbeast 1 week ago
I think if Harry Potter and Hermione had a boy, it would look a lot like Dawkins. And religious muggles everywhere would shit their pants on sight.
CrannBethadh 1 week ago
*Inhales*
WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH
WobblyBoy1031 1 week ago
So ure saying I need to meet more older men who look like Richard... cause they'll have seriously gorgeous? lol
Tuathalful 2 weeks ago
To much fucking time on your hands. Why not take up origami or sumthin?
DrSpooglemon 2 weeks ago
Evolution
belegulo 2 weeks ago 5
Wow, two humans from the same place look similar? That can't be a coincidence!
.
..
...
Oh, wait, it's not.
Keovar 3 weeks ago
I actually fap to both of these people.... That's not a joke.
ManDudeYeah 2 months ago 43
@ManDudeYeah Agreed.
BBC1146 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
ManDudeYeah 2 months ago
Everyone on the tele is just Chuck Norris in costumes, everyone knows that LOL
Keanu Reeves = Chuck Norris
Sigorni Weever= Chuck Norris
Brad Pitt = Chuck Norris
Obama =Chuck Norris
Bin Laden was Chuck Norris, ever wonder why they dumped him in the sea, because you cant kill Chuck ;)
AtheistCentre 2 months ago
@AtheistCentre I found that all the females are actually Uma Thurman
disturbedking8 1 month ago
This is creepy.
ShazerThe 2 months ago
I just realised I've never had a wank to Emma Watson. Time to make things right...
Oh Hermione you bad girl oh my yes oh *fap fap fap*
gunninlinguist 2 months ago 51
@gunninlinguist
I think you need you some Molly Rome my lad . .
flamesfromblazer 2 months ago
@gunninlinguist Shes ugly as Hermione... lets see that cute short hair of yours. Yes pixie cut! Small tits! Mmn.. PERFECT!
LemonsArentSour 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@gunninlinguist It's NOT as if Atheism, Fapping Off, Good Looks And Common Sense REALLY have "Anything" to do with each other, anyway!!!
ucancallmebaby1 2 days ago
@gunninlinguist Damn dog, I've been fappin' to emma fakes for years LOL
00movieman00 2 days ago
What, no morphing? Only a cross-fade? I want my money back!
rogermwilcox 2 months ago
She is going to age into him. Interesting.
SuperFantasticFox 2 months ago
you never realized that british on tv are just one person in different wigs? C'mon! I mean they allways know everything about every topic, what makes it impossible to debate. Thats your answer, it's just one realy smart brit in different wigs
PiterburgCowboy 2 months ago
you can morph anything to look just like the first picture... thanks photoshop bro
ktmmxer131 2 months ago
I don't believe all that Bible thumper bullshit, but Emma Watson might just prove god's existence. What else but a supreme being could make something that beautiful?
heartfire451 2 months ago
@heartfire451 so you're saying Richard Dawkins is hot too then since they look alike right?
T2DarIantan 2 months ago
@T2DarIantan He should be hot to women his age as he is intelligent and intelligence is hot.
hydrolito 2 months ago
So I'll repeat, what is the largest increase of information (nucleotides) we have ever recorded?
MagnusCattus 2 months ago
Come to think of it, have you ever seen Watson and Dawkins in the same place at the same time? They have to be the same person!
IAmClockwork 2 months ago
Btw our life expectancy is dropping not increasing. Mothers will start outliving children soon enough.
MagnusCattus 2 months ago
EVERYBODY STOP COMMENTING AND FLAG AS SPAM!!!! HELP CLEAN YOUTUBE!!!!
SuperVideodave 2 months ago
during the transformation she looked like ROGER FEDRER
eldokch911 2 months ago
his daughter, Professor Richard "Im right" Dawkins has a daughter
fundie2008 2 months ago
Wow. Old, retarded AND badly done.
VaterOrlaag 2 months ago
I can't decide if I'm in love with Emma Dawkins or Richard Watson!
politicoochie09 2 months ago
Evolution!!!
omarnug 2 months ago 32
I was wanking to Emma and shot all over Dawkins
fuzzynostic 2 months ago 59
@fuzzynostic In the space of 19 seconds? Wouldn't brag about that tbh.
JConnolly2211 2 months ago
@MagnusCattus Sir: To assert that all atheists are people with "a weak constitution, seemingly unable to laugh at themselves" is a sweeping generalization.
It is a bit like saying: "All black men between the ages of 16 and 35 are blessed with a plentiful amount of 'fast-twitch' muscle fibres, and can therefore run the 100 in a fast time." ... or: "All deeply religious, God-fearing American males over the age of 16 are big, tough hard men, full of muscle."
Have a nice day, sir.
TheEctomorph 2 months ago
@TheEctomorph What are you even talking about? The atheists I HAVE EVER MET ARE UPTIGHT, wtf, thats my opinion, what do you care?
MagnusCattus 2 months ago
@MagnusCattus Why don't you just STFU ... and refrain from making sweeping generalizations about atheists?
I am sure that SOME atheists are uptight people who take themselves - and life - too seriously, but there are also plenty of atheists who do not come into that category.
Mister, you are a very rude and ill-mannered man. But I am not going to make a sweeping generalization and say that all (or most) deeply religious, God-fearing Christians are rude and ill-mannered.
TheEctomorph 2 months ago
@TheEctomorph how old are you exactly? oh boo hoo someone said something bad about atheists. how horrible, even though theres thousands of videos deticated to making theists seem stupid. Awww, it offended you? well look at your response, you are exactly who am talking about.
MagnusCattus 2 months ago
@MagnusCattus "how old are you exactly?"
What's it to you? (as you Americans say).
From now onwards, I am not even going to bother reading your pointed, provocative and inane comments on this - or any other - 'You Tube' discussion board.
Like I said in my previous post, you are a bigoted and narrow-minded atheist hater. I'll bet that you are also one of those ridiculously old-fashioned Christians that still believes that Adam and Eve were actual characters in history. You numpty!
TheEctomorph 2 months ago
@TheEctomorph why are you even responding to me? you already lost, you fell right into a trap. Stop struggle, just gnaw your leg off and be done with it. I still don't care, infact I'm not even reading what you're typing anymore.
MagnusCattus 2 months ago
@TheEctomorph [Continuing on from my previous 'post' about Christians who make sweeping generalizations about atheists]
I am not into making sweeping generalisations about whole sections of the community - whether they be homosexuals, people of Afro-Carribean origin, Jews, atheists ... or people in any other category.
Bigoted, narrow-minded atheist haters like you make me feel pig-sick, to tell the truth. Fuck off, you repulsive, nauseating c u next tuesday. Do I make myself clear?
TheEctomorph 2 months ago
i love emma watson
Gallard42 2 months ago
LOL
lizardman563 2 months ago
Mind blow :|
FinReVieWs 2 months ago
That was weird.
MagnusCattus 2 months ago
wow emma watson is richard dawkins illegitimate love child!!! i wonder is she got baptized????
aaronlaverty 2 months ago
Report the fucking thing so it goes...
tool2342 2 months ago
From about halfway onwards that Emma Watson is looking a bit ropey these days!
rossini55 2 months ago
It's a spell she picked up at Hogwarts
ll1lI 2 months ago
This is why he is more popular than TAA
Engravingsful 2 months ago
Weirdest boner right now.
lateralusman87 2 months ago 26
holy crap
synal 2 months ago
My cock is so confused
Chefodeath 2 months ago 6
That is disturbing, lol.
Vire70 2 months ago
yeahhhh, to notice simularities like this you must have some affinty for them both,,,, what kind of sicko are you? haha only joking by the way but please,,,, get out more dude.
santirock69 2 months ago
yea except for the wrinkles, the eyebrows, the beard, the larger forhead, and the rest of the masculine features xD
TheBloodyBlackJackal 2 months ago
oh fk you torcheer......
sodaxcandy08 2 months ago
:D fap fap fap
:|
:'(
BeastLordofMetal 2 months ago
pause at 0:11
Ecocide112 2 months ago
I honestly doubt Richard Dawkins is an Atheist, I think he's an Agnostic who sells a lot of books by pretending to be a militant Atheist and convincing a bunch of retards to follow him around and preach his teachings much like Billy Graham or other Mob oriented Evangelists. I don't think he cares one bit about what he says, he just found a nitch market to make loads of cash. Richard Dawkins is hardly a scientist, doubt he's an Atheist, what he is is a business man.
lion575 2 months ago
@lion575 I honestly doubt you're not retarded.
Snuffomatica 2 months ago
@lion575 Dawkins is an evolutionary biologist. on top of that, he was the Charles Simonyi Professor in the Public Understanding of Science, AKA the guy trying to impart truth and knowledge to the peon masses. what makes you doubt his doubt so much? or are you just trolling? IDK, FTFY
snowblind420 2 months ago
@snowblind420 As a Physicist and Engineer I'd hardly consider an Evolutionary Biologist a Scientist for starters. Not that I am promoting Creation or something like that, just saying that that is more of a Philosophical and Historical background than it is one that derives from Math and Science (I'd put it in the same category as an Archeologist).
lion575 2 months ago
@lion575 Right. Archeology and Biology aren't sciences at all...haha
PhilipGregory1981 2 months ago
@lion575 OMG!!! so you say that darwin didnt conduct his experiments scietificly? idiot! you cant say that the teachings of life is somwthing to be compared to philosophy! its been proven by the process of elimination! im 17, and i know more then a physicist? i think ur country needs a better education system
RawSwedishMeatball 2 months ago
@RawSwedishMeatball What does the education of Richard Dawkins have to do with Charles Darwin? Darwin Studied Medicine, and yes Darwin conducted scientific experiments using mathematical proofs. What are you referencing having been proven? The US may have the 25th ranked primary education system, but has the highest rated secondary education system in the world. The Schools I attended rank higher than any school in all of Sweden. Who needs to be better educated?
lion575 2 months ago
@lion575 Sir: I don't mean to be rude, but judging your spelling ability - which is somewhat limited - and by your overuse of capital letters, I have very real doubts as to whether you are a gentleman with a high IQ. For all I know, you may be telling the truth when you say that you are a physicist and engineer ... but, to be frankly honest, I am not 100% convinced, by any means. Far from it, in fact.
TheEctomorph 2 months ago
@TheEctomorph If you truly new anything about Physicist's or Engineer's you'd know they think people who care that much about spelling are those with Liberal Arts degrees (which is essentially the same as no education at all). Especially when we are talking about comments on youtube videos. When they do get published and spelling is somewhat of a care .... that's what editors are for.
lion575 2 months ago
@lion575 spot on.
13dachronic 2 months ago
@lion575 do you think Dawkins is an illuminatus??
AppalachianKnight77 2 months ago
@lion575 ... so you say that everyone who is on mass media in a large scale is in it for the money? or are lying for money`? idiot
RawSwedishMeatball 2 months ago
@RawSwedishMeatball No I'm saying that Richard Dawkins makes a lot of money from book sales by praying on uneducated simpletons who can't think for themselves(much like yourself) and pointing out the similarities between him and Christian TV Evangelists.
lion575 2 months ago
@lion575 ... you are slow... saying that a man who actually tries to help people to understand the world a little bit better a predetor is quite amusing, yes he makes money, but thats not his goal, and trying to explain it all in this little box is impossible...
RawSwedishMeatball 2 months ago
@lion575 "No I'm saying that Richard Dawkins makes a lot of money from book sales by praying on uneducated simpletons who can't think for themselves ..."
Christians, of course, are so selfless, non-competitive and non-materialistic, that they are not in the slightest bit interested in making money, or owning big, expensive houses and flashy motor cars. (I'm sure that you don't really believe that any more than I do ... sir.)
TheEctomorph 2 months ago
@TheEctomorph Depends who we are talking about. Some Southern Baptist Preacher in Mississippi, or a Catholic Nun in Bosnia.
lion575 2 months ago
@lion575 I honestly doubt Nicky Gumbell is a Christian, I think he's an Agnostic who sells a lot of books - and makes a great deal of money - by pretending to be a deeply religious, bible-thumping, God-fearing Christian and convincing a lot of gullible people that they will roast in Hell-fire for billions and billions of years - indeed for eternity - unless they "see the light" and accept Jesus Christ as their personal saviour. I don't think Mr Gumbell cares one bit about
TheEctomorph 2 months ago
@TheEctomorph I have no idea who Nicky Gumbell is, but you may be correct.
lion575 2 months ago
@lion575 Actually, I think that Nicky Gumbell is a sincere and bona fide Christian, who genuinely believes in God, Jesus Christ, a Day of Judgement and a Hereafter. (The comments that I made earlier this evening about Mr Gumbell were a flippant response to your remarks about Professor Richard Dawkins, which - in my view - were uncalled for, and in bad taste.)
I firmly believe that this learned gentleman - Professor Dawkins - is a sincere and bona fide atheist, who has no belief
TheEctomorph 2 months ago
@lion575 [Continuing on from my previous 'post' about Professor Richard Dawkins]
whatsoever in God, Jesus Christ, A Day of Judgement or a Hereafter. Have you any tangible evidence to substantiate your suggestion that the good Professor is not as sceptical about the existence of a Divine Being as he purports to be in public?
TheEctomorph 2 months ago
@lion575 [Continuing on from my previous post about Mr Nicky Gumbell]
what he says, he just found a niche market to make loads of cash. Mr Gumbel is hardly a philosopher or a theologian, doubt he's a Christian, what he is is a business man.
TheEctomorph 2 months ago
MINDBLOWN
lemmehaviet 2 months ago
The OP has , err, serious bersonal gender issues..
BagBingTheory 2 months ago
A jihad on you.
happyblackness 2 months ago
Oh....now I figured out why Dawkins looks so sexy. Thanks for the video :D
U5011453 2 months ago 23
Same position, not face...
WadeTWilson 2 months ago
where da heck is the cancel comment button??
trifulquita15 2 months ago
...and Roger Federer wud fit too :-)
bartua 2 months ago
Heh. If Hermione believed in "egoistic genes" she'd have been put in Slytherin.
DoJaenin 2 months ago
can never be unseen
pulesekk 2 months ago
@pulesekk Man, that's the truth. I need a brain-eraser.
Kirkaiya 2 months ago
Respect for Emma Watson +8.
Respect for Richard....+9,000.
WhereIsReligion 2 months ago
Can everyone post the time at which you would no longer do her, thanks. P.S. 00:9 It's been a while.
gunboatd1plomat 2 months ago
Am I missing the point? What the fuck was the point in that video?
itsanepicname 2 months ago
@itsanepicname
I think the point was that the poster of this video is an idiot.
Numinous123 2 months ago
okay, that was little creepy...
smo1001 2 months ago
Yeah, all those English people look alike don't they.
aerhearts 2 months ago
Why so many dislikes? This is fucking funny!
shango02005 2 months ago 16
@shango02005 I don't think you understand what the word "funny" means.
Metzae 2 months ago
@Metzae Oh, I am sorry. Would you please explain what it means? I tend to get lost in my ignorance from time to time.
shango02005 2 months ago
@shango02005 Google it.
Metzae 2 months ago
@shango02005 there are so many dislikes because atheists have a weak constitution, seemingly incapable of laughing at themselves.
MagnusCattus 2 months ago
@MagnusCattus Really? I am an atheist and I laugh at myself all the time. Most other like minded people I know do the same. I really don't think being an atheist has anything to do with it. I think it's more a matter of having a sense of humor.
shango02005 2 months ago
@shango02005 Do you laugh at atheist specific things though? like how stupid your some of the theories are? Atheists have a higher suicide rate, so I doubt very much they are perpetualy happied than theists.
MagnusCattus 2 months ago
@MagnusCattus I don't know what you mean by theories. I am an atheist in the sense that I do not believe in a god. There's really nothing else to it. Now, I also describe myself as a skeptic because I am not easily convinced of extraordinary claims without some damned good evidence to back it up. So far, there's been absolutely nothing that makes me doubt my stance on theism. As for atheists having a higher suicide rate, where did you get this information? I've never heard that one before.
shango02005 2 months ago
@shango02005 google it.
MagnusCattus 2 months ago
@MagnusCattus Okay. I wasn't asking where I could find the info, I was asking where you got yours. I know my way around these here internets. lol Anyway, I did google it and read through a few hits. Youtube won't let me post a link, but the secular humanism dot org hit had some very interesting writing on the subject. It seems that it's more of a human nature and social issue rather than an atheist/theist issue.
shango02005 2 months ago
@shango02005 oh right, I forget it was a month or so ago, and I honestl don't care I'm not atheist it doesnt affect me any. You avoided it totally. In secular focused, usually atheist countries, the suicide rate is higher, in more theist driver, supposedly less capitalist driven, countries the suicide rate is less. You can read into all you want, I honestly don't care, most theists are wrong anyways so it isn't really an issue for me. I had a fairly strong disgut for atheists, can't blame me-
MagnusCattus 2 months ago
@shango02005 - for not really bothering researching them much. My disgust is that they claim God does not exist, rather than saying they do not believe in God. It might sound subtle but the implications are serious. There is more than enough evidence to believe in God, none of which has anything to do with "miracles". Those faith healers and the like are simply capitalising on people's gullibility. "sheep skinned and thrown about".
MagnusCattus 2 months ago
@MagnusCattus The faith healers etc, are laughable at best. I agree with you on that one. I am willing to listen to any evidence you might have. I am not evil, despite what you might believe. Maybe you can convince me. May I ask what religion do you practice? Oh, and I didn't duck your question. I told you what I think. Think is the key word here.
shango02005 2 months ago
@shango02005 I had never really planned on discussing the evidence to be honest. Its not that I am afraid to, just I really didn't have the patience to discuss this again. I never thought Atheists were evil, no more evil than any theist who doesn't practice what he preaches, and does preach what he practices. I said disgust, there are many a' thing that disgust me. Anyways, oh hell let's just come out and say it, if we did not evolve, that would be creation right?
MagnusCattus 2 months ago
@MagnusCattus For the sake of argument, we can pretend that evolution is not a fact (which it IS). If we hadn't evolved over a vast span of time, that wouldn't mean that life was created. The only thing that would prove is that we didn't evolve. Then we would search for another explanation for our existence by means of logic, reason, and science. The only reason to believe in a creator is tradition. If you feel you have the patience to enlighten me, please show your evidence.
shango02005 2 months ago
@shango02005 You said it is fact, thats the end of the dicussion as far as I am concerned. You've been brain washed, but whatever. The golden ratio for one thing. You should go look it up, because to explain it all, and propperly I can't do. From a sequence of numbers called the fibonacci number sequence, you can form with it a series of rectangles into a spiral. Snail shells, flowers, weather patterns, galaxy formations, acorns. On and on. The number sequence itself is translated into a formula
MagnusCattus 2 months ago
@shango02005 This formula has also been found in nature through and through in a variety of ways. You have to look it up, I just did a very poor job of explaining it, perhaps you might be smarter and will understand it better.
MagnusCattus 2 months ago
@MagnusCattus I am no expert, but I have read about the Fibonacci sequences. It really doesn't imply a supernatural being, though. That is kind of like looking to the rain gods to explain a thunder storm. It's just not necessary. Just look at how much science has explained in the past 100 years. Science is a method of thinking that tells us there are better answers out there to be found. It is possible that there is a better explanation than evolution. It's just extremely unlikely.
shango02005 2 months ago
@shango02005 I rest my case. Science points to God, and you deny it. You never will find proof, because you have thrown the idea that there is a God away. A divine signature found in nearly anythiing that is supposed to be creation, and you go "duhhh that doesn't sound like God did it" What is the point to even bothering with this conversation on my end. I could give you irrefutable proof and you would dismiss it.
MagnusCattus 2 months ago
@MagnusCattus You're giving yourself way too much credit. Science by definition doesn't point to any such things.
danieljliversLXXXIX 2 months ago
@danieljliversLXXXIX Right but its a good idea to hide behind definitions. Thats always a nice card to play.
MagnusCattus 2 months ago
@MagnusCattus It's not hiding. It's what it is.
danieljliversLXXXIX 2 months ago
@danieljliversLXXXIX No its hiding. You should know by now what a person is talking about when they say science. a vague general Idea, of what could possibly be associated. I don't need to go into detail and list every single field and it being in favor against or neutral of my claim. It is just an immature thing to spout off about definitions, infact the only other group I've seen that done consistantly by is feminists. So well done, you are about the same caliber as them. Golf clap*
MagnusCattus 2 months ago
@MagnusCattus It isn't a vauge or general idea you sod.
danieljliversLXXXIX 2 months ago
@danieljliversLXXXIX My use of the word isn't vague or general? Well now I have heard just about everything. I can tell you have no real interest in continueing this conversation, but surely you can at least see I am using only a specific part of science, just as anyone who says the word ever uses it. You should have the sense to filter out what branches don't pertain to what this entire thread is talking about. IT WAS MY WORDS, the way I USED THEM, i was being general and vague.
MagnusCattus 2 months ago
@MagnusCattus I don't really have any interest in talking to divs.
"IT WAS MY WORDS, the way I USED THEM, i was being general and vague."
So you were being deliberately facetious?
If you can't comprehend how language is used then maybe you shouldn't talk. God knows you'll be doing me a favor.
danieljliversLXXXIX 2 months ago
@danieljliversLXXXIX Well whatever, I'll leave you with some dignity left.
MagnusCattus 2 months ago
@MagnusCattus Sod off.
danieljliversLXXXIX 2 months ago
@danieljliversLXXXIX That guy who calls himself "MagnusCattus" is an obnoxious and insensitive human being, with no manners (like so many deeply religious, bible-thumping, God-fearing Christians).
TheEctomorph 1 month ago
@MagnusCattus Obviously, we have very different ideas of irrefutable proof is. A number sequence, incredible as it may be, is not proof of God. It has nothing to do with me "Throwing out the idea", either. I don't say there IS NO god, I say there probably isn't. So yeah, I don't think I am the one dismissing irrefutable proof. Shit, you implied that evolution is not fact! lol
shango02005 2 months ago
@shango02005 Evolution isn't fact, if it was fact it would imply it has been observed every time it has been brought into qeustion. What we have EVER been presented as "observable proof" is the slightest, and most convoluted changes within DNA, the changing about like 2 nucleotides. Ya, evolution is fact, it is sad you actualy bought it. You got sold snake oil.
MagnusCattus 2 months ago
@MagnusCattus Search for some info about medical stuff , including vaccines , and resistence virus , , educate yourself , research in fossile records , and investigate about the human DNA MAP , wich carries many info of our ancesters and past mutations.. Evolution its a fact , and is the base of modern cience and modern medicine , whos provide a better quality of life for all of us , and extendes life expectancy gradually , and that is FACT.
EdyMar77 2 months ago
@EdyMar77 I think you should take your own advice and look at the criticism. THere is no evidence of evolution. Fossils don't mean anything because we don't know if they gave birth to anything other than something that looked exactly like it. If you think we have evidence, then my rebuttle is, if it doesn't look exactly like it, MAYBE it isn't actualy a descendant. Oh ya I know, mind blowing theory isn't it. Shit when to things look different thinking they actualy are, how dumb was I?
MagnusCattus 2 months ago
@EdyMar77 That was alot of rediculous words you just strong together I must say. Prove we evolved. Right now, forget all these fabricated uses. I want to hear the BEST evidence for evolution. If you can't do that don't waste my time.
MagnusCattus 2 months ago
@MagnusCattus Changing of 2 nucleotides? Better look again friend, there's more a lot more than two nucleotide differences between individual cells in your body. You clearly don't have a clue.
richjammcl 2 months ago
@richjammcl tell me how many than,
MagnusCattus 2 months ago
@richjammcl Tell me how many is the largest recorded change we have ever experienced.
MagnusCattus 2 months ago
@MagnusCattus The human genome is about 3.4 billion nucleotide pairs. Between individual humans there is up to 0.5% difference. That accounts for 17 million nucleotide difference between some humans. Before you open your mouth, pick up a book.
richjammcl 2 months ago
@richjammcl Sight source.
MagnusCattus 2 months ago
@MagnusCattus Redon R., et al. Nature, 444. 444 - 454 (2006), Khaja R., et al. Nature Genetics, advance online publication doi:10.1038/ng1921 (2006)., Or, summed up in terms you can understand: Human genome more variable than previously thought, 22 November 2006 | Nature |. And for fun, a study that suggests diversity even between identical twins: Phenotypically Concordant and Discordant Monozygotic Twins Display Different DNA Copy-Number-Variation Profiles. Bruder et al 2008.
richjammcl 2 months ago
@MagnusCattus Even conservative estimates but diversity between individuals at about .01% which is roughly 3.4 million base pairs. That's between humans, there's even more between species. There's a lot for evolution to play around with.
richjammcl 2 months ago
@richjammcl That isn't anything of the sort, varation of information isn't the qeustion, its increase in information. I've heard, we have recoreded mutations that increase information. IF that is acualy true, how much information was added, and I think the word for information would be nucleotides. That is what I was asking.
MagnusCattus 2 months ago
@richjammcl Ok you're right, I did mess up, could you please quote source though? I meant was mutations actualy, so I probably got my terminology mixed up. Can you tell me what is the largest INCREASE of information from a mutation we have ever recorded? If it isn't nucleotides than tell me what the propper term would be. I'm honestly asking you because I have no clue where to look for it. I haven't had much luck hunting for anything coherent.
MagnusCattus 2 months ago
@MagnusCattus fair enough. Mutations are constant, ever cell in your body mutates many times a day, the only reason we don't die before we are born is that the cell has numerous mechanisms to correct the mutations before they kill us. It may be helpful to note that our cells add information in nonmutagenic mechanisms as well. If you're honestly interested, I'll send you a personal message, I don't like being limited to 500 characters.
richjammcl 2 months ago
@richjammcl That didn't really answer my qeustion, infact I think you just made the discussion more convoluded. Don't send me a bunch of PMs if you can at least hear my side and ponder it honestly, if I do have something to say.
MagnusCattus 2 months ago
@MagnusCattus Well, I just didn't want to pollute the comments section of this video any worse than we already have. I understand what you're saying, you want to know where new genetic information comes from correct? It would be difficult to say what the largest addition is, I'm not aware of anyone keeping a record, but I can give you some examples of how it happens.
richjammcl 2 months ago
@MagnusCattus Seriously? That's the only "observable proof" you have seen? Talk about sad. You should treat yourself to a ninth grade science class. You would learn a lot.
shango02005 2 months ago
@MagnusCattusSir: It's funny you should say that, because only the day I was thinking EXACTLY the same thing about deeply religious, bible-thumping God-fearing, Christians - i.e. that they are, generally speaking, people with a weak constitution, who seem incapable of laughing at themselves.
TheEctomorph 2 months ago
@TheEctomorph thank you for proving my point.
MagnusCattus 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Oh poor atheists,
Here is "Debate- Islam or Atheism- Hamza Andreas Tzortzis vs President of American Atheists "
watch?v=mjgmSQbDcQI
On my channel you will find more.
Thanks
akeello 2 months ago
an atheist and a witch, both working for the Antichrist
trifulquita15 2 months ago
@trifulquita15
You're an idiot.
ChainsawVsGod 2 months ago
@trifulquita15 Yeah but there are no witches and there is no "antichrist" and most importantly there is no "God"
FreeFromWar 2 months ago
@trifulquita15 I was going to give a drawn-out, detailed explanation as to why atheists do not "work for the Antichrist", as well as the actual mythological origins of the Witch, but I think that ChainsawVsGod pretty much had it pegged:
You're an idiot.
SeedsOfHatred 2 months ago
@SeedsOfHatred Many good people are "used" by the Antichrist, likewise many bad people are "used" by Christ. Using the enemy's efforts is the best sabotage and espionage
trifulquita15 2 months ago
@trifulquita15 Out of sheer curiosity...
...Do you ever just look at yourself in the mirror and think "Fuck I'm crazy"?
SeedsOfHatred 2 months ago