http://www.facebook.com/ScienceReason ...The True Core Of The Jesus Myth - Christopher Hitchens @ FreedomFest (Part 1).
---
Please subscribe to Science & Reason:
• http://www.youtube.com/FFreeThinker
• http://www.youtube.com/Best0fScience
• http://www.youtube.com/ScienceTV
---
Dinesh D'Souza and Christopher Hitchens go at it again at the 2008 Freedom Fest as the "Main Event".
FreedomFest is an annual festival where "free minds meet" to celebrate "great books, great ideas, and great thinkers" in an open-minded society. It is independent, non-partisan, and not affiliated with any organization or think tank.
Founded and produced by Mark Skousen, since 2002, FreedomFest invites the "best and the brightest" from around the world to talk, strategize, socialize, and celebrate liberty. FreedomFest is open to all and is purely egalitarian, where speakers, attendees, and exhibitors are treated as equals.
http://www.freedomfest.com/
Christopher Hitchens (born 1949) is an author, journalist and literary critic. Currently living in Washington, D.C., he has been a columnist at Vanity Fair, The Atlantic, World Affairs, The Nation, Slate, Free Inquiry, and a variety of other media outlets. Hitchens is also a political observer, whose books — the latest being "God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything" — have made him a staple of talk shows and lecture circuits.
In 2009 Hitchens was listed by Forbes magazine as one of the "25 most influential liberals in U.S. media." The same article noted, though, that he would "likely be aghast to find himself on this list" and that he "styles himself a radical", not a liberal.
http://www.hitchensweb.com/
.
If it were an accident then your suggestion that said accident has 'guided' interactions is devoid of logic. Accidents happen, they don't guide things. Once again, you're treating the accident as if it's a deity with a consciousness. Secondly, the fashion is not as wondrous or precise as you claim. People like you that pretend there's a God also like to pretend that this is some sort of perfect world, but it's far from perfect and doesn't make sense in the context of there being a 'creator'.
ponchred in reply to 1tabligh (Show the comment) 1 hour ago
what am i hiding behind? im ust trying to use multiple angles to explain myself. words make up the content last i knew...unless thats a new science theory yet to be proven?
WarbladeX1 in reply to clipsryan (Show the comment) 1 hour ago
ok, now you need to ask yourself when does personal feelings ring true to religous text? when the text concurs with reality. example: adultry, why do we take it so personal, if there is no moral god? if she cheats, its ok, we are just animals evolved right? that is only a snip reason why the bible had to be writen and is true, because you can relate to it. do you know what the consequences are if mankind loses it? we will go back to the midevil days and probly wipe ourselfs out.
WarbladeX1 in reply to clipsryan (Show the comment) 2 hours ago
Hmmm... fits the facts!
Oldtinear in reply to tanaats (Show the comment) 3 hours ago
There are two statistical probabilities: 1. hat other planets in the universe contain life. 2.That DNA/Cells/life could have developed from simple beginnings by a natural process. You try to confuse the two
The 1st probability can be intelligently tackled by physicists eg Hawking- we know the conditions suitable for life - ours! The 2nd requires detailed knowledge of the developmental steps which cells & DNA followed over billions of years. No biologist would go there, but creationists rush in!
Oldtinear in reply to smegma300 (Show the comment) 3 hours ago
The fact that we still to this day find stars producing complex molecules and shooting them into interstellar space is proof that complex matter, as complex as some amino acids, form naturally in space. So we know it happened because it's currently observed to still occur in formation of star systems and galaxies. That's based on observation in regard to chemical makeup of astronomical bodies, not belief. That's the difference.
rooio3 in reply to smegma300 (Show the comment) 3 hours ago
My own theory is that 1tablet is what I think of a "pamphleteer", analogous to someone who stands on a street corner handing out religious tracts. It's effortless to just hand out tracts. Perhaps 1tablet can't sustain debate, and knows it, so he periodically copies and pastes things that he's written before and never responds substantively to challenges. In this way he satisfies his religious obligation to "witness" to his faith without putting any sort of effort into it.
tanaats in reply to Oldtinear (Show the comment) 3 hours ago
Yep. And a better practice is to actually pay attention to which Reply button I press. :)
tanaats in reply to muppadrio (Show the comment) 4 hours ago