Richard Dawkins - God And The Universe

Richard Dawkins on the origin of the universe, the future of human evolution, plus, his argument about why God does not exist.

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• Richard
• Dawkins
• God
• Universe
• evolution

[roac7777]

@eternitywithjesus888 Grand rhetoric does not equal evidence or proof. The mind, our thoughts are neurons buzzing around our brains. RD deals with facts not fiction. We, like all life, are here because of evolution through natural selection. The evidence can be found in fossils and also molecular genetics. Your gods and devils are myth, superstition which have no place in the minds of people in the 21st century.

[PastaAndMuffins]

He has to get tired of being right 100% of the time..wish i was him ha

[roac7777]

@AvalonMoon22 Yes I know what science and assumption mean I do not need an English language lesson. You are wrongly assuming that evolution is not a scientific fact.

[AvalonMoon22]

@roac7777 science |ˈsīəns|: noun:

the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through OBSERVATION and EXPERIMENT.

assumption |əˈsəm(p)SHən|: noun:

a thing that is accepted as true or as certain to happen, without proof

[AvalonMoon22]

@roac7777 If you understand various scientific theories then you must know that all rely on assumptions. Macro evolution, if you really study the THEORY, relies only on ASSUMPTIONS.

[AvalonMoon22]

@roac7777 By all accounts, Roac, this is faith. Seeing as Macro Evolution is improvable neither through observation nor experimentation you cannot label it a science. It is a WORKING THEORY taken on FAITH that certain ASSUMPTIONS (heavily influenced by the hope that evolution is true) are part of the equation. Belief. Faith. Assumption

Get real. Know the detailed truth before you disgrace simple logic a rationale.

[roac7777]

@AvalonMoon22 Over 95% of scientists accept evolution I think that says it all.

[roac7777]

@AvalonMoon22 Then the "scientists" you have mentioned are a disgrace to their vocation and should not have the title "scientist". Evolution is a scientific fact and all scientists of worth accept that. I trust Richard Dawkins and those real scientists who research and use real science to come to conclusions, not psuedo scientists who confuse science with religion. No doubt the names you put forth are experts in their field but they are also deluded.

[AvalonMoon22]

@roac7777 You cannot use micro 'evolution' to prove macro evolution. Scientists who refute macro evolution theories are: John D Barrow, Kenneth R. Miller, Jennifer Wiseman, Martin Nowak, Stephen Barr, Freeman Dyson, Antonino Zichichi, R.J.Berry.....etc. This is what I mean! Believing things in generalizations is dangerous; you've got to research the details.

[roac7777]

@AvalonMoon22 I have researched fossils and molecular genetics. Molecular genetics absolutely proves that Darwinian Evolution is correct. You are like the Holocaust denier. I know of no scientist who refutes evolution.

[AvalonMoon22]

@roac7777 PLEASE go and research fossils and molecular genetics and see how much is really science and how much is really assumption. It's either a matter of un-education, faith or pure laziness that results in an evolutionist. 21st Century and we're still mindless and suck up every false theology that has some good PR! Never mind myth and superstition, human evolution theories are both of these with an extra dollop of stupid.

[Boot1998]

pink unicorns! like the invisible pink unicorn