Yes , the interviewer seems like a defensive choir boy who's desperately trying to save face, after all if he gives credence to Dawkin's views it would shatter his identity like a house of cards.
Only believers like the empty headed tin himself would throw such question. Science is progressing as the statistics suggests so, it might one day... HOLD ON HOLD ON, it looks like you have believe in science which will evidently bring in the meaning.. hahahah.. the host should Shut his HOLE UP.
having watched all 3 parts, it seems to me that the guy performing the interview simply looked up a list of the most common bullshit theist arguments against rationality. he must've forgot about the interview until 10 minutes before when he panicked and jumped onto google.
what an ass English presentors are not that bright are they ? dsjieeee.... how can those people have children and let we alow them to have them .... it is such a scary idea that anyone can have children, especialy when you think of the idea that SO much people are mental ill and believe in ghoststorys !!!
@myself2692 Would you Rather have Bill O'Reilly yell at him? He's doing his job. His job isn't to glorify Dawkins and put him on a pedestal, you bias piece of shit.
@12Ominous well technically the interviewer is actually being bias, he doesn't give any some would say this and other this. He gave the view that he wanted to analyse and debate dawkins views. Which is fine by me. Dawkins technically seemed to come out on top when everything is explained. However that question will you turn to religion if science fails, shows a misunderstanding of science i must admit. So some of his questions seemed a tad misguided.
There are critics to the fact that Dawkins repeats "i didn't say that" etc. He HAVE to say that repatedly because of the ignorants that put words in his mouth and repatedly cannot grasp the fact that atheism, science and whatnot is not faith.
The stamina of Richard Dawkins in order to get debates and interwievs getting to the point and not stray from the subjects at hand ... impressing - but seems like a Sisyfos-gig everytime. Richard: KUDOS!
@JLNLindbom If that is tragic, then what about the fact that religions only defence is that because science can't answer EVERYTHING there is, they can use any kind of ancient superstition with zero proof as "plausable" explanation.
That was a fantastic interview. I especially loved the way he dispelled the idiotic argument that because Stalin was an atheist, atheism is evil. I'm so sick of hearing that.
@darkanyons That seems to be a very common feature of journalists. Ben Goldacre, in his book "Bad science", describes how journalists are caricaturing science : in their opinion, science seems to be a succession of competing dogmas expressed by authoritative figures. When journalist report science news, they just say "science has shown..." but never explain why scientists have reached that conclusion. I find it so depressing
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important differences between heterosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption and homosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption. Even non-religious people know this.
Homosexual activists, with support from the media, have succeeded at framing themselves as noble victims; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
scientists try to interpret and explain the physical world around us through either provable theories or logically thought out theories which could eventually be proven right or wrong
@parsjp Faith is a confident belief in the truth. In terms of having faith in science, which is empircally based on truths, then it follows that you can't lose your faith in science if its products are there to be seen and can be supported by evidence.
@ManchesterBlade I tend to think faith similarly to how Dawkins views the unmerited respect for religion. I think your question "How can you lose your faith in science?" ought to be said "How can you not see the truth in science?" which neglects confidence or belief but rests on proof and truth.
@0penminds Did he ask "difficult" questions, or were they "stupid" questions?
You can tell by the conviction that the interviewer had in his pathetic attempts to misquote and manipulate various statements Dawkins had made, that he is religious and was throwing in his/the Bible's opinion in his attacks.
Or someone that hasnt had the chance to determine his own self opinions. Just like Dawkins in his childhood. Don't make pre-assumptions like that, because THAT is fucking retarded.
@Negend I'm trying to understand your reply. It does not make sense. Determine his own self opinions. Are you agreeing that religous people are brainwashed from birth to believe in the ridiculous? I think you are retarded as you do not make any sense whatsoever
Well I'm sorry, because english isn't my first language.
When Dawkins was young he WAS religious, but why? Because he had no choice (he went to an anglican school).THEN, when he grew up he made his own opinions and then became an atheist. So, what i meant is, calling everyone a fucking retarded idiot is discriminative against people that don't have the choice to make their OWN opinions. Oh and my first comment did make sense, you just don't understand it...
@Negend Looks like it is you who does not understand. Everyone has a choice when they grow up a bit. Anyone of adult age and under their own responsibility has a choice. Those who grovel to a ghost story are fucking retarded
@yahoopig Are you omnipresent and omniscient? If you are not then what foundation do you have to say any religion is wrong? It is just your own subjective view. Atheists can always be reduced to agnostic.
@yahoopig Oh that really defeats the argument I presented you? Yes your right I am brain washed in the TRUTH that there is a higher being in the universe it is logical, rational and evidence clearly suggests there is. The proof is in the pudding my friend. At least defend your accusations rather than just direct an insult.
One does not need to be omniscient to see that there is no evidence for a higher being that actively shapes/shaped our universe and that the various contradictory religious myths that exist are nothing but worthless mumbo-jumbo.
Even if something would have "created" the universe it is highly likely that it has nothing in common with any of the various god-figures invented by mankind.
@yahoopig I think you need to have a little more respect. I personally don't believe that religion just deserves the utmost respect but calling "Anyone who believes in god...a fucking retard", is just plain ridiculous.
@geonaturaleza Scientists also believe! Theories are often a matter of belief in something (Abduction) THEN...a theory is constructed along standards and rules of science. THEN...the theory is verified or falsified with empiric methods. After that a theory is accepted or refuted. In this stage Deduction takes place: Single cases are verified and falsified. Induction is when some phenomena strongly points to some possible theory. And theories are part of giant paradigmas that change over time.
@Tracchofyre you are wrong, scientists make hypothesis and after they verify them and accept or reject them if evidence does not confirm their hypothesis. But a religious person believes in something whatever evidence says, they don't care neither need evidence, they just blindly believe. On the other hand the scientist is not dogmatic and he is always ready to change if evidence is there to tell something else than the theory. Theory is a tool not a believe.
@geonaturaleza Heh, i'm a scientist and i believe form a hypothetis and if it's good enough it will become as close of a fact as science does, a theory.
Now i've never proposed a theori... but i still have of the gravitational waves, if proven before my death or not is very uncertain, but it is my staunch belief that it will evenrually be proven.
Evolution being a much more robust theory than gravity... i don't even want to meddle with that, far brighter men will do that.
@12Ominous You are uninformed, brainwashed, and utterly delusional if you reject observable, evidence-based science in favor of an imaginary deity that has no evidence in favor of its existence.
You are a weak-minded homo sapien who fears that everything he or she built their life around is a lie. There is no hope for you people I'm sorry. You can live your life in fear and submission to a made up deity in the hopes of an afterlife, I'm going to enjoy my life in the present.
at 0:17 , "in the end aren't we all trying to define meaning?"...i disagree with mr. dawkins answering yes to that. in the end, that is the very thing that separates atheists from theist, theist think they have ALREADY found the meaning (god and their beliefs). and vice versa.
Topics: DEADLY ARGUMENTS NOW ADDED For The Creationism-Evolutionism Debate (See Subchapter 10.2.2.), The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balanceddiet1.yolasite.com
See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
this is amazing, dawkins answered everyone of the difficult questions posed to him with incredible fluidity and understanding. he was not even 'caught out' once.
I find Dawkins often sluggish and limited in his ability to field questions, but he was very sharp in this one, unmasking swiftly each snide attempt to undermine rational thought. That host was throwing nothing but loaded questions at him, one after another, and he fielded every single one excellently...
@kerametgeo one of the common complaints i hear about religion is brainwashing. they do not want IN GOD WE TRUST because it "brainwashes" people to believe in god. would you watching this video and listening to ONE mans opinion call for me to complain about brainwashing? or is it because people have the freedom to choose whatever they want and you thought for yourself?
FAITH in science? Does this guy understand the language he speaks? SCIENCE IS BASED ON MEASURE-ABLE EXPERIMENTAL FACT! YOU DON'T HAVE TO BELIEVE ANYTHING. WHO DOESN'T UNDERSTAND THAT????
@Ender0410 He was refering to the belief for some athiests that science is turning into a cult-like, almost faith based and religiously fanatical mindset.
- Juristic Laws, given by a law maker(these have nothing to with physics).
- Laws of Physics in Sience, as found written down in a sience book. These are made by Sientists to discribe the world. They can be proven wrong and then will be changed.
- The Laws of Physics in the world itself, which make the universe work. Sometimes called regularities. These dont change and Physics tries to discribe those. If these were *made* remains the question.
Honestly, was this interviewer just feeding straw men for Dawkins to burn down or is he actually that stupid?
Of all his silly questions, the last has to be the dumbest - Dawkins lose his faith in science!?! I tell you, I'll stop trusting evidence based certainty when apples start falling upward from the tree!
@pandorachild "science hasnt YET provided the ultimate answers" your beloved dawkins just proved you wrong. it is based on real observable measurable THEORIES. once science disproves god. then you can go ahead and throw around the word FACTS. science can't answer the questions any more than religion can. are we more crazy to believe in one than we are another?
@noonie0444 Here we go again, another theist who doesn't understand what a theory is. Science is trustworthy and if given enough time will provide ALL the answers.As for your last question, yes you are "crazy" to believe any religion is there for your benefit. Facts tip the probable scale in favor of a cosmological evolution and the further examination of the religions prove there dubious at best. look forward to any reply from the TheEnglishAtheist1 on my grammar. :)
@pandorachild for religious people the same could be said. its an opinion not fact that science will disprove god. you have no logical reason to say that. big bang, evolution, dawkins books, none of them have proved anything against there being a god. yes, there are plenty of crazy religious people. but for the most part its good hard working people just trying to get by and believe in something. id rather die a believing idiot than live a genius who has faith in nothing.
@noonie0444 Disprove god? sound like shock of god, hey bud it isnt up for science to disprove "god", but so far science has proven genesis is completely false. If you read Dawkings, and understood it, comprehend evolution and the big bang you would realize that god cannot exist and if he does he is one sick twisted motherfucker who is not worthy of our praise.The problem with you and others like you is that you think your doing good when if fact your spreading lies deceit bigotry etc..
@pandorachild i have not read dawkins. yes,SOME religious people spread hate. just like SOME atheists spread hate. youre generalizing me and billions upon billions of other people. you claim reason and logic but use emotion and opinion to group religious people all together. you assume to know me and the ONE thing that you have is genesis. sadly, the world doesnt revolve around any one person. life is not fair now, thats right. but god does not think of this life as the time where things are
@pandorachild suppose to be so perfect. i understand that things probably have not gone perfect for you in your life and that it sucks the way people die and everything. but thats the nice thing about believing in god. you know that life after death is a whole lot better. i believe in god, but i am confused by it too. there are some things that dont make sense. but i also believe that could be the fault of man and it does not disprove god. i can sleep comfortably knowing that i have lived my
@pandorachild life the best that i could. if i do not wake in the morning and i am wrong about god, whats the worst that can happen to me? but do me a favor, stop generalizing people. i have agnostic, atheist, jewish, christian, muslim, etc friends that i have never once pushed my beliefs upon. if people stopped being so defensive and stopped feeling the need to do that then THAT would stop war and a lot of problems. not everyone giving up on god like dawkins and you clearly want.
@noonie0444 The first sentence in this paragraph reminded me of Pascals wager and how wrong you are.
I noticed you never mentioned any gay friends, might it be because your "religion" has culturally programed you and most of the followers that bigotry is okay? I wont bother asking you about lying because enough theists try to deceive, misquote, quote mine or just plain lie in an attempt to propagate the religion further that i find it a lesson in futility to explain Truth or facts. (conT)
@pandorachild The doctrine of the bible that you follow is horrendous and the two other books are just as guilty, and that is what worries us atheists and open minded people. You may be a "moderate" but you support an ideology that promotes discrimination, sexism, mutilation, bigotry, and slavery.
@pandorachild haha. youre not even going to bother misquoting me, you'll just assume and ONCE AGAIN make assumptions about me. ETC, as in others as well! i didnt say native american, but you probably dont care about that because being an american has culturally programmed you to not care about them. see i can pick and choose too! the hypocrisy is never ending. the fact is people do not need religion to do those terrible things. all they need is greed and the hunger for power.
@pandorachild ...cont...stalin may not have done the evil things in the name of atheism but the FACT is he did those things. proving that even without religion in your life stupid crazy people will find something to fight about. like money, land, OIL! i am glad i will not be around when this supposed "religious free" utopia happens. p.s. i have gay friends too! i guess i saved that for the end because its so hard for me to be down with that....what with all my religious based prejudices.
@noonie0444 justt because religion doesnt cause all tyrants and evil doers to do those things does not mean that alot of havent used it as motivation. and you have gay friends and support them that means you dont directly believe in the bible , admit your a secularist.
@revelation1234...im 25 years old. like most people my age i am still trying to figure things out...on my own...i know i believe in god. i just have troubles with certain parts of any written word because it is written by man, who is VERY fallible. if my mother were to kill,i would still support her. its my mother. im not going to not be friends with someone or care about them because of their beliefs or what they think. like any good person i believe in caring about everyone.
@revelation1234 what frustrates me is THIS. having faith in something doesnt make you "stupid" or "crazy". this guy is one of the most intelligent people in the world,right? then why does he resort to name calling? i live my life the way i want to and to the best of my abilty to be good, i have yet to be affected by someones beliefs or who they marry. its a personal thing. if you let yourself be affected by something you dont want in your life thats your own issue. not anyone else.
@revelation1234. and yeah, obviously there have been plenty of crazy relgious people doing stupid stuff. but that doesnt mean its their religions fault. its their own idiocy doing it and their own misinterpretation of their religion.
1.) A religion is made up of its followers and its texts; both of which have exemplified a history rife with the atrocities Dawkins recognizes. People like yourself are the exception to this, not the rule. Even so, Dawkins arguments that "believing in God in and of itself is foolish" and personally outright dangerous is well-founded
@Kinin4 ok, so should i stop believing that i will one day find love and be happily married? there isn't any basis in that either. you dont have solid proof that you can find love. love is dangerous because of the stress it puts on people in marriage, single and depressed without it,etc. arguing this is useless for both of us. "A man lives by believing something: not by debating and arguing about many things. "
"Love" and "religion" are not synonymous. Love is not anti-science. Love is not a fundamentalist belief. Love does not have an assigned text that tells you to slaughter millions of innocents.
Love is an emotion. Religion is a convention; a twisted one at that. And what is your basis for that last assertion? How do you reach that conclusion? Reasoning all of my opinions and stances has afforded me more satisfaction from life than any one "belief".
@Kinin4 others find religion all the time. others have spiritual happenings that they believe as proof of god. i have had certain things happen to me that i believe are due to god. does that mean that you will admit that there is a god because of that proof? you have no way of proving love either. people get married and think they are in love and then get divorced,cheat,lie. what i am trying to say is i am not going to stop believing in something because its stupid to a small group of people.
Except Love and Religion are totally different. Love doesn't claim anything; it's just an emotion. It's perfectly logical to take someone's word for what their emotion is. But religion claims facts; you can't take someone's word on that.
And what you should be concerned with is not that it's a small group of people, but it's a RATIONAL group of people. It was only a "small group of people" who thought slavery was wrong (and this was also AGAINST Christianity).
@Kinin4 in other words, listen to people and trust them as long as it is convenient for you. atheism CLAIMS facts about there being no god dumb dumb. guess i better not take your word either. just because people get things wrong doesnt disprove god. trial and error has helped in a lot of things. clearly RATIONAL christians today do not believe in slavery. also, christianity is not the only form of religion.i realize that its the most topical and easiest to pick on but at least make some effort.
1.) No, "listen to people and trust them" when the subject of trust is something only they can determine (e.g. personal emotion). Religion claims KNOWLEDGE and FACTS, it makes an ASSERTION. That is when "listening o them and trusting them" is completely illogical.
2.) Atheism claims nothing. Atheists are people who simply look at YOUR assertion and say "I'm sorry, I don't buy it." and REMAIN in the state of not having a proper explanation. You do the same thing; you yourself won't believe in anything (besides perhaps religion) without proper evidence; but that doesn't mean you CLAIM that it "doesn't exist at all", it just means that what you were presented with doesn't pass the smell test.
3.) "Trial and Error" is not supported in scripture; scripture TEACHES Genocide, Sexism, and Slavery. It doesn't say "well, if you think it's bad, don't do it. Feel free to experiment and flex."
These Scriptures are the source of all knowledge in 99% of Religions. If they can't be listened to, then why can those Religions?
These "Rational Christians" are disregarding the morals of the scripture.
@Kinin4 also,wouldnt an atheist think that it is not logical to take someones emotions into account? arent emotions sometimes what help bring people to religion? like the loss of a loved one or the frustration of things going wrong in life? they find religion often times based off of emotions. when we're young we claim we are in love when we are 14 and then realize we are not. is that logical?
Whether Love is logical is not the issue; the fact is that it exists and is something that the person them-self determines.Like I said, Love and Religion are two completely different things; whether emotion/love brings people to religion is irrelevant, since emotion/love also brings people to murder, rape, and war.
@Kinin4....my point is. neither side has 100 percent evidence for or against god. to call someone crazy or illogical for what they believe is crazy and is illogical in itself. you clearly see that there are commonalities between believing and not believing and yet somehow it is dumbed down to intelligence and stupidity because of those beliefs. just doesnt make sense. neither of us are going to change our minds on this,so good luck changing other peoples minds.
Except Atheists don't CLAIM to have 100% evidence against God. Atheism, in a nutshell, is acknowledging that there is NO evidence FOR God and sees no reason to believe in it.
The reason Atheism and Theism they are "dumbed down" to intelligence and stupidity is because the former is characterized by seeing evidence and acting upon it, while the latter is characterized by faith without evidence.
2.) When does he resort to name-calling? Did he say anything inaccurate? The things he says are objectively and observably no harsher than your average negative restaurant critic. And again; you are the exception to the general religious opinion of what other people do and believe privately.
Soooo, animals.....They don't believe in god because they are incapable of believing in such a thing. Does that mean all animals go to hell for their innocent ignorance? Isn't that kind of unfair to these poor animals? Just a thought.
His question at 3:00 was absolutely bs. I was pretty impressed that Dawkins knew what Hawking and Einstein had said using the word god. I kinda rolfed after he explained it and the guy was like, fuck................
The largest problem with religion is the spreading of ideas that are accepted on behalf of faith. Having faith in something does not make it true. I could have faith in winning the lottery, yet the chances of that happening are slim. In a sense, religion is like cheating. Whereas the universe is the test and we're trying to find answers. You're looking at someone else's ideas instead of finding the answers for yourself. In other words, religion is formed to revolve around people's own stupidity.
@nobodyrememberszak. youre not discovering these things for yourself, right? you havent studied the universe, or written a book on the subject, or figured out the source of life. youre going off of things you have read and seen. wouldnt that throw you in with people not thinking for themselves? or did you just magically come to all this knowledge with no outside influence? in other words, "The injury we do and the one we suffer are not weighed in the same scales." Aesop
Althought the host was very intelligent he lacked the professionalism to let Dawkins answer the questions without being interupted.He was biast ,leaning towards a god all the while trying to convey the message that Dawkins religious belief is "science" and as we all know science is based on facts and evidence which is easy to grasp if one fully understands the proccess in finding a conclusion.
Just because there are unanswered questions it does not mean that we fill that void with "god."
I don't know if you are familiar with hard talk but Dawkins did very well and he knows it. The host is ruthless and he probably questions himself constantly. He probably whips himself in his dressing room for failing to make a guest cry. He is one of the best. If only more idiots were willing to go on the show the fools of the world would be exposed.
OMG (no pun intended), the host compares science to a religion. He even says one copuld say it is sort of a religion. I cannot even grasp the reasoning behind this. Science is based on experiments, logic and observations, while religion is believing in things no one can percieve or prove.
He simply asked about something religious people use to ague against atheists the point is Dawkins answered the question. Sometimes you nee to ask the dumbest questions to get rid of he rumors.
If such answers were directed to a christian or muslim believer, it would have been a ridiculous conversation. They can never provide a single fact but addressing their answers to THAT book called BIBLE or QURAN . By the way---Who wrote them?
You can clearly witness how Dawkins was able to answer the questions in a straight face, without blabbering trying to find the correct answer, and with true conviction. If you place a hard talk debate against a creationist, you will definitely get a lot of blabbering, twitching, and defensive answers. All because, he doesn't really know what he is talking about.
as bad as the hosts questions were, I think they need to be adressed with proper answers because they really ARE the questions that naive critics of Dawkins will ask.
Yes , the interviewer seems like a defensive choir boy who's desperately trying to save face, after all if he gives credence to Dawkin's views it would shatter his identity like a house of cards.
ottawa856 6 days ago 2
Only believers like the empty headed tin himself would throw such question. Science is progressing as the statistics suggests so, it might one day... HOLD ON HOLD ON, it looks like you have believe in science which will evidently bring in the meaning.. hahahah.. the host should Shut his HOLE UP.
TheDendupe 1 week ago
BBC asking some weak questions...
MrGidderz 1 week ago
having watched all 3 parts, it seems to me that the guy performing the interview simply looked up a list of the most common bullshit theist arguments against rationality. he must've forgot about the interview until 10 minutes before when he panicked and jumped onto google.
Rabsputin 1 week ago 3
If you donno who killed a person...
You find proves and evidences.. U don't say that since there is no evidence therefore that guy commit suicide..!
Athrun000 4 weeks ago in playlist More videos from dawkinschannel
Religion is worthless...........
jlltruthseeker 1 month ago
Id rather believe in facts rather than in make belief
MMAGRO1 1 month ago
Dawkins is a genius. I am so grateful to him for how he is bringing free-thinkers together.
rupertoldham 1 month ago
what an ass English presentors are not that bright are they ? dsjieeee.... how can those people have children and let we alow them to have them .... it is such a scary idea that anyone can have children, especialy when you think of the idea that SO much people are mental ill and believe in ghoststorys !!!
myself2692 2 months ago
@myself2692 Would you Rather have Bill O'Reilly yell at him? He's doing his job. His job isn't to glorify Dawkins and put him on a pedestal, you bias piece of shit.
12Ominous 3 weeks ago
@12Ominous Fuck you, you religious psychopath.
RoCk4LiFe90 3 weeks ago
@RoCk4LiFe90 ...........
12Ominous 3 weeks ago
@12Ominous well technically the interviewer is actually being bias, he doesn't give any some would say this and other this. He gave the view that he wanted to analyse and debate dawkins views. Which is fine by me. Dawkins technically seemed to come out on top when everything is explained. However that question will you turn to religion if science fails, shows a misunderstanding of science i must admit. So some of his questions seemed a tad misguided.
TiberJai 2 weeks ago
There are critics to the fact that Dawkins repeats "i didn't say that" etc. He HAVE to say that repatedly because of the ignorants that put words in his mouth and repatedly cannot grasp the fact that atheism, science and whatnot is not faith.
The stamina of Richard Dawkins in order to get debates and interwievs getting to the point and not stray from the subjects at hand ... impressing - but seems like a Sisyfos-gig everytime. Richard: KUDOS!
ExtrackterYT 2 months ago 3
Dawkin's only defence is that there are different religions. Tragic.
JLNLindbom 2 months ago
@JLNLindbom It's NOT his ONLY defence. And still: it is a VERY heavy argument for the religious to comprehend.
ExtrackterYT 2 months ago
@JLNLindbom If you just watched all 3 of these videos and that is your educated conclusion... then you should go dig a big hole and go fall in it!
jrob24eagles 1 month ago
@JLNLindbom If that is tragic, then what about the fact that religions only defence is that because science can't answer EVERYTHING there is, they can use any kind of ancient superstition with zero proof as "plausable" explanation.
Defilerlord 1 month ago
@JLNLindbom Were you not watching this video? He delivered evidence to support his claims on everything he was challenged with.
RoCk4LiFe90 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
That was a fantastic interview. I especially loved the way he dispelled the idiotic argument that because Stalin was an atheist, atheism is evil. I'm so sick of hearing that.
phirephate 2 months ago
The interviewer seemed ignorant on how the scientific method works, sometimes equating faith in religion and faith in science.
darkanyons 2 months ago
@darkanyons That seems to be a very common feature of journalists. Ben Goldacre, in his book "Bad science", describes how journalists are caricaturing science : in their opinion, science seems to be a succession of competing dogmas expressed by authoritative figures. When journalist report science news, they just say "science has shown..." but never explain why scientists have reached that conclusion. I find it so depressing
CognitiveScienceFr 2 months ago
enjoy how the interviewer tries to trip Richard up and it never works, keep up the good work Richard.
GulommiRSi 3 months ago 3
When I read the comets I must say - there's still hope for this bloody world. Richard Dawkins you rock.
CanopyHull 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Say: 'He is God, One, 1
God, the Everlasting Refuge, 2
who has not begotten, and has not been begotten, 3
and equal to Him is not any one.' 4
=> for more information type in google "thedeenshow
akeello 4 months ago
3:24 Dawkins nails it.
the "magic" of today is the science of tomorrow.
BggProductions 4 months ago
Dawkins performed eloquently on HARDtalk, which is really HARD to do with such a strong interviewer.
SpidermanInLondon 4 months ago
Dawkins rules!!!
Semente200 4 months ago
Hawking recently rescinded his god statements after he made them.
twistedH3L1X 5 months ago
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours
xeropressure 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important differences between heterosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption and homosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption. Even non-religious people know this.
Homosexual activists, with support from the media, have succeeded at framing themselves as noble victims; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
lightandbeautiful 5 months ago
You know, I get the funny feeling that that interviewer really doesn't like atheism very much...
JediVulcanTimeLord 5 months ago
@JediVulcanTimeLord his job is too look into the negativity in everything
Abbadon380 4 months ago
scientists try to interpret and explain the physical world around us through either provable theories or logically thought out theories which could eventually be proven right or wrong
RelativelyHostile1 5 months ago
How can you lose your faith in science? For example, without science I wouldn't be here typing this comment online. It's real and ever-evolving.
ManchesterBlade 5 months ago
@ManchesterBlade What do you think faith means and is it contextual?
parsjp 5 months ago
@parsjp Faith is a confident belief in the truth. In terms of having faith in science, which is empircally based on truths, then it follows that you can't lose your faith in science if its products are there to be seen and can be supported by evidence.
ManchesterBlade 5 months ago
@ManchesterBlade I tend to think faith similarly to how Dawkins views the unmerited respect for religion. I think your question "How can you lose your faith in science?" ought to be said "How can you not see the truth in science?" which neglects confidence or belief but rests on proof and truth.
I think this is an issue of terms, not meaning.
parsjp 5 months ago
Can't see why peeps are commenting on the interviewer,he's just doing his job, asking difficult questions, he's not giving his own opinion.
0penminds 6 months ago
@0penminds Did he ask "difficult" questions, or were they "stupid" questions?
You can tell by the conviction that the interviewer had in his pathetic attempts to misquote and manipulate various statements Dawkins had made, that he is religious and was throwing in his/the Bible's opinion in his attacks.
RoCk4LiFe90 3 weeks ago
Anyone who believes in god is a fucking retarded idiot
yahoopig 6 months ago 47
@yahoopig
Or someone that hasnt had the chance to determine his own self opinions. Just like Dawkins in his childhood. Don't make pre-assumptions like that, because THAT is fucking retarded.
Negend 5 months ago
@Negend I'm trying to understand your reply. It does not make sense. Determine his own self opinions. Are you agreeing that religous people are brainwashed from birth to believe in the ridiculous? I think you are retarded as you do not make any sense whatsoever
yahoopig 5 months ago
@yahoopig
Well I'm sorry, because english isn't my first language.
When Dawkins was young he WAS religious, but why? Because he had no choice (he went to an anglican school).THEN, when he grew up he made his own opinions and then became an atheist. So, what i meant is, calling everyone a fucking retarded idiot is discriminative against people that don't have the choice to make their OWN opinions. Oh and my first comment did make sense, you just don't understand it...
Negend 5 months ago
@Negend Looks like it is you who does not understand. Everyone has a choice when they grow up a bit. Anyone of adult age and under their own responsibility has a choice. Those who grovel to a ghost story are fucking retarded
yahoopig 5 months ago
@yahoopig Are you omnipresent and omniscient? If you are not then what foundation do you have to say any religion is wrong? It is just your own subjective view. Atheists can always be reduced to agnostic.
jordan7787 5 months ago
@jordan7787 Because I'm not a brain washed moron
yahoopig 5 months ago
@yahoopig Oh that really defeats the argument I presented you? Yes your right I am brain washed in the TRUTH that there is a higher being in the universe it is logical, rational and evidence clearly suggests there is. The proof is in the pudding my friend. At least defend your accusations rather than just direct an insult.
jordan7787 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jordan7787 You are brainwashed to believe what you think is the truth. The fact that you grovel to nothing proves you are a moron.
yahoopig 5 months ago
@jordan7787
One does not need to be omniscient to see that there is no evidence for a higher being that actively shapes/shaped our universe and that the various contradictory religious myths that exist are nothing but worthless mumbo-jumbo.
Even if something would have "created" the universe it is highly likely that it has nothing in common with any of the various god-figures invented by mankind.
Nimmermaer 4 months ago
@jordan7787 atheism and agnosticism are not mutually exclusive.
Pirate44444 4 months ago
@yahoopig I think you need to have a little more respect. I personally don't believe that religion just deserves the utmost respect but calling "Anyone who believes in god...a fucking retard", is just plain ridiculous.
cjl236 4 months ago
@cjl236 Respect? What for? Outdated ghost stories? Religon is for the mindless. I have more respect for people who believe in santa claus. FUCK YOU.
yahoopig 4 months ago
@yahoopig Atheists......clearly the enlightened ones.
12Ominous 3 weeks ago
i love sackur..but he was just shat on
legend16 6 months ago
@legend16 Sackur usually interviews with a neutral view point.
jordan7787 5 months ago
Science is not a religion, a scientist doesn't believe, he brings evidences.
geonaturaleza 6 months ago 58
@geonaturaleza And accept that the knowledge we have is to the best of our knowledge.
Proof is for math and alcohol. Not for science.
jinxxedlikeshit 3 months ago
@geonaturaleza Scientists also believe! Theories are often a matter of belief in something (Abduction) THEN...a theory is constructed along standards and rules of science. THEN...the theory is verified or falsified with empiric methods. After that a theory is accepted or refuted. In this stage Deduction takes place: Single cases are verified and falsified. Induction is when some phenomena strongly points to some possible theory. And theories are part of giant paradigmas that change over time.
Tracchofyre 2 months ago
@Tracchofyre you are wrong, scientists make hypothesis and after they verify them and accept or reject them if evidence does not confirm their hypothesis. But a religious person believes in something whatever evidence says, they don't care neither need evidence, they just blindly believe. On the other hand the scientist is not dogmatic and he is always ready to change if evidence is there to tell something else than the theory. Theory is a tool not a believe.
geonaturaleza 2 months ago
@geonaturaleza Heh, i'm a scientist and i believe form a hypothetis and if it's good enough it will become as close of a fact as science does, a theory.
Now i've never proposed a theori... but i still have of the gravitational waves, if proven before my death or not is very uncertain, but it is my staunch belief that it will evenrually be proven.
Evolution being a much more robust theory than gravity... i don't even want to meddle with that, far brighter men will do that.
jinxxedlikeshit 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jinxxedlikeshit Hello, I am a scientist too, but I don't believe, I suppose things.
I mean, there is a difference between a religious believe and a scientific supposition.
Have a nice day.
geonaturaleza 2 months ago
@geonaturaleza Science is a doctrine of belief.
Religion:
1. Details of belief as taught or discussed
2. A pursuit or interest to which someone ascribes supreme importance
12Ominous 3 weeks ago
@12Ominous You are uninformed, brainwashed, and utterly delusional if you reject observable, evidence-based science in favor of an imaginary deity that has no evidence in favor of its existence.
You are a weak-minded homo sapien who fears that everything he or she built their life around is a lie. There is no hope for you people I'm sorry. You can live your life in fear and submission to a made up deity in the hopes of an afterlife, I'm going to enjoy my life in the present.
RoCk4LiFe90 3 weeks ago
@12Ominous "Science is a doctrine of belief."
that statement is an example of the matter which exits a bull's rectal orifice.
Rabsputin 1 week ago
at 0:17 , "in the end aren't we all trying to define meaning?"...i disagree with mr. dawkins answering yes to that. in the end, that is the very thing that separates atheists from theist, theist think they have ALREADY found the meaning (god and their beliefs). and vice versa.
phattown213 6 months ago
You can never have enough transitional fossils for a creationist. Every time they find a new piece of the puzzle they will ask for more.
Jacob22030 6 months ago
@Jacob22030 That's because every time we find one; as a result, we create 2 more gaps. This is something creats cannot comprehend.
elmohead 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NEW BOOK FOR DEBATES AND GOVERNANCE
Topics: DEADLY ARGUMENTS NOW ADDED For The Creationism-Evolutionism Debate (See Subchapter 10.2.2.), The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balanceddiet1.yolasite.com
See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
etc.
TheServiceWeb 6 months ago
this is amazing, dawkins answered everyone of the difficult questions posed to him with incredible fluidity and understanding. he was not even 'caught out' once.
10rasoor01 6 months ago
I agreed with Dawkins up until the last 10 seconds when he said Wodan is not the one true god and creator of all things.
HessenDragoon 7 months ago
Yeah but religion = poetry. That's the whole point. And poetry isn't good or bad in itself.
Grafschnitzel 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Wow, I was constantly on the edge of my seat the whole debate!
MeepullStewray 7 months ago
"If you lost your faith in the universality of science...." A very silly prepared question. If you lost your faith in breathing...
lewars1912 8 months ago
If you want to see the damage that religion does - two words - Bill O'reilly.
dilwich123 8 months ago
I find Dawkins often sluggish and limited in his ability to field questions, but he was very sharp in this one, unmasking swiftly each snide attempt to undermine rational thought. That host was throwing nothing but loaded questions at him, one after another, and he fielded every single one excellently...
Whatistobe 8 months ago
Beautiful.
revelation1234 8 months ago
@kerametgeo one of the common complaints i hear about religion is brainwashing. they do not want IN GOD WE TRUST because it "brainwashes" people to believe in god. would you watching this video and listening to ONE mans opinion call for me to complain about brainwashing? or is it because people have the freedom to choose whatever they want and you thought for yourself?
noonie0444 8 months ago
hahaha at the end when they each say "thank you very much" i was expecting it to go on and on "NO, thank YOU! very much" "THANK YOU VERY MUCH!"
ewebb16 10 months ago
At least the host did his job in presenting common dumb questions from theist.
bbsonjohn 10 months ago
FAITH in science? Does this guy understand the language he speaks? SCIENCE IS BASED ON MEASURE-ABLE EXPERIMENTAL FACT! YOU DON'T HAVE TO BELIEVE ANYTHING. WHO DOESN'T UNDERSTAND THAT????
Ender0410 11 months ago 2
@Ender0410 He was refering to the belief for some athiests that science is turning into a cult-like, almost faith based and religiously fanatical mindset.
DerpForce 9 months ago
Professor Dawkins, you sir are a legent
N7i3N 11 months ago
Dawkins rocks!
Doghnov 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
just by seeing this interview, I am more sure that there has to be a god.
thnx, for making me a stronger believer in God, Dear prof. dawkins....
rebabkhan 11 months ago
just by seeing this interview, I am more sure that there has to be a god.
thnx, for making me a stronger believer in God, Dear prof. dawkins....
rebabkhan 11 months ago
I totally retract my comments from the last video about Sackur. He seemed to be doing so well.... then played the Einstein card....
randar3 1 year ago
Law of Physics?
All laws are given by a law maker.
MandoMohan 1 year ago
@MandoMohan
There are 3 meanings of the word law:
- Juristic Laws, given by a law maker(these have nothing to with physics).
- Laws of Physics in Sience, as found written down in a sience book. These are made by Sientists to discribe the world. They can be proven wrong and then will be changed.
- The Laws of Physics in the world itself, which make the universe work. Sometimes called regularities. These dont change and Physics tries to discribe those. If these were *made* remains the question.
uiuiuiseraph 1 year ago
Honestly, was this interviewer just feeding straw men for Dawkins to burn down or is he actually that stupid?
Of all his silly questions, the last has to be the dumbest - Dawkins lose his faith in science!?! I tell you, I'll stop trusting evidence based certainty when apples start falling upward from the tree!
MothIncarnate 1 year ago
@MothIncarnate lolololol
nuitaridark 1 year ago
Hawking, relgious...ha,haha,ha. Egg on your face!!!! Now you can read his book.
coutsoulis 1 year ago
hahah nice try at the end" if you lost your 'faith' in science ", ROFL.
What these people fail to understand is that science is NOT another religion.
Science is based on REAL observable measurable FACTS.
kick some ass for me dawkins you da man!
pandorachild 1 year ago 92
@pandorachild
If atheism is a religion, then not collecting stamps is a hobby...
dawkinschannel 1 year ago 149
@dawkinschannel ohhh i like that TY
pandorachild 1 year ago
@pandorachild lol, I think he/she miss read your comment.
sk8inkill 1 year ago
@dawkinschannel are you nonstamp collector? : o
blazearmoru 1 year ago
@dawkinschannel yup still haven't collected any stamps yet HBU? :P
pandorachild 1 year ago
@dawkinschannel HAHA nailed it!
jfontenot1791 10 months ago
@dawkinschannel smarty;->
MegaServantofgod 9 months ago
@dawkinschannel xD
MsAreval 8 months ago
@dawkinschannel THATS MAGIC! LOL. I have a hobby collecting oxygen, but dont keep the Carbon Dioxide.
Simwillb 6 months ago
@dawkinschannel Thanks so much for using the hobby example, i have been trying to find an example to explain that point for a while.
TUPAPA1994 6 months ago
@dawkinschannel exactly, atheism is default. it's not a belief.
sam8110 5 months ago
@pandorachild Thumbs down for improper English.
TheEnglishAtheist1 1 year ago
@TheEnglishAtheist1 rofl......
pandorachild 1 year ago
@pandorachild "science hasnt YET provided the ultimate answers" your beloved dawkins just proved you wrong. it is based on real observable measurable THEORIES. once science disproves god. then you can go ahead and throw around the word FACTS. science can't answer the questions any more than religion can. are we more crazy to believe in one than we are another?
noonie0444 9 months ago
@noonie0444 Here we go again, another theist who doesn't understand what a theory is. Science is trustworthy and if given enough time will provide ALL the answers.As for your last question, yes you are "crazy" to believe any religion is there for your benefit. Facts tip the probable scale in favor of a cosmological evolution and the further examination of the religions prove there dubious at best. look forward to any reply from the TheEnglishAtheist1 on my grammar. :)
pandorachild 9 months ago
@pandorachild for religious people the same could be said. its an opinion not fact that science will disprove god. you have no logical reason to say that. big bang, evolution, dawkins books, none of them have proved anything against there being a god. yes, there are plenty of crazy religious people. but for the most part its good hard working people just trying to get by and believe in something. id rather die a believing idiot than live a genius who has faith in nothing.
noonie0444 8 months ago
@noonie0444 Disprove god? sound like shock of god, hey bud it isnt up for science to disprove "god", but so far science has proven genesis is completely false. If you read Dawkings, and understood it, comprehend evolution and the big bang you would realize that god cannot exist and if he does he is one sick twisted motherfucker who is not worthy of our praise.The problem with you and others like you is that you think your doing good when if fact your spreading lies deceit bigotry etc..
pandorachild 8 months ago
@pandorachild i have not read dawkins. yes,SOME religious people spread hate. just like SOME atheists spread hate. youre generalizing me and billions upon billions of other people. you claim reason and logic but use emotion and opinion to group religious people all together. you assume to know me and the ONE thing that you have is genesis. sadly, the world doesnt revolve around any one person. life is not fair now, thats right. but god does not think of this life as the time where things are
noonie0444 8 months ago
@pandorachild suppose to be so perfect. i understand that things probably have not gone perfect for you in your life and that it sucks the way people die and everything. but thats the nice thing about believing in god. you know that life after death is a whole lot better. i believe in god, but i am confused by it too. there are some things that dont make sense. but i also believe that could be the fault of man and it does not disprove god. i can sleep comfortably knowing that i have lived my
noonie0444 8 months ago
@pandorachild life the best that i could. if i do not wake in the morning and i am wrong about god, whats the worst that can happen to me? but do me a favor, stop generalizing people. i have agnostic, atheist, jewish, christian, muslim, etc friends that i have never once pushed my beliefs upon. if people stopped being so defensive and stopped feeling the need to do that then THAT would stop war and a lot of problems. not everyone giving up on god like dawkins and you clearly want.
noonie0444 8 months ago
@noonie0444 The first sentence in this paragraph reminded me of Pascals wager and how wrong you are.
I noticed you never mentioned any gay friends, might it be because your "religion" has culturally programed you and most of the followers that bigotry is okay? I wont bother asking you about lying because enough theists try to deceive, misquote, quote mine or just plain lie in an attempt to propagate the religion further that i find it a lesson in futility to explain Truth or facts. (conT)
pandorachild 8 months ago
@pandorachild The doctrine of the bible that you follow is horrendous and the two other books are just as guilty, and that is what worries us atheists and open minded people. You may be a "moderate" but you support an ideology that promotes discrimination, sexism, mutilation, bigotry, and slavery.
pandorachild 8 months ago
@pandorachild haha. youre not even going to bother misquoting me, you'll just assume and ONCE AGAIN make assumptions about me. ETC, as in others as well! i didnt say native american, but you probably dont care about that because being an american has culturally programmed you to not care about them. see i can pick and choose too! the hypocrisy is never ending. the fact is people do not need religion to do those terrible things. all they need is greed and the hunger for power.
noonie0444 8 months ago
@pandorachild ...cont...stalin may not have done the evil things in the name of atheism but the FACT is he did those things. proving that even without religion in your life stupid crazy people will find something to fight about. like money, land, OIL! i am glad i will not be around when this supposed "religious free" utopia happens. p.s. i have gay friends too! i guess i saved that for the end because its so hard for me to be down with that....what with all my religious based prejudices.
noonie0444 8 months ago
@noonie0444 Do you seriously believe your "friends " are going to burn alive for all eternity , for doing something completely natural?
pandorachild 8 months ago
@pandorachild ...did you not pick on my sarcasm there?
noonie0444 8 months ago
Respond to this video... pick up on*
noonie0444 8 months ago
@noonie0444 justt because religion doesnt cause all tyrants and evil doers to do those things does not mean that alot of havent used it as motivation. and you have gay friends and support them that means you dont directly believe in the bible , admit your a secularist.
revelation1234 8 months ago
@revelation1234...im 25 years old. like most people my age i am still trying to figure things out...on my own...i know i believe in god. i just have troubles with certain parts of any written word because it is written by man, who is VERY fallible. if my mother were to kill,i would still support her. its my mother. im not going to not be friends with someone or care about them because of their beliefs or what they think. like any good person i believe in caring about everyone.
noonie0444 8 months ago
@revelation1234 what frustrates me is THIS. having faith in something doesnt make you "stupid" or "crazy". this guy is one of the most intelligent people in the world,right? then why does he resort to name calling? i live my life the way i want to and to the best of my abilty to be good, i have yet to be affected by someones beliefs or who they marry. its a personal thing. if you let yourself be affected by something you dont want in your life thats your own issue. not anyone else.
noonie0444 8 months ago
@revelation1234. and yeah, obviously there have been plenty of crazy relgious people doing stupid stuff. but that doesnt mean its their religions fault. its their own idiocy doing it and their own misinterpretation of their religion.
noonie0444 8 months ago
@noonie0444
1.) A religion is made up of its followers and its texts; both of which have exemplified a history rife with the atrocities Dawkins recognizes. People like yourself are the exception to this, not the rule. Even so, Dawkins arguments that "believing in God in and of itself is foolish" and personally outright dangerous is well-founded
Kinin4 7 months ago
@Kinin4 ok, so should i stop believing that i will one day find love and be happily married? there isn't any basis in that either. you dont have solid proof that you can find love. love is dangerous because of the stress it puts on people in marriage, single and depressed without it,etc. arguing this is useless for both of us. "A man lives by believing something: not by debating and arguing about many things. "
noonie0444 7 months ago
@noonie0444
"Love" and "religion" are not synonymous. Love is not anti-science. Love is not a fundamentalist belief. Love does not have an assigned text that tells you to slaughter millions of innocents.
Love is an emotion. Religion is a convention; a twisted one at that. And what is your basis for that last assertion? How do you reach that conclusion? Reasoning all of my opinions and stances has afforded me more satisfaction from life than any one "belief".
Kinin4 7 months ago
@noonie0444
There IS prof that you can find love, because you can OBSERVE the evidence that others find love all the time. You are being idiotic.
Kinin4 6 months ago
@Kinin4 others find religion all the time. others have spiritual happenings that they believe as proof of god. i have had certain things happen to me that i believe are due to god. does that mean that you will admit that there is a god because of that proof? you have no way of proving love either. people get married and think they are in love and then get divorced,cheat,lie. what i am trying to say is i am not going to stop believing in something because its stupid to a small group of people.
noonie0444 6 months ago
@noonie0444
Except Love and Religion are totally different. Love doesn't claim anything; it's just an emotion. It's perfectly logical to take someone's word for what their emotion is. But religion claims facts; you can't take someone's word on that.
And what you should be concerned with is not that it's a small group of people, but it's a RATIONAL group of people. It was only a "small group of people" who thought slavery was wrong (and this was also AGAINST Christianity).
Kinin4 6 months ago
@Kinin4 in other words, listen to people and trust them as long as it is convenient for you. atheism CLAIMS facts about there being no god dumb dumb. guess i better not take your word either. just because people get things wrong doesnt disprove god. trial and error has helped in a lot of things. clearly RATIONAL christians today do not believe in slavery. also, christianity is not the only form of religion.i realize that its the most topical and easiest to pick on but at least make some effort.
noonie0444 6 months ago
@noonie0444
1.) No, "listen to people and trust them" when the subject of trust is something only they can determine (e.g. personal emotion). Religion claims KNOWLEDGE and FACTS, it makes an ASSERTION. That is when "listening o them and trusting them" is completely illogical.
Kinin4 6 months ago
@noonie0444
2.) Atheism claims nothing. Atheists are people who simply look at YOUR assertion and say "I'm sorry, I don't buy it." and REMAIN in the state of not having a proper explanation. You do the same thing; you yourself won't believe in anything (besides perhaps religion) without proper evidence; but that doesn't mean you CLAIM that it "doesn't exist at all", it just means that what you were presented with doesn't pass the smell test.
Kinin4 6 months ago
@noonie0444
3.) "Trial and Error" is not supported in scripture; scripture TEACHES Genocide, Sexism, and Slavery. It doesn't say "well, if you think it's bad, don't do it. Feel free to experiment and flex."
These Scriptures are the source of all knowledge in 99% of Religions. If they can't be listened to, then why can those Religions?
These "Rational Christians" are disregarding the morals of the scripture.
Kinin4 6 months ago
@Kinin4 also,wouldnt an atheist think that it is not logical to take someones emotions into account? arent emotions sometimes what help bring people to religion? like the loss of a loved one or the frustration of things going wrong in life? they find religion often times based off of emotions. when we're young we claim we are in love when we are 14 and then realize we are not. is that logical?
noonie0444 6 months ago
@noonie0444
Whether Love is logical is not the issue; the fact is that it exists and is something that the person them-self determines.Like I said, Love and Religion are two completely different things; whether emotion/love brings people to religion is irrelevant, since emotion/love also brings people to murder, rape, and war.
Kinin4 6 months ago
@Kinin4....my point is. neither side has 100 percent evidence for or against god. to call someone crazy or illogical for what they believe is crazy and is illogical in itself. you clearly see that there are commonalities between believing and not believing and yet somehow it is dumbed down to intelligence and stupidity because of those beliefs. just doesnt make sense. neither of us are going to change our minds on this,so good luck changing other peoples minds.
noonie0444 6 months ago
@noonie0444
Except Atheists don't CLAIM to have 100% evidence against God. Atheism, in a nutshell, is acknowledging that there is NO evidence FOR God and sees no reason to believe in it.
The reason Atheism and Theism they are "dumbed down" to intelligence and stupidity is because the former is characterized by seeing evidence and acting upon it, while the latter is characterized by faith without evidence.
Kinin4 6 months ago
2.) When does he resort to name-calling? Did he say anything inaccurate? The things he says are objectively and observably no harsher than your average negative restaurant critic. And again; you are the exception to the general religious opinion of what other people do and believe privately.
Kinin4 7 months ago
Soooo, animals.....They don't believe in god because they are incapable of believing in such a thing. Does that mean all animals go to hell for their innocent ignorance? Isn't that kind of unfair to these poor animals? Just a thought.
NarLiv 1 year ago 3
@NarLiv yea heaven doesnt sound like fun if all the animals dont make it in.
pandorachild 1 year ago
uhh mis-quoting famous scientists. One of religions specialty's.
91TheKW91 1 year ago 5
religious wing nuts do not have more rights than me. how dare they persecute me for not following fairy tales!
hennessy72 1 year ago
This guy knows what he's talking about. Religious belief is blind.
eirkjo 1 year ago 4
lol at god plays dice...
nukeandfusion 1 year ago
His question at 3:00 was absolutely bs. I was pretty impressed that Dawkins knew what Hawking and Einstein had said using the word god. I kinda rolfed after he explained it and the guy was like, fuck................
TheAznOne 1 year ago
The largest problem with religion is the spreading of ideas that are accepted on behalf of faith. Having faith in something does not make it true. I could have faith in winning the lottery, yet the chances of that happening are slim. In a sense, religion is like cheating. Whereas the universe is the test and we're trying to find answers. You're looking at someone else's ideas instead of finding the answers for yourself. In other words, religion is formed to revolve around people's own stupidity.
nobodyrememberszak 1 year ago 3
@nobodyrememberszak. youre not discovering these things for yourself, right? you havent studied the universe, or written a book on the subject, or figured out the source of life. youre going off of things you have read and seen. wouldnt that throw you in with people not thinking for themselves? or did you just magically come to all this knowledge with no outside influence? in other words, "The injury we do and the one we suffer are not weighed in the same scales." Aesop
noonie0444 8 months ago
See
Walter Isaacson - Einstein's God YouTube acc=ForaTV
Pauloaza3 1 year ago
Enjoyable debate, qudos to the interviewer, i thought he asked some probing and intelligent questions which Mr Dawkins answered with great thought.
bonnie43uk 1 year ago
Althought the host was very intelligent he lacked the professionalism to let Dawkins answer the questions without being interupted.He was biast ,leaning towards a god all the while trying to convey the message that Dawkins religious belief is "science" and as we all know science is based on facts and evidence which is easy to grasp if one fully understands the proccess in finding a conclusion.
Just because there are unanswered questions it does not mean that we fill that void with "god."
petestrat07 2 years ago 6
I don't know if you are familiar with hard talk but Dawkins did very well and he knows it. The host is ruthless and he probably questions himself constantly. He probably whips himself in his dressing room for failing to make a guest cry. He is one of the best. If only more idiots were willing to go on the show the fools of the world would be exposed.
thundavolt 2 years ago 4
Hard questions asked, very clear and succinct answer. Good program actually!!
gerjaison 2 years ago 4
Comment removed
TelLieVision1 2 years ago
Comment removed
TelLieVision1 2 years ago
OMG (no pun intended), the host compares science to a religion. He even says one copuld say it is sort of a religion. I cannot even grasp the reasoning behind this. Science is based on experiments, logic and observations, while religion is believing in things no one can percieve or prove.
149328 2 years ago 4
He simply asked about something religious people use to ague against atheists the point is Dawkins answered the question. Sometimes you nee to ask the dumbest questions to get rid of he rumors.
thundavolt 2 years ago
Comment removed
149328 2 years ago
If such answers were directed to a christian or muslim believer, it would have been a ridiculous conversation. They can never provide a single fact but addressing their answers to THAT book called BIBLE or QURAN . By the way---Who wrote them?
lo3331 2 years ago 2
Pity Dawkins leaned forward in a bow at the end to shake hands. His was the superior arguement but lost in the last gesture.
magottyk 2 years ago
Uh. Don't read too much into a handshake.
Iambecome 2 years ago 5
Yes - it's called good manners.
alhanacherie 2 years ago
yes it is good manners but dont give an asshole an even break, they wont.
luv Dawkins btw but no-one is beyond a criticism.
magottyk 2 years ago
You can clearly witness how Dawkins was able to answer the questions in a straight face, without blabbering trying to find the correct answer, and with true conviction. If you place a hard talk debate against a creationist, you will definitely get a lot of blabbering, twitching, and defensive answers. All because, he doesn't really know what he is talking about.
litetheory 2 years ago 3
as bad as the hosts questions were, I think they need to be adressed with proper answers because they really ARE the questions that naive critics of Dawkins will ask.
kwolf71 2 years ago 2