The irony of your statement on a video with these three, Who are among the most likely To effect open conversations like this Is astronomical. They literally begin this conversation🫣Discussing how it's possibly not a good thing that everyone has a voice.🤪
So in your world you can’t really “know” anything.. maybe Hitler was right? Maybe we’ll determine gravity isn’t really anything and we’ll float upwards. I guess this is the hyper skepticism take on induction and where that leads you and it’s sad. Because if nothing is sovereign then anything is prone to change on a whim.
God did it for me listening to the promises that people make on behalf of God I can see what Man is doing well, I have no idea what God is doing people will tell you what God like an what he don’t like How is that possible without talking to God, face to face
@@JaryismMore threats. Always threats. Not only that, they are empty threats because YOU CAN'T BACK THEM UP, and that's just pathetic. Try love. It's beautiful and works much better in most cases. Try being honest instead of saying things you can't substantiate!
Me too. Hopefully he will learn something. As a Dawkins fan it's very disappointing to see how he has become everything he fought against, and how anti-scientific he is over tans issues and the sex spectrum. He has obviously not kept up with the last 30 years of research in these areas and I don't want his legacy to end like this.
@@jaydeeoldboy9903 May I ask you how many sexes there are on the sex spectrum and what are they. Its now moved from unknown amount genders to unknown amount of sexes. Maybe Dawkins is right.
@@gsp3428 You don't need multiple sexes for there to be a spectrum, that's now what a spectrum is. A spectrum is a sliding scale between points. For there to be multiple sexes we would need people to exhibit traits that the first two sexes do not possess - we don't see that. We see combinations of traits from the two general sexes. Spectrums and binary are both systems of two, what separates them is binaries are diametrically opposed - no room for nuance; a spectrum however is nearly all nuance - like we see in all species. Dawkins is wrong, as the research and most experts from all the relevant fields are showing.
Those are 3 powerful minds right there... representing the elegant ability to reason and healthy skepticsim to a level that most human adults worldwide will never achieve, unfortunately... and boy what I would do to change that reality, cause it could save the planet
Love you my beloved Matt! Thank you for attending! May i walk with thee! If it takes to carry thee! 1 footprint! Love you beloved without shame but with boldness!
I started listening to James Randi almost 10 years ago. He opened up my world to even better sceptical thinking. That's how I got to know Matt and all my other friends in spirit, some of whom have sadly passed away in the meantime. I miss them all in the German-speaking culture. They are all a great spiritual enrichment. Matt's hot temper and short temper got on my nerves more and more often. And unfortunately, so did his gender mania. What a pity. Otherwise I love him too 😅
To the question of two sisters, there are no choices without consequences. The consequences always spread outward. You can not say no one will be affected by the sisters, what if children observe this? The children question it and the adults say well its ok for them, but they do not explain the context or children often are not mature enough to comprehend. Children will take what they observe and either reject completely or carry these things as far as they can.
That is so many what if;) What if meteor falls, what if unicorn happen to see them? You know there are many what if's, but not many are probable to happen.
@tgstudio85 Many children do replicate what they observe without understanding the full consequences of their actions. Your attempt to use Professor Dawkins' argument against what if, in this instance, missed the mark.
@@jerryrose6895 *Many children do replicate what they observe without understanding the full consequences of their actions.* That is why we learn on actions of others, and of others failures and successes... and thanks to that we can dismiss many "what if's..."
How to think?? Ha! That’s a good one. Richard Dawkins, in his delusional book _The God Delusion_ (the one that Michael Ruse said “made me ashamed to be an atheist”), said by his own admission that the _central argument_ of his book was this: “Well, if God made everything, then who made God?” Which has been called out by many as the _worst_ objection to the existence of God that there is. Good thinking, Richard!😁👌
Matt wouldn't be seen dead on a stage next to Dawkins these days but i for one would absolutely love to see them discuss trans issues, even better, get biologist Forrest Valkai to debate him on the subject cos I know he's already responded to some of Dawkins' incorrect comments about sex and gender
I'm certain Matt will always be delighted to participate with Richard. Richard's focus on science did cause an issue for some who have a stronger societal focus.
Guys so for those who don’t know apparently Dawkins is super ANTI-TRANS which sets him apart from the secular hacks, and one of them has like trans bf/gf they-friend? Whatever lmaoooooo Also Matts some random atheist dude, and Richard Dawkins is a scientist? This dude should not share a stage with Murray, i mean i don’t agree with them either but even peterson and harris have more to bring to the table 😭
Wow, I read the comments Dawkins has made. I can't figure out what the issue is. Do they want him to lie about biology or not say anything? This level of thought policing is both stupid and scary.
Me too. Hopefully he will learn something. As a Dawkins fan it's very disappointing to see how he has become everything he fought against, and how anti-scientific he is over tans issues and the sex spectrum. He has obviously not kept up with the last 30 years of research in these areas and I don't want his legacy to end like this.
I think the universal "ick" associated with incest stems primarily both from the genetic issue, but also the idea that when you grow up together, you hold a familiarity, a power, that makes it impossible in the imagination of most people to form a healthy adult bond. You're still attracted to what you know about the other, including how they looked and felt as a child, their childhood memories and so on. I think it's hard to argue it's wrong for the proposed couple to love each other and engage in casual sexual activity, but I assume psychology would still find plenty of issues that arise from that coupling - in fact, it might not form without psychological abnormalities in the first place - therefore suggesting that it perpetuates a bad state of mind, makes an issue persist, instead of dealing with it. Is that a good enough reason alone? Probably not. But if individually dissected, one could probably find a harmful effect at work in most incestuary relationships, and it would therefore reasonable to assume they couldn't exist without perpetuating previous harm.
Science and religion have the same ultimate reality. Its laws can be derived logically. They complement each other. Also, we can't invalidate a principle because of bad practice.
When we rely on scientific authority, so to speak, I don’t see that as equivalent to relying on authority in terms of taking the words of a specific person as gospel.
This is true. Do you think it's still possible to understand it as a kind of faith, based on the acknowledgement that we must inevitably fall back into abstract presuppositions?
During the Scamdemic, I had an acquaintance tell me that I should listen to him and accept that covid was a real threat.... because he had a degree in science. He should certainly listen to these guys and discover what is truly meant to be a "scientist".
"I call myself a 'Cultural Christian'. ... If I had to choose between alternatives, I'd Choose Christianity." --Richard Dawkins on LBC (March 31st, 2024)
Different people have different paths that leads them to well-being. What’s wrong with current Christianity is the misinterpretation of the teachings of Jesus.
Why? You cross a border and find another religion, or church. Science crosses every part of the Universe. You can't argue with it anywhere. If it changes it's mind in China, it will agree in US and on the moon.
@matthewphilip1977 , we are god or have god qualities within us. Our conscience holds ourselves accountable for our thoughts, speech and actions. The ability to see certain outcomes is a matter of from what perspective. If you go higher up you can see the behavioral patterns or direction of the people below. Following the 10 commandments or 5 precepts of Buddha are just guidelines to help us walk towards this god nature.
It's a little cringy how often Matt wants to talk about himself. He's a smart guy but it really shows how far above Sam and Richard are in reasoned discussions, not having to constantly fall on personal experience to get a point across. At worst he seems a little egotistical, or too eager for approval from these gents.
@jasonsteele83 he's a baitfish amongst sharks when it comes to high level intellectual discussions, while he can form solid basic-level arguments he is completely out of his depth when it comes to technical science discussions and tries to bolster himself in ways that the other 2 would chuckle and roll their eyes at. He's known as Matt Dillacunty for a reason.
34:00. About the What would convince you into believing in God?' question. Nothing, because between skepticism and God is the 'highly advanced alien civilization with a sense of humor'. That is way more likely possibility than God.
For a better quality of life and mind, seek and be understanding, because understanding is always better than assuming, and knowing is better than believing. Anyone insisting on not wanting to hear what they don't want to hear is simply immature a/o afraid. Since the human mind can justify anything, good luck significantly improving societal awareness and behavior.
the digital village is one of the biggest problems with Leftist movements. and in this case Secular movements. the right and the religious know how to pull people together physically together and therefore have a physical force to mobilize. too often the digital villagers do not have the physical presence needed to make certain changes IRL.
@@DCxSkateboarding the viciously circular and self defeating mindset of an atheist. That’s what’s wrong. It’s also my opinion to think this way so before you go on some atheist rant, I just simply do not care what you have to say but glad you stopped by. Have a good one.
@@ryanclour8680 so what about an atheist mindset is circular in self-defeating? Muslims tell you that Muhammad was the last prophet. Hindus state that the Vedas are the correct holy text. I'm not convinced of Christianity the same way I'm not convinced of Hinduism or Islam I need legitimate empirical evidence that can be repeated and can be falsified. So the only thing an atheist does is say the claims in your Bible need evidence. And until you give me that evidence I'm not going to believe in your God. Some atheists are agnostic atheist and they believe that there is a possibility of some sort of deity but they don't believe in said deity actively until there's evidence for it. There's nothing circular or self-defeating about this. The fact that you are actively making up ideas about atheists is in itself self-defeating because you're literally needing to use fallacious arguments to support your ideas. The entire idea of faith is also inherently self-defeating. And lastly the entirety of Christianity uses the Bible to justify its claims and its claims come directly from the Bible. That is objectively circular. Are you just projecting your own thoughts on to atheists?
The term "science deniers" might well apply to some people-- but to use this as a universal term to describe anyone who is aware of the enormity/intelligence/creativity of God can only be described as arrogance. Certainly science can describe many of the actions/reactions etc relating to the processes which occur within our universe. but to consider that this tiny amount of knowledge encompasses the entire universe, not to mention life (existence/awareness) itself, amounts to nothing less than intellectual arrogance. Unfortunately this characteristic is often exhibited by some "scientists" who think that the whole of creation is merely three dimensional. A simple concept but unfortunately one which is totally inadequate, even childish !
The term "science deniers" applies to all people denying that science is the only tool to paint an accurate picture of the reality ALL individuals can perceive-the use of this universal term perfectly describes anyone who claims they'd know "who" created the universe, which can only be described as arrogance. Certainly science can describe _any_ of the actions/reactions etc relating to the processes which occur within our universe, and to consider this enormous amount of knowledge encompassing the entire universe, not to mention life (existence/awareness) itself, amounts to nothing less than ignorance. Unfortunately this characteristic is often exhibited by some "believers" who think that there is some non-perceivable, undefinable, magical world beyond the reality ALL can perceive. "Some magical being did it"-a simple concept but unfortunately one which is totally inadequate, even childish! Did you know that your cell phone's innards are based on the scientific understanding of the quantum world? No, of course not. And why not? Because you never cared about scientific progress; no, you are stuck in that bleak infantile world full of magical beings and events, happily ignoring new insights, faithfully clinging to your belief in Santa Claus/magical being xy. Isn't it about time to grow up? Seriously, the explanation "some magical being burped the universe into existence" is for toddlers-if you want to know how far we have come in understanding the processes behind everything, you will have to invest some serious brainpower, because the explanation for adults is far more complex, so much more intriguing, so much more satisfying than "magical being xy did it".
One might well describe science as "a three dimensional ' game. Everything that exists (now, present past etc) has to fit is with the perceived rules of 'science'. However, consciousness exists on several different levels. Science manages only one because it finds it difficult to consider any other levels of consciousness. If you prefer to consider that memory is nothing more than connections between various neurons within the brain, , well if we go one assuming that, anything (everything) we might learn in this life, is of no consequence !! They (memories) would die together with the body, which is clearly not the purpose of (human) life. Dispute this, then I'm afraid all you are doing is to believe that life has (or is) of no purpose at all.. (Instead of the learning opportunities it (life ) ! So does your life have any purpose or is it simply a nothing experience ? Repeat nothing experience ?
Good point. Science used to be driven by things like eugenics; you know, the idea that some races are superior to others? Seems like some German guy with a funny mustache used that kind of science back in the 30s and 40s to justify what he did……. But hey, Sammy Harris says nothing to worry about, right?
The God I know, understand and love is but a projection of my mind, a shadow that has no substance. My imagination and experience cannot be ascertained as a phenomenological truth, so I better not confuse it with reality 🤓😇
That statement you just made is but a projection of your mind since God is real as the necessity for him testifies in most people and the complexity and order of a world that without a Mind as its source would not make sense or wouldn't also explain such kind of order and complexity
@@earth1710 Any statement anyone makes is a projection of their minds and that is far more untrue than the actuality of an object or phenomenon under consideration. For example, shadows can be shorter or longer, images can be inverted and virtual, mirages can arise out of a density gradient in the air, and so on. So, the truth cannot be accounted for, by the projection of one's mind. However, an objective truth that is based on logical principles such as prediction of an eclipse are inconsequential to subjective perceptions and projections. Order and complexity are natural phenomena that don't need the presence of a Mind. Questioning their existence is like asking why a dog can lick it's belly... It just can and therefore, it does !! 🙂
@@SajalChakravarty Your comment is self defeating, subjective, and therefore false. By your own account, you cannot tell what is design from what is not, which is the definition of lunacy.
Did anyone actually seek the kingdom with all the heart, until then you are not exspected to get it. look under every stone... or don't... if it was easy you would not be having such problems.
THAT ATHEIST LIED The Problem Atheists have is, They Unnecessarily Overcomplicate it God is simply the Existence of Love we all acknowledge. Everybody Believes Love exists Simple. But infinite in Power and Expression. To ignore the Reality of that Is not only Unfortunate It’s Shameful
drivel, religous people believe in talking snakes and virgin births and act as if you posses knowledge that is only available to people like you, atheism is simply a non-belief theism is acting as if you know that god exists and you know what he wants and doesnt want and force it on people, every bit of freedom we enjoy now all cam from secular minds never from people with cross on their chests, religion made other people discriminate and kill people and is respected for it, look at the middle east, look at education, students are being taught first century nonsense instead of what is actually true about the world their loving in, keep ur delusions private and stop indoctrinating children with your nonsensical beliefs
I clicked on this video to view because of the title "How To Think" (like I don't know already), and sat through the beginning of the discussion on how to navigate through the sensitivities regarding the Muslim faith. As the discussion progressed, the three dudes left Muslim sensitivities behind and the question of God came up. This always makes me laugh how they rack their brains on way to counter Christian apologists. You never once see any atheists apply these tactics to a Muslim, asking them why they believe in their demiurge Allah, or rationalize how Allah and Yahweh are basically brothers from the same line of divinity, except Allah is a moon god and Yahweh is a volcano god (yes, god with a small `g'). People always treat the Muslim faith with kids gloves, but the Christian faith must be a grand delusion. All religion is group-think, with a mind-hive of followers, just the same as political automatons from the Liberal Left, along with the Atheist social media groups. They all share the same outlook in their own right. None of them are truly independent thinkers, or exhibit any free will in thought. This is not a discussion on how to think, but rather a lesson on active inference to maintain the integrity of their world view and the biases that they support.
Conversations = together! With another. Conversation can't exist without another! Is how's thy conversations given just for thee my beloved and my Beautiful? Yes, even being alone is never alone! Is who ye are talking too? Able to identify unseen nor seen ye are talking too? Why? The tree is known by its fruits. Ye may know them! Likewise be mindful unto one another availeth much indeed! To remind and comes with comfort unto the Who am I?
( ﾟ_ゝﾟ)ﾉ Natural selection is the character flaw in evil that is integrity is more important than life otherwise evolution is tragic circumstances with nothing intelligent happening. Almost everyone survive until they reproduce. Nothing is getting selected except for the character flaw in evil. I found a replacement for the character flaw in evil that I liked but God makes me forget things that will cause me trouble.
Dawkins is a legit scientist. Harris is a pseudo-scientist. Dillahunty is a game show host who has memorized 20-25 atheist talking points for all occasions.
How can you say Sam Harris is a pseudo-scientist. He got a degree in philosophy from Stanford University and a PhD in neuroscience from UCLA. Idk what you’re smoking on but let me get a hit if you think that makes you a “pseudo-scientist “ ps Dawkins earned his zooology phd and masters. 🤷♂️
Maaf" apakah Manusia paling tinggi derajatnya?!? Manusia bisa berpindah tempat kedarat ke air"dll bisa bermacam macam volume suaranya" abcd...... dll" di Bu mi alam semesta!!! (Tidak seperti binatang" tumbuh tumbuhan" dll!!! Adakah manusia sebelum melahirkan manusia bukan dari Bagian Atas dulu pertemuan"nya?!? (ciuman.......) baru Bagian bawah?!? (Jenis kelamin......) Seperti Hukum Gravitasi Bumi" dari Atas jatuh...... Ke bawah......." Dll) 🤩😍😀😁🤫 terimakasih......
Science is material, it is based on facts which are based on sense perception, and at its better moments based on cognition and intuition. Religion is based on intuition and balanced by reason. The definition of religion is that to which we are bound. Not to acknowledge this ground of human cognition and experience which goes back to the beginning of human origin as a basic human experience is strange. Humanism puts humans at the center of reality for all the wrong reasons.
@@ALavin-en1kr everything you just said is shit you made up.. your definition of religion is not anything close to the definition of religion. . You must be using a dictionary only you have
@@hectormata449 we only have access to the singular Reality that we share. There are not multiple other Realities as far as we can currently tell. Perception is NOT Reality, there's a reason that we have different words for those separate concepts.
How Dillahunty ends up beside Harris and Dawkins.. I’ll never know. He must pinch himself. No formal education to speak of. He’s a fairly formidable debater within his parameters.. if he was educated then he’d be up there for sure.
Well, you dont need a formal education to have a proper understanding of logic. Even those with Phds in philosophy make terribly obvious errors in their reasoning
@@clayreiththe problem is when you debate people on the same topic for 25 years and they keep giving the same dead refuted responses and arguments it's annoying. Have you actually watched any of his recent content? The only time he doesn't have a discussion with somebody is when they're being intellectually dishonest.
Now that lassae Faire is coming to an end in the coming generation, the wholistic knowledge curriculum is crucial. Wholistic loss of knowledge under the german separatism may have helped rush things along in the obvious dominant peasants revolt separatist inspired Newton theological thread pulled in mapping codes and physics building machines to now dictate other diciplines that just got it wrong under older dogma echo chambers that held them back . What tool does the machinest need is our grandkids future. Once the light came on in humanity Dx,dy,dz = man made time hierarchy knowledge of Good and evil machinest was born. He cut the branche, lathe the bark, milled the edges and grinded the tip of the spear. Now we return
@fionagregory9147 If my park bench shade tree fat fingers accidentally taps a correct order of letters to form a word or proper sentence, I deserve a golden star 🌟 or 3😁 Laissez-faire
Let me help your audience where you cannot, The number one killer to intellect is bias. Two of these three men are literally ruled by their own bias. For you to present them as examples of how to think is quite ridiculous.
@13shadowwolf At least your little brain does understands how blinding of an influence bias can be..... Now it's just a matter of getting you to realize it's not just the other people (the ones you don't like) who are blinded. Once that happens you'll actually be a thinker.
@@MultipleGrievance that doesn't work, there are actually neutral stances on topics, Objectivity is more possible for Skeptics; they have functions built into their Logic, to detect more errors than any other group. Nobody understands how to deal with Bias, than the Skeptics.
@13shadowwolf Mostly a fallacy. Very few people are capable taking neutral stances on topics. It requires emotional detachment. I've been following Sam & Matt for years now, they are both very emotionally attached to the topics they discuss. Matt has gotten hysterical so many times I've lost count. The notion that this guy is objective is complete nonsense. Sam, has himself gotten worse over the years. He's now incapable of separating his politics from his positions. They are one and the same. Which of course makes objectivity impossible.
What is the Aim of 2 being together? Without bias! But with clarity, coherence, and adequacy! 2 same sex = ? Remember the Creator ways are not Thy ways! But will be revealed unto a little Child "i" increase belongs! Feet resting upon SUSTAINED! Yes, even the 2 same sex came from 1st! Can they exist? Creation will say, who will glorify thy creation? If none in front! Same sex give Gratitude and Honor unto my Heirs Hosts and my Beautiful= many the "i" AM! Remember can't exist without my Heirs Hosts and my Beautiful! Remember how else can even makes noises in front! Now what is the Aim of thy noises? Come let us have sincere conversations. It's ok to correct one another nor to bring to remembrance concerning. Without being offended in front! Together!
@@arthurwieczorek4894 ps the video is from Apologetics roadshow the title is He finally admitted it , the part I forgot was after he played the clip of Harris saying , roadshow said if you ask 100 Sam Harris after seeing this have you changed all would probably say no because Christianity is evil and harmful like you guessed it Trump , the ends justify the means . Watch that short video then tell me what you think .
@@22julip You don't know I was talking to you. Yes I was talking to you. If you have something to say, say it. What I can see from the comments, including yours is all childish.
This is like a couple of friends in a bar, slightly drunk, talking about deep things, and can't formulate how differences join us all. 20 minutes in, and i have not heard anything connected, just each talking their own stuff lol.
*These 3 Amigos are very proficient at expressing & communicating their collective derision for people of Faith. Not once taking a moment to consider what the Human Race would be without some belief in a High Power, Higher Ideals, and the drive that it creates for Humans to rise above their baser instincts. Personally I find that more than a little disturbing for 3 people who are supposed to be smarter than the rest of us "Idiots" that indeed see the collective benefits from lives of Faith...How long do you think these three Poffs would last without it?*
Matt says God should know what would convince him of His existence. But for them that love not the truth God sends them a powerfull delusion so they believe that instead.
If you enjoyed this discussion, please drop a like and consider subscribing.
Awesome
Quote nominal.
Think outside the box.
We must protect the conditions that allow discussions like this to exist
The irony of your statement on a video with these three, Who are among the most likely To effect open conversations like this Is astronomical.
They literally begin this conversation🫣Discussing how it's possibly not a good thing that everyone has a voice.🤪
@@MultipleGrievance they are talking about knowledge not permission to speak
@gking407
If you follow two of these three gentlemen , you'll know very well where they stand on other people having the ability to speak publicly.
@gking407
Nah. They are quite vocal about who they think should have reach and an open platform.
@@MultipleGrievance if so you didn’t get that from this video clip
My favorite quote comes from Bertrand Russell - "I would never die for my beliefs because I might be wrong."
And who would fight for your freedoms?
So in your world you can’t really “know” anything.. maybe Hitler was right? Maybe we’ll determine gravity isn’t really anything and we’ll float upwards. I guess this is the hyper skepticism take on induction and where that leads you and it’s sad. Because if nothing is sovereign then anything is prone to change on a whim.
Richard Dawkins made me an atheist thank goodness.
Let’s see if there’s life after death.. how proud of your atheism you’ll br after denying the logos of the creator. Good luck
@@Jaryism there is no God and never was. Once we are dead that is it full stop not period as we are not yanks. 😻
God did it for me listening to the promises that people make on behalf of God I can see what Man is doing well, I have no idea what God is doing people will tell you what God like an what he don’t like How is that possible without talking to God, face to face
@@JaryismMore threats. Always threats. Not only that, they are empty threats because YOU CAN'T BACK THEM UP, and that's just pathetic.
Try love. It's beautiful and works much better in most cases. Try being honest instead of saying things you can't substantiate!
@@charliecoley2423
Which god did you choose? Or, which god chose you? Would you know the difference? Free will and choice?
I so badly want Matt and Dawkins on stage again to discuss trans issues. I would pay to see that.
Only trans issues are trans persons.
Me too. Hopefully he will learn something. As a Dawkins fan it's very disappointing to see how he has become everything he fought against, and how anti-scientific he is over tans issues and the sex spectrum. He has obviously not kept up with the last 30 years of research in these areas and I don't want his legacy to end like this.
@@jaydeeoldboy9903 May I ask you how many sexes there are on the sex spectrum and what are they. Its now moved from unknown amount genders to unknown amount of sexes. Maybe Dawkins is right.
I just want Matt to lose his mind and go rage and make a fool of himself in front of an audience.
@@gsp3428 You don't need multiple sexes for there to be a spectrum, that's now what a spectrum is. A spectrum is a sliding scale between points.
For there to be multiple sexes we would need people to exhibit traits that the first two sexes do not possess - we don't see that. We see combinations of traits from the two general sexes. Spectrums and binary are both systems of two, what separates them is binaries are diametrically opposed - no room for nuance; a spectrum however is nearly all nuance - like we see in all species.
Dawkins is wrong, as the research and most experts from all the relevant fields are showing.
Those are 3 powerful minds right there... representing the elegant ability to reason and healthy skepticsim to a level that most human adults worldwide will never achieve, unfortunately... and boy what I would do to change that reality, cause it could save the planet
the best minds almost certainly aren't youtubers
Love you my beloved Matt! Thank you for attending! May i walk with thee! If it takes to carry thee! 1 footprint! Love you beloved without shame but with boldness!
fuck - you got it bad, bro -
I love Richard's ties, he's got birds on this one
He has many ties that were designed by his wife.
Had many aha! moments during this discussion, Thank you, Matt, Sam and Richard.
Every time I see the right brow of Sam Harris, it raises to new heights
Too many jab$😄
this is above politics and everything. we need Sam and Richard untill we have them on this planet to talk more.
I started listening to James Randi almost 10 years ago. He opened up my world to even better sceptical thinking. That's how I got to know Matt and all my other friends in spirit, some of whom have sadly passed away in the meantime. I miss them all in the German-speaking culture. They are all a great spiritual enrichment. Matt's hot temper and short temper got on my nerves more and more often. And unfortunately, so did his gender mania. What a pity. Otherwise I love him too 😅
To the question of two sisters, there are no choices without consequences. The consequences always spread outward. You can not say no one will be affected by the sisters, what if children observe this? The children question it and the adults say well its ok for them, but they do not explain the context or children often are not mature enough to comprehend. Children will take what they observe and either reject completely or carry these things as far as they can.
That is so many what if;) What if meteor falls, what if unicorn happen to see them? You know there are many what if's, but not many are probable to happen.
@tgstudio85 Many children do replicate what they observe without understanding the full consequences of their actions. Your attempt to use Professor Dawkins' argument against what if, in this instance, missed the mark.
@@jerryrose6895 *Many children do replicate what they observe without understanding the full consequences of their actions.*
That is why we learn on actions of others, and of others failures and successes... and thanks to that we can dismiss many "what if's..."
I thought the same thing. We do not do actions in a vacuum.
How to think??
Ha! That’s a good one.
Richard Dawkins, in his delusional book _The God Delusion_ (the one that Michael Ruse said “made me ashamed to be an atheist”), said by his own admission that the _central argument_ of his book was this:
“Well, if God made everything, then who made God?”
Which has been called out by many as the _worst_ objection to the existence of God that there is.
Good thinking, Richard!😁👌
its is the next logical question but youd have to be someone who thinks using reason and logic.....
Good set of questions Matt.
YES!!!!!!! tell me how to think!
Maybe... you should just think.
Matt wouldn't be seen dead on a stage next to Dawkins these days but i for one would absolutely love to see them discuss trans issues, even better, get biologist Forrest Valkai to debate him on the subject cos I know he's already responded to some of Dawkins' incorrect comments about sex and gender
why ?
I'm certain Matt will always be delighted to participate with Richard. Richard's focus on science did cause an issue for some who have a stronger societal focus.
Guys so for those who don’t know apparently Dawkins is super ANTI-TRANS which sets him apart from the secular hacks, and one of them has like trans bf/gf they-friend? Whatever lmaoooooo
Also Matts some random atheist dude, and Richard Dawkins is a scientist? This dude should not share a stage with Murray, i mean i don’t agree with them either but even peterson and harris have more to bring to the table 😭
Wow, I read the comments Dawkins has made. I can't figure out what the issue is. Do they want him to lie about biology or not say anything? This level of thought policing is both stupid and scary.
Me too. Hopefully he will learn something. As a Dawkins fan it's very disappointing to see how he has become everything he fought against, and how anti-scientific he is over tans issues and the sex spectrum. He has obviously not kept up with the last 30 years of research in these areas and I don't want his legacy to end like this.
Nevermind the interesting discussion. I just want to know where Matt got his snazzy boots! ❤
"Nevermind the interesting discussion" -youtubers
The Danger of religion is they all think they are right
I think the universal "ick" associated with incest stems primarily both from the genetic issue, but also the idea that when you grow up together, you hold a familiarity, a power, that makes it impossible in the imagination of most people to form a healthy adult bond. You're still attracted to what you know about the other, including how they looked and felt as a child, their childhood memories and so on.
I think it's hard to argue it's wrong for the proposed couple to love each other and engage in casual sexual activity, but I assume psychology would still find plenty of issues that arise from that coupling - in fact, it might not form without psychological abnormalities in the first place - therefore suggesting that it perpetuates a bad state of mind, makes an issue persist, instead of dealing with it.
Is that a good enough reason alone? Probably not. But if individually dissected, one could probably find a harmful effect at work in most incestuary relationships, and it would therefore reasonable to assume they couldn't exist without perpetuating previous harm.
Mercy is like Trust how many people do you Trust, No much Mercy
is There.Cant lie to Mr. Obvious
Science and religion have the same ultimate reality. Its laws can be derived logically. They complement each other. Also, we can't invalidate a principle because of bad practice.
What? The laws of science can be derived logically not religion...🤦🤦🤦🤦🤦
How did I miss this show 😮
When we rely on scientific authority, so to speak, I don’t see that as equivalent to relying on authority in terms of taking the words of a specific person as gospel.
This is true. Do you think it's still possible to understand it as a kind of faith, based on the acknowledgement that we must inevitably fall back into abstract presuppositions?
During the Scamdemic, I had an acquaintance tell me that I should listen to him and accept that covid was a real threat.... because he had a degree in science.
He should certainly listen to these guys and discover what is truly meant to be a "scientist".
It doesn't change my life one bit to think of what could be done with my body once I'm dead
You had me at "two sisters" .. haha
At the same moment I recognize we are evolved omnivores, but I'm also disturbed that it is so. "is and ought" cross swords.
"I call myself a 'Cultural Christian'. ... If I had to choose between alternatives, I'd Choose Christianity."
--Richard Dawkins on LBC (March 31st, 2024)
Different people have different paths that leads them to well-being. What’s wrong with current Christianity is the misinterpretation of the teachings of Jesus.
Why? You cross a border and find another religion, or church. Science crosses every part of the Universe. You can't argue with it anywhere. If it changes it's mind in China, it will agree in US and on the moon.
@matthewphilip1977 ,
“Thou shalt have no other gods before me.”
“Thou shalt not kill.”
@matthewphilip1977 , are you Christian?
Thou shalt not kill who?
Thou shalt not have no other gods before me is just about focus.
@matthewphilip1977 , we are god or have god qualities within us. Our conscience holds ourselves accountable for our thoughts, speech and actions. The ability to see certain outcomes is a matter of from what perspective. If you go higher up you can see the behavioral patterns or direction of the people below. Following the 10 commandments or 5 precepts of Buddha are just guidelines to help us walk towards this god nature.
My atheist heroes… love these guys !
It's amazing how Dawkins is at the same time the OT and the Prequel (atheist) Trilogy
just legends, this is nice
Take A Moment Relax and Enjoy the genius at play on stage.
Stay Safe and Stay Free
1:07:48
It's a little cringy how often Matt wants to talk about himself. He's a smart guy but it really shows how far above Sam and Richard are in reasoned discussions, not having to constantly fall on personal experience to get a point across. At worst he seems a little egotistical, or too eager for approval from these gents.
I don’t see that to a degree that is a problem. sorry
@jasonsteele83 he's a baitfish amongst sharks when it comes to high level intellectual discussions, while he can form solid basic-level arguments he is completely out of his depth when it comes to technical science discussions and tries to bolster himself in ways that the other 2 would chuckle and roll their eyes at. He's known as Matt Dillacunty for a reason.
Matt is a self important a hole.
Does evolutionary biology view technology as a "natural" occurrence?
yes
"Welcome to the Pangburn Universe, governed by the laws of good faith & helpfulness..." Get rid of the word "faith", and insert "trust".
34:00. About the What would convince you into believing in God?' question. Nothing, because between skepticism and God is the 'highly advanced alien civilization with a sense of humor'. That is way more likely possibility than God.
well, everybody here (except Richard Dawkins) should watch the episode "The Return" of the season 3, episode 8 of "Justice League Unlimited'
For a better quality of life and mind, seek and be understanding, because understanding is always better than assuming, and knowing is better than believing. Anyone insisting on not wanting to hear what they don't want to hear is simply immature a/o afraid. Since the human mind can justify anything, good luck significantly improving societal awareness and behavior.
Was there any discussion about the trans-topic? That would be an interesting discussion between Dawkins and Dillahunty.
Harris: “science isn’t driven by ideology.”
Really? What about “Gender Affirming Healthcare?” As practiced it’s entirely ideologically driven.
It isn't science
hey smarty pants stand right there while I make the Earth, your in the way hahaha
the digital village is one of the biggest problems with Leftist movements. and in this case Secular movements.
the right and the religious know how to pull people together physically together and therefore have a physical force to mobilize.
too often the digital villagers do not have the physical presence needed to make certain changes IRL.
Beware those who tell you how to think.
Agree, that is why I don't listen to any priests from any religion, as they all wan't me to believe them without showing evidences.
Religion has been trying to control how people think for thousands of years.
are you confusing what and how? everybody should learn how to use reason and logic to arrive at better understanding.
It's amazing that they got app 3 members of The Council of Who Gives a Shit on the same stage.
Unfortunately, asking a God believer/assumer to define "God" will essentially be like pushing the button on a word-randomizer machine.
Cameraman selling at 1:23:03
💀
selling?
To believe in god or not is nothing but the proof that you have a functional head office called Brain 😂
Crossing legs:
Richard ~
Matt ~~
Sam ~~~
1:08:12 Matt gets his mind blown, in a good way
2 dwarfs and a brit
And? That is all you got kiddo?
Herk-a-derk!
Do you have anything more than childishness?
Ask Matt the transformer issue. Matt crumbles. Dawkins has logic and reason.
Who wants to think like this?
Worst chair gag ever....
Is like sitting with my beloved! Pop Richard, I will not interrupt! Just know? I'm sitting with thee! In the midst!
Need not to say a WORD unto my beloved Sam Harris!
The wow signal agrees
How NOT to think.
What do you mean?
@@DCxSkateboarding I mean don’t think like these gentlemen.
@@ryanclour8680 why though? What's wrong with logic and reasoning?
@@DCxSkateboarding the viciously circular and self defeating mindset of an atheist. That’s what’s wrong. It’s also my opinion to think this way so before you go on some atheist rant, I just simply do not care what you have to say but glad you stopped by. Have a good one.
@@ryanclour8680 so what about an atheist mindset is circular in self-defeating? Muslims tell you that Muhammad was the last prophet. Hindus state that the Vedas are the correct holy text. I'm not convinced of Christianity the same way I'm not convinced of Hinduism or Islam I need legitimate empirical evidence that can be repeated and can be falsified. So the only thing an atheist does is say the claims in your Bible need evidence. And until you give me that evidence I'm not going to believe in your God. Some atheists are agnostic atheist and they believe that there is a possibility of some sort of deity but they don't believe in said deity actively until there's evidence for it. There's nothing circular or self-defeating about this. The fact that you are actively making up ideas about atheists is in itself self-defeating because you're literally needing to use fallacious arguments to support your ideas. The entire idea of faith is also inherently self-defeating. And lastly the entirety of Christianity uses the Bible to justify its claims and its claims come directly from the Bible. That is objectively circular. Are you just projecting your own thoughts on to atheists?
2 types of humans on this earth, does who believe magic is real, and those who not.
Will someone tell Sam that he isn't an expert on politics?
The term "science deniers" might well apply to some people-- but to use this as a universal term to describe anyone who is aware of the enormity/intelligence/creativity of God can only be described as arrogance.
Certainly science can describe many of the actions/reactions etc relating to the processes which occur within our universe. but to consider that this tiny amount of knowledge encompasses the entire universe, not to mention life (existence/awareness) itself, amounts to nothing less than intellectual arrogance.
Unfortunately this characteristic is often exhibited by some "scientists" who think that the whole of creation is merely three dimensional. A simple concept but unfortunately one which is totally inadequate, even childish !
The term "science deniers" applies to all people denying that science is the only tool to paint an accurate picture of the reality ALL individuals can perceive-the use of this universal term perfectly describes anyone who claims they'd know "who" created the universe, which can only be described as arrogance.
Certainly science can describe _any_ of the actions/reactions etc relating to the processes which occur within our universe, and to consider this enormous amount of knowledge encompassing the entire universe, not to mention life (existence/awareness) itself, amounts to nothing less than ignorance.
Unfortunately this characteristic is often exhibited by some "believers" who think that there is some non-perceivable, undefinable, magical world beyond the reality ALL can perceive. "Some magical being did it"-a simple concept but unfortunately one which is totally inadequate, even childish!
Did you know that your cell phone's innards are based on the scientific understanding of the quantum world? No, of course not. And why not? Because you never cared about scientific progress; no, you are stuck in that bleak infantile world full of magical beings and events, happily ignoring new insights, faithfully clinging to your belief in Santa Claus/magical being xy. Isn't it about time to grow up?
Seriously, the explanation "some magical being burped the universe into existence" is for toddlers-if you want to know how far we have come in understanding the processes behind everything, you will have to invest some serious brainpower, because the explanation for adults is far more complex, so much more intriguing, so much more satisfying than "magical being xy did it".
One might well describe science as "a three dimensional ' game. Everything that exists (now, present past etc) has to fit is with the perceived rules of 'science'.
However, consciousness exists on several different levels. Science manages only one because it finds it difficult to consider any other levels of consciousness.
If you prefer to consider that memory is nothing more than connections between various neurons within the brain, , well if we go one assuming that, anything (everything) we might learn in this life, is of no consequence !!
They (memories) would die together with the body, which is clearly not the purpose of (human) life.
Dispute this, then I'm afraid all you are doing is to believe that life has (or is) of no purpose at all.. (Instead of the learning opportunities it (life ) !
So does your life have any purpose or is it simply a nothing experience ? Repeat nothing experience ?
"Science is not driven by ideology" S. Harris...like climate change, evolution, trans, covid vaccines, abortion
Good point. Science used to be driven by things like eugenics; you know, the idea that some races are superior to others?
Seems like some German guy with a funny mustache used that kind of science back in the 30s and 40s to justify what he did…….
But hey, Sammy Harris says nothing to worry about, right?
Science is a tool, you are trying to assign intent to a pickaxe
Dont be a stupid fuck. Those are science and ethics issues not ideology issues. There are many people of a variety of beliefs who are scientists
L
The God I know, understand and love is but a projection of my mind, a shadow that has no substance. My imagination and experience cannot be ascertained as a phenomenological truth, so I better not confuse it with reality 🤓😇
That statement you just made is but a projection of your mind since God is real as the necessity for him testifies in most people and the complexity and order of a world that without a Mind as its source would not make sense or wouldn't also explain such kind of order and complexity
@@earth1710 Any statement anyone makes is a projection of their minds and that is far more untrue than the actuality of an object or phenomenon under consideration. For example, shadows can be shorter or longer, images can be inverted and virtual, mirages can arise out of a density gradient in the air, and so on. So, the truth cannot be accounted for, by the projection of one's mind. However, an objective truth that is based on logical principles such as prediction of an eclipse are inconsequential to subjective perceptions and projections.
Order and complexity are natural phenomena that don't need the presence of a Mind. Questioning their existence is like asking why a dog can lick it's belly... It just can and therefore, it does !! 🙂
@@SajalChakravarty Your comment is self defeating, subjective, and therefore false. By your own account, you cannot tell what is design from what is not, which is the definition of lunacy.
@@earth1710 I will deal with you later.. am busy right now. Looks like you are a classic delusional case
Here are two identical statements:
God is real.
And....
1 = 0
These guys are so smart that it's boring.
Did anyone actually seek the kingdom with all the heart, until then you are not exspected to get it. look under every stone... or don't... if it was easy you would not be having such problems.
How to think like programmed robots convinced that everything is material and there is no free will.
From the comments I've read, all I can say is, you're talking to a bunch of children.
THAT ATHEIST LIED
The Problem Atheists have is,
They Unnecessarily Overcomplicate it
God is simply the Existence of Love
we all acknowledge.
Everybody Believes Love exists
Simple. But infinite in Power and Expression.
To ignore the Reality of that
Is not only Unfortunate
It’s Shameful
drivel, religous people believe in talking snakes and virgin births and act as if you posses knowledge that is only available to people like you, atheism is simply a non-belief theism is acting as if you know that god exists and you know what he wants and doesnt want and force it on people, every bit of freedom we enjoy now all cam from secular minds never from people with cross on their chests, religion made other people discriminate and kill people and is respected for it, look at the middle east, look at education, students are being taught first century nonsense instead of what is actually true about the world their loving in, keep ur delusions private and stop indoctrinating children with your nonsensical beliefs
If aliens came to earth one day I will Direct them to these These 3 individuals right here
( ´・_ゝ・) The human body is burly, gnarly and surly like a fractal.
I clicked on this video to view because of the title "How To Think" (like I don't know already), and sat through the beginning of the discussion on how to navigate through the sensitivities regarding the Muslim faith. As the discussion progressed, the three dudes left Muslim sensitivities behind and the question of God came up. This always makes me laugh how they rack their brains on way to counter Christian apologists. You never once see any atheists apply these tactics to a Muslim, asking them why they believe in their demiurge Allah, or rationalize how Allah and Yahweh are basically brothers from the same line of divinity, except Allah is a moon god and Yahweh is a volcano god (yes, god with a small `g'). People always treat the Muslim faith with kids gloves, but the Christian faith must be a grand delusion.
All religion is group-think, with a mind-hive of followers, just the same as political automatons from the Liberal Left, along with the Atheist social media groups. They all share the same outlook in their own right. None of them are truly independent thinkers, or exhibit any free will in thought.
This is not a discussion on how to think, but rather a lesson on active inference to maintain the integrity of their world view and the biases that they support.
Look for Christopher Hitchins and you'll be surprised.
Richard Dawkins also is very clear about Islam. Just as harsh as on Christianity.
Matt trying to convince his mother that Jesus isn't working in her life. Lol.
The commercials are Donald Trump asking for money. Please stop this.
2 options. Adblock or update your ad preferences.
It's only fair to block if it's pushing partisan politics.
Conversations = together! With another. Conversation can't exist without another! Is how's thy conversations given just for thee my beloved and my Beautiful? Yes, even being alone is never alone! Is who ye are talking too? Able to identify unseen nor seen ye are talking too? Why? The tree is known by its fruits. Ye may know them! Likewise be mindful unto one another availeth much indeed! To remind and comes with comfort unto the Who am I?
( ﾟ_ゝﾟ)ﾉ Natural selection is the character flaw in evil that is integrity is more important than life otherwise evolution is tragic circumstances with nothing intelligent happening. Almost everyone survive until they reproduce. Nothing is getting selected except for the character flaw in evil. I found a replacement for the character flaw in evil that I liked but God makes me forget things that will cause me trouble.
Of course it's a trick question if you don't know what you believe or know 😂😂😂
Dawkins is a legit scientist.
Harris is a pseudo-scientist.
Dillahunty is a game show host who has memorized 20-25 atheist talking points for all occasions.
How can you say Sam Harris is a pseudo-scientist. He got a degree in philosophy from Stanford University and a PhD in neuroscience from UCLA. Idk what you’re smoking on but let me get a hit if you think that makes you a “pseudo-scientist “ ps Dawkins earned his zooology phd and masters. 🤷♂️
Maaf" apakah Manusia paling tinggi derajatnya?!? Manusia bisa berpindah tempat kedarat ke air"dll bisa bermacam macam volume suaranya" abcd...... dll" di Bu mi alam semesta!!! (Tidak seperti binatang" tumbuh tumbuhan" dll!!! Adakah manusia sebelum melahirkan manusia bukan dari Bagian Atas dulu pertemuan"nya?!? (ciuman.......) baru Bagian bawah?!? (Jenis kelamin......) Seperti Hukum Gravitasi Bumi" dari Atas jatuh...... Ke bawah......." Dll) 🤩😍😀😁🤫 terimakasih......
How to think in an echo chamber. The godless gatekeepers.
Science is material, it is based on facts which are based on sense perception, and at its better moments based on cognition and intuition. Religion is based on intuition and balanced by reason. The definition of religion is that to which we are bound. Not to acknowledge this ground of human cognition and experience which goes back to the beginning of human origin as a basic human experience is strange. Humanism puts humans at the center of reality for all the wrong reasons.
religion has brought out the most horrid behavior in man... shameful
@@phukrnd840 Atheistic Communism was a walk in the park? Not so. It is human nature not religion.
@@ALavin-en1kr uhh your comparison doesn't make Sense.. it's false equivalency... But not even that...
@@ALavin-en1kr everything you just said is shit you made up.. your definition of religion is not anything close to the definition of religion. . You must be using a dictionary only you have
"Insulted my savior" 😅 What a wimpy weak-minded savior !
Dillahunty: “I won’t use the word faith…..I’ll say trust.”
They are literally synonyms.
Poser.
Clear advances know aims given!
Jesus is as real as your wife is beautiful. I don’t need anyone else to believe with me because you’re not me.
the 3 stooges
What do the father,the son, and the Holy Spirit have to do with this!?
Nope, you're just backwards from Reality.
@@13shadowwolf which reality ⁉️ Buddha, Allah, Shiva, Thor, JahWeh, KimSun Il, Jim Jones, Jesus, Ozmandius, so many mythical gods to prostate to.
@@hectormata449 we only have access to the singular Reality that we share. There are not multiple other Realities as far as we can currently tell.
Perception is NOT Reality, there's a reason that we have different words for those separate concepts.
Jimbob would beat all 3 of these stooges in a debate at once.
How Dillahunty ends up beside Harris and Dawkins.. I’ll never know. He must pinch himself. No formal education to speak of. He’s a fairly formidable debater within his parameters.. if he was educated then he’d be up there for sure.
Well, you dont need a formal education to have a proper understanding of logic. Even those with Phds in philosophy make terribly obvious errors in their reasoning
Formal education has been the downfall of many - the most notable symptom is arrogance. 😢
Your inability to understand why is why he's there and you are not.
@@gregbatson616 woow so deep
@@smilloww2095 Wow, so shallow.
ahh I knew this had to be an old event.. Dillahunty has since lost his mind,
I am blocked on all of his current and previous shows/channels.
But that isn’t necessarily his fault.😅
@@ramigilneas9274 I'm blocked on his Twitter,
I think "no debate" is his main strategy these days,
@@clayreiththe problem is when you debate people on the same topic for 25 years and they keep giving the same dead refuted responses and arguments it's annoying. Have you actually watched any of his recent content? The only time he doesn't have a discussion with somebody is when they're being intellectually dishonest.
2:07 Expert:
An ex is a has-been and a spert is a drip under pressure.
Awwww... Cute pseudo-etymology.
Was that supposed to be smart? Did you have something to say?
technology will not save us - technology is the problem
Now that lassae Faire is coming to an end in the coming generation, the wholistic knowledge curriculum is crucial.
Wholistic loss of knowledge under the german separatism may have helped rush things along in the obvious dominant peasants revolt separatist inspired Newton theological thread pulled in mapping codes and physics building machines to now dictate other diciplines that just got it wrong under older dogma echo chambers that held them back .
What tool does the machinest need is our grandkids future.
Once the light came on in humanity Dx,dy,dz = man made time hierarchy knowledge of Good and evil machinest was born.
He cut the branche, lathe the bark, milled the edges and grinded the tip of the spear.
Now we return
Your spelling is not completely correct.
@fionagregory9147 If my park bench shade tree fat fingers accidentally taps a correct order of letters to form a word or proper sentence, I deserve a golden star 🌟 or 3😁
Laissez-faire
Is that supposed to make sense or you just had your feelings hurt so trolling?
Maybe both 😂
My money is on triggers
Try to get back to Reality, and post something worth interacting with.
There's already enough empty gibberish to go around, we don't need more
Let me help your audience where you cannot, The number one killer to intellect is bias.
Two of these three men are literally ruled by their own bias.
For you to present them as examples of how to think is quite ridiculous.
Nope, that's just you projecting your ignor@nce onto others.
Your Bias doesn't allow you to be Objective.
@13shadowwolf
Nope. You're just a clown , who needs to appeal to authority. Mostly because you don't do your own thinking.
@13shadowwolf
At least your little brain does understands how blinding of an influence bias can be.....
Now it's just a matter of getting you to realize it's not just the other people (the ones you don't like) who are blinded.
Once that happens you'll actually be a thinker.
@@MultipleGrievance that doesn't work, there are actually neutral stances on topics, Objectivity is more possible for Skeptics; they have functions built into their Logic, to detect more errors than any other group.
Nobody understands how to deal with Bias, than the Skeptics.
@13shadowwolf
Mostly a fallacy.
Very few people are capable taking neutral stances on topics. It requires emotional detachment.
I've been following Sam & Matt for years now, they are both very emotionally attached to the topics they discuss.
Matt has gotten hysterical so many times I've lost count. The notion that this guy is objective is complete nonsense.
Sam, has himself gotten worse over the years. He's now incapable of separating his politics from his positions. They are one and the same. Which of course makes objectivity impossible.
What is the Aim of 2 being together? Without bias! But with clarity, coherence, and adequacy! 2 same sex = ? Remember the Creator ways are not Thy ways! But will be revealed unto a little Child "i" increase belongs! Feet resting upon SUSTAINED! Yes, even the 2 same sex came from 1st! Can they exist? Creation will say, who will glorify thy creation? If none in front! Same sex give Gratitude and Honor unto my Heirs Hosts and my Beautiful= many the "i" AM! Remember can't exist without my Heirs Hosts and my Beautiful! Remember how else can even makes noises in front! Now what is the Aim of thy noises? Come let us have sincere conversations. It's ok to correct one another nor to bring to remembrance concerning. Without being offended in front! Together!
why don’t you guys go to Russia, they are in need of people to show people how to think…
They don't need them. YOU do.
Larry Moe and curly. Ughhhhhhh
I would say Curley Larry Moe , but I don’t want to insult the three stooges !!!!!’ Atheist speak with fork tongue !!!!
That first line is a cute, broad, negative generalization. What, you couldn't point to one thing as an example of what you found offensive?
@@arthurwieczorek4894 ps the video is from Apologetics roadshow the title is He finally admitted it , the part I forgot was after he played the clip of Harris saying , roadshow said if you ask 100 Sam Harris after seeing this have you changed all would probably say no because Christianity is evil and harmful like you guessed it Trump , the ends justify the means . Watch that short video then tell me what you think .
You only insulted yourself.
@@toni4729 who was insulted ? Me or the one who responded to me ? Cheers
@@22julip You don't know I was talking to you. Yes I was talking to you. If you have something to say, say it. What I can see from the comments, including yours is all childish.
This is like a couple of friends in a bar, slightly drunk, talking about deep things, and can't formulate how differences join us all. 20 minutes in, and i have not heard anything connected, just each talking their own stuff lol.
So you don't understand what they're saying therefore it's a waste of time?
*These 3 Amigos are very proficient at expressing & communicating their collective derision for people of Faith. Not once taking a moment to consider what the Human Race would be without some belief in a High Power, Higher Ideals, and the drive that it creates for Humans to rise above their baser instincts. Personally I find that more than a little disturbing for 3 people who are supposed to be smarter than the rest of us "Idiots" that indeed see the collective benefits from lives of Faith...How long do you think these three Poffs would last without it?*
Matt says God should know what would convince him of His existence. But for them that love not the truth God sends them a powerfull delusion so they believe that instead.