Hi Mrs. Beaver, research indeed! For me it's been 45 years, on par with Sir Richard Dawkins. Many naturalists argue, some quite vehemently, that religion is ultimately evil, by which I suppose they mean unadaptive. At the same time, evolutionary psychologists claim religious behavior is a result of evolution. Evolutionary dynamics allows a feature that is adaptively neutral to co-evolve as an accidental correlate or by-product of an advantageous feature. Gould calls such features "spandrels" after the supposedly unplanned spaces between arches.6 But, how can religion be both adaptively neutral, and ultimately unadaptive? This is another mystery of the naturalist faith. If spiritual longings evolved in the same way as our desires for food, drink, sex and knowledge, how could those longings be incapable of fulfilment? Imagine two genetic lines, one of which spends significant time and resources searching for mucta, which does not exist, and another like it in all respects except for the mucta-drive. Cleary, the second line will out-compete the first. For such evolutionary competition, we need the two variants, each able to pass its mucta-desire trait on to is heirs. If we take mucta to be God, the naturalist hypothesis points to the demise of spirituality. Is this hypothesis viable? There are atheists who profess no spiritual longings, and they tend to pass their position on to their children. So, while the preconditions for the evolutionary demise of spirituality exist, theists are not an extinct variant, but the majority of the population. So, spirituality is adaptive. Its adaptiveness is confirmed by the correlation of spiritual behavior with health, psychological well-being and longevity.7 Thus, if evolutionary psychology correctly accounts for the development of behavior, including spiritual behavior, it is hard to see how the quest for God could be baseless. At the very least, naturalists attacking religion and spirituality are working to reduce human fitness. 7. Hummer, et al. (1999), "Religious Participation and U.S. Adult Mortality." See also ScienceDaily (1999), "Research Shows Religion Plays a Major Role in Health, Longevity." Maselko, et al. (2006), "Religious Service Attendance and Decline in Pulmonary Function in a High Functioning Elderly Cohort." See also ScienceDaily (2006a), "Go to Church and Breathe Easier." Maselko, et al. (2008), "Religious Service Attendance and Spiritual Well-Being are Differently Associated with Risk of Major Depression," See also ScienceDaily (2006), "Weekly Religious Attendance Nearly as Effective as Statins and Exercise in Extending Life." God, Science & Mind: The Irrationality of Naturalism by Dennis F. Polis, Ph.D. The psalmist is right, but I'd also like to add the few opening seconds I watched of this video was the best I've ever seen of Dr. Dawkins. He was polite, warm, open, and honest about what he was born into, his parents baptizing him instead of that trite bullshit slogan his legions of followers live and die by, "We're all born atheist." Sir Richard Dawkins admitted he was a holy Christian until age 15 following in his parents saintly footsteps. Right on Sir!
@Darrin Ram "Thank you for admitting you're on my side." I'm your necessitating antecedent, we can't both exist and be on your side; that's why I can't ever be "atheist," I'd need *God* to be one! Hey Darrin, is this your first day on the internet, is eleven the age you reached for your parents consent?
David Lee Yeah man, I see your point, although i don’t really agree, but don’t get me wrong, I just thought it was a funny and awkward moment; i like Flowers and his music, but I think that the Mormon religion is a laugh.
Our Secret Lord A bit much don’t you think? Writing a whole academic-ish essay just to answer a comment clearly meant as a joke, by some individual using a drunk looking Pokemon puking fire as a profile picture.
Such a gifted human being, living in a mental prison. Joseph Smith was a known fraud and womanizer, but brainwashed Brandon is going to set the record straight.
@@JamesRichardWiley He's not imprisoned, his life isn't governed by Joseph Smith, but by belonging to an extraordinarily close knit, large, and vibrant family and community, while being a successful musician, he doesn't need to be patronised.
@@arianakhan6665 "Patronised"? Mormonism is utterly ridiculous and its "prophet" was a convicted con man. Religiously credulous, brainwashed fools will believe any bullshit then demand "respect" for their nonsense. Whether or not he has a "close knit family" is completely irrelevant to the "truth" of this "religion. American religious beliefs would be hilarious if the subject wasn't so serious.
hugh Jass>> I think you meant close KNIT family. And also, if you think it's only American religious beliefs that are laughable, you don't really know what you're talking about. Do you think Hinduism and Islam are the real truth?
Not a debate with Tom Cruise? David Miscavige should be the one to debate with the Prof but I doubt Miscavige would have the balls to come out of hiding for the debate.
@@secondhandguru3558 Tom Cruise is protected by the god Xenu who lives in a far away galaxy. I'm curious why Mr Lucas or Mr Spielberg haven't picked up the movie rights to scientology.
While this is true he suffers, albeit to a lesser extent, from the same issues as Hitchens. Hitchens straw-man’s the religious arguments. Dawkins does not straw-man but does not ever accept a religious premise and the debunk it. He just claims there’s an alternative way of viewing things but it is by no means a smoking gun to his opponent. Always great to listen to him though. He is much more respectable and peaceful than Hitchens.
If I were in the position to confront Dawkins, I would have crushed him. Anyone can testify to that by reading my book, "The guide of the post-cataclysmic Catholic", a philosophy of history theguideofthepostcataclysmiccatholic.blogspot.com/2020/10/the-guide-of-post-cataclysmic-catholic_22.html
Was Brandon not briefed before coming on here?? “ yeah just come on this obscure show, promote the new single, have a bit of a light chat... oh and Richard Dawkins will be wheeled out to completely dismantle your entire belief system and world view”
@La Hire There are many who are provoked by and take issue with things Dawkins says, and as a man of scientific integrity and an outspoken supporter of free speech, Dawkins seems to welcome challenges to his views that are intellectually driven, but to call a scientist who, outside of his research, has helped inspire and educate potentially millions of people around the world, an 'idiot' just because you disagree with him, is (ironically) what I'd call idiotic 😂
I actually feel sorry for Brandon here. It seems like he was caught off guard and wasn’t told he was going to be debating Dawkins. Although I find his beliefs silly, he otherwise comes across as a very nice guy. And he wrote some of the best songs of my youth.
Dawkins explained that he was asked to come onto the show to debate with Brandon about religion and Brandon was told he was to come onto to the show to talk about The Killers’ new album which is why Dawkins seems a little over-aggressive and Brandon looks blindsided. It was a miscommunication from the show producers.
Yeah man, imagine going to the pub with some entry level opinion and then fucking richard dawkins is there and you think Jesus, I wasn't prepared for this.
I actually don’t feel sorry for Brandon Flowers. In addition to being a devoted husband and father - he fronts one of the most successful bands of the 21st century. And it’s safe to say that the fact that you find his beliefs to be silly means nothing to him.
Dawkins did apologise, he genuinely didn't know who he was or why he was there. The show set him up, but I can see the funny side here, because I'm Mr Brightside.
Not true millions of Mormons are very happy and successful and happily believe in the gospel. This guy thinks human science is the maximum authority. How closed minded. There is more than we don’t know.
@Never Ashamed Again Ministries I can tell that your a guy who won't change his beliefs no matter what i say to you and I respect that. So I wish not to argue with you on this. But science is an ever changing enterprise. The longer we live the more we discover and the more our theories change. Dawkins would be the first guy to tell you that.
Yeah.. the band surely would have been soundchecked before the show started. Brandon could rock up to the at the last second and start playing, they're not a high school band. Unless of course I'm wrong.. I wasn't there. lol
The manager of The Killers probably ripped the mic from the hands of one of the shows employees off set and began screaming into the host earpiece, “Get FLOWERS off the stage immediately! Take FLOWERS off the STAGE NOW!!!!!!” The host forgetting Brandon’s last name is like, “What the fuck, there are no fucking flowers on the set!?! Why the fuck do they keep saying that...???” All the while carrying on a deep conversation with RICHARD FUCKING DAWKINS!!! All the while wondering who the fuck hates flowers so badly then....OH This Flower! Oh ok! Hey you...rockstar man, go rehearse.” And manages to keep a straight face and didn’t lose track of the conversation. I’m impressed! The host deserves an award and a raise!!
I respect Richard Dawkins for being honest about his views and not kowtowing the pressure to be diplomatic on these issues. While i'm not such a die hard atheist as him, we need more people like him who espouse their views with logical ferocity and less people who are liabile to be offended and demand people maintain their safe space where they can't be challenged because it would be considered 'mean'.
He wasn’t very logical about why people believe though, talking about lack of education, having admitted just a few seconds earlier that plenty of professors of biology are religious
@@sadem1045 Not at all, people can believe whatever they want. But people shouldn't tiptoe around religious people and be afraid to hold their views up to scrutiny in the name of social sensitivity.
@@sadem1045 By which I mean the modern tendency for creating environments where people cannot argue to the full extent of their viewpoint because it would get to the stage of being deemed offensive. If a religious person enters a debate about religion, an athiest should be allowed to point out the flaws in their theology with uttermost ruthlessness and people shouldn't villainise it.
I mean, to be fair, it is upsetting to be told your whole life is based on a foundation of lies. That being said, sometimes the truth hurts. And few are prepared to listen without being emotional about something like that.
Marc young But it’s not like he’s stuck in Utah with most of the Mormons, having never left or met anyone from outside that community. He is without excuse to have not done the most basic research on the way he lives his whole life.
Sure it is. It's a fact isn't it? Is being in pain an argument also or is that just like some silly mental construct that'll fade away with proper edumacation.... ?
“Can you play music for this segment?” “Sure” “Great! Also here’s Richard Dawkins telling you why your religion is false in front of millions of people”
My favorite part was when Dawkins and Flowers absolutely disagree, but they shake hands and move on. We don't all agree, but we can respect each other. Great moment of humanity.
doesnt make sense does it, if you believe im going to hell and i believe youre crazy then how can we agree to disagree? its not a discussion about sports or your favorite movie. its a discussion about you and your faith
@@19382q It's Bible stuff that your Satan inspired, Democrat/ Liftist induced, Dumb-down education failed to teach you & most about! Satan will soon show you how it works! I see you couldn't lucidely respond to Dr. Peter Stoners book, "Science Speaks"!! [Facts] Facts don't comport to your Godless, Faith in man, based, dumb-down education! The topic of so many book out now!
@@yes-wo7qn What does having qualification in religious studies have to do with "doing one's research"? Wouldn't it just be extremely hypocritical, then, considering the guy is just a singer with only a high school graduation? Surely what matters is whether the argument holds up to the research, rather than what your qualifications are?
As a scholar and member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Mormon), Dawkins really doesn't throw out anything substantial here. His claims are actually easily refuted which leads me to assume that he really hasn't done his research. The whole "con man" act is not grounded in reality.
I think Dawkins would say "if the religious person wants to believe their religion purely because it makes them feel good, there's no issue. But if he wants to say it's also TRUE, that's when it's wrong." Truth claims are different from _comforting claims_
As as Muslim I agree with that, Do research, Look up historic facts, And ofcourse reach out to the Teachers and Scholars of that perticular Religion/Subject. I think one should learn every religion and learn about every culture and just respect one other as a fellow Human Being first, everything else comes after!
@@friskyguy00 I definitely agree with you about respecting each others beliefs. However, I think one of the problems is the teachings of particular religions. How is one supposed to respect and coexist with a religion, when said religion teaches to kill non believers? Who would be accepting to a person who wants to kill you because of your beliefs or lack thereof. If two opposing religions accepted one another's teachings, wouldn't that be rebuking their own religion/teachings? I honestly believe most religions are either ancient attempts at understanding the world and life. Or they're stories conjured up by man to control man using his fear of the unknown.
As Christopher Hitchens said:- I hope I've made it clear, that I'm perfectly happy for people to have these toys, and to play with them at home, and hug them to themselves and so on, and to share them with other people who come around and play with the toys. So that's absolutely fine. They are not to make me play with these toys. I will not play with the toys. Don't bring the toys to my house, don't say my children must play with these toys, don't say my toys might be a condom - here we go again - are not allowed by their toys. I'm not going to have any of that.
@Harry Waddington you can't of course. but it gets to the heart of his issue. It's not the "feel good" or "pragmatic" aspects of religion it's the truth claims. So for hosts to keep bringing up "what about the good it does" is irrelevant to Dick's point.
@Harry Waddington No i'm pointing out that it's sill to bring up "how helpful religion is" it's basically like (as my original comment says) separating truth from pragmatics. You can't believe something that you're fine with claiming is false. It was tongue in cheek in way
I sincerely appreciate the uploader's decision to not use "DESTROYS"in the title. I cannot stand such titles as it undermines legitimate discussions and also makes the videos harder to share. I am an atheist.
It depends on the channel and its objective. On a slightly separate note, Skavlan strikes me more, as a comfy sitcom presenter, than a bold journalist asking the difficult questions.
That's the journey we're all on isn't it? I've found the Truth is the God of the Bible. He is Truth and the Truth will set you free (John 8:31-21). So know and follow Him. Other's may come to a different conclusion. However, If we're open minded, honest with ourselves and seek the Truth we shall find it. Like Dawkins, I also don't care about a truth, their truth, my truth our just any old truth. If objective Truth is exclusive by definition (and it is) we need to find The Truth (Ravi Zacharias)!
Lord Voldemort true is something that you can consistently be confirmed by empirical evidence. God almost certainly doesn’t exist so I can’t believe in something that has very little chances of being real sincere there is no consistent confirmation so no empirical evidence plus it’s story is a logical fallacy
@@AdventureSam- are you referring to the Christopher Hitchens who smoked cigarettes and abused alcohol - which led to his early death based on life expectancy averages for his race and country of origin? If so - perhaps he wasn’t so smart after all…
@@faviusarthum5038- maybe… Regardless - based on science - it’s impossible to trap a person in a debate if that person is dead. Science says that dead people don’t engage in debates with the living…
I love how even though Dawkins was adamant about his educated viewpoint, he realized that it was insulting that Brandon had to leave without the right to respond or argue his side. The professor profusely apologized upon realising the singer had to leave. And that's a sign of how moral the guy is no matter what some people think. The humanity in him makes me appreciate the man immensely.
@@AviChetriArtwork what if your educators were, for example, racist? What would be the basis for a higher objective moral framework to prove your educators wrong?
@@alexbakerloo1979 well it would be difficult to not to be racist. Which explains why racism was so prevelant in the past. Morality is relative. Our compassion is virtuous today because it is mutually benefial.
@@AviChetriArtwork sounds like utilitarianism is the basis for your moral framework then? Two questions: 1) what objectively tells you this a morally superior to survival of the fittest? 2) what do you do with utlitiarianism when it doesn't protect minorities?
@@martinkent333 and yet the one sat here is considerably richer than Dawkins. One is scientifically versed, the other is musically versed. The only difference between the two is that all Dawkins has to show for his work is theory and opinion - which, even as an athiest, is all his beliefs are.
@@robertimmanuel577 This quote can be most reliably credited to Daniel J. Boorstin. And Stephen Hawking was actually, IMO, in dire need of understanding this quote.
Indeed it is, and knowledge is based on understanding text not taking the literal meaning, but understanding it and only from understanding what the text is really saying then knowledge you shall truly have.
I mean he wasn’t even there to debate he was just promoting his band and then Dawkins just comes after him. It’s honestly embarrassing at that point. Flowers is a singer in a rock band and not a theologian or apologist.
It's obvious Richard Dawkins wanted to give him a chance to defend his position so they could have a conversation. He opened it up for that and had no idea the man had to leave, which shut down the possibility for discussion while leaving Dawkins with somewhat of the last word. He didn't want that. He wanted an actual conversation. Incredible admirable.
Thanks for seeing this too. Many people in the comments said Brandon cried and didn't say anything therefore he didn't have anything substantial to say, when in reality he didn't even really have a chance
Religious people believe the doctrine because they were taught to, I do not believe the unproven, practically unbelievable theories because my common sense told me, no one had to influence or convince me.
I can stump the religious people better than Dawkins. Simply ask the Brandon Flowers if he has ever had a wet fart i..e shit his pants. And then asking him if he still believes in an intelligent designer.
It’s obvious that Richard Dawkins will never go up against someone who is at the top of their field in religious studies. He’s actually a known fucking coward when it comes to this. He prefers the less educated so he can make himself seem more so. I’m just waiting for him to debate some like William Lane Craig so Craig can do to Dawkins what Peterson did to Harris…. End him.
@@VinnySmiles01 Like the religious freaks who have a rhetoric of saying what they know is true, but have no evidence. They ramble on about a 2000 year old theory. There are many aspects of religion which do not make sense to a normal person. The people who know best are those pastors who extort millions from gullible people. They shout about how god will punish sinners, but are themselves the greatest sinners. They know that if there was a god he would definitely punish them, they just keep on pushing the great big lie.
@@millersmash1000 He is a journalist that reports on English ethologists, evolutionary biologists, authors foundings and rears them to fit his narrative.
@@youngweezybaby3 you don't understand how to define peoples work. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Dawkins Just because somebody makes journalism a part of their work doesn't mean they are just a journalist. This is a very lazy and dishonest way to discredit someone
My daughter's puppy died. We buried it together and planted sunflower seeds on top. I told her that her puppy might not be with us anymore but through her loss the new flowers would grow strong (and they did, they were the biggest sunflowers we have ever grown in our garden).
3:35 "You have to understand. Most people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inured and so hopelessly dependent on the system that they will fight to protect it." - Morpheus
We all can be sure of a person's existence who has a birthday and a date of passing (into glory for Claus), and Saint Nicholas The *Wonderworker,* the Archbishop of Myra, has both.
@@richardholmes7199 Or we could claim we don't make claims, we reject another's claim, but that whole thing can't be a claim we're rejecting. You know, critical thinking and reasoning skills.
I could listen to The Killers for hours. They have several hit songs but Quiet Town is a masterpiece. The verse about the carnage caused by opioid overdoses is powerful.
To be honest theres something kind of sad about a grown man being told his life is a lie, especially on public TV against an intellectual powerhouse. It's painful to watch. Brainwashing kids with nonsense is a cruel thing to do.
He has absolutely no excuse, as a grown adult who has travelled the world, not to have considered that his beliefs are nonsense. He literally looked shocked by the very notion.
I absolutely love the faces Richard pulls. He's not offended by anything being said. He's not angry. He's not trying to make someone understand his point. He just literally doesn't understand why people think the way they think.
If I were to purchase Richard Dawkins latest book, take it home, and copy it almost word-for-word, so that "My" new book was 95% to 100% the same, And then sell "my" new book, But, with My name in it, Richard Dawkins and his publishing company would sue me for intellectual theft. If I told the judge, "Your Honor, this book is 100% original,... it's mine, I did not steal The intellectual property from Richard, I was hiking in New Mexico and went into a large deep cave, And I found this book about 200' inside the cave underneath some VERY VERY old pottery, And this 100 million year old book just evolved into what it is today." Would the judge believe my story,... No, of course not! In the same way, we should not believe the lie of macro evolution! (But who knows, Richard Dawkins might lose the case if the judge was his Ex wife Laila Ward 😆)
In the clip - Dawkins claims that the world is explained fully by science or will be explained fully by science. Assuming that any religious person - Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim, Christian, Scientologist, etc. - is illogical and irrational - what exactly has been fully explained by science and what will eventually be fully explained by science? Hundreds of years after Newton and still so many questions about gravity. There are antibiotics and successful organ transplants - yet the precise causes of something as simple as a common hangover can’t be fully explained by science. Most religions deal with questions about the origins of the universe - yet there are so many unknowns about human anatomy. There is no evidence that science will fully explain the world. But Dawkins makes this claim. Hmm… He’s an atheist and yet he holds unprovable beliefs…
Can I ask you something? Can a people become a nation again after having been dispersed in different parts of the world for more than two thousand years? And in the countries where they were exiled, they were the minority and were heavily persecuted. They were not allowed to secure jobs and were often expelled from their lands.. And throughout the ages, kings, queens, political and religious leaders tried to annihilate them...do you think they could survive as a people? Could they become a nation again and become a powerful force in the region shortly after they reestablish themselves in the land of their forefathers? And as they tried to rebuild their tiny country, they have to survive the attacks of the neighboring nations that have more well-established armies? Considering they are a small country, with no army at that time, as small as New Jersey with the land mostly dessert, surrounded by enemies who attack them from all sides--- and with hardly any natural resources that even Mark Twain in his diary said that even a cactus was having a hard time to grow in this arid, bone dry and dessicated land ? Will they survive? What do you think?
@@ps-bi2sr not really Brandon had no leg to stand on and the audacity and rudeness of him to say check your research when he has for his entire lifetime indicates how wrong you are
@@benhall2235 I don’t think Dawkins does that at all tbh he bases all his arguments on evidence and I open to the fact that if something disproves evolution he’ll accept it so
@Carlos Spiceywhiener He did not insult him. He criticized (or insulted if you like) his ridiculous belief. Insulting bad ideas or irrational beliefs is not offensive. Just because you have a belief does not entitle you to special treatment. He needs to grow up.
@Carlos Spiceywhiener No. I don't care if it is offensive or not. It may be. I still don't care. What you are advocating is how a child would view the world. Mockery is one of the best ways to criticize bad ideas and religion is the motherload of bad ideas. Like Hitchens said: taking offense is never an argument. We are still waiting for you to make a rational argument. Shouting "that's offensive" is worthless.
@Carlos Spiceywhiener Poor baby. You are really hung up on not offending anyone. Dawkins called the so-called mormon bible an obvious fake because of the language it used. He did not say anything about the guy personally. If an adult believed in Santa Claus or that Elvis was still alive, he would be laughed off the stage and called an idiot. So, what's the difference? Faith does not deserve the privilege you are demanding by demanding that it be off-limits to criticism.
Brandon wouldn't kill a fly. Like youre insulting someones beliefs in front of the world. Pretty harsh, he handled it relatively well all things considered haha
@@markderv yeah he's not that intelligent but who cares? The man's just a singer and he seems like a nice guy. I think we've come full circle were the edgy atheist who 'destroys' religious people is cringe. Hes religious... so what? If he's not harming anyone, let him do whatever dumb shit he wants
@@bustamoveorelse Don't strawman me, please. Who said I was a coming from an atheist angle? Not all religions are created equal and let's face it, anyone who wears magic underpants deserves all the coating they get.
A gentleman? Really? He was being rude when he said in front of Brandon that his religión was “fake” it is not educated to make such commentary in front of a person who believes in religion. If Dawkins was a gentleman, he would have respected Brandon’s beliefs and wouldn’t have said anything against his religion.
@@solounusuariomas5574 I disagree. I am an atheist, but what Muslim doesn't think that the Christian religion is "fake". What Christian doesn't think that the Hindu religion is "fake". Is it impolite to state what you believe? Dawkins states his opinions plainly, just as Christians state plainly that they believe that Jesus was resurrected and that he walked on water. If someone say that they believe these things and are offended when anyone tries to contradict them, they are essentially saying that any belief otherwise is fake or wrongheaded, which has been the norm for most of history. Dawkins is more direct in his language, but directness is not rudeness, I would say that what is worse is hiding behind vague sentiments and scripture that is, to say the least, not applicable to fact checking, and asserting that your beliefs are unassailable by the very virtue of their unassailablilty. Richard Dawkins is a gentleman, I however am not, so I say fuck religion, it has done more bad than good and anyone who disagrees is ignorant of history.
Adolfo Vazquez So you are defending Mormonism? All other Christians call Mormonism fake, or a cult. Those who’ve been indoctrinated into Mormonism obviously will take offense to this, but the rest of us see that it’s obvious that Joseph Smith was a con man.
Yep, I did. I cannot believe that people can believe tripe like Mormonism or as we see below in the comments Scientology? Both are obviously made up but then so are all the other religions of the world, even the old Roman and Greek gods but most followers of Christianity just sit back and smile at Prof Hawkins logic or write an letter to the local newspaper whilst another followers of other faiths issues death threats even to novelists who writes fiction. Even today if you take a copy of Satanic Verses to some UK cities usually those old mill town in NE and ask people on the streets if the copy you hold up is still divisive and proof of the lack of free speech you will end up attacked. Please don't give me a God or religion, any of them.
Actually Brandon is right on this one. While I do not question Dawkins ability to research, I do question what he looked at. Joseph Smith was in-fact never found guilty of a “con” crime. There was a hearing (not a trial) in 1826 stemming from the disgruntled son (or nephew) of a man who hired Joseph. However the man who hired Joseph said he was more than satisfied with Joseph and actually defended him during the hearing. Obviously, the case was thrown out by the judge. Joseph was never convicted of a crime or “con.” Those are the facts. The faulty facts come from anti-LDS sources who found evidence of a trial (hearing) and concluded that “he was a convicted con man.” He wasn’t. So yes, while Dawkins did research, he did not use reliable resources. This is known as “study bias” and sadly no one is completely immune to this kind of bias. A conclusion was reached without factual evidence. Factual evidence, does in fact show the case was thrown out during a hearing.
@@Mgbizkut Pascal's wager is a flawed concept. It only permits 2 outcomes as if there isn't endless variables. The religious can't even decide on a single God. You believe in fairytales and 2000 year old Chinese whispers.
@@jamesrobert4106 I’m a Sikh we believe everyone eventually returns to God so Pascal’s wager stands And so does contingency argument U believe in false things I didn’t know there were that many ppl who are slow when contingency argument has disproved atheism
@@Mgbizkut Firstly. Who says your supposed God is the one you think it is? There are a myriad of potential possibilities beyond some human created deity from a story book. That is Pascal's wager disposed of. The contingency argument is nonsense. There is no definitive that says every being is either necessary to some preordained purpose. I am not the one here with belief in a mythical being. People with Schizophrenia are deemed insane for the commanding voices they hear in their minds. I would suggest that is no different to people of religious persuasion born into or adopting blind faith in something that mankind had no concept of 2000 years ago. It is a fraud, accepted by slow of mind. "When the first conman, met the first fool.".
@@banishedfromthedwarfplanet530 I was going to write "he didn't either", but it didn't seem right. Thank you for clearing up my either/neither/didn't either/didn't neither/ did not neither/ did never neither either debacle.
@@007ptb007 I was going to write "he didn't either" That _is_ what you wrote. Is either/or and neither/nor really that difficult to grasp? Upon some reflection, considering the issues that SO many people have with two/too/to, your/you're and there/their/they're, I guess grammar is more intuitive for some people compared to others.
It is a shame. Dawkins is so easy to crush. Richard Dawkins teaches the universe came from "literally nothing." Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. We can't get anything from "literally nothing." We can't even get science without God. The laws of nature only can come from a Lawgiver, God. God is the reason for us and all we have. th-cam.com/video/JiMqzN_YSXU/w-d-xo.html “However improbable the origin of life might be, we know it happened on Earth because we are here.” -Richard Dawkins. ""There is no evidence for any supernatural being of any kind. So it goes against the spirit of science." --Richard Dawkins We only get life from life...the law of biogenesis. We can't get anything without God. The odds are NOT there. th-cam.com/video/W1_KEVaCyaA/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/yW9gawzZLsk/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/ddaqSutt5aw/w-d-xo.html No, the eye did not evolve into various eyes. Your mere chance mutations are absurd. th-cam.com/video/X7h2HWcTwa4/w-d-xo.html Even Dawkins admits we can't know what is true because of natural selection... The God Delusion, “Since we are creatures of natural selection, we cannot totally trust our senses. Evolution only passes on traits that help a species survive, and not with preserving traits that tell a species what is actually true about life.” Oh, but Dawkins knows what's true about life...killing those who don't meet his expectations for living. dailycaller.com/2021/05/19/richard-dawkins-down-syndrome-roe-v-wade/
Anthony Flew is considered one of the most prominent atheists, so he retracted his atheism and told us that the universe has a deity with modern scientific evidence, not with thought or dreams and feeling, but after science and modern discoveries about the existence of a Creator. He fell into another problem that the Creator wanted according to his mood He wanted the Creator to be neither speaking nor hearing, and creating creation in vain And God informed the Qur’an of this by saying: “Did you think that we created you without a purpose and that you would never return to us?” ? " God Almighty: ((We will show them Our signs in the horizons and within themselves until it becomes clear to them that it is the truth. But is it not sufficient concerning your Lord that He is, over all things, a Witness?) But it is logical that this Creator sends a messenger to teach us who he is. And we have to verify the authenticity of the Messenger and what this Messenger calls to? It transports sperm from the liquid state to the eyes, heart, blood, arteries, and bones. Unconscious nature creates a conscious human being. Then this nature teaches about the importance of the heart and lung, then puts the rib cage, then oxygen, then water, there is sexual desire, and there are the genitals to complete the male and female sexual process. , What coincidence are you talking about, a coincidence that creates the male and the female. All of these are called verses and there are things that complement each other, there is a lung and there is air and there are teeth and stomach and in food and other things and we say that it has no creator!!! The only question God will ask you is focus on it ((He said: Did you deny My verses and did not encompass them in knowledge, or what did you do?)) I mean, God Almighty tells you what I told you is a lie and you cannot realize it or understand it And what in the world have you been doing? Do you know what your answer is? ((The decree will befall them for what they did wrong, and they will not be able to speak. If you find yourself in the world without a choice in a great reality we live in, and you go without a choice and a question is the most important If your destiny is fire, has God wronged you??? Muhammad, may God’s prayers and peace be upon him, is a prophet from the Creator, and before him many prophets did not lie or deceive, and he is the only religion that commands you to worship one Creator who created everything. First of all, you should know that the religion of all prophets is the worship of one Creator who created everything. Islam today is the only religion that commands you to worship one Creator and not idols, illusions, conjecture or a number of gods. But how do we know that the speech is from God and not from Muhammad, may God bless him and grant him peace? . These are some of the things that comfort your heart and believe that this is a prophet and many of the prophets before him The Almighty said: (Moreover He comprehended in His design the sky, and it had been (as) smoke) The smoke confirms that the origin of this universe is inflamed. It is not a lake of water, as was the perception of all philosophies and religions that are based on illusion. This is one of the postulates of modern science today that the sky is condensation of smoke. This fact converted the French scientist Maurice to Islam and wrote a book entitled the Holy Qur’an on the scale of modern science How did Muhammad, may God bless him and grant him peace, know this fact before? The Almighty says: ((And the heaven We constructed)) The sky is a building, not a vacuum as it was thought, and this was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics in 2017 that proved it How did Muhammad, may God bless him and grant him peace, know this fact before? The Almighty’s saying: ((And the heaven We constructed with strength, and indeed, We are [its] expander. )). That is, the sky expands with time. This fact, even in the time of Einstein, was not imagined by anyone and it was proven. And Einstein admitted it and admitted that it was the biggest scientific mistake he made in his life if he believed that the sky was fixed. The Qur’an before Einstein says that the sky expands fact Almighty’s saying: :((And We have made the night and day two signs, and We erased the sign of the night and made the sign of the day visible that you may seek bounty from your Lord and may know the number of years and the account [of time]. And everything We have set out in detail. )) The verse of the night is the moon and the verse of the day is the sun. The Qur'an tells that the sun and the moon were fiery masses. That is, the moon was a fiery mass and was erased, and the verse of the day remained visible to the eyes. Was the moon a fiery mass and extinguished? This is one of the biggest scientific issues discovered about the moon. The moon was already a fiery mass, and NASA issued on its official website a conceptual clip entitled The Evolution of the Moon in the video. In fact, the moon was a fiery mass like the sun, and this is what the Qur’an told about and the truth of modern science. How did Muhammad, may God bless him and grant him peace, know this fact before? Almighty’s saying And you see the mountains thinking that they are rigid, while you will cross as the passage of clouds. [It is] the work of God who has perfected everything. In fact, he knows what you're doing.)) And the verse clearly spoke of a strange phenomenon, which is that the viewer of the mountains appears to him still, that is, they are still, but in fact they are not like that, rather they are in a state of constant movement. And the infidels of Quraish had previously accused our master Muhammad, may God’s prayers and peace be upon him, of madness, and it is likely that their joy was overwhelming when this verse was revealed. They also found in it, according to their claim, evidence of this madness, and they told the people: How can you believe this man who says that these fixed mountains move like clouds moving in the sky! And today it is proven that the earth rotates, and with it the mountains, how did Muhammad know that and why is he telling you instead of the matter that makes people consider him crazy? The matter was not from him, but from God. Almighty’s saying Those whom Allah (in His plan) willeth to guide,- He openeth their breast to Islam; those whom He willeth to leave straying,- He maketh their breast close and constricted, as if they had to climb up to the skies: thus doth Allah (heap) the penalty on those who refuse to believe)). After man was able to reach the sky by flying by modern means of transportation, he knew that the higher up in the air, the less oxygen and atmospheric pressure, which causes severe tightness in the chests and the process of breathing. : How did Muhammad, may God bless him and grant him peace, know this fact before? It was not from him, but from God Almighty’s saying Or (the Unbelievers' state) is like the depths of darkness in a vast deep ocean, overwhelmed with billow topped by billow, topped by (dark) clouds: depths of darkness, one above another: if a man stretches out his hands, he can hardly see it! for any to whom Allah giveth not light, there is no light! Modern sciences have revealed that in the bottom of the deep seas with abundant water - the deep sea - there is great darkness, to the extent that living creatures live in this darkness without visual tools, but live using their other senses such as hearing. These dark darknesses are not found in the sea water that surrounds the Arabian Peninsula, but rather they have been discovered in the oceans far from it This verse shows another aspect of the Qur’anic miracle, which is that the sea wave that all people only knew was one wave in the seas. The verse says there is another wave in the depths of the sea, and divers discovered at the beginning of the twentieth century a fact that was hidden in the depths of the sea, that fact that shows another wave that throws divers into it as it is thrown at swimmers, and this wave was discovered by Scandinavian divers. I will tell you what the Prophet said. The Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, said: One day the Bedouins who live in the desert will build tall towers, and this is my duty. Go and see where the tallest buildings are and who owns them. All these and other matters that I have not mentioned indicate that this is a prophet from God. More important than that, as I told you, is the only religion that commands you to worship one Creator, who created everything and before him many prophets. Say, if you wish, there is no god but God, and that Muhammad is the Messenger of God speak from the heart
no, nope I didn't see that. I saw Dawkins make a lengthy aggressive statement, and as soon as flowers started to respond Dawkins interrupted him yet again and continued his speech. Dawkins wanted to be heard.
@@AF-dn2bz That's exactly what I saw too. Dawkins was all about his own voice dominating and being in love with his own 'cleverness'. He was never there for genuine conversation - only to 'win' a debate. Comes across a man very much in need of some spiritual growth as he seems to have missed the basics. Brandon however is a man who KNOWS exactly why a piece of music or poetry can bring him to tears. Dawkins ego however will ensure that remains a mystery to him.
@@hammalammadingdong6244 How does doing research mean being indoctrinated?. How have atheists not been indoctrinated with scientism. The amount of blind faith they exhibit suggests they have.
I doubt Flowers had time to go into detail but he does reference the actual scholarship that exists on the Book of Mormon. There is a lot of it and almost everyone here spouting an opinion knows none of it.
Thats the usual way to change the subject and avoid admiting that someone had argumented the subject to you so well and you cannot beat him..i experience this everyday with my husband
I love The Killers, but Brandon sitting there on the edge of tears over what Dawkins is saying is just proof that religion is a warm blanket and doesn't hold up well when put to the test.
I would love to see him talk to John MacArthur,,the bible warned of people adding to it or taking from it,which mormon's did and do,as do most other man made rekigions,Christianity is made by God,Jesus,God among us,as prophisied in the bible.
on the one hand i agree but on the other hand, why not. a singer can have a very competent opinion about something despite not being his profession regarding wage labour.
Well, how exactly are you supposed to “punch up” when it comes to criticising ANY religion? They’re ALL ludicrous! And the arguments used to justify/defend them have all been debunked and decimated countless times over the last couple of centuries. When it comes to all religions, you can only ever punch down no matter who you’re debating with! It’s the same as “debating” flat Earthers or creationists! How on Earth is it possible to “punch up” when debating these people?
Religion does not exist only for the philosophy majors and masters of theology. Having the "laymen" express their beliefs and opinions can be refreshing. I think religion is a bandaid and crutch for those who would prefer not look into an unknown when considering existence after death. Religion in theory is fine, religion as a propergated medium is indoctrination.
"This week on Master-Debater we have Neil deGrasse Tyson debating physics with a... (checks notes) high school art teacher we just pulled in off the street who says they watch 'Ancient Aliens' on the weekend! Are you ready to feel smart at the sake of the layman's dignity? We sure are!!"
@@terrypussypower religion isnt necessarily the same as flat earthers. one can make up a religion that doesnt contradict our scientific knowledge. also when someone is wrong you still dont have to punch down. i also wouldnt "Punch up" rather on equal level
How the hell can Brandon Flowers tell Dawkins to "do his research" literally seconds after stating he isn't one of the professors who analysed the Book of Mormon seconds after Dawkins just explained how the book is a modern publication written with a poor attempt to appear older and therefore more credible (if you presume the age of a text has something to do with its accuracy)
As well as being arrested dozens of times Smith was a fugitive from justice for many years. And he was convicted in absentia in 1837 of illegal banking. Dawkins was right.
@@kiviuq3495 thousands were convicted after the banking collapse, that doesn’t make him a conman. Joseph smith was convicted for being a “disorderly person” again, not a conman conviction. I mean, I know what he’s referring to, it’s just that technically flowers is right and it’s funny watching everybody cream over him yelling Dawkins to do his research and how stupid Brandon must be to say it, but at the end of the day he was right. Just because you think he was a conman doesn’t make the statement Dawkins made to be literally true. I think that’s worth pointing out.
I feel sorry for Brandon, any non professional debater debating with a professional would be unable to hold their own, no matter their beliefs, one just gets stunted and can't effectively explain their viewpoint, or argue
what I saw is Brandon tried to respond, and Dawkins kept interrupting him. I was impressed with Brandon's restraint. He didnt lower himself to Dawkin's level.
@@brassattacks2411 Dawkins interrupted him because he was obviously lying. Joe Schmith WAS a convicted conman. And then telling Dawkins he should do his research whilst lying his pants off seems kind of rich.
Wrong. Brandon was there to talk music. The show unethically sandbagged him with this atheist’s religious attack. . Brandon never claimed to be any kind of academic on this subject. Very dirty on the part of this skavlan show to pull such a trick. Low class.
Christian Whitney Indeed But Honestly These Idiots Wouldn’t Understand. To Be Completely Honest Even Though Brandon Couldn’t Say Much Because He Was Interrupted, He Would’ve Won That Argument 😎
*Mr. Dawkins is one of my favorite people in the world. He's so witty and intelligent. He always explains things in layman's terms so that anyone can understand. BRILLIANT!*
Having just watched a video of a man who doesn’t believe in God and yet remains polite and respectful when discussing the matter, it is sad and possibly ironic to see a reply that is flippant and mocking in tone. الحالب والمحلوب
الحالب والمحلوب - as with all scientists, you don’t believe him. You assess the evidence and that, you can believe in because it’s been tested and Verified
Dawkins is a real gentleman. Apologising to Brandon 3-4 times that he didn’t realise he had to leave. Shows that he was interested in open debate with Brandon. They needed more time!
@Kwi Chang Kain yes that's how a debate is done by including a atheist prophet funded by aristocrats to preach atheism as they hate competition from God and a a idiot noob pop star broadcasting to the world.
@@mqk5564 You imply atheism is a religion. You don't seem to understand the word at all, its not to be anti religious it is to lack one. Since there is not temporal evidence of a creator one takes it on faith if they are religious, the non religious lack such faith and want evidence.
@@HistoricLife Atheism is the intermediate stage in religion used to remove old religion from peasants by poking fun at them & then move to future stage where rich aristocrats become gods as they hate competition from god. Similar example(dictatorships) is atheist north korea where kim ll-sung is considered a god. check their ridiculous beliefs of him & Stalin's cult. (In democracies)Look at all those worshippers sorry I mean "followers" of billionaires, celebs, "influencers"...etc following & praising their every tweet, post, lifestyle... the only thing remaining is bringing their idol & prostrating which will be achieved only need right crisis & serfs will accept anything to save their lives.(preview:covid)
SUPERNATURAL MAN Sorry nice try but not at all correct in any way.The UN commissioned a study into war and killing studying 17,634 events and found Aethism the biggest single factor some 40% and religion just 7% it was published in.”The Encyclopedia of War” by Axelrod/phillips and other authors like Colgate and is widely available.try again
@@TonyEnglandUK Yes beliefs are scary huh. You don't like to hear that. And who said I was Christian. I am certainly not a egotistical professor selling bs.
It's so interesting that we live in an era where members of the older generation are debating members of the younger on behalf of scientific logic. The tables have turned.
As an ex-Mormon myself, every claim made by Dawkins was correct. Smith was convicted as a con man and it was clearly written in biblical style in the 1800's. I cannot thank Professor Dawkins and his great friend Christopher Hitchens enough for helping me to free my mind from the corruption of faith. "Faith is the belief in what reason cannot" _Voltaire
@@mickhealy572 Thx but I am 60 years old. It took way too long to pat myself on the back 4 being so smart. I owe a lot to the great Christopher Hitchens (who had passed before I found out who he was.) If I can do it, anybody can get there. Fair winds and following seas
@MooRaw More to the point, the BofM was written in the 18th century. The language is 16th century "King James" English, why? The claim it was a "perfect translation" from ancient texts to modern language was a farce from the get-go. I have not lost my interest in history and ancient writings. I suspect the book of Enoch and other Gnostic gospels indicate the possibility of extraterrestrials visiting Earth. Like Socrates, I don't have to believe they existed, I just have to recognize the possibility and look for the preponderance of evidence. "Faith is the belief in what reason cannot" _Voltaire. Life is better without it.
It’s funny how anybody actually believed anything smith said. I mean... did you actually read what happened? Ok ok the 18th and 19th century the people were not so bright maybe. But nobody in their right mind in the 20th or 21st century could actually believe that crap. It’s even more ridiculous than the other religions. It comes second only to Scientology
@@swlk9996 Smith was a known con man before he used his magic rock to become a cult leader. We have an even better known con man in the White House right now. A small handful of racist wanna-be polygamists followed a guy who promised the moon, how many million Americans worship the Tangerine Tyrant right now?. 18th century is looking smarter by the minute in comparison, no?
@@TonyEnglandUK- I honestly think that no one cares what you honestly thought. And I definitely think that Brandon Flowers doesn’t care what you think about him. Prove me wrong, chump.
@@BigPapiCapone I found it so unreasonable for a pop star to debate Richard Dawkins that I never thought that was Brandon Flowers whenever I saw this clip sewn in with others about mr. Dawkins. I just thought "poor guy falling for mormon crap" - I realised who he was moments ago 😱
Dawkins listens so intently to what the other person is saying, a sign of true objectivity which is the essence of intelligence. This man speaks with a depth of understanding that few achieve.
John 1 King James Version 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. God loves you so much that he sent his only begotten Son to die on the cross to pay for your sins. If you believe and put your trust in Jesus Christ, that he died on the cross to pay your sin debt and that he rose again on the third day, you will be saved. once you are saved, you will not die in your sins and be damned to hell for eternity. God will remove your sins and your soul will be washed clean with the blood that Jesus Christ shed for us on the cross. your own good works will not get you into heaven. Jesus Christ did all of the work for you, all you have to do is believe and put your trust in him and he will save you. Ephesians 1:13 King James Version 13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,. Jesus Christ is coming back very soon and we all have to be ready. I pray in Jesus Christ's mighty name that you be saved.
@@johnmcfarlane6136 @Sofie Johansen I will continue to grow up, until I am dead, and then I will spend eternity with God in heaven, Because I have believed and put my trust in the gospel of Christ. How did you get here?. What is your purpose here?. Where will you go when you Die?. ask yourself these questions. How did the very first man get here?. our next breath is not promised to us. we could die at any second. then comes eternity, will you spend it in heaven or hell?. God loves you so much, He died for you so that you could spend eternity in heaven with Him. don't listen to satans lies, doubts and confusion that he sends to you. he wants you to deny God and His existence. satan wants you to go to hell. God is real. God is alive. God is coming back very soon. God does not want you to go to hell, and neither do I. God bless:)
I'm so sick of the word "offensive". If you can be offended by anything, you're pathetic. If a person doesn't like what another is saying, either step up and defend your side or turn and walk away....but don't start crying.....and yes, that is what the word "offensive" is. Whining!
@Carlos Spiceywhiener You may have put words in Dawkin's mouth. He didn't insult the man (ad hominem) but the subject (Book of Mormon). There is a difference. In a debate you are SUPPOSED to attack the subject not the person. As long as you attack the subject, you are fine. Analogy. Art - Some artist puts a stone on a pillar and call it art. - I say that is rubbish. It's a stone. There is no context to move me from seeing a piece of random rock pulled from the street. - Artist gets offended and says I insulted him. You can see the intellectual dishonesty? I was rightfully giving my opinion on the SUBJECT not the PERSON. So you can see how Dawkins' giving of an opinion on the Book of Mormon, is not an insult on the practitioner? That would be the same as every Christian getting pissy anytime someone criticises the Bible... or any professor getting pissy when an article s/he wrote is criticised....
@Carlos Spiceywhiener no we don't. I don't presume to know. You do. I tackle arguments and discussions on the face of what was said. And if a statement that was not said is to be inferred, the burden is on me to show the link between what was said and what was inferred. This is in world of mathematics is called writing a proof. Eg there is series of statements that link the statements A:"Let there be a right angled triangle" and B:"The sum of squares of the two shorter sides equals the square of the longest side". Pythagoras' theorem is just uttered out of thin air, it is shown by a clear delineation of steps. I make the argument you presume to know Dawkins intent. The burden is on you to show a delineation of steps from what he said about the book to what you inferred he said about the person.
@@GriuGriu64 you should probably learn the definition of words before you use them. Dogma means something you are told to believe absence of proof. He isn't obligated to teach you a lifes worth of scientific education before he states proven facts. That part is up to you.
@@GriuGriu64 Dawkins often stated that it is likely that we *cannot* explain everything, that is what he means by middle world people. You possibly meant that he believes that the most accurate and precise explanations are achieved by science. That is, investigation using methods that we have spent centuries developing so that they eliminate falsehoods, biases and errors in order to produce results that are accurate and precise? Dogmatic means putting something as unassailably true, you cannot believe that science is the best means of investigating stuff while simultaneously holding a dogmatic approach to that stuff. Either you can investigate it using methods designed to eliminate bias, or you can claim something as true without testing it, you cannot do both.
@@GriuGriu64 Such a large post to say absolutely nothing, could you come back to me when you get a coherent point please? Science has nothing to do with religion, science is a way of investigating the natural world, religion is the organisation of the belief in the supernatural.
@@googlespynetwork i will use evry abusive word that i have ever learned to tell him how rotten world he has made which contains rape, murder, wars etc. And what about animal suffering. I will ask him wether he is a sadist or something?
I have no problem with anyone following any religion, with or without evidence that their religion is true. But - and here's where my problem develops - practically all religions dictate their followers to inflict their beliefs on everyone else whether they like it or not.
@@TonyEnglandUK except Islam- sorry theres a direct verse in Chapter 2 saying there is no compulsion in religion. Also in Quran, God tells the Prophet that he is just a warner n a giver of good tidings, n guidance comes from God to who sincerely seeks.
But you are the educated ppl while ours are more ignorant than animals never been to the 1st class of a pry school yet preach in and out the delusions !
"Richard Dawkins and Brendon flowers have a dispute about religion" TH-cam title "omg this is going to be brilliant!!" me "Mormonism is obviously made up!" Richard Dawkins "no it isn't do your research" Brendon "erm brendon has to go now". Presenter. Possibly the worst dispute ever. 😂
When my son's first pet chicken died (he had 4 chickens), i was honest and explained to him the chicken was getting old encouraged him to spent time to comfort the animal. The 1st time was always the hardest. However such is life. No lies about heaven and hell. Kids are very intelligent and they learn fast. When the next chicken died pain, tears and sadness still there. What he learnt is to cherish the moments, journey and connections as the memories stay with you for the rest of your life.
That is the most stupid little story I’ve ever heard. Even if your son was autistic he’d be able to understand that the chicken he had as a pet was no different to the chicken he’d eat at Kentucky Fried Chicken. Chickens don’t have souls, except maybe your chicken as it had an arsehole for an owner. Tell your son his chicken was delicious. Idiot.
@TheCosmicWarrior research based on Research papers, Scientific journals and peer reviewed articles? Or research based on religious literature that's proven time and again to be falsifiable.?
@TheCosmicWarrior Dawkins did his research on Mormonism. He was right about it. It's fake and was founded by a convicted con man. Maybe you're just butthurt because you may be a Mormon yourself and you perhaps are having trouble with the real history of your religion.
Kudos to Dawkins for apologizing profusely to Flowers since he didn’t know he had to leave and wouldn’t have time to properly rebut to his satisfaction.
@@pleasesubscribe7659 That's a bit of a sweeping statement. I'd say he's misguided due to being brainwashed with the teachings of a charlatan passed down by his parents.
@@pleasesubscribe7659 It's a very broad generalization to call someone a moron. Everybody practically has opinions that other people would disagree with and probably think they are stupid. Just because you disagree with his religious beliefs doesn't means he's stupid in general. I'm sure there's opinions other's could potentially call you a moron for having.
Thank you Richard Dawkins! You made visible to me the ignorance I had for 30 years. I'm glad I was able to free myself from this nonsense. Although this made the relationship with family and surroundings a bit difficult.
Who else thinks this is one of the strangest interviews ever? Im trying to work out why a scientist is talking to what looks like a group of pop stars?
This show is obviously a piece of pop culture. Brandon Flowers is not the only pop icon present. Obviously a debate was not intended or desired, and no scientific or religious evidence was presented.
He uses reason and science not emotion to prove his points. Most religious zealots are just focused on their religious teachings and are unable to seek the truth since it would probably turn their world upside down. Religion can serve in a moral capacity but the problem is people twist it and turn it into something else for their own purposes.
I'm not saying that Richard is wrong, but I think he immediately goes in with a defensive attitude, which makes him appear at least as emotional as everyone else when he wants to prove his point. Maybe the nervousness contributes to him behaving that way, but it can irritate me a little when people can not argue for their cause in a calm and relaxed way. Richard is a very smart man, but we all have a different definition of what god is. In my own life, I get a feeling that people who often behave in this way in discussions are people who want to appear as very rational and shuts out everything that can have to do with spirituality or some sort of thought of what god is or whatever.
I don’t think Dawkins was disrespectful and I don’t think Brandon was either. The interviewer was. I think Brandon could’ve been more prepared to talk about his beliefs, but he was blindsided in front of a crowd because he was just there to perform. Dawkins didn’t know he was talking to someone who wasn’t informed about this beforehand, leading to an awkward discussion. The interviewers fault
@@zah936 God-on-High wrote the DNA Codes, because Evolution by RANDOM Mutation is proven to be Mathematically Impossible >>> 1) STUDY the OKAZAKI FRAGMENTS Process, for God's sake and your own !!! That Process, can NEVER have arisen by Darwin's BLIND LUCK !!! 2) Dear Evolutionist, The first thing you need to understand is, Charles Darwin did NOT make the animals & plant Life on Earth. Furthermore, neither did Darwinian “random mutation” assemble Life on Earth. Random mutation has the following problems ; 1) Mutation is only known to SUBTRACT information from the genome - not to ADD info. ie) A beast ( Emu, Ostrich) might LOSE wings through mutation, but no beast will GAIN wings ; not even half a wing or a quarter of a wing ! The other problem with Random Mutation/Assembly is, mathematicians compute that Life CANNOT be assembled by a Random Process … The statistical probability Against even ONE protein forming by “accident” is a 1 in 10 to the 180th power chance, which is measured as “OPERATIONALLY IMPOSSIBLE “. ( If your horse has 1 in 100 Chance of winning the Race, that is 1 in 10 to the 2nd power.. ) Here is a 5 minute video explaining OPERATIONALLY IMPOSSIBLE. th-cam.com/video/JQ3hUlU0vR4/w-d-xo.html IF you want a long video on this same Issue, here it is >>> th-cam.com/video/sq8McNGHrOU/w-d-xo.html ( The above video , especially between 34th minute and 38th minute , reveals there is just NO WAY that any Random Process of Darwinism could create or shape Life ! ) Ilya Prigogine, chemist-physicist, recipient of the Nobel Prize in chemistry, wrote: “The statistical probability that organic structures and the most precisely harmonized reactions that typify living organisms would be generated by accident, is zero. That’s right - zero!" Evolution Theory is NOT hard science ; it barely goes beyond the level of Conjecture. Here are some short videos explaining, the Holes in Evolution Theory are about a million times bigger than the brickwork >>> th-cam.com/video/SOtGb8hKyWE/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/KeMJn_wd8Wo/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/031swKKakB0/w-d-xo.html Darwinism & Evolution, are actually PHILOSOPHY not Science !!! Here are some short videos explaining that fact … th-cam.com/video/58Tf_HUZros/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/NJhuplCE7WE/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/AM-H6NxdCd4/w-d-xo.html Darwinism , the viewpoint that “Blind Luck” created Life, is already a KNOWN “Flat Earth “theory. It cannot be ! So what does that leave us with ? STUDY of the complexity of Living Cells and their organs, components , suggests strongly that this organic nano-machinery reveals, INTELLIGENT DESIGN… design by , God-on-High, or The Supreme Being, if you will. HERE is a classic video or 2 on INTELLIGENT DESIGN >>> th-cam.com/video/tzj8iXiVDT8/w-d-xo.html Charles Darwin had no electron microscope ; could NOT see the complexity of nano-machinery in MITOSIS here… WATCH this video of MITOSIS, in particular the “copy & paste “ procedure of OKAZAKI fragments and , you see a process that could ONLY come into existence by INTELLIGENT DESIGN ; not luck ! Cutting & Pasting the d.n.a. like a miniature Pierre Cardin Tailor, is self-evidently IMPOSSIBLE to be, by but Blind Luck… th-cam.com/video/yqESR7E4b_8/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/TEQMeP9GG6M/w-d-xo.html More INTELLIGENT DESIGN accepted >>> th-cam.com/video/fqiXgtDdEwM/w-d-xo.html Here is the Scientific Comedian AGAINST Darwinism; Dr D.Berlinski th-cam.com/video/puJnrZW6E14/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/S89IskZI740/w-d-xo.html AND, here is a scientific video revealing the huge problems of Evolution Theory, that a 15 year old can understand >>> th-cam.com/video/VUZna4aA1fQ/w-d-xo.html ooo000ooo Here is a short document, explaining that aTheism is a very poor explanation for the existence of the Universe >>> www.bibleprobe.com/thermodynamics.htm Last but not least on this list, I give you below Dr William Lane Craig, pointing out to Chris Hitchens, that mathematically only a Miracle ! could have created Humankind, therefore establishing the existence of the Miracle-MAKER, God-on-High… th-cam.com/video/NOJRSmrrM0o/w-d-xo.html Dear Friend, IF YOU HAVE STUDIED all I have supplied above, you then KNOW that pure Darwinism is a Dead-Man-Walking… DEAD like a Dodo… kept alive like a corpse on life-support machine… IF Evolution is happening at all, then THE ONLY WAY it can be happening , is through GUIDANCE BY GOD a.k.a Guided Evolution , or Theistic Evolution >>> en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theistic_evolution So… do you wish to find God ??? ??? ??? HERE are some short UNCONVENTIONAL videos, to help you find, The Supreme Being, a.k.a. God-on-High… th-cam.com/video/1mFRUGDY8Ao/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/xVUvEy8BbkU/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/Bsel8hEp4HM/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/pHn2zFU6-zY/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/7FEykDoaTHg/w-d-xo.html Here is The Bhagavad Gita, for good measure… th-cam.com/video/pqZqfTOxFhY/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/6mltFaiT9Gw/w-d-xo.html en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhagavad_Gita th-cam.com/video/8g90E9nBnyE/w-d-xo.html Here is The Gospel of John, in audio book & movie form >>> th-cam.com/video/47OkuvT5JFo/w-d-xo.html HERE is my own “hand-made” video : ) th-cam.com/video/gdcOGFUQAag/w-d-xo.html Have a Nice Day : ) from The All-Seeing Eye … P.S. The Judaeo-Christian Bible was written over millennium ; the further back in time you go, the less accurate it is. The New Testament therefore, being most recent, is most accurate. Events such as Noah’s Ark ; Noah was probably a Carpentry Genius who figured out how to rapidly convert houses & barns into a huge Floating Barge, thereby surviving a nasty, deadly flood. Wild animals too probably clambered on to this Barge… thereby the Legend of Noah’s Ark.. Noah’s Ark probably “saved the world” of ONE large river plain ; NOT the entire Earth ! Jonah, was probably rescued by a Dolphin cetacean NOT a Whale, And probably lived ON its back, not IN its mouth but FROM its mouth the Dolphin may have given Jonah , fish to eat at sea… EVERYTHING written in our Bible, is rooted in SOME Truth or other, albeit perhaps not literally exactly so… To understand, you really sometimes need to… THINK OUTSIDE THE BOX !!!
@@metalguru9333 Fortunately we can see evolution in action by using the Drosophila fruit fly for experimentation. You may not want to believe it and so you choose a few people or videos that agree with your argument but the huge majority of scientists do not agree with you. The scientists who claim that evolution is not real have not proved anything using scientific method and replicable experiments and data. Claiming that the New Testament is accurate because it was the most recent is laughable. By that logic the Quran is more accurate. It may not be Judeo-Christian but it is the last in the Abrahamic books. When you have to twist the words of god to fit the new world then you are clutching at straws really. Gods word would not have to be interpreted it would be clear and succinct. Using probably is not a good way to make an argument. But much love to you for whatever you believe if it makes you feel good.
@@pttransamdriver1999 If people are proud of their religion and truly believe it, they should be able to justify and defend it. Truth is, there is little left in religion that can be defended or justified...and the spreading of dogmatic lies has been getting old for 2,000 years for everyone else...
Dawkins is 100% right. But that host put Brandon and Dawkins in a very awkward situation. He shouldn't have lead them into a debate if they weren't prepared for it or get a chance to finish it.
John 1 King James Version 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. God loves you so much that He sent his only begotten Son to die on the cross to pay for your sins. If you believe and put your trust in Jesus Christ, that He died on the cross to pay your sin debt and that He rose again on the third day, you will be saved. once you are saved, you will not die in your sins and be damned to hell for eternity. God will remove your sins and your soul will be washed clean with the blood that Jesus Christ shed for us on the cross. your own good works will not get you into heaven. Jesus Christ did all of the work for you, all you have to do is believe and put your trust in Him and He will save you. Ephesians 1:13 King James Version 13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,. Jesus Christ is coming back very soon and we all have to be ready. I pray in Jesus Christ's mighty name that you be saved.
@@eliwalker6245 i prefer the mantra of the Jedi Code: There is no emotion, there is peace. There is no ignorance, there is knowledge. There is no passion, there is serenity. There is no chaos, there is harmony. There is no death, there is the Force.[8] and much proof there is that the Jedi code exists it does. as much proof as of any "god"
Well, he didn't intend for there to be a debate in the scheduling (clearly) and did apologize for it. Dawkins was unaware of the time constraint and therefore started the debate.
The first time I saw this I was really impressed by how warm Dr. Dawkins is towards Brandon Flowers towards the end of the conversation right before he leaves to prep for the band’s set. He had just finished saying some things that were probably deeply offensive to Brandon Flowers, and yet I was struck by the way he turned that around and showed real manners. What a cool, sharp guy.
Do not trust in your own understanding..man's undertanding of things are too limited that it is unwise to risk your one and only for something you are not 100 % sure about. You haven't gone to the other side to say with certainty that there is no spiritual realm, that there is no God. On the other hand, I and many others have seen and experienced God in the spiritual realm. So give it the benefit of the doubt , my friend..for your soul's sake.
@@mikeygarcia8271 thanks buddy, I appreciate the spirit you’re displaying, but I fear you’re wasting your effort. I don’t believe there’s any evidence to support the idea that there’s an ineffable spirit in human beings (a soul) so I’m not concerned about eternity because I’ll be dead. And of course I don’t believe in any gods, again because there’s just no objective evidence. Thanks for your thoughts, I’m not trying to offend you, but I just don’t want you to waste any energy on me and I don’t want to give the impression that I want to hear about your faith. Hope you are doing well 😊
@@B3ARCAT I saw Him that's why I am here to raise the alarm..the spiritual realm is real.I used to be an agnostic but after that vision of Jesus on top of a hill..I am a changed man.He is real..man.He is real.
@@mikeygarcia8271 I'm 100% confident that your god does not exist and there is no spooky "other side" that you've been told about by people who have never been there either. There is absolutely no chance you're going to convince me that I'm just too dumb to understand so I should bet on me not being smart enough. LOL get real. You believe the dumbest shit imaginable.
He doesn't really care that he offended him, he acts that way at the end because he got to have his say and Brandon didn't have the "time" to give a response and he recognises that is unfair, regardless of the nonsense he would have undoubtedly spewed.
@@alexf7377 lol no no 🤦🏻♂️ hahah... they always have the guests play...on the real though, dude is one of this gens top innovators and song writers. Just like you don’t get the killers without the strokes, you don’t get the 2010s indy rock without Brandon flowers. ✌🏻 guys and gals (I don’t think too many gals watch debates between dawkins and musicans (borderline false advertising though with the amount of time he was actually up there)
Looking pissed at 2:39, starting to squirm shortly after. 3:13 when he admits that he is not one of the experts who have studied the Book of Mormon... starting to sweat, wishing he weren't there...
“You should do your research", said the pop singer to the professor of evolutionary biology; saved by the bell...
Hi Mrs. Beaver, research indeed! For me it's been 45 years, on par with Sir Richard Dawkins.
Many naturalists argue, some quite vehemently, that religion is ultimately evil, by which I suppose they mean unadaptive. At the same time, evolutionary psychologists claim religious behavior is a result of evolution. Evolutionary dynamics allows a feature that is adaptively neutral to co-evolve as an accidental correlate or by-product of an advantageous feature. Gould calls such features "spandrels" after the supposedly unplanned spaces between arches.6 But, how can religion be both adaptively neutral, and ultimately unadaptive? This is another mystery of the naturalist faith.
If spiritual longings evolved in the same way as our desires for food, drink, sex and knowledge, how could those longings be incapable of fulfilment? Imagine two genetic lines, one of which spends significant time and resources searching for mucta, which does not exist, and another like it in all respects except for the mucta-drive. Cleary, the second line will out-compete the first. For such evolutionary competition, we need the two variants, each able to pass its mucta-desire trait on to is heirs.
If we take mucta to be God, the naturalist hypothesis points to the demise of spirituality. Is this hypothesis viable? There are atheists who profess no spiritual longings, and they tend to pass their position on to their children. So, while the preconditions for the evolutionary demise of spirituality exist, theists are not an extinct variant, but the majority of the population. So, spirituality is adaptive. Its adaptiveness is confirmed by the correlation of spiritual behavior with health, psychological well-being and longevity.7 Thus, if evolutionary psychology correctly accounts for the development of behavior, including spiritual behavior, it is hard to see how the quest for God could be baseless. At the very least, naturalists attacking religion and spirituality are working to reduce human fitness.
7. Hummer, et al. (1999), "Religious Participation and U.S. Adult Mortality." See also ScienceDaily (1999), "Research Shows Religion Plays a Major Role in Health, Longevity." Maselko, et al. (2006), "Religious Service Attendance and Decline in Pulmonary Function in a High Functioning Elderly Cohort." See also ScienceDaily (2006a), "Go to Church and Breathe Easier." Maselko, et al. (2008), "Religious Service Attendance and Spiritual Well-Being are Differently Associated with Risk of Major Depression," See also ScienceDaily (2006), "Weekly Religious Attendance Nearly as Effective as Statins and Exercise in Extending Life."
God, Science & Mind: The Irrationality of Naturalism by Dennis F. Polis, Ph.D. The psalmist is right, but I'd also like to add the few opening seconds I watched of this video was the best I've ever seen of Dr. Dawkins. He was polite, warm, open, and honest about what he was born into, his parents baptizing him instead of that trite bullshit slogan his legions of followers live and die by, "We're all born atheist." Sir Richard Dawkins admitted he was a holy Christian until age 15 following in his parents saintly footsteps. Right on Sir!
@Darrin Ram "Thank you for admitting you're on my side." I'm your necessitating antecedent, we can't both exist and be on your side; that's why I can't ever be "atheist," I'd need *God* to be one!
Hey Darrin, is this your first day on the internet, is eleven the age you reached for your parents consent?
@Serbian Beaver but... are there any TRUE atheist musicians? I feel you have to have some spiritual acceptance to express the transcendent truth
David Lee Yeah man, I see your point, although i don’t really agree, but don’t get me wrong, I just thought it was a funny and awkward moment; i like Flowers and his music, but I think that the Mormon religion is a laugh.
Our Secret Lord A bit much don’t you think? Writing a whole academic-ish essay just to answer a comment clearly meant as a joke, by some individual using a drunk looking Pokemon puking fire as a profile picture.
Brandon's PR manager: " get him out of there now"
Such a gifted human being, living in a mental prison.
Joseph Smith was a known fraud and womanizer, but brainwashed Brandon is going to set the record straight.
@@JamesRichardWiley He's not imprisoned, his life isn't governed by Joseph Smith, but by belonging to an extraordinarily close knit, large, and vibrant family and community, while being a successful musician, he doesn't need to be patronised.
@@arianakhan6665 "Patronised"? Mormonism is utterly ridiculous and its "prophet" was a convicted con man. Religiously credulous, brainwashed fools will believe any bullshit then demand "respect" for their nonsense.
Whether or not he has a "close knit family" is completely irrelevant to the "truth" of this "religion.
American religious beliefs would be hilarious if the subject wasn't so serious.
hugh Jass>> I think you meant close KNIT family. And also, if you think it's only American religious beliefs that are laughable, you don't really know what you're talking about. Do you think Hinduism and Islam are the real truth?
@@banishedfromthedwarfplanet530 all religion is nonsense, regardless of however many typos you point out.
Would love to see Prof Dawkins take on Tom Cruise and Scientology.
Anjo SixtyEight tom would just disappear in a pile of dust
Be like Cardi B vs Andy Ruiz
Not a debate with Tom Cruise?
David Miscavige should be the one to debate with the Prof but I doubt Miscavige would have the balls to come out of hiding for the debate.
Tom Cruises head would explode lmao
@@secondhandguru3558
Tom Cruise is protected by the god Xenu who lives in a far away galaxy.
I'm curious why Mr Lucas or Mr Spielberg haven't picked up the movie rights to scientology.
Dawkins is so level, doesn't take it personal, highly intelligent and so quick thinking, yet objective and logical. Respect.
While this is true he suffers, albeit to a lesser extent, from the same issues as Hitchens. Hitchens straw-man’s the religious arguments. Dawkins does not straw-man but does not ever accept a religious premise and the debunk it. He just claims there’s an alternative way of viewing things but it is by no means a smoking gun to his opponent. Always great to listen to him though. He is much more respectable and peaceful than Hitchens.
@@stephenpappanastos7885 You mean you're religious and you don't like what Hitchens ever said. At least be honest, here.
@@TonyEnglandUK I like a lot of Hitchens… and Dawkins… that’s why I can distinguish between the two…
@@stephenpappanastos7885 But are you religious?
@@TonyEnglandUK Dawkins is honest in his views. Hitchens was a warmongering fake.
This is the most bizarre line-up to a talk show I've seen
Having the guy from ABBA on really made me laugh.
loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooool
Absolutely !
If I were in the position to confront Dawkins, I would have crushed him. Anyone can testify to that by reading my book, "The guide of the post-cataclysmic Catholic", a philosophy of history theguideofthepostcataclysmiccatholic.blogspot.com/2020/10/the-guide-of-post-cataclysmic-catholic_22.html
They don't have many celebrities in scandinavia 😂
LMAO was just thinking the same thing
That awkward moment when your PhD is older than the guy you're debating
Best comment here people
lol
Older not a little but by double young man's age.
Holy shit forreal Richard Dawkins seems to have been here since forever lmfao.
@Kakashi Hatake they are aall good arguments
Was Brandon not briefed before coming on here??
“ yeah just come on this obscure show, promote the new single, have a bit of a light chat... oh and Richard Dawkins will be wheeled out to completely dismantle your entire belief system and world view”
Haha poor bastard
His booking agent was so fired.
🤣🤣🤣👍
@La Hire “Don’t stop believing “. Lol
@La Hire There are many who are provoked by and take issue with things Dawkins says, and as a man of scientific integrity and an outspoken supporter of free speech, Dawkins seems to welcome challenges to his views that are intellectually driven, but to call a scientist who, outside of his research, has helped inspire and educate potentially millions of people around the world, an 'idiot' just because you disagree with him, is (ironically) what I'd call idiotic 😂
I actually feel sorry for Brandon here. It seems like he was caught off guard and wasn’t told he was going to be debating Dawkins. Although I find his beliefs silly, he otherwise comes across as a very nice guy. And he wrote some of the best songs of my youth.
Dawkins explained that he was asked to come onto the show to debate with Brandon about religion and Brandon was told he was to come onto to the show to talk about The Killers’ new album which is why Dawkins seems a little over-aggressive and Brandon looks blindsided. It was a miscommunication from the show producers.
Yeah man, imagine going to the pub with some entry level opinion and then fucking richard dawkins is there and you think Jesus, I wasn't prepared for this.
Mormons in general are known for being very nice people.
I actually don’t feel sorry for Brandon Flowers. In addition to being a devoted husband and father - he fronts one of the most successful bands of the 21st century.
And it’s safe to say that the fact that you find his beliefs to be silly means nothing to him.
Dawkins did apologise, he genuinely didn't know who he was or why he was there. The show set him up, but I can see the funny side here, because I'm Mr Brightside.
Imagine telling Richard Dawkins that he should do his research. Lol
I was so angry that a “celebrity singer” had the audacity to say that to Richard Dawkins....what a complete tent peg!
🤣🤣🤣😂😂😂
maybe he should, he's an evolutionary biologist not here to tell us how everything came to existence
Lovely
He is young and good looking so he has the who the ef are you attitude
He doesn't look a thing like Jesus, but he talks like a gentleman.
maybe if he trimmed his eyebrows a bit
Tune
Hahaha nice
what song is that?
@@davidigleniec2483 when You Were Young
Former Mormon here. I've seen that look in Brandon's eyes before. Knowing in your core that you're wrong but standing up for the Church regardless.
👍👍Wow. I’ve seen that look in Mormons too. You’re spot on!!!
Not true millions of Mormons are very happy and successful and happily believe in the gospel. This guy thinks human science is the maximum authority. How closed minded. There is more than we don’t know.
carol m 👍
Manny Santiago 👍
Livhappy and yet Mormon leaders claim ultimate authority without a shred of empirical evidence. I’ll stick with science.
now that's a real gentleman....to disagree and still be polite and have respect.
And flat out lie about Joseph Smith being convicted as a “conman”. So virtuous.
@@YOHONOMOTO So Smith wasn't arrested over 40 times, and charged with dozens of criminal actions and civil suits?
The way Dawkins looks at people is hilarious lol. It's like he's really really trying to figure out why people are so dumb.
👍
@Never Ashamed Again Ministries I can tell that your a guy who won't change his beliefs no matter what i say to you and I respect that. So I wish not to argue with you on this. But science is an ever changing enterprise. The longer we live the more we discover and the more our theories change. Dawkins would be the first guy to tell you that.
Or maybe why people are cleverer than him
@Never Ashamed Again Ministries I just got an aneurysm reading that.
@Never Ashamed Again Ministries Bro chill I was talking about the grammar not the subject matter xD
I want to see a debate between Richard Dawkins and Kanye West
🤣 omfg!! That would be one hell of a conversation!
I don't think Kanye would realise what was going on.
hahahahahahaaa
I love kanye but he would get rolled
Why do you want dawkins to have another stroke?
No way he randomly had to leave. The host totally had someone from his team screaming in his ear to make him leave.
Exactly !!!!🤣🤣🤣
He had to meet up with the band.
This never came to mind, thanks for sharing! I can see now that 'how' the presenter told Brandon Flowers to leave made it all that more suspicious.
Yeah.. the band surely would have been soundchecked before the show started. Brandon could rock up to the at the last second and start playing, they're not a high school band. Unless of course I'm wrong.. I wasn't there. lol
The manager of The Killers probably ripped the mic from the hands of one of the shows employees off set and began screaming into the host earpiece, “Get FLOWERS off the stage immediately! Take FLOWERS off the STAGE NOW!!!!!!” The host forgetting Brandon’s last name is like, “What the fuck, there are no fucking flowers on the set!?! Why the fuck do they keep saying that...???” All the while carrying on a deep conversation with RICHARD FUCKING DAWKINS!!! All the while wondering who the fuck hates flowers so badly then....OH This Flower! Oh ok! Hey you...rockstar man, go rehearse.” And manages to keep a straight face and didn’t lose track of the conversation. I’m impressed! The host deserves an award and a raise!!
I respect Richard Dawkins for being honest about his views and not kowtowing the pressure to be diplomatic on these issues. While i'm not such a die hard atheist as him, we need more people like him who espouse their views with logical ferocity and less people who are liabile to be offended and demand people maintain their safe space where they can't be challenged because it would be considered 'mean'.
He wasn’t very logical about why people believe though, talking about lack of education, having admitted just a few seconds earlier that plenty of professors of biology are religious
So, what, are you against religious freedom?
@@sadem1045 Not at all, people can believe whatever they want. But people shouldn't tiptoe around religious people and be afraid to hold their views up to scrutiny in the name of social sensitivity.
@@-Blackberry Hmm, okay. What do you mean by safe spaces, though? To be clear, I'm an Agnostic Druid, not a Mormon.
@@sadem1045 By which I mean the modern tendency for creating environments where people cannot argue to the full extent of their viewpoint because it would get to the stage of being deemed offensive. If a religious person enters a debate about religion, an athiest should be allowed to point out the flaws in their theology with uttermost ruthlessness and people shouldn't villainise it.
Brandon looks like he's going to cry listening to dawkins.
He actually does
PSYKEY
It’s like he’s never ever considered any of the arguments against his position.
I mean, to be fair, it is upsetting to be told your whole life is based on a foundation of lies. That being said, sometimes the truth hurts. And few are prepared to listen without being emotional about something like that.
Marc young
But it’s not like he’s stuck in Utah with most of the Mormons, having never left or met anyone from outside that community.
He is without excuse to have not done the most basic research on the way he lives his whole life.
@@nick260682 Right!? haha. Especially with mormonism, is so obviously charlatanry.
Being offended is NOT a goddamned argument peoples.
Sure it is. It's a fact isn't it? Is being in pain an argument also or is that just like some silly mental construct that'll fade away with proper edumacation....
?
😍
If it is okay for homosexuals and transgenders, then it should be okay for others.
"Facts dont care about your feelings" - Ben Shapiro
@@MicrophoneHell-ec3bm We're talking about supernatural beliefs. Not biological components like sexuality, dumbass.
“Can you play music for this segment?”
“Sure”
“Great! Also here’s Richard Dawkins telling you why your religion is false in front of millions of people”
lmao
@GUTS This is fantastic and I'm stealing it.
Lol
@GUTS You nailed it...
@@austing.8870
Thou Shalt Not Steal😁
Unless you have the GUTS to do so
Love how polite Richard Dawkins is. He spits facts but has a kind and polite demeanour.
My favorite part was when Dawkins and Flowers absolutely disagree, but they shake hands and move on.
We don't all agree, but we can respect each other. Great moment of humanity.
doesnt make sense does it, if you believe im going to hell and i believe youre crazy then how can we agree to disagree? its not a discussion about sports or your favorite movie. its a discussion about you and your faith
@@19382q The Serpent is skilled in debate! How else could he win the Souls to Hell race?
@@stevemitz4740 idk wtf you're talking about
@@19382q It's Bible stuff that your Satan inspired, Democrat/ Liftist induced, Dumb-down education failed to teach you & most about! Satan will soon show you how it works! I see you couldn't lucidely respond to Dr. Peter Stoners book, "Science Speaks"!! [Facts] Facts don't comport to your Godless, Faith in man, based, dumb-down education! The topic of so many book out now!
@@stevemitz4740 Why would people need convincing to become the same race as someone who can survive lightning and throwing stars to Earth?
No matter how strong your faith is,
How does anyone have the balls to tell an evolutionary biologist "Do your research" ???
Is this subject Mormonism? Yes, of course. Therefore, why is Richard Dawkins not required to research?
@@richardholmes7199 because Joseph Smith was a con man?
@@tatian1547 No, he doesn't know all, but he certainly knows more than you or the man with the silly hat
@@tatian1547 I think it's normal to be angry at an institution that has contributed to regressive behaviours for the whole history of humanity
Luiz Vartuli that’s hard for dumb cunts to understand
Out of all people he chose Richard Dawkins to tell "do your research" I mean really dude?
I mean he has no qualifications in religious studies at all. Literally none.
@@yes-wo7qn What does having qualification in religious studies have to do with "doing one's research"? Wouldn't it just be extremely hypocritical, then, considering the guy is just a singer with only a high school graduation? Surely what matters is whether the argument holds up to the research, rather than what your qualifications are?
@@yes-wo7qn well religious studies isn't much of a qualification now is it?
As a scholar and member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Mormon), Dawkins really doesn't throw out anything substantial here. His claims are actually easily refuted which leads me to assume that he really hasn't done his research. The whole "con man" act is not grounded in reality.
@@ferrellfamily742 Arguments not being grounded in reality isn't much of a problem for you though. You are a mormon after all.
It was very refreshing to see such a discussion remain largely civil.
This was only civil because Professor Dawkins was desperately scared of Flowers request for him to play drums. Atheists are all the same.
I think Dawkins would say "if the religious person wants to believe their religion purely because it makes them feel good, there's no issue. But if he wants to say it's also TRUE, that's when it's wrong." Truth claims are different from _comforting claims_
As as Muslim I agree with that, Do research, Look up historic facts, And ofcourse reach out to the Teachers and Scholars of that perticular Religion/Subject. I think one should learn every religion and learn about every culture and just respect one other as a fellow Human Being first, everything else comes after!
@@friskyguy00 I definitely agree with you about respecting each others beliefs. However, I think one of the problems is the teachings of particular religions. How is one supposed to respect and coexist with a religion, when said religion teaches to kill non believers? Who would be accepting to a person who wants to kill you because of your beliefs or lack thereof. If two opposing religions accepted one another's teachings, wouldn't that be rebuking their own religion/teachings? I honestly believe most religions are either ancient attempts at understanding the world and life. Or they're stories conjured up by man to control man using his fear of the unknown.
As Christopher Hitchens said:-
I hope I've made it clear, that I'm perfectly happy for people to have these toys, and to play with them at home, and hug them to themselves and so on, and to share them with other people who come around and play with the toys. So that's absolutely fine. They are not to make me play with these toys. I will not play with the toys. Don't bring the toys to my house, don't say my children must play with these toys, don't say my toys might be a condom - here we go again - are not allowed by their toys. I'm not going to have any of that.
@Harry Waddington you can't of course. but it gets to the heart of his issue. It's not the "feel good" or "pragmatic" aspects of religion it's the truth claims. So for hosts to keep bringing up "what about the good it does" is irrelevant to Dick's point.
@Harry Waddington No i'm pointing out that it's sill to bring up "how helpful religion is" it's basically like (as my original comment says) separating truth from pragmatics. You can't believe something that you're fine with claiming is false. It was tongue in cheek in way
I sincerely appreciate the uploader's decision to not use "DESTROYS"in the title. I cannot stand such titles as it undermines legitimate discussions and also makes the videos harder to share.
I am an atheist.
+BatmaNZ:
I agree. Such titles show that people are not interested in talking. They just want to burn people.
As a Christian I absolutely agree
@Chairman Lmao
LMAO!!!!
It depends on the channel and its objective.
On a slightly separate note, Skavlan strikes me more, as a comfy sitcom presenter, than a bold journalist asking the difficult questions.
He did, though.
“I don’t care about what’s consoling, I care about what’s true”
That’s the way to go
What's true?
That's the journey we're all on isn't it? I've found the Truth is the God of the Bible. He is Truth and the Truth will set you free (John 8:31-21). So know and follow Him. Other's may come to a different conclusion. However, If we're open minded, honest with ourselves and seek the Truth we shall find it. Like Dawkins, I also don't care about a truth, their truth, my truth our just any old truth. If objective Truth is exclusive by definition (and it is) we need to find The Truth (Ravi Zacharias)!
Try talking to Jesus and giving Him the space to reply. Enjoy the journey.
Lord Voldemort true is something that you can consistently be confirmed by empirical evidence. God almost certainly doesn’t exist so I can’t believe in something that has very little chances of being real sincere there is no consistent confirmation so no empirical evidence plus it’s story is a logical fallacy
Benjamin Paroz
I’m not following an evil entity. The fact that you do really says allot about you personally.
People always try to trap Richard Dawkins in debates but it’s impossible
Trying to argue with an Atheist is like trying to play chess with a chimpanzee.
You can’t trap him or Christopher Hitchens. They’re too intelligent.
@@AdventureSam- are you referring to the Christopher Hitchens who smoked cigarettes and abused alcohol - which led to his early death based on life expectancy averages for his race and country of origin?
If so - perhaps he wasn’t so smart after all…
@@faviusarthum5038- maybe…
Regardless - based on science - it’s impossible to trap a person in a debate if that person is dead.
Science says that dead people don’t engage in debates with the living…
@@faviusarthum5038perhaps he had denied himself the blessing of a reason for living.
I love how even though Dawkins was adamant about his educated viewpoint, he realized that it was insulting that Brandon had to leave without the right to respond or argue his side. The professor profusely apologized upon realising the singer had to leave. And that's a sign of how moral the guy is no matter what some people think. The humanity in him makes me appreciate the man immensely.
How do you determine what is moral and what is not moral?
@@alexbakerloo1979 our education on morality.
@@AviChetriArtwork what if your educators were, for example, racist? What would be the basis for a higher objective moral framework to prove your educators wrong?
@@alexbakerloo1979 well it would be difficult to not to be racist. Which explains why racism was so prevelant in the past. Morality is relative. Our compassion is virtuous today because it is mutually benefial.
@@AviChetriArtwork sounds like utilitarianism is the basis for your moral framework then? Two questions: 1) what objectively tells you this a morally superior to survival of the fittest? 2) what do you do with utlitiarianism when it doesn't protect minorities?
Whoever got Brandon out of there saved his ass from something he never would have recovered from
Cuz freaks KNOW!
Dude ur so right! Dawkins would have proceded to DESTROY Brandon. No one is gonna win a religious conversation over Richard or Christopher
@@texastoast5202 ISN'T THE SPIRITUAL WORLD FULL OF BULLSHIT AND DUMBFUCKS?
😂😂😂
@@martinkent333 and yet the one sat here is considerably richer than Dawkins. One is scientifically versed, the other is musically versed. The only difference between the two is that all Dawkins has to show for his work is theory and opinion - which, even as an athiest, is all his beliefs are.
"The true enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, but the illusion of knowledge".
-Stephen Hawkins
Pretty unecessary for me to point that out since everyone knows it's from him
@@robertimmanuel577 This quote can be most reliably credited to Daniel J. Boorstin. And Stephen Hawking was actually, IMO, in dire need of understanding this quote.
@@scottclaudet - Hawkins? Why is it so difficult for people to remember his name? We don't misspell Richard Dawkins.
Indeed it is, and knowledge is based on understanding text not taking the literal meaning, but understanding it and only from understanding what the text is really saying then knowledge you shall truly have.
@@stephenbermingham6554 - what knowledge?
Dawkins is an amazing person. He genuinely wants to debate people but is never hateful and is always polite.
I mean he wasn’t even there to debate he was just promoting his band and then Dawkins just comes after him. It’s honestly embarrassing at that point. Flowers is a singer in a rock band and not a theologian or apologist.
@@BigPapiCaponehe came after Mormonism, not Brandon. Which is totally legitimate.
Most dangerous ideologues are charming on a personal level. Adolf Hitler was, Joseph Stalin was, Richard Dawkins is.
You worship at the altar of Richard Dawkins.
Congrats!
Such a nonsense comment and obviously designed as such .
It's obvious Richard Dawkins wanted to give him a chance to defend his position so they could have a conversation. He opened it up for that and had no idea the man had to leave, which shut down the possibility for discussion while leaving Dawkins with somewhat of the last word. He didn't want that. He wanted an actual conversation. Incredible admirable.
Thanks for seeing this too. Many people in the comments said Brandon cried and didn't say anything therefore he didn't have anything substantial to say, when in reality he didn't even really have a chance
Religious people believe the doctrine because they were taught to, I do not believe the
unproven, practically unbelievable theories because my common sense told me, no one had to influence or convince me.
I can stump the religious people better than Dawkins. Simply ask the Brandon Flowers if he has ever had a wet fart i..e shit his pants. And then asking him if he still believes in an intelligent designer.
It’s obvious that Richard Dawkins will never go up against someone who is at the top of their field in religious studies. He’s actually a known fucking coward when it comes to this. He prefers the less educated so he can make himself seem more so. I’m just waiting for him to debate some like William Lane Craig so Craig can do to Dawkins what Peterson did to Harris…. End him.
@@VinnySmiles01 Like the religious freaks
who have a rhetoric of saying what they
know is true, but have no evidence. They
ramble on about a 2000 year old theory.
There are many aspects of religion
which do not make sense to a normal
person. The people who know best are
those pastors who extort millions from gullible people. They shout about how god will punish sinners, but are themselves the
greatest sinners. They know that if there was a god he would definitely punish
them, they just keep on pushing the great
big lie.
I like Brandon Flowers but I find it ludicrous that a musician tells a professor to do research😂
Dawkins is a journalist
@@youngweezybaby3 He's an English ethologist, evolutionary biologist, author and helps the ignorant :)
@@millersmash1000 He is a journalist that reports on English ethologists, evolutionary biologists, authors foundings and rears them to fit his narrative.
@@youngweezybaby3 you don't understand how to define peoples work. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Dawkins
Just because somebody makes journalism a part of their work doesn't mean they are just a journalist. This is a very lazy and dishonest way to discredit someone
@@ninjaturtletyke3328 he simply cant deal with the truth so has to try and demean his work instead, a tactic trump uses. Also the blind religious.
My daughter's puppy died. We buried it together and planted sunflower seeds on top. I told her that her puppy might not be with us anymore but through her loss the new flowers would grow strong (and they did, they were the biggest sunflowers we have ever grown in our garden).
Wow that is very sweet and neutral way of doing it. Not gonna lie i might copy your idea ;p
Beautiful.
3:35 "You have to understand. Most people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inured and so hopelessly dependent on the system that they will fight to protect it." - Morpheus
probably*
It started out with a diss...how did it end up like this?
@Dorset Deb totalitarianism isnt atheism. Just another person to worship.
It was only a diss
Why does this comedy gold not have more likes????
It was only a diss... IT WAS ONLY A DISS
toughlove80 that’s show biz, baby.
Next week on Skavlan:
A boxing match between Mike Tyson and a tulip!
LOL. Love your comment.
I'm actually sat on the toilet laughing my head off at this
Adam Weightman 🤣
😂🤣🤣🤣 can't control the laughter. The best comment in here.
"Ya but I bob n weeve with the wind" said the Tulip.
This was like watching a kid being told that Santa Claus does not exist.
We all can be sure of a person's existence who has a birthday and a date of passing (into glory for Claus), and Saint Nicholas The *Wonderworker,* the Archbishop of Myra, has both.
😂😂...The kid was supper offended. That's what happens when you believe in something you cant prove.
@@sagesmotivationaltips7453 You can't possibly investigate the Mormon persuasion thoroughly, then turn around and say that the church isn't true.
@@richardholmes7199 Or we could claim we don't make claims, we reject another's claim, but that whole thing can't be a claim we're rejecting. You know, critical thinking and reasoning skills.
He knows when you've been bad or good so be good for goodness' sake 😉
I could listen to Richard Dawkins for hours.
I could listen to The Killers for hours. They have several hit songs but Quiet Town is a masterpiece.
The verse about the carnage caused by opioid overdoses is powerful.
I do
I could listen to Brandon for hours if you ply me with plenty of alcohol.
To be honest theres something kind of sad about a grown man being told his life is a lie, especially on public TV against an intellectual powerhouse. It's painful to watch. Brainwashing kids with nonsense is a cruel thing to do.
The 'pop star' should be more aware he's a grown man for fuck sake
He has absolutely no excuse, as a grown adult who has travelled the world, not to have considered that his beliefs are nonsense. He literally looked shocked by the very notion.
You can pinpoint the moment all his life's beliefs come crashing down.
I agree.
.....not as sad as your comment here - unfortunately. Who is brainwashed exactly....?
I absolutely love the faces Richard pulls. He's not offended by anything being said. He's not angry. He's not trying to make someone understand his point. He just literally doesn't understand why people think the way they think.
I felt sorry for the other dude
Mindlessly following the words in one ancient book, is the opposite to enlightenment.
Gee idk maybe because everyone has different views
not until the joke's on Richard that is, watch your hero get owned: th-cam.com/video/-AQvWrX-mKg/w-d-xo.html
Watch Dr John Lennox tear Dawkins apart on TH-cam time and time again. Dawkins left with nothing everytime and just gets more passive lol!
"Next up, Rebel Wilson debates Arnold Schwarzenegger on weightlifting technique"
Lol
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
This deserves WAY more likes.
If I were to purchase Richard Dawkins latest book, take it home, and copy it almost word-for-word, so that "My" new book was 95% to 100% the same, And then sell "my" new book, But, with My name in it, Richard Dawkins and his publishing company would sue me for intellectual theft. If I told the judge, "Your Honor, this book is 100% original,... it's mine, I did not steal The intellectual property from Richard, I was hiking in New Mexico and went into a large deep cave, And I found this book about 200' inside the cave underneath some VERY VERY old pottery, And this 100 million year old book just evolved into what it is today." Would the judge believe my story,... No, of course not! In the same way, we should not believe the lie of macro evolution!
(But who knows, Richard Dawkins might lose the case if the judge was his Ex wife Laila Ward 😆)
@@tndiw7264 What the hell 😂😂😂
You have no clue how evolution works, do you?
Thank you. More logic and rationality in the world please 👏
In the clip - Dawkins claims that the world is explained fully by science or will be explained fully by science.
Assuming that any religious person - Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim, Christian, Scientologist, etc. - is illogical and irrational - what exactly has been fully explained by science and what will eventually be fully explained by science?
Hundreds of years after Newton and still so many questions about gravity. There are antibiotics and successful organ transplants - yet the precise causes of something as simple as a common hangover can’t be fully explained by science. Most religions deal with questions about the origins of the universe - yet there are so many unknowns about human anatomy.
There is no evidence that science will fully explain the world. But Dawkins makes this claim. Hmm…
He’s an atheist and yet he holds unprovable beliefs…
And more Dawkins on lead guitar when the band steps up.
The amount of respect Dawkins provides in his counter arguments is admirable on its own 👌
Can I ask you something? Can a people become a nation again after having been dispersed in different parts of the world for more than two thousand years? And in the countries where they were exiled, they were the minority and were heavily persecuted. They were not allowed to secure jobs and were often expelled from their lands..
And throughout the ages, kings, queens, political and religious leaders tried to annihilate them...do you think they could survive as a people? Could they become a nation again and become a powerful force in the region shortly after they reestablish themselves in the land of their forefathers?
And as they tried to rebuild their tiny country, they have to survive the attacks of the neighboring nations that have more well-established armies? Considering they are a small country, with no army at that time, as small as New Jersey with the land mostly dessert, surrounded by enemies who attack them from all sides--- and with hardly any natural resources that even Mark Twain in his diary said that even a cactus was having a hard time to grow in this arid, bone dry and dessicated land ? Will they survive? What do you think?
Sorry, he speaks over Brandon from the outset.
Yeah it’s not his usual “mock them” , “ridicule them” approach is it?
@@ps-bi2sr not really Brandon had no leg to stand on and the audacity and rudeness of him to say check your research when he has for his entire lifetime indicates how wrong you are
@@benhall2235 I don’t think Dawkins does that at all tbh he bases all his arguments on evidence and I open to the fact that if something disproves evolution he’ll accept it so
"I take offense" SO WHAT. That is not an argument. Grow up.
@Carlos Spiceywhiener He did not insult him. He criticized (or insulted if you like) his ridiculous belief. Insulting bad ideas or irrational beliefs is not offensive. Just because you have a belief does not entitle you to special treatment. He needs to grow up.
@Carlos Spiceywhiener No. I don't care if it is offensive or not. It may be. I still don't care. What you are advocating is how a child would view the world. Mockery is one of the best ways to criticize bad ideas and religion is the motherload of bad ideas. Like Hitchens said: taking offense is never an argument. We are still waiting for you to make a rational argument. Shouting "that's offensive" is worthless.
@Carlos Spiceywhiener Poor baby.
You are really hung up on not offending anyone. Dawkins called the so-called mormon bible an obvious fake because of the language it used. He did not say anything about the guy personally. If an adult believed in Santa Claus or that Elvis was still alive, he would be laughed off the stage and called an idiot. So, what's the difference? Faith does not deserve the privilege you are demanding by demanding that it be off-limits to criticism.
@Carlos Spiceywhiener Santa Claus is the SAME---TOTAL BULLSHIT. Of course you can criticize nonbelief. DUH. Jesus fucking christ, man.
@TAOV 13829 That is the problem. Religion breeds narcissism.
That guy looked like he was either gonna cry or kill him.😳
Cocaine?
Brandon wouldn't kill a fly. Like youre insulting someones beliefs in front of the world. Pretty harsh, he handled it relatively well all things considered haha
@@bustamoveorelse Err no. He looked like the idiot he and all mormons are.
@@markderv yeah he's not that intelligent but who cares? The man's just a singer and he seems like a nice guy.
I think we've come full circle were the edgy atheist who 'destroys' religious people is cringe. Hes religious... so what? If he's not harming anyone, let him do whatever dumb shit he wants
@@bustamoveorelse Don't strawman me, please. Who said I was a coming from an atheist angle? Not all religions are created equal and let's face it, anyone who wears magic underpants deserves all the coating they get.
Such wonderful, reasoned, articulate, considerate, polite responses from Dawkins
Apart from Mr. Dawkins being incredibly smart, he is also quite a gentleman.
Seriously? Dawkins strikes me as condescending and rude. Neil Degrasse Tyson is the one who has the gentleman thing figured out.
A gentleman? Really? He was being rude when he said in front of Brandon that his religión was “fake” it is not educated to make such commentary in front of a person who believes in religion. If Dawkins was a gentleman, he would have respected Brandon’s beliefs and wouldn’t have said anything against his religion.
@@solounusuariomas5574 I disagree. I am an atheist, but what Muslim doesn't think that the Christian religion is "fake". What Christian doesn't think that the Hindu religion is "fake". Is it impolite to state what you believe? Dawkins states his opinions plainly, just as Christians state plainly that they believe that Jesus was resurrected and that he walked on water. If someone say that they believe these things and are offended when anyone tries to contradict them, they are essentially saying that any belief otherwise is fake or wrongheaded, which has been the norm for most of history. Dawkins is more direct in his language, but directness is not rudeness, I would say that what is worse is hiding behind vague sentiments and scripture that is, to say the least, not applicable to fact checking, and asserting that your beliefs are unassailable by the very virtue of their unassailablilty. Richard Dawkins is a gentleman, I however am not, so I say fuck religion, it has done more bad than good and anyone who disagrees is ignorant of history.
Maybe he’s Mr. Brightside!
Adolfo Vazquez So you are defending Mormonism? All other Christians call Mormonism fake, or a cult. Those who’ve been indoctrinated into Mormonism obviously will take offense to this, but the rest of us see that it’s obvious that Joseph Smith was a con man.
"The band would like you to get ready" is the modern equivalent of a shepard's crook pulling a crap actor off stage 🤣
😂😂👍
@Miles Doyle
🙄
Who else laughed when he said Richard should do his research 😂😂😂
Yep, I did. I cannot believe that people can believe tripe like Mormonism or as we see below in the comments Scientology? Both are obviously made up but then so are all the other religions of the world, even the old Roman and Greek gods but most followers of Christianity just sit back and smile at Prof Hawkins logic or write an letter to the local newspaper whilst another followers of other faiths issues death threats even to novelists who writes fiction. Even today if you take a copy of Satanic Verses to some UK cities usually those old mill town in NE and ask people on the streets if the copy you hold up is still divisive and proof of the lack of free speech you will end up attacked. Please don't give me a God or religion, any of them.
I read one comment by a person who tried to denigrate even Dawkins ‘ ability to do research... so ridiculous.
I hate it when people disrespect Dawkins. He is such a gentleman. (And I am a Christian )
Actually Brandon is right on this one. While I do not question Dawkins ability to research, I do question what he looked at. Joseph Smith was in-fact never found guilty of a “con” crime. There was a hearing (not a trial) in 1826 stemming from the disgruntled son (or nephew) of a man who hired Joseph. However the man who hired Joseph said he was more than satisfied with Joseph and actually defended him during the hearing. Obviously, the case was thrown out by the judge. Joseph was never convicted of a crime or “con.” Those are the facts. The faulty facts come from anti-LDS sources who found evidence of a trial (hearing) and concluded that “he was a convicted con man.” He wasn’t. So yes, while Dawkins did research, he did not use reliable resources. This is known as “study bias” and sadly no one is completely immune to this kind of bias. A conclusion was reached without factual evidence. Factual evidence, does in fact show the case was thrown out during a hearing.
@@chrishumphries7489 probably paid off 🤷♀️
Well spoken Richard, no matter what you say the world is full of gullible people who have a need to believe in something as a comfort blanket.
The alarming thing...There are 6 billion of these people allowed to roam free.
@@jamesrobert4106you’re literally the odd ones out lol
Also have u heard of contingency argument and Pascal’s wager
@@Mgbizkut Pascal's wager is a flawed concept. It only permits 2 outcomes as if there isn't endless variables.
The religious can't even decide on a single God. You believe in fairytales and 2000 year old Chinese whispers.
@@jamesrobert4106 I’m a Sikh we believe everyone eventually returns to God so Pascal’s wager stands
And so does contingency argument
U believe in false things I didn’t know there were that many ppl who are slow when contingency argument has disproved atheism
@@Mgbizkut Firstly. Who says your supposed God is the one you think it is? There are a myriad of potential possibilities beyond some human created deity from a story book. That is Pascal's wager disposed of.
The contingency argument is nonsense. There is no definitive that says every being is either necessary to some preordained purpose.
I am not the one here with belief in a mythical being. People with Schizophrenia are deemed insane for the commanding voices they hear in their minds. I would suggest that is no different to people of religious persuasion born into or adopting blind faith in something that mankind had no concept of 2000 years ago.
It is a fraud, accepted by slow of mind. "When the first conman, met the first fool.".
'The band would like you to join them' more like he's had the producer in his ear telling him to get the guy out of there before he explodes
... and he'll start embarrassing himself! 👍🤘
I was thinking the same thing, never does that happen where the host will tell a guest the band wants you to leave now lol
@La Hire 🤡
@La Hire you're the only clown here dictating your life from a 2000 year old fake book
"I didn't realize you had to leave" either did he.
*Neither.
@@banishedfromthedwarfplanet530 I was going to write "he didn't either", but it didn't seem right. Thank you for clearing up my either/neither/didn't either/didn't neither/ did not neither/ did never neither either debacle.
You said that already
neither not either.
@@007ptb007 I was going to write "he didn't either"
That _is_ what you wrote.
Is either/or and neither/nor really that difficult to grasp?
Upon some reflection, considering the issues that SO many people have with two/too/to, your/you're and there/their/they're, I guess grammar is more intuitive for some people compared to others.
you could see how genuinely sorry dawkins was that he had engaged someone in debate who didn't have the time to defend his beliefs.
It is a shame. Dawkins is so easy to crush.
Richard Dawkins teaches the universe came from "literally nothing."
Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it.
We can't get anything from "literally nothing." We can't even get science without God. The laws of nature only can come from a Lawgiver, God.
God is the reason for us and all we have.
th-cam.com/video/JiMqzN_YSXU/w-d-xo.html
“However improbable the origin of life might be, we know it happened on Earth because we are here.” -Richard Dawkins.
""There is no evidence for any supernatural being of any kind. So it goes against the spirit of science."
--Richard Dawkins
We only get life from life...the law of biogenesis. We can't get anything without God.
The odds are NOT there.
th-cam.com/video/W1_KEVaCyaA/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/yW9gawzZLsk/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/ddaqSutt5aw/w-d-xo.html
No, the eye did not evolve into various eyes. Your mere chance mutations are absurd.
th-cam.com/video/X7h2HWcTwa4/w-d-xo.html
Even Dawkins admits we can't know what is true because of natural selection...
The God Delusion, “Since we are creatures of natural selection, we cannot totally trust our senses. Evolution only passes on traits that help a species survive, and not with preserving traits that tell a species what is actually true about life.”
Oh, but Dawkins knows what's true about life...killing those who don't meet his expectations for living.
dailycaller.com/2021/05/19/richard-dawkins-down-syndrome-roe-v-wade/
Anthony Flew is considered one of the most prominent atheists, so he retracted his atheism and told us that the universe has a deity with modern scientific evidence, not with thought or dreams and feeling, but after science and modern discoveries about the existence of a Creator. He fell into another problem that the Creator wanted according to his mood
He wanted the Creator to be neither speaking nor hearing, and creating creation in vain
And God informed the Qur’an of this by saying: “Did you think that we created you without a purpose and that you would never return to us?”
? "
God Almighty: ((We will show them Our signs in the horizons and within themselves until it becomes clear to them that it is the truth. But is it not sufficient concerning your Lord that He is, over all things, a Witness?)
But it is logical that this Creator sends a messenger to teach us who he is. And we have to verify the authenticity of the Messenger and what this Messenger calls to?
It transports sperm from the liquid state to the eyes, heart, blood, arteries, and bones. Unconscious nature creates a conscious human being. Then this nature teaches about the importance of the heart and lung, then puts the rib cage, then oxygen, then water, there is sexual desire, and there are the genitals to complete the male and female sexual process. , What coincidence are you talking about, a coincidence that creates the male and the female. All of these are called verses and there are things that complement each other, there is a lung and there is air and there are teeth and stomach and in food and other things and we say that it has no creator!!!
The only question God will ask you is
focus on it
((He said: Did you deny My verses and did not encompass them in knowledge, or what did you do?))
I mean, God Almighty tells you what I told you is a lie and you cannot realize it or understand it
And what in the world have you been doing?
Do you know what your answer is?
((The decree will befall them for what they did wrong, and they will not be able to speak.
If you find yourself in the world without a choice in a great reality we live in, and you go without a choice and a question is the most important
If your destiny is fire, has God wronged you???
Muhammad, may God’s prayers and peace be upon him, is a prophet from the Creator, and before him many prophets did not lie or deceive, and he is the only religion that commands you to worship one Creator who created everything.
First of all, you should know that the religion of all prophets is the worship of one Creator who created everything. Islam today is the only religion that commands you to worship one Creator and not idols, illusions, conjecture or a number of gods. But how do we know that the speech is from God and not from Muhammad, may God bless him and grant him peace? . These are some of the things that comfort your heart and believe that this is a prophet and many of the prophets before him
The Almighty said: (Moreover He comprehended in His design the sky, and it had been (as) smoke)
The smoke confirms that the origin of this universe is inflamed. It is not a lake of water, as was the perception of all philosophies and religions that are based on illusion. This is one of the postulates of modern science today that the sky is condensation of smoke. This fact converted the French scientist Maurice to Islam and wrote a book entitled the Holy Qur’an on the scale of modern science
How did Muhammad, may God bless him and grant him peace, know this fact before?
The Almighty says: ((And the heaven We constructed))
The sky is a building, not a vacuum as it was thought, and this was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics in 2017 that proved it
How did Muhammad, may God bless him and grant him peace, know this fact before?
The Almighty’s saying: ((And the heaven We constructed with strength, and indeed, We are [its] expander.
)).
That is, the sky expands with time. This fact, even in the time of Einstein, was not imagined by anyone and it was proven. And Einstein admitted it and admitted that it was the biggest scientific mistake he made in his life if he believed that the sky was fixed. The Qur’an before Einstein says that the sky expands
fact
Almighty’s saying: :((And We have made the night and day two signs, and We erased the sign of the night and made the sign of the day visible that you may seek bounty from your Lord and may know the number of years and the account [of time]. And everything We have set out in detail.
))
The verse of the night is the moon and the verse of the day is the sun. The Qur'an tells that the sun and the moon were fiery masses. That is, the moon was a fiery mass and was erased, and the verse of the day remained visible to the eyes. Was the moon a fiery mass and extinguished? This is one of the biggest scientific issues discovered about the moon. The moon was already a fiery mass, and NASA issued on its official website a conceptual clip entitled The Evolution of the Moon in the video. In fact, the moon was a fiery mass like the sun, and this is what the Qur’an told about and the truth of modern science.
How did Muhammad, may God bless him and grant him peace, know this fact before?
Almighty’s saying
And you see the mountains thinking that they are rigid, while you will cross as the passage of clouds. [It is] the work of God who has perfected everything. In fact, he knows what you're doing.))
And the verse clearly spoke of a strange phenomenon, which is that the viewer of the mountains appears to him still, that is, they are still, but in fact they are not like that, rather they are in a state of constant movement. And the infidels of Quraish had previously accused our master Muhammad, may God’s prayers and peace be upon him, of madness, and it is likely that their joy was overwhelming when this verse was revealed.
They also found in it, according to their claim, evidence of this madness, and they told the people: How can you believe this man who says that these fixed mountains move like clouds moving in the sky!
And today it is proven that the earth rotates, and with it the mountains, how did Muhammad know that and why is he telling you instead of the matter that makes people consider him crazy? The matter was not from him, but from God.
Almighty’s saying
Those whom Allah (in His plan) willeth to guide,- He openeth their breast to Islam; those whom He willeth to leave straying,- He maketh their breast close and constricted, as if they had to climb up to the skies: thus doth Allah (heap) the penalty on those who refuse to believe)).
After man was able to reach the sky by flying by modern means of transportation, he knew that the higher up in the air, the less oxygen and atmospheric pressure, which causes severe tightness in the chests and the process of breathing. :
How did Muhammad, may God bless him and grant him peace, know this fact before? It was not from him, but from God
Almighty’s saying
Or (the Unbelievers' state) is like the depths of darkness in a vast deep ocean, overwhelmed with billow topped by billow, topped by (dark) clouds: depths of darkness, one above another: if a man stretches out his hands, he can hardly see it! for any to whom Allah giveth not light, there is no light!
Modern sciences have revealed that in the bottom of the deep seas with abundant water - the deep sea - there is great darkness, to the extent that living creatures live in this darkness without visual tools, but live using their other senses such as hearing.
These dark darknesses are not found in the sea water that surrounds the Arabian Peninsula, but rather they have been discovered in the oceans far from it
This verse shows another aspect of the Qur’anic miracle, which is that the sea wave that all people only knew was one wave in the seas.
The verse says there is another wave in the depths of the sea, and divers discovered at the beginning of the twentieth century a fact that was hidden in the depths of the sea, that fact that shows another wave that throws divers into it as it is thrown at swimmers, and this wave was discovered by Scandinavian divers.
I will tell you what the Prophet said. The Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, said: One day the Bedouins who live in the desert will build tall towers, and this is my duty. Go and see where the tallest buildings are and who owns them.
All these and other matters that I have not mentioned indicate that this is a prophet from God. More important than that, as I told you, is the only religion that commands you to worship one Creator, who created everything and before him many prophets.
Say, if you wish, there is no god but God, and that Muhammad is the Messenger of God
speak from the heart
no, nope I didn't see that. I saw Dawkins make a lengthy aggressive statement, and as soon as flowers started to respond Dawkins interrupted him yet again and continued his speech. Dawkins wanted to be heard.
@@AF-dn2bz That's exactly what I saw too. Dawkins was all about his own voice dominating and being in love with his own 'cleverness'. He was never there for genuine conversation - only to 'win' a debate. Comes across a man very much in need of some spiritual growth as he seems to have missed the basics. Brandon however is a man who KNOWS exactly why a piece of music or poetry can bring him to tears. Dawkins ego however will ensure that remains a mystery to him.
@@wendystevens8428 You mean you're a Christian and disapprove of Dawkins not sharing your beliefs. At least be honest here.
Saying "Do your research" without laying down your own argument says everything.
Translation: "I've been indoctrinated."
@@hammalammadingdong6244 How does doing research mean being indoctrinated?. How have atheists not been indoctrinated with scientism. The amount of blind faith they exhibit suggests they have.
I doubt Flowers had time to go into detail but he does reference the actual scholarship that exists on the Book of Mormon. There is a lot of it and almost everyone here spouting an opinion knows none of it.
He wasn’t even given a chance to lay out an argument.
Thats the usual way to change the subject and avoid admiting that someone had argumented the subject to you so well and you cannot beat him..i experience this everyday with my husband
I love The Killers, but Brandon sitting there on the edge of tears over what Dawkins is saying is just proof that religion is a warm blanket and doesn't hold up well when put to the test.
I would love to see him talk to John MacArthur,,the bible warned of people adding to it or taking from it,which mormon's did and do,as do most other man made rekigions,Christianity is made by God,Jesus,God among us,as prophisied in the bible.
@@glencampbell9219 glen ...seek help. ha ha!
@@coolmacatrain9434 I have all the help I will ever need,it comes from Jesus,my Lord and Savior.Where does your help come from?
@@glencampbell9219 Yeah, right ...say hello for me when you're next "talking" to jesus (sheesh!)
@@coolmacatrain9434 No need,He knows you perfectly,problem is,you do not know Him.
Look, I agree with Dawkins entirely. But, to bring on a singer and musician to debate their religion on live TV is just punching down.
on the one hand i agree but on the other hand, why not. a singer can have a very competent opinion about something despite not being his profession regarding wage labour.
Well, how exactly are you supposed to “punch up” when it comes to criticising ANY religion? They’re ALL ludicrous! And the arguments used to justify/defend them have all been debunked and decimated countless times over the last couple of centuries. When it comes to all religions, you can only ever punch down no matter who you’re debating with!
It’s the same as “debating” flat Earthers or creationists! How on Earth is it possible to “punch up” when debating these people?
Religion does not exist only for the philosophy majors and masters of theology.
Having the "laymen" express their beliefs and opinions can be refreshing.
I think religion is a bandaid and crutch for those who would prefer not look into an unknown when considering existence after death.
Religion in theory is fine, religion as a propergated medium is indoctrination.
"This week on Master-Debater we have Neil deGrasse Tyson debating physics with a... (checks notes) high school art teacher we just pulled in off the street who says they watch 'Ancient Aliens' on the weekend! Are you ready to feel smart at the sake of the layman's dignity? We sure are!!"
@@terrypussypower religion isnt necessarily the same as flat earthers. one can make up a religion that doesnt contradict our scientific knowledge.
also when someone is wrong you still dont have to punch down. i also wouldnt "Punch up" rather on equal level
How the hell can Brandon Flowers tell Dawkins to "do his research" literally seconds after stating he isn't one of the professors who analysed the Book of Mormon seconds after Dawkins just explained how the book is a modern publication written with a poor attempt to appear older and therefore more credible (if you presume the age of a text has something to do with its accuracy)
Because Joseph smith was never convicted for being a conman lol, Dawkins was technically wrong.
As well as being arrested dozens of times Smith was a fugitive from justice for many years. And he was convicted in absentia in 1837 of illegal banking. Dawkins was right.
@@kiviuq3495 thousands were convicted after the banking collapse, that doesn’t make him a conman. Joseph smith was convicted for being a “disorderly person” again, not a conman conviction. I mean, I know what he’s referring to, it’s just that technically flowers is right and it’s funny watching everybody cream over him yelling Dawkins to do his research and how stupid Brandon must be to say it, but at the end of the day he was right. Just because you think he was a conman doesn’t make the statement Dawkins made to be literally true. I think that’s worth pointing out.
Brandon is not very bright. Probably a nice man though
@@jesperjee In fact he is pretty stupid
I feel sorry for Brandon, any non professional debater debating with a professional would be unable to hold their own, no matter their beliefs, one just gets stunted and can't effectively explain their viewpoint, or argue
Then he should have said "No"
what I saw is Brandon tried to respond, and Dawkins kept interrupting him. I was impressed with Brandon's restraint. He didnt lower himself to Dawkin's level.
@@brassattacks2411 Dawkins interrupted him because he was obviously lying. Joe Schmith WAS a convicted conman. And then telling Dawkins he should do his research whilst lying his pants off seems kind of rich.
I feel sorry for him because he follows a joke religion founded by someone he doesn't realize is a charlatan.
@@brassattacks2411 Yeah, too bad we didn't get to hear more about what the LDS church assured him is true.
It was 3 seconds after opening his mouth that Brandon realized the enormity of his mistake
This was hilarious cuz I saw it and i knew it was over for him before it even began
*It was at that moment he knew he fucked up*
Wrong. Brandon was there to talk music. The show unethically sandbagged him with this atheist’s religious attack. . Brandon never claimed to be any kind of academic on this subject. Very dirty on the part of this skavlan show to pull such a trick. Low class.
Christian Whitney Indeed But Honestly These Idiots Wouldn’t Understand. To Be Completely Honest Even Though Brandon Couldn’t Say Much Because He Was Interrupted, He Would’ve Won That Argument 😎
@@regretful4586 that's hilarious
*Mr. Dawkins is one of my favorite people in the world. He's so witty and intelligent. He always explains things in layman's terms so that anyone can understand. BRILLIANT!*
100% agree. I abs love this dude.
The real question is how did you make this White Bold font?
The real question is how did you make this White Bold font?
@@MrKelso85 ancient Chinese secret.
melba sakowski then I shall visit my nearest restaurant and seek the knowledge whilst awaiting my chicken Chowmein
Professional, polite, humble, concise and enlightening - professor Dawkins as usual
LoLoL!!!! Poor you if you believe him, LoLoLoL!!!!
Having just watched a video of a man who doesn’t believe in God and yet remains polite and respectful when discussing the matter, it is sad and possibly ironic to see a reply that is flippant and mocking in tone.
الحالب والمحلوب
@@Serene-Solace4455 Poor you if you don't 😉
الحالب والمحلوب - as with all scientists, you don’t believe him. You assess the evidence and that, you can believe in because it’s been tested and Verified
@minxymissy1 One can be right and obnoxious at the same time you know 😉
Poor flowers though he looks so innocent, his smile breaks my heart...
Brandon Flowers has been removed from the chat.
Carlos Spiceywhiener the fuck are you talking about
yep he did he was very embarrassed and they saved him ...
was awkward for him
He started crying.
Talk about a sacrificial lamb...
Dawkins is a real gentleman. Apologising to Brandon 3-4 times that he didn’t realise he had to leave. Shows that he was interested in open debate with Brandon. They needed more time!
@Kwi Chang Kain yes that's how a debate is done by including a atheist prophet funded by aristocrats to preach atheism as they hate competition from God and a a idiot noob pop star broadcasting to the world.
@@mqk5564 lol stfu
@@mqk5564 You imply atheism is a religion. You don't seem to understand the word at all, its not to be anti religious it is to lack one. Since there is not temporal evidence of a creator one takes it on faith if they are religious, the non religious lack such faith and want evidence.
@@HistoricLife Atheism is the intermediate stage in religion used to remove old religion from peasants by poking fun at them & then move to future stage where rich aristocrats become gods as they hate competition from god. Similar example(dictatorships) is atheist north korea where kim ll-sung is considered a god. check their ridiculous beliefs of him & Stalin's cult. (In democracies)Look at all those worshippers sorry I mean "followers" of billionaires, celebs, "influencers"...etc following & praising their every tweet, post, lifestyle... the only thing remaining is bringing their idol & prostrating which will be achieved only need right crisis & serfs will accept anything to save their lives.(preview:covid)
@Sean Donnelly Medication time for you pal
I like how Prof Dawkins is straight to the point and is not afraid to challenge faulty logic when he sees it.
Krish Kumar imo Dawkins is an idiot and please don,t buy the Doctrine of Hitler,Stalin.Mao,Pol Pot who killed 200m.worst of all Dr Mengele.
@@Jack-fs2im what the fuck have you just said ?
I had to pause the video because kid was about to cry :D
@J. Buxter-Fleener I agree that Dawkins is an asshole but he isn't wrong.
SUPERNATURAL MAN Sorry nice try but not at all correct in any way.The UN commissioned a study into war and killing studying 17,634 events and found Aethism the biggest single factor some 40% and religion just 7% it was published in.”The Encyclopedia of War” by Axelrod/phillips and other authors like Colgate and is widely available.try again
Dawkins got the knowledge, the manners and skills. What a legend!
it was telling a kid their was no santa clause . felt bad for flowers
To be fair, Dawkins isn't a great pop singer. Big win for Flowers on this one.
He is a legend in his own ego yes.
@@dennis3351 Uh oh, the Christian has arrived.
@@TonyEnglandUK Yes beliefs are scary huh. You don't like to hear that. And who said I was Christian. I am certainly not a egotistical professor selling bs.
It's so interesting that we live in an era where members of the older generation are debating members of the younger on behalf of scientific logic. The tables have turned.
Best comment by far.
@@wangdangdoodie The older generation is far more religious than the younger where I'm from... Where are you guys from?
Richard Dawkins doesn't really represent the older generation, you're cherry picking. Younger people are far less religious than older generations.
@Michael kilby you would be wrong
www.pewforum.org/2018/06/13/young-adults-around-the-world-are-less-religious-by-several-measures/
The amount of boomers I see in my facebook feed, saying that climate change is a hoax. Would suggest that this isn't true.
As an ex-Mormon myself, every claim made by Dawkins was correct. Smith was convicted as a con man and it was clearly written in biblical style in the 1800's. I cannot thank Professor Dawkins and his great friend Christopher Hitchens enough for helping me to free my mind from the corruption of faith.
"Faith is the belief in what reason cannot" _Voltaire
You must have quite a sharp mind and intellect to have escaped, few of us do..kudos.
@@mickhealy572 Thx but I am 60 years old. It took way too long to pat myself on the back 4 being so smart. I owe a lot to the great Christopher Hitchens (who had passed before I found out who he was.) If I can do it, anybody can get there.
Fair winds and following seas
@MooRaw More to the point, the BofM was written in the 18th century. The language is 16th century "King James" English, why? The claim it was a "perfect translation" from ancient texts to modern language was a farce from the get-go.
I have not lost my interest in history and ancient writings. I suspect the book of Enoch and other Gnostic gospels indicate the possibility of extraterrestrials visiting Earth. Like Socrates, I don't have to believe they existed, I just have to recognize the possibility and look for the preponderance of evidence.
"Faith is the belief in what reason cannot" _Voltaire. Life is better without it.
It’s funny how anybody actually believed anything smith said. I mean... did you actually read what happened? Ok ok the 18th and 19th century the people were not so bright maybe. But nobody in their right mind in the 20th or 21st century could actually believe that crap. It’s even more ridiculous than the other religions. It comes second only to Scientology
@@swlk9996 Smith was a known con man before he used his magic rock to become a cult leader. We have an even better known con man in the White House right now. A small handful of racist wanna-be polygamists followed a guy who promised the moon, how many million Americans worship the Tangerine Tyrant right now?.
18th century is looking smarter by the minute in comparison, no?
Oof, imagine having to play a show right after that rinsing.
😂
I bet the producer was like "get him outta there"
Probably didn't even have a show to go to lol
Hahaha
😂😂😂
They might have actually been good that night...
1:44 the anger in Brandon's eyes 😂😂
At 2:06 I honestly thought Brandon was going to cry.
Nothing but a big American cry baby.
I mean he wasn’t even there to debate he was just promoting his band and then Dawkins just comes after him.
@@TonyEnglandUK- I honestly think that no one cares what you honestly thought.
And I definitely think that Brandon Flowers doesn’t care what you think about him.
Prove me wrong, chump.
@@BigPapiCapone I found it so unreasonable for a pop star to debate Richard Dawkins that I never thought that was Brandon Flowers whenever I saw this clip sewn in with others about mr. Dawkins. I just thought "poor guy falling for mormon crap" - I realised who he was moments ago 😱
Dawkins listens so intently to what the other person is saying, a sign of true objectivity which is the essence of intelligence. This man speaks with a depth of understanding that few achieve.
Facts not emotions
You don't say..fanboy
John 1
King James Version
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
God loves you so much that he sent his only begotten Son to die on the cross to pay for your sins.
If you believe and put your trust in Jesus Christ, that he died on the cross to pay your sin debt and that he rose again on the third day, you will be saved. once you are saved, you will not die in your sins and be damned to hell for eternity.
God will remove your sins and your soul will be washed clean with the blood that Jesus Christ shed for us on the cross.
your own good works will not get you into heaven. Jesus Christ did all of the work for you, all you have to do is believe and put your trust in him and he will save you.
Ephesians 1:13
King James Version
13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,.
Jesus Christ is coming back very soon and we all have to be ready.
I pray in Jesus Christ's mighty name that you be saved.
@@eliwalker6245
Oh please. Grow up!
@@johnmcfarlane6136 @Sofie Johansen I will continue to grow up, until I am dead, and then I will spend eternity with God in heaven, Because I have believed and put my trust in the gospel of Christ. How did you get here?. What is your purpose here?. Where will you go when you Die?. ask yourself these questions. How did the very first man get here?. our next breath is not promised to us. we could die at any second. then comes eternity, will you spend it in heaven or hell?. God loves you so much, He died for you so that you could spend eternity in heaven with Him. don't listen to satans lies, doubts and confusion that he sends to you. he wants you to deny God and His existence. satan wants you to go to hell. God is real. God is alive. God is coming back very soon. God does not want you to go to hell, and neither do I. God bless:)
Let's be clear - "I find it offensive" is not an argument.
But the book of mormon has been studied and torn apart by scholars. It has to be true. Lol
I'm so sick of the word "offensive". If you can be offended by anything, you're pathetic. If a person doesn't like what another is saying, either step up and defend your side or turn and walk away....but don't start crying.....and yes, that is what the word "offensive" is. Whining!
@@matrix72961 I find that very OFFENSIVE! LOL
@Carlos Spiceywhiener You may have put words in Dawkin's mouth. He didn't insult the man (ad hominem) but the subject (Book of Mormon). There is a difference. In a debate you are SUPPOSED to attack the subject not the person. As long as you attack the subject, you are fine.
Analogy. Art
- Some artist puts a stone on a pillar and call it art.
- I say that is rubbish. It's a stone. There is no context to move me from seeing a piece of random rock pulled from the street.
- Artist gets offended and says I insulted him.
You can see the intellectual dishonesty? I was rightfully giving my opinion on the SUBJECT not the PERSON.
So you can see how Dawkins' giving of an opinion on the Book of Mormon, is not an insult on the practitioner? That would be the same as every Christian getting pissy anytime someone criticises the Bible... or any professor getting pissy when an article s/he wrote is criticised....
@Carlos Spiceywhiener no we don't. I don't presume to know. You do.
I tackle arguments and discussions on the face of what was said. And if a statement that was not said is to be inferred, the burden is on me to show the link between what was said and what was inferred. This is in world of mathematics is called writing a proof. Eg there is series of statements that link the statements A:"Let there be a right angled triangle" and B:"The sum of squares of the two shorter sides equals the square of the longest side". Pythagoras' theorem is just uttered out of thin air, it is shown by a clear delineation of steps.
I make the argument you presume to know Dawkins intent. The burden is on you to show a delineation of steps from what he said about the book to what you inferred he said about the person.
Thanks very much for uploading this remarkable interview in stunning HD!
I wish this show was broadcast in my native Ireland. It’s fascinating.
I love Richard Dawkins. Putting Brandon on there was like putting a mouse in a snakepit.
@@GriuGriu64 and atheism is a religion right?
Panagiotis Papadimitriou I mean his view is correct so
@@GriuGriu64 you should probably learn the definition of words before you use them. Dogma means something you are told to believe absence of proof. He isn't obligated to teach you a lifes worth of scientific education before he states proven facts. That part is up to you.
@@GriuGriu64 Dawkins often stated that it is likely that we *cannot* explain everything, that is what he means by middle world people. You possibly meant that he believes that the most accurate and precise explanations are achieved by science. That is, investigation using methods that we have spent centuries developing so that they eliminate falsehoods, biases and errors in order to produce results that are accurate and precise?
Dogmatic means putting something as unassailably true, you cannot believe that science is the best means of investigating stuff while simultaneously holding a dogmatic approach to that stuff. Either you can investigate it using methods designed to eliminate bias, or you can claim something as true without testing it, you cannot do both.
@@GriuGriu64 Such a large post to say absolutely nothing, could you come back to me when you get a coherent point please?
Science has nothing to do with religion, science is a way of investigating the natural world, religion is the organisation of the belief in the supernatural.
Brandon looks like a 7yr old kid who just found out Santa isn’t real 🤣
I wonder how you will look when you stand before Jesus and realize Darwinism is a lie.
@@googlespynetwork Jesus is real? 😳 I look forward to meeting him/her
Grow up ffs. No one will be standing anywhere when dead. Especially your fictional Jebus 🥺@@googlespynetwork
@@googlespynetwork i will use evry abusive word that i have ever learned to tell him how rotten world he has made which contains rape, murder, wars etc. And what about animal suffering. I will ask him wether he is a sadist or something?
That was the most awkward exit of a guest mid-segment if ever there was one lollll
Dawkins is so elegant at explaining reality.
I have no problem with anyone following any religion, with or without evidence that their religion is true. But - and here's where my problem develops - practically all religions dictate their followers to inflict their beliefs on everyone else whether they like it or not.
@@TonyEnglandUK Read the comments and then say who is inflicting their beliefs on others.
@@anonanon2396 I've read them. Atheists aren't pretending an invisible superpower is ordering them to change their opinion. Religious people are.
his version of reality!
@@TonyEnglandUK except Islam- sorry theres a direct verse in Chapter 2 saying there is no compulsion in religion.
Also in Quran, God tells the Prophet that he is just a warner n a giver of good tidings, n guidance comes from God to who sincerely seeks.
I spent 24 years of my life in the Mormon church and its complete nonsense
But you are the educated ppl while ours are more ignorant than animals never been to the 1st class of a pry school yet preach in and out the delusions !
Sorry to hear that. Truth is a rare commodity today and still can be found.
I have several ex Mormon friends.
Which part did you find nonsensical?
The Mormon faith was created as money earner for the founder.
Scientology is the same scenario.
"Richard Dawkins and Brendon flowers have a dispute about religion" TH-cam title
"omg this is going to be brilliant!!" me
"Mormonism is obviously made up!" Richard Dawkins
"no it isn't do your research" Brendon
"erm brendon has to go now". Presenter.
Possibly the worst dispute ever. 😂
Next week; we have a hobo discuss economy with Bill Gates.
Great comparison , very true indeed.
Don't insult hobos by comparing them to withering Flowers.
@@FactStorm lots of famous economists hopped trains in their youth...
A hobo would know more about the economy than that guy knew about his own religion LOL
Nice put down. Much necessary.
When my son's first pet chicken died (he had 4 chickens), i was honest and explained to him the chicken was getting old encouraged him to spent time to comfort the animal. The 1st time was always the hardest. However such is life. No lies about heaven and hell. Kids are very intelligent and they learn fast. When the next chicken died pain, tears and sadness still there. What he learnt is to cherish the moments, journey and connections as the memories stay with you for the rest of your life.
That is the most stupid little story I’ve ever heard. Even if your son was autistic he’d be able to understand that the chicken he had as a pet was no different to the chicken he’d eat at Kentucky Fried Chicken. Chickens don’t have souls, except maybe your chicken as it had an arsehole for an owner. Tell your son his chicken was delicious. Idiot.
That's so heartwarming and at least your son got some tasty goodness out of it all.
I was listening to it during bedtime with my eyes Shut. My eyes popped open when I heard
"Do your research"
@TheCosmicWarrior because he is a research scholar.
It's like telling a mathematician "learn Algebra".
@TheCosmicWarrior research based on Research papers, Scientific journals and peer reviewed articles?
Or research based on religious literature that's proven time and again to be falsifiable.?
@TheCosmicWarrior proper Scientific research will prove Dawkins right and many times, religion incorrect.
@TheCosmicWarrior true.
@TheCosmicWarrior Dawkins did his research on Mormonism. He was right about it. It's fake and was founded by a convicted con man. Maybe you're just butthurt because you may be a Mormon yourself and you perhaps are having trouble with the real history of your religion.
Richard Dawkins and Brandon Flowers in the same room? How on Earth did this happen?
It's the most ludicrous scenario I've seen in weeks... That Mr Abba and Ulrika were there too makes it even more delicious :D :D :D
Mainly, because the interviewers are just jerks.
Kudos to Dawkins for apologizing profusely to Flowers since he didn’t know he had to leave and wouldn’t have time to properly rebut to his satisfaction.
He is a moron.
@@pleasesubscribe7659 That's a bit of a sweeping statement. I'd say he's misguided due to being brainwashed with the teachings of a charlatan passed down by his parents.
@Robert
I think Dawkins is a moron because of his philosophy rather than his parent.
@@pleasesubscribe7659 It's a very broad generalization to call someone a moron. Everybody practically has opinions that other people would disagree with and probably think they are stupid. Just because you disagree with his religious beliefs doesn't means he's stupid in general. I'm sure there's opinions other's could potentially call you a moron for having.
@@pleasesubscribe7659 Yes, well I think we know all we need to know about your respective intelligence and it isn't good.
Thank you Richard Dawkins! You made visible to me the ignorance I had for 30 years. I'm glad I was able to free myself from this nonsense. Although this made the relationship with family and surroundings a bit difficult.
Well done, congrats
Who else thinks this is one of the strangest interviews ever? Im trying to work out why a scientist is talking to what looks like a group of pop stars?
This show is obviously a piece of pop culture. Brandon Flowers is not the only pop icon present. Obviously a debate was not intended or desired, and no scientific or religious evidence was presented.
I think he’s trying to reach out to the younger generation so that’s good
@@officiallydenise Brandon? lol he just needs to make another Mr. Brightside that's all
MrHighgate123 No competition?!
maybe bc he is on their level?
Richard Dawkins's level of patience never stops to amaze me...
He uses reason and science not emotion to prove his points. Most religious zealots are just focused on their religious teachings and are unable to seek the truth since it would probably turn their world upside down. Religion can serve in a moral capacity but the problem is people twist it and turn it into something else for their own purposes.
Richard Dawkins is a left-brain prisoner sitting in his perception cell who believes he is free-thinking and intelligent.
Richard Dawkins is one of my models, knowledge - wisdom - fair respect - courage - openmindedness, thank you Sir.
I'm not saying that Richard is wrong, but I think he immediately goes in with a defensive attitude, which makes him appear at least as emotional as everyone else when he wants to prove his point. Maybe the nervousness contributes to him behaving that way, but it can irritate me a little when people can not argue for their cause in a calm and relaxed way.
Richard is a very smart man, but we all have a different definition of what god is. In my own life, I get a feeling that people who often behave in this way in discussions are people who want to appear as very rational and shuts out everything that can have to do with spirituality or some sort of thought of what god is or whatever.
Because knowing more is powerful
Dawkins was polite in admitting he thought he had more time to dismantle
LDS is easily proven total wacky. Not Christian obviously
@Karol D What kind of a fanatic are you i wonder.....
Dawkins gave him the soft side of his backhand
@@dcmsr5141 what Dawkins and his friend Jeffrey Epstein you mean
@@hectorramirez9353 Dawkins isn't arguing about denominations, Sherlock.
I don’t think Dawkins was disrespectful and I don’t think Brandon was either. The interviewer was. I think Brandon could’ve been more prepared to talk about his beliefs, but he was blindsided in front of a crowd because he was just there to perform. Dawkins didn’t know he was talking to someone who wasn’t informed about this beforehand, leading to an awkward discussion. The interviewers fault
Good for the Flowers guy for still being civil about it and shaking his hand
The he went back and said some shit about Dawkin's age. That's his true character. His politeness here is a mirroring of Dawkin's grace.
@@zah936 really? Link?
@@zah936 of Dawkins gave me some head it would feel so good! That’s a fact.
@@zah936 God-on-High wrote the DNA Codes, because Evolution by RANDOM Mutation is proven to be Mathematically Impossible >>> 1) STUDY the OKAZAKI FRAGMENTS Process, for God's sake and your own !!! That Process, can NEVER have arisen by Darwin's BLIND LUCK !!! 2) Dear Evolutionist, The first thing you need to understand is, Charles Darwin did NOT make the animals & plant Life on Earth. Furthermore, neither did Darwinian “random mutation” assemble Life on Earth.
Random mutation has the following problems ; 1) Mutation is only known to SUBTRACT information from the genome - not to ADD info. ie) A beast ( Emu, Ostrich) might LOSE wings through mutation, but no beast will GAIN wings ; not even half a wing or a quarter of a wing ! The other problem with Random Mutation/Assembly is, mathematicians compute that Life CANNOT be assembled by a Random Process … The statistical probability Against even ONE protein forming by “accident” is a 1 in 10 to the 180th power chance, which is measured as “OPERATIONALLY IMPOSSIBLE “. ( If your horse has 1 in 100 Chance of winning the Race, that is 1 in 10 to the 2nd power.. ) Here is a 5 minute video explaining OPERATIONALLY IMPOSSIBLE. th-cam.com/video/JQ3hUlU0vR4/w-d-xo.html
IF you want a long video on this same Issue, here it is >>> th-cam.com/video/sq8McNGHrOU/w-d-xo.html ( The above video , especially between 34th minute and 38th minute , reveals there is just NO WAY that any Random Process of Darwinism could create or shape Life ! )
Ilya Prigogine, chemist-physicist, recipient of the Nobel Prize in chemistry, wrote: “The statistical probability that organic structures and the most precisely harmonized reactions that typify living organisms would be generated by accident, is zero. That’s right - zero!"
Evolution Theory is NOT hard science ; it barely goes beyond the level of Conjecture. Here are some short videos explaining, the Holes in Evolution Theory are about a million times bigger than the brickwork >>> th-cam.com/video/SOtGb8hKyWE/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/KeMJn_wd8Wo/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/031swKKakB0/w-d-xo.html Darwinism & Evolution, are actually PHILOSOPHY not Science !!! Here are some short videos explaining that fact … th-cam.com/video/58Tf_HUZros/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/NJhuplCE7WE/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/AM-H6NxdCd4/w-d-xo.html
Darwinism , the viewpoint that “Blind Luck” created Life, is already a KNOWN “Flat Earth “theory. It cannot be ! So what does that leave us with ? STUDY of the complexity of Living Cells and their organs, components , suggests strongly that this organic nano-machinery reveals, INTELLIGENT DESIGN… design by , God-on-High, or The Supreme Being, if you will. HERE is a classic video or 2 on INTELLIGENT DESIGN >>> th-cam.com/video/tzj8iXiVDT8/w-d-xo.html Charles Darwin had no electron microscope ; could NOT see the complexity of nano-machinery in MITOSIS here… WATCH this video of MITOSIS, in particular the “copy & paste “ procedure of OKAZAKI fragments and , you see a process that could ONLY come into existence by INTELLIGENT DESIGN ; not luck ! Cutting & Pasting the d.n.a. like a miniature Pierre Cardin Tailor, is self-evidently IMPOSSIBLE to be, by but Blind Luck… th-cam.com/video/yqESR7E4b_8/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/TEQMeP9GG6M/w-d-xo.html
More INTELLIGENT DESIGN accepted >>> th-cam.com/video/fqiXgtDdEwM/w-d-xo.html
Here is the Scientific Comedian AGAINST Darwinism; Dr D.Berlinski th-cam.com/video/puJnrZW6E14/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/S89IskZI740/w-d-xo.html AND, here is a scientific video revealing the huge problems of Evolution Theory, that a 15 year old can understand >>> th-cam.com/video/VUZna4aA1fQ/w-d-xo.html ooo000ooo Here is a short document, explaining that aTheism is a very poor explanation for the existence of the Universe >>> www.bibleprobe.com/thermodynamics.htm Last but not least on this list, I give you below Dr William Lane Craig, pointing out to Chris Hitchens, that mathematically only a Miracle ! could have created Humankind, therefore establishing the existence of the Miracle-MAKER, God-on-High…
th-cam.com/video/NOJRSmrrM0o/w-d-xo.html
Dear Friend, IF YOU HAVE STUDIED all I have supplied above, you then KNOW that pure Darwinism is a Dead-Man-Walking… DEAD like a Dodo… kept alive like a corpse on life-support machine… IF Evolution is happening at all, then THE ONLY WAY it can be happening , is through GUIDANCE BY GOD a.k.a Guided Evolution , or Theistic Evolution >>> en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theistic_evolution
So… do you wish to find God ??? ??? ??? HERE are some short UNCONVENTIONAL videos, to help you find, The Supreme Being, a.k.a. God-on-High… th-cam.com/video/1mFRUGDY8Ao/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/xVUvEy8BbkU/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/Bsel8hEp4HM/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/pHn2zFU6-zY/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/7FEykDoaTHg/w-d-xo.html Here is The Bhagavad Gita, for good measure…
th-cam.com/video/pqZqfTOxFhY/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/6mltFaiT9Gw/w-d-xo.html
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhagavad_Gita th-cam.com/video/8g90E9nBnyE/w-d-xo.html
Here is The Gospel of John, in audio book & movie form >>> th-cam.com/video/47OkuvT5JFo/w-d-xo.html HERE is my own “hand-made” video : ) th-cam.com/video/gdcOGFUQAag/w-d-xo.html
Have a Nice Day : ) from The All-Seeing Eye …
P.S. The Judaeo-Christian Bible was written over millennium ; the further back in time you go, the less accurate it is. The New Testament therefore, being most recent, is most accurate. Events such as Noah’s Ark ; Noah was probably a Carpentry Genius who figured out how to rapidly convert houses & barns into a huge Floating Barge, thereby surviving a nasty, deadly flood. Wild animals too probably clambered on to this Barge… thereby the Legend of Noah’s Ark.. Noah’s Ark probably “saved the world” of ONE large river plain ; NOT the entire Earth ! Jonah, was probably rescued by a Dolphin cetacean NOT a Whale, And probably lived ON its back, not IN its mouth but FROM its mouth the Dolphin may have given Jonah , fish to eat at sea… EVERYTHING written in our Bible, is rooted in SOME Truth or other, albeit perhaps not literally exactly so… To understand, you really sometimes need to… THINK OUTSIDE THE BOX !!!
@@metalguru9333 Fortunately we can see evolution in action by using the Drosophila fruit fly for experimentation. You may not want to believe it and so you choose a few people or videos that agree with your argument but the huge majority of scientists do not agree with you. The scientists who claim that evolution is not real have not proved anything using scientific method and replicable experiments and data. Claiming that the New Testament is accurate because it was the most recent is laughable. By that logic the Quran is more accurate. It may not be Judeo-Christian but it is the last in the Abrahamic books. When you have to twist the words of god to fit the new world then you are clutching at straws really. Gods word would not have to be interpreted it would be clear and succinct. Using probably is not a good way to make an argument. But much love to you for whatever you believe if it makes you feel good.
Look at the desperation on BF's face - he is out of his depth and he knows it only too well
No, he's just frustrated. He shouldn't be but people like Dawkins insult and demean and its get old for us religious people.
@@pttransamdriver1999 sometimes the truth is hard to hear, Dawkins doesn't sugarcoat it.
Well I guess I’m all fairness he didn’t go there to represent and defend his faith, he’s only there to perform and promote the Killer’s album
@@pttransamdriver1999 If people are proud of their religion and truly believe it, they should be able to justify and defend it.
Truth is, there is little left in religion that can be defended or justified...and the spreading of dogmatic lies has been getting old for 2,000 years for everyone else...
Well the poor guys just a musician, imagine trying to debate a seasoned academic live. Plus Dawkins is right so good luck with that at all.
Dawkins is 100% right. But that host put Brandon and Dawkins in a very awkward situation. He shouldn't have lead them into a debate if they weren't prepared for it or get a chance to finish it.
John 1
King James Version
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
God loves you so much that He sent his only begotten Son to die on the cross to pay for your sins.
If you believe and put your trust in Jesus Christ, that He died on the cross to pay your sin debt and that He rose again on the third day, you will be saved. once you are saved, you will not die in your sins and be damned to hell for eternity.
God will remove your sins and your soul will be washed clean with the blood that Jesus Christ shed for us on the cross.
your own good works will not get you into heaven. Jesus Christ did all of the work for you, all you have to do is believe and put your trust in Him and He will save you.
Ephesians 1:13
King James Version
13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,.
Jesus Christ is coming back very soon and we all have to be ready.
I pray in Jesus Christ's mighty name that you be saved.
@@eliwalker6245 Once upon a time...blah blah blah
@@eliwalker6245😴😴😴Z-Z-Z-Z-Z-a-z-z-z-z
@@eliwalker6245 i prefer the mantra of the Jedi Code:
There is no emotion, there is peace.
There is no ignorance, there is knowledge.
There is no passion, there is serenity.
There is no chaos, there is harmony.
There is no death, there is the Force.[8]
and much proof there is that the Jedi code exists it does. as much proof as of any "god"
Well, he didn't intend for there to be a debate in the scheduling (clearly) and did apologize for it. Dawkins was unaware of the time constraint and therefore started the debate.
Dawkins, he doesn’t look a thing like Jesus, but he talks like a gentleman.
The first time I saw this I was really impressed by how warm Dr. Dawkins is towards Brandon Flowers towards the end of the conversation right before he leaves to prep for the band’s set. He had just finished saying some things that were probably deeply offensive to Brandon Flowers, and yet I was struck by the way he turned that around and showed real manners. What a cool, sharp guy.
Do not trust in your own understanding..man's undertanding of things are too limited that it is unwise to risk your one and only for something you are not 100 % sure about. You haven't gone to the other side to say with certainty that there is no spiritual realm, that there is no God.
On the other hand, I and many others have seen and experienced God in the spiritual realm. So give it the benefit of the doubt , my friend..for your soul's sake.
@@mikeygarcia8271 thanks buddy, I appreciate the spirit you’re displaying, but I fear you’re wasting your effort. I don’t believe there’s any evidence to support the idea that there’s an ineffable spirit in human beings (a soul) so I’m not concerned about eternity because I’ll be dead. And of course I don’t believe in any gods, again because there’s just no objective evidence.
Thanks for your thoughts, I’m not trying to offend you, but I just don’t want you to waste any energy on me and I don’t want to give the impression that I want to hear about your faith. Hope you are doing well 😊
@@B3ARCAT I saw Him that's why I am here to raise the alarm..the spiritual realm is real.I used to be an agnostic but after that vision of Jesus on top of a hill..I am a changed man.He is real..man.He is real.
@@mikeygarcia8271 I'm 100% confident that your god does not exist and there is no spooky "other side" that you've been told about by people who have never been there either. There is absolutely no chance you're going to convince me that I'm just too dumb to understand so I should bet on me not being smart enough. LOL get real. You believe the dumbest shit imaginable.
He doesn't really care that he offended him, he acts that way at the end because he got to have his say and Brandon didn't have the "time" to give a response and he recognises that is unfair, regardless of the nonsense he would have undoubtedly spewed.
He had to leave because the stage crew realized he was getting upset
Clever stage crew!
I don't know whether that's true but it seems entirely plausible, given Mr Flowers' predicament.
Yep manager made the call
@@alexf7377 lol no no 🤦🏻♂️ hahah... they always have the guests play...on the real though, dude is one of this gens top innovators and song writers. Just like you don’t get the killers without the strokes, you don’t get the 2010s indy rock without Brandon flowers. ✌🏻 guys and gals (I don’t think too many gals watch debates between dawkins and musicans (borderline false advertising though with the amount of time he was actually up there)
@@theshoes7488 oh no! What am I supposed to do without 2010s indy rock!
You can actually see the moment when Brandon dies inside. Priceless!
Willfuldevil Time stamp?
Looking pissed at 2:39, starting to squirm shortly after. 3:13 when he admits that he is not one of the experts who have studied the Book of Mormon... starting to sweat, wishing he weren't there...
He looked like he was gonna cry
Brandon dies ! His band called The Killers.
3:40 seriously considering violence...
Off camera: Brandon finds out about Santa!