Despite being born in the 30's and being very devoutly religious Catholics, my parents were pretty cool and pretty open-minded. I grew up Catholic and went through all the stuff. I never believed. I have no memories of ever believing. I knew there was no such thing as God many years before I reached puberty. I couldn't articulate it for I was too young, but I knew there was no God and religion as I knew it was bullshit. For my 12th birthday, in 1972, my parents gave me the gift of choice. They were going to church every Sunday as normal, but it was up to me if I wanted to go or not. I have never set foot in church since, not counting weddings and funerals. deGrasse-Tyson and others like him are what this world needs.
Ya, but god is inherently anti scientific. And Muslims are inherently anti- women. Obviously religions like islam and Christianity are stupid and ignorant and the believers are very small thinkers. Not to mention you are limiting your own dieties by saying they are not powerful enough to create the big bang.
I was born in the 30s and was raised southern Baptist. However, I have a brain and I use it. I became agnostic after living and realize that I don’t know if there is a god however I’m open to proof if there is any.
+John Lowenthal Francis Bacon said something to the effect that if we are willing to start with questions, we will end in certainties. But if we start with certainties, we will end with questions.
***** I think I may have asked you this before, as you seem familiar ;-) I cannot argue with your testimony (or with the testimonies of my LDS friends, either). Do you think there are people who think they got what they asked for, but do not share your beliefs? Do you think there are those who see wwI and wwII and ask 'Why is the Christian religion so violent?'
Ne1lcul well because people who are religious are most often not scientifically literate and thats what launched the golden age in our species where we created the most and discovered the most. Most people are fed up with religion being stuffed down our throat so it goes both ways...
Ne1lcul because weak people are those who feel strong by trying to impose you their own coward delusions and intellectual laziness: either they're jealous of you, either they're mentally challenged control freaks.
Dwight Burton Agnosticism questions everything. Personally, I take it farther than most and say that nothing can be known. All "facts" are just guesses. We assess all things using one tool: the human nervous system. It's unavoidable. Considering that we don't know how the human brain works (or even where "the mind" or consciousness are located in the physical brain) we are measuring all things with a tool we do not understand. We have no idea how it may be skewing the so called "results." I question everything because I believe nothing.
Jacob A No one can prove that invisible diarrhea monsters don't exist and run our lives, but that is no reason to think that they do. Just like no one can prove Zeus, Isis, Horus, Loki, Poseidon, or Quetzalcoatl aren't invisibly running things. You cannot put a burden of non-proof on people who say it is delusional. The burden of proof is on those making the claim. Personally, I would question things regardless (see my post above). And if it makes any difference, I have read the Bible cover-to-cover several times and studied multiple other religions.
I too was raised RC. Even thought about becoming a priest once, hell, I'm named after a RC monsigneur, but as I've aged, the more I thought about it, how we are taught what our parents were taught and their parents etc. etc. and realized that, to me, none of it made any sense. I don't believe, nor is it advisable, to tell anybody how they should believe, in fact it has made a slight schism between me and my siblings, but they respect my right to not believe. I've heard the names Mr. Tyson rolled off of atheist authors, but I can't say I've read any of their books, I don't need to base my belief on them. But, I do believe that religion, of any sort, does not and never will have a place in public schools except maybe as each of them relate to history, geography, and past and present political systems. Prayer belongs at home, privately and at church. Teaching religious doctrines has no place in our politics or any public institution, especially schools. (Imagine going in to get your drivers license and they ask you if you believe that Jesus Christ is your lord and savior. Answer yes and get a license. Answer no, and I guess you better be good on a bike)
The real problem is that we do not have a Neil DeGrasse Tyson on every schoolboard, at every classroom door, and sitting in on every back to school night. My daughter is in 8th grade and I just came back from one (BTS night) where an ELA teacher spent the better part of his presentation apologizing for some classic literature that is on his reading list and that may be offensive to the (religious, sexual, political... feel free to add your favorite peeve) views of some parents and that he would offer "alternative" reading to those students. WOW. At the same time the bible is full of mass murder, ethnic cleansing, infanticide, incest, justifies if not mandates slavery... that is presumably a-okay with these folks.
My favorite part, is the old "Do whatever the hell you want, here, on Earth and if it is a Sin, just blame good ol' Scapegoat Jesus and go to HEAVEN!!!!!!!" ploy. If you buy that crap, you certainly BUY BULL and/or you were Indoctrinated/Mentally Abused. DAMNIT! (Sorry. I almost forgot to not go to Church and not be a Christian.
Religion is just a psychological defense mechanism. People fear death. Religion offers eternal life. Even scientists are afraid to die, so they deal with it by convincing themselves that they will live forever.
+Zelkyplant Puzzling, if the human body is no more than a complex measuring device then what's making the measurement? Are you the human body or the observer using the human body to measure the universe?
venum4k And how does it do that? Through observation and measurements. Again, if all the human body does is make observations, then what's making the observations? A ruler doesn't measure anything unless there is an observer present.
Love Neil. I'm an atheist. Been one for a couple decades. My deconversion was traumatic. I felt so alone when I started researching my Christian religion. I could care less what others think and am so thankful I'm free from superstition. Tell it Neil!
And why were so many angels unhappy, confused, gullible, or delusional, in heaven, though? Pre Revolt. Also, what, did, Jesus... DO... during, the slave trade, Spanish Inquisition, and the blood libel, upon Jews? And I ask this, out of curiosity - not, fear. Plus, why, should Spanish medieval Jews... confess... when He may not... Have helped, them?@@kimberlywiederhold627
@@shrimpgripper Turning away from God and choosing evil instead brought death and all manner of suffering into this world. It was mankind's choice and that was the result.
@@timq6224 Man made the choice to supplant God's authority and, in so doing, put himself above God. He chose evil (Satan) rather than God. Satan became the 'ruler' of this world and all manner of wickedness, death and destruction came/comes from him. Read Matthew chapter 4, it shows the command that Satan has in our world in that he can give to whomever will fall down and worship him
Wayne Ekeh Neither one is a religion. A religion is a belief system built around the worship of a god or gods. Atheism/anti-theism doesnt do that, so its impossible for them to be religions. We dont have a dogmatic book that we read in the name of the God we dont believe in, we dont have a place that we go to sing hymns and hear sermons about the God we dont believe in, we dont have a list of rules that are contradicted by the dogmatic book we dont have, we dont pray to the God we dont have, and so on and so on...
Wayne Ekeh Its not a belief if Im able to look at the numbers myself and come to my own conclusions. I dont simply *believe* 2+2=4, because im able to look at the numbers and do the math for myself. A dogma is an incontrovertible truth. The thing about Science is that it changes. Sometimes what we thought was true changes with new discoveries. Religion is what it is, forever. Gods word/will never changes. If you deviate from that, you go to Hell. Whereas with Science, deviating from the norm will usually lead to learning something new. Which is exciting.
"This case is not about the need to separate church and state; it's about the need to separate ignorant, scientifically illiterate people from the ranks of teachers." That has to be the most savage line in history!! 🤣🤣🤣
@@williamlevy6964 Well, if having an opinion of my own and being open-minded to knowledge is your definition of being a wolf in sheep's clothing, then I will gladly follow.
Religion is an ancient placebo for the human condition. It only works if you are ignorant of the facts. Faith is a soothing tonic but some of us prefer a dose of reality.
What is real? We see less than 1% of what is there, and our hearing is not much better. When you say real, you mean what is real to you and your closed mind. Sure, you think science is the shit right now, but in 20, or 100 years, we will look back and have a good laugh about "science".
Great White7 Galileo's scientific observations that the earth moves around the sun are nearly five hundred years old, Newton's theory of Gravity is nearly four hundred years old and the germ theory of disease is over four hundred years old. I don't see anyone laughing at these ideas today.
Darren Carpenter Yes, fantastic little bugs. Proof that "there are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in our philisophy" (heaven meaning the cosmos of course)
I see a lot of people attacking Tyson saying he's insulting religious people, I don't see it that way. I see it as he's kinda defending them, telling people like Richard Dawkins not to try to convince the general public to go against their religious beliefs but to go against other Elite Scientists. Tyson himself said that he doesn't care if your religious or not, most of the music he listens to is fairly religious , he just doesn't want religion interfering in Science, He doesn't want the Church stopping Science Class rooms from teaching evolution etc....
That's an interesting outlook on it. He's asking his own scientific colleagues to be self critical concerning an overall scientific hypocritical outlooks against the general public concerning the overall issue of religion. The public would be secondary if 7%-15% of the elite scientist also cling to a notion of "god".
Who cares. Religious people deserve to be insulted for being stupid and ignorant. Same as someone who believes in a flat earth would be insulted for being a moron.
Vitamin B I'm religious and retain my rational thoughts, so no we don't deserve to be insulted because throughout my life religious people tend to have more compassion for others than atheists who just put down others with no respect whatsoever. Even Neil makes that point that scientists don't deserve to insult religious individuals.
@@jwsanders1214 Jesus isn't even a reliably existent historical figure. You sir are the only fool. You think humanity is special, and that your imaginary friend created us "in his image" to be perfect, but we know this is not the case. Humanity has come about, as every other species before it and after it has and will, through endless evolution. And we are far from perfect. There is so many imperfections in the human body that we even have fun with some of them, like mr tyson says in some other speeches optical illusions are simply the failure of our brain to properly comprehend the light waves received by our eyes. Don't you think a perfect creator would be smart enough to program out some of these inconsistencies and outright failures of the human body/mind if he truly intended for us to be the epitome of sentient life? The fact of the matter is, the bible is a jumbled mess of different stories both stolen from other mythos and twisted to the ends of those who rewrote it. The bible has been translated at least 3 times that we know of before it came to us in the english that you and I understand today, and before that it was copied several thousand times by different scribes and monks who certainly all made some errors or mistakes in copying. The bible as we know it today is not the bible that the hebrews or even the original disciples wrote, and if it was still 100% accurate to its original material it would certainly make even less sense than it does now. Basically what I'm saying is, the only real thing in the bible is some of the places it mentions. Everything else is a fairy tale. You can still take moral guidance from it, but do not mistake it for fact. It is farce in it's most obvious form, and to think otherwise is to be blind.
***** I believe he is talking about our technological advances and not how you choose to view society. The average teenager is far more educated than they were 100 or even 50 years ago. Some of course are not educated in "real life" and I do after kids are not as smart as they could be, but that is the fault of society as well. I agree with the comment that religion has no place now a days.
CommunistPie I disagree with your statement in fact the information age has actually greatly expanded belief systems. Whether you like it or not religion will always have a place in society no matter how technologically advanced we become.
Rawtheran how do you know? maybe when we upload our consciousness into machines there will be no desire for religon, the future is a crazy place. Also the trend that higher rates of education = lower rates of religion makes me think as the world's population becomes more educated religion will decline, I don't know. But as someone who has had the internet around my whole life the idea of religion seems utterly ridiculous and antiquated, as people have more access to information they have less of a desire to fill in the gaps in their knowledge with the idea of an all knowing god figure
CommunistPie Thousands of years ago before technology everyone was religious... Everything was the unknown. As technology and science advances people seem to be getting away from religion, because we have explanations. I am growing further away from religion day by day. Most religious people are very close minded with science. Even if there was a day that proved God did not exist most would still not want to believe. I lean at being agnostic. Still science cannot prove that their is no deity in the Heavens ( although they do not seem to be flaunting that) and the Bible or anything cannot prove the existence of a God.
I heard two fish talking in the fish tank the other day. One said: "There is no evidence that human beings exist." The other fish said: "What are you talking about? According to the bible that is why we are here. Human beings made the fish tank and put us here." The first fish challenged again: "Do you have any evidence of that?" The second fish then have nothing to say.
I worked as an engineer with other engineers & scientists in Silicon Valley for several decades (mostly in Life Sciences). I cannot recall one conversation that involved religion unless specifically asked, which was rare. Even then, the conversation only briefly touched the subject. Religious belief seems irrelevant to the people who have to think critically for a living. I regard religion as incompatible with science. Supernatural beliefs are not based on evidence whereas science is only concerned with measurable evidence, calculation & deduction; introducing any religious beliefs always contaminates science one way or another. Fortunately, most scientists & engineers know this!
I have to constantly remind certain people that Science isn't actively out to get religion. Yes, the point is put to task by the ardent believers themselves. Speaking from experience, they are literally taught from birth that they are under active assault and act accordingly. Yes, people in technical and scientific fields rarely if ever talk about religion. But listen to your typical Bible thumpers and they are constantly reaffirming themselves with each other. It's like they are groping in the dark and constantly asking "This is real, right? This is true?" So it is interesting to note that when they enter situations where that is missing, they start freaking out a bit. The whole thing is very cult-like. I had the opportunity to visit my parent's church for an Easter service after not going in quite some time and what I once thought of as a benign sort of friendly get together has turned into something not unlike a Nuremberg rally. It was really quite scary. So it's nice to see that there are level headed people out there. Thank you for your posts. And see? We didn't even talk about our own religion at all. After all, who cares if I think that the planet is carried along on the horn of a unicorn, right? ;)
CybershamanX Yeah, it takes courage for a person to question his/her own beliefs. Many of the PhD scientists I worked with were fairly humble people, considering their superior education; science casts its practitioners into the gauntlet of peer critique that frequently calls their conclusions into question, resulting in personal self-examination when knocked off the pedestal. I've watched my son change as he got his science doctorate, and noticed his bravado level come down closer to reality! Contrast this with the regular, frequent sermons & bible-reading sessions aimed at reinforcing beliefs that any seriously introspective person would reject if not for the hypnosis induction that repetition produces. Did you notice that church events are usually about the preacher speaking to his flock without any Q & A? Religious people are deliberately trained to not ask questions! I think the big draw of religion is its social aspect of complying with the one message from one person or one book with little discussion outside his/its preachments. Ironically, scientists are often fairly staunch individualists even though they're peer-reviewed. The process is competitive. This truth flies in the face of theistic & pseudoscientific mythology that suggests that they're part of a conspiracy under mind-control to devastate religion. The fact is that many scientists simply consider religious beliefs as irrelevant or obstructive; and with good reason! I've never seen so much blatant projection as that emanating from science critics!
A likely explanation is that most people are multi-dimensional with an array of mental states & ways of perceiving reality. Imagination can be a double-edged sword that at once enables us to explore & create, while also providing answers that aren't connected to serious observations. It seems that superstition is a vestigial behavior of recognizing patterns that we want to validate for the sake of deriving comfort & solace. We're smart enough to ask why we're here & where we're going, but not always smart enough to realize that some questions have no answers beyond the obvious. I suspect that all of us engage in excursions from the here-and-now reality, occasionally challenged to behave appropriately. Science is about knowledge in its core definition. What we know empowers us. It's a legacy of The Enlightenment, here only the last 400 of 200,000 years of our existence. It's new. For knowledge, we must deliberately omit our superstitious tendencies with effort, practice & discipline. Considering that, the population of scientists will always have outliers who somehow manage to compartmentalize religious beliefs separately from their scientific efforts like Francis Collins does.
Sim kinetics: I work with over 150 engineers and scientist , more than 70% believe. 100% hold PhDs or masters as a minimum , do not state experience as facts. It doesn't quit fit your description. At least you are approaching the subject intelligently , and I'd say I agree with many of your statements, but if you have any imagination you outta know that there has to be a point 0. Let's say we agree about religion , that there is just no evidence etc . Explain point 0? Do not try to explain what I have read numerous times , I will ask you what came before that until you are forced to say " I don't know" , or " it is just how is" there is absolutely not difference between accepting point 0 as something that "was just there" or that nothing created everything we see ( because I guess you see that every day, something created out of nothing ) and calling point 0 God. There is no difference , you simply think too highly of yourself to share the thoughts of an ignorant populations!
Paper viewed : event some evolutionist are Christians. Look it up and stop talking about personal life experiences as facts. The 7% exist. A scientist is presenting this data to you and you have to speak out your ass to misrepresent us scientist and are being a d because people don't agree with you.
As a religious Muslim, I thank Mr. Tyson for his notion of respect to people of religion. We are taught to co-exist, even with the greatest of disagreements, which I for do have. Peace be upon all of mankind and those who practice and preach the practicing of peace.
Ya, but god is inherently anti scientific. And Muslims are inherently anti- women. Obviously religions like islam and Christianity are stupid and ignorant and the believers are very small thinkers. Not to mention you are limiting your own dieties by saying they are not powerful enough to create the big bang.
One of my very good friends is a practicing Muslim. He is like an uncle to my boys. And I am an atheist. But the way we both treat people, value family, and generally conduct ourselves, is pretty much identical. We just got to the same place using different roads. My point being that the real Muslim faith (not the one co-opted by radicals) is exactly what you say.
If you read quarantine and suras you will see that you are wrong. Pretend friends are ok when Muslims have no power. Critical mass happens, it's a different beast entirely
Tim H Im honest. I'm strightforward, and I at least try to be respectful. You? Not so much.
9 лет назад
Tim Spangler you're none of the three. scroll up, jackass. I didn't just attack you out of the blue. you attacked me out of the blue. and as I recall all you do when actual points are being discussed is deny science, lie and troll. which is why you'd rather argue like a little child over non-issues like relative politeness. you want to pretend that your snide remarks are straightforward and respectful? that your dishonest responses on numerous occasions are honest? sure you do. jackasses like you always do.
After listening to the" religious" people thru the years ,I have come to the conclusion that most are religious by default. Default because they need a benevolent, out of their power, easy answers to way to complex questions. It is calming, anxiety relieving and leads to a better nights sleep...
Albert Einstein wrote: "We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library, whose walls are covered to the ceiling with books in many languages. The child knows that someone must have written those books. It does not know who or how., It does not understand the languages... the child notes a definite plan in the arrangement of the books, a mysterious order, which it does not comprehend but only dimly suspects." While it is true Einstein maintained that he didn't believe in a "personal" God, it can be noted her recognized a "definite plan.. and mysterious order" and was in awe of everything... Personally, I tend to think that those who dismiss everything "religious" as being primitive or anti-science have stopped short in their explorations.
@@mrtadreamer what does ungodly mean? a man does not work for any god? lots of money there,though! or not a god kiss ass,maybe? but i tell you what he is:he is definitely an ungoofy man,for sure.
I guess archaeology, history, statistics, observation, etc. don't count as knowledge. That's because in all irony it's the atheists that hide behind the theories they're taught to justify not truly investigating outside of their preference-zone.
@@Contending Interesting. Conversely, I go to the written word when I want a good laugh. The best ones are reading gods directions on how to BUY YOUR SLAVES, and how to BEAT YOUR SLAVES, in the "buy-bull". Lesson over.
Ray caster: Hi Ray; knowledge heals what? Are you referring to our incredible knowledge that has helped us produce nuclear weapons, that will soon blow the planet to bits?We'd better have faith that He will spare us from that (hint: He will!)
And yet none of those religious people forces you to do anything, including attend church. Do you think people like hearing your thoughts and opinions?
@@triky5384 You started with the word 'demand', so you explain it. You have beliefs about how things ought to be just like I do. There is no reason a person of faith has any less entitlement to an opinion as anyone else. If you disagree, explain why your thoughts trump mine.
+Aldo Torres we decide whats right and wrong. The powerful have no authority to answer to. So ultimately right and wrong ultimately become whats favorable for those who have the power. No more god given human dignity. Just our views on whose "worth" more. This i think is already apparent in the pro choice movement. They are human, so why do we kill them. God says we are children of his. Man says do what you want, its your body
+Tim H your going to have to show me how Stalins and hitlers regime were a religious movement. Atheism leads to a breakdown in the moral argument. In which really anything goes. I don't think we can make a comparison between nazi Germany and say the catholic church. Islam may be a different case.
I'm Christian and I have a huge respect for him. I've always liked the way he stood for respect in spite of different views and way of life, and I think everybody needs to learn this from him, religious and non-religious people alike. There is just too much disrespect and trolling in this world.. If only people could have his character rather than just his scientific knowledge and fervour.
Ya, but god is inherently anti scientific. And Muslims are inherently anti- women. Obviously religions like islam and Christianity are stupid and ignorant and the believers are very small thinkers. Not to mention you are limiting your own dieties by saying they are not powerful enough to create the big bang.
Religion is old as time but it's mad stupid because it's primitive and you can't ask questions. Just have to believe and have faith....wow.. That's a tell tell sign of a scam....it's like saying do what I said and don't hlask questions
What saddens me about America is that people like Neil DeGrasse Tyson are compelled to talk so ardently about religion. They shouldn't have to. Tyson is a terrific ambassador for science, he is eloquent and thoughtful, and I wish he were my teacher. But we live in a country where people like him and Bill Nye and before them Carl Sagan are forced to get themselves in the science vs. religion battle, and they have to defend science against those who want it halted, who see it as a threat to their view of the world. I consider myself a Christian, I've always considered science as discovering HOW the universe works, religion as an explanation as to WHY it works. They're compatible in my own head. They both make sense to me. Not that I'm so enlightened as to look down on anyone else, but if an Average Joe like myself can resolve this conflict in my own mind, why can't America? Why can't Tyson go back the planetarium, why can't he speak on behalf of NASA or do Cosmos or one of the many things he's good at, why does he have to waste--and I do think it's a waste--so much of his valuable time, taking on zealots?
+Flag Coco Here's the problem: when you only have a few religious idiots, that's fine. They are small in numbers so they can't do much damage to society. But when you have A LOT of religious idiots, then that's when shit goes full blown. Long story short, in America, we have a lot of religious idiots, and these even include our presidential candidates (e.g. out of all the GOP presidential nominee, almost every single one of them denies evolution).
+Sean Armstrong If America chooses to elect a leader who denies evolution and panders to those stone age neanderthals, she deserves everything she's going to get. American high school students already lag behind Europeans and Asians. But hey, maybe they'll be world beaters in Home School.....
I cannot understand how educated people can retain religious beliefs, in the absence of supporting evidence. What verifiable data can they have that would justify belief? If they used a bible as an evidence source, they’d be up against the problem of proving that written claims about god & Jesus Christ were accurate, given the lack of supporting evidence for either. Anyone with an education could have fabricated claims for the words and deeds of Jesus Christ, irrespective of whether the guy actually existed. Christ, it seems, was unable to write, thus accounts of his alleged activities were written by others. Suspicious, huh; and where is god? Is this invisible god up a mountain, in the sky, or not even in the cosmos as we know it?
3:20 is one of the few times I disagree with Tyson. Disrespecting religious beliefs that are explicitly harmful is not only a good thing, but is necessary.
Disrespecting anything is never good. Trying to debate and persuade people is a much more powerful approach to ending harmful religious beliefs like extremism.
Gabe Johnston I never said I respect absent mindedness, what I said was if you want to change people's beliefs, or in your case, stop Dahmer from killing people, the best way would be to persuade him that his ways are wrong and he should change.
You can privately disrespect harmful religious beliefs, but you'd better be publically discreet about it, if you want to affect real change over time. Otherwise you only create a backlash, and nothing causes stagnation like a religious jihad.
Well according to the bible, all Jeffrey Dahmer had to do is accept Jesus as his savior, ask for forgiveness, and he gets the golden ticket no matter what he did. In the bible there is only one sin, mentioned twice actually, that is unforgivable. I find it funny that 99% of people who claim to be of that religion have no idea what it is. That alone shows how valid religious beliefs are, lol.
ominous24 QUOTE: "all Jeffrey Dahmer had to do is accept Jesus as his savior" Which he did, along with fellow murderer Ted Bundy, so our 'born-again' friends are going to have good company in Heaven.
I have been an atheist from the time I was a child. I went to a Methodist church and thought religion was simply a tradition or cultural ritual we did but didn't actually believe to be real similar to the Santa Claus tradition. To my shock as a teen I met more people who honestly believed in gods I have always wondered why I was an atheist when so many people are not.
I am far more afraid of people who think they have the answers then those who say they mostly have more questions. When you 'know' you condemn, when you don't know and you search, you are more kind and aware of another who follows that path. A path that is far more courageous then believing in silly books written by men hundreds of years after mythical figures supposedly walked the Earth.
In my own life, I have noticed that the more religious someone is, the dumber they tend to be. Not always true, but true enough to be noticeable to me.
This man talks sense!! I believe in a God and I completely agree that religion and science are separate and should stay that way. That's why Religious Studies and Science are two different subjects. I know that over here in the UK we learn science in a science classroom and religion in an R.E. class, however I've heard that some places in America teach creationism in science classes?!? My Physics teacher is Catholic and not once does she bring religion into anything she teaches, any qualified scientist would understand this.
No public school district in America teaches creationism in the classroom. In fact no public school district in America teaches religion in the classroom, period. It stands in stark contrast to the Separation of Church and State and has been ruled by the SCOTUS to be Unconstitutional a number of times (this doesn't apply to private schools). Universities and colleges offer 'religious studies' but no accredited university or college would be caught dead supplementing creationism over evolution.
detox8388 What the laws say, and what religious people do, are often different things. You must have your eyes closed and ears shut if you really believe that.
smurfyday Oh trust me I know. I was speaking in technicalities. Obviously people will try to stretch the laws but it's usually corrected quickly in the courts.
Perhaps religion is much more nuanced than rationalists would care to admit, and that religion does not always and everywhere reject questioning or act opposite to scientific inquiry.
What's the difference between this RUclips comment section and Neil deGrasse Tyson? Tyson isn't ignorant, outspoken, insulting, or impulsive. This goes for people, regardless of their religion. There will always be "those people" on any side of religion or atheism, so let people believe what they believe. If they intrude and push their beliefs on you, whether it's a close-minded Jehovah's witness or an anti-religious Atheist, tell them to take it somewhere else, because as you all know, it is near-impossible to change someone's entire values and beliefs from a single knock on the door, or a cybernetic conversation over the internet. Keep your opinion to yourselves and don't thrive on such irrational conflict.
Forrest Gump Well for that is the debate, to maintain them away from classrooms, we don't want them to change their mind, unless they are willing to really understand science. But creationists wants to teach the bible as science, or more science than actual science. That isn't irrational conflict, they are being irrational and wants everyone to be the same.
Erediör I understand, but that's not what I'm talking about. The people in the comments aren't debating, they're bashing religious folk, and certain religious folk are being scientifically ignorant. There is no insulting in Tyson's lecture, yet people use such disrespect in the comments.
Forrest Gump Ah now I see your point, for that reason Tyson said that we should investigate the little percentage of religious scientist and see why they think like that, not to go bashing the uneducated believers, bc their argument is from ignorance on scientific topics most of the time.
I was expecting this video to be something different, but was actually incredibly impressed with what Tyson had to say. I especially liked what he said about some people being biologically "hard wired" to be religious, which from a neuroscience perspective is actually true in many cases. For example, individuals with bi polar disorder, schizophrenia and other psychiatric disorders are often often more religious than the general population. I was very religious prior to being medicated for bi polar disorder, now an agnostic. My perspective was completely different back then and I've come to realize there needs to be some level of respect from both sides.
I think there was a story of babies switched at birth, where the biological child of the religious parents was religious, while the biological child of the secular parents was more secular.
The higher the education, the lower religiosity. Dependence is the case, but not because of the fact that scientists are closer than others to the truth, but because of the fact that they find it difficult to admit their helplessness and ignorance, and to turn to God.
You just answered your own question. Common sense must prevail in order to deny Deities and accept evidence based information. Its your issue if you take offense to that, but you sound like someone who has been brainwashed from birth to believe in the particular God that your country believes in.
If you cannot understand what evidenced based information is, then you are a lost cause my friend. Your statement "evidence based information' sounds like a euphemism for little more than a guess", is the dumbest thing I have ever read on the entire internet. Well done! And no I did not rely on evidence when I made the assumption that you were a brainwashed religious nut job. Once again, you clearly indicate the non ability to decipher the difference between evidence based information and not! Tyson acknowledges that intelligent people can be religious, so your claim that he persecutes people who do not accept the factual evidence from science is complete nonsense. Did you base this statement on evidence? lol A famous geologist once said 'if all of the evidence in the world pointed to an old earth, I'd be the first to admit it, but I'd still be a young earth creationist because that is what the holy scriptures teach'. There is simply no reasoning with a brain in this frame of (deluded) mind. And FYI, just because (like the religious folk) you do not accept science, does not give you the right to call it pseudo-science. Yet again you have revealed your own ignorance.
So you are a racist? You hate Australians! Man, you can't help but dig your own hole even deeper. lol When I use the two words 'evidence' and 'based', I am suggesting that science will document a theory after testing and studying the evidence. I did not use these words to describe medically-related reference. What the hell are you talking about? If you read back through our comments you'll find that you were the first one to make a personal attack. You lose racist!
You are making yourself look bad buddy. And I find it laughable that you would stereotype 'ALL' atheists because you are losing a debate with one. Now that is childish, or just a stupid response to the situation you are in. Get your political agenda on track with health care and reduce your weekly massacres with gun control policies and I might fit in 'well' in the US, otherwise I think I'll stay right here. Yes the first race in Australia were the aboriginals, just like the Native Americans were in the US. Technically you are correct (which Atheist are more than happy to admit). But if you hate the Chinese, the Italians, the Greeks, the British, the Mexicans or the Australian's (in this case), I'd class you as a racist towards that nation. So fuck you buddy. You Aussie hating prick. Fancy stooping to that level in an otherwise healthy debate. Good one douche bag!
I want to see an interview with one of the 7% of Elite Scientists who do believe. I feel like their reasons would be very interesting, and even more so, would love to hear it from a person capable of using their owns words. Anyone know where I could find such a thing?
+Ed Colter Actually, since we're on RUclips, it's not hard to find many brilliant and accomplished dissenters against Atheism and Darwinism. It's worth listening to both points of view.
+AntiquityCentury21 I've been reading RUclips comments for a long time and I've yet to encounter a single "brilliant and/or accomplished dissenter against Darwinism" -- in fact they are all notably ignorant, many of them appallingly so.
+Ed Colter Search up Francis S Collins. He is a big scientist and he believes in god. He wrote a book about science and religion and has had many interviews. Funny thing is when I was researching on him he didn't believe in god until after he had obtained his science degrees.
Vasu Sharma I'm fully aware of geneticist Francis Collins, who believes in God and also fully accepts evolution-- as do most Christians. Creationism is a pseudo-scientific and pseudo-Christian cult. Evolution has nothing to do with theism vs. atheism.
Tyson's 'black-preacher' style of talking (even though he's a frigging astrophysicist) just goes to show you that there's something genetic in black people that makes them talk that way.
Yeah... um... that's like saying there's a "genetic" predisposition for people named Gail make idiotic youtube comments. Public speaking is an art form in and of itself and Dr. Tyson has no tone concerning "preaching" of any kind. He is stating general numbers from polls taken and overall facts. In other words: numerical evidence to support his position in order to educate, not preach. Preaching involves forced emotional empathy to drive a communal feeling of acceptance concerning an subject in which there is no evidence for and in which you must place "faith" in. There is no preaching of science, only the teaching of it.
David Randall Too bad you haven't figured out that God is just a character in a really old, really shitty fairy tale that the mentally deficient take way too seriously.
The more education a person exposes themselves to in this Society, the further they stray away from their CREATOR and the less they truly UNDERSTAND about their true REALITY and circumstances
Trevor Prather what nonsense you speak. Your worldview was born in the ignorance of ancient tribal rituals. So sad that some human beings cannot give up childish things.
@@trevorthinkstruthmatters2779 *I can't trust a book that says that the Sun revolves around the Earth* Joshua 10:12 " Then spoke Joshua to the LORD...Sun, stand thou STILL.. and thou [also] Moon.." Joshua commanded *both* the Sun _AND_ the Moon to stand still, NOT the Earth, which proves that the bible writers believed that the Sun moved, and that it traveled around the Earth, and also that it could actually be stopped by a man's prayer to Yahweh /Jesus ! The. Sun. Does. Not. Move. This is ONLY _one_ of 8 scriptures that were used to convict Galileo of heresy, in 1633, for publishing the science that the Earth revolved around the Sun, in opposition to the bible. A supernaturally inspired book, beyond human knowledge, would _at least have described it's _*_own_*_ creation_ truthfully compared to what all ancient civilizations believed at the time. None of this means that there is no god ; it means that the bible is not inerrant nor inspired, and was written by pre science men.
Education also includes indoctrination. I have a Masters degree, and I am also a Christian. Educational institutions actively preach atheism, and apply peer pressure to enforce the notion. Our country was founded upon Christian values, and became great while recognizing and glorifying God. It is no coincidence that, as we have pulled away from God, we have rapidly deteriorated from that greatness. Without God, we are doomed to fail.
Without rules and boundaries society will deteriorate further. It is totally unnecessary for society to live in fear of hell and damnation if it breaks from the oppressive regime of preachers spouting from their pulpit stories that support war, hatred,incest, mutilation of children and totally unbelievable accounts of incidents that simply did not and could not have taken place. We do not wish to be bombarded, threatened or coerced by religious fanatics in order to coexist in a civilised society but a balanced education system with responsible unbiased teachers would certainly help.
😅 absolutely love Neil's New York times statement that was published in their paper it was spot on! I've had ignorant teachers like that when I was growing up. Cannot believe that these people were hired to be teachers in the first place! You go Neil!❤❤❤
I see his point but I disagree. Just because there are scientists that believe in a god and maybe even worship that God doesn't mean that the rest of us should respect and admire those Believers that are not scientist. Religious Dogma deserves ridicule and disrespect. Not saying that we should hate the people that believe this bullshit, but do not Empower them by respecting their beliefs.I know a person usually does not choose what they believe they're just convinced. I used to call myself a Christian years ago. It was actually challenging my beliefs that led me to atheism. It was actually studying for the ministry that I learned that is all nonsense. Ultimately, I'm the one that had to make that decision. Societies have been held back too damn long by this superstitious nonsense. It is time that people rise up and stop putting Band-Aids on Christians Muslims Jews or anything else that is superstitious primitive and nonsensical void of logic and reason. Here's a quote of mine " The crabgrass of religion is slowly but surely being choked out by the flowers of logic and reason. Soon to be gone are the primitive superstitious and nonsensical beliefs in an all-powerful entity in the sky "
Only on every corner In america stands a building with a cross. He single handedly changed the world with his nonexistence,. Restores lives everyday. Your real,. How many lives have you touched. He's a badass for someone who don't exist. How can you even have a debate about someone who never lived. I guess your DNA designed itself and our earth sustanse itself. Our brain programmed itself and our imune system is just an accident
@@johnmoates5709 so nothing to offer other than more shit talk? what a shocker. but thanks for proving me right about you. i accept your concession on all points.
He's conflating two different issues. God, or a creator, can exist, and religion can be ridiculous. Both can be true. Neil is assuming religions version of god is THE version of GOD.
The concern of atheists is not about the existence of God but how followers of mythological beliefs are given preferential treatment in being allowed to have power in adversely affecting the lives of people they so choose.
Can't be an Atheist? We are all born atheists. Belief in any god, following of any dogma is taught. It may be engrained in them from their childhood, but it seems ignorant to say that they can't change their mind. It seems insulting to the religious. Also, I believe the founding fathers were trying to get away from theocracy and granted religious freedoms under a secular constitution. Tyson is right, but I would say it's spin doctoring to say that it was founded upon religious freedoms.Does he really think freedom was a big deal for a bunch of slave owners?
Your bias is showing :-) A child need not be taught there is a God to look into a night sky and know that SOMETHING far greater than he exists. It's only when we educate ourselves beyond reason into arrogance that we stop wondering. And no, I am NOT saying education is wrong. But taking oneself too seriously after education can be. Any truly educated person will tell you that the more they learn, the less they "know".
Richard Mcneil The only arrogance I see is someone using a vague sense of mysticism as evidence that there is a higher power. I agree with the last thing you said, but sulking in your own ignorance is just as detrimental as becoming arrogant in your education.
ViNcEnT RoSs You'll have to explain that to me. How does "sulking" in one's ignorance harm ANYONE else? My beliefs are my own - they harm no one, I force them on no one. But I have a right to speak publicly just as atheists do, have I not? I can see why the "ignorance" of others might be annoying, but detrimental? Come now.
Richard Mcneil I didn't say it was detrimental to anyone but yourself, but it's a bit like throwing a plastic cup out of a window. For 1 person to be willfully ignorant of the information presented to them is 1 thing, but when millions or billions do it it becomes a problem. It makes for an ignorant society and in this case it shows a complete lack of respect for the wealth of knowledge our species has been and is trying to collect. Nobody is saying you don't have the right to speak publicly. I'm using my right to speak publicly to tell you that I think you're wrong.
ViNcEnT RoSs I misunderstood your intention then - my apologies. I can understand your concern but it gets down to simple respect doesn't it? If you had some odd family member that embarrassed you due to their ignorance would you spend time castigating them or would you just accept that that is just who they are and be glad you "know better"? And btw, the ignorance you decry in the world is by far the majority of the earth's population since the vast majority have no access to the education you've obviously been fortunate enough to acquire. It's something to ponder.
Beautiful speech. Neil Tyson, a man after my own heart. There is just so much hubris in the term "atheism" and in the disbelievers who spend half their time criticizing the religiously ignorant. Just IGNORE them. If you're even half as bright as Neil here, you'd know it's a losing argument to try and convert believers. Leave them be unless they come trying to disrupt science education. EVERYONE, religious, atheist and the agnostic need to listen to this speech. "I don't normally get into those arguments, because I got the universe to worry about" "If you get famous smart scientists in your camp, that boosts your camp"
Oners82 And it'll die out soon enough, just like the 70s hippie subculture. It's highly unscientific to outright reject the existence of god. All atheism has accomplished(which didn't take much effort at all) is disprove the existence of a personal god. But what of the possibility of a transcendent one? We already have a limited understanding of the beginnings of the universe. Don't make it worst by rejecting any possibilities with no evidence.
Mikhail Kalashnikov Actually, Atheism and religion will fade from existence. Agnosticism will be the main state of mind of humanity somewhere down the road, as predicted by Michio Kaku.
Oners82 Unfortunately that's what you agnostic skepticism. "Absence of belief" lol. That in itself is just a joke. Atheism is a horrible label. Ask the majority of the people who call themselves atheists and you'll find that they fully reject any possibility of the existence of a creator. Michio Kaku is perfectly correct. Agnosticism is probably the most scientific and logical form of thinking that everyone needs to have for any sort of progress.
I understand the word, I AM Agnostic. But you're too busy trying to put me in a box, that you actually get offended when I tell you that you can't put an Agnostic in a box because they have the most abstract ideas compared to Atheists in general and Theists in general. There's Agnostic Atheist and Agnostic Theist and then there's just plain Agnostic. People try to hard to seclude these words into generalizations and you can't generalize Agnostic in THAT way. Generally, Agnosticism is just not knowing. Sure you can be an "Agnostic Theist" and believe there is something higher without actually knowing, and you can be an "Agnostic Atheist" and believe there is nothing without actually knowing. Or you can be like me, plain Agnostic. I believe there could be nothing, I believe there could be something. I don't believe in one or the other more than another. I just believe there's no way to really know. Mainly because I don't care what happens after death. Death isn't where my life is, and I don't live to die and serve an almighty being like Christians do.
so basically you are admitting that you have never read the bible for yourself nor tried to use any scientific method upon what it tries to say. If you believe the story of Babel, then you are only in the 40% because you were good at passing tests and really don't have the ability to think on your own.
@@shrimpgripper @Jude Martiniak is right. I used "conversely" wrong. It should have been "alternately". He's still a schmuck for pointing it out, though. :o)
Well i like religions for philosophical reasons i don't rely on it for solving or explaining natural phenomena but in some situations it helps with morale and introspection ,its like an imaginary friend who is always on your side .Religion should be a personal venture and not forced on anyone or used to discriminate against others...
All religion is is philosophy mixed with mythology. Why not remove the mythology part and just focus on the philosophy? My life turned around the day I discovered the Tao Te Ching. It has everything considered “good” in the Bible but is waaaaaaay shorter because it removes the folk tales and false claims about reality. The Tao Te Ching is an Ancient Chinese book of wisdom. That’s what we need, wisdom, not superstitious nonsense plus a little bit of wisdom.
@SURREY CROSSING It's funny you mention Zen because Zen Buddhism incorporates no mythology, archetypes, motifs, etc. I was literally going to use that as my example that contradicts the rest of your statement before I finished reading your response. Btw, despite what the intelligent-but-wrong Jordan Peterson thinks, all Christian mythology can be thought of in archetypes but not all archetypes are Christian mythology. I have been studying/practicing Zen Buddhism and philosophical Taoism for years now, but I'm also a scientist who knows objective facts. Jordan Peterson's biggest transgression is that he promotes utility rather than objectivity and intellectual integrity. And he's not stupid, by no means, he just isn't being honest. His metaphysics are horribly misguided. It's patently clear that he's only ever studied Christianity, and seems completely oblivious to the fact that other, some non-theistic, religions/philosophies exist that give people significant meaning, purpose, and morality in life.
@SURREY CROSSING I never once said Jordan Peterson's rhetoric wasn't useful, I know it's useful. My best friend from high school is a heroin addict who is steadily improving his life using Jordan Peterson's ideas. Jordan Peterson is not saying anything new either, he's just adding Christian archetypes and the term "metaphysical substrate" to what self-help writers have been saying forever. And he uses Christian archetypes specifically because doing so is an appeal to authority (which in itself is a fallacy, but we'll gloss over that). If people need superstition, or the semblance of superstition to be good people go for it, I'm all in. But I'm also a biological scientist, which means to do the work that I do there have to be objective facts that we can know. Discovering these objective facts was the springboard that launched us into an age of technology and advancement that even 100 years was inconceivable. So there is, I would argue, even more utility in what is true (the real meaning of "true", not JP's definition). Make no mistake Zen practice keeps me grounded, but I am first and foremost a scientist who, unlike Jordan Peterson, fundamentally cares about objectivity and intellectual integrity because we can go so much further with real truth than we can with what's only true for some. I get what JP is doing, but he's injecting what works from his clinical experience into the realm of what's true from an intellectualism standpoint. It also doesn't help that JP is a bipolar egotist, which that latter part explains why everything he says is "true" because he changed the definition of "true" to mean anything he says can be true, because he's massively egotistical but plays humble out of utilityThat's how he can say things like you can't quit smoking unless you have a supernatural experience and then backtrack after he realizes how stupid his thoughts are when vocalized and just use the "well, you misrepresented what I said..." defense. Notice how he never takes ownership of the dumb shit he does say, and when called out he employs any defense mechanism he can to keep from taking ownership of it; because he's egotistical. Not someone I would really want to take advice from. Everything JP says has been said better before without the massive amount of fluff involved, and that's a circle you just can't square. But if you see his "truth" as truth because anything can be true from a subjective perspective, then our conversation ends here. So namaste to you as well.
@SURREY CROSSING And this is what you aren't getting. There is no "my truth" or "your truth". There is only what is true. thinking that certain things can be only known to you and no one else, and that these make you feel special because you and only you hold these "truths", is the pinnacle of arrogance. And you call me narcissistic? That's laughable. There should be an "arrogance fallacy", when someone accuses someone else of narcissism as a defense mechanism because the first person doesn't actually know what they're talking about. I've been called "arrogant" and "narcissist" before over the objective facts I proffered about vaccines when speaking to an anti-vaxxer, and I work in medical research. So being called a "narcissist" sways me none considering the source of the claim. And btw, scientists are the least sure people of anything in the world because we always have to account for error in every model proposed. But with every model, we have to start from a premise of known facts and the model has to be logically sound. Jordan Peterson doesn't adhere to either of these. And Jordan Peterson is successful because he doesn't have to say objectively true things to be successful, most people don't. Peterson does quote a lot of scientifically designed studies with valid conclusions, so yes he does have some semblance of truth, but that's where his truthfulness stops and his idea of utility begins. If Peterson is addressing primarily white, young men with no direction in life, then he needs to have a disclaimer at the beginning of every one of his talks that specifies his worldview is in accordance with such an audience so the rest of us well-adjusted people can tune out. Just remember, bullshit can easily pass for wisdom among the ignorant and/or desperate, no matter what age the ignorant and/or desperate person is. One would think that age and experience should combat such ignorance, but that's rarely the case. In fact, an observation I've made is that the older someone gets, the more willfully ignorant they become, so this "wisdom of elders" bullshit is only applicable to the old and enlightened, not just the old. But I guess that's just "my truth", so you can't tell me otherwise, right? This is becoming more irksome than enjoyable so I'm going to leave now. Don't expect a reply to whatever you were about to type.
I know you are happy to see a very intelligent successful black man here but the way you say it suggests that other black people don't matter because they are not like him? I suppose you could also include average whites too. Be careful of backhanded compliments.
Until you stop looking at a single leaf and start looking at the forest...then you become aware of all the inherent contradictions in atheism. I agree with Dr. John Lennox when he said "I don't have enough faith to be an atheist".
@@norahkalunda1234 There are no contradictions in the Bible. The people who say that there are, haven't studied Hebrew and Greek, so they don't understand the meaning of what is written. Nor do they understand the way of expression used by ancient people. People who don't know these things , tend to apply a western scientific understanding to something that is so profound that it explains why science is even possible and it can not be explained and examined as "data". If you knew the history of science you would know that all scientific knowledge and expertise are the result of Christians in the 14th and 15th centuries who read the Bible and came to the realization that God was orderly and rational...therefore the universe He created must also be orderly and rational, the material secrets of which could be unlocked by experimentation and the application of mathematics. No other culture or civilization did this because no other culture had the Bible and Christianity as it's basis for existence. Consequently ALL of the early scientists without exception were Christians. It was only in the late 19th century that atheists hi-jacked science and tried to eliminate God...and to do this they broke with the principle of experimentation established by Christians and adopted many UNPROVEN ASSUMPTIONS which modern scientists accept for granted as being proven true when they have never been proven true. You can find some of these "dogmas" that were adopted in Rupert Sheldrake's "The Science Delusion".
(No contradictions) Reconcile 2 Samuel 24:1, with 1 Chronicles 21. Also, reconcile Romans 1:18-20, with glass darklies, Falls, 2 Corinthians 4:4, 1 Corinthians 2:14... And the concept, failing, in heaven... with one third, of, all angels, too - seemingly? Also, what, did, Jesus do, during... the blood libel on Jews, the slave trade within, sizable parts, of Christendom... and the Inquisition, also? Just to be clearer, here. And, Revelations 13:8, and... free will... Contextualize, together, please? Meantime, yes, schisms, were gonna, schism. Oddly enough.@@markanthony3275
I gave this the thumbs up, eight minutes into the video. Of course, Neil DeGrasse Tyson is likely to get that reaction from anyone who bothers to even THINK ABOUT the thumbs up button on RUclips while watching a video he's the main feature of, but if anyone wants to know, why I thought of the thumbs-up button at 8:00, watch the video at least up to that point and it should be obvious, I think. :)
I believe in a God. I think science will one day unite with spirituality but it will take a while, considering scientific egos and corruption will get in the way of this, but I have started with many questions and looked for many answers and I am not going to rule out that a God doesn't exist because there are so many things in science that seem to point to something we can't see. When I starting thinking about questions like "what makes up matter?" And "what is dark matter?" And "what is consciousness?" I realized there was no possible way for scientists to disprove the existence of a God and if your smart and not blinding by your own convictions then if you'll keep an open mind, you'll see that there are things that just don't really make sense from our perspective and that the world out there is so complicated, and we barely know anything about it. So it would be foolish to assume god doesn't exist.
We, as humans, have 5 senses. Some animals have better acute senses that humans don't experience. Scientists agree on that one. Then, that opens a possibility for other dimension not perceivable to humans senses. Another realm possibly. So, to be certain that an energy and intelligence "called : God" exists 100 % or not, is pure ignorance. So, we all shall say : I IGNORE if there is a God or not, but I choose to believe in One or choose not to believe in One.
Given time your wait and your journey will end in great disappointment as the questions will be answered sans a god. One does not have to see when one has mathematical equations to explain what cannot be seen. The pieces of the puzzle are coming together quite nicely
A Theist chooses what is emotionally appealing to believe... an intelligent man has no choice but to accept only that which has been found rational to believe through evidence. Emotional has always been a defining attribute of the Female gender.
So let me get this straight... The higher of a "Degree in Education that you have"... the dumber you become, and the LESS open you are to ideas that do NOT fit what you think! (Sounds about like N.d.T.)
There are physical laws and contentedness between everything in the universe. This will be the true religion in the future (if we survive long enough).
well, I will say one thing, creationists do need to not put Genesis 1 in the science room what I want to know is why would people want to put a historical text in the science classroom :P
Because Genesis is a fabrication with no factual basis and historical texts on old scientists derived from relatively recent sources such as journals and the work they have done in their lives. Also science actually matters in the world; it works. Historical text isn't a scientist's bible and the mere implication is stupid and narrowminded.
SuperUnunquadium I meant that I think its stupid for creationists to try and get the Bible (a complex and complicated for study) historical text into the science class room, keep it in the history and religion classes at least
Then I was more or less agreeing with you. The bible belongs in either religion classes or historical literature and should not taken factually. Learn what you what from it but do not treat it as gospel truth (lol).
you're quite correct atheism is a belief that there is no God . since science cannot prove or disprove that there is a God atheism qualifies as a belief system. the only question that atheist have to Ask themselves is atheism: do I believe in it or not.
Atheism is the exact word for someone with NO religion. The prefix "A" Meaning "Without" "Theism" Being belief in a personal god. It literally means "Without believe in a personal god" Not "Belief in the non existence of a personal god"
I love his line that this is not about religion, it's about ignorant, illiterate people being teachers!
Me too!
It's not what you know-- it's what you know that isn't true.
It SHOULD be about: WHY IS NOT PROSTITUTION LEGAL, at my House?
And you’re showing the true colors of “educated people”.
I know a lot of educated people who aren’t that smart.
Maybe some people have had experiences that science can't explain.
Despite being born in the 30's and being very devoutly religious Catholics, my parents were pretty cool and pretty open-minded. I grew up Catholic and went through all the stuff. I never believed. I have no memories of ever believing. I knew there was no such thing as God many years before I reached puberty. I couldn't articulate it for I was too young, but I knew there was no God and religion as I knew it was bullshit. For my 12th birthday, in 1972, my parents gave me the gift of choice. They were going to church every Sunday as normal, but it was up to me if I wanted to go or not. I have never set foot in church since, not counting weddings and funerals. deGrasse-Tyson and others like him are what this world needs.
That is absolutely NOT what he said. Watch the video again, but check your prejudices at the door.
Religion is delusion and De Grasse is a cornball.
Ya, but god is inherently anti scientific. And Muslims are inherently anti- women. Obviously religions like islam and Christianity are stupid and ignorant and the believers are very small thinkers. Not to mention you are limiting your own dieties by saying they are not powerful enough to create the big bang.
I was born in the 30s and was raised southern Baptist. However, I have a brain and I use it. I became agnostic after living and realize that I don’t know if there is a god however I’m open to proof if there is any.
Video Editor: How much Gain do you want in your sound?
Tyson: Yes
so mush you loose
No mm
There are far better versions of this specific video. The original is not distorted.
Brilliant and humourous , very compassionate with the ignorant.
Science starts with questions and seeks answers. Religion starts with answers and rejects questions.
+John Lowenthal Francis Bacon said something to the effect that if we are willing to start with questions, we will end in certainties. But if we start with certainties, we will end with questions.
Spot on!
+John Lowenthal Well said, may I quote you
*****
I have to ask, were you born into a Christian culture?
*****
I think I may have asked you this before, as you seem familiar ;-) I cannot argue with your testimony (or with the testimonies of my LDS friends, either). Do you think there are people who think they got what they asked for, but do not share your beliefs? Do you think there are those who see wwI and wwII and ask 'Why is the Christian religion so violent?'
I have the freedom of religion. I choose not to affiliate myself with any sort of religion. Why can't people understand and accept this?
Tim H What does me living in Texas have anything to do with it?
Ne1lcul well because people who are religious are most often not scientifically literate and thats what launched the golden age in our species where we created the most and discovered the most. Most people are fed up with religion being stuffed down our throat so it goes both ways...
Ne1lcul amen brother
Ne1lcul because weak people are those who feel strong by trying to impose you their own coward delusions and intellectual laziness: either they're jealous of you, either they're mentally challenged control freaks.
HawkFest "Intellectual laziness." I'm using that from now on. :'D
As an atheist I always envied those passionate preachers in church. Now we have one too. Thank you Mr T.
He's actually agnostic. watch?v=Ai4qeuvbi-0
YDCandO Completely agree. That's why I've considered myself agnostic since I was a teenager.
YDCandO so... Don't question anything? That's kind of pathetic. Just a like sheep sir.
Dwight Burton Agnosticism questions everything. Personally, I take it farther than most and say that nothing can be known. All "facts" are just guesses. We assess all things using one tool: the human nervous system. It's unavoidable. Considering that we don't know how the human brain works (or even where "the mind" or consciousness are located in the physical brain) we are measuring all things with a tool we do not understand. We have no idea how it may be skewing the so called "results." I question everything because I believe nothing.
Jacob A No one can prove that invisible diarrhea monsters don't exist and run our lives, but that is no reason to think that they do. Just like no one can prove Zeus, Isis, Horus, Loki, Poseidon, or Quetzalcoatl aren't invisibly running things. You cannot put a burden of non-proof on people who say it is delusional. The burden of proof is on those making the claim. Personally, I would question things regardless (see my post above). And if it makes any difference, I have read the Bible cover-to-cover several times and studied multiple other religions.
I was born a Roman catholic but I think some people can't kick religion because they fear their own demise.
Yes, they are concerned about their eternal life, and the eternal life of others.
I too was raised RC. Even thought about becoming a priest once, hell, I'm named after a RC monsigneur, but as I've aged, the more I thought about it, how we are taught what our parents were taught and their parents etc. etc. and realized that, to me, none of it made any sense. I don't believe, nor is it advisable, to tell anybody how they should believe, in fact it has made a slight schism between me and my siblings, but they respect my right to not believe. I've heard the names Mr. Tyson rolled off of atheist authors, but I can't say I've read any of their books, I don't need to base my belief on them. But, I do believe that religion, of any sort, does not and never will have a place in public schools except maybe as each of them relate to history, geography, and past and present political systems. Prayer belongs at home, privately and at church. Teaching religious doctrines has no place in our politics or any public institution, especially schools. (Imagine going in to get your drivers license and they ask you if you believe that Jesus Christ is your lord and savior. Answer yes and get a license. Answer no, and I guess you better be good on a bike)
Just wanted to add, there should equally be no politics in church. It works both ways.
@@tomclayton6875 yes. The separation of church and state should be enforced.
@@truecatholic8692 There is absolutely no evidence for an "eternal life."
The real problem is that we do not have a Neil DeGrasse Tyson on every schoolboard, at every classroom door, and sitting in on every back to school night. My daughter is in 8th grade and I just came back from one (BTS night) where an ELA teacher spent the better part of his presentation apologizing for some classic literature that is on his reading list and that may be offensive to the (religious, sexual, political... feel free to add your favorite peeve) views of some parents and that he would offer "alternative" reading to those students. WOW.
At the same time the bible is full of mass murder, ethnic cleansing, infanticide, incest, justifies if not mandates slavery... that is presumably a-okay with these folks.
My favorite part, is the old "Do whatever the hell you want, here, on Earth and if it is a Sin, just blame good ol' Scapegoat Jesus and go to HEAVEN!!!!!!!" ploy. If you buy that crap, you certainly BUY BULL and/or you were Indoctrinated/Mentally Abused. DAMNIT! (Sorry. I almost forgot to not go to Church and not be a Christian.
This is like scientific stand up
Yep love it
lol. This is a Joke.
+Tommy TheG If by "this," you mean your life, I agree.
yep, black comedy
That’s because he’s a paid actor
Religion is just a psychological defense mechanism. People fear death. Religion offers eternal life. Even scientists are afraid to die, so they deal with it by convincing themselves that they will live forever.
+Zelkyplant Puzzling, if the human body is no more than a complex measuring device then what's making the measurement? Are you the human body or the observer using the human body to measure the universe?
+LabbyShepherd Puppy And where do you get the idea that the human body is a complex measuring device?
venum4k
What else does the human body do besides make observations?
Attempts to rationalise its own existence.
venum4k
And how does it do that? Through observation and measurements. Again, if all the human body does is make observations, then what's making the observations? A ruler doesn't measure anything unless there is an observer present.
Love Neil. I'm an atheist. Been one for a couple decades. My deconversion was traumatic. I felt so alone when I started researching my Christian religion. I could care less what others think and am so thankful I'm free from superstition. Tell it Neil!
Religion of Nobel Prize winners between 1901 and 2000:
1- Christians (65.4%)
2- Jewish (21.1%)
3- Atheists + Agnostics (7.0%)
ruclips.net/video/PuLc3H2eC_M/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/me0N1BokVwA/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/gBx5aZZU6Sk/видео.html
Atheist was always a dirty word... until I turned 60. It's a word of hope and awakening, now!
One day every knee will bow and every tongue confess that Christ is Lord. The question is will you do so in love or fear.
@@kimberlywiederhold627 delusional.
And why were so many angels unhappy, confused, gullible, or delusional, in heaven, though? Pre Revolt.
Also, what, did, Jesus... DO... during, the slave trade, Spanish Inquisition, and the blood libel, upon Jews?
And I ask this, out of curiosity - not, fear.
Plus, why, should Spanish medieval Jews... confess... when He may not...
Have helped, them?@@kimberlywiederhold627
“It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is, than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.” - Carl Sagan
It is not delusion to recognize the things that ONLY intelligence can do. It's called being real.
@@shrimpgripper Turning away from God and choosing evil instead brought death and all manner of suffering into this world. It was mankind's choice and that was the result.
@@shrimpgripper I suppose that is why our intelligent species created weapons that can destroy the world multiple times over.
@@meb280 -- what "evil" did man do? What exactly was the very first sin of mankind that caused god to punish him with all these horrible things?
@@timq6224 Man made the choice to supplant God's authority and, in so doing, put himself above God. He chose evil (Satan) rather than God. Satan became the 'ruler' of this world and all manner of wickedness, death and destruction came/comes from him. Read Matthew chapter 4, it shows the command that Satan has in our world in that he can give to whomever will fall down and worship him
rip headphone users :./
roblestito93 yeah, i know your pain
Yeah, I too died for a second. RIP me
bob93 that’s what I’m talking about! Thx-
the pain of too much amplifier gain.
I love to hear Niel so no, there was no pain.
atheism isn't a religion, I feel like most religious people think so...
anti theism is
but atheism has slowly become that over the years though
Wayne Ekeh Neither one is a religion. A religion is a belief system built around the worship of a god or gods. Atheism/anti-theism doesnt do that, so its impossible for them to be religions.
We dont have a dogmatic book that we read in the name of the God we dont believe in, we dont have a place that we go to sing hymns and hear sermons about the God we dont believe in, we dont have a list of rules that are contradicted by the dogmatic book we dont have, we dont pray to the God we dont have, and so on and so on...
The Creeper well its more a belief
you do have dogmatic books
there the new atheist books like god delusion
Wayne Ekeh Its not a belief if Im able to look at the numbers myself and come to my own conclusions. I dont simply *believe* 2+2=4, because im able to look at the numbers and do the math for myself. A dogma is an incontrovertible truth. The thing about Science is that it changes. Sometimes what we thought was true changes with new discoveries. Religion is what it is, forever. Gods word/will never changes. If you deviate from that, you go to Hell. Whereas with Science, deviating from the norm will usually lead to learning something new. Which is exciting.
The Creeper yeah the inconvertable truth is
god is not real
"This case is not about the need to separate church and state; it's about the need to separate ignorant, scientifically illiterate people from the ranks of teachers."
That has to be the most savage line in history!! 🤣🤣🤣
The wolf in sheep's clothing is deceiving you well
@@williamlevy6964 Well, if having an opinion of my own and being open-minded to knowledge is your definition of being a wolf in sheep's clothing, then I will gladly follow.
@@Seoulsister5 Neil isn't dropping knowledge bombs on you. He's distracting you and exploiting your pride.
William Levy
Sound like a troll
@@teresaamanfu7408 Well. I would to a brainwashed one
Religion is an ancient placebo for the human condition. It only works if you are ignorant of the facts. Faith is a soothing tonic but some of us prefer a dose of reality.
This is the most direct, yet poetic response on the subject that I've ever heard. Well done sir.
What is real? We see less than 1% of what is there, and our hearing is not much better. When you say real, you mean what is real to you and your closed mind. Sure, you think science is the shit right now, but in 20, or 100 years, we will look back and have a good laugh about "science".
Great White7 Galileo's scientific observations that the earth moves around the sun are nearly five hundred years old, Newton's theory of Gravity is nearly four hundred years old and the germ theory of disease is over four hundred years old. I don't see anyone laughing at these ideas today.
Is that a water bear for your icon?
Darren Carpenter Yes, fantastic little bugs. Proof that "there are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in our philisophy" (heaven meaning the cosmos of course)
I am a Christian, and yet I just respected Neil even more than I did before.
I see a lot of people attacking Tyson saying he's insulting religious people, I don't see it that way. I see it as he's kinda defending them, telling people like Richard Dawkins not to try to convince the general public to go against their religious beliefs but to go against other Elite Scientists.
Tyson himself said that he doesn't care if your religious or not, most of the music he listens to is fairly religious , he just doesn't want religion interfering in Science, He doesn't want the Church stopping Science Class rooms from teaching evolution etc....
That's an interesting outlook on it. He's asking his own scientific colleagues to be self critical concerning an overall scientific hypocritical outlooks against the general public concerning the overall issue of religion. The public would be secondary if 7%-15% of the elite scientist also cling to a notion of "god".
Who cares. Religious people deserve to be insulted for being stupid and ignorant. Same as someone who believes in a flat earth would be insulted for being a moron.
Vitamin B I'm religious and retain my rational thoughts, so no we don't deserve to be insulted because throughout my life religious people tend to have more compassion for others than atheists who just put down others with no respect whatsoever. Even Neil makes that point that scientists don't deserve to insult religious individuals.
Well, the Catholic Church gave us modern science. So religion "interfering" in science gave us all the technology we have today.
@@truecatholic8692the only thing modern about Christianity is pedophilia
Knowledge is power
Education is propaganda
Wisdom is knowing the difference.
@Self Discipline Thanks ,
Thanks , and God Bless Toby Mac's Family
education is propoganda? yea, religious education anyways. REAL education is the impartment of knowledge on those who seek it.
@@user-vl5qg5rf4n You can go to college , go to your school , but if you don't know Jesus your'e just an educated fool , and that's all
@@jwsanders1214 Jesus isn't even a reliably existent historical figure. You sir are the only fool. You think humanity is special, and that your imaginary friend created us "in his image" to be perfect, but we know this is not the case. Humanity has come about, as every other species before it and after it has and will, through endless evolution. And we are far from perfect. There is so many imperfections in the human body that we even have fun with some of them, like mr tyson says in some other speeches optical illusions are simply the failure of our brain to properly comprehend the light waves received by our eyes. Don't you think a perfect creator would be smart enough to program out some of these inconsistencies and outright failures of the human body/mind if he truly intended for us to be the epitome of sentient life? The fact of the matter is, the bible is a jumbled mess of different stories both stolen from other mythos and twisted to the ends of those who rewrote it. The bible has been translated at least 3 times that we know of before it came to us in the english that you and I understand today, and before that it was copied several thousand times by different scribes and monks who certainly all made some errors or mistakes in copying. The bible as we know it today is not the bible that the hebrews or even the original disciples wrote, and if it was still 100% accurate to its original material it would certainly make even less sense than it does now.
Basically what I'm saying is, the only real thing in the bible is some of the places it mentions. Everything else is a fairy tale. You can still take moral guidance from it, but do not mistake it for fact. It is farce in it's most obvious form, and to think otherwise is to be blind.
Religion has no place in the age of information
***** I believe he is talking about our technological advances and not how you choose to view society. The average teenager is far more educated than they were 100 or even 50 years ago. Some of course are not educated in "real life" and I do after kids are not as smart as they could be, but that is the fault of society as well.
I agree with the comment that religion has no place now a days.
CommunistPie I disagree with your statement in fact the information age has actually greatly expanded belief systems. Whether you like it or not religion will always have a place in society no matter how technologically advanced we become.
Rawtheran how do you know? maybe when we upload our consciousness into machines there will be no desire for religon, the future is a crazy place. Also the trend that higher rates of education = lower rates of religion makes me think as the world's population becomes more educated religion will decline, I don't know. But as someone who has had the internet around my whole life the idea of religion seems utterly ridiculous and antiquated, as people have more access to information they have less of a desire to fill in the gaps in their knowledge with the idea of an all knowing god figure
CommunistPie Thousands of years ago before technology everyone was religious... Everything was the unknown. As technology and science advances people seem to be getting away from religion, because we have explanations. I am growing further away from religion day by day. Most religious people are very close minded with science. Even if there was a day that proved God did not exist most would still not want to believe. I lean at being agnostic. Still science cannot prove that their is no deity in the Heavens ( although they do not seem to be flaunting that) and the Bible or anything cannot prove the existence of a God.
+CommunistPie Bit's of information doesn't create wisdom.
I heard two fish talking in the fish tank the other day.
One said:
"There is no evidence that human beings exist."
The other fish said:
"What are you talking about? According to the bible that is why we are here. Human beings made the fish tank and put us here."
The first fish challenged again:
"Do you have any evidence of that?"
The second fish then have nothing to say.
+罗文彬: What's the point of having an opaque fish tank?
I worked as an engineer with other engineers & scientists in Silicon Valley for several decades (mostly in Life Sciences). I cannot recall one conversation that involved religion unless specifically asked, which was rare. Even then, the conversation only briefly touched the subject. Religious belief seems irrelevant to the people who have to think critically for a living.
I regard religion as incompatible with science. Supernatural beliefs are not based on evidence whereas science is only concerned with measurable evidence, calculation & deduction; introducing any religious beliefs always contaminates science one way or another. Fortunately, most scientists & engineers know this!
I have to constantly remind certain people that Science isn't actively out to get religion. Yes, the point is put to task by the ardent believers themselves. Speaking from experience, they are literally taught from birth that they are under active assault and act accordingly. Yes, people in technical and scientific fields rarely if ever talk about religion. But listen to your typical Bible thumpers and they are constantly reaffirming themselves with each other. It's like they are groping in the dark and constantly asking "This is real, right? This is true?" So it is interesting to note that when they enter situations where that is missing, they start freaking out a bit. The whole thing is very cult-like. I had the opportunity to visit my parent's church for an Easter service after not going in quite some time and what I once thought of as a benign sort of friendly get together has turned into something not unlike a Nuremberg rally. It was really quite scary. So it's nice to see that there are level headed people out there. Thank you for your posts. And see? We didn't even talk about our own religion at all. After all, who cares if I think that the planet is carried along on the horn of a unicorn, right? ;)
CybershamanX Yeah, it takes courage for a person to question his/her own beliefs. Many of the PhD scientists I worked with were fairly humble people, considering their superior education; science casts its practitioners into the gauntlet of peer critique that frequently calls their conclusions into question, resulting in personal self-examination when knocked off the pedestal. I've watched my son change as he got his science doctorate, and noticed his bravado level come down closer to reality!
Contrast this with the regular, frequent sermons & bible-reading sessions aimed at reinforcing beliefs that any seriously introspective person would reject if not for the hypnosis induction that repetition produces. Did you notice that church events are usually about the preacher speaking to his flock without any Q & A? Religious people are deliberately trained to not ask questions! I think the big draw of religion is its social aspect of complying with the one message from one person or one book with little discussion outside his/its preachments.
Ironically, scientists are often fairly staunch individualists even though they're peer-reviewed. The process is competitive. This truth flies in the face of theistic & pseudoscientific mythology that suggests that they're part of a conspiracy under mind-control to devastate religion. The fact is that many scientists simply consider religious beliefs as irrelevant or obstructive; and with good reason! I've never seen so much blatant projection as that emanating from science critics!
A likely explanation is that most people are multi-dimensional with an array of mental states & ways of perceiving reality. Imagination can be a double-edged sword that at once enables us to explore & create, while also providing answers that aren't connected to serious observations. It seems that superstition is a vestigial behavior of recognizing patterns that we want to validate for the sake of deriving comfort & solace. We're smart enough to ask why we're here & where we're going, but not always smart enough to realize that some questions have no answers beyond the obvious. I suspect that all of us engage in excursions from the here-and-now reality, occasionally challenged to behave appropriately.
Science is about knowledge in its core definition. What we know empowers us. It's a legacy of The Enlightenment, here only the last 400 of 200,000 years of our existence. It's new. For knowledge, we must deliberately omit our superstitious tendencies with effort, practice & discipline. Considering that, the population of scientists will always have outliers who somehow manage to compartmentalize religious beliefs separately from their scientific efforts like Francis Collins does.
Sim kinetics: I work with over 150 engineers and scientist , more than 70% believe. 100% hold PhDs or masters as a minimum , do not state experience as facts. It doesn't quit fit your description. At least you are approaching the subject intelligently , and I'd say I agree with many of your statements, but if you have any imagination you outta know that there has to be a point 0. Let's say we agree about religion , that there is just no evidence etc . Explain point 0? Do not try to explain what I have read numerous times , I will ask you what came before that until you are forced to say " I don't know" , or " it is just how is" there is absolutely not difference between accepting point 0 as something that "was just there" or that nothing created everything we see ( because I guess you see that every day, something created out of nothing ) and calling point 0 God. There is no difference , you simply think too highly of yourself to share the thoughts of an ignorant populations!
Paper viewed : event some evolutionist are Christians. Look it up and stop talking about personal life experiences as facts. The 7% exist. A scientist is presenting this data to you and you have to speak out your ass to misrepresent us scientist and are being a d because people don't agree with you.
As a religious Muslim, I thank Mr. Tyson for his notion of respect to people of religion. We are taught to co-exist, even with the greatest of disagreements, which I for do have. Peace be upon all of mankind and those who practice and preach the practicing of peace.
Excuse my typo. I am unable to edit for some odd reason.
Ya, but god is inherently anti scientific. And Muslims are inherently anti- women. Obviously religions like islam and Christianity are stupid and ignorant and the believers are very small thinkers. Not to mention you are limiting your own dieties by saying they are not powerful enough to create the big bang.
One of my very good friends is a practicing Muslim. He is like an uncle to my boys. And I am an atheist. But the way we both treat people, value family, and generally conduct ourselves, is pretty much identical. We just got to the same place using different roads. My point being that the real Muslim faith (not the one co-opted by radicals) is exactly what you say.
If you read quarantine and suras you will see that you are wrong. Pretend friends are ok when Muslims have no power. Critical mass happens, it's a different beast entirely
Allah doesn't exist and Muhammed rxped aisha.
Brilliant! I can listen to Him for hours..:-)))
Tyson is rationally arguing for a nominal level of respect toward religious people, but he is asking too much. Some people just can't be respectful.
Tim H We should all emulate your amazing degree of respect. I nominate you for "respecter" of the year.
Tim Spangler cool. and you can be ignorant, dishonest religi-troll of the year.
Tim H Im honest. I'm strightforward, and I at least try to be respectful. You? Not so much.
Tim Spangler you're none of the three.
scroll up, jackass. I didn't just attack you out of the blue. you attacked me out of the blue.
and as I recall all you do when actual points are being discussed is deny science, lie and troll. which is why you'd rather argue like a little child over non-issues like relative politeness.
you want to pretend that your snide remarks are straightforward and respectful?
that your dishonest responses on numerous occasions are honest?
sure you do. jackasses like you always do.
Tim H How lovely and full of compassion and empathy. Your sweetness is duly noted.
After listening to the" religious" people thru the years ,I have come to the conclusion that most are religious by default. Default because they need a benevolent, out of their power, easy answers to way to complex questions. It is calming, anxiety relieving and leads to a better nights sleep...
Albert Einstein wrote: "We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library, whose walls are covered to the ceiling with books in many languages. The child knows that someone must have written those books. It does not know who or how., It does not understand the languages... the child notes a definite plan in the arrangement of the books, a mysterious order, which it does not comprehend but only dimly suspects." While it is true Einstein maintained that he didn't believe in a "personal" God, it can be noted her recognized a "definite plan.. and mysterious order" and was in awe of everything... Personally, I tend to think that those who dismiss everything "religious" as being primitive or anti-science have stopped short in their explorations.
I love the point he made about never witnessing scientists barging into sunday school classes or picketing and protesting outside.
That's only because scientists and those who live by reason and tangibility alone don't think they have a reason to do that.
A warning, turn your volume down before beginning video. Probably too late though lol
DANG JOS i didn't turn it down. I learned that Tyson is a wicked and ungodly man.
I had headphones in at full volume
jake the pyro518 ur a badass
@@mrtadreamer what does ungodly mean? a man does not work for any god? lots of money there,though! or not a god kiss ass,maybe? but i tell you what he is:he is definitely an ungoofy man,for sure.
SO WHAT ? ................
"Faith is a wound that knowledge heals."
I guess archaeology, history, statistics, observation, etc. don't count as knowledge. That's because in all irony it's the atheists that hide behind the theories they're taught to justify not truly investigating outside of their preference-zone.
@@Contending Interesting.
Conversely, I go to the written word when I want a good laugh.
The best ones are reading gods directions on how to BUY YOUR SLAVES, and how to BEAT YOUR SLAVES, in the "buy-bull".
Lesson over.
Ray caster: Hi Ray; knowledge heals what? Are you referring to our incredible knowledge that has helped us produce nuclear weapons, that will soon blow the planet to bits?We'd better have faith that He will spare us from that (hint: He will!)
This video is one of the best stand up comedies I have viewed in quite some time
I wouldn't give a damn with how many people were religious if they didn't try willing their nonsense into reality.
And yet none of those religious people forces you to do anything, including attend church. Do you think people like hearing your thoughts and opinions?
@@meb280 They demand their religious believes be part of the law. That's the problem.
@@triky5384 And you demand that your secular beliefs be part of the law. Are you any better?
@@meb280 What is it that I'm demanding, according to you?
@@triky5384 You started with the word 'demand', so you explain it. You have beliefs about how things ought to be just like I do. There is no reason a person of faith has any less entitlement to an opinion as anyone else. If you disagree, explain why your thoughts trump mine.
Out of ALL the scientist Neil will always be my most fav, Dude is just awesome
I wonder how different the world would be without religion ...
probably be pretty bad
+Elias Lucero but why?
+Aldo Torres we decide whats right and wrong. The powerful have no authority to answer to. So ultimately right and wrong ultimately become whats favorable for those who have the power. No more god given human dignity. Just our views on whose "worth" more.
This i think is already apparent in the pro choice movement. They are human, so why do we kill them. God says we are children of his. Man says do what you want, its your body
+Tim H And tyrannical governments that slaughter millions.
People do bad things.
+Tim H your going to have to show me how Stalins and hitlers regime were a religious movement.
Atheism leads to a breakdown in the moral argument. In which really anything goes. I don't think we can make a comparison between nazi Germany and say the catholic church. Islam may be a different case.
I'm Christian and I have a huge respect for him. I've always liked the way he stood for respect in spite of different views and way of life, and I think everybody needs to learn this from him, religious and non-religious people alike. There is just too much disrespect and trolling in this world.. If only people could have his character rather than just his scientific knowledge and fervour.
Ya, but god is inherently anti scientific. And Muslims are inherently anti- women. Obviously religions like islam and Christianity are stupid and ignorant and the believers are very small thinkers. Not to mention you are limiting your own dieties by saying they are not powerful enough to create the big bang.
Just exactly which side are you on?… you should “examine yourself to see if you’re in the faith”.
The fool says in his heart “there is no God”. It’s simple…
@@malcolmarnsdorffthe fool is someone who believes without evidence
Religion is old as time but it's mad stupid because it's primitive and you can't ask questions. Just have to believe and have faith....wow..
That's a tell tell sign of a scam....it's like saying do what I said and don't hlask questions
What saddens me about America is that people like Neil DeGrasse Tyson are compelled to talk so ardently about religion. They shouldn't have to. Tyson is a terrific ambassador for science, he is eloquent and thoughtful, and I wish he were my teacher. But we live in a country where people like him and Bill Nye and before them Carl Sagan are forced to get themselves in the science vs. religion battle, and they have to defend science against those who want it halted, who see it as a threat to their view of the world. I consider myself a Christian, I've always considered science as discovering HOW the universe works, religion as an explanation as to WHY it works. They're compatible in my own head. They both make sense to me. Not that I'm so enlightened as to look down on anyone else, but if an Average Joe like myself can resolve this conflict in my own mind, why can't America? Why can't Tyson go back the planetarium, why can't he speak on behalf of NASA or do Cosmos or one of the many things he's good at, why does he have to waste--and I do think it's a waste--so much of his valuable time, taking on zealots?
+Flag Coco Here's the problem: when you only have a few religious idiots, that's fine. They are small in numbers so they can't do much damage to society.
But when you have A LOT of religious idiots, then that's when shit goes full blown.
Long story short, in America, we have a lot of religious idiots, and these even include our presidential candidates (e.g. out of all the GOP presidential nominee, almost every single one of them denies evolution).
Religion doesn't answer why it works, it makes up one.
+Sean Armstrong
If America chooses to elect a leader who denies evolution and panders to those stone age neanderthals, she deserves everything she's going to get. American high school students already lag behind Europeans and Asians. But hey, maybe they'll be world beaters in Home School.....
+TheShockerKnocker was someone talking to you? Lol attention seeking theist as usual.
+Tushaar Nippuleti I don't think you are a pompous atheist at all. Take no notice.
I cannot understand how educated people can retain religious beliefs, in the absence of supporting evidence. What verifiable data can they have that would justify belief? If they used a bible as an evidence source, they’d be up against the problem of proving that written claims about god & Jesus Christ were accurate, given the lack of supporting evidence for either. Anyone with an education could have fabricated claims for the words and deeds of Jesus Christ, irrespective of whether the guy actually existed. Christ, it seems, was unable to write, thus accounts of his alleged activities were written by others. Suspicious, huh; and where is god? Is this invisible god up a mountain, in the sky, or not even in the cosmos as we know it?
Love Neil DeGrasse Tyson and wish he was on TV media shows more.
3:20 is one of the few times I disagree with Tyson. Disrespecting religious beliefs that are explicitly harmful is not only a good thing, but is necessary.
Disrespecting anything is never good. Trying to debate and persuade people is a much more powerful approach to ending harmful religious beliefs like extremism.
Gabe Johnston I never said I respect absent mindedness, what I said was if you want to change people's beliefs, or in your case, stop Dahmer from killing people, the best way would be to persuade him that his ways are wrong and he should change.
You can privately disrespect harmful religious beliefs, but you'd better be publically discreet about it, if you want to affect real change over time. Otherwise you only create a backlash, and nothing causes stagnation like a religious jihad.
Well according to the bible, all Jeffrey Dahmer had to do is accept Jesus as his savior, ask for forgiveness, and he gets the golden ticket no matter what he did. In the bible there is only one sin, mentioned twice actually, that is unforgivable. I find it funny that 99% of people who claim to be of that religion have no idea what it is. That alone shows how valid religious beliefs are, lol.
ominous24 QUOTE: "all Jeffrey Dahmer had to do is accept Jesus as his savior"
Which he did, along with fellow murderer Ted Bundy, so our 'born-again' friends are going to have good company in Heaven.
I have been an atheist from the time I was a child. I went to a Methodist church and thought religion was simply a tradition or cultural ritual we did but didn't actually believe to be real similar to the Santa Claus tradition.
To my shock as a teen I met more people who honestly believed in gods
I have always wondered why I was an atheist when so many people are not.
Separation of church and state means not only that the state doesn't interfere with religion but religion doesn't interfere with the state.
I am far more afraid of people who think they have the answers then those who say they mostly have more questions. When you 'know' you condemn, when you don't know and you search, you are more kind and aware of another who follows that path. A path that is far more courageous then believing in silly books written by men hundreds of years after mythical figures supposedly walked the Earth.
Amen brother! its when we stop asking that we give up on life...
Well, the Catholic Church gave us modern science.
In my own life, I have noticed that the more religious someone is, the dumber they tend to be. Not always true, but true enough to be noticeable to me.
Like Albert Einstein for example?
I noticed your stupidity
*Wh0isTh3D0ct0r*
I have noticed the same thing about atheists & agnostics... they are usually pretty dumb.
EXACTLY....it is so true!
Wh0isTh3D0ct0r sadly true
This man talks sense!! I believe in a God and I completely agree that religion and science are separate and should stay that way. That's why Religious Studies and Science are two different subjects. I know that over here in the UK we learn science in a science classroom and religion in an R.E. class, however I've heard that some places in America teach creationism in science classes?!? My Physics teacher is Catholic and not once does she bring religion into anything she teaches, any qualified scientist would understand this.
No public school district in America teaches creationism in the classroom. In fact no public school district in America teaches religion in the classroom, period. It stands in stark contrast to the Separation of Church and State and has been ruled by the SCOTUS to be Unconstitutional a number of times (this doesn't apply to private schools). Universities and colleges offer 'religious studies' but no accredited university or college would be caught dead supplementing creationism over evolution.
detox8388 Oh, okay, thanks!! It was just the impression I got, but clearly this is the case. :)
detox8388 *isn't the case
detox8388
What the laws say, and what religious people do, are often different things. You must have your eyes closed and ears shut if you really believe that.
smurfyday Oh trust me I know. I was speaking in technicalities. Obviously people will try to stretch the laws but it's usually corrected quickly in the courts.
Perhaps religion is much more nuanced than rationalists would care to admit, and that religion does not always and everywhere reject questioning or act opposite to scientific inquiry.
What's the difference between this RUclips comment section and Neil deGrasse Tyson? Tyson isn't ignorant, outspoken, insulting, or impulsive. This goes for people, regardless of their religion. There will always be "those people" on any side of religion or atheism, so let people believe what they believe. If they intrude and push their beliefs on you, whether it's a close-minded Jehovah's witness or an anti-religious Atheist, tell them to take it somewhere else, because as you all know, it is near-impossible to change someone's entire values and beliefs from a single knock on the door, or a cybernetic conversation over the internet. Keep your opinion to yourselves and don't thrive on such irrational conflict.
What about religious zealots that wants to teach the bible in science classrooms? We want them to keep their faith but to themselves, that's all.
Erediör That's what I meant by *those people* pushing their religious beliefs on you.
Forrest Gump Well for that is the debate, to maintain them away from classrooms, we don't want them to change their mind, unless they are willing to really understand science.
But creationists wants to teach the bible as science, or more science than actual science. That isn't irrational conflict, they are being irrational and wants everyone to be the same.
Erediör I understand, but that's not what I'm talking about. The people in the comments aren't debating, they're bashing religious folk, and certain religious folk are being scientifically ignorant. There is no insulting in Tyson's lecture, yet people use such disrespect in the comments.
Forrest Gump Ah now I see your point, for that reason Tyson said that we should investigate the little percentage of religious scientist and see why they think like that, not to go bashing the uneducated believers, bc their argument is from ignorance on scientific topics most of the time.
I fully agree. Some people are just wired to believe and some are just wired to not believe.
I was expecting this video to be something different, but was actually incredibly impressed with what Tyson had to say. I especially liked what he said about some people being biologically "hard wired" to be religious, which from a neuroscience perspective is actually true in many cases. For example, individuals with bi polar disorder, schizophrenia and other psychiatric disorders are often often more religious than the general population. I was very religious prior to being medicated for bi polar disorder, now an agnostic. My perspective was completely different back then and I've come to realize there needs to be some level of respect from both sides.
I think there was a story of babies switched at birth, where the biological child of the religious parents was religious, while the biological child of the secular parents was more secular.
The higher the education, the lower religiosity. Dependence is the case, but not because of the fact that scientists are closer than others to the truth, but because of the fact that they find it difficult to admit their helplessness and ignorance, and to turn to God.
How ignorant of people to ignore this information.
Surely
You just answered your own question. Common sense must prevail in order to deny Deities and accept evidence based information.
Its your issue if you take offense to that, but you sound like someone who has been brainwashed from birth to believe in the particular God that your country believes in.
If you cannot understand what evidenced based information is, then you are a lost cause my friend.
Your statement "evidence based information' sounds like a euphemism for little more than a guess", is the dumbest thing I have ever read on the entire internet. Well done!
And no I did not rely on evidence when I made the assumption that you were a brainwashed religious nut job. Once again, you clearly indicate the non ability to decipher the difference between evidence based information and not!
Tyson acknowledges that intelligent people can be religious, so your claim that he persecutes people who do not accept the factual evidence from science is complete nonsense. Did you base this statement on evidence? lol
A famous geologist once said 'if all of the evidence in the world pointed to an old earth, I'd be the first to admit it, but I'd still be a young earth creationist because that is what the holy scriptures teach'. There is simply no reasoning with a brain in this frame of (deluded) mind.
And FYI, just because (like the religious folk) you do not accept science, does not give you the right to call it pseudo-science. Yet again you have revealed your own ignorance.
So you are a racist? You hate Australians! Man, you can't help but dig your own hole even deeper. lol
When I use the two words 'evidence' and 'based', I am suggesting that science will document a theory after testing and studying the evidence. I did not use these words to describe medically-related reference. What the hell are you talking about?
If you read back through our comments you'll find that you were the first one to make a personal attack.
You lose racist!
You are making yourself look bad buddy.
And I find it laughable that you would stereotype 'ALL' atheists because you are losing a debate with one. Now that is childish, or just a stupid response to the situation you are in.
Get your political agenda on track with health care and reduce your weekly massacres with gun control policies and I might fit in 'well' in the US, otherwise I think I'll stay right here.
Yes the first race in Australia were the aboriginals, just like the Native Americans were in the US. Technically you are correct (which Atheist are more than happy to admit). But if you hate the Chinese, the Italians, the Greeks, the British, the Mexicans or the Australian's (in this case), I'd class you as a racist towards that nation.
So fuck you buddy. You Aussie hating prick. Fancy stooping to that level in an otherwise healthy debate. Good one douche bag!
I am not from America but I have seen on every coin, note "in God we trust"
Also, see great Architect...
@Axel Jacques Mamouaka Yep, Our Slogan! "We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created ...."
Wasn't always on there. It was added in the late 1950's under the fear of communism.
@@danescott5149 Your right , but its there now !
@@jwsanders1214 you're right but so what?!?
Stop yelling at me!
Everyone can hear this right? I'm not imagining the volume?
lmao
That 7% point was really important and some of y’all in the comments missed it.
Great Neil...I love the way you keep giving me knowledge & thought ... enhancing my open. free .mind..
I want to see an interview with one of the 7% of Elite Scientists who do believe. I feel like their reasons would be very interesting, and even more so, would love to hear it from a person capable of using their owns words. Anyone know where I could find such a thing?
+Ed Colter if you ever find that, please make me know too ;)
+Ed Colter Actually, since we're on RUclips, it's not hard to find many brilliant and accomplished dissenters against Atheism and Darwinism. It's worth listening to both points of view.
+AntiquityCentury21 I've been reading RUclips comments for a long time and I've yet to encounter a single "brilliant and/or accomplished dissenter against Darwinism" -- in fact they are all notably ignorant, many of them appallingly so.
+Ed Colter Search up Francis S Collins. He is a big scientist and he believes in god. He wrote a book about science and religion and has had many interviews. Funny thing is when I was researching on him he didn't believe in god until after he had obtained his science degrees.
Vasu Sharma I'm fully aware of geneticist Francis Collins, who believes in God and also fully accepts evolution-- as do most Christians. Creationism is a pseudo-scientific and pseudo-Christian cult. Evolution has nothing to do with theism vs. atheism.
Tyson's 'black-preacher' style of talking (even though he's a frigging astrophysicist) just goes to show you that there's something genetic in black people that makes them talk that way.
No it doesn't.
It shows it's something cultural.
Gail, do yourself a favor and think before you post something for the world to see.
Genetic: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Next time you have a thought, let it go.
Boy you are a dim bulb aren't you.
Yeah... um... that's like saying there's a "genetic" predisposition for people named Gail make idiotic youtube comments. Public speaking is an art form in and of itself and Dr. Tyson has no tone concerning "preaching" of any kind. He is stating general numbers from polls taken and overall facts. In other words: numerical evidence to support his position in order to educate, not preach.
Preaching involves forced emotional empathy to drive a communal feeling of acceptance concerning an subject in which there is no evidence for and in which you must place "faith" in. There is no preaching of science, only the teaching of it.
Florida is already at this point 😢
what exactly is an elite scientist
+Neil Gupta No clue. That was my question too.
+Neil Gupta I believe that theyre are scientists that study very intense and specific subjects, I could be wrong lol
is there a clear definition? is this some sort of scientist vip club?
+Neil Gupta Tim is right. It's a non-scientific term for scientists that are very knowledgeable/well-known in their field.
Wait then how did he get demographics for a group that ids loosely defined?
Gotta love Neil deGrasse Tyson!!! He's my hero...along with Carl Sagan of course. Great video!! 😃✌
Don't forget Bill Nye.
+Cheezeburger Walrus Yup, him too 👍
Carl Sagan is already dead. He knows God is real.
David Randall Too bad you haven't figured out that God is just a character in a really old, really shitty fairy tale that the mentally deficient take way too seriously.
@@xaenon "mentally deficient"... wow... how condescending and disrespectful is that?!!
"Claiming to be wise, they became fools..."
I wipe my white ring-piece every day with GOD.
The more education a person exposes themselves to in this Society, the further they stray away from their CREATOR and the less they truly UNDERSTAND about their true REALITY and circumstances
Trevor Prather what nonsense you speak. Your worldview was born in the ignorance of ancient tribal rituals. So sad that some human beings cannot give up childish things.
@@trevorthinkstruthmatters2779
So the creator gave us a brain to think and then burns us for all eternity for using it?
@@trevorthinkstruthmatters2779 *I can't trust a book that says that the Sun revolves around the Earth*
Joshua 10:12 " Then spoke Joshua to the LORD...Sun, stand thou STILL.. and thou [also] Moon.."
Joshua commanded *both* the Sun _AND_ the Moon to stand still, NOT the Earth, which proves that the bible writers believed that the Sun moved, and that it traveled around the Earth, and also that it could actually be stopped by a man's prayer to Yahweh /Jesus !
The. Sun. Does. Not. Move.
This is ONLY _one_ of 8 scriptures that were used to convict Galileo of heresy, in 1633, for publishing the science that the Earth revolved around the Sun, in opposition to the bible.
A supernaturally inspired book, beyond human knowledge, would _at least have described it's _*_own_*_ creation_ truthfully compared to what all ancient civilizations believed at the time.
None of this means that there is no god ; it means that the bible is not inerrant nor inspired, and was written by pre science men.
Education also includes indoctrination. I have a Masters degree, and I am also a Christian. Educational institutions actively preach atheism, and apply peer pressure to enforce the notion. Our country was founded upon Christian values, and became great while recognizing and glorifying God. It is no coincidence that, as we have pulled away from God, we have rapidly deteriorated from that greatness. Without God, we are doomed to fail.
Without rules and boundaries society will deteriorate further. It is totally unnecessary for society to live in fear of hell and damnation if it breaks from the oppressive regime of preachers spouting from their pulpit stories that support war, hatred,incest, mutilation of children and totally unbelievable accounts of incidents that simply did not and could not have taken place.
We do not wish to be bombarded, threatened or coerced by religious fanatics in order to coexist in a civilised society but a balanced education system with responsible unbiased teachers would certainly help.
This man is so brilliant. He blows my mind. He's smart, funny, and relatable.
And he’s not a jerk. He’s not trying to belittle people with his wits. He’s using his talents to explain things to everyone.
Me too he is a great man.
You could make some spicy memes with that mic.
So I choose to look to Jesus and live
i feel bad that i learned about this guy from instagram one liners. he's pretty awesome
haha, yeah i can't believe he's the "we got a badass over here" meme
😅 absolutely love Neil's New York times statement that was published in their paper it was spot on! I've had ignorant teachers like that when I was growing up. Cannot believe that these people were hired to be teachers in the first place! You go Neil!❤❤❤
The religious troll are flooding this post
I see his point but I disagree. Just because there are scientists that believe in a god and maybe even worship that God doesn't mean that the rest of us should respect and admire those Believers that are not scientist. Religious Dogma deserves ridicule and disrespect. Not saying that we should hate the people that believe this bullshit, but do not Empower them by respecting their beliefs.I know a person usually does not choose what they believe they're just convinced. I used to call myself a Christian years ago. It was actually challenging my beliefs that led me to atheism. It was actually studying for the ministry that I learned that is all nonsense. Ultimately, I'm the one that had to make that decision. Societies have been held back too damn long by this superstitious nonsense. It is time that people rise up and stop putting Band-Aids on Christians Muslims Jews or anything else that is superstitious primitive and nonsensical void of logic and reason. Here's a quote of mine
" The crabgrass of religion is slowly but surely being choked out by the flowers of logic and reason. Soon to be gone are the primitive superstitious and nonsensical beliefs in an all-powerful entity in the sky "
Jesus is real
Only in the hearts of 3 billion people. That's pretty real I would say
Only on every corner In america stands a building with a cross. He single handedly changed the world with his nonexistence,. Restores lives everyday. Your real,. How many lives have you touched. He's a badass for someone who don't exist. How can you even have a debate about someone who never lived. I guess your DNA designed itself and our earth sustanse itself. Our brain programmed itself and our imune system is just an accident
His actual name is YHWH and one day you will now down to Him even tho it will be too late for you at that point, you will still bow down
Islam will never be bigger than Christianity
@@johnmoates5709 so nothing to offer other than more shit talk?
what a shocker.
but thanks for proving me right about you.
i accept your concession on all points.
it's funny that there's never a good "sound guy" available
He's conflating two different issues. God, or a creator, can exist, and religion can be ridiculous. Both can be true.
Neil is assuming religions version of god is THE version of GOD.
Matthew Holden Which doesn't exist in my book.
@@matthewkellar9757 No one cares about your book. Why are you so self-important that you think anyone cares what you think?
We dont know any other god.
The concern of atheists is not about the existence of God but how followers of mythological beliefs are given preferential treatment in being allowed to have power in adversely affecting the lives of people they so choose.
Stop them from voting or making laws based around their religion then I'll leave them alone.
Can't be an Atheist? We are all born atheists. Belief in any god, following of any dogma is taught. It may be engrained in them from their childhood, but it seems ignorant to say that they can't change their mind. It seems insulting to the religious. Also, I believe the founding fathers were trying to get away from theocracy and granted religious freedoms under a secular constitution. Tyson is right, but I would say it's spin doctoring to say that it was founded upon religious freedoms.Does he really think freedom was a big deal for a bunch of slave owners?
Your bias is showing :-) A child need not be taught there is a God to look into a night sky and know that SOMETHING far greater than he exists. It's only when we educate ourselves beyond reason into arrogance that we stop wondering. And no, I am NOT saying education is wrong. But taking oneself too seriously after education can be. Any truly educated person will tell you that the more they learn, the less they "know".
Richard Mcneil
The only arrogance I see is someone using a vague sense of mysticism as evidence that there is a higher power. I agree with the last thing you said, but sulking in your own ignorance is just as detrimental as becoming arrogant in your education.
ViNcEnT RoSs You'll have to explain that to me. How does "sulking" in one's ignorance harm ANYONE else? My beliefs are my own - they harm no one, I force them on no one. But I have a right to speak publicly just as atheists do, have I not? I can see why the "ignorance" of others might be annoying, but detrimental? Come now.
Richard Mcneil I didn't say it was detrimental to anyone but yourself, but it's a bit like throwing a plastic cup out of a window. For 1 person to be willfully ignorant of the information presented to them is 1 thing, but when millions or billions do it it becomes a problem. It makes for an ignorant society and in this case it shows a complete lack of respect for the wealth of knowledge our species has been and is trying to collect. Nobody is saying you don't have the right to speak publicly. I'm using my right to speak publicly to tell you that I think you're wrong.
ViNcEnT RoSs I misunderstood your intention then - my apologies. I can understand your concern but it gets down to simple respect doesn't it? If you had some odd family member that embarrassed you due to their ignorance would you spend time castigating them or would you just accept that that is just who they are and be glad you "know better"? And btw, the ignorance you decry in the world is by far the majority of the earth's population since the vast majority have no access to the education you've obviously been fortunate enough to acquire. It's something to ponder.
I wonder what the percentage of religious elite scientists would be if you discount those who were influenced by religious parents.
Beautiful speech. Neil Tyson, a man after my own heart. There is just so much hubris in the term "atheism" and in the disbelievers who spend half their time criticizing the religiously ignorant.
Just IGNORE them. If you're even half as bright as Neil here, you'd know it's a losing argument to try and convert believers. Leave them be unless they come trying to disrupt science education.
EVERYONE, religious, atheist and the agnostic need to listen to this speech.
"I don't normally get into those arguments, because I got the universe to worry about"
"If you get famous smart scientists in your camp, that boosts your camp"
Oners82 And it'll die out soon enough, just like the 70s hippie subculture. It's highly unscientific to outright reject the existence of god. All atheism has accomplished(which didn't take much effort at all) is disprove the existence of a personal god. But what of the possibility of a transcendent one? We already have a limited understanding of the beginnings of the universe. Don't make it worst by rejecting any possibilities with no evidence.
Mikhail Kalashnikov Actually, Atheism and religion will fade from existence. Agnosticism will be the main state of mind of humanity somewhere down the road, as predicted by Michio Kaku.
Oners82 Unfortunately that's what you agnostic skepticism. "Absence of belief" lol. That in itself is just a joke. Atheism is a horrible label. Ask the majority of the people who call themselves atheists and you'll find that they fully reject any possibility of the existence of a creator.
Michio Kaku is perfectly correct. Agnosticism is probably the most scientific and logical form of thinking that everyone needs to have for any sort of progress.
Agnosticism isn't ceasing to have an opinion, it's growing a pair of balls and admitting that you just really don't know.
I understand the word, I AM Agnostic.
But you're too busy trying to put me in a box, that you actually get offended when I tell you that you can't put an Agnostic in a box because they have the most abstract ideas compared to Atheists in general and Theists in general.
There's Agnostic Atheist and Agnostic Theist and then there's just plain Agnostic. People try to hard to seclude these words into generalizations and you can't generalize Agnostic in THAT way.
Generally, Agnosticism is just not knowing. Sure you can be an "Agnostic Theist" and believe there is something higher without actually knowing, and you can be an "Agnostic Atheist" and believe there is nothing without actually knowing.
Or you can be like me, plain Agnostic.
I believe there could be nothing, I believe there could be something. I don't believe in one or the other more than another. I just believe there's no way to really know.
Mainly because I don't care what happens after death. Death isn't where my life is, and I don't live to die and serve an almighty being like Christians do.
religion? id rather not. living is living.
Very good information Dr Neil well done sir!
As a Theist I love and respect Mr. T. The world needs more of him .
He's so disrespectful. Insulting religious people but way worse than that insulting his maker. So sad.
@@petrabreeze9480 bruh stfu with your indoctrination
I'm proud to be included in that 40%.
Do you like the smell of your own farts?
so basically you are admitting that you have never read the bible for yourself nor tried to use any scientific method upon what it tries to say. If you believe the story of Babel, then you are only in the 40% because you were good at passing tests and really don't have the ability to think on your own.
Neil degrasse Tyson "science preacher" except when he talks bullshit doesn't come out😮
It's called The Argument from Ignorance: "I am stupid, therefore God"
Something like, "I am stupid, therefore big bang, evolution"?
And conversely, I am ignorant, therefore atheism.
How about "I am poor, therefore cardboard box"?
@@Contending difference is, there is evidence pointing to the big bang and there is evidence we evolved.
It is fact whether you believe it or not.
@@shrimpgripper @Jude Martiniak is right. I used "conversely" wrong. It should have been "alternately". He's still a schmuck for pointing it out, though. :o)
Differentiate between being religious and being spiritual and redo the survey.
Well i like religions for philosophical reasons i don't rely on it for solving or explaining natural phenomena but in some situations it helps with morale and introspection ,its like an imaginary friend who is always on your side .Religion should be a personal venture and not forced on anyone or used to discriminate against others...
All religion is is philosophy mixed with mythology. Why not remove the mythology part and just focus on the philosophy? My life turned around the day I discovered the Tao Te Ching. It has everything considered “good” in the Bible but is waaaaaaay shorter because it removes the folk tales and false claims about reality. The Tao Te Ching is an Ancient Chinese book of wisdom. That’s what we need, wisdom, not superstitious nonsense plus a little bit of wisdom.
@SURREY CROSSING It's funny you mention Zen because Zen Buddhism incorporates no mythology, archetypes, motifs, etc. I was literally going to use that as my example that contradicts the rest of your statement before I finished reading your response. Btw, despite what the intelligent-but-wrong Jordan Peterson thinks, all Christian mythology can be thought of in archetypes but not all archetypes are Christian mythology. I have been studying/practicing Zen Buddhism and philosophical Taoism for years now, but I'm also a scientist who knows objective facts. Jordan Peterson's biggest transgression is that he promotes utility rather than objectivity and intellectual integrity. And he's not stupid, by no means, he just isn't being honest. His metaphysics are horribly misguided. It's patently clear that he's only ever studied Christianity, and seems completely oblivious to the fact that other, some non-theistic, religions/philosophies exist that give people significant meaning, purpose, and morality in life.
@SURREY CROSSING I never once said Jordan Peterson's rhetoric wasn't useful, I know it's useful. My best friend from high school is a heroin addict who is steadily improving his life using Jordan Peterson's ideas. Jordan Peterson is not saying anything new either, he's just adding Christian archetypes and the term "metaphysical substrate" to what self-help writers have been saying forever. And he uses Christian archetypes specifically because doing so is an appeal to authority (which in itself is a fallacy, but we'll gloss over that). If people need superstition, or the semblance of superstition to be good people go for it, I'm all in. But I'm also a biological scientist, which means to do the work that I do there have to be objective facts that we can know. Discovering these objective facts was the springboard that launched us into an age of technology and advancement that even 100 years was inconceivable. So there is, I would argue, even more utility in what is true (the real meaning of "true", not JP's definition). Make no mistake Zen practice keeps me grounded, but I am first and foremost a scientist who, unlike Jordan Peterson, fundamentally cares about objectivity and intellectual integrity because we can go so much further with real truth than we can with what's only true for some.
I get what JP is doing, but he's injecting what works from his clinical experience into the realm of what's true from an intellectualism standpoint. It also doesn't help that JP is a bipolar egotist, which that latter part explains why everything he says is "true" because he changed the definition of "true" to mean anything he says can be true, because he's massively egotistical but plays humble out of utilityThat's how he can say things like you can't quit smoking unless you have a supernatural experience and then backtrack after he realizes how stupid his thoughts are when vocalized and just use the "well, you misrepresented what I said..." defense. Notice how he never takes ownership of the dumb shit he does say, and when called out he employs any defense mechanism he can to keep from taking ownership of it; because he's egotistical. Not someone I would really want to take advice from. Everything JP says has been said better before without the massive amount of fluff involved, and that's a circle you just can't square. But if you see his "truth" as truth because anything can be true from a subjective perspective, then our conversation ends here. So namaste to you as well.
@SURREY CROSSING And this is what you aren't getting. There is no "my truth" or "your truth". There is only what is true. thinking that certain things can be only known to you and no one else, and that these make you feel special because you and only you hold these "truths", is the pinnacle of arrogance. And you call me narcissistic? That's laughable. There should be an "arrogance fallacy", when someone accuses someone else of narcissism as a defense mechanism because the first person doesn't actually know what they're talking about. I've been called "arrogant" and "narcissist" before over the objective facts I proffered about vaccines when speaking to an anti-vaxxer, and I work in medical research. So being called a "narcissist" sways me none considering the source of the claim. And btw, scientists are the least sure people of anything in the world because we always have to account for error in every model proposed. But with every model, we have to start from a premise of known facts and the model has to be logically sound. Jordan Peterson doesn't adhere to either of these. And Jordan Peterson is successful because he doesn't have to say objectively true things to be successful, most people don't. Peterson does quote a lot of scientifically designed studies with valid conclusions, so yes he does have some semblance of truth, but that's where his truthfulness stops and his idea of utility begins. If Peterson is addressing primarily white, young men with no direction in life, then he needs to have a disclaimer at the beginning of every one of his talks that specifies his worldview is in accordance with such an audience so the rest of us well-adjusted people can tune out. Just remember, bullshit can easily pass for wisdom among the ignorant and/or desperate, no matter what age the ignorant and/or desperate person is. One would think that age and experience should combat such ignorance, but that's rarely the case. In fact, an observation I've made is that the older someone gets, the more willfully ignorant they become, so this "wisdom of elders" bullshit is only applicable to the old and enlightened, not just the old. But I guess that's just "my truth", so you can't tell me otherwise, right? This is becoming more irksome than enjoyable so I'm going to leave now. Don't expect a reply to whatever you were about to type.
Now here's a prime example of a black life that DOES matter
***** Nice username Dirk lmao
***** Feel feel feel feel.......feel my heat! That movie is classic
I know you are happy to see a very intelligent successful black man here but the way you say it suggests that other black people don't matter because they are not like him? I suppose you could also include average whites too. Be careful of backhanded compliments.
Psalm 14:1 - The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
Neil always makes SO much sense !!!!
Until you stop looking at a single leaf and start looking at the forest...then you become aware of all the inherent contradictions in atheism. I agree with Dr. John Lennox when he said "I don't have enough faith to be an atheist".
@@markanthony3275 what of the contradictions of the Bible?
@@norahkalunda1234 There are no contradictions in the Bible. The people who say that there are, haven't studied Hebrew and Greek, so they don't understand the meaning of what is written. Nor do they understand the way of expression used by ancient people. People who don't know these things , tend to apply a western scientific understanding to something that is so profound that it explains why science is even possible and it can not be explained and examined as "data". If you knew the history of science you would know that all scientific knowledge and expertise are the result of Christians in the 14th and 15th centuries who read the Bible and came to the realization that God was orderly and rational...therefore the universe He created must also be orderly and rational, the material secrets of which could be unlocked by experimentation and the application of mathematics. No other culture or civilization did this because no other culture had the Bible and Christianity as it's basis for existence. Consequently ALL of the early scientists without exception were Christians. It was only in the late 19th century that atheists hi-jacked science and tried to eliminate God...and to do this they broke with the principle of experimentation established by Christians and adopted many UNPROVEN ASSUMPTIONS which modern scientists accept for granted as being proven true when they have never been proven true. You can find some of these "dogmas" that were adopted in Rupert Sheldrake's "The Science Delusion".
@@markanthony3275 I don't blame you. But you'll realize "when you die"
(No contradictions) Reconcile 2 Samuel 24:1, with 1 Chronicles 21.
Also, reconcile Romans 1:18-20, with glass darklies, Falls, 2 Corinthians 4:4, 1 Corinthians 2:14...
And the concept, failing, in heaven... with one third, of, all angels, too - seemingly?
Also, what, did, Jesus do, during... the blood libel on Jews, the slave trade within, sizable parts, of Christendom... and the Inquisition, also?
Just to be clearer, here.
And, Revelations 13:8, and... free will...
Contextualize, together, please?
Meantime, yes, schisms, were gonna, schism. Oddly enough.@@markanthony3275
I gave this the thumbs up, eight minutes into the video. Of course, Neil DeGrasse Tyson is likely to get that reaction from anyone who bothers to even THINK ABOUT the thumbs up button on RUclips while watching a video he's the main feature of, but if anyone wants to know, why I thought of the thumbs-up button at 8:00, watch the video at least up to that point and it should be obvious, I think. :)
I believe in a God. I think science will one day unite with spirituality but it will take a while, considering scientific egos and corruption will get in the way of this, but I have started with many questions and looked for many answers and I am not going to rule out that a God doesn't exist because there are so many things in science that seem to point to something we can't see. When I starting thinking about questions like "what makes up matter?" And "what is dark matter?" And "what is consciousness?" I realized there was no possible way for scientists to disprove the existence of a God and if your smart and not blinding by your own convictions then if you'll keep an open mind, you'll see that there are things that just don't really make sense from our perspective and that the world out there is so complicated, and we barely know anything about it. So it would be foolish to assume god doesn't exist.
We, as humans, have 5 senses. Some animals have better acute senses that humans don't experience. Scientists agree on that one. Then, that opens a possibility for other dimension not perceivable to humans senses. Another realm possibly. So, to be certain that an energy and intelligence "called : God" exists 100 % or not, is pure ignorance. So, we all shall say : I IGNORE if there is a God or not, but I choose to believe in One or choose not to believe in One.
Given time your wait and your journey will end in great disappointment as the questions will be answered sans a god. One does not have to see when one has mathematical equations to explain what cannot be seen. The pieces of the puzzle are coming together quite nicely
No need to disprove gods, just show EVIDENCE that meets scientific standards for the existence of ANY god.
Without that, it's just wishful thinking.
Your God occupies an ever-receding quantity of pockets in knowledge and understanding being steadily removed by Scientific discovery.
A Theist chooses what is emotionally appealing to believe... an intelligent man has no choice but to accept only that which has been found rational to believe through evidence. Emotional has always been a defining attribute of the Female gender.
So let me get this straight... The higher of a "Degree in Education that you have"... the dumber you become, and the LESS open you are to ideas that do NOT fit what you think! (Sounds about like N.d.T.)
At 7:42, again, Tyson falls victim to the common error of conflating "science," with "conclusions made by those who practice science."
Right
There are physical laws and contentedness between everything in the universe. This will be the true religion in the future (if we survive long enough).
I like what Einstein said about Buddhism.
RIP Ears
Explain consciousness first mr Tyson. Then we can talk.
Yes, and also explain the origin of information and DNA. And the origin of gender: Evolution cannot create in pairs.
well, I will say one thing, creationists do need to not put Genesis 1 in the science room
what I want to know is why would people want to put a historical text in the science classroom :P
Because Genesis is a fabrication with no factual basis and historical texts on old scientists derived from relatively recent sources such as journals and the work they have done in their lives. Also science actually matters in the world; it works. Historical text isn't a scientist's bible and the mere implication is stupid and narrowminded.
SuperUnunquadium what were you trying to say in this statement
What was your point exactly? It depends on what your comment meant
SuperUnunquadium I meant that I think its stupid for creationists to try and get the Bible (a complex and complicated for study) historical text into the science class room, keep it in the history and religion classes at least
Then I was more or less agreeing with you. The bible belongs in either religion classes or historical literature and should not taken factually. Learn what you what from it but do not treat it as gospel truth (lol).
Religious freedom includes atheim
Aethism is not a religion.
freedom from religion.
you're quite correct atheism is a belief that there is no God . since science cannot prove or disprove that there is a God atheism qualifies as a belief system. the only question that atheist have to Ask themselves is atheism: do I believe in it or not.
It is actually disbelief or lack of belief
Atheism is the exact word for someone with NO religion. The prefix "A" Meaning "Without" "Theism" Being belief in a personal god. It literally means "Without believe in a personal god" Not "Belief in the non existence of a personal god"
If you can’t adjust for distortion on a mic, how can you know the origin of the universe?
@@Thundarr8888 Which god? There are so fucking many to pick from.
@@Thundarr8888 yikes a fundie
Lmao he doesnt control the audio
It hardly requires an advanced degree to determine that the existence of a personal God is unlikely. Just a little intelligence.
this audio is nauseating. Whoever set up deGrasse's mic clearly was not a scientist
its not his mic, its the audio feed from the mixer to the camera record thats shitty.
Mixer should be rewarded then... with a pink slip. Unless they were using Zoom then there's some leeway... not their fault.