What a moron LOL! He calls people who believe in God Delusional but admits that he doesn't know if there is a God or not. He believes beyond any doubt in his mind that we evolved from absolutely nothing but thats reasonable to believe!? What a joke he is. I guess his English accent is supposed to make his nonsense more credible huh? He says Jesus may not have existed but when pressed he has to admit he would be shown a fool do deny Jesus is an historical person & has NO answer for Moral values!
look at man ? He is so small that the wind could blow him away . But yet he talks boldly Before the throne of God . Find me one man that is perfect and i will believe in him . But why should i follow a man that is no greater then i am ? But yet this same man has no power over death . But you follow him like his has power . But yet the truth is he has none . And one day death will come . And he will show man what power realy is . We have to wake up and understand long words will not save you ?
Warren Buffett is agnostic and Bill Gates is a full blown Atheist. Those two have given more to charity than anyone. If you need a sky daddy that always watches you to make sure you do right and will punish you if you don't do good things, you're not a very good person.
@BaBYPuNCheR133 IF you need to have more money than anyone in the world before you began to give to Charity you are not a that good of a person.. You clearly have never heard the proverb about the rich man who gave 50 bucks and the poor woman who only gave a penny but it was all she had. the poverb said that the woman gave MORE than the rich man.. Kind of makes since on all levels... And in the story you knew the man's name because he was seeking credit, where as no one knew the woman name..
@PhilLankford Wow Bill Gates plans to give away over 95% of his wealth in his lifetime but that's not even the point. If you pulled your head out of your ass you might have realized I was saying they don't need a god to give their money away. This has nothing to do with rich and poor. This has to do with delusional nutjobs that need their pimp in the sky who will bitch smack them if they don't give up their money, to give to the less fortunate.
@BaBYPuNCheR133 And you really didn't get my point either.. Would Bill Gate give away his all that money if he wasn't a billionaire... probably not... And 95% percent of 30+ billion is around 150 million, oh yeah he would really be roughen it then... And you are completely over generalizing the religious and why they give there money... And dont tell me pull my head out of my ass, Charity has ALWAYS been preached to Aristocrats and Capitalist by the Christian Church for ages, not by Kings..
Why would anyone think that they get their moral values from religion? do these people see themselves as puppy dogs being trained not to piss on a rug or something. Why not say we get our moral values from something which is consistent among humans, our evolved intelligence. why are these people so willing to flaunt their intelligence about abstract matters like how did the universe begin, but fail miserably at comprehending why we know it is wrong to disembowel the neighbour's cat.
@MuonRay First of all, Morals and Values are religious based words. That's why it is called a Value because it is not common sense... We failed miserably at cat disembowelment because atheist places like Russia don't believe that is bad... Stalin, an Athiest, said Morality is the united states greatest strength.. Even our enemies believe our Morality comes from our religion..
@MuonRay Im glad you explained you rebuttle.... the problem with saying we get our moral values from something consistent among humans is because morals and values aren't consistent among humans. .. And its not the religious who flaunt intelligence about the universe, they simply embrace it. Its men of science who think they are onto something just because they own a telescope and now all of the sudden they think they can understand everything objectively..
I dont even understand why this is a debate still. We can be good without god because we can make laws. there does not have to be an absolute logical argument saying that god makes our morals or does not, because its clear we are capable of rational discussion. Through that rational discussion we can create our own concepts of acceptable morals.
@december6 Your right but up until the 1600 hundreds the Mayans believed that human sacrifices were rational... But yet biblical believers put a halt to human sacrifice almost 5000 year before with the story of Abraham and Isaac.. Kind of funny how Mayans who could predict the end of the world couldn't have a rational moral compos.. and it was only the influence of Christian RELIGIOUS tradition that we were able to change there minds...
ha! good one faggot.. I wish atheist would be more open minded and quit acting like they know everything about everything objectively.. I also wish you burned in hell for all eternity... and the suicide rate is much higher in atheist countries than in religious countries so why don't you do what the smartest atheist in the world did, Frederick Nietzsche, and kill yourself...
@PhilLankford I was going to reply to your point but looking at your last comment calling people "faggot" and telling them "kill yourself", you are obviously a troll or a dickhead.
@BaBYPuNCheR133 Look "babypuncher" I was saying most of that for effect because that is all Martyaus is doing. He was wishing everybody who is religious would be killed and telling me to suck my own dads cock.. I think i can get a little ignorant with my comments.. And its only the religious who believe it is wrong to take your own life.. So marty an all the other atheist shouldn't have a problem with that.. and if you do, I would really like know why??
@PhilLankford Refusing to acknowledge science and reason is close-minded Correlation does not equal causation. And Nietzsche did not kill himself. You twit.
How could some of the scientists permit themselves to make a claim that would necessitate knowledge as extensive as the scheme of the universe, when their knowledge of the total scheme of being is *close* to zero, when confronted with a whole mass of unknowns concerning this very earth and tangible, lifeless matter, let alone the whole universe?
I've had virtually nothing to do with any religion whatsoever, and I don't find myself running around murdering people, burning houses down and badmouthing Iron Man 2, I manage to have morals of my own as do millions of other people who are strong minded enough not to have to be told how to live by religion. Saying you can only get morals from religion is the floppiest argument I've ever heard.
@h0usesparr0w Your Mind is the collection of every experience, person and everything you have ever takin in socially.. You might live in America where over 90 percent of the people are religious.. Meaning you socially act like these people whether you know it or not.. Their beliefs have rubbed off on you more than you think, only you have passed them for common sense.. A good example is if you were an athiest who was born in the middle east your "common sense" would lean more Islamic..
So he does believe Jesus exists, and he was a Jewish teacher. I wonder what he taught. MORALS, this guy is just full of SH8t, how do you buy into Dawkins garbage spewing out of his mouth. his augments are terrible.
I am sorry I don't buy into his shanaghans, and I will call them that, cause he simply isn't right. He is trying to understand the world through his eyes. and I'm not buying it. his arguments are way too weak and poorly substantiated.
It is safe to say much of our morality steams from religion, humanities interpretations of the morality is different. In the interpretations lies suffering.
3. Jesus did exist. There were Roman historians who have documented his life. granted there isn't much but there are 3 parties that attest to his existence. Plus the bible, Koran both refer to Jesus, and there are countless augments to the authenticity of Jesus.
4. Love your neighbor as yourself. those are jesus' words 2000 years ago, before modern times according to this guy. the 10 commandments.
@danieljfm3 "Love your neighbor..., Do unto others..." didn't start with Jesus. That's a universally held tenet in virtually every religion. Christianity, Judaism, Islam are newcomers and consist of 99.99% plagiarism from older religions. Yaweh, Jesus, Allah, et. al., didn't create morality. Mens' morality of the time was imposed on them. Moral men aren't moral because of Jesus. Jesus speaks morals because of Men.
2. why Christianity. He ignores all other faiths. Guarantee he will avoid the discussion of Islam. Budahism-thousands of years ago, right speech, right thought, right intentions, right actions, ultimate enlightenment and compassion. These were teachings of Buddha. Well before the "modern era"
@danieljfm3 Dawkins speaks of ALL religions and deities. He rarely speaks specifically of Buddhism because Buddah never pretended to be a god. Buddhism is more a value system than a religion in the traditional sense. When he denies the Christian god, he is also denying the Muslim god. He concentrates on Christians because they are dominant where he speaks. They are also one of the most obnoxious, proselytizing and all-around disgusting and destructive religions (along with Islam) on the planet.
I wish I was there during that interview. Several counterpoints to his flakey responses. He just sounded conceded which made his comments have more impact than his words actually had.
1. It is extremely easy to to describe the world getting it's values from religion. (I want him to go on TV and say Muhammad was not the prophet of God, and God does not exist) Dawkins is sadly mistaken and feel sorry for him.
@danieljfm3 He would obliterate you in a debate and your tenuous grasp of logic proves it. If someone denies the very existence of god, why should they "go on TV and say Muhammad was not the prophet of God"? That makes no logical sense and only serves to inflame. Your failure to understand that (as well as your failure to know the difference between "concede" and conceit", demonstrates you, by far, lack the eductation to challenge anything Dawkins says.
@mdfouru If he would obliterate him than why hasn't he obliterated the rest of the world.. Most people who are religious don't blindly believe like a lot of atheist think we do.. We struggle with it every day, that's why we call it FAITH.. But yet even with our Faith being as week as it is, we still don't fall for these Universal claims that Dawkins PREACHES.. One point dawkins doesn't answer is that Religion is universal.. Go to the four corners of the earth and you will find religion..
@PhilLankford So? What does that have to do with it being right or wrong? Years ago if you traveled to the four corners of the Earth, you would find people who believe the Earth is flat. Years ago if you traveled to the four corners of the Earth, you would find people who believe the Sun revolves around the Earth. Just because a lot of people believe it, doesn't make it true. As our knowledge of the world grew, we abandoned our Bronze age beliefs. The same will happen with religion.
"Dead-to-the-spirit deluded "God Delusion" author & blithering fool scientist goon Richard Dawkins another "leader" given to the profane masses is another useful idiot for Jesuit machinations"-C.O.
Jesuitical: pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuits completely altered the education system to suit their evolution agenda to discredit the Bible. They cant have a Satanic society of 'Do as Thou Wilt' if people still follow the Bible.
I wonder why Dawkins concedes the point that Jesus probably existed, there is no evidence to support that claim. No contemporary historians mention Jesus, in fact the first reference comes about 300 years after his alleged death.
Wow Richard, I was expecting you to identify the "conscience" - the intellect that knows right from wrong, as where humans get morals. And I agree if people got morals from religion that would be a bad thing as to justify all sorts of ill behavior.
If Jesus was a Jewish teacher who had followers and Jesus wanted to reform the Jewish religion which is my understanding... if you can follow my line of thought here...
The whole idea of a distinct religion seperate from Judaism which is 'Jesus's religion' (didn't he say to his followers: go and preach my religion)
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
I dont find it truthful to asset that Believers are secure as a majority. Because many simply identify with something an elder in their family belived. this its just a fact-of-life mentality and why bother question it. i know several people who do not go to church yet if you asked them they would say some denomination as if they had anything but a passing attachment to it... very easy to manipulate this "data" to compel based on numbers
We shouldn't be good because of God...we should be good because we are all living in an ecosystem-we are all interconnected living beings who are fundamentally the same.
@Luchik44 The Bible says all people are created equal... Aristotle did not believe this, He said some people were meant to be slaves and other meant to rule over them.. be careful what you think is common sense and what is religious teaching..
@PhilLankford When quoting the Bible, it is very important to remember that the Bible is full of contradictions. The fact that the Bible says something does not mean that it doesn't say the exact opposite on some other page.
Agnosticism and atheism are not mutually exclusive and refer to different theses: Gnosticism is belief in the thesis, "I know (that...)". Theism is belief in the thesis, "some god exists". The prefix "a-" means "non-".
*Theism and atheism are mutually exclusive positions.* (#) If one holds the belief that both theses "some god exists" and "no god exists" are equiprobable , one cannot truly claim, "I believe some god exists".
i have been saying for many years now...even after obtaining a masters degree in Theology...that we are ALL A-gnostic...for none of us KNOW whether god exists or does not exist PERIOD. therefore, live n let live...prob w/ religions is it is obsessed w/ forcing other to believe as they do and preventing others from human/civil rights over the centuries. If Religions were a corp it would have been out of business years ago.
It is better to believe than do not. "I am puzzled why people who do not belive in God do not commit suicide...", Dostoevsky. Life is purposeless then. It is dangerous for the mankind what he is telling.
@fialkool LOL what?? that's it? that's the problem w/ religious people...they dont make intelligent argument for their defense. clearly the world can't be any worse off w/o organized religion. Organized religion may not have hurt society (if that is ur argument) but it certainly hasn't helped and in fact has been more significantly a contributor to societal problems as evidenced by many centuries of religious based horror.
@Pisces31660 Science and religion are different. So they do not have arguments at all, while science has. But both do not answer the question "Why ?".
@fialkool I"m all for it..(re your reply) i agree religion and science are mutually exclusive however i wish religious fanatics would be of like mind but they are not. It seems religion and its followers can't be content w/ their faith alone they feel they must convert others and or prevent others from their human n civil rights. for evidence look at the long history of world religions standing in the way of rights and justice. i agree they shud b differentiated.
@fialkool yea but i caution... atheism is also a 'religion' of sorts. my friend Andy once said 'it should be freedom FROM religion in US not OF religion' i said 'on no Andy u dont want that..that is just as oppressive. Look at the systems that band religion all oppressive. im in favor of the spirituality of the 12 step philosophy that being 'finding a god of ur own understanding (lower case intential)
@fialkool i like what Thomas Paine had to say i quote him on my face book page. 'The world is my country and to do good is my religion' ...beautiful in its simplicity.
I've watched many videos of Dawkins and especially in this one he made he's point about morals very clear. Some other times the wording was a bit different, but it seems that he has said similar line so many times that now he had invented the perfect words for it.
Buffet and Gates are both atheists. I wonder if that clip was intended to be an accommodating example of atheist generosity as both are also well known philanthropists?
The interviewer actually did a pretty good job of interviewing his guest instead of trying to argue or talk over the guest like so many do. He clearly has his bias, but keeps it in check for the sake of a good, productive interview. Good job guy.
Very true. As a nontheist myself, I think he could have bit a little bit more aggressive towards Dawkins, but he did very, very well for someone with an opposing view.
wow!!!! I'm impressed the interviewer obviously leans towards the religious side of the issue, but he's still able to interview Richard Dawkins without letting his emotions over take him, with a fair amount of objectivity and respect. Bravo!
@DoctorNumLuck I don't know, are we talking about the world is flat or Dawkins' weak points, that have been countered previously below. why Christianity. He ignores all other faiths. Guarantee he will avoid the discussion of Islam. Budahism-thousands of years ago, right speech, right thought, right intentions, right actions, ultimate enlightenment and compassion. These were teachings of Buddha. Well before the "modern era" Jesus taught love your neighbor as yourself. that sounds like morality
People don't get their morality from stone tablets, a book or a deity. Morality evolves and changes over time. We get our morality from observation, experience and our ability to identify with both.
If people actually read the books in which they claim to get their morality from, they'd see that claiming such a thing doesn't help their argument one bit.
Things that are not condoned in today's world were once condoned as moral in those same books.
There is no better animal for Satan to use against the very God that created them, than the animal that represented the very power of God himself.
No other animal has been used to support the Anti-God philosophy of Evolution more than the dinosaur. Then animal best able to show God's strength and power in His Creation is the animal most often used to deny the existence of a Creator.
Doesn't disprove God, but since the Bible clearly states that God created the universe in 6 days, and we know that to be a complete lie, obviously the Bible is inaccurate. Why would you believe the rest of it?
@PCrePs I was merely making a statement. In response to your question though, some people believe that the first 11 chapters of Genesis are metaphorical. If this is the case then I guess one would be able to believe the rest of it.
They don't always interperate the Bible literally, but then that begs the question: How do you know what to follow if some of the Bible is bullshit storytelling?
@xAFallFarewellx i agree i cant stand that shit "you just beleive in evolution because you hate god" lol there mad because it disproves the literal interpertation of the bible and other "holy" books
There isn't a single charitable deed that religious people do that can not also be done by an atheist. However, look at the amount of evil deeds done IN THE NAME OF RELIGION.
How do you figure? I think he actually does an excellent job of hauling a shitload of commentary out of the interviewee - which is an interviewer's job. It isn't a debate.
@fuckucxcukckc The interviewer is not trying to disprove him or attack his beliefs. He's trying to be the "devil's advocate" of the situation and provide viewers with a full view of Richard Dawkins' ideas.
@Deadmansparty2002 Maybe, maybe not. His devil's advocacy sounds a lot like the common religious advocacy you hear every day. So in that sense, Dawkins owned the common man on every point.
@osgeek But if you look at the way in which this interviewer approaches any number of issues on his talk show, you realize that no matter who he is talking to, he attempts to present an opposing opinion if he doesn't have someone to promote that aspect on their own. When looking at his work as a whole, he is always the neutral party.
@Deadmansparty2002 I might have believed you until I watched the rest of the segments. He came out much more forcefully vs Dawkins. Note the part where he misunderstands scientific atheism by accusing Dawkins of hedging his bets or where he accuses Dawkins of being too confrontational. Exactly when did he offer any kind of push-back vs his later incoherently babbling religious panelists? He offered one weak self-described devil's advocacy moment, but that was it.
@osgeek He's not accusing Dawkins of hedging his bets, he's asking whether or not Dawkins himself feels that he is hedging his bets because it's most likely that there are those who view Dawkins perspective as being as such. Dawkins himself has a very definitive view on the world and it's the interviewer's responsibility to present an opposing view in order to help clarify what Dawkins' view is.
@Deadmansparty2002 Then why doesn't he do the same with the later panelists? Instead, he floats them a bunch of softball questions allowing them to attack Dawkins' positions without pushing back against them at all. Maybe he would say he's trying to be neutral, but I think his lack of comprehension of an agnostic's position prevents him from being able to do so effectively.
@fuckucxcukckc how does an interviewer get owned? this isn't about who's right and who's wrong. this is an interview.not a debate on Paikin's vs. Dawkin's personal views.
@caioma87 the idea that people get their values from religion is a largely held belief among the general public, and there is some evidence to suggest that is in fact the case. The interviewer is also very knowledgeable on a number subjects and I suspect he did in fact read Dawkins' book before interviewing him.
never seen him speak. I must say he does a good job. I'm agnostic as well and it's good to see someone not claiming to be atheist, since truly there is no way to prove a superior being doesn't exist. And his answer about picking and choosing is a very good answer. Is homosexuality in the ten Commandments? just more picking and choosing. People many years ago probably needed guidance and direction. However, this does not hold true in modern times.
I am an atheist, but I don't claim to even beleive you can prove a god does not exist, but that's because you cannot prove something doesn't exist like that without exhaustive knowledge, so instead of saying I don't know which religion is right, which is generally what I find agnostics to say, I say that there is no reason to beleive ANY god or religion is right due to there being no infaliable and distinguishable evidance for ANY god.
I see what you're saying. Ultimately it just depends on what definition of atheist or agnostic we hold to be true, because there are many different ones. I was merely talking about atheist or a derivative of atheist that say there is definitly no god. I do not mean to group the whole together and i do apologize. i'm agnostic but I only follow evidence, so i am not like the agnostics that you talked about. This just stems from the many interpretations of one word, like atheist or agnostic.
dawkins is wrong about people should be stoning others to death for showing an inch of skin ....it is true god ordered this but on a different event and anyway its not in the commandments so we would not do such a thing...
Nevertheless, its in the bible. "An eye for an eye" isnt in the commandments either and yet its the foundation of the mentality towards the death penalty in the US. Despite the fact that the commandments say "thou shalt not kill" Dawkins is 100% right. Its the Christians who have it wrong on every count.
Thats funny.I swear everytime I see one of those despicable TV evangelists,they always refer to some vague passage in the OT.Especially when it comes to punishment for all humanity.
yeah well im not an evangelist......they suck...........probably we will be punished if we dont repent for our sins but what ever..........its better being safe than sorry......if dawkins is right there is no such punishment but if hes wrong then hes fucked lol
You know youve just reffered to what is known as Pascals Wager. And its baseless and doesnt offer anything in evidence or proof.However I did indeed like you use of profanity. lol
no but it would still be interesting to know what he would do...if he was wrong... cuz if hes right he doesnt get punished or anything but if hes wrong then hes in trouble
Quantum physics and String Theory are getting as strange and farfetched as most religions.
Every brilliant physicist in the world that believes these things are delusional?
I think they're just trying to figure out the truth, just like a religious person. The problem is that physicists actively work to prove their theories whereas religious people rely on faith and do less work questioning themselves.
I think you mean 'Delusional'. Dawkins has had a go at lots of religions not just christianity. See him on the big debate, he heavily criticizes islam.
Thats why Dawkins is an idiot - he attacks religion ? - but only Christianity actually - it's all he ever attacks. Cause it's all he knows - Says I am delutional then in same breath says well as a scientist I have to admit U might be right - but your still delutional ??
I`m tired of this shit that only good people are religious and only a lowlife bastard could ever be Atheist, and if they aren`t completely evil, they`re just "confused".
People prove every day that Atheists are good people. People of various religions, including Christianity, prove that having a belief in God does not MAKE you a good person.
It is highly dangerous to assume that "God" or any other force can make you do good things. Everyone CHOOSES their own actions.
You just gotta love how Dawkins can put these arguments down so easily, they're used over and over and over and over that it just because second nature, ie: "where do Atheists get their morals"
I think he himself doesn't love it, because that fluency had to be built up by repeating his answers over and over, depriving him and the world of valuable Dawkins-does-actual-research-time.
What a moron LOL! He calls people who believe in God Delusional but admits that he doesn't know if there is a God or not. He believes beyond any doubt in his mind that we evolved from absolutely nothing but thats reasonable to believe!? What a joke he is. I guess his English accent is supposed to make his nonsense more credible huh? He says Jesus may not have existed but when pressed he has to admit he would be shown a fool do deny Jesus is an historical person & has NO answer for Moral values!
RomeoSeal3 4 days ago
0:24 - My first thought: Nants ingonyama bagithi baba...
LoverofLiszt 2 weeks ago
I believe in fairies...
jshap97 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
look at man ? He is so small that the wind could blow him away . But yet he talks boldly Before the throne of God . Find me one man that is perfect and i will believe in him . But why should i follow a man that is no greater then i am ? But yet this same man has no power over death . But you follow him like his has power . But yet the truth is he has none . And one day death will come . And he will show man what power realy is . We have to wake up and understand long words will not save you ?
thinkalott33 1 month ago
I would like to see Dawkins interview Tim Tebow...
PhilLankford 1 month ago
This guy is a tool. That is pretty much why I don't watch TVO.
andorr 1 month ago
the interviewer is a spastic retard
ExNihiloJimmy 1 month ago
Warren Buffett is agnostic and Bill Gates is a full blown Atheist. Those two have given more to charity than anyone. If you need a sky daddy that always watches you to make sure you do right and will punish you if you don't do good things, you're not a very good person.
BaBYPuNCheR133 2 months ago
@BaBYPuNCheR133 great, useful comment...
sinachiniforoosh 1 month ago
@BaBYPuNCheR133 IF you need to have more money than anyone in the world before you began to give to Charity you are not a that good of a person.. You clearly have never heard the proverb about the rich man who gave 50 bucks and the poor woman who only gave a penny but it was all she had. the poverb said that the woman gave MORE than the rich man.. Kind of makes since on all levels... And in the story you knew the man's name because he was seeking credit, where as no one knew the woman name..
PhilLankford 1 month ago
@PhilLankford Wow Bill Gates plans to give away over 95% of his wealth in his lifetime but that's not even the point. If you pulled your head out of your ass you might have realized I was saying they don't need a god to give their money away. This has nothing to do with rich and poor. This has to do with delusional nutjobs that need their pimp in the sky who will bitch smack them if they don't give up their money, to give to the less fortunate.
BaBYPuNCheR133 1 month ago
@BaBYPuNCheR133 And you really didn't get my point either.. Would Bill Gate give away his all that money if he wasn't a billionaire... probably not... And 95% percent of 30+ billion is around 150 million, oh yeah he would really be roughen it then... And you are completely over generalizing the religious and why they give there money... And dont tell me pull my head out of my ass, Charity has ALWAYS been preached to Aristocrats and Capitalist by the Christian Church for ages, not by Kings..
PhilLankford 1 month ago
Why would anyone think that they get their moral values from religion? do these people see themselves as puppy dogs being trained not to piss on a rug or something. Why not say we get our moral values from something which is consistent among humans, our evolved intelligence. why are these people so willing to flaunt their intelligence about abstract matters like how did the universe begin, but fail miserably at comprehending why we know it is wrong to disembowel the neighbour's cat.
MuonRay 2 months ago
@MuonRay First of all, Morals and Values are religious based words. That's why it is called a Value because it is not common sense... We failed miserably at cat disembowelment because atheist places like Russia don't believe that is bad... Stalin, an Athiest, said Morality is the united states greatest strength.. Even our enemies believe our Morality comes from our religion..
PhilLankford 2 months ago
@PhilLankford
Incoherence, Nonsense, Rhetoric, Misinformation ,Your Comment.
That is all.
MuonRay 2 months ago
@MuonRay Im glad you explained you rebuttle.... the problem with saying we get our moral values from something consistent among humans is because morals and values aren't consistent among humans. .. And its not the religious who flaunt intelligence about the universe, they simply embrace it. Its men of science who think they are onto something just because they own a telescope and now all of the sudden they think they can understand everything objectively..
PhilLankford 2 months ago
take that...you canadian CUNT!!!!
larsars7 2 months ago
I love it when he tells the interviewer to be serious!
borris2 2 months ago
I love his butterfly tie! lol
CrayZDude2 2 months ago
I dont even understand why this is a debate still. We can be good without god because we can make laws. there does not have to be an absolute logical argument saying that god makes our morals or does not, because its clear we are capable of rational discussion. Through that rational discussion we can create our own concepts of acceptable morals.
december6 2 months ago
@december6 Your right but up until the 1600 hundreds the Mayans believed that human sacrifices were rational... But yet biblical believers put a halt to human sacrifice almost 5000 year before with the story of Abraham and Isaac.. Kind of funny how Mayans who could predict the end of the world couldn't have a rational moral compos.. and it was only the influence of Christian RELIGIOUS tradition that we were able to change there minds...
PhilLankford 1 month ago
I wish all religious people would die and leave the earth to people with brains.
martyaus2905 3 months ago
@martyaus2905 that's cruel...(atheist talking)
sinachiniforoosh 1 month ago
@martyaus2905 Who are you wishing to????????
PhilLankford 1 month ago
@PhilLankford your mom.
martyaus2905 1 month ago
ha! good one faggot.. I wish atheist would be more open minded and quit acting like they know everything about everything objectively.. I also wish you burned in hell for all eternity... and the suicide rate is much higher in atheist countries than in religious countries so why don't you do what the smartest atheist in the world did, Frederick Nietzsche, and kill yourself...
PhilLankford 1 month ago
@PhilLankford How about you get on your knees and suck your old mans cock you dumb ass god believer.
martyaus2905 1 month ago
@PhilLankford I was going to reply to your point but looking at your last comment calling people "faggot" and telling them "kill yourself", you are obviously a troll or a dickhead.
BaBYPuNCheR133 1 month ago
@BaBYPuNCheR133 Look "babypuncher" I was saying most of that for effect because that is all Martyaus is doing. He was wishing everybody who is religious would be killed and telling me to suck my own dads cock.. I think i can get a little ignorant with my comments.. And its only the religious who believe it is wrong to take your own life.. So marty an all the other atheist shouldn't have a problem with that.. and if you do, I would really like know why??
PhilLankford 1 month ago
@PhilLankford Refusing to acknowledge science and reason is close-minded Correlation does not equal causation. And Nietzsche did not kill himself. You twit.
TheArcaneMaster 2 weeks ago
The atheist Delusion!
How could some of the scientists permit themselves to make a claim that would necessitate knowledge as extensive as the scheme of the universe, when their knowledge of the total scheme of being is *close* to zero, when confronted with a whole mass of unknowns concerning this very earth and tangible, lifeless matter, let alone the whole universe?
1tabligh 3 months ago
I've had virtually nothing to do with any religion whatsoever, and I don't find myself running around murdering people, burning houses down and badmouthing Iron Man 2, I manage to have morals of my own as do millions of other people who are strong minded enough not to have to be told how to live by religion. Saying you can only get morals from religion is the floppiest argument I've ever heard.
h0usesparr0w 3 months ago
@h0usesparr0w Your Mind is the collection of every experience, person and everything you have ever takin in socially.. You might live in America where over 90 percent of the people are religious.. Meaning you socially act like these people whether you know it or not.. Their beliefs have rubbed off on you more than you think, only you have passed them for common sense.. A good example is if you were an athiest who was born in the middle east your "common sense" would lean more Islamic..
PhilLankford 1 month ago
The point about morality is brilliant. I've heard him express this idea in different interviews before, but never so thoroughly as in this one.
pesahson 3 months ago
So he does believe Jesus exists, and he was a Jewish teacher. I wonder what he taught. MORALS, this guy is just full of SH8t, how do you buy into Dawkins garbage spewing out of his mouth. his augments are terrible.
danieljfm3 3 months ago
@danieljfm3 Jesus christ on a fucking bike, are you serious? Wait don´t answer, I already know.
yatter1 3 months ago
I am sorry I don't buy into his shanaghans, and I will call them that, cause he simply isn't right. He is trying to understand the world through his eyes. and I'm not buying it. his arguments are way too weak and poorly substantiated.
It is safe to say much of our morality steams from religion, humanities interpretations of the morality is different. In the interpretations lies suffering.
danieljfm3 3 months ago
3. Jesus did exist. There were Roman historians who have documented his life. granted there isn't much but there are 3 parties that attest to his existence. Plus the bible, Koran both refer to Jesus, and there are countless augments to the authenticity of Jesus.
4. Love your neighbor as yourself. those are jesus' words 2000 years ago, before modern times according to this guy. the 10 commandments.
danieljfm3 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@danieljfm3 "Love your neighbor..., Do unto others..." didn't start with Jesus. That's a universally held tenet in virtually every religion. Christianity, Judaism, Islam are newcomers and consist of 99.99% plagiarism from older religions. Yaweh, Jesus, Allah, et. al., didn't create morality. Mens' morality of the time was imposed on them. Moral men aren't moral because of Jesus. Jesus speaks morals because of Men.
mdfouru 3 months ago
2. why Christianity. He ignores all other faiths. Guarantee he will avoid the discussion of Islam. Budahism-thousands of years ago, right speech, right thought, right intentions, right actions, ultimate enlightenment and compassion. These were teachings of Buddha. Well before the "modern era"
danieljfm3 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@danieljfm3 Dawkins speaks of ALL religions and deities. He rarely speaks specifically of Buddhism because Buddah never pretended to be a god. Buddhism is more a value system than a religion in the traditional sense. When he denies the Christian god, he is also denying the Muslim god. He concentrates on Christians because they are dominant where he speaks. They are also one of the most obnoxious, proselytizing and all-around disgusting and destructive religions (along with Islam) on the planet.
mdfouru 3 months ago
I wish I was there during that interview. Several counterpoints to his flakey responses. He just sounded conceded which made his comments have more impact than his words actually had.
1. It is extremely easy to to describe the world getting it's values from religion. (I want him to go on TV and say Muhammad was not the prophet of God, and God does not exist) Dawkins is sadly mistaken and feel sorry for him.
3 more points to follow
danieljfm3 3 months ago
@danieljfm3 He would obliterate you in a debate and your tenuous grasp of logic proves it. If someone denies the very existence of god, why should they "go on TV and say Muhammad was not the prophet of God"? That makes no logical sense and only serves to inflame. Your failure to understand that (as well as your failure to know the difference between "concede" and conceit", demonstrates you, by far, lack the eductation to challenge anything Dawkins says.
mdfouru 3 months ago
@mdfouru If he would obliterate him than why hasn't he obliterated the rest of the world.. Most people who are religious don't blindly believe like a lot of atheist think we do.. We struggle with it every day, that's why we call it FAITH.. But yet even with our Faith being as week as it is, we still don't fall for these Universal claims that Dawkins PREACHES.. One point dawkins doesn't answer is that Religion is universal.. Go to the four corners of the earth and you will find religion..
PhilLankford 1 month ago
@PhilLankford So? What does that have to do with it being right or wrong? Years ago if you traveled to the four corners of the Earth, you would find people who believe the Earth is flat. Years ago if you traveled to the four corners of the Earth, you would find people who believe the Sun revolves around the Earth. Just because a lot of people believe it, doesn't make it true. As our knowledge of the world grew, we abandoned our Bronze age beliefs. The same will happen with religion.
BaBYPuNCheR133 1 month ago
At least they called him an evolutionary biologist, unlike the o'reiily factor which had him labelled as an atheist.
ethanherrick1 4 months ago
Dawkins is clearly 100x smarter than this guy -- the interviewer is being outwitted on every point so easily.
braydenbeautiful 4 months 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 to the profane masses is another useful idiot for Jesuit machinations"-C.O.
Jesuitical: pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuits completely altered the education system to suit their evolution agenda to discredit the Bible. They cant have a Satanic society of 'Do as Thou Wilt' if people still follow the Bible.
SpencerBenedict2nd 4 months ago
well said by dawkins at the end, master class
chelseamate2 5 months ago
The interviewer is not expressing his personal opinions, he's just asking questions that you'd expect to public to want answered.
GenRipper 5 months ago 2
That reporter get totally crushed by crystal clear arguments from Dawkins.
Pompelipom33 5 months ago
Dumbass. Of course you dont get your morals from religion.
Nobody has to tell you its wrong to kill your mother.
Your born knowing that.
Therefore ur born knowing right from wrong.
Demov12 5 months ago
I wonder why Dawkins concedes the point that Jesus probably existed, there is no evidence to support that claim. No contemporary historians mention Jesus, in fact the first reference comes about 300 years after his alleged death.
solitdude 5 months ago
Wow Richard, I was expecting you to identify the "conscience" - the intellect that knows right from wrong, as where humans get morals. And I agree if people got morals from religion that would be a bad thing as to justify all sorts of ill behavior.
HostileNegotiator 6 months ago
If Jesus was a Jewish teacher who had followers and Jesus wanted to reform the Jewish religion which is my understanding... if you can follow my line of thought here...
The whole idea of a distinct religion seperate from Judaism which is 'Jesus's religion' (didn't he say to his followers: go and preach my religion)
kind of baseless?
would like a reply.
shanyin1234 6 months ago
absolute genius! and more than fair with his perception of the bible.
TheSulphuric 6 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 6 months ago
I like the stuff of the guys going "Ooga Booga!" at the beginning.
Mrsimplesimon99 6 months ago in playlist Richard Dawkins Debates/Lectures
I dont find it truthful to asset that Believers are secure as a majority. Because many simply identify with something an elder in their family belived. this its just a fact-of-life mentality and why bother question it. i know several people who do not go to church yet if you asked them they would say some denomination as if they had anything but a passing attachment to it... very easy to manipulate this "data" to compel based on numbers
cycophile 6 months ago
LOLOOLLOLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOOLLOLOLOLLOOLLO BE SERIOUS
cheatdath 7 months ago
We shouldn't be good because of God...we should be good because we are all living in an ecosystem-we are all interconnected living beings who are fundamentally the same.
Luchik44 7 months ago 22
@Luchik44 The Bible says all people are created equal... Aristotle did not believe this, He said some people were meant to be slaves and other meant to rule over them.. be careful what you think is common sense and what is religious teaching..
PhilLankford 2 months ago
@PhilLankford When quoting the Bible, it is very important to remember that the Bible is full of contradictions. The fact that the Bible says something does not mean that it doesn't say the exact opposite on some other page.
VidkunQL 1 month ago
I love prof. dawkins
KEEETARO 7 months ago 19
Agnosticism and atheism are not mutually exclusive and refer to different theses: Gnosticism is belief in the thesis, "I know (that...)". Theism is belief in the thesis, "some god exists". The prefix "a-" means "non-".
*Theism and atheism are mutually exclusive positions.* (#) If one holds the belief that both theses "some god exists" and "no god exists" are equiprobable , one cannot truly claim, "I believe some god exists".
#: plato.stanford.edu/entries/contradiction/#LEMLNC
HenriFaust 8 months ago
3:33 what does he say?
sebc2s 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@sebc2s "3:33 what does he say?"
"are you hedging your bets a bit"
nordhorny 1 year ago
@sebc2s "Are you hedging your bets a bit?"
nickcoffeydotcom 9 months ago
@nickcoffeydotcom lol
sebc2s 9 months ago
Oh man, this guy is so unprepared to interview dawkins... he is getting logicaly raped.
justatallguy 1 year ago 3
It should be called deconverts corner! but i guess that didnt sound so good.
LowleyUK 1 year ago
is that borat?
LowleyUK 1 year ago
i have been saying for many years now...even after obtaining a masters degree in Theology...that we are ALL A-gnostic...for none of us KNOW whether god exists or does not exist PERIOD. therefore, live n let live...prob w/ religions is it is obsessed w/ forcing other to believe as they do and preventing others from human/civil rights over the centuries. If Religions were a corp it would have been out of business years ago.
Pisces31660 1 year ago
It is better to believe than do not. "I am puzzled why people who do not belive in God do not commit suicide...", Dostoevsky. Life is purposeless then. It is dangerous for the mankind what he is telling.
fialkool 1 year ago
@fialkool how can life n society be in any more danger than it has been for 5000yrs of religeous belief which has brought danger n horror to society.
Pisces31660 1 year ago
@Pisces31660 It can be.
fialkool 1 year ago
@fialkool LOL what?? that's it? that's the problem w/ religious people...they dont make intelligent argument for their defense. clearly the world can't be any worse off w/o organized religion. Organized religion may not have hurt society (if that is ur argument) but it certainly hasn't helped and in fact has been more significantly a contributor to societal problems as evidenced by many centuries of religious based horror.
Pisces31660 1 year ago
@Pisces31660 Science and religion are different. So they do not have arguments at all, while science has. But both do not answer the question "Why ?".
Religion and belief should be differentiated.
fialkool 1 year ago
@fialkool I"m all for it..(re your reply) i agree religion and science are mutually exclusive however i wish religious fanatics would be of like mind but they are not. It seems religion and its followers can't be content w/ their faith alone they feel they must convert others and or prevent others from their human n civil rights. for evidence look at the long history of world religions standing in the way of rights and justice. i agree they shud b differentiated.
Pisces31660 1 year ago
@Pisces31660 Any religion is like a virus: they spread.
fialkool 1 year ago
@fialkool yea but i caution... atheism is also a 'religion' of sorts. my friend Andy once said 'it should be freedom FROM religion in US not OF religion' i said 'on no Andy u dont want that..that is just as oppressive. Look at the systems that band religion all oppressive. im in favor of the spirituality of the 12 step philosophy that being 'finding a god of ur own understanding (lower case intential)
Pisces31660 1 year ago
@fialkool i like what Thomas Paine had to say i quote him on my face book page. 'The world is my country and to do good is my religion' ...beautiful in its simplicity.
Pisces31660 1 year ago 2
I've watched many videos of Dawkins and especially in this one he made he's point about morals very clear. Some other times the wording was a bit different, but it seems that he has said similar line so many times that now he had invented the perfect words for it.
McAnkkuli 1 year ago
Buffet and Gates are both atheists. I wonder if that clip was intended to be an accommodating example of atheist generosity as both are also well known philanthropists?
darkmiles22 1 year ago
undefined what the fuck?
TZMNorway 1 year ago
Minding numbing stuff Mr interviewer.
faithisfiction 1 year ago
The interviewer actually did a pretty good job of interviewing his guest instead of trying to argue or talk over the guest like so many do. He clearly has his bias, but keeps it in check for the sake of a good, productive interview. Good job guy.
mrboo18 2 years ago
Very true. As a nontheist myself, I think he could have bit a little bit more aggressive towards Dawkins, but he did very, very well for someone with an opposing view.
Schragmeister 1 year ago
@ScotlandMaleGlasgow He still is
tolchock1984 2 years ago
wow!!!! I'm impressed the interviewer obviously leans towards the religious side of the issue, but he's still able to interview Richard Dawkins without letting his emotions over take him, with a fair amount of objectivity and respect. Bravo!
grimwatcher 2 years ago
well the whole fucking world thought the earth was flat, that didn't stop the Galileo genius from saying it's round
DoctorNumLuck 2 years ago 8
@DoctorNumLuck I don't know, are we talking about the world is flat or Dawkins' weak points, that have been countered previously below. why Christianity. He ignores all other faiths. Guarantee he will avoid the discussion of Islam. Budahism-thousands of years ago, right speech, right thought, right intentions, right actions, ultimate enlightenment and compassion. These were teachings of Buddha. Well before the "modern era" Jesus taught love your neighbor as yourself. that sounds like morality
danieljfm3 3 months ago
People don't get their morality from stone tablets, a book or a deity. Morality evolves and changes over time. We get our morality from observation, experience and our ability to identify with both.
If people actually read the books in which they claim to get their morality from, they'd see that claiming such a thing doesn't help their argument one bit.
Things that are not condoned in today's world were once condoned as moral in those same books.
Mechelle68 2 years ago 4
As Sarte said its the current society who makes the morallity and determines whats right or wrong.
FinalHeresy 2 years ago
Religion is a social form of schizophrenia. The theist has no more evidence that their invisible friend exists than the schizophrenic does.
The only difference between the theist and the schizophrenic is that society glorifies one and institutionalizes the other.
Mechelle68 2 years ago 10
great comment Mechelle I totally agree
MrKydaman 2 years ago
mechelle68 is correct!
well said!
TheEruditepolymath 2 years ago
There is no better animal for Satan to use against the very God that created them, than the animal that represented the very power of God himself.
No other animal has been used to support the Anti-God philosophy of Evolution more than the dinosaur. Then animal best able to show God's strength and power in His Creation is the animal most often used to deny the existence of a Creator.
TheNarlyBones 2 years ago
@TheNarlyBones Evolution doesn't disprove God. In fact there are a number of Deist and Christian evolutionary scientists.
xAFallFarewellx 2 years ago
Doesn't disprove God, but since the Bible clearly states that God created the universe in 6 days, and we know that to be a complete lie, obviously the Bible is inaccurate. Why would you believe the rest of it?
PCrePs 1 year ago 3
@PCrePs I was merely making a statement. In response to your question though, some people believe that the first 11 chapters of Genesis are metaphorical. If this is the case then I guess one would be able to believe the rest of it.
xAFallFarewellx 1 year ago
They don't always interperate the Bible literally, but then that begs the question: How do you know what to follow if some of the Bible is bullshit storytelling?
Schragmeister 1 year ago 2
@xAFallFarewellx i agree i cant stand that shit "you just beleive in evolution because you hate god" lol there mad because it disproves the literal interpertation of the bible and other "holy" books
patrickledford420 1 year ago
Faith is not a virtue.
ExtremeModerate77 2 years ago
There isn't a single charitable deed that religious people do that can not also be done by an atheist. However, look at the amount of evil deeds done IN THE NAME OF RELIGION.
crabbit101 2 years ago 2
lol it was interesting to his respones about jesus
FnHilarious101 2 years ago
Wow. Dawkins steamrolled that arguement.
sustainedbyramen 2 years ago 3
this interviewer gets owned on every point.
fuckucxcukckc 2 years ago 44
@fuckucxcukckc
How do you figure? I think he actually does an excellent job of hauling a shitload of commentary out of the interviewee - which is an interviewer's job. It isn't a debate.
Shobner 1 year ago
@fuckucxcukckc The interviewer is not trying to disprove him or attack his beliefs. He's trying to be the "devil's advocate" of the situation and provide viewers with a full view of Richard Dawkins' ideas.
Deadmansparty2002 1 year ago
@Deadmansparty2002 Maybe, maybe not. His devil's advocacy sounds a lot like the common religious advocacy you hear every day. So in that sense, Dawkins owned the common man on every point.
osgeek 1 year ago
@osgeek But if you look at the way in which this interviewer approaches any number of issues on his talk show, you realize that no matter who he is talking to, he attempts to present an opposing opinion if he doesn't have someone to promote that aspect on their own. When looking at his work as a whole, he is always the neutral party.
Deadmansparty2002 1 year ago
@Deadmansparty2002 I might have believed you until I watched the rest of the segments. He came out much more forcefully vs Dawkins. Note the part where he misunderstands scientific atheism by accusing Dawkins of hedging his bets or where he accuses Dawkins of being too confrontational. Exactly when did he offer any kind of push-back vs his later incoherently babbling religious panelists? He offered one weak self-described devil's advocacy moment, but that was it.
osgeek 1 year ago
@osgeek He's not accusing Dawkins of hedging his bets, he's asking whether or not Dawkins himself feels that he is hedging his bets because it's most likely that there are those who view Dawkins perspective as being as such. Dawkins himself has a very definitive view on the world and it's the interviewer's responsibility to present an opposing view in order to help clarify what Dawkins' view is.
Deadmansparty2002 1 year ago
@Deadmansparty2002 Then why doesn't he do the same with the later panelists? Instead, he floats them a bunch of softball questions allowing them to attack Dawkins' positions without pushing back against them at all. Maybe he would say he's trying to be neutral, but I think his lack of comprehension of an agnostic's position prevents him from being able to do so effectively.
osgeek 1 year ago
@osgeek because Dawkins is there to defend his own position.
Deadmansparty2002 1 year ago
@fuckucxcukckc how does an interviewer get owned? this isn't about who's right and who's wrong. this is an interview.not a debate on Paikin's vs. Dawkin's personal views.
mnagmobile 10 months ago
@mnagmobile because he's not interviewing, he's trying to argue for religion (namely, Christianity).
And when Dawkins destroys all of his arguments, he is pretty much owning him.
kafata1 8 months ago in playlist Richard Dawkins Debates/Lectures
this guy is a idiot, "we know religious get their values from religion"....
u never red anything about dawkins, harris, hitchens at all, have u?
caioma87 2 years ago
@caioma87 the idea that people get their values from religion is a largely held belief among the general public, and there is some evidence to suggest that is in fact the case. The interviewer is also very knowledgeable on a number subjects and I suspect he did in fact read Dawkins' book before interviewing him.
Deadmansparty2002 1 year ago
Hahaha, this interviewer guys looks like Owen Wilson.
iamericwhite 2 years ago 2
LOL!! Warren Buffet is an atheist!!! They didn't do their homework on that one
requiemdexter 2 years ago 35
Very True! lol
shelbymainzer 2 years ago
@requiemdexter Warren Buffett has described himself as agnostic not atheist. But I agree they did not do their homework.
Erichleep 8 months ago
pascal's wager? what a joke.
pat171985 2 years ago
never seen him speak. I must say he does a good job. I'm agnostic as well and it's good to see someone not claiming to be atheist, since truly there is no way to prove a superior being doesn't exist. And his answer about picking and choosing is a very good answer. Is homosexuality in the ten Commandments? just more picking and choosing. People many years ago probably needed guidance and direction. However, this does not hold true in modern times.
Jfrisella 2 years ago
I am an atheist, but I don't claim to even beleive you can prove a god does not exist, but that's because you cannot prove something doesn't exist like that without exhaustive knowledge, so instead of saying I don't know which religion is right, which is generally what I find agnostics to say, I say that there is no reason to beleive ANY god or religion is right due to there being no infaliable and distinguishable evidance for ANY god.
Deshara218 2 years ago 3
I see what you're saying. Ultimately it just depends on what definition of atheist or agnostic we hold to be true, because there are many different ones. I was merely talking about atheist or a derivative of atheist that say there is definitly no god. I do not mean to group the whole together and i do apologize. i'm agnostic but I only follow evidence, so i am not like the agnostics that you talked about. This just stems from the many interpretations of one word, like atheist or agnostic.
Jfrisella 2 years ago
dawkins is wrong about people should be stoning others to death for showing an inch of skin ....it is true god ordered this but on a different event and anyway its not in the commandments so we would not do such a thing...
pup101 3 years ago
Nevertheless, its in the bible. "An eye for an eye" isnt in the commandments either and yet its the foundation of the mentality towards the death penalty in the US. Despite the fact that the commandments say "thou shalt not kill" Dawkins is 100% right. Its the Christians who have it wrong on every count.
philster61 2 years ago 3
yeah but those are old commandments that we dont follow ...........
pup101 2 years ago
no.Your mistaken.Its the Old Testament that you cherry pick and follow to the letter.
philster61 2 years ago 2
nope
pup101 2 years ago
Thats funny.I swear everytime I see one of those despicable TV evangelists,they always refer to some vague passage in the OT.Especially when it comes to punishment for all humanity.
philster61 2 years ago
yeah well im not an evangelist......they suck...........probably we will be punished if we dont repent for our sins but what ever..........its better being safe than sorry......if dawkins is right there is no such punishment but if hes wrong then hes fucked lol
pup101 2 years ago
You know youve just reffered to what is known as Pascals Wager. And its baseless and doesnt offer anything in evidence or proof.However I did indeed like you use of profanity. lol
philster61 2 years ago
no but it would still be interesting to know what he would do...if he was wrong... cuz if hes right he doesnt get punished or anything but if hes wrong then hes in trouble
pup101 2 years ago
well GOD definitely could exist according to dawkins
pup101 3 years ago
good on dawkins there "no be serious-"
i hate it when hosts try to be charming etc - this is about the god debate and not for jokeing about.
paulaitchison 3 years ago
last minute was great
ikkebenhier 3 years ago
I hate that he's going to be remembered as that atheist. He should be remembered as Sagan is.
ryu1024 3 years ago
a debate about the existence of god! JESUS... fucken...CHRIST! god exist and his name is Richard Dawkins.
lebrandon713 3 years ago
lol
pup101 3 years ago
Quantum physics and String Theory are getting as strange and farfetched as most religions.
Every brilliant physicist in the world that believes these things are delusional?
I think they're just trying to figure out the truth, just like a religious person. The problem is that physicists actively work to prove their theories whereas religious people rely on faith and do less work questioning themselves.
This makes them slackers, not delusional.
gamersoasis 3 years ago
Thank "god" for Dawkins, Harris, Hitchens, et al. True rationalism has finally got voices.
scorpdan 3 years ago
I think you mean 'Delusional'. Dawkins has had a go at lots of religions not just christianity. See him on the big debate, he heavily criticizes islam.
amul83 3 years ago
Thats why Dawkins is an idiot - he attacks religion ? - but only Christianity actually - it's all he ever attacks. Cause it's all he knows - Says I am delutional then in same breath says well as a scientist I have to admit U might be right - but your still delutional ??
monkeycage2 3 years ago
OH GOD
bastardrob 3 years ago
HAIL DAWKINS!!!! SAY HAIL! SAY HAIL!
philateliceun 3 years ago
Yes I would worship dawkins over jesus any day!!!!
andron333 3 years ago
Haha. Can reason alone be the reason for Buffer giving his money to Gates. Its funny, cause Gates is an atheist.
IdleGod 3 years ago
I`m tired of this shit that only good people are religious and only a lowlife bastard could ever be Atheist, and if they aren`t completely evil, they`re just "confused".
People prove every day that Atheists are good people. People of various religions, including Christianity, prove that having a belief in God does not MAKE you a good person.
It is highly dangerous to assume that "God" or any other force can make you do good things. Everyone CHOOSES their own actions.
shrikechan 3 years ago 2
This has to be one of the smartest comments on the page. Thumbs Upx1000!
cottonwhiskersuk 3 years ago
Lol dawkins, pure fucking genius.
manonymous333 3 years ago
Bill Gates is an atheist. That would suggest that you don't need god to be good.
DefaultPosition 3 years ago
As is Warren Buffet
CaMaverick 3 years ago
Actually, Bill Gates is a thief...
okauj 3 years ago
Thanks for posting this.
Haha it almost sounds like he's saying "are we good because of God AND Richard Dawkins?" :P.
Biogirl52 3 years ago
You just gotta love how Dawkins can put these arguments down so easily, they're used over and over and over and over that it just because second nature, ie: "where do Atheists get their morals"
CaMaverick 3 years ago 4
I think he himself doesn't love it, because that fluency had to be built up by repeating his answers over and over, depriving him and the world of valuable Dawkins-does-actual-research-time.
garouHH 3 years ago 3
there may be better continuity and possibly more views to these videos if you link them together as video responses to each other
RationalLiberty 3 years ago 2