RICHARD DAWKINS DESTROYING RELIGION

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 4 ม.ค. 2025

ความคิดเห็น •

  • @rudysimoens570
    @rudysimoens570 ปีที่แล้ว +25

    If the topic would not be religion, people who believe all that supernatural nonsense of ANY religion would be considered lunatics and the doctors would lock them up in an asylum for their own sake and for the sake of the community! Mr Lennox is the perfect example of how corrosive indoctrination from childhood on with all that supernatural bullshit of the religion of the parents and the community can be to the minds of even intelligent people! He puts his reasoning abilities and critical thinking skills on hold as soon as his religion comes into play! It's about time to grow up and to get rid of all those ancient bronze age myths and to deal with the REAL NATURAL WORLD!

    • @ignaciojzam
      @ignaciojzam ปีที่แล้ว

      Atheists say religion is for ignorant minds. Now you see a man like Lennox and say religion corrupts his abilities and puts them on hold...

    • @marceloaraujo6108
      @marceloaraujo6108 ปีที่แล้ว

      You’ll be dead in a few years and you’ll finally meet God, whom you stupidly denied all your life.

    • @mottthehoople693
      @mottthehoople693 ปีที่แล้ว

      ummmm supernatural is what to you? electricity would have been supernatural to people 200 years ago...multiple dimensions are mathematically probable...the likelihood that what we perceive reality to be and what it really is definitely different. Ghosts etc are real...You are looking at religion in a most simplistic way...especially when you say bronze age....wisen up there is more going on than you understand

    • @ScienceisStupid-f3r
      @ScienceisStupid-f3r ปีที่แล้ว +4

      I want to talk about Carl Sagan.
      To many people Carl Sagan was a voice of reason. He was a kind and intelligent man who took on the position of educating the masses. His lectures and presentations were edifying and helpful in promoting enlightenment among the masses.
      I say bullshit! I say that Carl Sagan was a propagandist who spread hate and division amongst the masses. Under the guise of scientific enlightenment, he justified condescension and derision towards Christians and other believers. And he does it in a sneaky and passive/aggressive way, which makes him even more despicable!
      Science is owned by the people who fund it. If science didn't help to make profits for industrialists or if it didn't feed the war machine, then it wouldn't exist except for maybe in cloister.
      Sagan worked for NASA. I think for PR as much as anything. His presence made NASA look like it had a peaceful, beneficial to humanity mission.
      NASA was publicly funded R&D for defense contractors. Data obtained through the projects at NASA helped the defense establishment to build ICBM's. Sagan was certainly a part of the Military Industrial Complex. In his own little way, he contributed to the war machine. (Sagan wasn't very bright and I am sure he was just a useful idiot.)
      Sagan and his modern counterparts are copies of each other. They all say the same thing. None of them will ever talk about the dark side of the technocracy. They will never mention that science has enabled copious amounts of pollution. They will never talk about how science feeds the war machine. Leaving out a large part of the story makes him deceptive.
      Public Broadcasting isn't funded by hippies. It is funded by serious businesspeople who work at large, worldwide, corporations. Big oil, big agriculture. I have seen where BP and Archer Daniels have underwritten PBS presentations. Why would such wealthy, smart and powerful people be so interested in indoctrinating the masses? I don't know!
      As far as the science he was pushing:
      Big Bang cosmology is highly theoretical. In order to find out if the hypotheses about the big bang are true, we would have to get in a space cruiser and get a closer look. I doubt that will ever happen.
      Evolution is just plain stupid. There never has been a clear demonstration of speciation. If you want to believe that slime on a rock turned into Beethoven that is your business. It is also true to say that one can reject evolution and it will in no way hurt the quality of their life. Evolution is a hobby that is used for atheist propaganda.
      In science theory means no practical value as much as anything else.
      Carl Sagan got the job because of his nerdy good looks and warm demeanor. It is just show business. Carl is an atheist equivalent to a televangelist preacher. Carl got the job because he looked good on television and his handlers knew that would help the indoctrination to sink in the minds of the public.
      With Carl Sagan one doesn't get the full story. One only hears what the people who sign his paycheck want them to hear.

    • @simonbaush6200
      @simonbaush6200 ปีที่แล้ว

      The 'REAL' natural world? What's real? Quantum physicists are no longer sure, and it may have a lot more to do with consciousness than some wish to believe. What is consciousness? Neuroscience is no longer sure, and it may not be an emergent property of the brain, as many wish to believe. No real objectivity to the physical world, and consciousness being potentially fundamental to the existence of the body. If you haven't noticed, science is now considering elements of what you referred to as 'supernatural nonsense'.

  • @mehran1384
    @mehran1384 ปีที่แล้ว +27

    The fact that lots of people believe in something, does not prove it is right.

    • @TheFracturedfuture
      @TheFracturedfuture ปีที่แล้ว +6

      It just proves that a lot of people are very gullible.

    • @johnholiver2003
      @johnholiver2003 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Exactly. Believing there is no God is also a belief and therefore Atheism is a religion.

    • @amaranthswami2577
      @amaranthswami2577 ปีที่แล้ว

      ​@@johnholiver2003 Atheism is not a belief.. it is rejecting claim of god..

    • @majmage
      @majmage 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@johnholiver2003 Religion is belief/worship of a god. (That's the actual definition.) Atheism is disbelief or lack of belief in all gods. So do you see why _by definition_ atheism isn't a religion?

  • @AtamMardes
    @AtamMardes 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +10

    "Religion began when the first scoundrel met the first fool."
    Voltaire

  • @mericesin83
    @mericesin83 ปีที่แล้ว +12

    Richard Dawkins is a blessing to humanity and civilisation.

    • @k.sikkema309
      @k.sikkema309 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Hahaha! What is a blessing?

    • @ankitchaudhary9192
      @ankitchaudhary9192 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      ​@@k.sikkema309a thing which has less probability to happen in this universe full of randomness. Atleast he asks questions and doesn't agree to fairy tales

    • @nealeboden5157
      @nealeboden5157 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Richard Dawkins is an educated fool who one day will stand in front of the one true God he doesn’t know anything about the bible.

  • @eensio
    @eensio ปีที่แล้ว +11

    In the end of the video Richard Dawkins reveals how religions are used to subjugate children: we must be afraid of punisment, ordered to respect. In this way we learn inauthentic pretense- not how to love or to be loved.

    • @mottthehoople693
      @mottthehoople693 ปีที่แล้ว

      ahhh so richard dawkins is your new god? excellent

  • @marktaylor2502
    @marktaylor2502 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    There two debates between Dawkins and Dr John Lennox, professor emeritus, Oxford, 3 doctorates in Mathematics, Philosophy, and Theology on youtube. Fascinating stuff, highly recommended.

  • @dawoodwaris
    @dawoodwaris 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Protect this man at all cost.

  • @musicauthority674
    @musicauthority674 ปีที่แล้ว +19

    Richard Dawkins is one of the most intelligent intellectuals in the Atheist community. of which there are many. such as Carl Sagan who is greatly missed. Christopher Hitchens who also is greatly missed. Sam Harris, Aron Ra, Lawrence Krause, Matt Dillahunty, Steven Pinker, Neil Degrassi Tyson, and many others being highly intelligent seems to be common among Atheists. but you don't have to be highly intelligent to be an Atheist. that's another one of the beauties of being an Atheist. come join us there's no obligation unlike religion.

    • @D4MI0N
      @D4MI0N ปีที่แล้ว

      Sagan was an Agnostic, not an Atheist! Lawrence Krause is a seggsual predator! Aron Ra is a Satanist masquerading as an Atheist! Neil Degrasse Tyson is a Freemason! Freemason's are definitely not Atheist!
      Atheist's are so easily manipulated by celebrities!

    • @MarkH-cu9zi
      @MarkH-cu9zi ปีที่แล้ว

      @@D4MI0N
      _"Neil Degrasse Tyson is a Freemason! "_
      🤦‍♂

    • @marceloaraujo6108
      @marceloaraujo6108 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Atheists have a blind faith.

    • @ScienceisStupid-f3r
      @ScienceisStupid-f3r ปีที่แล้ว +2

      I want to talk about Carl Sagan.
      To many people Carl Sagan was a voice of reason. He was a kind and intelligent man who took on the position of educating the masses. His lectures and presentations were edifying and helpful in promoting enlightenment among the masses.
      I say bullshit! I say that Carl Sagan was a propagandist who spread hate and division amongst the masses. Under the guise of scientific enlightenment, he justified condescension and derision towards Christians and other believers. And he does it in a sneaky and passive/aggressive way, which makes him even more despicable!
      Science is owned by the people who fund it. If science didn't help to make profits for industrialists or if it didn't feed the war machine, then it wouldn't exist except for maybe in cloister.
      Sagan worked for NASA. I think for PR as much as anything. His presence made NASA look like it had a peaceful, beneficial to humanity mission.
      NASA was publicly funded R&D for defense contractors. Data obtained through the projects at NASA helped the defense establishment to build ICBM's. Sagan was certainly a part of the Military Industrial Complex. In his own little way, he contributed to the war machine. (Sagan wasn't very bright and I am sure he was just a useful idiot.)
      Sagan and his modern counterparts are copies of each other. They all say the same thing. None of them will ever talk about the dark side of the technocracy. They will never mention that science has enabled copious amounts of pollution. They will never talk about how science feeds the war machine. Leaving out a large part of the story makes him deceptive.
      Public Broadcasting isn't funded by hippies. It is funded by serious businesspeople who work at large, worldwide, corporations. Big oil, big agriculture. I have seen where BP and Archer Daniels have underwritten PBS presentations. Why would such wealthy, smart and powerful people be so interested in indoctrinating the masses? I don't know!
      As far as the science he was pushing:
      Big Bang cosmology is highly theoretical. In order to find out if the hypotheses about the big bang are true, we would have to get in a space cruiser and get a closer look. I doubt that will ever happen.
      Evolution is just plain stupid. There never has been a clear demonstration of speciation. If you want to believe that slime on a rock turned into Beethoven that is your business. It is also true to say that one can reject evolution and it will in no way hurt the quality of their life. Evolution is a hobby that is used for atheist propaganda.
      In science theory means no practical value as much as anything else.
      Carl Sagan got the job because of his nerdy good looks and warm demeanor. It is just show business. Carl is an atheist equivalent to a televangelist preacher. Carl got the job because he looked good on television and his handlers knew that would help the indoctrination to sink in the minds of the public.
      With Carl Sagan one doesn't get the full story. One only hears what the people who sign his paycheck want them to hear.

    • @ScienceisStupid-f3r
      @ScienceisStupid-f3r ปีที่แล้ว

      @@marceloaraujo6108 History shows that so far, atheists haven't been able to form an effective political movement.

  • @alexissmith5589
    @alexissmith5589 ปีที่แล้ว +8

    Any scientist that believes in any religion needs to have their PhD revoked.

    • @D4MI0N
      @D4MI0N ปีที่แล้ว

      So you think you know everything that there is to know? Do you even keep up with any of the current research in Biology? Do you know that man cannot create 3 dimensional biological code?

    • @D-Pocalypse
      @D-Pocalypse ปีที่แล้ว +1

      👍🍻

    • @brohumphskytholic
      @brohumphskytholic 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      You are talking nonsense. Read their criticism of Dawkins. Dawkins is ignorant both in science and philosophy.

    • @alexissmith5589
      @alexissmith5589 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@brohumphskytholic Another Bible thumper. It's hilarious and sad how you say he's ignorant yet it's people like you who always deny reality and continue feeding your delusion by drinking your Kool aid.

    • @D-Pocalypse
      @D-Pocalypse 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @brohumphskytholic7
      Your cup of ignorance is overflowing today.....

  • @leebode4643
    @leebode4643 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Great work!

  • @GerhardGiesse
    @GerhardGiesse 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

    James Turner "Without God Without creed" describes how unbelief came to be from a Christian point of view. It has a historical development indeed... and the book forces one to think about where one stands apart from exterior influences.

  • @hglundahl
    @hglundahl 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

    0:06 I checked.
    On the first two videos, there is no Indian Catholic priest on the one, no Cardinal Pell on the other, and on the third, I'm sure you don't dare to pick Lennox' best lines!

  • @joelrongpe7362
    @joelrongpe7362 หลายเดือนก่อน

    One question should we believe jesus who lived a sinless and blameless life or Richard Dawkins ?

  • @marceloaraujo6108
    @marceloaraujo6108 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    Highly intelligent people believe in God, and arguably equally highly intelligent people don’t believe in the existence of God. It’s not a matter of intellectual capacity but rather of personal choice. To atheists, I say they’re entitled to their lack of belief in God just as much as I am entitled to my belief in God, which, I should say, only grows over time.

    • @a.t.6322
      @a.t.6322 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Well said.

    • @mottthehoople693
      @mottthehoople693 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      a matter of faith and calling

    • @sankalp2520
      @sankalp2520 ปีที่แล้ว

      But all highly intelligent people agree the probability of the existence of god is very small. So, those people who believe in god as if its existence is 100% probable are stupid.

    • @ScienceisStupid-f3r
      @ScienceisStupid-f3r ปีที่แล้ว

      Atheists don't show near as much creativity as Christians and other believers. History has shown that atheism is incapable of uniting people into any kind of effective political force. Atheists do nothing but talk.

    • @ScienceisStupid-f3r
      @ScienceisStupid-f3r ปีที่แล้ว +1

      I choose to believe. I confessed my sins, asked Jesus to forgive me, and never looked back. Whatever doubts that may infect my mind from time to time I still pray, meditate, contemplate and believe.
      When People are asked, “Do you believe in God? It is either: yes, no or not sure. If one is not sure, that means they don’t believe. Since the atheist answers the question with no, that means he believes there is no God.
      The atheist says there is evidence that suggests the universe may be cosmic accident. They say a singularity erupted and created all of this. A singularity is something that exists outside of time and space. Nobody has ever seen this singularity. No one could tell you its properties. Yet they still believe it exists. That is faith.
      The atheists say they have evidence. Evidence means you are interpreting. How can any of us assure ourselves that we have no confirmation bias? We make mistakes. We are human.
      Evidence can be manufactured and dishonest. It can be misinterpreted. For these reasons lawyers, and not scientists run, the world.
      So, the atheist has double faith: Faith that there is no God and faith that the evidence is honest and well understood.
      I do not see myself as a proselyte. I am a humble wretch. I am not smarter or better than anybody. I committed to God. I have seen Him work in my life and the lives of others. It is not unreasonable to believe in God.
      Exercising my faith has brought me everything in my life that I value. My life isn’t perfect but I always feel the love of God in my heart. There is nothing better than feeling the love of God in one’s heart, in my experience. I am always confident and in a constant state of joy.

  • @RLekhy
    @RLekhy 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Really? One of his atheist friends converted to Christianity. Faith and Atheism are extreme paths.

  • @EricDG326
    @EricDG326 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Remember when Richard Dawkins gave strong arguments against God and religion?
    Me neither

  • @DadeMurphy666
    @DadeMurphy666 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

    7:44

  • @ignaciojzam
    @ignaciojzam ปีที่แล้ว +1

    4:30 I like to imagine Dawkins being in the shoes of Job trying to answer all the questions God asks him at the climax of his story and can´t avoid to ask to myself: ¿What does Dawkins really know about the "grandior of the universe"? ¿With what kind of autorithy a tiny pile of dust like him is speaking about what is just, petty or small minded? If the behaviour and motivations of God are beyond your capacity of reasoning, maybe it´s time to begin a certain journey, not make a living about what at the end of the day you clearly don´t understand.

    • @oscarmudd6579
      @oscarmudd6579 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

      There's fiction that's much better.

    • @ignaciojzam
      @ignaciojzam 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@oscarmudd6579 God is fiction. Dawkins is bullshit. We all like to make it as easy as possible. But sometimes is not as easy as we would like it, and is in those moments, that we can find ourselves as brothers.

  • @Godless-Being
    @Godless-Being 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    “The greatest trick god and Jesus ever pulled was convincing the world they did exist”
    -Me

  • @Steve-mo4qp
    @Steve-mo4qp ปีที่แล้ว

    Richard Dawkins argues against a god. He says, “The whole point of Darwinian natural selection is that it works without design, without foresight”. The problem for science is that scientific thinking is increasingly coming to a view that everything, with sufficient knowledge, is predictable. Everything follows a preordained pattern, even evolution. That is perfect foresight! Quite clearly there is a God. The problem for religion, is that we are almost certainly not made in God's image.

  • @legitlou2246
    @legitlou2246 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    We can choose between mortality and immortality. It is the inferior choice that destroys man, those who have a mixture of rage and lust do not value things worthy of their attention,but turn to the pleasures and appetites of the body, believing that man was born for that reason, or mistake these greatest evils as the greatest goods
    There are two kinds of beings, the embodied and unembodied, in whom there is mortal and the divine spirit. Man is left to choose one or the other , if he so wishes
    For one cannot choose both at once; when one is diminished, it reveals the power of the other

  • @k.sikkema309
    @k.sikkema309 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Destroying religion is destroying mankind.

    • @GeoCoppens
      @GeoCoppens 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Have mercy on you, idiot!

  • @michaelparks5669
    @michaelparks5669 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Atheists say you cannot know for certain that divine beings exists. They need to speak for themselves. For 5,000 years of human history from the 4 corners of the planet people have encountered divine beings. Are they all lying? Or are are they all crazy? Tell us what the divine beings told the Egyptians on how to build the great pyramid of Giza. Tell us what it is for. Are we the only beings in the Universe? If not are some more advanced than us i.e. divine? Atheists need to open their minds.

  • @KingMalaxis
    @KingMalaxis 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Man this didn’t age well😂

  • @TheGuitarReb
    @TheGuitarReb 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

    " I am the way, the truth...."
    Your problem Richard Dawkins is that you only believe in the physical Realm.

  • @nibiruresearch
    @nibiruresearch 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

    The greatest confusion in the Bible is the existence of two versions of God. One version is a man-like being who walks and talks with the patriarch Abraham. He is so powerful that he can wipe out a city from the face of the earth. The other version is a supernatural evil force. According to the Bible, the disaster like Noah's Flood is deliberately caused by that vindictive supernatural God because HE wants to punish the people for their sins. But supernatural powers simply do not exist. When we ignore the words god, lord, holy, sins and sacred and study the bible again with an open mind we will see that this book gives us many details about a recurring, thus predictable but inescapable natural disaster that wipes out mankind according to a fixed timetable. The end of days, the creation, the exodus, the sun stood still, and the change of the day into night are all referring to this natural disaster that is often mentioned an act of god in the English language but it is no more or less than a recurring natural disaster. This disaster is caused by the ninth planet in our solar system that is mentioned "the great red dragon" or the beast with many heads that fights with the army of gods angels. Years after this disaster people from planet 9, best known as heaven, descend on our planet and they help the survivors to build a new civilization. These people have a bond with mankind because their planet causes the extinctions and they made humans "in his image". We have abundant and convincing evidence in texts and pictures to support this story. All is written and depicted in the e-book: "what I know about Nibiru". search: know nibiru

  • @allgood6760
    @allgood6760 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Watch Revelations unfold... the Bible is prophetic.🙏

    • @ScottRoberts-el2jn
      @ScottRoberts-el2jn 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Fairytales

    • @allgood6760
      @allgood6760 4 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Not fairy tales.. eg cashless society.

  • @johnholiver2003
    @johnholiver2003 ปีที่แล้ว

    Atheism is merely another religion. Period.

    • @shadowfrenzy9370
      @shadowfrenzy9370 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Do you think 'not playing football' is a sport?

  • @johnhough7738
    @johnhough7738 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    As far as I've got ... Interviewer seems neither very bright, nor widely read.
    For myself I accept that I cannot prove a negative and simply regard that fact as fact. Ergo (you religiosi are gonna love this)-
    -we atheists can't 'prove' that God/s doesn't exist. (I just run with the weight of evidence as my decades have weighed it; for example I don't accept that 'Noddy' exists even though there are books about him. I don't accept that Donald Duck exists - though he even has movies showing him doing incredible things (and I love Donald Duck, he's my hero~!).
    The Bible is no more 'proof' for any outlandish claims than my childhood hero Biggles, even though he too has books and is/was very credible. Noddy likewise, and Captain Nemo.
    In Marlborough province (New Zealand) lives a man who does exactly that, he turns water into wine (Daniel le Brun, of anyone wants to know).
    Halfway through now, I sneaked a peep and the other guy ... for obvious reasons ... isn't looking too happy. But all Dawkins is doing is nicely stating the obvious in a good natured way (that not very long ago would have had him tortured to death if the 'good guys' had got hold of him).
    Religion = sick, no?

  • @etienne_laforet
    @etienne_laforet 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Dawkins believes in God. At least, he relies on Him. Not the “God” he imagines (and which he rightly rejects), but the one pointed to by the great mathematician and philosopher Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz. Because when Dawkins argues against God - more precisely against what he imagines as “God” - he implicitly relies on the spaceless and timeless, i.e., immaterial and eternal laws of logic.
    It is precisely in this way that he recognizes - with Leibniz - these laws as universal and unconditionally valid ‘eternal truth’.
    What is actually the case and can be seen, for example, in the fact that mathematical theorems, such as the Euclidean prime number theorem or the fundamental theorem of algebra, cannot be thought of in any other way than being valid in, before and independently of every conceivable world. Already that alone shows that they exist in some kind of intangible, immaterial manner.
    In fact, if one admits that spaceless and timeless, that is, immaterial and eternal truths exist, such as the laws of logic and mathematics, then one must conclude with Leibniz that there is something that constitutes their being. According to Leibniz, this ‘something’ is God. The ‘Logos’ God [cf. Jn 1-1] is the realm of eternal truths. Leibniz in his “Monadology“: "The understanding of God is the realm of eternal truths and the ideas, on which they depend ... God's infinite mind embraces the ideas of all potential beings, that is, of all real beings and of all those that can be thought, because they imply no contradiction."
    Every theistic, but also every atheistic, argument relies on logic. In this way both testify to the 'Logos' God. The first consistently, the second obviously not ...
    In this context, it is noteworthy that some physicists think that even matter ultimately arises from pure (quantum) logic [ e.g. John. A. Wheeler's “It from bit”]. The brilliant Martin I. Kober, who further developed Carl F. von Weizsäcker's quantum theory of primordial alternatives before he sadly passed away in 2021 at the young age of 38, left us this message in his last published article: “The crucial thing about all these considerations is that ... [ in Weizsäcker's theory ] no space-time, no background structure at all and therefore no field-theoretical concepts whatsoever are presupposed. As with Hegel, the entire world is spanned by pure logic, more precisely by pure quantum logic. Apart from time, all that really exists is logic, which floats in the void. This corresponds exactly to the claim of Christian theology that God created the world from the Logos."
    [ cf. arxiv.org/pdf/1809.02469.pdf, p. 101 f. ; translated from German ]

    • @donthesitatebegin9283
      @donthesitatebegin9283 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Yeah, even though he was religious I suspect that by "God" Leibniz meant the non-Supernatural Secular God of the Rationalist Philosophers, not his Personal God - "God" is the Necessary Being at the centre of the Universe - not this-or-that human-centric Supernatural God.
      In the same way Newton was religious, but didn't hesitate to conclude Principia with reference to an Impersonal, seamless logical function and leave his Personal God out of it ("Therefore the entire Universe is built from oscillations on a hyperbolic paraboloid").
      Also, it's interesting you mention Wheeler and logic. In his astonishing essay Beyond the End of Time (In Gravitation: Misner, Thorne, Wheeler) Wheeler calls logic "the ethereal eyrie at the heart of mathematics" and introduces his "idea for an idea" - Physics as a manifestation of logic/Pregeometry as the calculus of propositions.
      That is my personal favourite Cosmogony and compared to Wheeler's conception of a non-circular First Principle at the heart of all Reality the claim that the God of the Bible created the Universe, is silly and superfluous to requirements.

  • @alankuntz6494
    @alankuntz6494 ปีที่แล้ว

    Richard Dawkins is God.

  • @williamcreighton1417
    @williamcreighton1417 ปีที่แล้ว

    The honest answer to me is that we do not know how we or how this earth got started. God (s) are not the answer...science has not yet found an answer but continues to look

    • @mottthehoople693
      @mottthehoople693 ปีที่แล้ว

      yep and will have the same success as that mouse staring at the moon and wanting to go there...

    • @williamcreighton1417
      @williamcreighton1417 ปีที่แล้ว

      Hey the moon is made of cheese so the mouse has a big incentive

    • @mottthehoople693
      @mottthehoople693 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@williamcreighton1417 lol but no matter what it does it cant get there

  • @nsp74
    @nsp74 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

    he destroyed religion?
    he is even scared to death to debate Christian philosopher william lane craig!!!

  • @batakrghabik635
    @batakrghabik635 ปีที่แล้ว

    My Mom delicious foods exists…😋😋😋😋

    • @johnhough7738
      @johnhough7738 ปีที่แล้ว

      At last! Belief in something real~! With you as her prophet, and with one of her meals as evidence ...
      Hey, you could start a whole new religion; one more valid than the relying on half-forgotten words of long dead men recorded in books only partially read (yet still used as irrefutable evidence for the improbable impossible.

  • @ericaasen8736
    @ericaasen8736 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    “Do not be deceived: “Evil company corrupts good habits.””
    ‭‭I Corinthians‬ ‭15‬:‭33‬ ‭NKJV‬‬

    • @FactStorm
      @FactStorm ปีที่แล้ว

      Nothing more evil than Abrahamic doomsday cults

  • @k.sikkema309
    @k.sikkema309 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

    The God of the Bible is a jealous God which is not a problem for an atheïst, is it? What seems to be the problem? If Richard would read the New Testament he would also read that Richard doesn't want to believe in God. As a consequence he will endlessly find arguments...

  • @ScienceisStupid-f3r
    @ScienceisStupid-f3r ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Religion is still around, and it isn't going anywhere. Dawkins didn't destroy anything. Dawkins will meet the same fate as the rest of us. He will die and be forgotten about, but Religion will go on.

    • @a.t.6322
      @a.t.6322 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      That was a truly honest and correct assessment. 👍🏼

    • @stanlee4029
      @stanlee4029 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

      that's why it is said that religion is opium of masses.

    • @nickderbyshire4965
      @nickderbyshire4965 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Well technically religion is less popular now then ever, the church is losing more, and more followers everyday- so maybe it just takes longer to die, then a old man?

  • @D4MI0N
    @D4MI0N ปีที่แล้ว +1

    LOL at this shill. This is the same Richard Dawkins that said he would be afraid to spend the night in a "notoriously haunted house". What would you be afraid of?

    • @maylingng4107
      @maylingng4107 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      He was ridiculing belief in spirits. Quote mining is a very dishonest tactic. The exact quote is "Even then, I could imagine being frightened of spending the night in a notoriously haunted house, although rationally I don't believe in ghosts."

    • @mysticcove3392
      @mysticcove3392 ปีที่แล้ว

      ❤ Professor Richard Dawkins ❤ invented what we called "memes" ridiculing something/someone eloquently. 😂

  • @lisabethalmgren6626
    @lisabethalmgren6626 ปีที่แล้ว

    GOD, the first cause of death of humankind.

  • @a.t.6322
    @a.t.6322 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    The Clickbait title is hilarious!!! Dawkins has done no such thing! 🤣🤣🤣🤣

  • @dannyarcher6370
    @dannyarcher6370 ปีที่แล้ว

    8:15 - LMAO this aged poorly!

    • @asdfgh-uh6cy
      @asdfgh-uh6cy ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Can you prove that riots around the world are caused by a lack of religion, and not by other social factors?

    • @dannyarcher6370
      @dannyarcher6370 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@asdfgh-uh6cy That's the whole argument! Religion ensures that negative social factors DON'T cause people to run riot and loot shops. And I'm saying that as an atheist.

    • @mottthehoople693
      @mottthehoople693 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@asdfgh-uh6cy can you prove they are not?

    • @user-3w9jf4r5qz
      @user-3w9jf4r5qz ปีที่แล้ว

      ​@@mottthehoople693considering what is going on now, i'd say it's proved

    • @mottthehoople693
      @mottthehoople693 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@user-3w9jf4r5qz umm I don’t know the human psyche is a complex thing. All religions rely on the fact that if we do bad things then when we die we will be judged one way or another..if we no longer care or believe in the after life there is no reason not to do what we want because there is no punishment.. we all die sooner or later so what’s the difference?

  • @granthodges3012
    @granthodges3012 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    If you read Dawkins' books you realize he is crazy.

    • @D-Pocalypse
      @D-Pocalypse ปีที่แล้ว +4

      You clearly haven't read ANY of his books.....

    • @granthodges3012
      @granthodges3012 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      wrong @@D-Pocalypse

    • @D-Pocalypse
      @D-Pocalypse ปีที่แล้ว

      @granthodges3012
      I suggest you start reading evolutionary biology papers and publications. There is far more compelling evidence for our existence than anything in the bible!

    • @markcromwell1975
      @markcromwell1975 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      Intellectual people can appear crazy if you're a tad slow

    • @granthodges3012
      @granthodges3012 ปีที่แล้ว

      It's obvious you haven't read his theory about evolutionary skyhooks. Just plain nuts. @@markcromwell1975

  • @javierarmada4819
    @javierarmada4819 ปีที่แล้ว

    i don´t believe either in the god Dawkins thinks we beleve in... He doesn´t know what God is

  • @slickhatter9812
    @slickhatter9812 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

    The fundamental Question is Do you believe of a creator or not ?
    If you can see the marvelous things around us and believe it was created by a creator who is the most knowledgeable and strongest etc why it is difficult to believe that the same creator saved Ibrahim from fire, Split the sea for Moses and Ascended Muhammad to the sky.
    You can make fun of things to mask an ignorant, hatred and denial of a creator as much as you want but eventually you will die and no amount of evolution or sarcasm will bring you back nor help you for whatever is coming next

    • @oscarmudd6579
      @oscarmudd6579 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

      In the twenty-first century, given the advances in common knowledge of the world, only ignorant or disingenuous people believe in magic.

    • @slickhatter9812
      @slickhatter9812 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@oscarmudd6579 the ignorants really who thinks that knowing just 5% of the observable universe could without a shadow of a doubt deny a creator- that’s stupidity and ignorance as well arrogance.

    • @oscarmudd6579
      @oscarmudd6579 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@slickhatter9812 Because you say so.

    • @slickhatter9812
      @slickhatter9812 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@oscarmudd6579 because it’s logic, you should use some.

  • @pydxq8167
    @pydxq8167 ปีที่แล้ว

    😮😅

  • @EndofDays-7777
    @EndofDays-7777 ปีที่แล้ว

    Hilarious.
    Mathematics alone unequivocally proves the existence of God .
    Dawkins ....😂😂😂😂

    • @markh1011
      @markh1011 ปีที่แล้ว

      _"Mathematics alone unequivocally proves the existence of God ."_
      How so?

    • @EndofDays-7777
      @EndofDays-7777 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@markh1011 Fractals .

    • @EndofDays-7777
      @EndofDays-7777 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@markh1011 Search fractals prove God ...theres a great documentary on it here on YT

    • @markh1011
      @markh1011 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@EndofDays-7777 ok and how do they prove a god and your god?

    • @EndofDays-7777
      @EndofDays-7777 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@markh1011 Where are the mathematical constants of the universe ?
      Where are they stored ?
      Who wrote them ?
      They're mathematically perfect , regardless of human existence.
      Without human observation they're still true. Still exist.
      How can they exist if they're nonntangle yet absolute ?
      They must originate OUTSIDE of space and time.
      Invisible, absolute, and true , just as God is .
      A random collection of energies spontaneously existed from nothing and adhered to the mathematical constants to create order without a shred of sentience?
      That's faith . 😂👍🏻

  • @mottthehoople693
    @mottthehoople693 ปีที่แล้ว

    there is no proof that there is no god either.....I'm sure that what we experience as reality and what reality really is, is two different things.. everything is too complex too perfect...the likelihood of this perfection coming out of the chaos of the universe is nonexistent

    • @markh1011
      @markh1011 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      _"there is no proof that there is no god either.."_
      There is no proof that there isn't a magical fairy in my garden.
      _"everything is too complex too perfect."_
      Too perfect huh? Most of the universe kill us instantly. 99% of all species that ever existed on earth are extinct. Children are born with cancer. Old people suffer pain and have their dignity taken away from them.
      Your have a pretty funny idea about perfection.

    • @mottthehoople693
      @mottthehoople693 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@markh1011life in general ...you are look at life from a moral perspective...the fact life exists at all .We have no more right to life than anything else..99% of the universe kills us? what sort of comment is that? There are life forms on this planet that easily live in conditions we can't no need to go off world...why focus on us? Because the bible teaches us we were made in the image of God? lol not a chance..pain dignity cancer suffering mean nothing..the fact cells somehow grow multiply divide specialize age are replaced etc etc etc...multiply that by every species...your perfection is based on the bible and eden...on this rock life feeds on death there is no eden never was..life itself is perfection..

    • @MarkH-cu9zi
      @MarkH-cu9zi ปีที่แล้ว

      @@mottthehoople693
      _"life in general ...you are look at life from a moral perspective...the fact life exists at all"_
      What about it?
      _".We have no more right to life than anything else."_
      If you say so... how does this help you?
      _"99% of the universe kills us? what sort of comment is that? "_
      A correct observation.
      _".why focus on us? "_
      Did your god supposedly send prophets to the other species?
      _"Because the bible teaches us we were made in the image of God? lol not a chance"_
      So you deny the bible... 🤷‍♂ ...ok then. Nothing has addressed my points so far.
      _"pain dignity cancer suffering mean nothing"_
      What a strange thing to say. Are you totally lacking of emotion and empathy? Are you a robot?

    • @MarkH-cu9zi
      @MarkH-cu9zi ปีที่แล้ว

      @@mottthehoople693
      _"your perfection is based on the bible and eden"_
      If raised problems that show we cannot be perfection.
      You have not addressed them.

    • @mottthehoople693
      @mottthehoople693 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@MarkH-cu9zi how do you know god didn't send prophets to other species?

  • @norakheroian791
    @norakheroian791 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    the evidence of existence of God is all around you sweet richard and the science and creation and the universe is his finger prints (ask the masons)

  • @Mitramon
    @Mitramon ปีที่แล้ว

    What a fool

    • @FactStorm
      @FactStorm ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Who, you? Why, yes.

  • @PietStassenAdamastor
    @PietStassenAdamastor 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

    🟪There is no such a thing as a 'cultural Christian'. Those who are not for Christ are against him.
    Jesus has warned: "The one who is not with Me is against Me, and the one who does not gather with Me scatters." (Matthew12:30MKJV). Imagine a man standing on a high mountain scattering millions of toxic feathers into the wind from a giant pillow case. That man is Richard Dawkins ... scattering, scattering & scattering day in and day out.
    The multimillion-rupee question: Where, on Judgment Day, is he going to find the time, at the last minute, to go and pick up and retrieve every single feathered word of unbelief, profanity and blasphemy he had ever written and published over his lifetime to face God while standing trembling like a reed in the wind in front of the Great White Throne of Divine Judgment?
    There is one secret that Richard Dawkins, a modern, suburban pagan who says he can live and survive without God, must still discover: Yes ... one may be able to live high, wide, handsome and successfully without God, but I have yet to meet the man who will die successfuly without God.🟪