Christopher Hitchens Debates Mark Roberts (Part 01/12)

This is an audio only debate of Christopher Hitchens and Mark D. Roberts on the Hugh Hewitt Radio Show from a couple months ago. Billed as the "Great God Debate" They cover a ton of topics and this is one of the few debates I've heard between Hitchens and the religious where the religious side doesn't come off as unintelligent. The intro is a minute or two long. There are 12 parts (originally 3 hours with commercials but those are edited out) this is from townhall (dot) com do a search for Christopher Hitchens and you'll get a few results. Enjoy.




Also just a note, the debate starts off slowly but it is a very good one (i've heard/watched them all) I encourage you to check out the subsequent parts or d/l the complete set of 3 mp3s at townhall and listen to them in your car or something because there are a lot of points raised that aren't covered by other cookie-cutter rinse and repeat intellectual asswhoopins dished out by hitchens against the religious.

this is definately a must-listen for Hitchens groupies / youtube atheists

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• Christopher
• Hitchens
• Mark
• Roberts
• Atheist
• Atheism
• Agnostic
• Religion
• God
• is
• not
• Great
• Delusion
• Hugh
• Hewitt
• Debate

[F33bs]

Oh please. Was Jefferson a scientist? Thomas Paine?

Almost all of Hitchens arguments aren't even based on scientific methods, they are based on logic, human faculty and the larger picture from the standpoint of the species as a whole.

So ignoring the obvious falsehoods in your little screed here, I'd say Hitchens' arguments are more effective than any ones based on science.

Science can't disprove God, common sense can or at least diminish Him significantly.

[Exmech2]

Actually, Hitchens, much like De Grasse and Dawkins is well spoken, intelligent, and isn't afraid to call anyone a dumbass. Those, imo are respectable qualities.

Atheism isn't reactionary any way. Annoyance, on the other hand, of some fools that try to foist their talking snakes and imaginary friends on everyone else... IS, indeed, reactionary.

[TomVodkaCollins]

I love how the theist totally ignores the challenge of a moral statement/deed that couldn't be done by a non-believer and a wicked statement/deed only a believer could. Hitch is right, I've seen/heard him put that question about 15 times now and the only answer he's ever received is crickets.

[LordShivasServant]

I, and most spiritually-inclined people, would rather believe in a "celestial dictator" (as Hitchens accurately put it) commanding me to be moral than some impersonal software in my cells mandating vague morality with no real purpose but to perpetuate itself IF the third option of me being an autonomous Conscious Being wasn't an option... which isn't taught to us as children, Christian OR Atheist. Selfhood is nowhere to be found in Culture!!!

[LordShivasServant]

As a non-religious and non-atheist individual I can shed light on the question of morality and why Christians might get "stuck" on this point and ultimately "bought in".

"For the purpose of evolution and survival" is such a DRY and deflated reason for morality. It doesn't bring Consciousness into the picture at all. Neither camp believes in Consciousness, Christians replaced that with God and Atheists replaced that with Evolution. When really we have Souls, and immorality isn't conducive OR fun

[polystyleneman]

@F33bs If it's true that God can't be disproven, then it is also true that the concept can't be proven and therefore not falsifiable, making it an unreasonable and unscientific claim to make. However, the argument can be made that God is indeed disprovable. Stephen Hawking argues that since time and space were created together in the Big Bang that no time existed before that event wherein God could have caused the event. Others argue that the lack of evidence is in fact evidence of absence.

[juikm]

@F33bs Actually Jefferson was something of a scientist. He was a palaeontologist, archaeologist and botanist and invented a special chilled container for transporting vaccines.

[gbleines]

@F33bs is hitchens a scientist?

[m1nt101]

atheistsblog.tumblr.com

[F33bs]

@kushsmokkeralt That's the Christian conception of God, limited to only Christians.

[kushsmokkeralt]

@F33bs "Science can't disprove god"  Um yes it can and it has plenty of times. In the bible it says God made man with Adam and Eve but science shows we evolved from less intelligent life forms. And every time logic and science battle battle, science wins because it's based on facts, and logic is based on speculation .Different people speculate things differently, but everybody agrees that 1 +1 = 2. Logic states that a ship that was made to to be unsinkable, won't sink. Look at the Titanic.....