Dawkins vs. Tyson

At the 'Beyond Belief' discussion, Tyson rebukes Dawkins for his rhetorical style, and Dawkins responds brilliantly.

• Category

  Howto & Style

[FromCrownToKingdom]

"Science is interesting and if you don't agree, you can fuck off." Wiser words have never been heard.

[Baal Zobel]

Thank you Mr Tyson, For expressing a fault that is so clear to any intelligent being with Mr Dawkins.

[examROAR]

LOL - this is what I was asking you - only I used nicer words. Thanks for proving my early point.

So, back to my original question - What is your definition of reality and how do you know?

So as to show I'm not being dodgy, one proof that there's more to reality than the material universe is the fact that we're having this conversation in the first place.

And you can refute religion based on dogma. Dogma can be tested like any other assertion. (oops! der goes my pseudo intellect agin)

[TroutMaskReplicaa]

you're another pseudo-intelligent wank-stain trying to cough out more pretend academic bluff. please provide some evidence for these other realities in opposition to the evidence and ingenuity evolved from the laws of science.

and by the way, you can refute religion using dogma because fundamentally theist belief is based on dogma and religious scripture.

[examROAR]

And how was the last century better than any other century? less genocide? less war? less disease? less injustice? less atrocities, disasters, corruption . . . don't think so. you assert it was better - which is important point if evolution were true. Prove it.

[examROAR]

I also don't care for atheists who try to refute logic with dogma. What makes you think that the laws of science is your only reality? How much of reality do you know? 10% 25%?

[examROAR]

Focuse fernie - you made an assertion without proof. Read the last chapters of "Why Evolution is True" (with a foreward by Dawkins) for proof of my assertion. The author says that evolution cannot explain everything - and lists language as an example.

[TroutMaskReplicaa]

tyson's point really falls flat. to educate the pupil needs a willingness to learn... therefore if you refuse to accept reality, the laws of science then how can you "sensitively" make "impact" with a theist who refutes all logic with dogma?

[FernieCanto]

Wow, I'm sorry. I didn't know I was replying to a 6-year-old. I feel bad now.

[clitmint]

Except for the 2,082,214 lucky people who watched this video to the end.

[examROAR]

Here's a help: Read the last chapters of "Why Evolution is True".