Added: 3 years ago
From: joshkarchmer
Views: 58,271
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (297)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • "What's for lunch?"

  • @callofduty497 Compassion seems natural to me. It seems to be an extension of self-preservation and species preservation. I don't want someone inflicting pain on me, so I don't do it to others. If I go around treating others badly, then I set the standard that it's okay for someone to do it to me.

  • @callofduty497 I think you confuse the words "probable" and "intuitive". Re the universe being younger than 4.5 b years. Do you dispute Light speed? Bodies whose light has taken longer to reach us are observable. If a comet is less than 4.5 b years old only means it was not formed until less than 4.5 b years ago.

    ars ago

  • Great film! Just bought it and watched it last week. In fact, I don't mind this particular trailer being one-sided; the film itself isn't. And one of the best parts was when Hitchens and Wilson were riding together, talking candidly at the end of the film. Hitchens then talks about his encounter with Richard Dawkins. When you hear what transpired, it will blow your mind.

  • This is a great movie. They've edited it cleverly and cinematically, creating a sort of building narrative, and they are as even handed as possible, generously highlighting the few scores Wilson made so as to not seem one sided. And the final line of the film is really intriguing - positing a note of question in the atheist armor of Hitchens.

  • No God Day,November the 30th.

    Lets take back the spirit of man from the insanity of the worlds religious uneducated violent and oppresive masses.

    You don't have to actually do anything except not praise the word of god so it's a win win situation for everyone.

    So relax,have a coke and enjoy the life evolution has provided you,you no longer have to feel guilty for being alive.

    God strike me dead if I'm wrong.....LOL.

  • I really pity the atheists. It is because they don't have directions in their lives. The only truth is God and the way of truth is Jesus. If you read the bible it talks about the teachings of Christ which are the facts of our daily experiences and the morals that we have to follow. The teachings would put us into a loving life. We might have different religion but the common principle that we have and we dream to attain is love. Love=God. We all directed to love in every walks of life.

  • @Napoleon432 Love is not dependent on god and I truly pity those who believe so.

    I pity those who have to worship an imaginary figure to feel value in their lives when all around us is the beauty of the universe right there ready to be worshiped and admired.

    I pity those who believe the pope is gods representative on earth and not a peadophile who covers for others who torture and rape children.

    I pity you.

  • @Napoleon432 you can love without belief in Jesus

  • @Napoleon432 You can certainly love without a god. I do, all the time. If you think that religion is the only path, then I consider you an arrogant prick. And the beauty of it...is that I don't have to love my enemies! As you so claim to do. ;)

  • @Napoleon432 since God is "the only truth", as you put it, it follows from this that only Christian people like you can be truly "moral" people. Moral, like the inquisition, witch-hunting, crusades, pederasty etc.? No, the fact that you refer to Christianity as the ONLY truth automatically defines other belief systems as wrong and potentially dangerous. Whether God or a supreme being exists or not, I don't know, but I do know that religion truly poisons everything.

  • heh heh, siiiiiiik

  • Just watched this and it was very interesting..

    I have to say Hitch's opponent was one of the most interesting I have seen him debate. A very smart man with some interesting points. I wasn't swayed by his arguments for a moment, for me they were still weak but much better than the likes of the people that Hitch usually debates. He seemed like a good fellow.

  • what's the name of the song?

  • Lol, I saw that. And knowing modern physics is coming to an end again (just like classical physics ended due to the fact that physics in the rest of the universe don't obey the laws on earth), it's also bullshit.

    Look up Young's double slit experiment. It'll blow your mind.

    So to say that the brain follows the theory of relativity is actually kind of a bold statement, considering psychologists and physicists are years behind finding out how the brain really works in it's entirety.

  • I just saw the film (excellent content, terrible editing at times.) Pastor Wilson is terribly and, as a true believer, predictably outmatched in a contest of logic, but puts up a good fight. Sadly too quickly his argument falls back to the default setting: objective truth can not be established by human beings, therefor there must be a god because we know certain acts (e.g. murder) are objectively wrong. Atheists presumably steal what little morality they have from the true believers.

  • @PaladinConstantin the wall certainly doesn't have "specific instructions" do to anything. It formed by natural processes and there is no intelligent design in it.

    Secondly, you haven't addressed your flawed logic from a while ago. When I studied philosophy in college, I believe one of the intro courses used a book called "How We Know What Isn't So." Maybe there you can gain a grasp of philosophical fallacies and then you won't make the mistake of continuing to argue after making one.

  • @PaladinConstantin I looked up "Sophism". Doesn't apply. I tried to make it simple for you to understand that your logic is flawed by using a very very basic example. Now, you are changing your premises and you have a different argument.

    Here's why your wrong.

    A = "no human free will" is not a fact and most intellectuals would agree that we have free will.

    B = not everything is intelligent design (like a wood drift wall - it functions as a wall, but not intelligently designed to be a wall).

  • @PaladinConstantin you still don't understand that you aren't making logical sense. Let me try to break it down for you in a simple format. My logic goes as follows:

    A = B, and B= C,

    therefore, A = C.

    Your Logic:

    A=B and B=C,

    therefore, D=F.

    That's why I am not continuing the conversation after you mentioned nonsense of intelligent design... I am just trying to help you realize that no one is going to listen to you if you can't make logical sense. Your logic is where the fallacy lies.

  • @PaladinConstantin And you still continue to reason poorly and make no logical sense. Same mistake as last comment. You need to correct your illogical way of thinking rather than ignoring it and continuing to make illogical comments. It's not strengthening your perspective in any way. You don't seem to understand that by me saying your making a fallacy, it means you aren't making sense... yet you continue to try to make sense even though it's been identified that there's an error in your logic

  • @divineson05 If you're a phil major, I see no point in arguing with you. Took those classes, aced them, said "Fuck this" and studied Bio and Computer Science instead. Phil majors get so caught up in the mundane minutia that they forget to actually produce something useful for humanity.

    Also, since there are so many conflicting Ideologues, phil majors tend to think their right regardless, even though the arguments for god and against god are both deeply flawed.

    If you aren't, sorry to bother you

  • @brainstewdgeek not a philosophy major just took some courses. You do seem to be describing william craig in my opinion though.

    the only reason i mentioned it in my previous posts is that the other person was saying "we're intelligent, therefore there's a god" I was trying to show him how that's not how basic logic works so i referenced philosophical fallacies hoping he'd look up what they are.

  • @divineson05 I didn't say anything that pronounced my world views other than the fact that I said Philosophy is a grand waste of time (well, philosophy in the academic sense). As for William Craig, didn't he have a Masters in Phil? Wouldn't that mean that I think his arguments are also a waste of time?

    As for my worldview, I see legitimacy in the inference maker logic just as I see legitimacy in an accidental cause argument. Just because odds are insurmountable, doesn't mean it's impossible.

  • @brainstewdgeek this is divineson05 - i didn't mention anything about what your worldviews are. I only said I'm not a philosophy major and I said you were describing william craig so yes that's what i said is he is wasting his time and you agree. I didn't ask about your worldview or make any reference to it.

  • @brainstewdgeek

    Wanker.

  • woah!

  • @PaladinConstantin So you know you're making fallacies in reasoning, and then you continue to try to reason your point of view after the fact? LOL. Why would I listen to anything you have to say when you cannot form a pattern of logical sentences.

  • @PaladinConstantin "i know you think your words are intelligent, you would not promote them otherwise. thus there is proof of a higher intelligence" this is a fallacy in reasoning.  The conclusion doesn't follow the premise at all. Anyone who's studied philosophical fallacies I'm sure would also vouch for me here.

  • @PaladinConstantin Just saying there is evidence doesn't mean that there's evidence. You must also present the evidence. The only evidence you presented wasn't evidence, it was subjective, and most scientists would say it's proof of no design. As I said, you need to actually read about evolution before you make your decision. You make your decision about what you believe before you look at evidence, that way you through out what doesn't fit with your biases. That's dangerous thinking.

  • @PaladinConstantin If there were evidence of intelligent design i would believe it. There's only evidence that it's not intelligently design. If you read a book about evolution rather than believing only information that is compatible with your belief system, you'd believe like I do too.

  • @PaladinConstantin That doesn't counter what I said, nor does it supply reason to believe there's an intelligent design. I would that actually contradicts it.

  • @PaladinConstantin are you aware that 99.999% of species that once were,,,, now cease to exist? That's very intelligent, you are correct. lol.

  • anyone know the name of the song?

  • omg, this trailer was so freaking epic!!! Yeah, its totally one sided, and I'm a Christian! (but from what I read from the reviews, the movie is actually legit when it comes to balance, revioews from both sides, so whatev) METAL!!! yeah!!!!

  • Go Hitchens!

  • The BEST trailer on any subject I have ever seen!

    Cheers!

  • Of course this trailer is "one sided". Douglas Wilson is a walking caricature. "Collision" is the Christopher Hitchens show, and rightly so!

    Serpent.

    Religion Retards

  • This trailer is so one sided towards Hitchens.

  • yeah i think there was more than one trailor possible with the view of 'one for the atheists and one for the christian'. I saw this trailor first and thought the same thing as you. But then the next trailor puts Douglas in the better light.

    It would be pretty rude if this is the only trailor I reckon.

  • It's supposed to be retard. Wilson has his own trailer also.

  • mind ur language mr. 'boMan'

  • @ETworldjone its 4 part trailer one part is about Wilson

  • @ETworldjone That's the point. If people really wanted to watch the movie for Wilson, they'd be very disappointed...

  • @myteethareshiny which people?  you are fan of hitchens and therefore, it is typical for u to make such baseless comments....so no surprises there!

  • Actually, it could be said that the Universe is one-sided toward Hitchens.

  • @ETworldjone funny. all of the debates seem to be that way as well.

  • @ETworldjone the reality is one sided towards Hitchens

  • @ETworldjone I agree, the trailer is one sided...but that's Wilson's fault.

    I watched the entire full length video - Wilson never said anything of substance to PUT in the trailer!

  • @ETworldjone

    It is hard to advertise stupidity.

  • @ETworldjone All of his debates are one-sided too. He demolishes the fairy tale believers...

  • @MrTruthAddict haha, yeah. He's just got so much more ammunition, it's like a boxing match -- Ali vs Steve Urkel.

  • @jerryhello100 Ali vs Steve Urkel. hahah you just made my day

  • Comment removed

  • @ETworldjone That doesn't mean the movie is. The movie was directed by a Christian Film maker.

  • Does Hitch have metal in his movie? AWESOME! \m/

  • Can we agree this is a badass trailer? haha its awesome the way it starts.

  • I loved this documentary and I adore Christopher Hitchens!

    It pissed me off a bit when Douglas mentioned that it

    was Charles Manson who said, "If God is one, then who

    created evil?" Then Douglas equates CM's 'idea' to be

    the cause of the consequent evil CM commited.

    To me CM was saying...why am I evil and why can't I stop

    being evil? Did God make me this way and why did he pick

    on me? Because if god is real and he is one, then he

    also created evil and he 'is'to blame for what I am.

  • This debate is being sold out when it's sold, it's so good.

  • dude, that was the most epic- "what's for lunch"- in the history of man kind

  • Finalprophet10: no one can escape circular reasoning. No one. As soon as pagans admit that, the debate can truly begin. I'll admit it: I am a prejudiced Christian who argues circularly. And so do you, Mr. Pagan. So do you. (Except for that prejudiced Christian part.)

  • I'm actually not a pagan. But guess who are pagans without even realizing it? Christians, Jews, and Muslims. You worship so many idols but you are so busy calling others pagans that you don't realize how paganistic you are. I on the other hand am not religious. If I find that I made a circular argument I then look at my flaws and contradictions to find clarity and figure out my own mind. Religious people do not have that self-reflection and do not admit fault.

  • No, I admit fault. I am faulty. Actually you are religious. It's in your very nature. Religion as such, is anyone's service to and living before God either rightly or wrongly. Much like it's a misnomer to say worship only happens in a church service, so too, religion is a misnomer. Simply b/c you might not "grace" the doors of a church, you are religious. God is there and you either attribute worth to him or live before him rightly or wrongly.

  • If living rightly means thinking I am superior and everyone else who doesn't believe in my myths is going to hell then I prefer to live "wrongly" before him. Because from what I have read of the jewish god he is a mentally ill motherfucker and he can suck my fucking balls. I would like to see him come to earth and try to fight me. He won't because he doesn't exist.

  • I am not atheist thought there is nothing wrong with atheism. According to people who beleive in a personal god I would be considered atheist but I believe in an impersonal god, an infinite consciousness, but not a dictator micromanaging life and taking sides with only one group out of all of it's creation. That is nothing but egocentrism projected onto the world.

  • Has anyone favouring CH actually heard him say anything substantial (except his own dislike for any divine authority)? His diatribe amounts to nothing more than a spoiled child pouting for his way and sulking b/c his "daddy is just so mean that he actually cares that I behave well."

  • I realize that you dislike his views, but that doesn't mean your self-serving interpretation of Hitchens is anywhere near accurate.

  • I want it

  • It seems a bit arrogant to me for Hitchens to dismiss a genius like Fyodor Dostoevsky so glibly. "With god all things are permissible" is only true if you have a false God who cares nothing about behavior and motives. But without God, morals only exist as arbitrary social (if not individual) constructs, so Dostoevsky's statement is much more broad and accurate.

  • Well done to Douglas for having the guts to take on Hitchens even though he will get killed.

  • Ah the religious they want so much to be wanted.Death will be there truths

  • Hitchens will own him again and again.

  • Hitchens is my savior!!

  • You should see the movie - Collision. I saw a pre-showing of it - GREAT!

    Hitchens starts out all confident. By the end he is asking questions, and the last 3 min are QUITE the surprise! Remember, he starts out saying "Christianity is a wicked cult, and it is high time we LEAVE IT BEHIND" Be basically goes back on that entire statement right at the end, on the third day. I think seeing a Christian not just arguing, but seeing how he LIVES sent Hitchens for a spin..

  • Yeah right. As if Hitchens debated this guy and then had an epiphany and woke to "the truth" of Christianity. They show wilson living like a pussy hippie. Christianity is complete bullshit and Jesus was a fucking pussy who is never coming back.

  • Just see the movie. No philosophical argument would convince HItchens, but the movie's not called "Collision of Philosophies" but "Collision of Lives."

    That "pussy hippie" has questions Hitchins can't answer, and answers to Hitchins' questions.

  • That seems rather unlikely. I've seen most all of Hitchens' debate work and I've never seen him stumped. Nor did i ever really see his pointed questions handles in a respectable manner.

    I guess I'll just have to see the movie and either be dreadfully surprised or (if what I expect happens) Hitchens will rather put the man in his place.

  • chris killed wilson on the movie as he as did everyone else in real life....

  • Your savior is a fat prick!!

  • Ie's not that fat. Just because he lets you know that your beliefs are nonsense, that the genocidal scriptures you love, and the disgusting human sacrifice that you think has saved mankind are ridiculous does not mean he's a prick. Fuck Jesus. If he were alive today I would cum in his face and make him look like a glazed donut.

  • yes, I'm a wanker that does not believe delusioned schizophrenics with genocidal tendencies, disgust of every living creature, and a love of splattering blood have a direct connection to god. I am a wanker because I do not believe ignorant peasants were told by god to slaughter every tribe other than themselves, take their virgin women, take their gold, sheep, etc. I am a wanker that believes in loving all humans, not disgusting myths born out of superiority complexes and survival issues.

  • It isn't the fact that they don't agree with me that makes me tell you to fuck off. It's the fact that each of you religious people think that you are superior to every other group. I hate the hatred and the stupidity and gullibility of people who think that there is actually a genocidal personal god.

  • Thanks for clearing that up... I love u too.

  • You're sweet.  I just want to kiss you in a big Bruno type way. Haaaa!!!

  • Stay well, cheers

  • "I hate the hatred"

    Nice circularity there.

  • actually that isn't circularity. It is perfectly linear.

  • here's circularity. god says Jesus is his only begotten son. And who said that? Jesus. Jesus verifies god's word, god verifies Jesus' word. And around around the grand assumption goes. Self-verifying self-perpetuating assumptions which you place the eternal destiny of your soul on. Lame!!

  • Don't forget the hundreds of years of prophets claiming the same thing. I mean, come on, it was just a coincident that over 40 authors from different parts of the world, from all different backgrounds, over a span of 1500 years all keep the same theme. No one with any degree of intelligence denies the fact that Jesus Christ walked the earth. There is too much historical data to back it up.

  • So since we know He existed and we know the claims He made, the question is was Jesus who He said he was? Did he make up all the claims of being God? Or was He really God? No one would endure the kind of death he endured knowing it was a lie. It wouldn't be possible. Then you have the disciples. Every single disciple (except Judas) dies for their faith. They saw the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus.

  • So would they too give up their life if they really knew Jesus made it up or if he didn't really raise from the dead? You sound like an intelligent person. Have you really investigated this?

  • I don't believe he was raised from the dead (anymore) but even if he did it does not mean that what he taught was true. There is no direct connection between being raised from the dead and the validity of a teaching. I think Jesus was a deluded moron teaching oversimplified cleched inverse relationships. I think he had a god complex and was obsessed with the concept of a "heavenly father" due to the fact that jews who were desperate for a savior told him he was the son of god.

  • I think that would create a really strange complex which would make one obssess about his conncetion to his father. That is all I think it was. And I think he truly believed it and people desperate to rid themselves of guilt would believe it too.

  • So what is your answer to the question that Hitchens refused to answer in the film? Do you believe in right and wrong and if so, where do you base the foundation of absolute truth?

  • I believe in right and wrong but I do not believe in absolute truth. I think what needs to happen is, people need to stop taking advice from stupid fairy tales and learn to develop a sense of intuition regarding right and wrong. So far religion has not done a very good job cultivating that in people. people need to use their own mind and access every situation independantly and flexibly. To me wrong actions are intended to cause pain and right actions are intended to bring comfort and happiness

  • But where does that "intuition" come from? It has to come from absolutes. What if someone who is taught their entire life to kill, that's all they know, would their intuition not tell them to kill? Based on your idea of right and wrong, they would be right. So how can something be right for one person and wrong for another? It just doesn't make sense. And to say there are no absolutes, isn't that an absolute statement?

  • The more you fill your mind with these empty philosophies and intellectual gymnastics the less time you have to decide basic things such as..."maybe I shouldn't rape, pillage, and murder everyone who doesn't look or think like me." And who cares where intuition comes from. What humans need to start doing is thinking for themselves. Stop asking advice. As Kramer in Seinfeld said, "You gotta listen to the little man (inside." Haaaa

  • That doesn't answer the question. And it's a legitimate question because it happens everyday. If they truly believe they are right how can anyone say they are wrong? And to say "who cares where intuition comes from" shows ignorance. I don't believe you are an ignorant individual. You used to believe in the resurrection of Christ, what changed your mind? I think you owe it yourself to investigate this. Its too important to just throw your hands up and say "who cares". What if you're wrong?

  • I actually don't care where intuition comes from but I know what it comes from, and that is by relying on ones own decision making abilities. Prior to doing that I was a gullible idiot and was taken advantage of by religious people for years. It was hard for the first two years but like a muscle, my brain began to make better and better decisions with kindness as its basis and goal.

  • When you say, "They believe they are right," I think you mean religious people, it is easy to say they are wrong because world events and the discoveries of science, and even some basic logic of even an average person like me can figure out. Even if the big bang and evolution turn out to be wrong that is okay. We can at least rule out the stupid option of Adam and Eve, Noah and the flood, and many other religions' myths. They are only myths invented from ignorant ancient humans.

  • as the human species developed, they understood the harmfulness killing does. They can see the emotional pain and distress infront of them. That's why we have laws against killing. People are taught to kill in the name of religion, so to answer that, their intuition goes with what their religion says. This is why religions are no good (in modern times).

    No one has killed in the name of critical thinking and the search for scientific evidence that explains human nature and the world.

  • The film will be released in September and available for pre-order in a few weeks. Release date announcement coming soon.

  • is this movie out yet? I can't find it anywhere.

  • The film will be released in September and available for pre-order in a few weeks. Release date announcement coming soon.

  • What is the name of the rock / metal song in this trailer ? or who sings it ?

  • What is the name of the rock/metal song? or who sings it ?

  • Comment removed

  • I cannot wait to see this.

  • A must see.

  • Does anyone know the title to this song? Its been in my head for days now. Thanks in advance.

  • No Sorry M8.

    Your not the Alex martin of chease making fame are you???

  • no I have never made cheese in my life.

  • Hitchens tore this guy apart. Christianity is in it's death throes and will, in about 500 years, be safely filed away in the mythology section of the library.

  • I sure hope it doesn't take that long...

  • Wilson was destroyed pretty badly. The only person I've really seen handle themselves well against hitchens is D'nesh.

  • Which Hitch - D'nesh one?

    I've seen one, but I'd hardly say he did anything but sound like a chump.

    Do you have a link or name?

    Have you seen the Dawkins - McGrath one, its quite a long one, but number 9, I think, McGrath just totally loses it, doesn't have a clue what else to mumble on about, and then as good as tells them to cut, but luckily the producer/director, (or whoever he was) had a pair of knackers, and presses him to carry on.

    Its a classic moment, he thinks he slithered out of it

  • Im referring to the debate at king's college. I wasn't saying he won the debate or anything, but he does a pretty good job. Mainly because he doesn't argue very much about religion itself but rather attacks hitchens' claim that religion poisons EVERYTHING. I personally thought Hitchens took it to him pretty good but D'nesh is solid. Hitchens also claims in any interview that D'nesh is the most formiddable opponent he has faced and that he understands atheists better than Wilson.

  • Yeh I suppose he is one of the better ones.

    Matt Slick, I suppose could come accross OK to believers too, but man he's slippery.

    Have you seen the Joke of a debate with Rev Al Sharpton, I laughed my bollocks off, what a total spacer, I hope he watched it back afterwards, and is appropreatly embarased.

  • haha- yeah I can't really stomach McGrath either. He is too long-winded and too prone to circular argument. Plus, he uses the word "transformative" too much.

  • George Galloway, but only because he debates Hitch on the Iraq War and not religion. A debater is only as good as the position they are debating on behalf of, and the Iraq War is the polar opposite of atheism in this regard.

  • Wilson lost miserably.

    Fellow human being, who shares and cares about this fragile and unique part of Universe with me, respected be your individuality, let the universal peace come, let the common good be done in your homeland and all over the world.Share your knowledge and wealth with the disadvantaged .

    Treat others the way you want to be treated

    Stand up against inhumanity, injustice or deliberate deception

    and deliver the vulnerable from a temptation of irrational thinking or delusion.

  • Hahaha. This is so funny. I love the video. I do think that Wilson won that debate, but it surely wasn't his finest performance. However, in his debate with William Lane Craig, Hitchens got detroyed.

  • Yo! you got Hitched!

  • Does anyone know how/where this documentary can actually be viewed?

  • No clue. It's already April...

  • I like the style, but I think something cooler could be added than "what's for lunch".

  • Weird ending. "Taxi! What's for lunch?"

  • Erghh...they premiered it on Friday, but I don't know when its going to be released to the rest of us.

  • harlon57. You may have missed my point. When I say that opponents of Christianity like simplistic answers, I mean they like them in terms of what they most often argue against, not in terms of answers they may be seeking for themselves. As to the stat you offer, I find the bandwagon appeal less than compelling. It does not address the issue of whether or not God exists. I also reject the idea that scientific truth = all truth. How many scientists will do that? Maybe 10%? Sounds about right.

  • In fact, , many rational beliefs cannot be tested by the scientific method: ethics, aethetics, morality and of course, logic and mathematics. Science presupposes logic and maths, to try to prove them by science would be to argue in a circle. Science itself cannot be justified by the scientific method because it is permeated with unprovable assumptions

  • To those challenging most of the Christian posts on this site, just a caution. You are arguing against the most simplistic, pat answers that have no real meaning to thoughtful Christians. I doing so, you seem to take them as truly representative of the faith. It makes it look like you reject Christianity because you do not understand it either. Surely that is not the case, is it?

  • No, i understand christianity...the problem with my statement, as well as yours, is that many differ on what being a christian is. This means there is no real truth in the word christianity because the definition can differ person to person.

  • While I get your point, it seems a bit too easy. People have differing opinions about what being a man means, or being an American, or being black, etc. Does that there is no truth of meaning in these terms? Most Christians like simplistic interpretations and pat answers to difficult questions. So do their opponents. That's because getting at the heart of the faith takes thought, effort, humility and perseverance. Way too many simply don't want to, or know how to do that.

  • altarofego: you write that too many christians and their opponents like simplistic interpretations and pat answers to difficult questions.

    I think you will find that in every study that has been taken, the more educated the person, the less likely they are to believe in any sort of god.

    Over 90% of all scientists nominated by their peers into the National Academies of science do not believe in a god.

    It would seem that the evidence shows that it is believers who lack knowledge, thus, simple.

  • Is this actually going to be a film?? I so want it to be :)

  • Sky daddy worship(or any of the thousands of present and past made-up gods) is simply delusional behaviour practiced by folks who follow the 'herd' of fellow delusional, indoctrinated folks who do the same, unquestionably. The prognosis for escaping this delusion/disorder is largely related to the level of conviction in the delusion and the openness the person exhibits in allowing info that contradicts the delusion. First step for recovery is questioning the stance. Big step but a good one.

  • a devout christian could murder someone then on death row just ask god for forgiveness, and then its all good. see yah in heaven folks. In all likeliness this is it people. this is the only life your getting. so make the best of it and dont end up in jail.

  • Comment removed

  • Mao, Stalin and the like did not commit the crimes they did BECAUSE of atheism you idiot. There were no banners or doctrine titled "Atheists" or anything like that.

    Christianity was the motivation and the "reason" (if you will), for which all of these killings and violence has been carried out. What were the last words spoken by the 9/11 hijackers, for example? Not once did Stalin or any of the other atheists cite atheism as the source for their crimes.

  • Nonsense. Perhaps you should take a college sociology class before opening your mouth and spewing forth your asinine remarks. Darwinism by no means advocates "sruvival of the fittest," it is simply fact in the natural and biological realm. "Social Darwinism," the concept that the weakest of the humans should be considered expendable predates Darwinism and was begun by Herbert Spencer (D

  • Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.

    ( Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Ralph Mannheim, ed., New York: Mariner Books, 1999, p. 65. )

  • I'm not quite sure what this has to do with Christianity.....Hitler was not a Christian.

    "One cannot break the Church over one's knee. It has to be left to rot like a gangrenous limb...but the healthy youth belong to us."

    "[Making peace with the church] won't stop me from stamping out Christianity in Germany, root and branch. One is either a Christian or a German. You can't be both."

    Hitler wanted to stamp out Protestantism, Bible-believing Christians.

  • no, that's not true.. hitler was a roman catholic, like most of the nazis. goebels was the only one excommunicated by the church, because he married a protestant. there were various nazi emblems during that time picturing the cross together with the fylfot.. and the biggest indicator for that connection are the 6million killed jews. the only reason to hate jews, is a religious, a christian (or islamic reason).. they killed the messiah, you know?

  • I'm not convinced that Hitler was a Christian. He may not have repudiated catholicism, but many of his quotes show his contempt for that religion.

    What is almost certain, however, is that the Nazis couldn't have performed evils to the extent that they did without popular Christian support, and the endorsement of the churches. To say Nazism was secular in nature is false.

  • Hitler never left his church or refused to pay church taxes. he praised Christian heritage, German Christian culture, and professed a belief in an Aryan Jesus Christ, a Jesus who fought against the Jews. Hitler spoke of his interpretation of Christianity as a central motivation for his antisemitism, stating that "As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice."

  • The Vatican and the Pope collaborated with him. They made archives readily available to the Nazis to research the extent of ones Jewish heritage.

    Wicked stuff...

  • well, for example, the pilot who landed the plane safely in the hudson was considered by many in the media to be a miracle or an act of God. I just think it was a good Pilot who could keep his nerves together and land the plane.

  • I dont believe the big guy in the sky deserves any credit for what a man did. If god is real and he landed the plane safely in the Hudson, then would he in turn be responsible for throwing a bunch of birds in the turbine? Its like in high school, i remember this kid who stayed up all night studying for this test and was praising the lord that he was the only one that got a perfect score in the class. How about giving yourself some credit for working your ass off.

  • this is the only life we have. I believe that if people think there is an afterlife, they wont take the present one seriously. that is the danger of religion. the muslim extremists dont believe their present life is as important than the next life.

  • That's the thing with the deluded. All fortunate happenings are the 'Work of god' whereas anything unfortunate is conveniently forgotten or is the put down to 'the devil'. It's self fulfilling.

    God sees evil, does nothing. God is evil

    God sees evil, can do nothing, God is impotent.

    God doesn't see evil, God is powerless.

    FSM FTW

  • part 2- The fact is, the title did shake him. In the book Hitchens goes after muslims just as much as christians. He always has,  and has been physically attacked in the past by an Islamic extremist, because of his book. im not mocking you. the whole part 1 part 2 thing is pretty clever

  • my point= christians believe in GOD.  muslims believe in GOD. you said that the title needed to be called Allah is not great. I had a muslim man see what i was reading in a hotel lobby the other day. He asked me if i dont believe in jesus, allah, or god, then what do i believe in. I told him that people dont give themselves enough credit for the good things they do. I told him i believe in people. He respected my argument and went on to talk about theme park attractions

    .

  • Dont the muslims say "god willing" all the time. entitling it Allah is not great is the same as entitling it Jesus is not great. God is just the generic big bearded man in the clouds that both religions use. Allah is a prophet and Jesus is a prophet. There are valid arguments to Hitchens work, but yours is just dumb. Muslims and Christians alike could be offended by the title.

  • i meant to say neighbors wife. shit, if it was his friend and he was a guy, i would still go to hell. haha. cant wait to see this anyway

  • god bless christopher hitchens!! I mean...ughh wait. god damn it. ughhh... I mean. seriously though. its simple.  God loves you more than anyone can love you in the world, yet if I think my neighbors friend is a hotty, he'll send me to burn in an eternity of hell fire. religion contradicts simple and basic human logic. Religion is silly and childish when you get down to it. Think about the first time you found out santa claus wasnt real, then put it in broad perspective.

  • Ergh...when does this come out?

  • Just a friendly reminder to all of those who dont use

    their brain for independent thought, time for a haircut...

    The only reason you have a head, is to keep barber busy.

    The rules of nature abhor the vacuum between your ears.

  • hahaha, I love the video, but Hitchens is a nothing but a child throwing a perpetual tantrum. He really doesn't have legitimate arguments. Instead, he prefers to excite the emotions of the crowd and dare to claim that there is morality outside of God, and that God is, in fact, IMmoral. haha. First, though, Hitchens has to get past William Lane Craig, who is going to thoroughly demolish him. Hitchens is going to debate an intellectual. I can't wait.

  • The Hitchinator is about to claim a new victim

  • This shit is so badass hahaha

  • Do NOT mess with "the Hitch" because he knows what he's talking about!!

  • Hitchens is a boxer now?

  • Christopher Hitchens = Elite smart ass living happy and free from religious enslavement. Hitchins always wins because clear minded logic and science always wins over religion.