Added: 3 years ago
From: ourgodiseverywhere
Views: 111,601
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (1,981)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • nicely edited fake ending for defending Richard Dawkings flawed arguments.

  • good work here

  • I downloaded and saw "Expelled". Laughed. The. Whole. Way. Through.

  • It's funny how this video has about 111,112 views when the actual Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed has about 34,000. Is it just me or does that seem a little fishy? I would rather a good reporter lie and uncover a huge scandal of corruption as to be honest and allow me and my children to get fooled.

  • and there are a lot of sciences that christianity judiasm and any other relgion would not deny, simply belonging to a religion does not mean you cannot therefore be a competent scientist.

  • i can see a good reason for them to be dishonest, after all, what self respecting evolutionist would willingly admit that another branch of science wasnt actually science right? after all, they would probably try to cover their tracks thats what all politicians...... ss....scien.....scientists.. do right?

  • What's the opposite of Einstein?

    Ben Stein!

  • Hard to believe how many people can excuse the man's very words and invent an inside job conspiracy theory to expose people for what they actually say. Huh? This new idea of film editing from the makers of Expelled, No Intelligence Allowed could be a huge step forwarded in film making. Just imagine what could happen if the actual film had the actor's very own words instead of just a rehearsed script. We might actually get a 5 hour film and better value for our $10 movie ticket!

  • THIS VIDEO TITLE IS MISLEADING. SO ET TU BRUTE....

  • Was Premise Media dishonest about Dawkins in his own words? "It could be that at some earlier time, somewhere in the universe, a civilization evolved by probably some kind of Darwinian means to a very, very high level of technology and designed a form of life that they seeded onto perhaps this planet...I suppose it's possible that you might find evidence for that if you look at the details of biochemistry, molecular biology, you might find a signature of some sort of designer..."

  • @1GODISNOWHERE1

    You asshole. Nice quotemine from a shitty deceptive movie. You creationists are lying through your vile clenched teech as usual.

    And the rest of the quote:

    "that designer could well be a higher intelligence from elsewhere in the universe. That higher intelligence would, itself, have had to have come about by some explicable, ultimately explicable, process. It couldn’t have just jumped into existence spontaneously. That’s the point."

    Go gobble a huge bag of penises asshole.

  • @ChickenHawk110 So glad to see you have removed your lips from Richard Dawkins' and PZ Myers' rectums long enough to take a breath and demonstrate your lack of intelligence. It's no surprise that you were passed over for an in depth interview by Ben Stein considering the title of the documentary included "No Intelligence Allowed". Could this be the defining moment of your personal little anger party?

  • Isn't that "You can fuck off" taken from when he said "Science is interesting, and if you don't think so, then you can fuck off."?

  • The only thing that this video shows is that the OP is a ignorant fucktard.

  • On an other note people who vehemently defend or attempts to belittle detractors of god are simply in denial, uneducated, ignorant or biased...see how that line of thinking works? And I highly doubt you worked in molecular biology studied it maybe but certanly not done any groundbreaking work in the field of biology as Dawkins has, I don't want to have to point out the damning fact that high religiosity and low IQ's go hand in hand.

    Correlation? Yes! Causation? More than likely!

  • Ben Stein is awesome. He wasn't afraid to take on the obviously dim dorkins and any other narrow minded individuals. Anyway- go study molecular biology and see how complicated, intricate well designed and breath taking life is. I studied it for years and then robotics so i know how hard it is to make something function logically. Any individual who attacks or attempts to ridicule a belief in God is simply in denial, uneducated, ignorant or biased.

  • « Stein your a coward »

    I don't think he's necessarily a coward. He's merely extremely, and I do mean incredibly, dim.

  • This is BS

  • Ben Stein seems to have brain/neurologic problems...

  • @lordnimr0d not sure what you are talking about. I am quite clear on the proper way to conduct scientific inquiry. You may have misread what I wrote. My point was you do not pre-decide that the earth is heating, then go out and only accept measurements and data that support your pre-determined decision, throwing out anything that does not fit. That is exactly how "mmgw research" has occurred...it most certainly is not "science".

  • I just checked kenfo0's channel. That explains it.

  • Why aren't we allowed to debate religion in the classroom? For the same reason we aren't allowed to waste classroom time discussing flat Earth nonsense or talking donkeys & snakes, or fire-breathing dragons, or unicorns, or satyrs, or dead and decomposing corpses getting up and walking around, or people turning into salt, or telepathically communicating with invisible, magical superfriends, or telepathically remote-controlling invisible magical superfriends, or bird-blood leprosy cures ...

  • Hmmmm....so editing is wrong. watch dawkins here: Famous atheist is stumped - He avoids answering the question

    somehow, editing is ok, as long as it's purpose is aligned with the correct ideology? That is called a lack of honesty/integrity/morality.

  • @kenfo0 Wow! You were actually duped by the Expelled movie editing weasels. The movie flopped, as did your comment.

  • @ndrthrdr1 Um, sorry dickweed, but I criticized the expelled movie. you, being stupid think "if a, then not b" for no factual reason. How sad that you are so stupid and so easily duped. cast ANOTHER vote for obummer, kiddie...THIS time he SUPER promises to pay your mortgage and give you the ceo's salary.

  • waahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh! Poor poor atheists. I can't believe they edited the movie. How could they? Those evil movie editors! I have never heard of such a thing as editing film to make it fit into a 2 hour watchable movie!

    Poor poor atheist

  • @ivflytrap

    don't be such a faggot

    no one is arguing over editing when it makes a 4 hour movie into a 2 hour movie by reducing irrelevant information.

    people are disliking because the editing is not irrelevant. People are cut off before the interview ends, in the middle of a rebuttal, or edited into a context that outside of the editing, does not exist.

    perhaps, less faggotry and more integrity could be a motto for you

  • @foursquarefour yes, because using a word like "faggotry" like some sort of child because your infantile brain is so filled with anger that you can't express yourself in an intelligent manner is a great way to show a person of integrity. Yes, left wing, liberal, homosexual or should I say "faggots" such as youself and film makers such as, I don't know, Michael Moore would never do such a thing as make a film and edit the hell out of it and spread his propaganda. Look in the mirror assclown :)

  • @ivflytrap

    yes of course, who I am and what I personally say, determines whether or not the video has been edited unfairly.

    Good to know how you come about making decisions and then argue them.

  • @ivflytrap said " Those evil movie editors! I have never heard of such a thing as editing film to make it fit into a 2 hour watchable movie!"

    When we say "creatard", that's the sort of dim worldview we're talking about. I know that you can't comprehend that, but at least you provide comic relief for the rest of us.

  • @ndrthrdr1 Apparently you're the one who has a problem with comprehension, judging by your senseless comment, nonetheless I am thrilled any time I can make an assclown laugh.

  • Someone should propose talking about making it mandatory to teach evolution in church...cuz it's an alternative theory

  • @ONeilYu You must not go to church, because they do teach it, so now I guess it must be taught in schools.

  • @ONeilYu Nice idea, but a little late since this is the norm in most evangelical Churches today. This is the very reason the affable Mr. Dawkins is leading a group of individuals to convert pastors and preachers into his realm of understanding origins. His high intellect will fail him on this group study however, since the very idea that preachers will trade in their hope of heaven for the hope of becoming fertilizer, well just is just too hard a seed to plant.

  • @ONeilYu your idea would suggest that evolution is a brand of religion rather than a division of science. you are less wrong than you might think.

  • @jmorton112991 im not doing that at all. There is a dichotomy between science and religion and trying to combine one with the other in no matter what setting is just wrong. I said that we should make it mandatory to teach it in church to make it obvious how absurd the idea of combining both really is. People always discuss if we should bring religion into science, so it has almost been culturally accepted that that is a reasonable thing to do. However if we flip it around, we realize that itsnot

  • I thought it edited. Typically Ben Stein. Obviously not Einstein. One's at the bottom of the ladder one's at the top. Wonder where Ben is?

  • The war between Good and Evil is not being fought in the skies between a God and a Devil. It is being fought by men that believe they are of some importance to the intelligent design of the universe, and those that believe they are somehow behind this intelligent design . A good man is one who lives in accord with the surrounding nature and its co-inhabitants. Any man who thrives to control it for personal gain is evil. Life is a test.

    So who is good and who is evil?

  • @okthisisboring But we humans rely on our control and manipulation of "the surrounding nature" for survival; manipulation of nature is the basis of agriculture and hence of civilization.

  • That's funny... Dawkins' awesomely intellectual quote really sums up everything about his argument. Couldn't ask for better...

  • As usual, as at any point in human history, mankind fallaciously assumes himself to be at the pinnacle of knowledge, only later to find his stand a delusion.

  • Wow. Welcome to the world of documentary making. Welcome to the world of anything you watch on TV or in theaters actually. You think they should have told them outright that they were making a documentary about ID? You think they would have gotten the interviews otherwise? Until I see proof that the interviews were edited to change the meaning I won't believe it. But even if I am shown some, it still doesn't prove anything other than the makers of the film were dishonest.

  • I do teach it my classroom, and when the "reverends" come in to give their accounts of Genesis as compared to evolution, I can barely clean up all the snot bubbles that are spewed all over the desks. Sorry to tell MY ID proponents, your propaganda is dead, even though you'll write more nonsense to support your claims, you'll be forever looking for evidence to support it. A high standard for evidence will always beat your donkeys!!

  • I doubt even Dawkins would use the type of language that his ill-mannered classless followers use. Oh well something to think about anyway.

  • Ok, Who the fuck cares about dishonesty about an interview? SHIT HAPPENS ALL THE TIME, It's sometimes the ONLY way you can discuss things with certain people.

  • lol evolution got pwnd with this movie

  • @9pt9 not sure if troll or just stupid..

  • @idreamtofflight Ready to get ended?: Please provide evidence and a deatailed explanation of how male and female reproductive systems evolved by random mutations over time. See ya!

  • @9pt9 sorry, I don't know that exact answer, ask someone who studies evolutionary biology, they'd know. Also even if evolution wasn't real, that doesn't mean creationism is correct at all.

  • @idreamtofflight You're right you don't and neither does any evolutionary biologist bc its impossible.

  • @9pt9 yup and they never will... argument from ignorance much?

  • @idreamtofflight Why don't they just say science doesnt know how life happened or male and female species came about rather than pretending mutations did it?

  • @9pt9 Watch the real video and have a slight understanding of the topics if you are going to comment. Dawkins clearly states that nobody knows the origin of life. Mutations has nothing to do with that.

  • @9pt9

    Science does not know how life began 'abiogenisis', there are I think 3 hypothesies seeking the evidence to get promoted to Theory or trashed if they fail. I do think we should know within the next 10years. There is so much going on in the field and new evidence coming to light.

    How ever once life started mutation and evolution took over. That is evidenced and proven.

    It is the most supported Theory in science.

  • @9pt9

    Sure no problem. So you want the evidence of 100 years of cross disipliary studies covering 100's of text books millions of experiments, documented observations of realityand the chemistry of reproductive science.

    All in 500 characters.

    Then after all that EVIDENCE, you would accept it or denigh the facts.

    Watch some documentaries they should be a good start... but basically it is whatyou wood expect for survival swapping genes via progeny. If it didn't that would be strange.

  • @bradpittftw1111 how dare you say that there are thousands of radical muslims "causing mayhem". you are just believing the propoganda. in reality that is an obscene understatement. it's well into the tens of millions, lol.

  • Also, let's note that on Youtube, for a comment to be posted on Expelled, it has to be "approved," which is typical religious cowardice. Richard Dawkins is brilliant; Ben Stein is a moron with money. I'm glad (and not surprised) Dawkins told him to fuck off. Any person with half a brain knows that ID is NOT science. It is a pseudo-science with a religious agenda and deserves no place in the American public with any government funding under 'science.'

  • @BillA1016 "It is a pseudoscience with a religious agenda..."

    Why the Red herrings? Why can't evolutionists confront ID according to the evidence: Irreducible complexity, the Divine Proportion, Information in DNA etc. Every debate I've seen on the news, the evolutionists go straight to a red herring argument attacking religion.

    @hanbaal Can you please point out these "outright lies"

  • @54tumelo56 OK so i could be bothered to watch a random part of the movie.

    We do know what species are. Guy says we dont.

    Nowhere near the best example of an outright lie in the film im sure.

  • @54tumelo56 Oh my the irony.

  • And the outright lies. Dont forget them! Disgraceful movie.

  • This was very funny, well done :)

  • So here's my question: If we are all having such a wonderful time debating this on youtube and countless other web sites across the world, why aren't we being allowed to do it in the class room as well? And before you deny the fun you're having, why else would we spend so much time talking about something if we hated the topic?

  • @murray12282 Where can't you debate it. Jw. I mean, i'm an atheist that was forced to go to a catholic high school. When I was there creationism was taught in the religion class and evolution in the science class. When I defended evolution in the religion class, the teacher always said you have to have faith and blah blah blah. But I was allowed to give my opinions and I think he liked that someone was actually hearing what he had to say instead of just absorbing it and obeying it.

  • @murray12282 Evolution offers evidence through the fossil record, geographic distribution & genetics. It's findings are peer reviewed & have successfully made predictions about the natural world.

    ID has done none of this & only attempts to point out holes in evolution, which is not really a bad thing. It's just not a scientific theory worth being taught with evolution. ID needs to do more than pose a few questions to evolution. It's terribly inadequate as a theory hence no time in class.

  • @skullface216

    ID is a hypothesis not a theory. A theory has facts to back it up. ID is just linguistic calasthenics and bull.

    Based on wishing it were true and psudoscience.

  • @VideoAudioDisco09 Correction: for something to be a hypothesis, it must be stated in a way that it can be falsified, and it must make predictions. ID doesn't fit either of those. It's just a religious belief. But you at least know what a theory is. Most people seem to think it means a wild guess.

  • @VideoAudioDisco09 - funny that sounds like evolution to me.

  • @murray12282

    if you put it that way, why teach history instead of bringing a few gaming consoles and fucking around all day?

    because schools are for education, not necessarily to have unproductive fun.

  • @murray12282

    When you do, you also have to discuss the the islamic, buddhistic, hinduistic, flying spaghetti monster etc etc etc viewpoint on creation.

  • @murray12282

    Religion is not science that why it is faith... belief without evidence.

    Teaching Science is teaching what is know and based on Facts or current theories. It does not get into or argue about the para-normal or mythalogical claims. These can not be tested. The problem is the wild claims are made like Noahs Flood for which we would expect evidence and there is none, zip , zero.

    Otherwise all religions would need equal time, which is a waste of time. There is no debate

  • @murray12282

    I HAVE studied religion in public school! The course was called "World Religions," and was kept completely separate from Chemistry, Physics, and Biology. And that's the way it should be.

  • @murray12282 because this type of discussion belongs in a class on religion, not on science. I only say that because in America there are nuts (Michelle Bachman), who think creationism should be taught in science classes alongside evolution.

  • @murray12282 beacuse is illegal talk about religion in science class, it goes against the separation of state and church thing, and we keep debating because there is still people that deosnt want to see the truth in front of them, and thats dangerous.

  • @murray12282 cause it's time to finally talk about the elephant in the room.

  • @murray12282 because its already been disproved.

  • @murray12282 depends which classroom - cultural history? yes, allow it

  • @roteViolation so, you don't think dogma is taught in the science classroom today? that would be fascinating, were it not pathetic and clearly incorrect.

  • @kenfo0 give me an example of what you define as dogma. and tell me about all the science classes you have taken. i'm sure you're speaking from experience.

  • @roteViolation hmmm. you seem very stupid, so let me help: you can find an acceptable definition of "dogma" in any dictionary. You are lazy too, so why not just google the "big boy words" like dogma. yeah, you caught me! What do I know about science, with the highest grades, across all sections, in chemistry, genetics, human anatomy and physiology, comparative vertebrate zoology and the like. I mean, compared with some dumbass who can't look up the definition of "dogma". PFFT.

  • your words sparkle with their own humble genius - no need to list classroom accomplishments. a couple of things. i asked you to support your claim of dogma in the science classroom with examples – i believe your response was to make a clumsy personal attack. my intellect is on a lower plane than yours. what did i miss?

  • @rote aaww....little girl doesn't understand English. I'll help, downtrodden, lazy dupe: You clearly did NOT "ask me to support my claim of dogma in the classroom". "give me an example of what you define as dogma". You are asking for a definition of dogma, as I clearly understand. Yes, you're uneducated and lazy.You have reached a point of accurate awareness. Now it's time to go get yourself a CLASSICAL education, as opposed to the leftist-agenda brainwashing you've received.

  • @kenfo0 more name-calling - what a shock - hey, plato - people with classical educations don't specialize in childish rants -- science is the opposite of dogma - when a better theory comes along that contradicts the previous, and is verifiable, repeatable, the previous theory is tossed, regardless of whether it is a "law" - eg Einstein showed how gravity was not a force, but a distortion of spacetime - this info is not suppressed in science class - now i'm through with you

  • @rote yes, compared to you w/your arrogant stupidity, I am Plato. You think Plato didn't dress down morons? HAHAH...ok girlie. Science SHOULD be the opposite of dogma, but is not anymore. MMGW is clearly a fraud. One does not conduct scientific inquiring by saying "the earth IS heating (before measuring) and it is CAUSED BY man, now let's go prove it. Let's toss any data that doesn't fit the model...make sure you delete the email where I told you to delete the data". That is anti-science.

  • @roteViolation that is who you, and most are today: lazy liars, thieves and mindless chanters. You have no understanding of the world around you, and make no effort to learn. You simply repeat whatever nonsense "sounds good" and shout it loud-n-proud. when proven wrong, you simply spew more angry nonsense. This occurs in all sectors of society today, including the "hallowed" halls of "science".

  • @murray12282 it should be allowed in the classroom - but not the science classroom - it ain't science. on the other hand, who cares? science isn't everything; it certainly can't explain everything.

  • @murray12282

    You can discuss it in a class room. An anthropology or social studies class room and if we are really generous we'll offer a religious studies class as well as an elective.

  • @murray12282 Probably because it's a ridiculous debate that can't be won. Given enough time, and solid arguments... it'll always end the same way: either "I don't know" if you're an evolutionist or "It's about faith" if you're a creationist.

  • @murray12282 Stupid question. It might be fun to debate with someone that believes the sun revolves around the earth, but it certainly does not belong in a classroom.

  • @murray12282 Yeah I agree, except not in a science class.

  • @murray12282 you are allowed to debate this in class, its called philosophy class because beliefe in god is just that, a beliefe, not a science. believers dont know they are right through experimental proof, they simply have "faith"

  • @murray12282 because it's not really a debate

    this "debate" is like saying a little nation like Naura (look it up) could beat the USA in total war

    their's not really anything to say to that

  • I don't believe the film was used to bash science, but instead exposed how science is taken up as an excuse to attack religion.

    By claiming that the film was made with dishonesty, doesn't address the real issues about people like Dawkins who use science as part of their anti-religion policies. Promoting the facts in science by attacking religion isn't necessary. If the facts are legitimate, then no one needs to be attacked to defend them. People either accept them or they don't.

  • A. I knew it was a pro-intelligent design film after only 5minutes of watching it.

    B. Dawkins is an asshole (no Im not a religious fundamentalist och pro-creationist) so he got what was comming.

  • @bradpittftw1111 than atheism is a blind surgeon.

  • All you need to know about God:

    La Illah Il Allah

    English translation: (stick your fingers in your ears) La La La La La

  • gods are imaginary

  • @ndrthrdr1 True, all gods are but Jesus are imaginary.

  • @ndrthrdr1 Ur moms imaginary.. jk jk lol God bless prayin 4 u! :)

  • Comment removed

  • @ndrthrdr1 Proove God does not exist. Just one shred of evidence will do?

  • @MrMaxTruth That's ridiculous. Prove that there's not an invisible McDonalds hamburger stand at the bottom of the ocean. Can'y do it? Wow, then there must be one!

  • @ndrthrdr1 you are imaginary.

  • @ndrthrdr1 Ya but God isn't.

  • @squitchleton123 Based on what? Your feelings? People in other religions have those same feelings about their gods and godesses. What makes you think that they're wrong, and you're right?

    All gods are really your "God"? No, they're not. Thor, with his giant hammer that "causes" the thunder we hear isn't the same as The Mayan twin gods.

    I know how it is to believe.  I used to, also. Then I examined WHY I believed, and realized there's no rational justification for belief without evidence.

  • @ndrthrdr1 No based on novels and novels of evidence. And Christianity isn't a religion. That's a common misconception. Branches of Christianity are religions like Catholicism. It's having a personal relationship with Jesus. Religion is man made rules to try to reach God. Christianity is God reaching down for us.

  • @squitchleton123 said "No based on novels and novels of evidence."

    Don't you know that novels are fiction?

    Also, what the heck does "novels of evidence" even mean?

    If you believe you have a personal relationship with a Bronze Age Jewish cult leader who's been dead for 2,000 years, you're incapable of separating fact from fiction. All religions (cults) tell you that they are the one and only real deal.

  • @ndrthrdr1 I meant "long books of evidenc" happy?  Actually he raised from the dead and fyi a cult is against God so. Not trying to start anything. so calm down.

  • @ndrthrdr1 What an original notion, sir.

  • It makes me laugh how much Dawkins thinks of himself, he's a friggin' Zoologist, WTF?

  • @evi3lynni3 Dawkins is an evolutionary biologist and you are a moron

  • @bradpittftw1111 shutting themselfs in their own self imposed cage.

  • @bradpittftw1111 well really I think because Islam has that very prominent rule about punishment for apostasy and clearly if all followed that rule, people being born into the religion also, if that was the case all the time then clearly Islam would be forever increasing and it would be using its belief in god as a justification for world conquest, Islam like other aspects of religions can be used as a colonisation tool this would also be bad for thier own thoe as they would effectivly be

  • Weak suck.

  • YOU CAN FUCK OFF!

  • Stimulants will jar our slumbrous wakes. The chemico-/radio- “therapies” utilized to frustrate (or thwart) the placental onslaught of crab cancer are serologically worthless. Cops lie. The bench-law-making courts decree that they're allowed to.

  • @bradpittftw1111 If I'm a materialist, and I'm hyper-rational, This means I can steal, and/or do worse things and as long I get away with them, I will benefit from them. Now consider the scenario where I believe there is retribution for these acts, and I am hyper rational. (at this point, try to contain yourself like and don't say "if I was hyper-rational I would not be religious" because this, you see, is a circular argument) If I am rational, I will not do that which is disadvantageous.

  • Ok that was pretty clever:3

  • Religion is fucking retarded get over it and give me a blow job pussy

  • @mrtrollmaster1 I dont know what a 'blow job pussy' is but it sounds awesome! I'll have one as well.

    p.s. There is no god.

  • If there was some kind of useful intention behind this video, I fail to see it. It is not only a complete waste of time, the language and audio is actually deterimental to a positive human spirit and constructive thinking. It is typical of a society determined to reject an intelligent creator with a loving purpose for his creation. It contributes NOTHING to intelligent debate.

  • @projectlevydelta" What happens when WW3 starts and a nuke falls in your town?

    Then we all die (by human action...humans made the nuke and humans will die from it) All humans (nothing supernatural.

    "Saying because you do something it will have YOUR desired outcome is stupidity!"(I never said that, you are putting your own spin) Sometimes when you do things it doesn't come out the way you want. It has nothing to do with god...it has to do with variables...especially human variables.

  • @projectlevydelta" What happens when you walk in your bank and behind you are bank robbers and they find it better to shoot you then keep you hostage?" Then I might die...of coarse...you are not clear on how any thing supernatural is occurring in these situations. These are everyday human occurrences done by human actions. It was the bank robber that killed me (human) then I die (human) How are you shoring up your supernatural argument with this?

  • @projectlevydelta So what happens when you die by the gun as you claim you wont?" We were talking about consequences cause/effect. If someone shot me and I would die..then I'm dead,.shit happens. You have no realistic argument. What I said is logical..who MIGHT have a better life span? a gang member or a law abiding citizen? This does not mean that I might not die in violent circumstances, by someone else's choice, not a gods. This is obvious. Again not an argument 4 god.

  • @projectlevydelta "Plenty of people inject heroin and are fine!" Really? Who?Define what you mean by "fine"

    "Plenty of people are perfectly health and exercise everyday eat the proper foods maintaining a good muscle to fat ratio and drop dead suddenly the next day for no real reason." You never drop dead for no reason, there is always a reason. you not knowing the reason does not mean there isn't one or that goddidit.

  • Autism is mercury-poisoning [hydrargyrism n. poisoning with mercury; mercurialism], as prescribed by our pharmaceutical cartels as eugenics is population decimation as granted in granite on the Georgia Guide Stones.

  • @LovingKimiKatkar shhhh dont say that!! People will think your stupid..hehehe

  • Ben Stein, you can Fuck Off.

  • @bradpittftw1111 Indeed there are a lot of messed up people in the world, I'm sad when I hear about fellow Muslims behaving in un-Islamic ways.

    However, there's no death penalty for leaving Islam according to the Qur'an and the Prophet (pbuh) and his family (pbut), unfortunately people try to modify Islam to be what they want instead of obeying God.

    Religion is not cancer, cancer is cancer. Religion is a method of promoting unity, welfare, and happiness. People try to ruin everything though.

  • That's really the only argument Dawkins makes that makes sense.

  • Dawkins must have been infuriated. Only Theists need to edit and twist truth. We are all ABOUT truth.

  • @leilapitcher2 kay.

  • @bradpittftw1111 cancer is cancer. faith is personal.

  • yup. that's the Richard Dawkins we all love

  • @bradpittftw1111 islam doesn't kill you if you leave it i turned atheist left and i am still good friend with a lot of muslims. maybe in some areas of the world they kill if you leave. but on a whole no u will not be killed

  • @dimichi13 ahh don't fall for arguments from idiotic trolls going with the anti-terrorist idiotic agenda.

  • I laughed so hard...its so simple, yet incredibly funny!

  • So there was no leaked video.... (Hence the title is a lie in itself.. hypocritical when you consider the contents of the video).... and here I was thinking this was going to contain something credible. When in fact it is some person spreading their own point of view, (with nothing to actually support their claims)

  • Stupid video. Try to provide some friggen substance next time. This one failed.

  • Everyone saying it was a disonest interveiw but I don't see dawkins speaking for himself....It clear he doesn'y really know but yet everyone is following him blindly.....

  • @bradpittftw1111 Actually, I think religion might be more deadly than cancer could ever hope to be.

  • @Microtardz Yep the religion that believes everything including man has evolved has killed untold millions,and continues to.

  • @Godexists100 lmfao, proof please. And if it's single people,cults, or communist attempts. I will slap you.

    Whats more, is the religions that believe god exists, have killed TOLD millions. But hey w.e.

  • @Microtardz Will start slapping because the communists Pol Pot,Stalin,to name two have killed millions in the name of survival of the fittest which stems from evolutionary belief. Of course you'll refuse to believe that because like most people that hold on to this theory do not want to admit it. It's also responsible for racism,races is an evolutionary term. Genetics shows us there is only one race,the human race,there are many cultures,but only one race.

  • @Godexists100 "Will start slapping because the communists Pol Pot,Stalin,to name two have killed millions in the name of survival of the fittest which stems from evolutionary belief."

    exactly what part of evolutionary biology instructed these dictators to kill anyone? In fact, name any scientific theory that instructs anyone to do harm. The connection you're attempting to make is ludicrous and laughable. "Survival of the fittest" has nothing to do with killing people.

  • @Godexists100 " It's also responsible for racism,races is an evolutionary term. "

    Once again, what part of evolutionary biology instructs people to hate people of another race?

    Contrast this with specific teachings of many religions (including christianity) instructing followers to specifically hate, fear and even kill those with different beliefs, lifestyles and opinions. Its right there in the bible.

    It seems you have it all backwards.

  • @Godexists100 "Genetics shows us there is only one race,the human race,there are many cultures,but only one race"

    I think you need to look up the word "race" and how its used for classification.

    That very same genetic research you're proudly touting also shows unequivocally the nested heirarchies of common ancestry in every species that has been sequenced.

    Im guessing you somehow reject that part of what genetics has uncovered simply because it contradicts your chosen religious beliefs.

  • @stiimuli lolz, I see you've came here and begun to argue with godexists while I was busy protesting and partying.

    Welcome :D

  • @Godexists100 Stalin, wasn't he a member of Hitlers regime? Hitler a man supported by the Vatican(catholic organization) in his persecution of the jews, and many other races, which in reality was merely because he's a fucked up man, that needed a buy out for germany's problems at the times. And the jews were his buy out.

    Stalins personal beliefs do not matter in this issue, because he wasn't even the leader.

  • @Microtardz

    "Stalin, wasn't he a member of Hitlers regime?"

    Oh my god you are ****ing kidding me!?

    Do you not even know the slightest bit about history, of WW2?

    HITLER AND STALIN WERE ENEMIES!! STALIN WAS OUR WAR TIME ALLY!!

    "Stalins personal beliefs do not matter in this issue, because he wasn't even the leader."

    LOL!! This is priceless ignorance. No, Stalin wasn't the leader of the USSR (that's mostly Russia, if you can find it on a map) and didn't order the deaths of 50 mil people! Ha!

  • @Birdieupon Ahh, I see. So why is it you defending the argument from an obvious retard that's using an obviously fucked up in the head guys personal beliefs in order to attempt to discredit atheism?

    You can believe me or not believe me when I say this. I'm merely trolling at the moment with that stalin and hitler comment. Socialism vs Fascism, wooooo.

    There is only one conclusion for mass murdering fuck heads, they're fucked up in the head, not that they were taught to be that way.

  • @Birdieupon not that i enjoy defending silly points, but it should be noted that until Hitler turned on the Soviets, Stalin and Hitler had a pact of non-aggression. Also, Stalin did order the deaths of millions of people, including his own Soviets and Jews... all in all, not really much better than Hitler.

  • @Godexists100 I believe stimulii has argued the genetics position enough to be suitable for me, so I shall continue on the killing of millions. "survival of the fittest" goes hand in hand with "you should be allowed to struggle and attempt to survive anyway".

    Survival of the fittest isn't about killing, but is about self preservation. In which the fittest, shall be able to preserve themselves, while the weak, will not.

    If you're notice, it's very prominent in business.

  • Comment removed

  • @Microtardz "Survival of the fittest isn't about killing, but is about self preservation"

    actually it isnt even as "sinister" as that.

    survival of the fittest simply means organisms most able to adapt to their environment and successfully reproduce will be more likely to continue.

    its not "survival of the meanest jerks" or "survival of the organism that can kill all the others" as creationists seem to think.

  • @stiimuli hmm, good point.

  • @stiimuli hmm, anyway, ever had one of those moments, where you're trying to type one thing, while you're thinking of another, then you unconsciously typed what you were thinking. Then for some stupid reason you click post without reading over it, only to find out you posted to all the pedobears on youtube you have JB undies.

    That's merely a hypothetical of course *cough*.

    Anyway, just random question out of boredom..

  • @Microtardz O_O

  • @bradpittftw1111

    Religion may be a cancer (not saying that it is).

    But life itself is a cancer of rocks - never forget that.

  • Saying, "fuck off," doesn't help Dawkin's argument one bit. If anything, removing it helped preserve his professional facade and credibility. It's not something to get up and arms about video editing. What would really help his argument is learning how to argue in the first place, in stead of just tooting his own horn with his, "I am so amazing.."