Added: 1 year ago
From: TheScienceFoundation
Views: 59,647
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (150)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • what is the music in the beginning?

  • Does anyone know what name of the piece of music at the beginning is called?

  • You ever think MAYBE more christians would watch these videos if the top comments werent always talking shit....Because personally if I click on a video and the top comments are about how retarded atheists are, I assume the video is stupid because stupid people like it....just saying

  • @Pheonix2022 i just tried to say the same thing a couple posts above yours. i can not agree more! when did WE evolutionists forget this is a THEORY? a damn good theory but a theory none the less. show some professionalism and some humility. if science has taught us one lesson the most, it is how often we are wrong and humbled!

  • what is the song in the opening?

  • Religion equals BULLSHIT! END OF. If you truly believe in any sort of god or a creation then your seriously retarded. Adam and Eve?? Did their children fuck each other? Noahs ark?? What a crock of shit that is!! Afterlife????? We can see a dead body rot after it dies.THAT IS ALL THAT HAPPENS!! GET OVER IT!!. And we let these idiotic priests,vicars,bishops( lot of them peadophiles) into our hpuse of Lords( UK) to make decisions for us.

  • In Sweden there is a large amount of education time spent learning about religion.

    Sweden consists of 85% atheists.

    Do I need to say more?

  • whaattt?? I've never seen this video before! a Dawkins video I've never seen before?! how can that be?!

  • Comment removed

  • The tree of knowlage is that a metaphore for forbiding a need of knowlage. (speaking from an athiest point of view) So God put this tree in reach for adam and eve to eat the fruit of, so im guessing that means the truth is easy to acess but if forbiden. Is that a good interpretation that its basically saying you shouldnt search for knowlage right?

  • Creationists are the most stubborn, close minded, irrational people to debate with. Give it up. Religion is the earliest form of government. That's it. It provides a false sense of security as well as keeping mass groups of people timid. It's outdated and is a ridiculous story.

  • @WeWontEscape I have many religious friends that over time we have had open and respectful discussions, have come to the conclusion that religion is simply wrong and they have come to learn about evolution and Charles Darwin. All of this in Puerto Rico from where I am (very religious country). I used to express myself in the way you wrote, but I've come to the conclusion that is better to convince & change minds in the way of respect, than to just simply be arrogant & stubborn.

  • @MrPerezCosta The problem is that not everyone is approached by "kind and respectful" people> some are just downright stupid and don't listen to reason. meanwhile they sweep in and out of people's lives and do irreparable damage based on the 'sanctity" of their beliefs while never once listening to a voice of reason. these people, have so much 'faith", yet never once give any credibility to anyone with a differing view that is, undoubtedly, correct in the face their irrationality.

  • @AzazelZaphorOmega You are absolutely right, maybe our generation won't see a dramatic change in favor of science and reason, but one can only hope future ones do. I just wish one day we as human beings can live without faith and religion, and work with the things that we have and we know for sure, for a better future. Difficult, but there's no such thing as "impossible" in this world.

  • @WeWontEscape im not a creationist...but have to point out how "open minded" you just sounded. like oyu would be willing to hear out a hardcore creationist and respect his right to his beliefs and agree to disagree. you do us evolutionists nooo favors when we have to defend the THEORY of evolution from other evolutionists extremism. You ARE aware it is merely a theory?

  • @HonGyakku you have no idea what a scientific theory is. to say that evolution is JUST a theory is like saying gravity and cellular science are JUST theories. all three have TONS evidence. a scientific theory is not a mere guess.

  • @avalsonline2 is a theory not a hypothesis supported by facts? if so, then you are wrong about what i know and dont know. and if you do a slight amount of research you will find "the gravity" is a "law" not a "theory". define theory any way you like, is evolution not a theory? i will not be replying to you again. im here to learn other points of view, not repeat myself over and over. i cant believe you think gravity is a theory! its a LAW! proven beyond theory. Thanx

  • @HonGyakku there are laws of gravity.BUT THERE IS ALSO SUCH A THING AS A THEORY OF GRAVITY. GOOGLE IT IF YOU MUST. there is also cellular theory. to say that evolution is JUST a theory is to assume that somehow theories graduate into being facts or laws. this is not the case. there are TONS of evidedence to support evolution. and even if we get TONS more, to the point where there is almost no room for doubt, it will still remain a theory.

  • @HonGyakku simplistically speaking, a scientific theory is the best explanation we have based on current evidence without simply just saying "God did it". So when you claim "evolution is just a theory", that's equivalent to saying "evolution is just the best explanation we have based on current evidence". So yes, it is indeed 'just a scientific theory', thank you for agreeing it is so!

  • ANYONE WHO BELIEVES THIS SHIT CAN GO SUCK HIS TINY COCK

  • @azza5101 Scientist do not believe in evolution as you believe in faith, they accept it based on the weight of evidence attained from statistically unconfounded experiments. There is no confusion among unbias people who have learnt the scientific method, of attempting to falsify hypotheses to reveal reality.

  • @azza5101 You trust in what you have been indoctrinated to trust, 'unthinking'. A word of advice...read more. You don't understand genetics, the interplay with ecology, the end result being a proliferation of favourable genetic frequencies, from competition over limited resources. Ready YOU know nothing of science, read.

  • @azza5101 read this on wiki E. coli long-term evolution experiment

  • I'm finding it amazing how much Dawkins is holding my attention with that awesome background behind him.

  • Comment removed

  • 11:50 Wow. This is a bit of a bombshell. Having to choose a major at age 15 to 16? I'd choose science over history in a flash. But the idea of forcing kids to choose as high school sophomores seems rather awful.

  • evolution is never going to be proved, for it can't be proved, i trust in science, but only scince with proof, evolution has no proof.

  • @azza5101

    You start off with the assumption that it can't be proved, probably because you believe that we cannot directly observe it. Actually, we see it happening everyday on smaller scales through dog breeding, antibiotics, and other examples of natural or artificial selection at work. If you think the little changes are possible, then it's entirely reasonable that the small changes accumulate into big changes over billions of years.

  • @arghivebeenshot you do know that when darwin died, he said 'its just a theory'... even he didn't believe it was real. and dude how can you compare dog breeding to evolution its a dog, there are different types of dogs, but they're still dogs, thy haven't grown wings or something.. its still a dog, and answer this, if evolution exists, why aren't there still half human half monkey or whatever you retards think we came from and how did our perfect body systems come to place? not a circumstance.

  • @azza5101 Darwin did not renounce evolution on his death bed, that is a myth gleefully maintained by young earth creationists. Anyway, your question about half-monkeys has an answer that anyone who has spent 5 minutes of their time studying evolution would know. You reject evolution for emotional reasons, not rational ones. Study the theory before you reject it. You're an intelligent person, and you CAN do better than this. You have Google. EDUCATE YOURSELF.

  • @Zeuts85 AHAHAHA dude i said that darwin didnt believe his theory was true. so even the maker of the theory didn't believe it, so anyone who does is a blind idiot. ei you. and i reject evolution cus i know its complete bullshit, im a christian you dickhead. not an athiest or whatnot... i have a true belief ... not some theory that the maker of doesn't even think it true... its as if i said im a billionaire and some dumbass thinking i was... even if i look like a homeless person.. come on man..

  • @azza5101 Yes, and I said you were wrong about Darwin. Did you even read my response? Anyway, even if it were true that Darwin renounced evolution, that has absolutely no bearing on whether the theory is true. Surely you can see that? I mean REALLY, use your brain a little. . .

  • @azza5101 u talk a crock of shit, of course darwin believed his theory, how can you believe some crap written ages ago by some random guys and put together to make your crappy bible, faith is just a belief not a truth...

  • @whadefu AHAhAHAHAHA do your fucking research he didn't. know your facts before you talk dumbass

  • Comment removed

  • @azza5101 the only one who needs to research their facts is you.

  • Comment removed

  • @azza5101 No one cares how much you love your attachments, no one is going to bother worrying how little you know, only yourself.

  • @azza5101 and I would not boast about being a christian, they are nothing but a bunch of blind idiots believing an old book over facts, grow up ffs !!

  • @whadefu and you believe something some crazy wako made up as a THEORY. think about that word. its a THEORY not fact. man you guys gotta get real.. i know god is real ive been in his presence you would never know ... its not all about the bible you know.

  • @azza5101 A theory is an explanation, for example the theory of gravitation explains the fact of gravity or the theory of evolution explains the fact of evolution. Which god were you in the presence of and how do you know it was a he? Was this god a person or an animal, if not, how could it have a gender?

  • @1empathy @azza5101 but your only proof for your claim to have been in your god's presence is your own anecdotal claims regarding a feeling you had. Your religion is less than a theory, it is a belief, based on no evidence, similar to most of the world's superstitions.

  • @andrewc2768 Take a deep breath and relax, you are an idiot and only time will make you realise that;o)

  • @1empathy i guess only a non-idiot would know that comment wasn't meant for him(by actually reading it, Einstein.)

  • @andrewc2768 ditto for you. My comment has no reference to anything you have posted, so could you not have figured out for yourself it wasn't meant for you? ;o)

  • @azza5101 why you think the human body is perfect? Its very good but not perfect, we get sick, people lose eye sight, DIE.... l could go on forever....

  • @azza5101 What about the fossil record, molecular biology, comparative anatomy, embryology? Aren't these proof of evolution?

  • @ChristopherRaines I can't say it better than Matt Dillahunty

    /watch?v=v9WRG4e6m2s

  • @ChristopherRaines Don't use this argument please. It's not new. It's tiring. I don't know how serious you are about it, but just do a search for Pascal's wager, and there are numerous responses to it. It is wrong on every level.

  • @ChristopherRaines

    Certainly, the 9/11 bombers bet on faith, and look what that got them. 72 virgins in paradise.

    Oh, you meant YOUR version of an unproven God! Well, why didn't you say so? Which God is YOUR version, by the way? Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1879, or Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912?

  • @ChristopherRaines If there was a beast which caused great pain and suffering if you didn't believe in it - According to the wager, you should believe in it.

    But can you?

    There is absolutely no evidence for this beast, yet you are expected to just believe in it... Could you?

    Pascals wager fails, because it makes the assumption that believing in the ridiculous is something you can do off of a whim....

    I cannot believe in this beast any more than I can believe in a god.

  • @ChristopherRaines “My wager says that you should in all cases wager on reason and accept the logical consequence, which in this case is atheism. If there's no god, you're correct; if there's an indifferent god, you won't suffer; if there's a just god, you have nothing to fear from the honest use of your reason; and if there's an unjust god, you have much to fear but so does the Christian.” - George H. Smith

  • @ChristopherRaines If you live in illusion, you have already lost.

  • @ChristopherRaines There's the simple fact that if God exists, I'm quite sure he wouldn't be happy about people believing in him just so they aren't fucked in the "afterlife". In fact, I'm quite confident that if he does exist, he would be quite upset at those who worshipped him "just in-case" and would be apt to punish them. However, since that's not the case, all I can say is you would be wasting valuable time worshipping him, rather than doing more productive things.

  • @ChristopherRaines What if belief were exactly what condems you? Consider this theory: God wrote the Bible as a test. All those who believe it reveal their stupidity and gullibilty. Or, if you think the story of Abraham sacrificing his son makes sense, you fail God's test, just as Abraham failed God's test (Abraham was supposed to say "No I won't do that obviously evil thing", not take the "I was just following orders" defence). Only skeptics go to heaven, because all the others bore God.

  • @ChristopherRaines Belief isn't a wager, it's a state of mind. People cannot choose what they believe. If the reasons are good enough they will helplessly believe a proposition. No part of it is voluntary. People can lie to themselves, but that's different from belief. Regardless, given the sheer quantity of Gods available, no matter which God one "chooses" to believe in, one should expect damnation purely as a matter of probability. I'll stick with logic, thanks.

  • @ChristopherRaines I hate this sentence ," if you gain you gain all , and if you lose you lose all " .. lose what ? its like you have no other choice !

    are we (atheists) killing / stealing / etc .. ?

    I bet that we have more moralities than all religious people combined!

    I dont mind people believing in a creator, its up to them,but to use a book (oh wait which book? cause u know there are many books) and brainwash the people and spread the hate among the population, well thats what am against

  • @ChristopherRaines Thats just a cowards way out if you think something cant be proved don't belive it. Just because it cant necessarily be disproved isnt a logical reason to belive something. Most religous beliefs which are specific about what they belive are usualy rediculous ideas. Sending your son but is also you to earth to die for our sins which we are apparently born with is silly. As carl sagan said "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" Think logically about it :)

  • @ChristopherRaines So by your logic, why even go outside? why drive a car? why eat junkfood? why do anything that can be remotely dangerous?

    You linger on to the pascal arguement, but apply it to normal life and you see how useless it is.

  • @ChristopherRaines But belief in a false god will send you to hell (abrahamic faiths) isn't it bettert to be rational?

  • @ChristopherRaines reality is more interesting than fiction

  • See a great lecture called: story of life origins: the obvious version

    Gives a fresh look at the development of life, from the point of view of the developers of THING: an autonomous nano-machines complex, designed to auto clone itself out of molecules and energy that it gathers from its ambient.

    Basic systems are described, including a quality control system named EVO1.

    Suggests: if we put aside our preconditioning , and look just at the hard evidence, this becomes the OBVIOUS story of LIFE.

  • Also, accepting evolution is not equivalent to atheism. However, it does create a potential conflict in the religious in that it proves aspects of their dogma are manifestly false.

  • It's a crime that evolution is not taught earlier in schools, it makes almost everything more interesting. Dawkins is great, more power to him for dedicating his life to science and education.

  • Every Athiest i've ever met has been a pretentious cock-sucker !!!!

  • @66605777 Did you ever think about the fact that you're the only common denominator in that equation?

  • @4Chanonymous See what i mean.

  • @66605777 You mean that you never thought about the fact that the only person in common between you and every atheist you've met is you?

  • @66605777 nice to meet you.

  • @66605777 Hello cock-sucker

  • @66605777 It sounds like you've lost many arguments.

  • I'm glad to see he's changed his tune on global warming alarmism. I'm not saying I'm a skeptic, but hysteria and jumping to conclusions is bad for science and not convincing to outsiders.

  • Great.

  • nice interview

  • I love you Dr. Dawkins!

  • @EPICLEGENDS2011 Other than your mere assertion and circular logic, where are you getting that god exists? By what means did he create anything and how can this be empirically verified?

  • @EPICLEGENDS2011 So you're saying that you, someone who believes in god, would go around murdering stealing etc. if there were no invisible threat to keep you in line?

  • Some people wounder why so many atheists are on the internet well its one of the few places you can express thoughts without being hammered in the ass,that and well for most places there's not enough atheists i know personally to talk to!And the internet provides a safe haven for atheists to say what you like with no penalty :D

  • @tjinga2u1 You shouldn't need a safe haven to discuss science or anything else for that matter, especially in the western world but I get ya.

  • @TheDouchesupreme Your right but trying to to some groups of people is pointless, its like talking to a wall,in a way.

  • The Three Day Week was from 1st Jan - 7th March 1974

  • Religious indoctrination of children = mental child abuse

  • And how in the Hell was his "campaign to arrest the pope uninformed?? The Pope was DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE for the cover-up, remember...

  • DARwin saw in an ape, Marilyn Monroe.

  • NEW BOOK FOR DEBATES AND GOVERNANCE

    Topics: The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.

    Websites: balanceddiet1.yolasite.com etc.

    See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc.yolasite.com

    or

    figure4etc3.yolasite.com

    See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weeb­­ly.com announcements-balancedway.yola­­site.com

  • thank you dawkins for helping me evolve

  • LOL that lady at 8:36 =3

  • As FellS3raph stated (top comment), I am too shocked to see that this documentary video has only so few views..

  • I don't like the interviewer... maybe speak to someone with so many "measures" like Dawkins should be difficult... but when Dawkins stops talking, he kinda "mmm" and asks another question, without any connection or a fluid overall speaking.

    Dawkins is great, kinda rude sometimes about science but we are all really lucky to have him helping the "science area" to make the final step: step out from corporations, have a public budget and return to the people side

  • whats the deal with the guy interviewing, i jus cant help thinkin he's a nob

  • @MrBrittish DARwin saw in an ape, Marilyn Monroe.

  • Is there any evidence for the Omnipotent God of Abrahamic Religion? Miracles? None whatsoever it seems. I think the real question we must ask is,what is the origin of the Universe? Can we know at present? Science says 'we don't know'. If this is the only Universe then it's no accident.The value of the Cosmological Constant, accurate to 1: 10 to the 120th power is the proof of fine -tuning. The alternative is the Multiverse Theory, and we don't have any real proof yet. We just don't know.

  • @brianjsmith1895 DARwin saw in an ape, Marilyn Monroe.

  • The reason what endears Dawkins is that he is always on a quest to learn. He is neither self promoting nor patronizing.

  • @FellS3raph: Have you ever SEEN a cat play piano?? It's freaking AWESOME!! (and yes, I do deplore the the fish-like attention span and immature sensibilities of our culture today, but what can you do but shake your head dangle some string?)

  • I can't tell you how much it pains me that every cat playing piano or jackass-stunt has millions of views, and that which offers truth and enlightenment struggles for 10,000 views.

  • @FellS3raph I'll make a video of a cat playing piano, then he finishes his tune and says "Evolution is real! There's no god!".

    Then I get 10 million views.

  • @FellS3raph that proves that evolution is a fact. Some people still being monkeys.

  • NO Evidence???? The evidence is all around you - what there is no evidence of is a god... crazy

  • @anniechang27 DARwin saw in an ape, Marilyn Monroe.

  • @sfyr Really now. So fossils and DNA are fairytales but invisible big magians in the sky are not. You friggin' idiot. LOL

  • @sfyr Have you actually researched into evolution from non-creationist sources? I suspect your understanding has been filtered by creationist presentation. What postitive evidence is there for the theory of creationism? A dubious book that has multiple authors (ie. the bible) doesn't constitute evidence in support of the theory of creatonism.

  • @sfyr Are you insane?

    "There's NO evidence for evolution..."

    The force of the facepalm I did, when i saw your comment, could've caused another Big bang. Just.....wow

    I guess ignorance is bliss...

  • @FellS3raph Cats don't require an hour of engaged listening. People don't like having to think for that long. It is unfortunate.

  • @FellS3raph Can you say the dumbing down of the American population. I agree, it's pretty sad and kinda painful to see.

  • @FellS3raph PIANO CAT IS TRUTH

  • @FellS3raph Yeah, I hear you. I'm a dog person.

  • @FellS3raph

    Some of the best things in life are an aquired taste.

  • @FellS3raph I would like to say that i share your proclivities absolutely, people now days seem to be more interested in superficial bullshit, we live in a time where we have a world of majestic knowledge at our fingertips, the beauty of the universe, the complexity of the atom, the diversity and variety of life, yet somehow this pales into insignificance next to a bloody talking orange on the net! To be fair i actually found the talking orange quite funny, but i"m a sucker for comical whimsy!

  • @FellS3raph thats the sad state we are in. and it goes all the way to the corridors of power. no wonder we are screwed.

  • @FellS3raph Yeah, and on the radio, have you noticed how there are no good songs at all? And theres only a collection of third rait idiots?

  • Great interview. Usually in interviews Dawkins merely discusses his most recent book but this one gave a personal background and it is fascinating to learn not just what he knows of science but why he learnt it. Thanks for the upload.

  • I enjoyed this interview thoroughly. Many thanks for the upload.

  • I just love how wonderfully modest Dawkins is too. This is a guy who has made a vast contribution to the world and yet he's so much more self-questioning and modest and broad-minded than those creationist fools who he tries to educate. What a guy!

  • @tomski3 Funny guy, First of all he is not modest, secondly he has not made any contribution to the world, at least not scientifically, just a ruminant of a very arbitrary field of science, very outspoken but nothing new!

  • @RoelGeurtsen lol was that a joke?

  • @finchvalor A joke? well let's see! You tell me, How did that ol' theory of dawkins go again! Oh yeah God does not exist because the flying spaghetti monster does not exist! almost forgot the second law of Dawkins: Hitler was a catholic christian, what every historian will dispute! Oh no you are right, we cannot do without him!

  • @tomski3 and yet hes been given this completely false label of being strident, arrogant, self-aggrandizing, etc. None of which is true. I have close friends and family who are non-religious, scientists, atheists, even all 3 at once, and they get very dismissive about him... A friend of mine said Dan Dennets book Breaking the Spell made them "really angry"....I pleaded with them to explain why....they couldnt. Their reasons were moot....people just tow the line it seems.

  • A wonderful talk on a wonderful beach day! Beautiful all around.

  • All the seats at the Sunday Masses filled with the masses massive asses classes pass as fast as molasses. Ceremonial reading glasses.

  • This is a very illuminating interview, thanks for uploading.

  • I am about half way through the book at the moment, but i am reading another book aswell.

  • can't thank you enough for the great video interview

  • Comment removed

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more