hilarious. quite humiliating really. guy starts shouting in anger and ignorance... how cool is that? and don't tell me i'm arrogant when you believe the universe was created for you.
It's pretty pathetic that people think we need Christianity in order to behave ethically. People learned not to kill and screw each other over way before this religion. Those are behaviors that are inherent because they're bioevolutionarily useful to our survival.
So bill wants to be told a story. Okay. There once was a magical unicorn called Pinkie. He played gayly all day in the fields of empty space before the universe was created. Anyway, one day he ate a particularly spicy burrito from a space taco stand run by Pablo the donkey. This burrito upset Pinkie's tummy so much he shat out a torrent of molten unicorn shit and thus the universe was created. Ironically this shit was also used to create Christianity. The end. ALL HAIL PINKIE.
Why do theists think that the constitution is a popularity contest? Just because, for sake of argument, a high school has more Christian students than Atheist ones, does NOT mean they then have the right to ignore the 1st amendment which covers seperation of church and state. Sorry Bill, it doesn't work that way.
here`s the problem bill, you say that jesus is loving + peaceful, the son of god.it is taught in christianity + says in the bible, god is jesus, they are one and the same. well in leviticus god tells people to stone to death anyone wearing an item of clothing made out of 2 different materials (not very loving). as god is jesus + they are one and the same, his father, both without sin, you can not remove jesus from these barbaric actions. does he still sound peaceful???
Can I just say that Bill is very wrong in saying that there are more believers (in Christianity) than there are non-believers. Believers in other religions also count as "nonbelievers", and all together, they do outnumber Christians. There's a lot more wrong with what he said, but there's really no point in going into it.
clearly anyone with any moral sense can tell which side is just and which isn't. Christians should be rational, loving one another is part of rationality. All the rest is guidelines and "arguable history".
Since when did Youtube become so anti-Christianity? I guess it's the thing to do these days. People are entitled to their opinion, but the sheeple who go video to video and copy and paste other non believers posts is petty. If you're saying things just for the sake of being a follower, by all means, have away at it. But the fact that the faith probably hasn't hurt these people who speak so vehemently against it is what bugs me, I'm not the most religious person, but stupidity is stupidity.
"My thesis is that if everyone followed the teachings of Jesus Christ then we would have peace on earth." In that case my thesis is that if everyone followed the teachings of My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic and Star Trek we would have peace on earth.
wow what a contrast between levels of intelligence. i can kind of understand why o'reilly maintains his forward attitude and loud voice... it's his only defense
why does bill oreilly even bother having guests? he constantly interrupts them before they can make any semblance of a point, his crew keeps his mic several decibels higher than the guest and perhaps worst of all he's very condescending...that "smarter than you" remark...I can't even believe for a second that he had the nerve to say that to an internationally renowned oxford professor...
Dejando el asunto de la religion aparte, es obvio que este tipo o reilly es un payaso, ignorante. Como es posible que sea una personalidad ! Mal estan los creyentes si esto es lo mejor que pueden presentar.
@jll8520 "Fuck religion, its fucking retarded and so are the 'believers' it is just slowing down the advance of mankind."
Actually I don't believe it is slowing down the advance of mankind. I believe who ever holds onto religion will form their own devolved human race and in a million years, just like we have monkeys and humans today, we'll have Christian blobs (shit for brains) and super intelligent people.
Wow, Bill is a fucking idiot. Christianity teaches to love one another and will bring us towards a peaceful civilization? So, that's why Christianity (and religion) has caused more war, death, and destruction than anything else. That's why it preaches fear and brainwashes people to do "good" or else they'll burn in hell. "Religion is a way of controlling and keeping people in line and it's one more thing that holds us back as a species." -George Carlin
Richard Dawkins is right. Science tops Religion. Science is about advancing our knowledge about what's out there. Religion is above anything, a safety net for the insane. A place where people go when they're on their last limbs or when they become or have always been intellectually incapable of facing their own problems.
I once came home to find my garage door pried open and a crowbar discarded nearby in the grass. Nothing was missing, but there were also no fingerprints or leads to follow in piecing together what exactly went on while I was at work. I suppose I will never know, so I must turn to the conclusion that Jesus was trying to rob me. I am at a loss to explain the scenerio using logic, and yet I have no evidence to the contrary that the Lord in human form was not the culprit.
It is because of people like O'Reilly that my faith of Christianity is given a bad rap. I really just wish we could get someone in the media to represent the level-headed Christians who are willing to hear other arguments and not just say, "Jesus exists. End of story. You can't argue it." I honestly think if intelligent Christians were brought into the media and given a chance to respectfully debate with those of other faiths, or lack thereof, instead of shouting at them, we might get somewhere.
I honestly think Bill O'Reilly is probably one of the most closed-minded, stubborn men living today.
A journalist trying to provoke an Oxford biologist into an argument on how to teach science in the classroom.
He says 'Present all the alternatives,' fair enough. But here's the problem Bill. Science tests every theory until there is only the best standing theory left. So in the case of teaching all aspects of science, he doesn't realize, there is only the best current theory standing.
Bill O'Reilly: stupid fuck. We are in the start of the techo. revolution. And no, we are not civilized yet. There are no wars,hunger and poor people in a global civilized society.
It's facism to print religous beliefs in a science book.
Bill is not an idiot. He's a very smart, calculating, and manipulative man. I'm 100% sure he knows he is wrong in pretty much wrong in every way. He also knows that the more wrong he is, the more likely it is that the majority of his idiot followers will continue watching the bullshit he puts on TV. He's appealing to the masses, and the masses like people to be like themselves. He's like Steven Colbert in a sense. He is almost always in character. I'd love to see Bill out of character.
I think Dawkins is such a legend because in the face of the utmost moronity, he remains mostly polite and calm. Personally, if I had an "execute human" button, I would have been pressing it like mad when O'Reilly started blathering on about presenting Christianity as part of a science class. Some people are too dumb and too dangerous to be allowed a public forum, and to hell with freedom of speech. O'Reilly should go back to burning books and witches.
Intelligent design can't be science because it's based on assuming and belief. Any scientific theory can only be proved with experimentation and/or previous evidence.
At High School I took both philosophy and religious education and would have had no problem in hearing about intelligent design there.
I also took physics, chemistry and biology but would have had a problem hearing of it there.
Intelligent design can't be science because it's based on assuming and belief. Any scientific theory can only be proved with experimentation and/or previous evidence.
At High School I took both philosophy and religious education and would have had no problem in hearing about intelligent design there.
I also took physics, chemistry and biology but would have had a problem hearing of it there.
Teach Science in science classes... science is a discipline based on proven fact and theories based upon those proven facts... science categorises a theory as a fact unproven, but a hypothesis that is logical given factual evidence (which grows all the time).
Intelligent design does not base it's unproven theories on the logical conclusion of factual evidence and requires religious belief (belief - fact = faith) and should be taught within a religious curriculum (along with every major faith).
@matbroomfield i don't think its a pure science class if you are talking about the origin of life and where we all came from - its all "opinions" (no 100% factual solution). in that case, both sides should be presented
@Gamermatt99 No, when we're talking about the origin of life in science class, we should discuss the current scientific hypotheses about the origin of life, I'm afraid that religious perspectives have no place in science class until some empirical evidence is presented for them.
@0mniaV1nc1t regarding the origin of life - intelligent design is a one theory, and evolution is another theory - both require "faith," both are controversal, both should be presented.
@Gamermatt99 Again, this is where you're wrong. Intelligent design is not supported by any empirical or experimental evidence, it's just a religious dogma. There are several legitimate hypotheses about the origin of life which are supported by varying degrees of scientific evidence. And if we're talking about biodiversity, there's only one game in town, and that's the theory of evolution.
@0mniaV1nc1t intelligent design inherently doesn't offer scientific evidence (how could it, other than writings by people in the past?)... but it is a theory of the origin of life, just like evolution/others. how could there be any empirical evidence of any origin of life if you aren't able to recreate it?
@Gamermatt99 In which case it's not part of scientific discourse - "that which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence," and all that. The hypotheses of abiogenesis actually have some grounding in experimental evidence and our current understanding of molecular biology.
@Gamermatt99 The origins of the universe are not taught as fact, but they are taught as best working hypothesis based on observable evidence. Merely because yoyu can't see or hold something does not mean it is not science. That's the basis of the scientific method, whereas religion is based upon faith and the often disprovable stories of people thousands of years ago.
@matbroomfield regarding the origin of life - intelligent design is a one theory, and evolution is another theory - both require "faith," both are controversal, both should be presented.
@dreigel411Vin Your comment doesn't even make sense. Scientists have hypothese - theories - based upon measurements and observations. They are not assumptions, they are based upon tangible evidence, or inferred from known knowledge. Sure they are often wrong - which is why a lot of their theories of origin are just that - theories. But the evidence for evolution is pretty overwhelming now. Only a fool would believe in creation with absolutrely no evidence, over evolution.
@dreigel411Vin There are not enough hours in the day to deal with your level of stupidy or denial. Go do the research yourself - there are millions of words written on the subject, enough confirmed research to fill a library, millions of fossils, loads of biological and geological studies, and dozens of documentaries. None of which will convince you, because you're delusional.
@dreigel411Vin It's a typical answer because it continues to be true. If you wilfully ignore demonstrable, repeatable evidence in favour of a bunch of bronze ae story, you ARE just being dumb.
@dreigel411Vin What?! You're rambling. "There's no such thing as delusional"? Why was the word invented then? To describe a state of mind that doesn't exist? You can be a product of evolution and be delusional. Charles Manson is completely delusional, but he is as much a product of evilution as anybody.
@matbroomfield I have one more thing to say to you since you are the type to name call and run. Thomas Edison was a scientist, the Wright brothers were scientists. Dawkins is an assumptionist. If you took out all his presumtions statements like…”Suppose we start with a single cell with a sheath light sensitive cells (youtube Eye,god?)…Suppose? Where is proof of a sheath of light sensitive cells….you have an assumption..like God dun it....Dawkins is delusional 'Id say
@dreigel411Vin Oh FFS, the fact that Dawkins uses the term "suppose" does not mean that the things he suggests do not exist. He already demonstrated that all of the stages of vision, including the sheath of light sensitive cells, exist in sea creatures, right now, today. As usual, a Christian resorting to semantics and word games not facts. This is why people insult you and leave: because you are incapable of logical discussion without resorting to these tactics.
@dreigel411Vin You continue to throw out the challenges and the claims without disproving the facts. We can point to currently living creatures that illustrate every step of Dawkin's illustration of the development of an eye. That's not an assumption. That is demonstrable evidence of the credibility of his theories. Stop your silly semantic word games and man up with some disproof. You can mischaracterise logic and the scientific method any way you like, but it proves nothing.
@dreigel411Vin There is not a single piece of definitive proof - there's an entire 1 million year trail of it. All of the evolutionary steps of man, and many other animals. And of course YOU are not offering proof, because there is none.
@matbroomfield We can point to currently living creatures that illustrate every step of Dawkin's illustration of the development of an eye.....Eh no you can not..lol
@dreigel411Vin I'm not a biologist. I can't conclusively prove this to you. I would go away and research each and every creature and shove it down your stupid throat, but even whilst you're choking on it, you'd still be denying it. However, Dawkins IS an evolutionary biologist, and he says these creatures DO exist. Watch his video the blind watchmaker here youtube.com/watch?v=lRQ7SaZ4wfs. I tire of your foolishness. You are simply too moronic to debate with.
@matbroomfield Yeah you are probably right and I do apologize for not being more kind. However, being a Christian doesn’t not equate to being a door mat either. I wish I could make you understand how amazing God’s love is, I cannot so I will leave that to Him.
@dreigel411Vin I'd have a better chance of believing it, if those people who were the most vocal about being christians were better examples of the virtues espoused by their faith. I've been a passionate youtube atheist for about a year, and in all that time I can only think of two christians I can respect in spite of their beliefs because they practice what they preach - they are mannerly, compassionate, patient, and above all, intellectually honest.
@matbroomfield It's hard to judge someone over the net. That therein lays the difference; there would never be chance for me believing in evolution no matter how nice. Most atheists are condescending anyway, mention Jesus and you’re an instant dumbass. 95% of Christian is genuine…there in fact some crazies out there…just like atheists. But to me being an atheist, I would have this sense of hopelessness. I came from nothing and mean nothing and will die nothing…just not for me.
@dreigel411Vin I think that the internet reveals a person's TRUE personality free of the constraints of a potential smack in the face. The reason atheists are hostile is because they see just how much theism has wrecked our existence. Theism should be treated like ebola of the mind. That you get treated like a dumbass is because anyone who discards reason is hard tto take seriously. The conflict for me is when theists are personally likeable, but their beliefs are hateful.
@matbroomfield We could go on forever with this, because Christians see just how mush atheism is ruining our society. Let’s face it, at its core we are an accident with no meaning. Christians are accused of lying but then an atheist will use the same core values of that Christian to make that accusation. When in fact if what the atheist is saying is true, lying would not matter. It cheapens life…ie abortion, devalues self-worth and teaches selfish behavior.
@dreigel411Vin Ah, correcting my spelling as well now. Well done - what a compelling refutation of my arguments. It's pathetic. Instead of tackling the substance and facts, you attack my spelling. This is the kind of misdirection that is all too common from you "honourable" christians. Your feeble attempts to redirect focus from your lack of evidence and your adolescent beliefs accomplishes nothing, and your stupidity stands as transparent as it did before.
Fascists seek rejuvenation of their nation based on commitment to an organic national community where its individuals are united together as one people in national identity by suprapersonal connections of ancestry, culture, and blood through a totalitarian single-party state that seeks the mass mobilization of a nation through discipline, indoctrination, physical education, and eugenics.
Sounds like an exact definition of Christianity to me.
@youthank8 If jesus appeared to me, the first question I would ask, is "Why do you allow all this horribleness to happen?" If he couldn't give a reasonable answer I would despise him.
Religion is not science and should not be treated as such. Science is there for us to learn and advance our knowledge base, and religion (in my opinion) is there to enhance our lives on a different level. The two are fundamentally different things.
I respect Atheism greatly as I was once an Atheist myself, and I suggest that people (like me) who believe there's more to existence than what we see and hear should be questioning things more, instead of blindly following the Bible, Qur'an, or Torah.
@bored1980 Maybe your perception of religion is similar to the one of spirituality, the one that people like Sam Harris believe is perfectly separable from faith. Personally, i agree with him that we don't need to blindly accept dated moral codes, like the Bible or the Qur'an, to achieve mystical experiences.
What an idiot. Science belongs in a science class, religion belongs in church or a religious studies class. If you study one religion at school, you have to study them all.
Bill o'reilly is ignorant, uneducated and has NO idea what he is talking about. Public schools are funded by tax money, BY THE GOVERNMENT, so therefore any kind of religion should not be taught in the class room because that would violate the separation of church and state, end of story, if you would like your children to be undereducated in science and how the universe actually works feel free to send them to private school where they can learn whatever you pay the teachers to "teach" them.
Bill O'Reilly is a moron. I am an atheist, but on his topic of teaching religion in a science class- It's ridiculous. Learn science in a science class, and if you would like to learn religion, go to church or seminary or something along those lines. Religion is not science and never will be.
@coreylyo Oh I am sorry that I have been brought up in a state where grammar isn't commonly used. But anyways, i'm sorry that I can't be perfect like you.
i am afraid to hit the thumbs up button...if i hit the "thumbs up" button, does that mean i agree with oreilly? if i hit the "down button" does it mean i disagree with dawkins? oreilly cant be that dumb. science has not furthered the human condition? what?????
Oh that's the greatest question of all. If we knew the answer to that we'd know everything right? I never said "he" was just there....that's not a logical response, and once again you've dodged the question. You think that all of the matter in the Universe was simple "there" and then exploded into what we have today? Ridiculous! Why? What caused the Big Bang? Your answer is simply asking another question, which is no answer at all!
@DickLodge68 Not all Atheists are intolerant to other ppls beliefs most atheist dont even talk about it because of potential backlash and the dont care what you think and the ones that do get involved in the argrement are prob concern with what ppl.do in the name of religion so if they can disprove god then they belief the world will be a safer placedo
You know, I'm Atheist myself but Richard, seriously, you have to stop trying to convince somebody that doesn't want to be convinced even though he's wrong.
It's like trying to talk with a dog barking at him: it's not just hopeless, it also make you look as stupid as him. Trust me, it's not worth it.
Here's the problem...Dawkins is thinking it's Christians vs. scientists. Religion is a man-made belief to understand existence. Let's say the Big Band happened...as it likely did. That does not explain where all of the matter in the Universe came from. It had to come from somewhere! And that's the question no atheist can explain. My simple conclusion is there must be a higher power or "God". But atheists do everything they can to try to disprove a God....why?
@numberman52 What is to figure out? That all of the matter in the Universe came from someplace? You cannot get something from nothing...unless it was created. Pretty simple, the way I see it. It's not magic...it's a power/force/God greater than ourselves.
@numberman52 Wow...lot's of "we's". Instead of trying to disprove a "God", why not just give a theory instead of rambling on with a bunch of bullshit? You can't. I don't think you are capable of giving any theory. But, I'm all ears. Stop the bullshit and answer the question. Where did all the matter in the Universe come from?
@numberman52 I came to my conclusion..the same one Einstein did. I don't need to prove or disprove anything to you. You have given nothing...not even a theory. Instead of trying to disprove a "God" maybe think about it more and just answer the question? You won't. I'm not a religious person....as blinded as you may think they are, take a look in the mirror. For some strange reason you are afraid of a God or supreme being, or something greater than you! That's arrogant and ridiculous!
@numberman52 Do you actually read what others say, or just spew nonsense at random? I believe in a higher power than ourselves. That isn't religion. Religion is fellowship, faith, and a common bond between humans, on the most part to better their lives. Not me! I came to the simple conclusion there must be a God...and you have nothing! You still keep asking a question from a question. ANSWER THE FUCKING QUESTION!!!!
@DickLodge68 what is this fucking question you keep going on about? where did everything come from? as i said you moron we dont know and neither do you
so tell me something whats the difference between your magic man and a unicorn?
@numberman52 Oh, there is no difference between a magic unicorn, spaghetti monster, or a "God" that created all the matter in the universe. Here's the difference...I'm willing to believe in such because there is no other explanation. You simply won't and cannot come up with any other answer to the question.
@DickLodge68 You say "you cannot get something from nothing unless it was created". Who exactly created "god" then? where did he come out of? If your response to this is that "well he was just there, we can't explain where he came from because he is so big and great" then why can't the same be said about the universe?
I know this will make a lot of people happy; I have posted all I have to say. I am neither a preacher nor a scientist but like everyone, I had questions. I inspected methods, results and what is factual and what is presumptuous. Through deductive reasoning and simple logic I came to my OWN conclusion. It might be unpopular but it’s my own conclusion. My challenge to you all is to think for yourself and dig deeper.
its that attitude of because i dont know im just going to pick what ever is out there, not so much raising a logical thought towards the fact that My belief is based on the sppagetti monster and if some on has a more logical point of view Im going to dismiss it like a child and ninunanu you are a poopy head and i just need to not understand your real accurate scientific studies cuz my magic works better. Nice journalism stupid. when you get cancer where are you going the priest or a doctor?
@dreigel411Vin no.. you didnt bother to try and understand. From what it looks like, using logic, he most likely is reffering to the scientific method..
what im trying to say is Bill is ignorant on both sides of the discusion so he is going to side with the one he is indoctranated with, without even giving the other side serious consideration. The evolution side shows more truth than mythological stories of any book of religion
I am throwing in with Jesus? FTF! Apart from 4 short stories called the gospels (wriiten 80 years after his life time) What proof is there that Jesus was real?
God is a fictitious fabrication devised by human beings for power and control. Man needs support for his fears and is open to domination by theologian authoritarian figures. Mankind hasn't the intellectual capacity to discern the existence of a god or not. It's all thoughtless conjecture.
My God is the only real one because this religion tells me so.
If others do not know answers to questions, it is always answered with God.
This divine knowledge of the universe allows me to look down on people, especially over the internet and gloat at their ignorance.
When I pray to get a mortgage and receive one, that's proof of God. I can disregard the millions of children dying in agony as long as he answers my prayers.
i recognize theres a good chance im just feeding the troll, but ill continue anyway
while you can find lots of evidence for evolution in reputable scientific journals, even completely disproving evolution does not constitute evidence for creationism. again, if we don't know, it doesn't mean "god did it," it means we don't know. this is a typical god of the gaps argument and is simply arguing from ignorance
@10YNWA10 Evidence that is based on assumption. Like knowing if decay rates have always been constant - we don't know
Evidence that was based on ignorance - Hesperopithecus a.k.a. Nebraska man was based on a single tooth, which was that of a type of pig native to Paraguay.
@10YNWA10 Evolution is more presumptuous than religion – Faith based as well. I cannot base my life on such contradiction. If you would truthfully be more challenging of the evidence that has (or has not been found) you could then start to think for yourself. But, it’s so much more fun to get on the internet and poke fun at spiritual people. Ignorant Jesus Freaks! Right?
Where is the faith at? do you know how many times a hypothasis gets thown out before it becomes a theory? Can you imagine if the medical comunity did like the christian religion and held on to ancient manuscipts to cure cancer and not did reserch and develop new process and methods we would still be bleeding people and using leeches to cure cancer. Its time to put the bible where it suppose to be in the fiction part of the library next to zeus and mithrus and all the other fakes gods
@pana376 Cancer is not an idea, hypothesis or a theory, it is a physical disease. Late in 2007 doctors performed the first surgeries without making any incisions. People will be posting sometime in the future “can you believe we actually used to cut people open to do surgery.” Not a good example at all. As for the Bible, over 6 Billion have been printed (in various languages) better be an awfully big library!
hilarious. quite humiliating really. guy starts shouting in anger and ignorance... how cool is that? and don't tell me i'm arrogant when you believe the universe was created for you.
looneYeah 52 minutes ago 2
Title should have been "Ignorant American confronts British Scientist and ignores answers".
Regnberg 4 hours ago
It's pretty pathetic that people think we need Christianity in order to behave ethically. People learned not to kill and screw each other over way before this religion. Those are behaviors that are inherent because they're bioevolutionarily useful to our survival.
TheArcaneMaster 9 hours ago
No bill! please don't throw in with science. Atheists don't want you either.
OrangeMcblue 14 hours ago
So bill wants to be told a story. Okay. There once was a magical unicorn called Pinkie. He played gayly all day in the fields of empty space before the universe was created. Anyway, one day he ate a particularly spicy burrito from a space taco stand run by Pablo the donkey. This burrito upset Pinkie's tummy so much he shat out a torrent of molten unicorn shit and thus the universe was created. Ironically this shit was also used to create Christianity. The end. ALL HAIL PINKIE.
Adroitism 18 hours ago
Why do theists think that the constitution is a popularity contest? Just because, for sake of argument, a high school has more Christian students than Atheist ones, does NOT mean they then have the right to ignore the 1st amendment which covers seperation of church and state. Sorry Bill, it doesn't work that way.
PappeH 1 day ago
here`s the problem bill, you say that jesus is loving + peaceful, the son of god.it is taught in christianity + says in the bible, god is jesus, they are one and the same. well in leviticus god tells people to stone to death anyone wearing an item of clothing made out of 2 different materials (not very loving). as god is jesus + they are one and the same, his father, both without sin, you can not remove jesus from these barbaric actions. does he still sound peaceful???
thetruth8720 1 day ago
"FASCISM?!"
ROLNIKxPL 1 day ago
Can I just say that Bill is very wrong in saying that there are more believers (in Christianity) than there are non-believers. Believers in other religions also count as "nonbelievers", and all together, they do outnumber Christians. There's a lot more wrong with what he said, but there's really no point in going into it.
Vdawgrun 1 day ago
What happens if we did have a JESUS world. It would be alot more socialistic than these conservatives would ever allow. LOL
lorisam314 2 days ago
clearly anyone with any moral sense can tell which side is just and which isn't. Christians should be rational, loving one another is part of rationality. All the rest is guidelines and "arguable history".
marvin140100 2 days ago
Since when did Youtube become so anti-Christianity? I guess it's the thing to do these days. People are entitled to their opinion, but the sheeple who go video to video and copy and paste other non believers posts is petty. If you're saying things just for the sake of being a follower, by all means, have away at it. But the fact that the faith probably hasn't hurt these people who speak so vehemently against it is what bugs me, I'm not the most religious person, but stupidity is stupidity.
krazygreen 2 days ago
"My thesis is that if everyone followed the teachings of Jesus Christ then we would have peace on earth." In that case my thesis is that if everyone followed the teachings of My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic and Star Trek we would have peace on earth.
TheRastaBadger 2 days ago
george carlin says: THIS GUY IS FUCKING STUPID!
cerattos209 2 days ago
yelling doesn't mean you are correct billy
shvm05 3 days ago
wow what a contrast between levels of intelligence. i can kind of understand why o'reilly maintains his forward attitude and loud voice... it's his only defense
mrmkowals2 3 days ago
why does bill oreilly even bother having guests? he constantly interrupts them before they can make any semblance of a point, his crew keeps his mic several decibels higher than the guest and perhaps worst of all he's very condescending...that "smarter than you" remark...I can't even believe for a second that he had the nerve to say that to an internationally renowned oxford professor...
manifestgtr 3 days ago
Dejando el asunto de la religion aparte, es obvio que este tipo o reilly es un payaso, ignorante. Como es posible que sea una personalidad ! Mal estan los creyentes si esto es lo mejor que pueden presentar.
renacuajo64 3 days ago
Bill O'reilly is the ultimate troll.
SkateObsession 3 days ago 9
dawkins has an amazing voice. his cool.
TopGame123 3 days ago
Dawkins arguing with O'Reilly is like a man arguing with a worm.
inEarthCEO 3 days ago
I hope Bill gets shot by a Christian.
inEarthCEO 3 days ago
Bill O'Reilly thinks that if everyone followed teachings of Jesus, the world would be a better place. hmm..
75% of the US population are Christian.
10% of the US population are Atheist.
Over 75% of the US prison population are Christian (they were Christian before ending up in prison).
Less than 0.25% of the US prison population are Atheist.
And the majority of the rest believe in some other gods.
Yep, the world would be a better place indeed.
inEarthCEO 3 days ago
Hahaha Catholicism, a nearly 2000 year old scam used by an Italian child
Molester to scare people in to doing what he says and giving him money to pay for
His luxury and stupid 'churches'
Fuck religion, its fucking retarded and so are the 'believers' it is just slowing down the advance of mankind.
jll8520 3 days ago
@jll8520 "Fuck religion, its fucking retarded and so are the 'believers' it is just slowing down the advance of mankind."
Actually I don't believe it is slowing down the advance of mankind. I believe who ever holds onto religion will form their own devolved human race and in a million years, just like we have monkeys and humans today, we'll have Christian blobs (shit for brains) and super intelligent people.
inEarthCEO 3 days ago
@inEarthCEO totally agree. Ever heard of the Dark Ages?
marvin140100 2 days ago
Wow, Bill is a fucking idiot. Christianity teaches to love one another and will bring us towards a peaceful civilization? So, that's why Christianity (and religion) has caused more war, death, and destruction than anything else. That's why it preaches fear and brainwashes people to do "good" or else they'll burn in hell. "Religion is a way of controlling and keeping people in line and it's one more thing that holds us back as a species." -George Carlin
hebewster 4 days ago 12
Richard Dawkins is right. Science tops Religion. Science is about advancing our knowledge about what's out there. Religion is above anything, a safety net for the insane. A place where people go when they're on their last limbs or when they become or have always been intellectually incapable of facing their own problems.
stephanooblus 4 days ago
I LOL'ed so hard at Dawkin's reaction "fascism?!?"
lol he was so confused by O'reilly's stupidity
TheJulsisCool 4 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The look on Dawkin's face as soon a O'Reilly said "Science doesn't advance us morally."...
Priceless. You can just see the gears turning: "How on earth did Corky Thatcher end up with a news program?!?"
And I feel the same.
ProblemHonorStudent 4 days ago
I once came home to find my garage door pried open and a crowbar discarded nearby in the grass. Nothing was missing, but there were also no fingerprints or leads to follow in piecing together what exactly went on while I was at work. I suppose I will never know, so I must turn to the conclusion that Jesus was trying to rob me. I am at a loss to explain the scenerio using logic, and yet I have no evidence to the contrary that the Lord in human form was not the culprit.
JGNonsense 4 days ago 2
We should teach satanic creation in public schools!
xxxcrowwingsxxx 4 days ago
@xxxcrowwingsxxx im assuming your trolling, if not then im putting you in the o'reilly category
CyclonexxxIce 3 days ago
It is because of people like O'Reilly that my faith of Christianity is given a bad rap. I really just wish we could get someone in the media to represent the level-headed Christians who are willing to hear other arguments and not just say, "Jesus exists. End of story. You can't argue it." I honestly think if intelligent Christians were brought into the media and given a chance to respectfully debate with those of other faiths, or lack thereof, instead of shouting at them, we might get somewhere.
CapnSammich 4 days ago
I honestly think Bill O'Reilly is probably one of the most closed-minded, stubborn men living today.
A journalist trying to provoke an Oxford biologist into an argument on how to teach science in the classroom.
He says 'Present all the alternatives,' fair enough. But here's the problem Bill. Science tests every theory until there is only the best standing theory left. So in the case of teaching all aspects of science, he doesn't realize, there is only the best current theory standing.
JoeBrenan 5 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Bill O'Reilly: stupid fuck. We are in the start of the techo. revolution. And no, we are not civilized yet. There are no wars,hunger and poor people in a global civilized society.
It's facism to print religous beliefs in a science book.
m4raak 5 days ago
Comment removed
m4raak 5 days ago
why Oreilly is on tv isretarded
Tris67 5 days ago
Bill is not an idiot. He's a very smart, calculating, and manipulative man. I'm 100% sure he knows he is wrong in pretty much wrong in every way. He also knows that the more wrong he is, the more likely it is that the majority of his idiot followers will continue watching the bullshit he puts on TV. He's appealing to the masses, and the masses like people to be like themselves. He's like Steven Colbert in a sense. He is almost always in character. I'd love to see Bill out of character.
skylineaddict 6 days ago
I like how Bill O'Reilly is busy saying how science isn't good whilst talking directly to millions of people through a magic glowing box.
TheGMaster111 6 days ago
I think Dawkins is such a legend because in the face of the utmost moronity, he remains mostly polite and calm. Personally, if I had an "execute human" button, I would have been pressing it like mad when O'Reilly started blathering on about presenting Christianity as part of a science class. Some people are too dumb and too dangerous to be allowed a public forum, and to hell with freedom of speech. O'Reilly should go back to burning books and witches.
matbroomfield 6 days ago
We can teach Christianity in science classes when we can teach Evolution in churches.
hj7397 6 days ago
@hj7397 Very nicely put! Well played good sir!
matbroomfield 6 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Intelligent design can't be science because it's based on assuming and belief. Any scientific theory can only be proved with experimentation and/or previous evidence.
At High School I took both philosophy and religious education and would have had no problem in hearing about intelligent design there.
I also took physics, chemistry and biology but would have had a problem hearing of it there.
jackflash341 6 days ago
Intelligent design can't be science because it's based on assuming and belief. Any scientific theory can only be proved with experimentation and/or previous evidence.
At High School I took both philosophy and religious education and would have had no problem in hearing about intelligent design there.
I also took physics, chemistry and biology but would have had a problem hearing of it there.
jackflash341 6 days ago
Teach Science in science classes... science is a discipline based on proven fact and theories based upon those proven facts... science categorises a theory as a fact unproven, but a hypothesis that is logical given factual evidence (which grows all the time).
Intelligent design does not base it's unproven theories on the logical conclusion of factual evidence and requires religious belief (belief - fact = faith) and should be taught within a religious curriculum (along with every major faith).
TheMrPMullins 6 days ago
sometimes when i need a pick me up i type into google: "is Bill O'Reilly dead yet?"
hazzabeen 1 week ago 9
haha love how he lectures him "stop shouting at me"
Dawkins ftw.
TheRubsi 1 week ago 6
I HATE him, I fucking HATE him. O'Reilly is an imbecile! "That's fascism!" - He can't be serious!!??
shawnanthony1992 1 week ago
i don't think either side should force it's opinion upon others. all information should be presented, but force should not be used
Gamermatt99 1 week ago
@Gamermatt99 That's true, but the OPINIONS of creationists have no place is a SCIENCE class.
matbroomfield 6 days ago
@matbroomfield i don't think its a pure science class if you are talking about the origin of life and where we all came from - its all "opinions" (no 100% factual solution). in that case, both sides should be presented
Gamermatt99 6 days ago
@Gamermatt99 No, when we're talking about the origin of life in science class, we should discuss the current scientific hypotheses about the origin of life, I'm afraid that religious perspectives have no place in science class until some empirical evidence is presented for them.
0mniaV1nc1t 6 days ago
@0mniaV1nc1t regarding the origin of life - intelligent design is a one theory, and evolution is another theory - both require "faith," both are controversal, both should be presented.
Gamermatt99 6 days ago
@Gamermatt99 Again, this is where you're wrong. Intelligent design is not supported by any empirical or experimental evidence, it's just a religious dogma. There are several legitimate hypotheses about the origin of life which are supported by varying degrees of scientific evidence. And if we're talking about biodiversity, there's only one game in town, and that's the theory of evolution.
0mniaV1nc1t 5 days ago
@0mniaV1nc1t intelligent design inherently doesn't offer scientific evidence (how could it, other than writings by people in the past?)... but it is a theory of the origin of life, just like evolution/others. how could there be any empirical evidence of any origin of life if you aren't able to recreate it?
Gamermatt99 5 days ago
@Gamermatt99 In which case it's not part of scientific discourse - "that which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence," and all that. The hypotheses of abiogenesis actually have some grounding in experimental evidence and our current understanding of molecular biology.
0mniaV1nc1t 4 days ago
@0mniaV1nc1t
The late C. Hitchens, if I'm not mistaken. Here's another, if I may:
"Gravity is a theory. It is also a fact. Anyone who disagrees is invited to jump out a ten story window." -- R. Dawkins
XD
recalibration 3 days ago
@Gamermatt99 The origins of the universe are not taught as fact, but they are taught as best working hypothesis based on observable evidence. Merely because yoyu can't see or hold something does not mean it is not science. That's the basis of the scientific method, whereas religion is based upon faith and the often disprovable stories of people thousands of years ago.
matbroomfield 6 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@matbroomfield regarding the origin of life - intelligent design is a one theory, and evolution is another theory - both require "faith," both are controversal, both should be presented.
Gamermatt99 6 days ago
@matbroomfield Neither do assumptions of scientist
dreigel411Vin 6 days ago
@dreigel411Vin Your comment doesn't even make sense. Scientists have hypothese - theories - based upon measurements and observations. They are not assumptions, they are based upon tangible evidence, or inferred from known knowledge. Sure they are often wrong - which is why a lot of their theories of origin are just that - theories. But the evidence for evolution is pretty overwhelming now. Only a fool would believe in creation with absolutrely no evidence, over evolution.
matbroomfield 6 days ago
@matbroomfield Evolution is pretty overwhelming now? Give me empirical proof?
dreigel411Vin 6 days ago
@dreigel411Vin There are not enough hours in the day to deal with your level of stupidy or denial. Go do the research yourself - there are millions of words written on the subject, enough confirmed research to fill a library, millions of fossils, loads of biological and geological studies, and dozens of documentaries. None of which will convince you, because you're delusional.
matbroomfield 6 days ago
@matbroomfield yep typical answer..."yous is just dumb" ....NEXT!
dreigel411Vin 6 days ago
@dreigel411Vin It's a typical answer because it continues to be true. If you wilfully ignore demonstrable, repeatable evidence in favour of a bunch of bronze ae story, you ARE just being dumb.
matbroomfield 5 days ago
@matbroomfield ok it's true...you have convinced me with all of the evidence..so we'er done...goodbye
dreigel411Vin 5 days ago
@matbroomfield I am a product of evolution, there is no such thing as delusional
dreigel411Vin 6 days ago
@dreigel411Vin What?! You're rambling. "There's no such thing as delusional"? Why was the word invented then? To describe a state of mind that doesn't exist? You can be a product of evolution and be delusional. Charles Manson is completely delusional, but he is as much a product of evilution as anybody.
matbroomfield 6 days ago
@matbroomfield I have one more thing to say to you since you are the type to name call and run. Thomas Edison was a scientist, the Wright brothers were scientists. Dawkins is an assumptionist. If you took out all his presumtions statements like…”Suppose we start with a single cell with a sheath light sensitive cells (youtube Eye,god?)…Suppose? Where is proof of a sheath of light sensitive cells….you have an assumption..like God dun it....Dawkins is delusional 'Id say
dreigel411Vin 6 days ago
@dreigel411Vin Oh FFS, the fact that Dawkins uses the term "suppose" does not mean that the things he suggests do not exist. He already demonstrated that all of the stages of vision, including the sheath of light sensitive cells, exist in sea creatures, right now, today. As usual, a Christian resorting to semantics and word games not facts. This is why people insult you and leave: because you are incapable of logical discussion without resorting to these tactics.
matbroomfield 6 days ago
@matbroomfield So ..you're an assumptionist too then. typical.
dreigel411Vin 6 days ago
@dreigel411Vin You continue to throw out the challenges and the claims without disproving the facts. We can point to currently living creatures that illustrate every step of Dawkin's illustration of the development of an eye. That's not an assumption. That is demonstrable evidence of the credibility of his theories. Stop your silly semantic word games and man up with some disproof. You can mischaracterise logic and the scientific method any way you like, but it proves nothing.
matbroomfield 5 days ago
@matbroomfield I am not offering any proof. I am asking for it. just one piece of difinative proof positive...please.
dreigel411Vin 5 days ago
@dreigel411Vin There is not a single piece of definitive proof - there's an entire 1 million year trail of it. All of the evolutionary steps of man, and many other animals. And of course YOU are not offering proof, because there is none.
matbroomfield 5 days ago
@matbroomfield yeah ok typical....we're done...don't respond to me anymore please
dreigel411Vin 5 days ago
@matbroomfield We can point to currently living creatures that illustrate every step of Dawkin's illustration of the development of an eye.....Eh no you can not..lol
dreigel411Vin 5 days ago
@dreigel411Vin I'm not a biologist. I can't conclusively prove this to you. I would go away and research each and every creature and shove it down your stupid throat, but even whilst you're choking on it, you'd still be denying it. However, Dawkins IS an evolutionary biologist, and he says these creatures DO exist. Watch his video the blind watchmaker here youtube.com/watch?v=lRQ7SaZ4wfs. I tire of your foolishness. You are simply too moronic to debate with.
matbroomfield 5 days ago
@matbroomfield Heavy sigh…I’ve watched and it….its presumptuous and leads to nowhere. Take care.
dreigel411Vin 5 days ago
@dreigel411Vin "Take care" - that's the first christian thing you've said since we started debating. You take care too.
matbroomfield 5 days ago
@matbroomfield Yeah you are probably right and I do apologize for not being more kind. However, being a Christian doesn’t not equate to being a door mat either. I wish I could make you understand how amazing God’s love is, I cannot so I will leave that to Him.
dreigel411Vin 5 days ago
@dreigel411Vin I'd have a better chance of believing it, if those people who were the most vocal about being christians were better examples of the virtues espoused by their faith. I've been a passionate youtube atheist for about a year, and in all that time I can only think of two christians I can respect in spite of their beliefs because they practice what they preach - they are mannerly, compassionate, patient, and above all, intellectually honest.
matbroomfield 5 days ago
@matbroomfield It's hard to judge someone over the net. That therein lays the difference; there would never be chance for me believing in evolution no matter how nice. Most atheists are condescending anyway, mention Jesus and you’re an instant dumbass. 95% of Christian is genuine…there in fact some crazies out there…just like atheists. But to me being an atheist, I would have this sense of hopelessness. I came from nothing and mean nothing and will die nothing…just not for me.
dreigel411Vin 5 days ago
@dreigel411Vin I think that the internet reveals a person's TRUE personality free of the constraints of a potential smack in the face. The reason atheists are hostile is because they see just how much theism has wrecked our existence. Theism should be treated like ebola of the mind. That you get treated like a dumbass is because anyone who discards reason is hard tto take seriously. The conflict for me is when theists are personally likeable, but their beliefs are hateful.
matbroomfield 5 days ago
@matbroomfield We could go on forever with this, because Christians see just how mush atheism is ruining our society. Let’s face it, at its core we are an accident with no meaning. Christians are accused of lying but then an atheist will use the same core values of that Christian to make that accusation. When in fact if what the atheist is saying is true, lying would not matter. It cheapens life…ie abortion, devalues self-worth and teaches selfish behavior.
dreigel411Vin 5 days ago
@dreigel411Vin
So you're saying that as long as there is no reward for doing good it doesn't matter, seriously? Do you have a problem telling right from wrong?
Kinvariz123 5 days ago
@dreigel411Vin It's called the Fossil Record and Genetics. Look them up.
Spiderpope 5 days ago
@Spiderpope Now Hey,,,,there is an idea...lol..
dreigel411Vin 5 days ago
@matbroomfield I think you mean a hypothesis - a proposition assumed as a premise in an argument.
dreigel411Vin 6 days ago
@dreigel411Vin Ah, correcting my spelling as well now. Well done - what a compelling refutation of my arguments. It's pathetic. Instead of tackling the substance and facts, you attack my spelling. This is the kind of misdirection that is all too common from you "honourable" christians. Your feeble attempts to redirect focus from your lack of evidence and your adolescent beliefs accomplishes nothing, and your stupidity stands as transparent as it did before.
matbroomfield 6 days ago
I love how his face is like "is this guy fucking kidding me" XDD
RandomPonyProduction 1 week ago
Fascists seek rejuvenation of their nation based on commitment to an organic national community where its individuals are united together as one people in national identity by suprapersonal connections of ancestry, culture, and blood through a totalitarian single-party state that seeks the mass mobilization of a nation through discipline, indoctrination, physical education, and eugenics.
Sounds like an exact definition of Christianity to me.
youthank8 1 week ago
that's fascism?
seriously bill?
how much dick do you suck?
youthank8 1 week ago
Bill O'Reilly, I don't care if Jesus appeared to me and told me I would suffer in hell for all eternity if I hate you, I would still hate you.
youthank8 1 week ago
@youthank8 If jesus appeared to me, the first question I would ask, is "Why do you allow all this horribleness to happen?" If he couldn't give a reasonable answer I would despise him.
matbroomfield 6 days ago
Religion is not science and should not be treated as such. Science is there for us to learn and advance our knowledge base, and religion (in my opinion) is there to enhance our lives on a different level. The two are fundamentally different things.
I respect Atheism greatly as I was once an Atheist myself, and I suggest that people (like me) who believe there's more to existence than what we see and hear should be questioning things more, instead of blindly following the Bible, Qur'an, or Torah.
bored1980 1 week ago
@bored1980 Maybe your perception of religion is similar to the one of spirituality, the one that people like Sam Harris believe is perfectly separable from faith. Personally, i agree with him that we don't need to blindly accept dated moral codes, like the Bible or the Qur'an, to achieve mystical experiences.
kibo3232 1 week ago
What an idiot. Science belongs in a science class, religion belongs in church or a religious studies class. If you study one religion at school, you have to study them all.
slapehdiebass 1 week ago
Bill o'reilly is ignorant, uneducated and has NO idea what he is talking about. Public schools are funded by tax money, BY THE GOVERNMENT, so therefore any kind of religion should not be taught in the class room because that would violate the separation of church and state, end of story, if you would like your children to be undereducated in science and how the universe actually works feel free to send them to private school where they can learn whatever you pay the teachers to "teach" them.
pypaurora 1 week ago
Bill O'Reilly is a moron. I am an atheist, but on his topic of teaching religion in a science class- It's ridiculous. Learn science in a science class, and if you would like to learn religion, go to church or seminary or something along those lines. Religion is not science and never will be.
IntiChabert87 1 week ago
choose to believe?? haha i didn't know you could do that!
ikov 1 week ago
Do people in the US watch Fox?
Ravensteinzh 1 week ago
@Ravensteinzh a very small handful yes
squiddie96 1 week ago
@Ravensteinzh Unfortunately YES. Pity isn't it.
odinstreet 1 week ago
Do people in the US watch Fox?
Ravensteinzh 1 week ago
Bill O'Reilly is such a idiot.
Devialx10 1 week ago 27
@Devialx10, Such *AN idiot...
I agree but, please, don't comment for Non believers unless you can be intelligent about it. Thanks.
coreylyo 1 week ago
@coreylyo Look out! It's the grammar Nazi's on the march again. GTFO of here coreylyo. LOL
Yz7604 1 week ago
@Yz7604, more like the Ignorant police.
coreylyo 1 week ago
@coreylyo Ignorant is the perfect definition for you, indeed. I'd also like to add Pathetic. So again.. GTFO trollolol :D
Yz7604 1 week ago
@coreylyo Oh I am sorry that I have been brought up in a state where grammar isn't commonly used. But anyways, i'm sorry that I can't be perfect like you.
Devialx10 6 days ago
"You guys fftt
alqammd 1 week ago
So, we should teach about Jesus is science class? But christianity isn't science, so why the hell would you teach about it in a science class. Wtf.
PAC0SANCHEZ 1 week ago
'creative design', 'my thesis', 'smarter than you', he makes me laugh so much, i want to get him a dictionary though lol
Tekeydieb 1 week ago 11
Could O'Reily be a bigger asshole ???
zh1992 1 week ago
i am afraid to hit the thumbs up button...if i hit the "thumbs up" button, does that mean i agree with oreilly? if i hit the "down button" does it mean i disagree with dawkins? oreilly cant be that dumb. science has not furthered the human condition? what?????
robthefirefly 1 week ago
Dawkins expression at 1:40-1:50 is priceless.
jackthefrenchguy 1 week ago
If I ever see Bill O'Reilly, I will beat him into submission with a science textbook.
Darius135gease 1 week ago
"How did the moon get there?"
2ExistIsToDesist 1 week ago
Oh that's the greatest question of all. If we knew the answer to that we'd know everything right? I never said "he" was just there....that's not a logical response, and once again you've dodged the question. You think that all of the matter in the Universe was simple "there" and then exploded into what we have today? Ridiculous! Why? What caused the Big Bang? Your answer is simply asking another question, which is no answer at all!
DickLodge68 1 week ago
Fair play to Dawkins for keeping cool. This moron is making my blood boil.
adam4757 1 week ago
:)) i enjoy every interview with Bill O'Reilly and Richard Dawkins, funy as hell...no joke intended :))
radutrc1 1 week ago
god i hate that he uses "you guys"
theabcsofstds 1 week ago
"committed to atheism"
uuuuuh not a commitment, its fucking science. cold hard facts. cant stray from that shit or you're bull
theabcsofstds 1 week ago
@DickLodge68 Not all Atheists are intolerant to other ppls beliefs most atheist dont even talk about it because of potential backlash and the dont care what you think and the ones that do get involved in the argrement are prob concern with what ppl.do in the name of religion so if they can disprove god then they belief the world will be a safer placedo
crabmanAK 1 week ago
You know, I'm Atheist myself but Richard, seriously, you have to stop trying to convince somebody that doesn't want to be convinced even though he's wrong.
It's like trying to talk with a dog barking at him: it's not just hopeless, it also make you look as stupid as him. Trust me, it's not worth it.
UltimatePlayer000001 1 week ago
@UltimatePlayer000001
...but still, it does make a good laugh :))
radutrc1 1 week ago
Fuck, O'really is one goddamn numbskull.
Weswaswrite 1 week ago
Bill is an asshat
earlgreygaming 1 week ago
Here's the problem...Dawkins is thinking it's Christians vs. scientists. Religion is a man-made belief to understand existence. Let's say the Big Band happened...as it likely did. That does not explain where all of the matter in the Universe came from. It had to come from somewhere! And that's the question no atheist can explain. My simple conclusion is there must be a higher power or "God". But atheists do everything they can to try to disprove a God....why?
DickLodge68 1 week ago
@DickLodge68 do everything they can? lol we dont have to do anything to not believe in unprovable fairy tales
numberman52 1 week ago
@numberman52 Right...but you have no answer to anything. So instead of answering the question, you throw out more questions!
DickLodge68 1 week ago
@DickLodge68 the difference is we are still figuring it out while you think its magic haha
numberman52 1 week ago
@numberman52 What is to figure out? That all of the matter in the Universe came from someplace? You cannot get something from nothing...unless it was created. Pretty simple, the way I see it. It's not magic...it's a power/force/God greater than ourselves.
DickLodge68 1 week ago
@DickLodge68 "power/force/God" aka magic ahahah
numberman52 1 week ago
@numberman52 You have given nothing to explain it...other than wise-ass remarks. Hell, maybe it is magic...what's your call?
DickLodge68 1 week ago
@DickLodge68 i never said we knew only you did
we know we dont know and we also know you dont know either and think its magic
numberman52 1 week ago
@numberman52 Wow...lot's of "we's". Instead of trying to disprove a "God", why not just give a theory instead of rambling on with a bunch of bullshit? You can't. I don't think you are capable of giving any theory. But, I'm all ears. Stop the bullshit and answer the question. Where did all the matter in the Universe come from?
DickLodge68 1 week ago
@DickLodge68 as i said jackass we dont know and neither do you
nobody has to disprove anything youre making the claim he exists the burden of proof lies on you
numberman52 1 week ago
@numberman52 I came to my conclusion..the same one Einstein did. I don't need to prove or disprove anything to you. You have given nothing...not even a theory. Instead of trying to disprove a "God" maybe think about it more and just answer the question? You won't. I'm not a religious person....as blinded as you may think they are, take a look in the mirror. For some strange reason you are afraid of a God or supreme being, or something greater than you! That's arrogant and ridiculous!
DickLodge68 1 week ago
@DickLodge68 what have you given exactly? the theory that it was all magic?
see i dont have to disprove god as much as i dont have to disprove the flying spaghetti monster
you say i have to think? haha all youve done is read a 2000 year old book written by a con man and now you think you have the answers
now thats arrogance
numberman52 1 week ago
@numberman52 Do you actually read what others say, or just spew nonsense at random? I believe in a higher power than ourselves. That isn't religion. Religion is fellowship, faith, and a common bond between humans, on the most part to better their lives. Not me! I came to the simple conclusion there must be a God...and you have nothing! You still keep asking a question from a question. ANSWER THE FUCKING QUESTION!!!!
DickLodge68 1 week ago
@DickLodge68 what is this fucking question you keep going on about? where did everything come from? as i said you moron we dont know and neither do you
so tell me something whats the difference between your magic man and a unicorn?
numberman52 1 week ago
@numberman52 Oh, there is no difference between a magic unicorn, spaghetti monster, or a "God" that created all the matter in the universe. Here's the difference...I'm willing to believe in such because there is no other explanation. You simply won't and cannot come up with any other answer to the question.
DickLodge68 1 week ago
@DickLodge68 yea youre willing to believe because you are an idiot who blindly accepts everything told to you without evidence
i on the other hand require a little more convincing than a book written by con men
numberman52 1 week ago
@DickLodge68 You say "you cannot get something from nothing unless it was created". Who exactly created "god" then? where did he come out of? If your response to this is that "well he was just there, we can't explain where he came from because he is so big and great" then why can't the same be said about the universe?
funkyknight1 1 week ago
Uh Bill, They don't like it when you admit that ID is "faith based". they like to pretend that it's an objective science.
standinstann 1 week ago
I know this will make a lot of people happy; I have posted all I have to say. I am neither a preacher nor a scientist but like everyone, I had questions. I inspected methods, results and what is factual and what is presumptuous. Through deductive reasoning and simple logic I came to my OWN conclusion. It might be unpopular but it’s my own conclusion. My challenge to you all is to think for yourself and dig deeper.
Goodbye
dreigel411Vin 1 week ago
its that attitude of because i dont know im just going to pick what ever is out there, not so much raising a logical thought towards the fact that My belief is based on the sppagetti monster and if some on has a more logical point of view Im going to dismiss it like a child and ninunanu you are a poopy head and i just need to not understand your real accurate scientific studies cuz my magic works better. Nice journalism stupid. when you get cancer where are you going the priest or a doctor?
pana376 1 week ago
@pana376 ??...complete jibberish..???
dreigel411Vin 1 week ago
@dreigel411Vin no.. you didnt bother to try and understand. From what it looks like, using logic, he most likely is reffering to the scientific method..
PCurly92 1 week ago
@dreigel411Vin lol i was drunk as hell
pana376 1 week ago
what im trying to say is Bill is ignorant on both sides of the discusion so he is going to side with the one he is indoctranated with, without even giving the other side serious consideration. The evolution side shows more truth than mythological stories of any book of religion
pana376 1 week ago
It's amazing how much O'Reilly loves Jesus, but doesn't even remotely follow what Jesus taught.
playbak 1 week ago
Dawkins must've only agreed to go on this show in order to speak with the "missing link" first hand.
bhoyjames 1 week ago
I am throwing in with Jesus? FTF! Apart from 4 short stories called the gospels (wriiten 80 years after his life time) What proof is there that Jesus was real?
Punorss 1 week ago
1:49 I think Professor Dawkins had to swallow a bit of sick.
lizoir 1 week ago
God is a fictitious fabrication devised by human beings for power and control. Man needs support for his fears and is open to domination by theologian authoritarian figures. Mankind hasn't the intellectual capacity to discern the existence of a god or not. It's all thoughtless conjecture.
OREALLY OREILLY??? YOU're A FOOL BILLY BOY!
lifeschild1 1 week ago
@lifeschild1 you must be non-human to then right?
dreigel411Vin 1 week ago
im with bill on this one
K20civicsirturbo 1 week ago
Hello, I am a stereotypical theist.
My God is the only real one because this religion tells me so.
If others do not know answers to questions, it is always answered with God.
This divine knowledge of the universe allows me to look down on people, especially over the internet and gloat at their ignorance.
When I pray to get a mortgage and receive one, that's proof of God. I can disregard the millions of children dying in agony as long as he answers my prayers.
Religion explains nothing.
theafi99000 1 week ago
@theafi99000 To those who understand it, it explains everything
dreigel411Vin 1 week ago
i recognize theres a good chance im just feeding the troll, but ill continue anyway
while you can find lots of evidence for evolution in reputable scientific journals, even completely disproving evolution does not constitute evidence for creationism. again, if we don't know, it doesn't mean "god did it," it means we don't know. this is a typical god of the gaps argument and is simply arguing from ignorance
10YNWA10 1 week ago
@10YNWA10 Evidence that is based on assumption. Like knowing if decay rates have always been constant - we don't know
Evidence that was based on ignorance - Hesperopithecus a.k.a. Nebraska man was based on a single tooth, which was that of a type of pig native to Paraguay.
dreigel411Vin 1 week ago
@10YNWA10 Evolution is more presumptuous than religion – Faith based as well. I cannot base my life on such contradiction. If you would truthfully be more challenging of the evidence that has (or has not been found) you could then start to think for yourself. But, it’s so much more fun to get on the internet and poke fun at spiritual people. Ignorant Jesus Freaks! Right?
dreigel411Vin 1 week ago
Where is the faith at? do you know how many times a hypothasis gets thown out before it becomes a theory? Can you imagine if the medical comunity did like the christian religion and held on to ancient manuscipts to cure cancer and not did reserch and develop new process and methods we would still be bleeding people and using leeches to cure cancer. Its time to put the bible where it suppose to be in the fiction part of the library next to zeus and mithrus and all the other fakes gods
pana376 1 week ago
@pana376 Cancer is not an idea, hypothesis or a theory, it is a physical disease. Late in 2007 doctors performed the first surgeries without making any incisions. People will be posting sometime in the future “can you believe we actually used to cut people open to do surgery.” Not a good example at all. As for the Bible, over 6 Billion have been printed (in various languages) better be an awfully big library!
dreigel411Vin 1 week ago
@10YNWA10 Quick somebody google "Why we wear shoes" lol
dreigel411Vin 1 week ago
@10YNWA10 A "Troll" rather
dreigel411Vin 1 week ago
...it doesnt say we can or should teach it. that was my point.
10YNWA10 1 week ago
Wow bill you behave like an ape. You are the proof that men come from monkey.
drasteek 1 week ago 15
@drasteek No he's a proof that man and monkey had a common ancestor! :)
lokenath123 1 week ago
@drasteek Men did not evolve from monkey. Monkey and humans are from the same ancestor. They both evolve in a different direction.
mrnolan91 1 week ago