In theological discussion with religious leaders, I often ask what their
response would be if a central tenet of their faith were disproved by science.
When I put this question to the Dalai Lama he unhesitatingly replied as no conservative or fundamentalist religious leaders do: in such a case Tibetan Buddhism would have to change. Even if it's a central tenet like reincarnation? Even then, he answered. However, he added with a twinkle, it's going to be hard to disprove reincarnation.
@infideluxe You sound surprised... That's what all religious people do: believe some irrational bull crap and then erroneously shift the burden of proof onto the skeptics for failing to disprove it. I.E. "You can't prove there's no unicorns, therefore it's rational for me to believe in unicorns." In logic, it's called the "negative proof fallacy."
So I guess it's both endearing and yet disappointing that the Dalai Lama would twinkle forth such blather. I sometimes like to think that Buddhism is above all that. I know there are devotional elements to it, though.
@infideluxe They're every bit as superstitious as the other religions. It just worked out that Buddhist MORALITY is better in line with secular values.
In a sense, reincarnation is real. When and organism dies, its molecules have a chance of being used as nutrients that feed plants and animals. There is also a chance said molecules could be used to create new cells or animal gametes. The carbon cycle and other life cycles recycle molecules all the time.
Obviously this is far from the karma influenced/caste system that is part of the Buddhist reincarnation belief, but it is a scientific way to look at reincarnation.
Well, all this does happen. But let's not call it reincarnation, which means specifically the rebirth of a soul in a new body. It seems that this kind of conflation of science and religion leads to huge misunderstands, similar to charlatans like Deepak Chopra co-opting quantum physics to prove god.
It would make more sense to call it recycling, or perhaps there's a more descriptive term that covers it. I'm just extremely skeptical of appropriating "spiritual" terms for science.
@bishop8000 Reincarnation happens if you don't break away from the cycle of hatred; Transcendence within and on a quantum level with all things. In a sense you are trying to become one again with the very thing that is bearing your existence. You can also take the Big Bang into Buddhism and it will be compatible
@bishop8000 But putting a label like "atheistic" on it is silly. Of course it is atheistic by nature, just as it is "a-santaclausic", "afairyic", "a-spaghettimonsteric", "ateapotic". "Atheistic" is just as silly as these terms.
@MatsEP In a world where 90% of the entire population BELIEVES in one or another god, atheism it's not a silly distinction. We do not yet live in a post-theistic age.
Sagan was a scientist who knew more during his time than most. Science has historically forced Christians to shift the goal-posts by answering mysteries whose explanations were previously superstitious. And good science isn't usually concerned with superstition. It encroaches upon it and destroys it without even trying.
Scientists, as far as I can tell, work very hard, and become understandably angry when their work is undermined by superstitious twaddle.
Great interview. Technically, it was not his last, though. If you want to see a video showing him being interviewed a couple weeks before his death, do a YouTube search for "On The Day Carl Sagan Died" (YouTube wouldn't let me link to it here).
There is more evidence proving accounts of the Bible in all fields of science than evidence supporting evolution. There is substantial scientific evidence disproving evolution.
Its okay to be angry. I felt the same way too, but after studying the archeological, biological, historical, and even astronomical evidence it would take more faith to believe in evolution than God. Don't let your pride and the devil's veil over science keep you from the truth. God bless.
The moment the interviewer interrupted Carl Sagan I wanted to rip his fucking head off. Not good to see Carl like this, I always imagine him the way he was in Cosmos
As a Christian who seeks objectivity, I really can appreciate Carl Sagan. Yes there is probably much ideologically where he and I would disagree. However I deeply respect his contributions to science. He really was one of the greatest minds in history.
@1GodOnlyOne I apologize, but you have too many videos and I could not find that particular one, if you could send a private message link. You are wrong about Carl Sagan, he promoted the expansion of the scientific curriculum through the teaching of evolution as the process by which species diversified.
Carl Sagan pioneered the Science of Intelligent Design, and coined the phrase "Intelligent Design, circa 1985. I'm sorry if you don't like it, but nothing can be done about it -- these are historical facts.
@1GodOnlyOne Your video is misleading. It pro-ports that all reputable scientists know that an intelligent designer created the universe, unsupported by any evidence. You also used quotes from Carl Sagan that were intended to promote your side. Overall your video is biased towards intelligent design.
@ScientificExploits Actually, there is ample scientific evidence in favor of intelligent design -- my video is not misleading at all, and you have failed to provide evidence otherwise.
Thank you for admitting that Carl Sagan's quotes were intended to promote the Science of Intelligent Design -- you are correct about that, as Carl Sagan is the Father of the Science of Intelligent Design.
For more information, see my video at the following: watch?v=4Ywm8Y0Zx_8
@1GodOnlyOne Science doesn't know how life began. So the science of intelligent design is flawed. I did not say that Carl Sagan promoted intelligent design, in fact I would say that if he were still alive he would disagree with the entire philosophy.
@tommyblunt Not at all. They both make factual claims about the universe that contradict one another. And it really matters what millions of people believe to be true, especially in a democracy.
@bishop8000 No it made factual claims 2000 years ago. In 2000 years from now, the science of today will be just as invalid. Religion however has another dimension - a philosophical one that makes it important to society in a different way.
@ohedd The validity is not nearly as important as how the knowledge, correct or incorrect, was derived. And in any case, the philosophical and moral lessons of religion can be had on their own without any connection to religion.
@bishop8000 Using a god as an explanation isn't very far-fetched and was a product of man's logic 5000 years ago, just as science is today. Yes philosophical and moral lessons and guidelines can be had elsewhere, but religion is a way of unifying people with the same goals and intentions, just like a political party. In Sweden 80 years ago, the Christian Democrats were the only ones opposing sterilizaition of eugenically undesireble elements of society - negros and retards.
@bishop8000 You are wrong, i see your replies on anyone here, what are u trying to acomplish? tell everyone that they are wrong and u are "true" to someone's else way of thinking? try to think for yourself little man.
@bishop8000 It's not a mob just because several people share and create an opinion. That's just how civilization has evolved. Religion, ideologies and what you call "mob mentality" is something every single successful civilization is built upon. It is obviously a human trait.
@bishop8000 I am amazed you say that as a supposed advocate of science and objectivity. Evolutionary psychologists say that religion is an expression of man's most profound advantages separating us from the animals - our ability to organize and unite. Religion is yet another forum for this and it has had a great deal of value for every civilization in history so far. Its entire existence and common occurance is in itself proof of its intrinsic value to mankind.
@bishop8000 Our model of the atom is just a picture of what we assume it looks like based on directly percievable observations, and so was god 5000 years ago. That is the scientific part of it, then there's the sociological part of it; Just like socialism unified under a worldview of materialism, Christianity unified under a worldview of creationism or whatever. Though, both socialism and christianity has another dimension to it other than a scientific one - a sociological dimension.
@ohedd Socialism is a pattern of governance, Christianity is a superstitious belief system. You're using them in a sentence like they're in the same category. It doesn't matter one iota if there's a "sociological dimension" to religion or not, it's an incorrect view of the universe, it's not consistent with observations. It's not a good source of morality or anything else. It's purely a hindrance to our advancement in every way.
@bishop8000 That's a weird conclusion: "It's an incorrect view of the universe and it's inconsistent with observations, THUS not a good source of morality or anything else". What? How is religious morals bad because of its scientific worldview? Is socialism per se, wrong because Lamarckism suits their worldview more? That logic doesn't prevail anywhere else, so it's almost as if you have intent to hate religion unconditionally?
@bishop8000 Aha sorry. But my point stands; It has a sociological dimension to it and the science behind it is irrelevant - it's not like technology is based on it or anything.
@ohedd Technology is held back by religion. Stem cell research is a prime example. The sociological dimension is essentially mob mentality backed by bronze age superstition. It's a disastrous combination of ignorance and power.
@bishop8000 That is an example of how it can be harmful, yes. Eugenics is another example of science doing more harm than good. It's just the way it is, but eventually it all turns for the better.
@ohedd Any and all good done by religion could also be done by secular organizations, doctors without borders, donations to the poor, etc.. The same can't be said for science.
@bishop8000 It's my opinion that it doesn't matter if good/bad is done by a religion or by another organization. What matters is who's the most widespread of them, and as of today christianity has like 2 billion supporters, and it would take an enormous amount of effort to, for whatever reason, try to dissolve this huge and historic thing that in so many ways has defined today's society. I'd say we'll let them be and encourage the good things and question the bad things they do.
we cannot move forward without science,but we cannot move forward without compassion.We need coping mechanisms to deal with the fact we know we will die,but we need to know we dont know all the answers and science helps us figure this out better than anything we have at this point in time.
@dubaipete Mr. Sagan was just being polite, Atheism was considered even more controversial back then, don't worry we've got Richard Dawkins to call religion out on it's BS
A great man, one of the greatest in my opinion. Neverltheless, with his immense intellect and love of humanity he still felt compelled to appease religion. Look from 08:00.
Just read, yes READ, the bible, torah,quran and see how completely immoral are their religious doctrines: clear instruction on beating, killing (children included), even genocide. Sorry Carl. There can be NO room for religion if our future if we are to succeed as a species.
It saddens me to see him look so feeble. However, he lives forever in our minds and science. I've read one of his books and plan to read the rest. My children will do the same; hopefully they will be as mesmerised by his work and his passion of science as I.
Carl Sagan looked like a good guy, however, he was bad by nature, some times the really very important thing is not what people say instead it is what they are. In Spanish we says: Road to hell is paved with good intents. A little advices, is it really necessary to be rich such as a lot of capitalists believe?, is public opinion infallible such as a lot of socialists believe?, I repeat: some times the really very important thing is not what people say instead it is what they are
I'm not quite sure I've ever seen such a mishmash of meaningless non-sequiturs, blatant ignorance, and baseless accusations all in one post. Congratulations!
@infideluxe : Perhaps your viewpoint is due to you are used to think "logical things" such as: evolutionary process is driven by randomness, at the same time, such process selects to fittest without take into account there are a lot factors which overcome capacity of surviving of any organism. Any lava flux can destruct any species.
@infideluxe I prefer to think: your understanding about real life is zero. By the way, it is not so difficult realizing during first century and after, that any guy who declares "I am god" is crazy. However, Jesus is considered God, since then until present. Love in Jesus.
@infideluxe Well said. I think it's a testament to Sagan's stature and influence that jello-brained fanatics - choose the type - feel the need to attack him. Carl Sagan is the Gold Standard of what it means to want to know. He was astonishingly diplomatic and secure in his statements regarding the irrational and delusional - and the people who earnestly embrace those twin evils. And so it goes . . .
I have told this a lot; human self-consciousness cannot be explained by means of natural laws or randomness because it is volitional, it means, it posses will. besides, it is not possible prevent philosophical explanation because nothing does not originate nothing therefore, eternity exists. The all is eternal, only finite things are originate by another things. Atheism is impossible. Sagan lost his opportunity to reach the eternity.
@bishop8000 Only, write it on your notes please: «Human self-consciousness cannot explained by laws or randomness», maybe you will get understand it when you are too tired due to waiting for first self-conscious computer such as shown on Space Odyssey film. Write it down please.
@Leivinn20 Qué triste que te metas con una de las mayores mentes que ha dado la humanidad.... Decir que el ateísmo es imposible, y los argumentos que das....son de risa. No trates de compararte con él.
@AlWoolridge : Solo anota: «la auto consciencia humana por definición no puede ser justificada mediante leyes o aleatoriedad»...tal vez algún día lo entiendas, cuando te canses de esperar por el primer computador auto-consciente, algo alfo así como el computador de la película Odisea Del Espacio.
Dude, you really should brush up on your English language before you start exposing yourself like that. No one's going to take you seriously? Don't they have spell checker in Latin America?
@Leivinn20 Honestly, you are completely clueless. I don't even know what to tell you except... get with it, man. There's far too much real information out there for anyone to be walking around as ignorant as this comment makes you seem.
@fabs039 ¿Are theories true because these are based on data, or are data true because these are based on theories?...now the question: have you seen life originated spontaneously? . You made a decision in relation to evolution. Any human being can escape from any idea, but it is not possible to escape from own nature. Human being is religious by nature...look around through your window. "Atheists" have been trying to escape from God, instead of this, they founded another religion.
@Leivinn20 Have you used a cell phone? Have you driven a car? Have you seen radio waves, or do you just believe that God is routing our calls? Have you seen fuel being injected into an engine to be ignited by a spark, or is God pushing your car around town?
@tomplunket : Let me ask you for by mean of a reflexive question: if God (by definition or concept) is Being who controls everything, can you find him by mean of experimental methods???, take in account, you are a part of everything. I can only show you a little of evidence: our *self-consciousness and unity of universe show evidences for one God only. (*natural laws cannot determine previously our thoughts). If you tell me: "God didn't respond me", I would say live your life.
@bengacris :Anybody can try to escape from any idea, but it can't escape from own nature, Atheists believe that life can created by mean of natural laws regardless how many failed attempts in laboratory, therefore, they believe time is magic. At the same time, atheists believe that Natural laws have been same during all universe existence.
If tomorrow everyone decides to praise the boogyman, something in which has just as much proof and evidence behind it as god, does this make its right. We need to realize that we are not cavemen, religion was created to control the masses. This isnt some conspiracy theory, what do we call our bill of rights, "god given" rights. Our money has god related slogans, we say god bless america, etc. There is no god, keep believing in fairy tales, keep conforming. You have self-awareness for a reason...
@VoLCoMzYaDiGG If it wasn't for religious people we'd be immortal now and this is FACT! We are just now making it happen as evidence it is possible! They are working on multiple methods to universally eliminate disease, and have found something recently that will double the 100 year lifespan of humans. is science "evil stuff that is bad for you"? or the tool of hope?
"Faith is belief in the absence of evidence." That search for the evidence - the truth of things - is what distinguishes us from the lower primates. Our curiosity. Why we would give that up for the belief in the words of people who thought the sun revolved around Earth is beyond me.
@knoxinsocks I agree with you, but I don't think why so many cling to superstition is truly beyond you. As intelligent mammals aware of our own mortality but also with survival instincts, we long for a way to cheat death. Religion gives us a way of tricking ourselves into believing that death is not the end, and never mind that the evidence is paper thin.
@bishop8000 The unbelievable thing is... i do not know if you know, but it is a FACT, that if you look at what they are doing right now, with synthetics, robotics, and just the span of everything else... that book had it's chance for thousands of years and at least a thousand of which science wasn't even given any chance.... it is FACTUAL we would be IMMORTAL(immune to disease and age) TODAY if it wasn't for a book that teaches you the immortality comes after this life.
The only answers for the mysteries of this universe, this cosmos, are found in Christianity. Period. Defy me if you may but give logical supporting argument if you do.
@bishop8000 This is a Carl Sagan video. Why do you have to be a internet fag and say the troll shit here? Have some fucking respect for the Saganater.
@Rattlehead408 Hey I'm all for emphasizing respect for Carl Sagan, but if you are going stand up for him don't use profanity and don't attack the person who posted the video. The troll thing was about the religious troll who attempted to defile this video. The statement made was simply a statement that the troll had been blocked. Please get everything right before you decide to post.
@AuthorSteven yea, the logical. reasonable, FACT/EVIDENCE based answer is Science. God? really? Christianity believes that God, the all powerful, all loving being hates gays, commies, etc. We have laws against gay rights. Christians are able to emphasize on this piece of the bible, they make rules, laws etc. Yet when the bible also says all have the right to food, shelter, and water, all of those are absent in majorities of humans. Christianity cant even interpret its OWN book correctly. Wake up
@ImGladImBrad Now that mention it, you also never see them in the same place at the same time. Sorta like Clark Kent and Superman. Uh oh. Are you thinking what I'm thinking? YIKES!
Science doesn't point to a divine being, saying so just shows the ignorance of your statement I hope u read this I can't reply to your massage since I'm viewing this on my phone but like infedeluxe said not only doesnt science point to a divine Creator but even if we actually found something that we could conclude was evidence of a divine being, science actually advices to approach it with skepticism to eventually filter the best result.
he's amazing! I am a practicing Catholic and not because it is a "feel good" experience, but because scientific evidence and humanity combined points to a divine being. We are not a religion of faith alone, but faith and reason.
"scientific evidence and humanity combined points to a divine being."
Poetic, but religious faith and scientific reason are incompatible with one another. Science has never pointed to a divine being, nor is it in the business of attempting to do so.
Co-opting science as such has been the endeavor of many theists, though. It seems that with the advent of fields like quantum physics, theists are ever more insistent on such nonsense.
@Erdos2n Look...we all know about conservation laws of science. They are something that is taught at a very young age. All I'm saying is, The Big Bang Happened, right? Planets formed and through the process of what we call Evolution, life is created, these are all things we can agree upon; however, there had to be a first mover. Even if the universe started from the reproduction of molecules, that first molecule had to come from somewhere, there is always a first mover, logically speaking.
@Erdos2n But if everything has to have a first mover does not the first mover require a first mover? You can not really think in the same patterns as you do IN the universe because there was no time or space. If you can say that "God" always existed and created the universe why cant you just go one step less and say that the universe always existed?
"Jefferson said he was at heart a scientist, that he would've loved to be a scientist, but there were certain events in America that called to him and so he devoted his life to politics so that generations later people could be scientists." That line mind fucked me. Thanks Jefferson, Sagan and countless others ^_^
"Science is more than a body of knowledge, it's a way of scepticaly interrogating the Universe with a fine understanding of Human fallability". - Carl Sagan.
So both people of faith and people of science are making the same argument. "Oh no, my way of thinking is being pushed out of society!" And I think that's good. People should stand up for what they think is right.
@Anguigen I completely agree. To move society forward we need social discourse on the subject. Of course, science clearly works, look at the internet you're using. And religion clearly doesn't, there's not a single case of prayer healing beyond what the body could've done on its own. In many cases religion takes credit for medical science's genuine miracles. There's absolutely no evidence whatsoever for a god, and a great deal of evidence that the universe operates by natural principals.
Carl Sagan virou o José Serra.......
toniaraujorocha 1 day ago
i miss him:(
saganemc2 1 day ago
I almost want to cry not seeing him with his beautiful hair :-(
SirGeorge8600 5 days ago
I wonder what he would have thought of Buddhism, he should have looked into it.
eatcarpet 1 week ago
In theological discussion with religious leaders, I often ask what their
response would be if a central tenet of their faith were disproved by science.
When I put this question to the Dalai Lama he unhesitatingly replied as no conservative or fundamentalist religious leaders do: in such a case Tibetan Buddhism would have to change. Even if it's a central tenet like reincarnation? Even then, he answered. However, he added with a twinkle, it's going to be hard to disprove reincarnation.
bishop8000 1 week ago
@bishop8000
"However, he added with a twinkle, it's going to be hard to disprove reincarnation."
Interesting. So even the Dalai Lama doesn't require proof for certain claims. He only requires proof of nonexistence to convince him to the contrary.
infideluxe 6 days ago
@infideluxe You sound surprised... That's what all religious people do: believe some irrational bull crap and then erroneously shift the burden of proof onto the skeptics for failing to disprove it. I.E. "You can't prove there's no unicorns, therefore it's rational for me to believe in unicorns." In logic, it's called the "negative proof fallacy."
bishop8000 6 days ago
@bishop8000
Right.
So I guess it's both endearing and yet disappointing that the Dalai Lama would twinkle forth such blather. I sometimes like to think that Buddhism is above all that. I know there are devotional elements to it, though.
infideluxe 6 days ago
@infideluxe They're every bit as superstitious as the other religions. It just worked out that Buddhist MORALITY is better in line with secular values.
bishop8000 6 days ago
@bishop8000
Something to feel thankful for, at least.
infideluxe 6 days ago
@infideluxe
@bishop000
In a sense, reincarnation is real. When and organism dies, its molecules have a chance of being used as nutrients that feed plants and animals. There is also a chance said molecules could be used to create new cells or animal gametes. The carbon cycle and other life cycles recycle molecules all the time.
Obviously this is far from the karma influenced/caste system that is part of the Buddhist reincarnation belief, but it is a scientific way to look at reincarnation.
Gright 6 days ago
@Gright
Well, all this does happen. But let's not call it reincarnation, which means specifically the rebirth of a soul in a new body. It seems that this kind of conflation of science and religion leads to huge misunderstands, similar to charlatans like Deepak Chopra co-opting quantum physics to prove god.
It would make more sense to call it recycling, or perhaps there's a more descriptive term that covers it. I'm just extremely skeptical of appropriating "spiritual" terms for science.
infideluxe 5 days ago
@bishop8000 Reincarnation happens if you don't break away from the cycle of hatred; Transcendence within and on a quantum level with all things. In a sense you are trying to become one again with the very thing that is bearing your existence. You can also take the Big Bang into Buddhism and it will be compatible
hiroshidude 5 days ago
wish that reporter would shut up and listen....
We all miss you carl x
your one of the stars that continues to shine bright....
wingle007 1 week ago
Don't you wish you could push a button that made everyone in the world see this clip?
antizac 1 week ago
285,693 views and only 30 idiots, I think it's pretty good
qwertyqart 2 weeks ago 9
@qwertyqart Carl Sagan had that effect on people.
bishop8000 2 weeks ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Ah, Carl. That illustrious shill, who drove forward the intellectualisation of atheism, not science.
fashklash 2 weeks ago
@fashklash Science is atheistic because there's no evidence for any gods.
bishop8000 2 weeks ago 11
@bishop8000 But putting a label like "atheistic" on it is silly. Of course it is atheistic by nature, just as it is "a-santaclausic", "afairyic", "a-spaghettimonsteric", "ateapotic". "Atheistic" is just as silly as these terms.
MatsEP 2 weeks ago 3
@MatsEP In a world where 90% of the entire population BELIEVES in one or another god, atheism it's not a silly distinction. We do not yet live in a post-theistic age.
bishop8000 2 weeks ago 5
@bishop8000 Science is agnostic because it cannot state whether or not supernatural forces exist.
ClamCrunchy 1 week ago
@ClamCrunchy Atheism and agnosticism are not mutually exclusive. Science is both.
bishop8000 1 week ago
@fashklash
Sagan was a scientist who knew more during his time than most. Science has historically forced Christians to shift the goal-posts by answering mysteries whose explanations were previously superstitious. And good science isn't usually concerned with superstition. It encroaches upon it and destroys it without even trying.
Scientists, as far as I can tell, work very hard, and become understandably angry when their work is undermined by superstitious twaddle.
infideluxe 2 weeks ago 2
He knew what he was talking about.
Did you know there are infinite numbers between 1 and 2.
And the atoms in your body are 99.99999999% empty space?
think about it
Enticer666 2 weeks ago 6
Love
Llukashipman 3 weeks ago
thank you Carl. Science is my religion.
FloridaRaider 3 weeks ago
Sagan. Forever.
btl743 3 weeks ago
I'd say Rest In Peace but my Baloney Detecting Kit forbids me....
mattb521 3 weeks ago
Such a great man!
GmrWeb 3 weeks ago
Great interview. Technically, it was not his last, though. If you want to see a video showing him being interviewed a couple weeks before his death, do a YouTube search for "On The Day Carl Sagan Died" (YouTube wouldn't let me link to it here).
tominterval 3 weeks ago
@tominterval
For future reference, I believe youtube will allow posts to contain the part of the url after the slash, such as watch?v=jod7v-m573k
infideluxe 3 weeks ago
thats not too bad tho out of 280k i would only have to fight 30
DaRealFiberOptix 3 weeks ago
those dislikes are misclicks.
EcoDimension 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Let me help you find the part which you show to your friends:
3:50
You're welcome.
filip000 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
filip000 3 weeks ago
this is the most important info ever...!
TZMrazvitie 3 weeks ago
30 people are scared of death.
callumserberus 3 weeks ago
Best way to start new year.
linkuei83 3 weeks ago
30 dislikes. Incredible.
pant1979 4 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ATHEISTS BURN IN HELL FOREVER !!!!
fuckmania07 4 weeks ago
i love his laugh :')
happyhanieh 1 month ago in playlist Favorite videos
why do all the smart people die from canser
lefunh12 1 month ago
@lefunh12 shit happens
ntipouan 1 month ago
@lefunh12 Uh...'canser'[sic] has no respect of persons when it comes to death...whether they're smart or dumb.
conkpit 1 month ago
every time i feel lost i listen to carl sagan and it brings me the knowing that we all are the same and all of a sudden everithing is ok
midnightowl401 1 month ago 5
His laugh makes me happy
Sakayoshi95 1 month ago in playlist Favorite videos
This has been flagged as spam show
There is more evidence proving accounts of the Bible in all fields of science than evidence supporting evolution. There is substantial scientific evidence disproving evolution.
Its okay to be angry. I felt the same way too, but after studying the archeological, biological, historical, and even astronomical evidence it would take more faith to believe in evolution than God. Don't let your pride and the devil's veil over science keep you from the truth. God bless.
Maindrian5 1 month ago
RIP One of our finest thinkers.
Mrsiepel 1 month ago 47
I love this guy sooooo much <3
hYdEdesign 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Ditto to quotes by by Sagan68 "Thank you dear teacher for having existed" and MartinGianola "Carl changed my life."
willywonka4340 1 month ago
Could a higher res transfer than 240 be available please?
jontycampbell 1 month ago
@jontycampbell No you can't because the videos is from 1996.
Wildtigaah 1 month ago
Thank you dear teacher for having existed
Sagan68 1 month ago
Carl changed my life.
MartinGianola 1 month ago 70
@MartinGianola how?
Starwars1442 2 weeks ago
@MartinGianola mine as well. literally, no lie.
ThyrmBloodaxe 1 week ago
i wanna be as awesome as this guy when im that old. you dont use the word wise alot nowadays, but this guys pretty wise lol
nightreaper999 1 month ago
The moment the interviewer interrupted Carl Sagan I wanted to rip his fucking head off. Not good to see Carl like this, I always imagine him the way he was in Cosmos
pitstopjohn 1 month ago
stop discussing with these (some) religious people.. you can't win
88Cortex 1 month ago
As a Christian who seeks objectivity, I really can appreciate Carl Sagan. Yes there is probably much ideologically where he and I would disagree. However I deeply respect his contributions to science. He really was one of the greatest minds in history.
objectivechristian 1 month ago
@objectivechristian I wouldn't go that far, but I do appreciate him for pioneering the Science of Intelligent Design:
"A pattern always indicates Intelligent Design."
-- Carl Sagan, circa 1985
1GodOnlyOne 1 month ago
@1GodOnlyOne Carl Sagan didn't support intelligent design.
ScientificExploits 1 month ago in playlist Uploaded videos
@ScientificExploits Sure he did -- he's the Father of the Science of Intelligent Design.
For more information, see my video entitled, "Bible Predicts Intelligent Design Science."
1GodOnlyOne 1 month ago
@1GodOnlyOne I apologize, but you have too many videos and I could not find that particular one, if you could send a private message link. You are wrong about Carl Sagan, he promoted the expansion of the scientific curriculum through the teaching of evolution as the process by which species diversified.
ScientificExploits 1 month ago
@ScientificExploits I'll have even more videos soon. ; )
Here's the link for you:
watch?v=4Ywm8Y0Zx_8
Carl Sagan pioneered the Science of Intelligent Design, and coined the phrase "Intelligent Design, circa 1985. I'm sorry if you don't like it, but nothing can be done about it -- these are historical facts.
1GodOnlyOne 1 month ago
@1GodOnlyOne Your video is misleading. It pro-ports that all reputable scientists know that an intelligent designer created the universe, unsupported by any evidence. You also used quotes from Carl Sagan that were intended to promote your side. Overall your video is biased towards intelligent design.
ScientificExploits 1 month ago
@ScientificExploits Actually, there is ample scientific evidence in favor of intelligent design -- my video is not misleading at all, and you have failed to provide evidence otherwise.
Thank you for admitting that Carl Sagan's quotes were intended to promote the Science of Intelligent Design -- you are correct about that, as Carl Sagan is the Father of the Science of Intelligent Design.
For more information, see my video at the following: watch?v=4Ywm8Y0Zx_8
1GodOnlyOne 1 month ago
@1GodOnlyOne Science doesn't know how life began. So the science of intelligent design is flawed. I did not say that Carl Sagan promoted intelligent design, in fact I would say that if he were still alive he would disagree with the entire philosophy.
ScientificExploits 1 month ago
religion and science are 2 completely different things, just sayin'.
tommyblunt 1 month ago
@tommyblunt Not at all. They both make factual claims about the universe that contradict one another. And it really matters what millions of people believe to be true, especially in a democracy.
bishop8000 1 month ago
@bishop8000 Religion has no facts to back it up therefore it can't be a factual claim. Popularity has nothing to do with the truth.
ComputerGamerify 1 month ago
@ComputerGamerify It's true that popularity doesn't determine truth. But a factual claim can be made without evidence, it just shouldn't be accepted.
bishop8000 1 month ago
@bishop8000 No it made factual claims 2000 years ago. In 2000 years from now, the science of today will be just as invalid. Religion however has another dimension - a philosophical one that makes it important to society in a different way.
ohedd 1 month ago
@ohedd The validity is not nearly as important as how the knowledge, correct or incorrect, was derived. And in any case, the philosophical and moral lessons of religion can be had on their own without any connection to religion.
bishop8000 1 month ago
@bishop8000 Using a god as an explanation isn't very far-fetched and was a product of man's logic 5000 years ago, just as science is today. Yes philosophical and moral lessons and guidelines can be had elsewhere, but religion is a way of unifying people with the same goals and intentions, just like a political party. In Sweden 80 years ago, the Christian Democrats were the only ones opposing sterilizaition of eugenically undesireble elements of society - negros and retards.
ohedd 1 month ago
@ohedd Mob mentality is bad thing and particularly bad when it grows up around religion.
bishop8000 1 month ago
@bishop8000 You are wrong, i see your replies on anyone here, what are u trying to acomplish? tell everyone that they are wrong and u are "true" to someone's else way of thinking? try to think for yourself little man.
valentyn0 1 month ago
@valentyn0 What are you trying to accomplish? Tell me I'm wrong? In addition to being stupid, and wrong, you're also a hypocrite. Goodbye.
bishop8000 1 month ago
@bishop8000 It's not a mob just because several people share and create an opinion. That's just how civilization has evolved. Religion, ideologies and what you call "mob mentality" is something every single successful civilization is built upon. It is obviously a human trait.
ohedd 1 month ago
@ohedd Civilization was built in spite of religion, not because of it. Religion is obviously a human weakness.
bishop8000 1 month ago
@bishop8000 I am amazed you say that as a supposed advocate of science and objectivity. Evolutionary psychologists say that religion is an expression of man's most profound advantages separating us from the animals - our ability to organize and unite. Religion is yet another forum for this and it has had a great deal of value for every civilization in history so far. Its entire existence and common occurance is in itself proof of its intrinsic value to mankind.
ohedd 1 month ago
@ohedd You're confusing teamwork with superstition and pretending they're inseparable. Fail.
bishop8000 1 month ago
@bishop8000 Our model of the atom is just a picture of what we assume it looks like based on directly percievable observations, and so was god 5000 years ago. That is the scientific part of it, then there's the sociological part of it; Just like socialism unified under a worldview of materialism, Christianity unified under a worldview of creationism or whatever. Though, both socialism and christianity has another dimension to it other than a scientific one - a sociological dimension.
ohedd 1 month ago
@ohedd Socialism is a pattern of governance, Christianity is a superstitious belief system. You're using them in a sentence like they're in the same category. It doesn't matter one iota if there's a "sociological dimension" to religion or not, it's an incorrect view of the universe, it's not consistent with observations. It's not a good source of morality or anything else. It's purely a hindrance to our advancement in every way.
bishop8000 1 month ago
@bishop8000 That's a weird conclusion: "It's an incorrect view of the universe and it's inconsistent with observations, THUS not a good source of morality or anything else". What? How is religious morals bad because of its scientific worldview? Is socialism per se, wrong because Lamarckism suits their worldview more? That logic doesn't prevail anywhere else, so it's almost as if you have intent to hate religion unconditionally?
ohedd 1 month ago
@ohedd You put the "THUS" in there. Those were two separate points independent of one another. So leave that straw man alone.
bishop8000 1 month ago
@bishop8000 Aha sorry. But my point stands; It has a sociological dimension to it and the science behind it is irrelevant - it's not like technology is based on it or anything.
ohedd 1 month ago
@ohedd Technology is held back by religion. Stem cell research is a prime example. The sociological dimension is essentially mob mentality backed by bronze age superstition. It's a disastrous combination of ignorance and power.
bishop8000 1 month ago
@bishop8000 That is an example of how it can be harmful, yes. Eugenics is another example of science doing more harm than good. It's just the way it is, but eventually it all turns for the better.
ohedd 1 month ago
@ohedd Any and all good done by religion could also be done by secular organizations, doctors without borders, donations to the poor, etc.. The same can't be said for science.
bishop8000 1 month ago
@bishop8000 It's my opinion that it doesn't matter if good/bad is done by a religion or by another organization. What matters is who's the most widespread of them, and as of today christianity has like 2 billion supporters, and it would take an enormous amount of effort to, for whatever reason, try to dissolve this huge and historic thing that in so many ways has defined today's society. I'd say we'll let them be and encourage the good things and question the bad things they do.
ohedd 1 month ago
@ohedd That's about the most ignorant complacency I've ever heard. I'm glad christianity is dieing.
bishop8000 1 month ago
@ohedd That's about the most ignorant complacency I've ever heard. I'm glad christianity is dieing.
bishop8000 1 month ago
@bishop8000 Complacency? In what way? No it's not dying. It's the fastest growing religion in the world.
popescoach1 1 month ago
@popescoach1 You are ill informed sir.
bishop8000 1 month ago
@popescoach1 You are ill informed sir.
bishop8000 1 month ago
@popescoach1 I think atheist, the disbelief in religion is growing faster.
PSNDonutDude 1 month ago
@tommyblunt The land and the sea are two completely different things, but both are factual. Same with Theism and science.
1GodOnlyOne 1 month ago
we cannot move forward without science,but we cannot move forward without compassion.We need coping mechanisms to deal with the fact we know we will die,but we need to know we dont know all the answers and science helps us figure this out better than anything we have at this point in time.
8302967 1 month ago
Carl Sagan....like a boss
LKR1Dust 1 month ago
Charlie Rose is an A**hole, he won't let Sagan speak he seems to want to interject his bull into the talk. Screw Charlie Rose!
nash984954 1 month ago in playlist More videos from bishop8000
@dubaipete Mr. Sagan was just being polite, Atheism was considered even more controversial back then, don't worry we've got Richard Dawkins to call religion out on it's BS
dudeofelric 1 month ago
he was right
MrNachoflores1 1 month ago
A great man, one of the greatest in my opinion. Neverltheless, with his immense intellect and love of humanity he still felt compelled to appease religion. Look from 08:00.
Just read, yes READ, the bible, torah,quran and see how completely immoral are their religious doctrines: clear instruction on beating, killing (children included), even genocide. Sorry Carl. There can be NO room for religion if our future if we are to succeed as a species.
dubaipete 1 month ago
Great Upload, thanks and well done!
Mauriceok 1 month ago
"...This mixture of ignorance and power is going to blow in our faces..."
Goddamn, if only he could be alive today to see how unfortunately right he was. That man was more of a prophet than a mere scientist.
nothGhost 1 month ago
If you can't open your mind, then Carl Sagan isn't for you PERIOD...
I say that strongly, as ppl say "There is a god"....
freedomland11 1 month ago
It saddens me to see him look so feeble. However, he lives forever in our minds and science. I've read one of his books and plan to read the rest. My children will do the same; hopefully they will be as mesmerised by his work and his passion of science as I.
Jezzabeanz 1 month ago
Carl Sagan looked like a good guy, however, he was bad by nature, some times the really very important thing is not what people say instead it is what they are. In Spanish we says: Road to hell is paved with good intents. A little advices, is it really necessary to be rich such as a lot of capitalists believe?, is public opinion infallible such as a lot of socialists believe?, I repeat: some times the really very important thing is not what people say instead it is what they are
Leivinn20 1 month ago
@Leivinn20
I'm not quite sure I've ever seen such a mishmash of meaningless non-sequiturs, blatant ignorance, and baseless accusations all in one post. Congratulations!
infideluxe 1 month ago 2
@infideluxe : Perhaps your viewpoint is due to you are used to think "logical things" such as: evolutionary process is driven by randomness, at the same time, such process selects to fittest without take into account there are a lot factors which overcome capacity of surviving of any organism. Any lava flux can destruct any species.
Leivinn20 1 month ago
@Leivinn20
Your understanding of evolution is zero.
infideluxe 1 month ago
@infideluxe I prefer to think: your understanding about real life is zero. By the way, it is not so difficult realizing during first century and after, that any guy who declares "I am god" is crazy. However, Jesus is considered God, since then until present. Love in Jesus.
Leivinn20 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Leivinn20
"I prefer to think: your understanding about real life is zero. "
That's okay. Preferring your facts rather than recognizing them is the first sign of intellectual bankruptcy.
"Jesus is considered God"
"Love in Jesus"
Repeat and rinse.
infideluxe 1 month ago
@infideluxe Well said. I think it's a testament to Sagan's stature and influence that jello-brained fanatics - choose the type - feel the need to attack him. Carl Sagan is the Gold Standard of what it means to want to know. He was astonishingly diplomatic and secure in his statements regarding the irrational and delusional - and the people who earnestly embrace those twin evils. And so it goes . . .
TheStockwell 1 month ago
Allow me add: brain complexity is not relevant in this case because any complexity is determined by laws...
Leivinn20 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I have told this a lot; human self-consciousness cannot be explained by means of natural laws or randomness because it is volitional, it means, it posses will. besides, it is not possible prevent philosophical explanation because nothing does not originate nothing therefore, eternity exists. The all is eternal, only finite things are originate by another things. Atheism is impossible. Sagan lost his opportunity to reach the eternity.
Leivinn20 1 month ago
@Leivinn20 You're wrong at every conceivable scale of resolution. Zooming in on anything you just said finds beliefs as wrong as the entire comment.
bishop8000 1 month ago 14
@bishop8000 Only, write it on your notes please: «Human self-consciousness cannot explained by laws or randomness», maybe you will get understand it when you are too tired due to waiting for first self-conscious computer such as shown on Space Odyssey film. Write it down please.
Leivinn20 1 month ago
@Leivinn20 Qué triste que te metas con una de las mayores mentes que ha dado la humanidad.... Decir que el ateísmo es imposible, y los argumentos que das....son de risa. No trates de compararte con él.
AlWoolridge 1 month ago
@AlWoolridge : Solo anota: «la auto consciencia humana por definición no puede ser justificada mediante leyes o aleatoriedad»...tal vez algún día lo entiendas, cuando te canses de esperar por el primer computador auto-consciente, algo alfo así como el computador de la película Odisea Del Espacio.
Leivinn20 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Leivinn20
"I have told this a lot;"
Imagine that! Too bad you most likely never actually listened to any and every sane rebuttal to such rubbish.
infideluxe 1 month ago
@Leivinn20
Dude, you really should brush up on your English language before you start exposing yourself like that. No one's going to take you seriously? Don't they have spell checker in Latin America?
jump70 1 month ago
@jump70 : Evasive behaviour. I have discussed a lot with anglophones. At least, enough to realize about their tricks.
Leivinn20 1 month ago
@Leivinn20 lol whut? Stop thinking you are a beautiful and unique snowflake
kingcarcas1349 1 month ago
@kingcarcas1349 are you trying to distract my attention?. my arguments are logical an obvious.
Leivinn20 1 month ago
@Leivinn20 Honestly, you are completely clueless. I don't even know what to tell you except... get with it, man. There's far too much real information out there for anyone to be walking around as ignorant as this comment makes you seem.
dpowens 1 month ago
@dpowens These cases are called "epistemological barriers", I call it "spiritual barriers" I think you will never achieve understand my point. Bye.
Leivinn20 1 month ago
@Leivinn20 I absolutely agree, though I doubt we'd concur on who's to blame.
dpowens 1 month ago
@Leivinn20 WTF?????
fabs039 1 month ago
@fabs039 ¿Are theories true because these are based on data, or are data true because these are based on theories?...now the question: have you seen life originated spontaneously? . You made a decision in relation to evolution. Any human being can escape from any idea, but it is not possible to escape from own nature. Human being is religious by nature...look around through your window. "Atheists" have been trying to escape from God, instead of this, they founded another religion.
Leivinn20 1 month ago
@Leivinn20 Have you used a cell phone? Have you driven a car? Have you seen radio waves, or do you just believe that God is routing our calls? Have you seen fuel being injected into an engine to be ignited by a spark, or is God pushing your car around town?
tomplunket 1 month ago
@tomplunket : Let me ask you for by mean of a reflexive question: if God (by definition or concept) is Being who controls everything, can you find him by mean of experimental methods???, take in account, you are a part of everything. I can only show you a little of evidence: our *self-consciousness and unity of universe show evidences for one God only. (*natural laws cannot determine previously our thoughts). If you tell me: "God didn't respond me", I would say live your life.
Leivinn20 1 month ago
@tomplunket : By the way, if your concept about God is not «The God of Everything». Do not pay attention to such "god".
Leivinn20 1 month ago
@Leivinn20 Atheists founded another religion? Wich one? And Atheists don't try to 'escape' God, they just deny it's existence.
bengacris 1 month ago
@bengacris :Anybody can try to escape from any idea, but it can't escape from own nature, Atheists believe that life can created by mean of natural laws regardless how many failed attempts in laboratory, therefore, they believe time is magic. At the same time, atheists believe that Natural laws have been same during all universe existence.
Leivinn20 1 month ago
you know those few people who are like "ima fucking baller"...while you know the few that can accually pull that shitz off?
carl sagan was fucking baller
lovetownsend 1 month ago
His last book was one of his greatest.
phasespace 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@phasespace
was it really? did u read it, what was it like
lovetownsend 1 month ago
08:22
AgentMirage 2 months ago
That old looking fellow taught me everything I need to know about life here on this pale blue dot.
shizzle5150 2 months ago
he spoke the truth.religious madmen hate him.
blutobelushi 2 months ago
If tomorrow everyone decides to praise the boogyman, something in which has just as much proof and evidence behind it as god, does this make its right. We need to realize that we are not cavemen, religion was created to control the masses. This isnt some conspiracy theory, what do we call our bill of rights, "god given" rights. Our money has god related slogans, we say god bless america, etc. There is no god, keep believing in fairy tales, keep conforming. You have self-awareness for a reason...
VoLCoMzYaDiGG 2 months ago
@VoLCoMzYaDiGG If it wasn't for religious people we'd be immortal now and this is FACT! We are just now making it happen as evidence it is possible! They are working on multiple methods to universally eliminate disease, and have found something recently that will double the 100 year lifespan of humans. is science "evil stuff that is bad for you"? or the tool of hope?
IronicAtheist 2 months ago
"Faith is belief in the absence of evidence." That search for the evidence - the truth of things - is what distinguishes us from the lower primates. Our curiosity. Why we would give that up for the belief in the words of people who thought the sun revolved around Earth is beyond me.
knoxinsocks 2 months ago 13
@knoxinsocks I agree with you, but I don't think why so many cling to superstition is truly beyond you. As intelligent mammals aware of our own mortality but also with survival instincts, we long for a way to cheat death. Religion gives us a way of tricking ourselves into believing that death is not the end, and never mind that the evidence is paper thin.
bishop8000 2 months ago 12
@bishop8000 The unbelievable thing is... i do not know if you know, but it is a FACT, that if you look at what they are doing right now, with synthetics, robotics, and just the span of everything else... that book had it's chance for thousands of years and at least a thousand of which science wasn't even given any chance.... it is FACTUAL we would be IMMORTAL(immune to disease and age) TODAY if it wasn't for a book that teaches you the immortality comes after this life.
IronicAtheist 2 months ago
Comment removed
mustbeburtreynolds 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@knoxinsocks /watch?v=JF61lhEeGng
/watch?v=n426PazcFXE
Science and god are one and the same.
mustbeburtreynolds 2 months ago
@knoxinsocks Creativity.
Etrajbe 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The only answers for the mysteries of this universe, this cosmos, are found in Christianity. Period. Defy me if you may but give logical supporting argument if you do.
AuthorSteven 2 months ago
@AuthorSteven Troll. Blocked.
bishop8000 2 months ago 13
@bishop8000 This is a Carl Sagan video. Why do you have to be a internet fag and say the troll shit here? Have some fucking respect for the Saganater.
Rattlehead408 2 months ago
@Rattlehead408 Hey I'm all for emphasizing respect for Carl Sagan, but if you are going stand up for him don't use profanity and don't attack the person who posted the video. The troll thing was about the religious troll who attempted to defile this video. The statement made was simply a statement that the troll had been blocked. Please get everything right before you decide to post.
terrbearisatiger 2 months ago
@AuthorSteven yea, the logical. reasonable, FACT/EVIDENCE based answer is Science. God? really? Christianity believes that God, the all powerful, all loving being hates gays, commies, etc. We have laws against gay rights. Christians are able to emphasize on this piece of the bible, they make rules, laws etc. Yet when the bible also says all have the right to food, shelter, and water, all of those are absent in majorities of humans. Christianity cant even interpret its OWN book correctly. Wake up
VoLCoMzYaDiGG 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
faith does not need o proof
admin10077 2 months ago
@ImGladImBrad Now that mention it, you also never see them in the same place at the same time. Sorta like Clark Kent and Superman. Uh oh. Are you thinking what I'm thinking? YIKES!
TheStockwell 2 months ago
Science doesn't point to a divine being, saying so just shows the ignorance of your statement I hope u read this I can't reply to your massage since I'm viewing this on my phone but like infedeluxe said not only doesnt science point to a divine Creator but even if we actually found something that we could conclude was evidence of a divine being, science actually advices to approach it with skepticism to eventually filter the best result.
INMATE2468 2 months ago
he's amazing! I am a practicing Catholic and not because it is a "feel good" experience, but because scientific evidence and humanity combined points to a divine being. We are not a religion of faith alone, but faith and reason.
Erdos2n 2 months ago
@Erdos2n
"scientific evidence and humanity combined points to a divine being."
Poetic, but religious faith and scientific reason are incompatible with one another. Science has never pointed to a divine being, nor is it in the business of attempting to do so.
Co-opting science as such has been the endeavor of many theists, though. It seems that with the advent of fields like quantum physics, theists are ever more insistent on such nonsense.
infideluxe 2 months ago
@Erdos2n Look...we all know about conservation laws of science. They are something that is taught at a very young age. All I'm saying is, The Big Bang Happened, right? Planets formed and through the process of what we call Evolution, life is created, these are all things we can agree upon; however, there had to be a first mover. Even if the universe started from the reproduction of molecules, that first molecule had to come from somewhere, there is always a first mover, logically speaking.
Erdos2n 2 months ago
@Erdos2n But if everything has to have a first mover does not the first mover require a first mover? You can not really think in the same patterns as you do IN the universe because there was no time or space. If you can say that "God" always existed and created the universe why cant you just go one step less and say that the universe always existed?
Ryalnotch 2 months ago
@Erdos2n Evolution has nothing to do with life being created only variations.
JerryConlon 2 months ago
"Jefferson said he was at heart a scientist, that he would've loved to be a scientist, but there were certain events in America that called to him and so he devoted his life to politics so that generations later people could be scientists." That line mind fucked me. Thanks Jefferson, Sagan and countless others ^_^
PitchBlack696 2 months ago
This is awesome...read The Dawn of Intelligence.
Search Wildman Walker's blog
superwhuffo1 2 months ago
"Science is more than a body of knowledge, it's a way of scepticaly interrogating the Universe with a fine understanding of Human fallability". - Carl Sagan.
N4SONIC 2 months ago
Happy 77th Birthday Carl !, R.I.P.
N4SONIC 2 months ago
What an inspiration ... sorely missed.
dazhatz 2 months ago
carl sagan rest in peace and smoke heavenly weed up there
seennlisten 2 months ago
Happy birthday Carl
BowlofIndoMee 2 months ago
carl sagan should have been president. all that's left in this modern era is a bunch of old brainwashed bible-fucks who secretly dictate the country.
MrFerjurowns 2 months ago
So both people of faith and people of science are making the same argument. "Oh no, my way of thinking is being pushed out of society!" And I think that's good. People should stand up for what they think is right.
Anguigen 2 months ago
@Anguigen I completely agree. To move society forward we need social discourse on the subject. Of course, science clearly works, look at the internet you're using. And religion clearly doesn't, there's not a single case of prayer healing beyond what the body could've done on its own. In many cases religion takes credit for medical science's genuine miracles. There's absolutely no evidence whatsoever for a god, and a great deal of evidence that the universe operates by natural principals.