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
Topics: DEADLY ARGUMENTS NOW ADDED For The Creationism-Evolutionism Debate (See Subchapter 10.2.2.), 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
See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
the magnificent information I get from this video turns me on more than a hardcore porn movie. super interesting to hear someone speaking the truth instead of filling our minds with superstitious beliefs.
if you're going to ask why anything, then why god? What's god's purpose, again answered differently depending on where the question is directed, if you direct it at something larger than god which claims to know the purpose of god then why that larger something? If you're in the business of asking why like this I don't see why you'd stop at god.
'why' in this sense can only be answered from single perspectives. We as a human society find a personal purpose for mountains, maybe that's the environmental and weather conditions it provides for preferred living. Why is there life depends on where you direct it, it you direct it at the elements that helped form life you can describe a purpose. What they are asking for is the ultimate purpose, why anything. They're told that god knows the ultimate purpose, but why do they stop there?
so... now theres global warming, after that we're going to have the Oil Crisis (when all the earths oil run out and we need an alternat energy resourse), after that we'll have the over population crisis.. and if not some new unknown enviromental problem has hitt us by then we going to have a problem with to much garbage on the planet... seems we have a huge job infront of us..
Actually, that's a very common misconception that many people, have!
Most people think that Humans are in a higher level of evolution than, say, the sharks! This is NOT true!
When people say that, they actually mean that the common ancestor of sharks is older than the human's common ancestor!
In the persent time, we are all at the SAME LEVEL of evolution - becaus its a continuous process! Thats why i dont like the model of te tree of life - i prefer the "bush" or circle tree of evolution!
The problem with the common "tree" is that people think that the species on the "higher branches" are more evolved than the ones in the "trunk" or in the "lower branches"!
Oh wow, other than the interview with Ted Haggard, I have never seen Dawkins lose his patience. That was incredible, he just went straight to the point and called the MC on his bullshit. LOL
I find Dawkins' last answer in this video to be mean spirited and inconsiderate. I would answer that only things which are designed by intelligence require a purpose. Things which arise by natural means have no inherent reason or purpose aside from possibly the function of reproducing. I find the atheistic approach to life gives me the purpose of continuing on the human race and leaving the world a little better for me having been here. I feel a need to be good, raise a family and accomplish.
Why are we here? We came about through natural processes of the universe. Nothing more. I don't understand why some people can't take that, why they feel such a strong need to feel special about themselves. We think we're special because we're smart, but when you consider we were once just as 'dumb' as any other animal, you find out we really aren't special. Our planet is one of 8 orbiting a star that's one of 100 billion billion in the universe. There's really nothing special about it.
I agree. I think that religion only exists because so many people can't handle the reality of their existence, that they're just animals that live for a while after birth and die forever. People like the idea of eternal life in Heaven and such, but they're all just stories that people, sadly, take very seriously and actually believe is true. Religious people enjoy thinking that their Gods are real, and deny the obvious truth.
@GuppyPal I would like to agree fully but I do believe that humans are unique in certain ways. I think's it's pretty amazing that we're the only beings trying to unfold the mysteries of the universe.
Very important question here, about what is the meaning of life. Dawkins gets to the point by explaining that some questions are silly.
This of course can be elaborated, to say a) Science doesn't claim to have all the answers, but it's working on it, b) Religion certainly doesn't have all the answers, although it claims to, c) As your understanding grows, the questions will probably change. ie: Asking why Ra is not happy with my sacrifice is meaningless with current knowledge.
I understand he thinks the question about the meaning of life is silly, but I don´t know why he thinks so. Many philosofers and scientists make their own theories about this subject, even nowadays.
Please, could you explain me what I missed? Why is the question silly?
Richard Dawkins and Paula Kirby sit down for a 40 minute conversation at Eden Court Theater. There, they talk about evolution, religion and the importance of science. This is followed by a question and answer session with the audience.
to challenge god to exist is to note that god doesnt exist without this challenge. in this duel you are god's creator. god's existence, in fact, is incidental. as a symbolic exchange, god is only the interstitial term of the transaction. thus it has no consequence for us to beleive in it
@DefaultPosition Word Change is not sufficient to explain evolution, its change with natural selection to be better than what you are at surviving and propogating your genes= progress in that sense. An apple turning to rot is change not evolution, but the evolution plants from wind fertilization to produce flowers and nectar to enhance fertilization by insects is a change towards improvement, i.e. progress. peace
@sushanalone Progress is an incredibly subjective term. I've never read a book that's ever alluded to evolution as 'progress'. Stuff changes over time. 99.99% of all species that ever lived died. Evolution is a mindless, non-caring, blind process of natural, sexual and artificial selection (in the case of breading) and genetic drift acting upon errors in DNA copying. By which objective criteria can we say that we are better than our ancestors?
@DefaultPosition OMG "Evolution is a mindless, non-caring, blind process of natural, sexual and artificial selection (in the case of breading) and genetic drift acting upon errors in DNA copying" blind, depending on errors on dna, mindless(mind is result of evolution)..you are better left stewing in your ignorance imo than some one spending time to educate you. cos i have no afterlife and i dont want to waste time on scrubs or mindless grubs, peace
His questions are a little simple, especially the one about why didn't all apes evolve into humans. But I'm glad he asked it because I think there are a lot of people like him who don't understand evolution and had those kinds of questions in mind. Maybe he asked it for the sake of those people.
Great ending! People turn to religion to find the answer to an inherently silly question. Love it! And so obvious; of course there's no ultimate purpose or plan to our existence, we're just products of natural processes, like everything else. The orthodox religious HATE that egalitarian notion.
they turn to religion to find a free resource to fulfill their greed.
they dont want to die, they can't imagine the world without them in it, so they've figured they'd strike a deal with something imaginary that lets them live on once their bodies here on earth die, at which point they'll get the big payout in the afterlife.
a religious person defending their religion.
a guy with a lottery ticket defending it as he goes to collect his jackpot(that he's sure has has).
I think what he should've said at the end is that the question doesn't deserve a scientific answer. It's a silly question scientifically. It's a philosophical question. But of course it's an important question, which is in need of answering for any atheist. The implications of the question that science can't answer what religion can are based on a misunderstanding, but dawkins failed to point that out
my answer for 00:17 is that chimpanzee are actually more evolved than humans. From our common ancestor we differentiate with 154 genes and chimps with 233 genes. We don't know what advantage those genes give them but evolution doesn't mean better brain. Nervous system is just a tool like any other tool: claw, fang, eye, hair, etc. Some animals have it, other animals don't have it.
In terms of professor Dawkin's answer as to "why", I think he was a bit abrupt. A more appropriate answer may have been, "the human condition is of no consequence to the universe or physical laws, and it is arrogant to think so".
"Did you see the movie? If you did, are you saying Stein put words in his mouth?"
No, I haven't seen it. What I'm saying is that I have no doubt that Ben got Dawkins to say that there MAY be an intelligent designer. It's not impossible. But if him saying that is used to substantiate the claim made of creationists, then yes: he has quoted Dawkins out of context.
I think your talking about the movie 'Expelled'. Ben did not put 'words in Dawkins mouth', however he edited the film to make it appear as though Dawkins was admitting to I.D. If you don't beleive me then you can check out you tube where Dawkins is interviewed and he states that the makers of Exposed lied about the purpose of the film in order to interview him. Its another wonderful example of the lies and deceit that the I.D. movement will stoop to...
He was asked to give his best shot at a possible scenario where Intelligent Design might be a plausible explanation and so he gave the idea that highly intelligent aliens might have seeded life on Earth, but still, the Aliens themselves would necessarily need to have evolved to get to that stage. He got quoted out of context after that for the purpose of that movie's (Expelled) intentions.
At the end of this video, he's basically saying there is no meaningful answer to the 'meaning of life' given darwinian evolution is not a purposeful system(Teleological). It is a causal system, explanations can only be given in causal terms.
The question literally becomes meaningless or senseless (the logical positivists would be proud :) )
A very good answer, all though not well expressed! (Dawkins)
yes. People turn to religion to find silly answers for silly questions. In the end how does that benefit you and how do you progress from asking such a silly question. That's a moot point.
watch?v=e5Grg5KquHM (Irish accents video). The closest you will get to the Scottish accent is in North Eastern parts of Northern Ireland (closest to Scotland), where many Scottish came over to live centuries ago, they are known collectively as Ulster-Scots. Though anyone from Northern Ireland (including me) can easily tell their difference from Scottish ones.
The last questioner I see (green top) has a Scottish accent, not Irish. Maybe I missed someone, but there are NO Irish accents anywhere in this debate.
But I'm not a bigot, you see. I find their voices asthetically unappealing. I may have been ignorant as to which cultural grouped had that accent, but the fact that I do not like the accent doesn't make me a bigot.
there are many variations of the scots accent, I'm not overly keen on glasgow/edinburgh accents, but I'm from the shetland islands and the accent is totally different, we still retain a lot of norse words and dialect.
Please note that in my original post I used the word "SOUNDS". "SOUNDS" is fundamental here.
For example, if you could imagine someone speaking in "yokel" about quantum physics or Judaism in Russia, you would probably thing it SOUNDS stupid and ridiculous. Then again, SOUNDING and actually being are two different things.
Yeah, and it is not the hosts place to comment in that way. He is there to mediate the discussions in an unbiased manner, not participate. If he wants to debate with Dawkins, he should do it in an event scheduled for such a purpose.
The host guy is having a hard time with this whole affair. At every opportunity he tries to interject a reason somebody might need religion. Either Dawkins is giving him a crisis of faith, or he is playing devils advocate.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
bullox, the color of jealousy is a perfectly fine question to ask. and more over scientists ponder it. Just because RD doesn't study synesthesia, doesn't make it absurd. He blindly adheres to his presupposed beliefs just as much as other religious people do.
This "why are there still apes?" question is stupid on so many levels, and we see it over and over again nonetheless. For one thing, we *are* apes. For another thing, as Dawkins points out, as far as natural selection is concerned, as long as you're reproducing you are allowed to stay around, whether you're doing that in a way that involves space shuttles or one that involves picking nats out of your brother's hair in the jungle, both are considered equal in the eyes of nature until an asteroid.
but he fielded it badly. Subsets of a population facing differences in environment will select for those better suited to each environment. If separation persists then speciation can follow..
The answer to the question "why are there still apes if humans descended from apes?" is to ask the equivalent question, "why are there still Europeans if Americans descended from Europeans?"
I share Dawkins irritation. It's not the fact that people don't know about evolution, it's that they ask loaded questions full of false assumptions as if they know what they're talking about.
The guy questioning at 1:15 has a hard time understanding that a so called soul didn't just suddenly start entering organisms. And it really depends on if you define "life" as having the mechanism to create reaction or just reproduction.
Modern society will have certainly made an impact on evolution. Even other species as can be observed in domesticated animals..
but as for ourselves, it isnt the case that evolution has stopped - it is more the case that we have completely redefined how natural selection selects among us. It is not yet completely clear what genes are more likely to survive in todays world.
I think that human evolution are getting slower and slower due too the less natural selection and longer life expectancy. (less natural selection= insane population growth...)
How long we live for is not really important. What is important is whether people are having children later in life. If this is the case then that would result in a slowdown in evolution.
Im not sure what 'less natural selection' means. I think youre referring to the fact that we have no predators. Natural selection is about more than just predator/prey issues. There is sexual selection too, which probably plays a more important role than basic survival for many species.
Evolution stopped because of our science. There is no natural selection anymore and even if we had in future some mutation our science and society would not allow it. We would seek and find a way to reverse it. There is another evolution: Our evolution with our science and technology. Google for "Transhumanism". Im a Transhumanist. :-)
"There is another evolution: Our evolution with our science and technology."
In the sense that our science advances in increments it is a form of evolutional development.
"if we had in future some mutation our science and society would not allow it. We would seek and find a way to reverse it. "
I know what youre hinting at. The thing is evolution doesnt rely on sudden mutations, but mostly consists of tiny small steps which we would not notice. Perhaps in the future it may be different.
Evolution hasn't 'stopped' — there are still individuals who survive to reproduce and others who don't. The factors involved in dividing those groups may be numerous and perhaps seem more subtle than, for example, selection pressures between cheetahs and gazelles, but they exist. Sexual selection also provides very interesting evolutionary pressures.
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 4 months ago
"Maybe people turn to religion to find that answer"
Well, a silly question deserves a silly answer.
Who is the moderator again?
MrPessimal 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NEW BOOK FOR DEBATES AND GOVERNANCE
Topics: DEADLY ARGUMENTS NOW ADDED For The Creationism-Evolutionism Debate (See Subchapter 10.2.2.), 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
See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
etc.
TheServiceWeb 7 months ago
moderator is a dickhead
dna598 7 months ago in playlist Richard Dawkins Debates/Lectures
wow the stupidest question came from the moderator XD
freiheitsalv 8 months ago
the first man to genetically engineer the flying spaghetti monster is gonna be so famous...
ComputerScience54 10 months ago
IF MAYN EVOLVED FRUM MONKEYS THEN WHY COME THERE STILL BE MONKEYS
SleepyKites 1 year ago
@SleepyKites did you watch the video at all?
junioramora 11 months ago
@junioramora Don't worry, i wasn't being serious :)
SleepyKites 11 months ago
@SleepyKites lol sorry man, you sounded serious. my bad. = P
junioramora 11 months ago
@SleepyKites Np :P
SleepyKites 11 months ago
@SleepyKites DUH BCUZ GOD MADE THE MONKEYZ
strutsandfrets 10 months ago
the magnificent information I get from this video turns me on more than a hardcore porn movie. super interesting to hear someone speaking the truth instead of filling our minds with superstitious beliefs.
SteveDutchy 1 year ago
If Chimpanzees evolved into Humans, then why are there still humans? That is awesome, I'll remember that.
mime454 1 year ago
if you're going to ask why anything, then why god? What's god's purpose, again answered differently depending on where the question is directed, if you direct it at something larger than god which claims to know the purpose of god then why that larger something? If you're in the business of asking why like this I don't see why you'd stop at god.
guyverdio 1 year ago
'why' in this sense can only be answered from single perspectives. We as a human society find a personal purpose for mountains, maybe that's the environmental and weather conditions it provides for preferred living. Why is there life depends on where you direct it, it you direct it at the elements that helped form life you can describe a purpose. What they are asking for is the ultimate purpose, why anything. They're told that god knows the ultimate purpose, but why do they stop there?
guyverdio 1 year ago
guy in the green t shirt got pwned lol
BitchIStoleYourFish 1 year ago
He didn't like the "why do we still have apes" and rightly so.
mikeyman211 1 year ago
It may be part of the human condition to ask silly questions. lol.
sulljoh1 1 year ago
20 000th view...
domthomson 1 year ago
I think the final few seconds of this video illustrate the allegiances of the moderator.
hotjohn321 1 year ago
so... now theres global warming, after that we're going to have the Oil Crisis (when all the earths oil run out and we need an alternat energy resourse), after that we'll have the over population crisis.. and if not some new unknown enviromental problem has hitt us by then we going to have a problem with to much garbage on the planet... seems we have a huge job infront of us..
anonymepelle 1 year ago
a great man of our time.
greggcaff 2 years ago
Inverness - the bible belt of the UK? I think I'll skip that tour stop, thank you very much.
darkmiles22 2 years ago
I've never understood the "why are there still apes?" question.
Why stop at apes? Why don't they say "Hey, like, why are there still non-human animals?"
Dawkins has probably heard that dumbass question too many times for him to count.
FunkmasterA997 2 years ago 7
Actually, that's a very common misconception that many people, have!
Most people think that Humans are in a higher level of evolution than, say, the sharks! This is NOT true!
When people say that, they actually mean that the common ancestor of sharks is older than the human's common ancestor!
In the persent time, we are all at the SAME LEVEL of evolution - becaus its a continuous process! Thats why i dont like the model of te tree of life - i prefer the "bush" or circle tree of evolution!
luarionte 2 years ago 2
the tree is a family tree that a good way of showing it if you show as a family tree
kokofan50 2 years ago
The problem with the common "tree" is that people think that the species on the "higher branches" are more evolved than the ones in the "trunk" or in the "lower branches"!
This is of course false!
luarionte 2 years ago
Oh wow, other than the interview with Ted Haggard, I have never seen Dawkins lose his patience. That was incredible, he just went straight to the point and called the MC on his bullshit. LOL
TheWALOS 2 years ago 4
LMAO! I hope everyone from the Westborough (spelling?) Baptist Church gets to see this!
Lol! "a bunch of really very very weird and unpleasant people" ~ "extreme wingnuts"!
(He was being polite.)
MrPoopybum 2 years ago 2
I find Dawkins' last answer in this video to be mean spirited and inconsiderate. I would answer that only things which are designed by intelligence require a purpose. Things which arise by natural means have no inherent reason or purpose aside from possibly the function of reproducing. I find the atheistic approach to life gives me the purpose of continuing on the human race and leaving the world a little better for me having been here. I feel a need to be good, raise a family and accomplish.
QuestionMarc 2 years ago
Dawkins is so funny
EclecticSceptic 2 years ago
Why are we here? We came about through natural processes of the universe. Nothing more. I don't understand why some people can't take that, why they feel such a strong need to feel special about themselves. We think we're special because we're smart, but when you consider we were once just as 'dumb' as any other animal, you find out we really aren't special. Our planet is one of 8 orbiting a star that's one of 100 billion billion in the universe. There's really nothing special about it.
GuppyPal 2 years ago 31
I agree. I think that religion only exists because so many people can't handle the reality of their existence, that they're just animals that live for a while after birth and die forever. People like the idea of eternal life in Heaven and such, but they're all just stories that people, sadly, take very seriously and actually believe is true. Religious people enjoy thinking that their Gods are real, and deny the obvious truth.
9Endon9 2 years ago 8
@GuppyPal I would like to agree fully but I do believe that humans are unique in certain ways. I think's it's pretty amazing that we're the only beings trying to unfold the mysteries of the universe.
XxwonderfifflexX 5 months ago
Oh NO...they know about the Westboro Baptist Church in Britain?
Grrrreat....they must think America is the stupidest country in the world.
kryptoknightmare 2 years ago 3
You know I actually thought the Westboro Baptist Church was a SPOOF when I first saw them, it's that stupid!
AtheistBrit 2 years ago
Very important question here, about what is the meaning of life. Dawkins gets to the point by explaining that some questions are silly.
This of course can be elaborated, to say a) Science doesn't claim to have all the answers, but it's working on it, b) Religion certainly doesn't have all the answers, although it claims to, c) As your understanding grows, the questions will probably change. ie: Asking why Ra is not happy with my sacrifice is meaningless with current knowledge.
Excellent video.
karlismoose12 3 years ago 5
I understand he thinks the question about the meaning of life is silly, but I don´t know why he thinks so. Many philosofers and scientists make their own theories about this subject, even nowadays.
Please, could you explain me what I missed? Why is the question silly?
fedea82 2 years ago
Sorry for mispelling "philosophers".
fedea82 2 years ago
Richard Dawkins and Paula Kirby sit down for a 40 minute conversation at Eden Court Theater. There, they talk about evolution, religion and the importance of science. This is followed by a question and answer session with the audience.
deljugo 3 years ago
to challenge god to exist is to note that god doesnt exist without this challenge. in this duel you are god's creator. god's existence, in fact, is incidental. as a symbolic exchange, god is only the interstitial term of the transaction. thus it has no consequence for us to beleive in it
iaeruo 3 years ago
*interstitial*
iaeruo 3 years ago
iaeruo
I'm sorry, I'm a little confused.
Is this solipsism or pretention?
ggab7768 3 years ago
solipsiabsurd pataphysics
iaeruo 3 years ago 2
All apes have evolved. They evolved into apes.
DefaultPosition 3 years ago 46
@DefaultPosition Not all Apes evolved , some became Religious! :P
sushanalone 1 year ago
@sushanalone Evolution = Change, not progress.
DefaultPosition 1 year ago
@DefaultPosition Word Change is not sufficient to explain evolution, its change with natural selection to be better than what you are at surviving and propogating your genes= progress in that sense. An apple turning to rot is change not evolution, but the evolution plants from wind fertilization to produce flowers and nectar to enhance fertilization by insects is a change towards improvement, i.e. progress. peace
sushanalone 1 year ago
@sushanalone Progress is an incredibly subjective term. I've never read a book that's ever alluded to evolution as 'progress'. Stuff changes over time. 99.99% of all species that ever lived died. Evolution is a mindless, non-caring, blind process of natural, sexual and artificial selection (in the case of breading) and genetic drift acting upon errors in DNA copying. By which objective criteria can we say that we are better than our ancestors?
DefaultPosition 1 year ago
@DefaultPosition OMG "Evolution is a mindless, non-caring, blind process of natural, sexual and artificial selection (in the case of breading) and genetic drift acting upon errors in DNA copying" blind, depending on errors on dna, mindless(mind is result of evolution)..you are better left stewing in your ignorance imo than some one spending time to educate you. cos i have no afterlife and i dont want to waste time on scrubs or mindless grubs, peace
sushanalone 1 year ago
@sushanalone Your comment drips with irony.
DefaultPosition 1 year ago
@DefaultPosition i am glad you noticed, i was not expecting such a discovery on your part. Peace in your this life, and good luck for afterlife.
sushanalone 1 year ago
The compere is frustratingly ignorant.
sassymarvin 3 years ago
I totally agree. I love(hate) how he quickly interjects his simple-minded opinion before he has another member of the audience ask a question.
didsaid 3 years ago
His questions are a little simple, especially the one about why didn't all apes evolve into humans. But I'm glad he asked it because I think there are a lot of people like him who don't understand evolution and had those kinds of questions in mind. Maybe he asked it for the sake of those people.
shwwnn 3 years ago 5
the question was created after the answer was framed?
jameellondon 3 years ago
dawkins is no doubt a very Intellegent man. Look at the way he answered the question why life exists? or why are we here?
jameellondon 3 years ago 2
Dawkins speaks the truth!
qpwnsall 3 years ago 5
There's only one monster, and that's the Flying Spaghetti Monster! lol, may his noodle appendages bless you
ViperRob42 3 years ago 5
Great ending! People turn to religion to find the answer to an inherently silly question. Love it! And so obvious; of course there's no ultimate purpose or plan to our existence, we're just products of natural processes, like everything else. The orthodox religious HATE that egalitarian notion.
mmartini50 3 years ago 10
they turn to religion to find a free resource to fulfill their greed.
they dont want to die, they can't imagine the world without them in it, so they've figured they'd strike a deal with something imaginary that lets them live on once their bodies here on earth die, at which point they'll get the big payout in the afterlife.
a religious person defending their religion.
a guy with a lottery ticket defending it as he goes to collect his jackpot(that he's sure has has).
i see no difference.
beebobox 3 years ago 4
good comment!
mmartini50 3 years ago
the color of jealousy is red lol, and the answer to the ultimate question of life, the universe, and everything is.... 42 =)
ViperRob42 3 years ago 3
Please excuse my ignorance: is this series available as one clip / stream...?
Fantastic and right. Science is the truth. Simple. The truth often is...
13112911 3 years ago 2
Did you hear the MC slip in "Well maybe that's why people turn to religion to find that answer"
Valelacerte 3 years ago 2
I agree, last comment was priceless, Dawkins is a semi-god
paxtonhume 3 years ago 5
There is only one thing wrong with Dawkins here; his voice.
He's fantastic!
Dequilibrium 3 years ago 6
friggin genius..
eduzitcho 3 years ago 7
...and wait, there's a "bible belt" in Scotland???
darkuser999 3 years ago
lol
SamShah33 3 years ago
I challenge that guy at 00:17 to live in a tree in a dense rainforest and do half as well as a chimpanzee...
darkuser999 3 years ago 3
I think what he should've said at the end is that the question doesn't deserve a scientific answer. It's a silly question scientifically. It's a philosophical question. But of course it's an important question, which is in need of answering for any atheist. The implications of the question that science can't answer what religion can are based on a misunderstanding, but dawkins failed to point that out
eggory 3 years ago
my answer for 00:17 is that chimpanzee are actually more evolved than humans. From our common ancestor we differentiate with 154 genes and chimps with 233 genes. We don't know what advantage those genes give them but evolution doesn't mean better brain. Nervous system is just a tool like any other tool: claw, fang, eye, hair, etc. Some animals have it, other animals don't have it.
felixpetrar 3 years ago
The last sentence by Dawkins is priceless. :D
Flyborg 3 years ago 4
ha, yeah I literally laughed out loud, and that usually takes a lot.
shtosuka 3 years ago 3
In terms of professor Dawkin's answer as to "why", I think he was a bit abrupt. A more appropriate answer may have been, "the human condition is of no consequence to the universe or physical laws, and it is arrogant to think so".
runevirage 3 years ago 2
"Einstein was a deist"
Pantheist, actually.
smaakjeks 3 years ago 5
Dawkins was honest in answering the question about the Westboro Baptist Church? Great Answer, haha
chris7777777777777 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Hey, it's Dawkins, the one who admitted to Stein in his movie that there just might BE intelligent design.
Nallanyesmar 3 years ago
"Hey, it's Dawkins, the one who admitted to Stein in his movie that there just might BE intelligent design."
Quote-mining is fun, isn't it.
smaakjeks 3 years ago 4
Did you see the movie? If you did, are you saying Stein put words in his mouth?
Nallanyesmar 3 years ago
"Did you see the movie? If you did, are you saying Stein put words in his mouth?"
No, I haven't seen it. What I'm saying is that I have no doubt that Ben got Dawkins to say that there MAY be an intelligent designer. It's not impossible. But if him saying that is used to substantiate the claim made of creationists, then yes: he has quoted Dawkins out of context.
smaakjeks 3 years ago 4
I think your talking about the movie 'Expelled'. Ben did not put 'words in Dawkins mouth', however he edited the film to make it appear as though Dawkins was admitting to I.D. If you don't beleive me then you can check out you tube where Dawkins is interviewed and he states that the makers of Exposed lied about the purpose of the film in order to interview him. Its another wonderful example of the lies and deceit that the I.D. movement will stoop to...
crazykb 3 years ago 4
He was asked to give his best shot at a possible scenario where Intelligent Design might be a plausible explanation and so he gave the idea that highly intelligent aliens might have seeded life on Earth, but still, the Aliens themselves would necessarily need to have evolved to get to that stage. He got quoted out of context after that for the purpose of that movie's (Expelled) intentions.
SyDemon 3 years ago
syrett76 - The host (Paula Kirby) was playing devils advocate.
If my research serves me right.....Kirby is a christian who is now an Atheist.
jessie74 3 years ago
yep
Subfightr 3 years ago
At the end of this video, he's basically saying there is no meaningful answer to the 'meaning of life' given darwinian evolution is not a purposeful system(Teleological). It is a causal system, explanations can only be given in causal terms.
The question literally becomes meaningless or senseless (the logical positivists would be proud :) )
A very good answer, all though not well expressed! (Dawkins)
TheSophist2007 3 years ago
omfg, the host is a fuking total IDIOT!
lianghaochen 3 years ago 3
yes. People turn to religion to find silly answers for silly questions. In the end how does that benefit you and how do you progress from asking such a silly question. That's a moot point.
Domzdream 3 years ago
its our didease to be distracted by our language.
peteq1972 3 years ago
Would there be a problem us getting into a relationship?
I mean, if you can't beat them, join them, eh?
YawnGod 3 years ago
"Would there be a problem us getting into a relationship? I mean, if you can't beat them, join them, eh?"
If you can't beat them, let them beat you. You might enjoy it. Sticks and stones may break my bones, but whips and chains exite me!
Morlawnical 3 years ago
Disagreeing with me is not a prerequisite of being correct.
I think you're cute.
YawnGod 3 years ago
Well, I dislike southern American accents too, and I'm sure you'd agree with me.
And you pronounce words better than I do? Congratulations. You win at life.
YawnGod 3 years ago
Dawkins probably wished he had used a more nonsensical example circa 10:30. Because we all know that the color of jealousy is green. Just like envy.
mwahaha. BTW I love watching Dawkins answer questions.
EGarrett01 3 years ago
that host is a complete moron
ferrariModenas 3 years ago
watch?v=e5Grg5KquHM (Irish accents video). The closest you will get to the Scottish accent is in North Eastern parts of Northern Ireland (closest to Scotland), where many Scottish came over to live centuries ago, they are known collectively as Ulster-Scots. Though anyone from Northern Ireland (including me) can easily tell their difference from Scottish ones.
riverrunRRS 3 years ago
The last questioner I see (green top) has a Scottish accent, not Irish. Maybe I missed someone, but there are NO Irish accents anywhere in this debate.
riverrunRRS 3 years ago
No, the last questioner's accent was indeed Irish.
fergusgallagher 3 years ago
Hehehehe, dude, Irish people, compared to Dawkins, sound so fucking stupid. Phonetically speaking.
YawnGod 3 years ago
Scottish accents, not Irish. If you're going to be a bigot at least get your regions right.
riverrunRRS 3 years ago
Oh, I'm sorry. Scottish.
But I'm not a bigot, you see. I find their voices asthetically unappealing. I may have been ignorant as to which cultural grouped had that accent, but the fact that I do not like the accent doesn't make me a bigot.
YawnGod 3 years ago
there are many variations of the scots accent, I'm not overly keen on glasgow/edinburgh accents, but I'm from the shetland islands and the accent is totally different, we still retain a lot of norse words and dialect.
soupie 3 years ago
WHAT? I am quite fond of Irish accents.
ericv00 3 years ago
Me too. I'm Irish.
riverrunRRS 3 years ago
Making any assumption based on an accent seem so ignorant to me. How would something so inconsequential have anything to do with the argument?
saken 3 years ago
It hurts my ears. Well, my brain really.
Please note that in my original post I used the word "SOUNDS". "SOUNDS" is fundamental here.
For example, if you could imagine someone speaking in "yokel" about quantum physics or Judaism in Russia, you would probably thing it SOUNDS stupid and ridiculous. Then again, SOUNDING and actually being are two different things.
YawnGod 3 years ago
Ohhh, that old guy that asked Dawkins to define life was probably a thiest.
The sneaky bastadge.
YawnGod 3 years ago
LOL He's awesome! Just incredible.
Antichrist4Life 3 years ago 3
At the end the host or whatever guy said "Maybe it's part of why people turn to religion; to find that answer."
Ask a silly question, get a silly answer.
BoozyBeggar 3 years ago 2
Yeah, and it is not the hosts place to comment in that way. He is there to mediate the discussions in an unbiased manner, not participate. If he wants to debate with Dawkins, he should do it in an event scheduled for such a purpose.
ericv00 3 years ago 3
lol he`s startin to wind me up too.
peteq1972 3 years ago 2
The host guy is having a hard time with this whole affair. At every opportunity he tries to interject a reason somebody might need religion. Either Dawkins is giving him a crisis of faith, or he is playing devils advocate.
KurNorock 3 years ago 2
Yeah, I noticed that.
deadpisser88 3 years ago
i love his answer to the meaning of life, it's simply brilliant.
IgWannA2 3 years ago 5
There is no purpose... things are, and life can...
pmokadakeisuke 3 years ago
"Has almost reached 6 billion"
The fuck are you talking about?
We're reaching 7 billion.
LovelyYTRocks 3 years ago
i guess he's been reading an old textbook ;)
IgWannA2 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
bullox, the color of jealousy is a perfectly fine question to ask. and more over scientists ponder it. Just because RD doesn't study synesthesia, doesn't make it absurd. He blindly adheres to his presupposed beliefs just as much as other religious people do.
qstephe 3 years ago
envy is green, so i guess jealousy is a shade of green ;)
IgWannA2 3 years ago 2
nice treatment of scientist compatibility with faith.
AtheistCitizen 3 years ago
I thought so too.
tedhaggardly 3 years ago
"What is the colour of jealousy?" Brilliant. =)
AtheistAaron 3 years ago
There are always ppl who don't read books and ask stupid questions with assumption like "human evolved from chimp"
dreamy2 3 years ago
This "why are there still apes?" question is stupid on so many levels, and we see it over and over again nonetheless. For one thing, we *are* apes. For another thing, as Dawkins points out, as far as natural selection is concerned, as long as you're reproducing you are allowed to stay around, whether you're doing that in a way that involves space shuttles or one that involves picking nats out of your brother's hair in the jungle, both are considered equal in the eyes of nature until an asteroid.
bmcguire80 3 years ago 3
but he fielded it badly. Subsets of a population facing differences in environment will select for those better suited to each environment. If separation persists then speciation can follow..
AtheistCitizen 3 years ago
LOL that guy got pwned! He asked "why is there life?" after dawkins had carefully and methodically explained WHY there is life more than 3 times.
aq1q 3 years ago 2
The answer to the question "why are there still apes if humans descended from apes?" is to ask the equivalent question, "why are there still Europeans if Americans descended from Europeans?"
I share Dawkins irritation. It's not the fact that people don't know about evolution, it's that they ask loaded questions full of false assumptions as if they know what they're talking about.
theinquisitor 3 years ago 5
"If chimpanzees evolved from humans, then why are there still humans?" mega lol for Richard
LikeAPossum 3 years ago 2
Yes that was well put.
TawntheAtheist 3 years ago
Population can be controlled very easily; COLONIZE MARS ASAP.
sciencedoggy 3 years ago 2
We'll colonise the gobi desert before we colonise mars.
loathi 3 years ago 4
Haven't you read the Mars Trilogy? That really won't help at all.
closedmouth 3 years ago
The guy questioning at 1:15 has a hard time understanding that a so called soul didn't just suddenly start entering organisms. And it really depends on if you define "life" as having the mechanism to create reaction or just reproduction.
Dem212 3 years ago 2
Evolution doesnt exist anymore. We stopped it.
angel2901 3 years ago
lol.. Joking, right?
Dem212 3 years ago
It's ok, I have a jump starter.
studio7manga 3 years ago
"Evolution doesnt exist anymore. We stopped it. "
I assume youre talking about our own evolution?
Modern society will have certainly made an impact on evolution. Even other species as can be observed in domesticated animals..
but as for ourselves, it isnt the case that evolution has stopped - it is more the case that we have completely redefined how natural selection selects among us. It is not yet completely clear what genes are more likely to survive in todays world.
TawntheAtheist 3 years ago 9
I think that human evolution are getting slower and slower due too the less natural selection and longer life expectancy. (less natural selection= insane population growth...)
hookah604 3 years ago
How long we live for is not really important. What is important is whether people are having children later in life. If this is the case then that would result in a slowdown in evolution.
Im not sure what 'less natural selection' means. I think youre referring to the fact that we have no predators. Natural selection is about more than just predator/prey issues. There is sexual selection too, which probably plays a more important role than basic survival for many species.
TawntheAtheist 3 years ago
Evolution stopped because of our science. There is no natural selection anymore and even if we had in future some mutation our science and society would not allow it. We would seek and find a way to reverse it. There is another evolution: Our evolution with our science and technology. Google for "Transhumanism". Im a Transhumanist. :-)
angel2901 3 years ago
"There is another evolution: Our evolution with our science and technology."
In the sense that our science advances in increments it is a form of evolutional development.
"if we had in future some mutation our science and society would not allow it. We would seek and find a way to reverse it. "
I know what youre hinting at. The thing is evolution doesnt rely on sudden mutations, but mostly consists of tiny small steps which we would not notice. Perhaps in the future it may be different.
TawntheAtheist 3 years ago 2
Evolution hasn't 'stopped' — there are still individuals who survive to reproduce and others who don't. The factors involved in dividing those groups may be numerous and perhaps seem more subtle than, for example, selection pressures between cheetahs and gazelles, but they exist. Sexual selection also provides very interesting evolutionary pressures.
TheraminTrees 3 years ago 2
Evolution stopped by idiocy ;-)
clray123 3 years ago