Richard Dawkins - "What if you're wrong?" South Park

Well here's another Dawkins themed upload. Had the urge to try my hand at some animation and some new software, I think it turned out quite well. For some reason I decided to recreate the popular "What if you're wrong?" clip on youtube featuring Richard Dawkins lecture in Lynchburg.
Watch the full lecture here http://fora.tv/2006/10/23/Richard_Dawkins

I did have some ideas for some different endings but I thought I would just keep it faithful to the original. Feel free to send me your ideas on amusing variations...

Oh and this should be viewable in full HD!

Category:

Film & Animation

Tags:

• Richard
• Dawkins
• south park
• animation
• lynchburg
• christianity
• god
• atheism
• full
• hd

[lesliekwan80]

Christians sound so stupid when they ask "what if you're wrong?". I guess it takes someone with that sort of thinking to believe in invisible, wish-granting beings and talking donkeys.

[UltimatePlayer000001]

Richard Dawkins, the only sane south park character

[aakkoin]

Flying teapot???

Is that a reference to a fucking awesome song by French psychedelic band called Gong?

[PurpleGhost]

@6gunwalker

I've watched explaination vids, so I do know what it is. I just have never seen and consensus of philosopher supporting it.

I'm frankly not sure that I believe that anything can be apriori. - Evid3nc3's latest video, he talks about it, and I feel rather convinced by what he had to say. He discusses how the term is superfluous (= unncessary) because our evidence based experiences can provid solid proofs, so we can reserve logical proofs for the unseeable.

[6gunwalker]

@PurpleGhost the philosophical logical case for the existence of God.. The Ontological Argument... its not an empirical argument but a priori logical case.... its just one point of many i use that strengthens my case for the existence of God...

[PurpleGhost]

@6gunwalker O.o 'Universally accepted by scholars and experts'?

Aside from that being an absolute statement about human opinion, and thus impossible. Do you have any source for that statement basis? (a term I can search to find people agreeing about this - because all I seem to find, are explainations, debates, and refutations.

Experts in what field exactly? Scholars in what field?

[6gunwalker]

@gorilla199uncensored lol the evidence is all around you? youre even the evidence.. lol Y exists as a result of X... its right under yr nose lol did a car just evolve into its state??? did it appear from random particles clashing together by odds that are rediculously impossible? even if the particles of energy and masses colide is it possible that the designs and features of the car could beautifully have come together?? lol Y EXISTS AS A RESULT OF X.

[6gunwalker]

@gorilla199uncensored if you actually could READ in my comment I specifically wrote "the late Dr Francis Crick" which means hes obviously passed on, but since you read and understand things like your name says you are, ill do the hard work of putting the name up in its context since your fingers suffer from sudden artheritis lolTHE LATE Dr Francis Crick , Human Genome Project. co discoverer of the extraterrestrial genes... ABC 123??? lol

[6gunwalker]

@gorilla199uncensored lol ??? i give logical claims such as the ontological argument that are universally accepted by scholars and experts as a legitimate case and your response is an opinion? lol an opinion from gorilla199uncensored lol great response.

[huwrj]

When a Christian says "what if you're wrong?" there's always an implied threat. It means, you better accept Jesus into your heart now, buster, because if you don't kneel down and praise him then we're going to burn you, torture you and make your dead body suffer forever after you die. So you better accept Jesus right now, Richard, for your own sake. DISGUSTING BULLIES is what they are.

[gorilla199uncensored]

@6gunwalker

"ontological argument"

You havbe no idea how crap it is, but ill pretend its valid.

Lets look at the god of the bible.

IT GOT THE BIBLE TERRIBLY WRONG.

Therefore theres better gods than it that exist.

It can be used to claim anything.

Theres a reason, you wont find philosophy used in court instead orf evidence.

[leivasacade]

Ever noticed how the creationist always claim that evolucionist are wrong, instead of give reason to why they are right?