Dead-to-the-spirit deluded "God Delusion" author & blithering fool scientist goon Richard Dawkins another "leader" given 2 the profane masses is another useful idiot 4 Jesuit machinations
Jesuitical; pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuit Order completely altered the education system 2 suit their Evo-Hoax Agenda to discredit the Bible
Papal Rome cant have their Counter Reformation 2nd Dark Age DESPOTISM until Bible is destroyed
All one has to do is look at the progression of science and religion through history. There is a very long trail of exchanges, whereby religion repeatedly RELINQUISHES claims to science. There is not ONE example where science relinquishes a claim back to religion. It's a fascinating pattern. I'm not saying God does not exist. But I am convinced that the involvement of God in our affairs is far less (like Deism) than any religious zealot would dare acknowledge.
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
Atheists are stuck with their own embarrassing assertion that:
(A) Intelligence arises from a NON-intelligent source.
and that
(B) Intelligence, reason and logic evolve via meaningless, random chaos; and are continually evolving via meaningless, random chaos.
Only THEISTS, DEISTS and AGNOSTICS can sit at the table of intelligence, reason and logic with credibility. Atheists alone utterly exclude themselves.
At least Agnositics are wise enough to say that they don't know WHAT to believe.
@Mr88playmaker Seriously, just put a lid on it. Ive spent more than enough time trying to talk sense to you in the past. Don't reply to my comments, dont bother trying to debate with me and don't give me anymore of your petty creationist bullshit because I've heard it all before. If you ever get any real evidece that supports your fantasies by all means let me know. Until then stop making a fool of yourself. You live in a fantasy world.
@petestrat07 Not as eloquent as I would have put it, but good idea - sometimes you just have to step back. I've had the same arguments with creationists misinterpreting (knowingly or not) every source put before them and falling into lots of logical fallacies. Point them towards Talk Origins or a decent science book.
@SAMagic I know. I've been very blunt lately because I have spent many hours/months/years answering their rheorical question. The make an argument with a good question yet they refuse to listen to the answer. Therefore they only proposed the question in hope that they stump you and you have to resort to accepting the supernatural.They were never interested in the answer and I find this extremely frustrating. You're right about leading the horse to water.
@Mr88playmaker "Intelligence, reason and logic evolve via meaningless, random chaos; and are continually evolving via meaningless, random chaos."
That's an idiotic claim. When you are equating "evolve" with "meaningless, random chaos" it's you who have left the table of intelligence, reason, logic and credibility. Evolution works precisely because there are consequences to variation in a reality with natural laws. Certain consequences are of a form that reinforce themselves.
Dogmatic, militant Atheists (alone) maintain that symbolic information is MATTER.
Einstein pointed to the nature and origin of symbolic information as one of the profound questions about the world as we know it. He could identify no means by which matter could bestow meaning to symbols. The clear implication is that symbolic information, or language, represents a category of reality distinct from matter and energy.
If Einstein is wrong, and code is matter, prove it and win the Nobel prize.
@ws81086n Erm, no it's not. Basing your conclusion or beliefs about something soley on it's origin, disregarding it's current meaning or context is not 'common sense' or logical.
Atheism is a very new idea. It does not hold water. The idea that intelligence and thought and logic are but meaningless, random chaos arising from a NON-intelligent source is both NON-scientific and illogical.
An agnostic is far more wise than an atheist because an agnostic --or a deist for that matter-- it not automatically and utterly disqualified from all things logic. A Deist says "IN the beginning, was The MIND of God", and an agnostic says "It's too heavy man, I DON'T KNOW"
Atheism arises from lack of evidence for theism. It is a response to theism.
it is not a system which is identical for all atheists, and essentially even theists are 99% NON-theists (hence, atheist), since they do not believe in Thor, Zeus, etc,etc,etc. All agnostics are, to a degree, atheist...it is the simple 'knowledge' vs. 'faith' situation, but ultimately agnostics do not agree with the propositions posed by theists, hence making them largely atheists. for me, anyways.
"The idea that intelligence and thought and logic are but meaningless, random chaos arising from a NON-intelligent source is both NON-scientific and illogical."
This is a ridiculous argument. You clearly do not understand what atheism is. You are mixing many different positions, arguments, and understandings to make your point. For example "intelligence and thought" arising from "non-intelligence" of course doesn't make sense. BUT... this is not the question.
There is no such thing as one genus (KIND) evolving into another genus (KIND).
Evolutionists finally admit that. The problem is that they have not removed General Evolution Theory from the text books and are still pushing it on people via "suggestive" means. For example, PBS keeps running Evolution programs where they fail to clarify that humans have always been humans and animals have always been animals. They 'suggest' man evolved from animals.
Your comment implies that all atheists believe in meaningless and random chaos...this is false. Nowhere is it stated that evolution, the big-bang, or any other logical/physical-evidence based theory, is equal to randomness, or chaos. In fact, in evolution, natural selection is essentially the OPPOSITE of random, or chaos. This applies to the universe as well, when galaxies are destroyed, and born again.
We cannot know what was there before the big bang. thats it..
Evolutionists are backed up into a corner. The SCIENCE is on the side of Intelligent Design. What do they do? They RE FRAME the argument as one of "science vs. religion."
Richard Dawkins is a perfect example. After losing BIG in a debate against a Creationist at Oxford, he vowed to never debate another Creationist again. Instead he devoted his time to writing books and giving lectures about the "evils" of GOD and religion!
DNA is NOT "religion." DNA is scientific proof that God exists.
@Mr88playmaker Agnosticism is a "statement" about knowledge.Atheism is a "statement" about belief. They are two completely different things.Most atheists are also agnostic(they don't believe and do not claim to know there's no god)and most agnostics are also atheists(they don't know but they also don't believe)
The beginning of intelligence has nothing got to do with atheism.And it's not an idea,its the default state of mind for every human being when theyre born,just like non-belief in pixies.
@Mr88playmaker You sir are uneducated. Atheism has been around as long as humans have been around. As soon as one says look there is a sun god look there is a universal god, look its the god of farming, is as soon as someone says "i dont believe it". If you knew anything about chemistry or biology, you could actually mean something, but right now you don't even sound as if you know anything about the building blocks of everything including us, nor do you sound like u know genetics
@iliveon (QUOTE): "If you knew anything about chemistry or biology, you could actually mean something, but right now you don't even sound as if you know anything about the building blocks of everything including us, nor do you sound like u know genetics" (END QUOTE)
Biological life forms are the purposeful product of information and language. Information arises only from a mind. Symbolic information is neither matter nor energy. Symbolic Info writes your chemicals. Code requires an author.
@Mr88playmaker Yeah viruses and bacteria are purposeful product of God and so is all the evolution that occurs in them as we use antibiotics. That's why HIV is hard to stop, because it evolves. Code doesn't require an author. If you knew anything about natural selection and Genetics as I've said, you'd understand how code gets more complex. You are a waste of time because you are ignorant and you refuse to wikipedia evolution or genetic mutation
iliveon said (QUOTE) "Yeah viruses and bacteria are purposeful product of God and so is all the evolution that occurs in them..." (END QUOTE)
Yours is the Darwin Age mentality. DNA killed Darwin.
Modern Science proves that life forms are written into being via information & language in the way of genetic code. Matter does not add information to the genome. In other words, a bacteria today can only contain an EQUAL or LESS amount of info as did the same bacteria an infinite GAZILLION yrs ago.
@Mr88playmaker Symbolic information IS matter. It is stored on paper. It is stored in the mind. Those are corporeal forms. It is represented IN matter. Our brains are bio-electric. We physically (chemically) store memories and access them via electrical impulses. Accessing those memories in a variety of patterns results in new information (developed theories, conclusions, etc). If they weren't physically stored in some manner, they'd dissipate into nothing, right?
@informant007 said: "Symbolic information IS matter. It is stored on paper." Information represents a category of reality that transcends matter. Paper only represents itself. Ink only represents itself. Patterns only represent themselves. INFORMATION is the communication or reception of KNOWLEDGE or INTELLIGENCE between an encoder and decoder utilizing agreed upon symbols. Symbolic information writes/creates your physical brain. Symbolic information only arises from a mind.
He may point out obvious facts and thereby think he's made a point that most everyone hasn't already considered several time over, but I will give him this, he's definitely got a certain eloquence about him.
However, eloquence is the greatest tool of a deceiver because eloquence can make one forget the facts and the wisdom to believe a lie. The most powerful are always the most eloquent, the most deceptive are always the most eloquent, the greatest liars are always the most eloquent.
@NewnotesJR WTF are you going off about??? HE IS A BLOODY FUCKIN SCIENTIST you creationist IDIOT! How dare you even presume he would want someone forgetting about the facts. People like Mr. Dawkins dedicate their lives to putting out, investigating and questioning the best facts and wisdom human kind has. His eloquence comes from his knowledge and confidence in what he speaks about. Tell me Newnotes did the religion that your parents force fed you taste good with the paint chips you ate.
Not only has Christianity influenced the social, political, and moral attitudes of peoples tens of thousands of miles away, but in the geographic location where Christianity started, it is most shunned, thereby proving what Christ said before hand that a prophet is not accepted in His own land.
Fascinating how Dawkins can point out the obvious that we all already know, yet cannot see the even more obvious distinction, or perhaps he does notice it and merely refuses to acknowledge it.
He can notice that, but he can't notice also that religions tend to stay around their place of origin, and only grow out from it.
Yet, he cannot see the distiinction with Christianity how it's singular pecularity not only is not subject to it's geographic location, but has radically moved across the earth from it's origins and even affected profound changes in the personal, political, and social attitudes of a populace tens of thousands of miles away from it's origin.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Dawkins comes off as a little kid to me all the time....his mind works in a very cute way... he things all he sees is all that there is to see and because he can explain the 2% of the things in the world that matter he calls the rest silly just because he cannot understand them.
@fairjasmine i think you need to watch more dawkins, as he often says the opposite. perhaps you "thing" his mind works in a cute way because he's delivering to an audience who are dumb enough to believe in supernatural beings.
@fairjasmine Just because science doesn't yet know 100% of the universe (and we never will), that doesn't mean that you get to come along and say "Well that means that god must have done it then."
500 years ago, everyone KNEW that the sun revolved around the Earth.
It's not that Dawkins won't believe in things that he can't see with the naked eye; it's that he's only comfortable believing something if there some reason to do so.
Consider if you will, that the world can be divided into two very distinct groups. Those who believe in a supreme being, and those who seem to spend all of their time saying there isn't one.
@Mr88playmaker Natural Selection is the opposite of chaos by definition. That's why bricks were shat. People knew the fact of Evolution (common descent) before Natural Selection was proposed. The race and 'holy grail' was to explain it naturally.
Also, your option 1 is an infinite loop. Yo dawg, if intelligence can only arise from intelligence, then your god has a god.
I've noticed a pattern. Creationists are uneducated ignorant Americans or Middle-Easterners.
Darwin ignorantly thought that the cell was a simple blob of goo but 100 yrs later, Modern science discovered DNA! Genetic code works like computer SOFTWARE and the cell works like a COMPUTER. You have within you the most sophisticated information computing system in the entire known universe. There are people now designing DNA run computers.
The symbolic information contained in DNA is neither matter nor energy.
Information is not molecules.
EXAMPLE: The information I am giving you is NOT your glass computer screen.
Your screen is a MEDIUM that is made up of matter (molecules) but said computer screen is NOT the INFORMATION itself.
If you can think deep, you will come to the startling realization that the information within a book is NOT ink and paper (molecules). Information transcends its medium.
(A) Information is the communication or reception of KNOWLEDGE or INTELLIGENCE between an encoder and a decoder utilizing agreed upon symbols.
(B) DNA code is symbolic INFORMATION like computer software & cells are computers.
(C) Even if humans had NEVER discovered DNA code: DNA code creates and governs all things biological via the communication of KNOWLEDGE or INTELLIGENCE between an encoder and a decoder utilizing agreed upon symbols.
(D) INFORMATION arises from a MIND. So does LANGUAGE.
@Mr88playmaker who gave the Egyptians their intelligence then? (FYI, they were around several thousand years before Jesus was puportedly around...)
Or the third option: Intelligence is taught and learned from observation. Ignorance is learned from ignoring everything science has discovered because it contadicts what your bible says.
Matter does not bestow meaning to symbols. Only a mind can do that.
For this reason, even the great Greek SECULAR (non religious) philosophers began all things logic upon the required foundation that "in the beginning" there was Nous Logos i.e. the MIND of the Creator and LANGUAGE. Language and thought are inseparable. All symbolic information arises from thought.
DNA has made deists or theists out of skeptics & atheists.
The entire Naturalist theory of Evolution itself is wholly founded upon, and completely dependent upon the scientifically unsupported fairy tale called "Abiogenesis".
Abiogenesis VIOLATES the LAW of Biogenesis!
Life does NOT come from Non-life! Evolutionists PROPAGATE Abiogenesis as the only BASIS for Evolution-- but when called on it, they DISTANCE themselves and claim it has NOTHING to do with Evolution.
"ABIOLOGY" is scientifically INCOMPATIBLE with all things BIOLOGY.
A lot of the very early creation myths are linked by common astrological configurations stretching back to 10500BC, all have similar symbology as well- serpents, architecture and procedural numerology. Ancient civilisations in England, Egypt, South America, South East Asia and Japan are all linked by this common heritage despite being thousands of miles apart
Interesting how you interpret that way. A rational mind would assume that there was a much older civilisation that linked them either either by seatravel and trade or cultural dominion
The secular Greeks themselves determined via rational thought and critical observation that God exists and directs the universe. Antony Flew was the world's most militant atheist. He was the mentor and hero of Richard Dawkins. The very "Billy Graham" of Atheism" per se. Flew spent almost 40 yrs. debating Creationists and defending Evolution but the reality of DNA destroyed his argument, and consequently, Flew humbled himself and admitted he had been wrong about the origins of life.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I like and respect Richard Dawkins as a scientists.
But when Dawkins over steps his bondaries into territories which he has no expertises in and starts bashing religion and theology then he is completely out of his league.
Dawkins should stick with what he knows best which Evolutionary biology.
I disagree. As a race we have embraced religion so much that is seems almost imoral to question it. Yet all corners of the globe worship different gods.Instictfully we yearn for answers and seek refuge in "god" as this is the only possible way this universe come about. Religion truly does seem to be nothing more than a man-made theory that gives us meaning and comfort. I think Richard see's the world through vey unbiast eyes. The more i listen to him, the more I enjoy his point of veiws.
@petestrat07 Interesting point, Religion came about around the same time we developed consciousness, and with that awareness of self, and awareness of our own death. This would have brought trauma to the mind, and hence religion to comfort all the fears.
And yes your very right, Richard is unbiased, he is a scientist, and by default they have no agenda, the results are what they are, and that is what they are seeking.
petestrat07 said (QUOTE) "As a race we have embraced religion so much..." (END QUOTE)
A thinking man, unafraid to follow & face the natural and observable evidence, will never leap to "religion" UNTIL the most practical philosophical question of 1st cause agent is settled. Atheists who jump to the subject of "people seeking refuge in..." are making the clumsy mistake of leaping OVER the scientific question and awkwardly changing the subject to religion. Dawkins does so to his own discredit.
What saddens me most is that what the young Mr Dawkins is stating is obviously factual, and nothing controversial - scientifically speaking that is. I am so fed up with religions and the damage they continue to inflict on us. They all preach peace, love and mercy but the vast majority in practice deal in ignorance, oppression and death.
I remember this lecture series when I were a lad, only now do I realise it was Richard Dawkins. I had no idea he had such a pivotal role in shaping my ideas.
I wonder if you would be allowed to do a lecture like this in the UK these days ?
Calling people's faith into question - especially so to an audience of children - would have the Muslims and the Christians red faced with anger and indignation. Out would come the protests, the placards and every Christian and Islamic 'representative' to trade in their 'offense' for air time.
Well, religious people have always indoctrinated their children with their belief systems. If teaching young children that the world is around 6000 years old and that it was created in 6 days is OK with society, it's a shame we don't have intelligent people like Dawkins teaching our children the truth instead, in every school.
The visible marks of extraordinary wisdom and power appear so plainly in all the works of the creation that a rational creature, who will but seriously reflect on them, cannot miss the discovery of a Deity. --- John Locke
Why can't people just accept that people have different opinions/theories on origin of life or evolution/creationism. Why are both sides so scared of the other? If you believe one way or the other that's fine. Let them teach both ways and let people make up their minds for themselves. It's just as religious to say there is no God as there is to say there is one.
Because Religion is fantasy, made up, fiction, and some can't stand to see others believing in fantasy created by people who knew nothing about the world some thousand years ago.
Because some things aren't a matter of opinion, they're a matter of truth, or at least probability based on the evidence. Ignorance is not a good thing for anyone.
If there is fear, it is certainly from creationists as there is no evidence to support the idea that the biblical god, or any "god" for that matter, created anything in this universe. One thing you will find is that should a "creator" ultimately be discovered, science will certainly acknowledge it. Religious persons will never accept science so long as it conflicts with their 0 evidence, 100% faith based beliefs. One "fear" is that this sort of ignorance could persist for generations.
Dawkins doesn't seem to get that religion is most often about believing things about which evidence is lacking on both sides;it's views are harmless and unable to be disproved.His metaphor only serves to display his hostility towards religion,hardly a scientific outlook.
Scripture like the Bible is seen as allegorical, and serves to protect people's sanity by offering an explanation of unexplainable phenomena.Polls have shown that religious people believe less in nonsense conspiracy theories.
Well, many things that religions claim are, in fact, known to be untrue. For example, some Christians and Jews claim the universe is 6,000 years old, or thereabouts. Yet, there is no "lack of evidence" on both sides. Only one side lacks evidence.
How does the bible or any religious text answer anything? It is ancient words from bronze aged men. All the 'defining' claims of religions' have been proven to be wrong. Why hang on to any of it. The way I see it, if a book is inspired by an all knowing creator, it shouldn't contain vast factual errors and lack consistancy. All religious texts read like what we can logically conclude they are: works of fiction.
It's like people get a high from being willfully ignorant and believing in shit.
I'm getting real tired of this "intelligent reasoning based on observations is the same as faith bullshit" this is how morons argue against people like dawkins... they say he is hypocritical. Yes you are taught many subjects... but science allows questioning, you try to uncover the truth through explainable means. It is not based off one authoritarian, unchanging text.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
his argument is proven wrong by himself. He admits growing up in a christian home and he didn't grow up christian. So much for that argument. People chose to believe what they want. He never debates the facts only pokes fun at what other people believe.
With that mindset we are indoctrinated from birth with every idea we are taught.
There is no other way to learn. Education is indoctrination. He can be so brilliant and in the same breath anally hypocritical and self contradictory. Yet he doesn't see it.
exactly, he says that people believe in jesus becuase their parents are christians. That is not the truth. we chose to agree with it or not. Just as he did
Well that comes down to his typical human ego. He feels his views are somehow more justified than others and only those that share his ideals and mindset are "enlightened"
So you deny the fact that you're more likely to be a Christian if your parents are Christian than if they're not? That's too funny. Then how do you explain the correlation between geography/religion? Pure coincidence? Even funnier.
If the pope was born in saudi arabia he would probably be muslim now. With his ambition he might even be a high ranking member.
The response I often get from theists is god's master plan. To which I reply that Catholics don't believe in predestination.
Also the billions of people who have not even heard of christianity that are suffering from hunger and will burn in hell by christian standards for beign pagan lol.
What if the pope was born a Hitler Youth? haha and the people suffering and burning are the African Colonies and South American Colonies who had christainty beat into them like they were Toby.
yep but he wasnt the only one. Madalyn Murray O'Hair was also a smart atheist at the time. She might even have been a motivation for Richard Dawkins to go public with his beliefs.
Very silly video. Comparing religion to science is comparing apples to oranges. All humans behave this way. Being in "science mode" are not immune to being human. No human on the planet derives their behavior from the thought process called science. All motivation comes from the subjective. It is where we exist.
He is motivated by his belief that science somehow reveals truth or is "superior" These are not scientific notions. They are subjective. He will never admit or escape this.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
There's no such thing as transition. No fossil demonstrates morphological transition. Punctuated Equalibrium is a gap theory that has embaressed evos for 30 yrs now.
yes there is LOL. Don't you keep an eye on the news lol. They literally have fossils of transitional forms of where there the fishlike organisms first started coming onto land. We've had transitional forms of today's whale for years lol. Of course we have these things. Science is something that takes time to crack problems or find mathematical rigour in observation. It isn't like mythology that says, hey this happened okay. Science doesn't work like that. Humans don't know everything :P
what makes you think i am in trouble with the law? and uhh, 3 things,
1. this is youtube
2. we are not in school, its summer
3. and if it wasn't summer, this aint english class
your one of those types of jackoffs who are proven wrong, or who has no valid or legit comeback or counter point, so you just start hacking away at someone who isn't using spellcheck on youtube, thus inflating your ego into thinking that you won the debate by say "you spelled that wrong"
this is not a spelling and grammar test....if you want to be anal, do, by all means....you are the worst type of you-tuber..... you cannot come up with an intelligent response of your own but choose to attack peoples' grammar and spelling......your not my fuckin schoolteacher dude (n this isn't a freakin spelling test)
go have sex with yourself cos i've no doubt no-one else will
so now your attacking our intelligence.....thats the funniest......the greatest thinkers of our time were atheist....why not try giving us an intelligent reason as to why you believe god exists (without resorting to pseudo-science, heresay and retarded retorts like the one you just made)
If you saw a camel crap in the desert, does it mean there was no camel? If you saw created things like the earth and human beings does that not indicate the presence of an eternal and all mighty creator.
The most convincing evidence I've seen is petrified trees standing vertically through multiple layers of rock, proving that there was a worldwide flood. THAT would kill the dinosaurs!
So petrified trees can't be buried by sedimentary layers? And heck even if it was a flood, are you finding these trees all over the world all buried in the exact same way in the exact same layer?
Those are good questions. I saw the photos from a video presentation. They came from a couple different places in the U.S., and I'm not sure if the elevation is the same at each location or not. I would like to get more information on them.
If you find it post it here so we can have a look too ;)
That's the reason a lot of us appreciate the scientific method so much. Any hypothesis that anyone wants to introduce into science has to pass hundreds of questions like that from people much smarter than me. An idea won't be accepted until it passes the most rigorous testing.
Which wouldn't change the entirety of evolution. It's not like one thing wrong is going to debunk a whole set of related phenomena, it will simply refine it, and for all the refining done to evolution, I'm sure if I took the time to google it there's a completely natural reason or we've yet to get a working hypothesis for the explanation. It doesn't automatically point that because X happened it was a god.
God was created by man.
dkthg 2 weeks ago
Science was created by God.
Metsada007 2 weeks ago
Oh. His hair was brown.
tra1215 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Dead-to-the-spirit deluded "God Delusion" author & blithering fool scientist goon Richard Dawkins another "leader" given 2 the profane masses is another useful idiot 4 Jesuit machinations
Jesuitical; pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuit Order completely altered the education system 2 suit their Evo-Hoax Agenda to discredit the Bible
Papal Rome cant have their Counter Reformation 2nd Dark Age DESPOTISM until Bible is destroyed
SpencerBenedict2nd 3 months ago
All one has to do is look at the progression of science and religion through history. There is a very long trail of exchanges, whereby religion repeatedly RELINQUISHES claims to science. There is not ONE example where science relinquishes a claim back to religion. It's a fascinating pattern. I'm not saying God does not exist. But I am convinced that the involvement of God in our affairs is far less (like Deism) than any religious zealot would dare acknowledge.
informant007 4 months ago
Dawww, look at baby Richard! :)
BJ219 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
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
TheServiceWeb 5 months ago
Both evolution and atheism have become another DUMB religion.
This mason scumbag is HYPOCRISY in action.
I loved it when Ben Stein OWNED this clown in Expelled.
buffboynick 6 months ago
@buffboynick Hahaha... what the fuck were you smoking dude? I want some
mehico33 6 months ago
@buffboynick Google Expelled Exposed to see that Ben Stein didn't OWN Dawkins. Stein conned you.
ndrthrdr1 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
unbias eyes!? whahahahaha!
guch0902 7 months ago
unbias eyes!? whahahahaha!
guch0902 7 months ago
Atheists are stuck with their own embarrassing assertion that:
(A) Intelligence arises from a NON-intelligent source.
and that
(B) Intelligence, reason and logic evolve via meaningless, random chaos; and are continually evolving via meaningless, random chaos.
Only THEISTS, DEISTS and AGNOSTICS can sit at the table of intelligence, reason and logic with credibility. Atheists alone utterly exclude themselves.
At least Agnositics are wise enough to say that they don't know WHAT to believe.
Mr88playmaker 9 months ago
@Mr88playmaker Seriously, just put a lid on it. Ive spent more than enough time trying to talk sense to you in the past. Don't reply to my comments, dont bother trying to debate with me and don't give me anymore of your petty creationist bullshit because I've heard it all before. If you ever get any real evidece that supports your fantasies by all means let me know. Until then stop making a fool of yourself. You live in a fantasy world.
petestrat07 9 months ago
@petestrat07 Not as eloquent as I would have put it, but good idea - sometimes you just have to step back. I've had the same arguments with creationists misinterpreting (knowingly or not) every source put before them and falling into lots of logical fallacies. Point them towards Talk Origins or a decent science book.
Then again, you can lead a horse to water...
SAMagic 9 months ago
@SAMagic I know. I've been very blunt lately because I have spent many hours/months/years answering their rheorical question. The make an argument with a good question yet they refuse to listen to the answer. Therefore they only proposed the question in hope that they stump you and you have to resort to accepting the supernatural.They were never interested in the answer and I find this extremely frustrating. You're right about leading the horse to water.
petestrat07 9 months ago
@Mr88playmaker
"Atheists are stuck with their own embarrassing assertion that: Intelligence arises from a NON-intelligent source."
I think you've debunked the shit out of that theory.
SpeakingSerpent 9 months ago 4
@Mr88playmaker "Intelligence, reason and logic evolve via meaningless, random chaos; and are continually evolving via meaningless, random chaos."
That's an idiotic claim. When you are equating "evolve" with "meaningless, random chaos" it's you who have left the table of intelligence, reason, logic and credibility. Evolution works precisely because there are consequences to variation in a reality with natural laws. Certain consequences are of a form that reinforce themselves.
Gnomefro 9 months ago
@Mr88playmaker
"Only THEISTS, DEISTS and AGNOSTICS can sit at the table of intelligence."
Yes, because making idiotic claims about vast demographics is a clear sign of intelligence.
Have you ever wondered why nobody respects your (pitiful attempt at an) argument?
luminaeus 9 months ago
@luminaeus No that's true, because whenever I sit with an atheist... they attack me verbally, physically.
faro0485 5 months ago
@faro0485
Your idiotic lie shouldn't surprise me, after all, lying has been one of the main tools of religion for thousands of years.
luminaeus 5 months ago
@luminaeus Ah there you go attacking me.
faro0485 5 months ago
@faro0485
Was it a physical attack? Did my YouTube reply button leave a bruise on your face?
luminaeus 5 months ago
@luminaeus More atheists die from verbal criticism...
faro0485 5 months ago
@faro0485
Herp? Herpity derp derp durr.
luminaeus 5 months ago
@luminaeus Statistics.
faro0485 5 months ago
Dogmatic, militant Atheists (alone) maintain that symbolic information is MATTER.
Einstein pointed to the nature and origin of symbolic information as one of the profound questions about the world as we know it. He could identify no means by which matter could bestow meaning to symbols. The clear implication is that symbolic information, or language, represents a category of reality distinct from matter and energy.
If Einstein is wrong, and code is matter, prove it and win the Nobel prize.
Mr88playmaker 9 months ago
is it murder when an ape kills another ape?
69upinu 9 months ago
What is it about the genetic fallacy that is so difficult to understand? Dawkins, other science-worshippers, anyone? It's pretty common sense.
ws81086n 10 months ago
@ws81086n Erm, no it's not. Basing your conclusion or beliefs about something soley on it's origin, disregarding it's current meaning or context is not 'common sense' or logical.
TheOmniscientSpanner 10 months ago
@TheOmniscientSpanner The "argument" disproves all religions by default. Which makes it an assertion, not an argument.
ws81086n 10 months ago
Meteor, Virus , Mammels eating Eggs...
there all false theorys
the truth is that Chuck Norris Killed all the Dinosaurs
I believe in Chuck Norris
abumefak2 11 months ago
richard dawkins is awesome. i was waiting for the map to show how religion and language are identical geometrical regions.
tomitstube 1 year ago
@orkneymist
Atheism is a very new idea. It does not hold water. The idea that intelligence and thought and logic are but meaningless, random chaos arising from a NON-intelligent source is both NON-scientific and illogical.
An agnostic is far more wise than an atheist because an agnostic --or a deist for that matter-- it not automatically and utterly disqualified from all things logic. A Deist says "IN the beginning, was The MIND of God", and an agnostic says "It's too heavy man, I DON'T KNOW"
Mr88playmaker 1 year ago
@Mr88playmaker
Atheism arises from lack of evidence for theism. It is a response to theism.
it is not a system which is identical for all atheists, and essentially even theists are 99% NON-theists (hence, atheist), since they do not believe in Thor, Zeus, etc,etc,etc. All agnostics are, to a degree, atheist...it is the simple 'knowledge' vs. 'faith' situation, but ultimately agnostics do not agree with the propositions posed by theists, hence making them largely atheists. for me, anyways.
mutedmakequiet 1 year ago
@Mr88playmaker
...continuing...
"The idea that intelligence and thought and logic are but meaningless, random chaos arising from a NON-intelligent source is both NON-scientific and illogical."
This is a ridiculous argument. You clearly do not understand what atheism is. You are mixing many different positions, arguments, and understandings to make your point. For example "intelligence and thought" arising from "non-intelligence" of course doesn't make sense. BUT... this is not the question.
mutedmakequiet 1 year ago
General Evolution has been proven to be a lie.
There is no such thing as one genus (KIND) evolving into another genus (KIND).
Evolutionists finally admit that. The problem is that they have not removed General Evolution Theory from the text books and are still pushing it on people via "suggestive" means. For example, PBS keeps running Evolution programs where they fail to clarify that humans have always been humans and animals have always been animals. They 'suggest' man evolved from animals.
Mr88playmaker 9 months ago
@Mr88playmaker
...continuing
Your comment implies that all atheists believe in meaningless and random chaos...this is false. Nowhere is it stated that evolution, the big-bang, or any other logical/physical-evidence based theory, is equal to randomness, or chaos. In fact, in evolution, natural selection is essentially the OPPOSITE of random, or chaos. This applies to the universe as well, when galaxies are destroyed, and born again.
We cannot know what was there before the big bang. thats it..
mutedmakequiet 1 year ago
@Mr88playmaker Atheism is not a new idea, but it's not even an idea to begin with. Atheism is the lack of a belief in God. People are born atheists.
You're in no position to talk about what's not scientific.
ninjajesus81 1 year ago
Evolutionists are backed up into a corner. The SCIENCE is on the side of Intelligent Design. What do they do? They RE FRAME the argument as one of "science vs. religion."
Richard Dawkins is a perfect example. After losing BIG in a debate against a Creationist at Oxford, he vowed to never debate another Creationist again. Instead he devoted his time to writing books and giving lectures about the "evils" of GOD and religion!
DNA is NOT "religion." DNA is scientific proof that God exists.
Mr88playmaker 9 months ago
@Mr88playmaker Stop, just stop. You're full of shit and you know it, so stop.
ninjajesus81 9 months ago
@Mr88playmaker Agnosticism is a "statement" about knowledge.Atheism is a "statement" about belief. They are two completely different things.Most atheists are also agnostic(they don't believe and do not claim to know there's no god)and most agnostics are also atheists(they don't know but they also don't believe)
The beginning of intelligence has nothing got to do with atheism.And it's not an idea,its the default state of mind for every human being when theyre born,just like non-belief in pixies.
byteresistor 11 months ago
@byteresistor (QUOTE): "most agnostics are also atheists" (END QUOTE)
Most Agnostics are like most Deists in that they don't have too many nice things to say about atheism.
Agnostics and Deists make more sense than Atheists.
Atheism is the state of Agnostic after he has committed intellectual suicide.
Mr88playmaker 9 months ago
@Mr88playmaker Yeah thanks for not adressing my points. When arguments fail, insults follow.
byteresistor 9 months ago
@Mr88playmaker You sir are uneducated. Atheism has been around as long as humans have been around. As soon as one says look there is a sun god look there is a universal god, look its the god of farming, is as soon as someone says "i dont believe it". If you knew anything about chemistry or biology, you could actually mean something, but right now you don't even sound as if you know anything about the building blocks of everything including us, nor do you sound like u know genetics
iliveon 10 months ago
@iliveon (QUOTE): "If you knew anything about chemistry or biology, you could actually mean something, but right now you don't even sound as if you know anything about the building blocks of everything including us, nor do you sound like u know genetics" (END QUOTE)
Biological life forms are the purposeful product of information and language. Information arises only from a mind. Symbolic information is neither matter nor energy. Symbolic Info writes your chemicals. Code requires an author.
Mr88playmaker 9 months ago
@Mr88playmaker Yeah viruses and bacteria are purposeful product of God and so is all the evolution that occurs in them as we use antibiotics. That's why HIV is hard to stop, because it evolves. Code doesn't require an author. If you knew anything about natural selection and Genetics as I've said, you'd understand how code gets more complex. You are a waste of time because you are ignorant and you refuse to wikipedia evolution or genetic mutation
iliveon 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
iliveon said (QUOTE) "Yeah viruses and bacteria are purposeful product of God and so is all the evolution that occurs in them..." (END QUOTE)
Yours is the Darwin Age mentality. DNA killed Darwin.
Modern Science proves that life forms are written into being via information & language in the way of genetic code. Matter does not add information to the genome. In other words, a bacteria today can only contain an EQUAL or LESS amount of info as did the same bacteria an infinite GAZILLION yrs ago.
Mr88playmaker 9 months ago
@Mr88playmaker Symbolic information IS matter. It is stored on paper. It is stored in the mind. Those are corporeal forms. It is represented IN matter. Our brains are bio-electric. We physically (chemically) store memories and access them via electrical impulses. Accessing those memories in a variety of patterns results in new information (developed theories, conclusions, etc). If they weren't physically stored in some manner, they'd dissipate into nothing, right?
informant007 6 months ago
@informant007 said: "Symbolic information IS matter. It is stored on paper." Information represents a category of reality that transcends matter. Paper only represents itself. Ink only represents itself. Patterns only represent themselves. INFORMATION is the communication or reception of KNOWLEDGE or INTELLIGENCE between an encoder and decoder utilizing agreed upon symbols. Symbolic information writes/creates your physical brain. Symbolic information only arises from a mind.
Mr88playmaker 6 months ago
He may point out obvious facts and thereby think he's made a point that most everyone hasn't already considered several time over, but I will give him this, he's definitely got a certain eloquence about him.
However, eloquence is the greatest tool of a deceiver because eloquence can make one forget the facts and the wisdom to believe a lie. The most powerful are always the most eloquent, the most deceptive are always the most eloquent, the greatest liars are always the most eloquent.
NewnotesJR 1 year ago
@NewnotesJR WTF are you going off about??? HE IS A BLOODY FUCKIN SCIENTIST you creationist IDIOT! How dare you even presume he would want someone forgetting about the facts. People like Mr. Dawkins dedicate their lives to putting out, investigating and questioning the best facts and wisdom human kind has. His eloquence comes from his knowledge and confidence in what he speaks about. Tell me Newnotes did the religion that your parents force fed you taste good with the paint chips you ate.
party489 1 year ago
Not only has Christianity influenced the social, political, and moral attitudes of peoples tens of thousands of miles away, but in the geographic location where Christianity started, it is most shunned, thereby proving what Christ said before hand that a prophet is not accepted in His own land.
Fascinating how Dawkins can point out the obvious that we all already know, yet cannot see the even more obvious distinction, or perhaps he does notice it and merely refuses to acknowledge it.
NewnotesJR 1 year ago
He can notice that, but he can't notice also that religions tend to stay around their place of origin, and only grow out from it.
Yet, he cannot see the distiinction with Christianity how it's singular pecularity not only is not subject to it's geographic location, but has radically moved across the earth from it's origins and even affected profound changes in the personal, political, and social attitudes of a populace tens of thousands of miles away from it's origin.
NewnotesJR 1 year ago
Is this supposed to be very quiet or is this just a tough crowd? They feel pissed off.
lizardizzle 1 year ago
@lizardizzle its a lecture not Saturday night live
cartdoesnotmoveself 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Dawkins comes off as a little kid to me all the time....his mind works in a very cute way... he things all he sees is all that there is to see and because he can explain the 2% of the things in the world that matter he calls the rest silly just because he cannot understand them.
Awwww ....How cute is that!
fairjasmine 1 year ago
@fairjasmine i think you need to watch more dawkins, as he often says the opposite. perhaps you "thing" his mind works in a cute way because he's delivering to an audience who are dumb enough to believe in supernatural beings.
eeeaten 1 year ago 2
@fairjasmine Just because science doesn't yet know 100% of the universe (and we never will), that doesn't mean that you get to come along and say "Well that means that god must have done it then."
500 years ago, everyone KNEW that the sun revolved around the Earth.
dogstylee51 1 year ago
@fairjasmine
It's not that Dawkins won't believe in things that he can't see with the naked eye; it's that he's only comfortable believing something if there some reason to do so.
CzarAdam2009 1 year ago
Dawkins was a sexy beast.
suprflcn 1 year ago 8
@suprflcn Indeed...
CodeMonkeyGurl 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Consider if you will, that the world can be divided into two very distinct groups. Those who believe in a supreme being, and those who seem to spend all of their time saying there isn't one.
digital0707neo 1 year ago
Atheists are illogical dummies.
There are only two options:
(1) Intelligence arises from an INTELLIGENT source (the MIND of GOD)
(2) Intelligence arises from a NON-intelligent source.
To their embarrassment, Atheists are stuck with option no.2 ---- a position that can NOT be logically or scientifically defended.
FUNNY but TRUE: Atheists maintain that logic arises out of meaningless random chaos and is continually evolving via meaningless random chaos.
Class dismissed.
Mr88playmaker 1 year ago
@Mr88playmaker
You have no idea what you're talking about. I voted a thumbs up on this comment so that people can have a laugh too.
garabato21 1 year ago
@Mr88playmaker HAHAHA, oh wow.
suprflcn 1 year ago
@Mr88playmaker You misunderstand how evolution works.
fsvehla 1 year ago
@Mr88playmaker Natural Selection is the opposite of chaos by definition. That's why bricks were shat. People knew the fact of Evolution (common descent) before Natural Selection was proposed. The race and 'holy grail' was to explain it naturally.
Also, your option 1 is an infinite loop. Yo dawg, if intelligence can only arise from intelligence, then your god has a god.
I've noticed a pattern. Creationists are uneducated ignorant Americans or Middle-Easterners.
JeefCakes 1 year ago
Darwin ignorantly thought that the cell was a simple blob of goo but 100 yrs later, Modern science discovered DNA! Genetic code works like computer SOFTWARE and the cell works like a COMPUTER. You have within you the most sophisticated information computing system in the entire known universe. There are people now designing DNA run computers.
Mr88playmaker 9 months ago
The symbolic information contained in DNA is neither matter nor energy.
Information is not molecules.
EXAMPLE: The information I am giving you is NOT your glass computer screen.
Your screen is a MEDIUM that is made up of matter (molecules) but said computer screen is NOT the INFORMATION itself.
If you can think deep, you will come to the startling realization that the information within a book is NOT ink and paper (molecules). Information transcends its medium.
Mr88playmaker 9 months ago
(A) Information is the communication or reception of KNOWLEDGE or INTELLIGENCE between an encoder and a decoder utilizing agreed upon symbols.
(B) DNA code is symbolic INFORMATION like computer software & cells are computers.
(C) Even if humans had NEVER discovered DNA code: DNA code creates and governs all things biological via the communication of KNOWLEDGE or INTELLIGENCE between an encoder and a decoder utilizing agreed upon symbols.
(D) INFORMATION arises from a MIND. So does LANGUAGE.
Mr88playmaker 9 months ago
@Mr88playmaker who gave the Egyptians their intelligence then? (FYI, they were around several thousand years before Jesus was puportedly around...)
Or the third option: Intelligence is taught and learned from observation. Ignorance is learned from ignoring everything science has discovered because it contadicts what your bible says.
dogstylee51 1 year ago
Matter does not bestow meaning to symbols. Only a mind can do that.
For this reason, even the great Greek SECULAR (non religious) philosophers began all things logic upon the required foundation that "in the beginning" there was Nous Logos i.e. the MIND of the Creator and LANGUAGE. Language and thought are inseparable. All symbolic information arises from thought.
DNA has made deists or theists out of skeptics & atheists.
Mr88playmaker 9 months ago
The entire Naturalist theory of Evolution itself is wholly founded upon, and completely dependent upon the scientifically unsupported fairy tale called "Abiogenesis".
Abiogenesis VIOLATES the LAW of Biogenesis!
Life does NOT come from Non-life! Evolutionists PROPAGATE Abiogenesis as the only BASIS for Evolution-- but when called on it, they DISTANCE themselves and claim it has NOTHING to do with Evolution.
"ABIOLOGY" is scientifically INCOMPATIBLE with all things BIOLOGY.
Mr88playmaker 9 months ago
Captain Falcon killed all the dinosaurs lol.
supersmash43 1 year ago
How old (young) was Richard then?
dycarbon1 1 year ago
A lot of the very early creation myths are linked by common astrological configurations stretching back to 10500BC, all have similar symbology as well- serpents, architecture and procedural numerology. Ancient civilisations in England, Egypt, South America, South East Asia and Japan are all linked by this common heritage despite being thousands of miles apart
robblindsay 1 year ago
@robblindsay so you believe a big man in the sky made everything?
MultiTrollHunter 1 year ago
@MultiTrollHunter
Interesting how you interpret that way. A rational mind would assume that there was a much older civilisation that linked them either either by seatravel and trade or cultural dominion
robblindsay 1 year ago
The secular Greeks themselves determined via rational thought and critical observation that God exists and directs the universe. Antony Flew was the world's most militant atheist. He was the mentor and hero of Richard Dawkins. The very "Billy Graham" of Atheism" per se. Flew spent almost 40 yrs. debating Creationists and defending Evolution but the reality of DNA destroyed his argument, and consequently, Flew humbled himself and admitted he had been wrong about the origins of life.
Mr88playmaker 9 months ago
is the pink spanish/portugese? because brazil is also pink.
cozzy3002 1 year ago
Well done Richard Dawkins.
illywacker1 1 year ago
The dinosaurs died because Dawkins bored them to death.
tom87pate 1 year ago
@tom87pate I wish you were a dinosaur :)
EliteDoomer 1 year ago
Ricky D back at his best :D
SgtSpankey 1 year ago
Most excellent words to live by!!!
CSXer 1 year ago
He was good looking. My Darwinian misfiring is giving me the urge to penetrate him.
tobyobrie 2 years ago 3
I am amazed how many bezzerwizzers there is commenting all kida stuff on YouTube. At least be humble then..
ingareinar007 2 years ago
it is were how young he looks here, yet his voice sound exactly the same
2naruto1 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I like and respect Richard Dawkins as a scientists.
But when Dawkins over steps his bondaries into territories which he has no expertises in and starts bashing religion and theology then he is completely out of his league.
Dawkins should stick with what he knows best which Evolutionary biology.
IgnosticView101 2 years ago
I disagree. As a race we have embraced religion so much that is seems almost imoral to question it. Yet all corners of the globe worship different gods.Instictfully we yearn for answers and seek refuge in "god" as this is the only possible way this universe come about. Religion truly does seem to be nothing more than a man-made theory that gives us meaning and comfort. I think Richard see's the world through vey unbiast eyes. The more i listen to him, the more I enjoy his point of veiws.
petestrat07 2 years ago 66
@petestrat07 Not as a race, but as a species.
I guess the tendency to be irrational about something is just another evolutionary obstacle that our species will transcend.
It has done so with many other issues.
It’s all up to time and natural-selection.
eldadevata 1 year ago
@petestrat07 VERY well put
CarlSagan6 1 year ago
@petestrat07 Interesting point, Religion came about around the same time we developed consciousness, and with that awareness of self, and awareness of our own death. This would have brought trauma to the mind, and hence religion to comfort all the fears.
And yes your very right, Richard is unbiased, he is a scientist, and by default they have no agenda, the results are what they are, and that is what they are seeking.
Caineheist 10 months ago
petestrat07 said (QUOTE) "As a race we have embraced religion so much..." (END QUOTE)
A thinking man, unafraid to follow & face the natural and observable evidence, will never leap to "religion" UNTIL the most practical philosophical question of 1st cause agent is settled. Atheists who jump to the subject of "people seeking refuge in..." are making the clumsy mistake of leaping OVER the scientific question and awkwardly changing the subject to religion. Dawkins does so to his own discredit.
Mr88playmaker 9 months ago
No.
newexperiment 2 years ago
Based on what evidence do you feel that way?
Gman01010010 2 years ago
@IgnosticView101 No.
asargentb 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"The God Debate" is on my channel.
atheistfriends 2 years ago
What saddens me most is that what the young Mr Dawkins is stating is obviously factual, and nothing controversial - scientifically speaking that is. I am so fed up with religions and the damage they continue to inflict on us. They all preach peace, love and mercy but the vast majority in practice deal in ignorance, oppression and death.
dubaipete 2 years ago 11
dubaipete-Correct! Religion is the primarary cause for death and destruction since it's concept began!
CSXer 1 year ago
there is a good article on this subject you can find if you google search: "marotta religion examiner argument"
StephenM02 2 years ago
wow he's young here.
alexander92648 2 years ago 4
yeah, i thought he was born old lol
sulthus 2 years ago
I remember this lecture series when I were a lad, only now do I realise it was Richard Dawkins. I had no idea he had such a pivotal role in shaping my ideas.
eamonnca1 2 years ago 7
I wonder if you would be allowed to do a lecture like this in the UK these days ?
Calling people's faith into question - especially so to an audience of children - would have the Muslims and the Christians red faced with anger and indignation. Out would come the protests, the placards and every Christian and Islamic 'representative' to trade in their 'offense' for air time.
Silly pricks ! :)
MRSstraightA 2 years ago 19
Well, religious people have always indoctrinated their children with their belief systems. If teaching young children that the world is around 6000 years old and that it was created in 6 days is OK with society, it's a shame we don't have intelligent people like Dawkins teaching our children the truth instead, in every school.
hotkonto 2 years ago 11
The conversation goes like this: scientist - comet hit the earth, or virus killed them or that's mammals fault religion man - there was no dinosaurs
666Rudy666 2 years ago 4
or they coexited and the flinstones is, in fact, a documentary, lol
IAMME000 2 years ago 5
In Brazil they speak portuguese not spanish
tekhiun 2 years ago
That's why Brazil is a different color from the Spanish speaking countries around it on the map.
malcolmmcdermott 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The visible marks of extraordinary wisdom and power appear so plainly in all the works of the creation that a rational creature, who will but seriously reflect on them, cannot miss the discovery of a Deity. --- John Locke
markpianoman 2 years ago
Holy shit! He's so young!
kittygirl792 3 years ago 2
3 out of 4 doctors recommend Lucky Strikes.
ussick 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Why can't people just accept that people have different opinions/theories on origin of life or evolution/creationism. Why are both sides so scared of the other? If you believe one way or the other that's fine. Let them teach both ways and let people make up their minds for themselves. It's just as religious to say there is no God as there is to say there is one.
KFayant 3 years ago
Because Religion is fantasy, made up, fiction, and some can't stand to see others believing in fantasy created by people who knew nothing about the world some thousand years ago.
KazumaR1 3 years ago 12
This comment has received too many negative votes show
fail
chrispaulrevolution 3 years ago
what do you mean "fail"?
RationalEmotive 2 years ago
Because some things aren't a matter of opinion, they're a matter of truth, or at least probability based on the evidence. Ignorance is not a good thing for anyone.
Gremlin 3 years ago 14
If there is fear, it is certainly from creationists as there is no evidence to support the idea that the biblical god, or any "god" for that matter, created anything in this universe. One thing you will find is that should a "creator" ultimately be discovered, science will certainly acknowledge it. Religious persons will never accept science so long as it conflicts with their 0 evidence, 100% faith based beliefs. One "fear" is that this sort of ignorance could persist for generations.
liberty013 3 years ago 4
Dawkins rules!
lemonheartfly 3 years ago 5
Dawkins doesn't seem to get that religion is most often about believing things about which evidence is lacking on both sides;it's views are harmless and unable to be disproved.His metaphor only serves to display his hostility towards religion,hardly a scientific outlook.
Scripture like the Bible is seen as allegorical, and serves to protect people's sanity by offering an explanation of unexplainable phenomena.Polls have shown that religious people believe less in nonsense conspiracy theories.
hfeec 3 years ago
Well, many things that religions claim are, in fact, known to be untrue. For example, some Christians and Jews claim the universe is 6,000 years old, or thereabouts. Yet, there is no "lack of evidence" on both sides. Only one side lacks evidence.
prospero811 3 years ago 6
How does the bible or any religious text answer anything? It is ancient words from bronze aged men. All the 'defining' claims of religions' have been proven to be wrong. Why hang on to any of it. The way I see it, if a book is inspired by an all knowing creator, it shouldn't contain vast factual errors and lack consistancy. All religious texts read like what we can logically conclude they are: works of fiction.
It's like people get a high from being willfully ignorant and believing in shit.
NCMStrudwick 3 years ago 4
Polls show that religious people believe less in nonsense conspiracy theories? Religion is one big Nonsense Conspiracy Theory!
spgtenor 3 years ago 7
thanks to Dawkins for showing ordinary people like myself the light of scientific reasoning!
lemonheartfly 3 years ago 7
WTF Richard Dawkins when he was younger! LOL!
ThisIsRysta 3 years ago 2
Hahaha I know he sounds so English. "Oh yess um cup of teaa."
KidsWithGuns1992 3 years ago
I'm getting real tired of this "intelligent reasoning based on observations is the same as faith bullshit" this is how morons argue against people like dawkins... they say he is hypocritical. Yes you are taught many subjects... but science allows questioning, you try to uncover the truth through explainable means. It is not based off one authoritarian, unchanging text.
satanversusjesus 3 years ago 6
This comment has received too many negative votes show
his argument is proven wrong by himself. He admits growing up in a christian home and he didn't grow up christian. So much for that argument. People chose to believe what they want. He never debates the facts only pokes fun at what other people believe.
Riverfrog72 3 years ago
"So much for that argument."
lol, The whole "indoctrination" thing.
With that mindset we are indoctrinated from birth with every idea we are taught.
There is no other way to learn. Education is indoctrination. He can be so brilliant and in the same breath anally hypocritical and self contradictory. Yet he doesn't see it.
Twicebakedtaters 3 years ago
exactly, he says that people believe in jesus becuase their parents are christians. That is not the truth. we chose to agree with it or not. Just as he did
Riverfrog72 3 years ago
"Just as he did"
Well that comes down to his typical human ego. He feels his views are somehow more justified than others and only those that share his ideals and mindset are "enlightened"
It's a cult like mindset and he's a preacher.
No different than Jerry Faldwell.
Twicebakedtaters 3 years ago
So you deny the fact that you're more likely to be a Christian if your parents are Christian than if they're not? That's too funny. Then how do you explain the correlation between geography/religion? Pure coincidence? Even funnier.
Catrambi 2 years ago 46
If the pope was born in saudi arabia he would probably be muslim now. With his ambition he might even be a high ranking member.
The response I often get from theists is god's master plan. To which I reply that Catholics don't believe in predestination.
Also the billions of people who have not even heard of christianity that are suffering from hunger and will burn in hell by christian standards for beign pagan lol.
riopieboy 2 years ago 5
What if the pope was born a Hitler Youth? haha and the people suffering and burning are the African Colonies and South American Colonies who had christainty beat into them like they were Toby.
Religion helping ruin the world day to day!
TheWordofJah311 2 years ago 4
Wow, this guy was ahead of his time.
PR0GRAMMING 3 years ago 9
yep but he wasnt the only one. Madalyn Murray O'Hair was also a smart atheist at the time. She might even have been a motivation for Richard Dawkins to go public with his beliefs.
There probably were more, but not an awful a lot.
Devilsnightforlife 3 years ago 6
"Science without religion is lame, and religion without science is blind"
(Albert Einstein)
seeksake06 3 years ago
Albert Einstein had an amazing mind but just because was an expert in space-time doesn't make him an expert in all things.
TheJerm78 3 years ago
Very silly video. Comparing religion to science is comparing apples to oranges. All humans behave this way. Being in "science mode" are not immune to being human. No human on the planet derives their behavior from the thought process called science. All motivation comes from the subjective. It is where we exist.
He is motivated by his belief that science somehow reveals truth or is "superior" These are not scientific notions. They are subjective. He will never admit or escape this.
Twicebakedtaters 3 years ago
science is a method not thought process.
dasheriff001 3 years ago 2
"science is a method not thought process."
I would appreciate a clarification of the distinction between the two.
Twicebakedtaters 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
There's no such thing as transition. No fossil demonstrates morphological transition. Punctuated Equalibrium is a gap theory that has embaressed evos for 30 yrs now.
NephilimFree 3 years ago
yes there is LOL. Don't you keep an eye on the news lol. They literally have fossils of transitional forms of where there the fishlike organisms first started coming onto land. We've had transitional forms of today's whale for years lol. Of course we have these things. Science is something that takes time to crack problems or find mathematical rigour in observation. It isn't like mythology that says, hey this happened okay. Science doesn't work like that. Humans don't know everything :P
Entertainmentwf 3 years ago 3
NephilimFree
It is ironic that you should oppose evolution when your IQ is clearly no higher than that of an ape.
GODandPEACE 3 years ago
Wow. He really has been owning religion for a long time hasn't he.
SniperLarkin666 3 years ago 4
omfg he is making fun of creationists so bad.
automaticAEV 3 years ago 3
I can hardly believe he was once young!
nicolaslevine 3 years ago
OMG he's so cute when he has blonde hair
Backwaterguy 3 years ago
. . . you keep going lower and lower huh? i never said i was homosexual, like i said earlier, you need your head examined
andretheking86 3 years ago
huh???
sorry i like chicks, im not even going to talk to you anymore, you need your head examined
andretheking86 3 years ago
Do you think with your asshole? Just wondering because you are really stupid. You are actually the type of stupid that scares me.
andretheking86 3 years ago
what makes you think i am in trouble with the law? and uhh, 3 things,
1. this is youtube
2. we are not in school, its summer
3. and if it wasn't summer, this aint english class
your one of those types of jackoffs who are proven wrong, or who has no valid or legit comeback or counter point, so you just start hacking away at someone who isn't using spellcheck on youtube, thus inflating your ego into thinking that you won the debate by say "you spelled that wrong"
get a job man
andretheking86 3 years ago
sorry clown, haven't been arrested in my life, does yours?
andretheking86 3 years ago
ill translate for fennessy
you are a fucking clown, shut, the fuck, up.
andretheking86 3 years ago
planbod
eh... no!
Your argument finally fell apart on the word 'created'
ronnieknotts 3 years ago
what like the excerpts from your "books"...fuckin kerouac wannabe
fennessy1980 3 years ago
this is not a spelling and grammar test....if you want to be anal, do, by all means....you are the worst type of you-tuber..... you cannot come up with an intelligent response of your own but choose to attack peoples' grammar and spelling......your not my fuckin schoolteacher dude (n this isn't a freakin spelling test)
go have sex with yourself cos i've no doubt no-one else will
fennessy1980 3 years ago 4
so now your attacking our intelligence.....thats the funniest......the greatest thinkers of our time were atheist....why not try giving us an intelligent reason as to why you believe god exists (without resorting to pseudo-science, heresay and retarded retorts like the one you just made)
fennessy1980 3 years ago 2
If you saw a camel crap in the desert, does it mean there was no camel? If you saw created things like the earth and human beings does that not indicate the presence of an eternal and all mighty creator.
planbod 3 years ago
LOL
your hair was pretty intense there rich
extremepietbh 3 years ago
The most convincing evidence I've seen is petrified trees standing vertically through multiple layers of rock, proving that there was a worldwide flood. THAT would kill the dinosaurs!
yamascott 3 years ago
Trees. Yeah. Except all the other evidence otherwise, that's a great one piece.
GnosticDjinn 3 years ago
It's still one peice that has to be dealt with.
yamascott 3 years ago
So petrified trees can't be buried by sedimentary layers? And heck even if it was a flood, are you finding these trees all over the world all buried in the exact same way in the exact same layer?
megamarsvin 3 years ago
Those are good questions. I saw the photos from a video presentation. They came from a couple different places in the U.S., and I'm not sure if the elevation is the same at each location or not. I would like to get more information on them.
yamascott 3 years ago
If you find it post it here so we can have a look too ;)
That's the reason a lot of us appreciate the scientific method so much. Any hypothesis that anyone wants to introduce into science has to pass hundreds of questions like that from people much smarter than me. An idea won't be accepted until it passes the most rigorous testing.
megamarsvin 3 years ago
Which wouldn't change the entirety of evolution. It's not like one thing wrong is going to debunk a whole set of related phenomena, it will simply refine it, and for all the refining done to evolution, I'm sure if I took the time to google it there's a completely natural reason or we've yet to get a working hypothesis for the explanation. It doesn't automatically point that because X happened it was a god.
GnosticDjinn 3 years ago
This is similar to an argument presented by Bertrand Russell, and I do know that Dawkins borrows his ideas from time to time.
BeatBuddy 3 years ago 2
openly
PrexicKehdaki 3 years ago 2