I just play Hitchens while doing paperwork… what a great speaker. I love it how he completely dismantles religion time and time again. The impossibility of God is staggering…and Hitchens proves this fact with such ease, intelligence and grace. I’m so glad that we can still see and hear him anytime we like here on RUclips. The loss of this man was such a tragedy.
@@alanwilson8407 Same here, I’m not much of a fan of his fondness for Marxism either…but I’m sure that he could speak about it and we’d listen just because he’s such a great speaker. Be well.
@@ENFPerspectives Which one of the estimated 5000 Gods is it impossible to be without? Ahhh….don’t worry, yours is probably the right one. Which one do you believe in? I’m curious, how do you just simply throw logic, common sense and rational thinking to the wind… knowing full well that Billions of people believe in a totally different God than you do? Why is your’s the right one? Explain that to me would ya..
Except when he said he belonged to the pro life community that’s embarrassing af, he wants to keep superstitious morality with his conservatism, but without the superstition, it’s just fascism.
@princegobi5992: I consider your pro-abortion (?) comment as a completely miscap of what Hitchens said here. And, btw: there are „pro life“ guys on this planet who don‘t vote Conservative or are religious at all. Maybe you have never thought about this.
@@princegobi5992 as an atheist it is a good position to hold. To deny someone the right to have a life at all is tragic, I imagine the religious think these embryos just fly straight up to heaven after they are aborted. Having said all that I still am prochoice
Awestruck and inspired, as always, by Christopher Hitchen's words. Not sure how much the ego plays into the others, but they seem to amplify my theory: stupidity = stubborness.
+Dave Dennison The very existence of 6 billion religious people (plus your manifestly stupid comment about religion and intelligence, which was shot down by Hitchens himself) means that you need to think of some *much* better arguments.
@@DaveDennisonsecular Good point. The irony I find is that the vast majority of 'awake' people who are aware of this are 'asleep' when it comes to religious belief and god, ie they believe in it. Most 'conspiracy theorists' seem to be believers in god, while most atheists dismiss conspiracy theories in much the same way they do religion. I'm an atheist, but I'm well aware that the elite control the way the public think and act, in much the same way that religion controls its followers.
You can walk through Sodom and Gomorrah TODAY and pull sulfur right out of the walls. A total of 5 cities incinerated by God., with the land in between left alone. The evidence for the truth of the bible is EVERYWHERE. ruclips.net/video/_tGNgd9_6qI/видео.html
Especially the phony Canadians. Their heretofore withering and shameful treatment of Indians is astonishing. Silence is golden to these "friendly phone's".😂
No actually he didn't - he deflected brilliantly and is dead on about religion but in no way did he undercut the theistic groundwork. Theology persists and the public face of it as maligned as it is by the natural and ethnic tyranny of of the status quo. i.e. religion, is the fundamental fuel of atheism. Atheism is bound to the superficiality that is religiosity confusing G-d with the history of 'faith' . Atheism could not exist otherwise. So the absurd notion that G-d emerges from the imagination as a creative act of ambitious albeit supremely ignorant and desperate pattern makers. CH loves ironically to refer to Spinozoa his very opposite because unlike Hitchens he does not project the template of a natural man's needs or temporality onto G-d . To do the latter would indeed have to solicit the disgust CH feels towards THAT concept of G- d.
Not to mention that those two ding dongs (especially Stein) are supposed to be the moderators, when in fact they come across as unobjective Hitchens opponents.
Christopher Hitchens speaks logically and intelligently, it is a sad reflection on how much retrograde thinking is currently around that he has even to bother debating with such stupid fools..
The funny thing about these philsophers is that they have absolutely no scientific understanding yet uncontrollably yearn for the validity it would provide
He still is brother :-) Offstage, my husband was an impossible act to follow. At home at one of the raucous, joyous, impromptu eight-hour dinners we often found ourselves hosting, where the table was so crammed with ambassadors, hacks, political dissidents, college students, and children that elbows were colliding and it was hard to find the space to put down a glass of wine, my husband would rise to give a toast that could go on for a stirring, spellbinding, hysterically funny 20 minutes of poetry and limerick reciting, a call to arms for a cause, and jokes. “How good it is to be us,” he would say in his perfect voice. Carol Blue, Christopher Hitchens widow
I want to express my wish Christopher was here. We need him now more than ever. Given the knowledge gained since this debate, the views expressed on design in this debate have been discounted, at least. I see his widow has responded in the comments. I was heartened to hear from her . I will continue to find him on RUclips and enjoy his quick mind and the way he applies it.
Mr. Hitchslap, for your patience and diligence in bringing to us this episode of Hitch, we all thank you. Well, I see above, at this time, 866 of us do, at any rate. Myself included.
Huge thanks to whoever invited Ben Stein, always nice to have an arrogant simpleton humiliating himself unintentionally. Don't threaten me with a good time.
Thank you for posting this. I was listening to Catholic Answers radio earlier today and one of the hosts, Al Kresta, interviewed Jay Richards about his new book on CS Lewis and scientism, and when I looked Richards up and saw that he had once debated Hitchens, I just had to check this out! I thought the Catholic Church had repudiated the Intelligent Design movement, so I found it kind of weird to hear a Discovery Institute person invited onto Catholic radio. Listening to this video, I see that Richards is just another ID shill using arguments that have already been refuted even by other Catholics like biologist Ken Miller. Catholic Answers must be growing pretty desperate to oppose "new atheists" if they're now sinking so low to start inviting people from the Discovery Institute to aid them.
@@glennsimonsen8421 God put it there. But who put God there? No one put God there. He’s always been there. Why can’t the baseball have always been there? That would be silly. Etc. Etc.
As a scientist, I want to scream when I hear non-scientists debating science. I love Hitch, but his descriptions sometimes land short. But listening to theists abuse science and logic makes me want to scream! It's almost physically painful!
+Tim Teatro I'd like to know which scientific claims you thought Christopher fell short on. Indeed he is not a scientist (neither am I) but he is taking most of his findings straight from scientist. Richard Dawkins, Lawarence Kraus whom he does quote quite often.
Sado Moreno If you're super-curious about specifics, I can re-watch and document anything that makes me grind my teeth. But perhaps I can satisfy your curiosity with a general clarification. In paraphrasing what he's understood from Prof. Dawkins or Prof. Krauss, Christopher at times lost some of the precision with which scientists craft their prose. It grates slightly on the ear but still falls far ahead of being incorrect. I certainly didn't mean to suggest that Christopher's description of anything was a mere lesser of evils when compared to the factually-void scientifically semi-literate nonsense that comes from the other side.
+Tim Teatro I know what you mean and agree to an extent, as a scientist myself. However, what is brilliant about Hitchens, that you don't see in William Lane Craig, Frank Turek and this Jay Richard fellow is the concession that he is not a scientist and isn't qualified to discuss these topics in depth. Watch either of Hitchens debates against Turek and you'll see that he concedes that he's not qualified. I think that concession in itself is in itself poetically scientific. RIP Hitch
Hitchens was a historian above all other titles he earned. He studied science history, Social and political history and above all the history of religions around the world. His job as a journalist allowed him to travel around the world to seek the actual truth the general popular media would censor due to political and clerical pressures. History should be studied thoroughly from various sources to avoid repeating the same mistakes.
Hello. I realise it’s been some years since your post. I’m trying unsuccessfully to find an unbiased history of Israel. Can you make a recommendation please. Hitchens on you tube talks about Iraq, Iran in which there are overlaps relating to Israel and Palestine but I cannot find anything definitive. I can read about orthodox rabbis opinions or the victorians trying a solution etc resulting in the current borders. Nothing I’ve read satisfies as it is all biased to the writer. Can you help? Thank you.
@@mannie7028 I could tell you right away if I had a memory for every book I ever read like Hitchens. and I too am slow at looking up things, names and subjects that are important to me online. Hitchens gave book suggestions during his many video taped debates and lectures. Just take the time to watch Hitchens videos. Still I'm glad to be the person a am although unhelpful in some cases. Don't be lazy if you actually do want something bad enough like being on time for work takes energy and hustle.
@@JosephNordenbrockartistraction100% with you Joseph! I got lucky and discovered him on C-Span in the mid 80s since then I’m proud to have read every single one of his works (books, not Vanity Fair) the which I proudly display in my home library, this word (special) may have different connotations to many, but yes, this man was special.
What a wonderful thought. But I think were I to be given the chance I would be shrinking and running away in awe of this mans intellect. I don’t think I could last 3 minutes in conversation.
@@starboy1100Same here, wish I could have given him a hug and tell him everything he’s done to help me and my family think for ourselves..Love this man, wish he could have toned down his smoking habit. Terrible loss to freethinkers everywhere.
The part I remember from that movie is when Jody Foster is being driven to the launch site and the albino preacher (the guy who blew up the first launch) says ".....And these scientist....do you want them speaking to your God for you?" (....and then Jody Foster rolls her window up). That was a good movie!
read alot of comments and I can't find one saying Jay won the debate,,,he just got slaughtered ! Even the less gifted religious fools dare not suggest a victory
I've been watching a lot of Hitchens debates the past couple days and this is definitely one of the better ones in my opinion... Even the antagonist (Richards) brings up interesting topics for once, which just reaffirms Hitch's extreme depth of knowledge in so many areas. So much BRILLIANCE!
Ben Stein... famous for a bit part in an 80s movie. Had his own game show with Jimmy Kimmel. Tries to convince everyone that because he studied under Milton Friedman he is an economist. Uses that status as a springboard for entering any serious academic discussion. Releases a documentary about creationism titled, "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed" which lives up to its name, and would actually be quite a good title for his biography. If not you could always use "Ben Stein: A Bad Joke."
He's debating all fucking three of them at the same time. Each one of them challenged him multiple times and he just kept going. The supposed moderators were just bullpen relief when the starting pitcher blew his arm out in the 3rd inning. I've seen this dozens of times. It just shows the absolute weakness of the theist argument and I loathe that we even still have it.
I never thought about that. The Sun and the Moon are the same size in the sky and one covers the other sometimes, so that means God sent himself to Earth to be tortured to death to forgive us for torturing him to death. It all makes perfect sense now!
Riiight up until Jay avoided the young earth creationist question and deflected on to the ontological argument which in this case is nothing more than an argument from ignorance. Anyone in their right mind should be skeptical about the capacity to educate when they're too deluded to recognize the wishful thinking of religion despite the mountain of evidence supporting evolution by natural selection. PS, you KNOW it's propaganda whenever they say "teach darwinism."
You believe in a book that has talking animals, wizards, witches, demons, sticks turning into snakes, food falling from the sky, people walking on water, and all sorts of magical, absurd and primitive stories, and you say that we are the ones that need help?
Just for the sake of the truth: Andromeda galaxy won't collide with Milky Way, they will merge peacefully and create a greater galaxy, because the distances between stars are too great for the stars to possibly collide ^^ Still, mr Hitchens was a brilliant person.
Jay makes the very contradictory point that there can't be something from nothing, but when faced with the question, where did god come from he cops out and says god always was. That is an extremely illogical answer. That is the basic problem with theism.
If it's morally wrong to kill children , why did God slaughter so many in the bible? Or is it ok for him , but we know it's wrong ,doesn't that mean we have far better moral code than God .
It is NOT a competition. Human even animals can do the right thing for their own kind, without religion. God is what you want to believe ,it is your personal point of view . Religion spoil your freedom
+ShadeyBladey :WE? speak for yourself!! and i have observe that you swear a lot,,perhaps you are not a kind lovable person. .God ,the one we wish to believe exist:is the great indifferent.
+khaled zakaria hello to you..whether I am or not it doesn't matter. We should all live without labeling on and other .just be happy,we will find when our time come up..Christopher Hitchens has find that out!
C. HITCHEN 'S every word/sentence so easy to understand,makes sense,logical.J.RICHARDS on the other hand,very difficult to understand,what he is trying to say .PENZIAC never said it went to zero,because it is not allowed by the laws of physics(i forgot the scientists name),universe bounced back before it reached zero.sigularity is not zero.
The summary of Jay Richards argument is: "Reality exists, therefore something akin to a very specific thing in the reality must have not been reality and then it must have done things that are found in reality so there would be a reality, otherwise reality would not be reality." Jay Richards is not worthy of the title: "Analytical Philosopher."
1:14:30 Jay claims we KNOW that the universe began to exist. But we DON'T KNOW that. He claims a LOT that he doesn't and cannot know. Hitchens makes so much more sense than Richards.
I love what the guy talking about theism said at around 16:30 - 17:50. He said "everyone knows that torturing children is wrong". It's ironic that his infinitely good being does just that but is still all loving.
b24harman If you are referring to Noah's flood, get your facts straight... The human population had been corrupted by breeding with evil spirit creatures, resulting in hybrids called nephilim: *The fallen sons of God corrupted the earth with false doctrines by intermarrying with humans and thus teaching them their ways *God sent preachers to plead with the people to change their ways, but they would not repent. He therefore said told Noah that He would not always strive (diyn/plead/contend) with them (v 3) *God therefore said that He would reduce human lifespan from centuries to 120 years because there was great wickedness in the earth and people’s spirits were full of evil from their youth (v 5) *The people of the earth were corrupt (shachath/morally corrupt) - Gen 6: 11, 12) and there was violence in the earth (Gen 6: 11,13) Part of the corruption included the worship of idols, and the sacrifice and canabilism of multitudes of small children as well as adults. the nephilim even ate each other....The nephilim were giants. They ate everything... consuming all of the herds the produce of the fields, and wild animals. The nephilim were destroying creation, and all but Noah and his family worshipped them. Some of the grizzly details are on this string.....bear in mind, there are legends of giants in human history. ancientlosttreasures.yuku.com/topic/4663/Giants-Ate-Human-Flesh-drank-his-Blood Noah, and his family warned these (human) people for 100 years to repent or die. He was laughed at... I will speculate that perhaps by the time of the flood...all of the innocent children were already dead.
davelanger The plagues set upon the people of Egypt, were relative to the gods of the land...demonstrating that God was the true God and that their gods were weak, ineffective, and false. 1. Turning the Nile to blood (Isis and Khmom) 2. Frogs (Heget) 3. Gnats (Set) 4. Flies (Re and Uatchit) 5. Death of livestock. (Hathor and Apis) 6. Boils (Sekmet and Sunu) 7. Hail (Nut and Set) 8. Locusts (Osiris) 9. Darkness (Re, Horus and Hathor) 10. Death of firstborn (Min and Isis as well as Pharaoh himself) After each plague, Moses begged Pharaoh to "let my people go" in each case, Pharaoh stubbornly refused. After 9 plagues, Moses demanded his people go free, or the 10th plague would come from Pharaoh's own lips.... Pharaoh threatened Moses, saying that he would kill all of the Hebrew first born.... By saying this, Pharaoh declared the next plague upon Egyptian citizens, having witnessed 9 plagues and knowing full well what would happen. The Hebrews put lambs blood on their door, causing the spirit to pass over their household and all within some Egyptian converts were saved by staying safe in Hebrew marked homes....thus "The Passover". Pharaoh had seen in the 9 preceding plagues and witnessed the power of God, and if he had only let the Hebrews go...the first born sons of Egypt, including Pharaoh's own son, would have been spared... . After the 10th plague, Pharaoh drove the Hebrews out of Egypt...there were also many Egyptian religious converts (and their children) leaving with the Hebrews... Please also keep in mind the Egyptian Pharaoh would routinely execute the first born sons of the Hebrew families to keep the population down... Moses (as a baby) was only saved by his mother who hid him in the reeds, He was found by Pharaoh's daughter and raised as her son ie, royalty. God created us all, and had the right to end the lives of the pagan Egyptians, including children. There will be a resurrection... including the hope for all in the grave to have eternal life, which is made possible by the blood of the Lamb of God, Jesus. Today, un-believers have the chance to repent and accept this gift as long as they draw breath and have heard the good news... Perhaps eternal life will be offerred to resurrected children who died before they could hear about Jesus. The whole story of the exodus and the parting of the Jordan is in the book of Exodus.. davelanger, you have just heard some of the good news...the rest is up to you. The first commandment given to Moses: "I am the Lord thy God, thou shalt have no other gods before me."
Right, so God sent all those plagues on man and that is a loving and caring God in what way? So God your God killed thousands of innocent children, killing innocent peoples food and water supplies just because some of the Pharaohs believed in other gods? LOL. So much for God giving us free will right? And I love how you say well Godhas the right to kill what he created. Again how is that a loving God? Its not.
I'm glad the word debate was not used in the caption heading. This was no debate anymore than Mike Tyson vs Michael Spinks was a fight. The difference between this and the Tyson vs Spinks fight is that it lasts much longer and is even more one sided. Richards was not effective at all.
Why do theologians always have to say that their worldview is correct because it's the most hopeful?? So what if it's more hopeful...I want the truth...not to live a lie. Reality doesn't care about our hopes or dreams. It just IS. As humans we can accept that and make the most of our lives or we'll always be waiting for someone who's never going to come. And people naturally have morals. No God needed for that. Humans are social beings so we'll go by what's culturally accepted guidelines for the success of the species. Period. Atheists are mostly good people and Christians are mostly good people. But both can be moral regardless of belief.
"...everything that begins to exist must have a cause for its existence." This is not true, and even if it was, there is no reason to believe the cause would be a divinity.
Although I rest and agree with Hitchens almost entirely, there’s no denying the eloquence of Richard’s and his arguments here. He’s one of the better and more articulate theological debaters I’ve heard.
LOL to me Richards was an absolute joke , he went to the beach. Nothing he said made sense or was in any relatable to our knowledge of the world. Theology has nothing to offer reality, and has never contributed one thing to opur knowledge of the world, It always had to dragged screaming and kicking back into reality.
David Fahey Yes. I mistook him for the famous stunt driver and pyrotechnician of the same name. I feel like such an idiot, thank you for pointing out the error of my ways... Oh wise onlooker!
comanchio, my apologies. I thought you were talking about the debate it's self. But clearly now, you were referring to Stein. Your comment was a bit vague.
I have been watchin Hitch shows for years and can never tire of them...how can this man ALWAYS make debating counterparts seem like whining children at his feet? Its like watching in usa NFL super running backs make grown ass linebackers look so lame....
December the 15th 2011 - the day the world became a much dumber place. For the life of me I just cannot even begin to understand how some people can be so gullible. Must be something to do with our wiring.
![[#2024MAMA] ROSÉ (로제), Bruno Mars - APT. | Mnet 241122 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/dgGqD28J6aQ/mqdefault.jpg)
I just play Hitchens while doing paperwork… what a great speaker. I love it how he completely dismantles religion time and time again. The impossibility of God is staggering…and Hitchens proves this fact with such ease, intelligence and grace. I’m so glad that we can still see and hear him anytime we like here on RUclips. The loss of this man was such a tragedy.
Agreed. I don't know your politics,😡 but I wish he'd never become such a fan of Buckley.
@@alanwilson8407 Same here, I’m not much of a fan of his fondness for Marxism either…but I’m sure that he could speak about it and we’d listen just because he’s such a great speaker. Be well.
The impossibility without God is staggering.
@@ENFPerspectives Which one of the estimated 5000 Gods is it impossible to be without? Ahhh….don’t worry, yours is probably the right one. Which one do you believe in?
I’m curious, how do you just simply throw logic, common sense and rational thinking to the wind… knowing full well that Billions of people believe in a totally different God than you do? Why is your’s the right one? Explain that to me would ya..
I bet Mr Hitchens wouldn't see his death as a tragedy;)
Hitch completely owned all three of these guys, He knocked them on their ass, good show
Hitchens is absolutely ON FIRE in this debate
We he was born and popped out of his mom he grabbed a glass of whiskey and a good book and looked at the nurse and said “carry on dear”
Except when he said he belonged to the pro life community that’s embarrassing af, he wants to keep superstitious morality with his conservatism, but without the superstition, it’s just fascism.
@@princegobi5992his pro-life position was a lot more nuanced than you would have us believe.
@princegobi5992: I consider your pro-abortion (?) comment as a completely miscap of what Hitchens said here. And, btw: there are „pro life“ guys on this planet who don‘t vote Conservative or are religious at all. Maybe you have never thought about this.
@@princegobi5992 as an atheist it is a good position to hold. To deny someone the right to have a life at all is tragic, I imagine the religious think these embryos just fly straight up to heaven after they are aborted. Having said all that I still am prochoice
Awestruck and inspired, as always, by Christopher Hitchen's words. Not sure how much the ego plays into the others, but they seem to amplify my theory: stupidity = stubborness.
Give a man a fish, and you'll feed him for a day;
Give him a religion, and he'll starve to death while praying for a fish.
+Dave Dennison The very existence of 6 billion religious people (plus your manifestly stupid comment about religion and intelligence, which was shot down by Hitchens himself) means that you need to think of some *much* better arguments.
Good one!!
@@DaveDennisonsecular Good point. The irony I find is that the vast majority of 'awake' people who are aware of this are 'asleep' when it comes to religious belief and god, ie they believe in it. Most 'conspiracy theorists' seem to be believers in god, while most atheists dismiss conspiracy theories in much the same way they do religion. I'm an atheist, but I'm well aware that the elite control the way the public think and act, in much the same way that religion controls its followers.
You can walk through Sodom and Gomorrah TODAY and pull sulfur right out of the walls. A total of 5 cities incinerated by God., with the land in between left alone. The evidence for the truth of the bible is EVERYWHERE.
ruclips.net/video/_tGNgd9_6qI/видео.html
No, the believers will realize their god wants them to kill their neighbors and take their fish (and women of coarse).
Someone tell all these bloody fools what a supreme privilege it was for them to have debated the great Hitch.
"The man had more wit and style and substance than a few civilizations I could name" - Sam Harris (about Hitchens)
Especially the phony Canadians. Their heretofore withering and shameful treatment of Indians is astonishing. Silence is golden to these "friendly phone's".😂
Money; fame; power; intelligence. Watching Christopher Hitchens in this debate reinforces my conviction that intelligence is what I'd prefer most.
Well put. I also prefer to use the basic scientific method of reasoning during my day to decide for myself what is moral and what is not.
Religion is bullshit
I so agree.
I like money
@@AECholakian I'm with you. I like money, too, but it's because I'm intelligent. 😕
Wow! I can listen to Hitchens all day. He owns every debate in which he participates.
He admitted he lost his debate with John Lennox. Give a listen!
"I would say NO - FUCK you."
My favourite moment from Christopher Hitchens, together with everything else I've ever seen of this titan of a man.
😊.
Hitchens asked to debate Richards. He ended up debating Richard's and the entire panel, AND mopped the floor with all 3.
You are so right, .mopped the floor he did
No actually he didn't - he deflected brilliantly and is dead on about religion but in no way did he undercut the theistic groundwork. Theology persists and the public face of it as maligned as it is by the natural and ethnic tyranny of of the status quo. i.e. religion, is the fundamental fuel of atheism. Atheism is bound to the superficiality that is religiosity confusing G-d with the history of 'faith' . Atheism could not exist otherwise. So the absurd notion that G-d emerges from the imagination as a creative act of ambitious albeit supremely ignorant and desperate pattern makers. CH loves ironically to refer to Spinozoa his very opposite because unlike Hitchens he does not project the template of a natural man's needs or temporality onto G-d . To do the latter would indeed have to solicit the disgust CH feels towards THAT concept of G- d.
@@piezoification tf is "G-d"?
All 3 are fully grown adults who actually believe in ancient fairy tales. Combined iq still below Hitchens.
@@piezoificationMosty a bunch of woo and a word salad. Being verbose isn't a sign of intelligence
As soon as I saw Ben Stein I understood why Hitch was in a foul mood.
Bueller?
Ben Stein comes off as a snarky, ineloquent ass throughout this stellar Hitchens talk.
Not to mention that those two ding dongs (especially Stein) are supposed to be the moderators, when in fact they come across as unobjective Hitchens opponents.
An ineloquent, unintelligent, condescending, and willfully obtuse jackass.
Ugh -- Ben's surname is more appropriately "Slime."
Christopher Hitchens. If ever there was a time his voice was needed, it is now.
Well, we won't get it.
@ripdbtpoo1441 its been 8 years and 3 months yet still no one quite like him (that Ive come across)
We know what he might say. It is up to us to act.
also, now ~
Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest
Christopher Hitchens speaks logically and intelligently, it is a sad reflection on how much retrograde thinking is currently around that he has even to bother debating with such stupid fools..
I long for the breath of fresh ideas he would bring to the current "woke" ideology spreading the western world.
Anyone suffering from insomnia should listen to Jay Richards - the best sleeping pill ever.
You could apply that statement to all who try to defend fairy tales.
Actually he completely fails there too.
Kept thinking that at any moment Ben Stein would jump up and take over the debate... It seemed like he really resented Hitch even existing.
let it be known, Richards has just co authored a book on the "tryanny of experts", Hitch was right about him all those years ago.
Richard's knows no science ,nothing to do with it
The funny thing about these philsophers is that they have absolutely no scientific understanding yet uncontrollably yearn for the validity it would provide
@@richhogg8074great point
"Chris I was just wondering" "Christopher please, I promised my mother, also it's my name" brilliant hitchslap
Christopher Hitchens- what a well spoken man
I would have loved to have met Hitchens, If only to be called an idiot by him.
🤣🤣 it would have been an honor for me
I wish I would of said that !
*would "have", not would "of".
“A Freudian slit” 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
1:03:15 - 1:03:40
One of the best response to christianity i've ever heard
Hail, Hitchens
lol
Whoever let this Jay Richards guy debate Hitchens clearly didn't like him. He's no way near Hitchens league
He likes the sound of his own voice, meanwhile the genius word smith obliterates him on every subject to no avail to him 🤣🤣🤣
I think he knew it and was intimidated. ?
What theist is? There's only so much one can say.
I've seen most Hitchens debates, that is probably the best introduction I have ever seen.
I miss Christopher Hitchens, I wish he was still with us.
He still is brother :-)
Offstage, my husband was an impossible act to follow.
At home at one of the raucous, joyous, impromptu eight-hour dinners we often found ourselves hosting, where the table was so crammed with ambassadors, hacks, political dissidents, college students, and children that elbows were colliding and it was hard to find the space to put down a glass of wine, my husband would rise to give a toast that could go on for a stirring, spellbinding, hysterically funny 20 minutes of poetry and limerick reciting, a call to arms for a cause, and jokes. “How good it is to be us,” he would say in his perfect voice.
Carol Blue, Christopher Hitchens widow
Vincent C. L.
He is still with us. Learn from him and spread what you learn. And through us he is immortal.
he's an idiot so are you the Earth is flat
I want to express my wish Christopher was here. We need him now more than ever.
Given the knowledge gained since this debate, the views expressed on design in this debate have been discounted, at least.
I see his widow has responded in the comments. I was heartened to hear from her . I will continue to find him on RUclips and enjoy his quick mind and the way he applies it.
That "Voila!" at 1:03:58 and the brief stare to the audience after that... just classic!!
What a man you were Hitch.. deeply missed!
Followed immediately by the admission that Hitchens is a Pro-Lifer... what do you make of that?
Mr Richard's thesis is anathema to science .God done dooed Dat
Poor Jay got his ass handed to him here
Yet brave enough to pick up the gauntlet.
@@geoffcrumblin9850 brave or stupid?Sorry I have to go with stupid!
Thanks for re-syncing and sharing this, I can get by an out of sync debate, but this is just so much more enjoyable.
Hitches was the Bruce Lee of the Mind
I thought that was Stephen Hawking.
Jay Richards is the Eddie Edwards of logic and reason.
Hitchens has something rare stardust. Humor.
Bruce Lee was a fake and an actor.He would die facing a UFC fighter.
wow did Richards just give the example of a perfect eclipse being proof for god? lol damn this guy has no idea what physics is i guess.
Thanks for this one. It is one of the rare ones I had not before seen.
Mr. Hitchslap, for your patience and diligence in bringing to us this episode of Hitch, we all thank you. Well, I see above, at this time, 866 of us do, at any rate. Myself included.
This debate is absolutely fantastic! Can't get enough.
Hitchens was a razor sharp wordsmith and genius. How i miss this man. This world is less without him😢
to bad he's in hell riding satan's hard meat and smelling righteous a nal st ink
I second that notion! Ben Stein is nauseating
Huge thanks to whoever invited Ben Stein, always nice to have an arrogant simpleton humiliating himself unintentionally. Don't threaten me with a good time.
Dude was the valedictorian of Yale Law School... But go ahead and call him a simpleton.
Thank you for posting this. I was listening to Catholic Answers radio earlier today and one of the hosts, Al Kresta, interviewed Jay Richards about his new book on CS Lewis and scientism, and when I looked Richards up and saw that he had once debated Hitchens, I just had to check this out! I thought the Catholic Church had repudiated the Intelligent Design movement, so I found it kind of weird to hear a Discovery Institute person invited onto Catholic radio. Listening to this video, I see that Richards is just another ID shill using arguments that have already been refuted even by other Catholics like biologist Ken Miller. Catholic Answers must be growing pretty desperate to oppose "new atheists" if they're now sinking so low to start inviting people from the Discovery Institute to aid them.
Hitchens and the shoulders he stood on all came at the right time for us alive now.The debate is over. god is a business, nothing more .
This is beautiful 👏
Cheers to that 🍻
Agreed
This
@@stevebrown8368 from the deer hunter.... right?
"This is This"!
one of the best hitchens debates!
“In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded...” Terry Pratchett.
Hitch claims it was the size of a baseball. Where'd the baseball come from, Cristopher?
@@glennsimonsen8421 God put it there.
But who put God there?
No one put God there. He’s always been there.
Why can’t the baseball have always been there?
That would be silly.
Etc. Etc.
I miss Hitch so much ✌🏼❤️
Thanks for putting this up, a treat.
|Best wishes
Gary
As a scientist, I want to scream when I hear non-scientists debating science. I love Hitch, but his descriptions sometimes land short. But listening to theists abuse science and logic makes me want to scream! It's almost physically painful!
+Tim Teatro I'd like to know which scientific claims you thought Christopher fell short on. Indeed he is not a scientist (neither am I) but he is taking most of his findings straight from scientist. Richard Dawkins, Lawarence Kraus whom he does quote quite often.
Sado Moreno If you're super-curious about specifics, I can re-watch and document anything that makes me grind my teeth.
But perhaps I can satisfy your curiosity with a general clarification. In paraphrasing what he's understood from Prof. Dawkins or Prof. Krauss, Christopher at times lost some of the precision with which scientists craft their prose. It grates slightly on the ear but still falls far ahead of being incorrect.
I certainly didn't mean to suggest that Christopher's description of anything was a mere lesser of evils when compared to the factually-void scientifically semi-literate nonsense that comes from the other side.
+Tim Teatro I know what you mean and agree to an extent, as a scientist myself. However, what is brilliant about Hitchens, that you don't see in William Lane Craig, Frank Turek and this Jay Richard fellow is the concession that he is not a scientist and isn't qualified to discuss these topics in depth. Watch either of Hitchens debates against Turek and you'll see that he concedes that he's not qualified. I think that concession in itself is in itself poetically scientific. RIP Hitch
Dan G Spot on, mate.
Agreed
Hitchens was a historian above all other titles he earned. He studied science history, Social and political history and above all the history of religions around the world. His job as a journalist allowed him to travel around the world to seek the actual truth the general popular media would censor due to political and clerical pressures. History should be studied thoroughly from various sources to avoid repeating the same mistakes.
Joseph you are the when speaking about journalism they get actual experience. One reason why administrators are always trying to keep them out
Hello. I realise it’s been some years since your post. I’m trying unsuccessfully to find an unbiased history of Israel. Can you make a recommendation please. Hitchens on you tube talks about Iraq, Iran in which there are overlaps relating to Israel and Palestine but I cannot find anything definitive. I can read about orthodox rabbis opinions or the victorians trying a solution etc resulting in the current borders. Nothing I’ve read satisfies as it is all biased to the writer. Can you help? Thank you.
@@mannie7028 I could tell you right away if I had a memory for every book I ever read like Hitchens. and I too am slow at looking up things, names and subjects that are important to me online. Hitchens gave book suggestions during his many video taped debates and lectures. Just take the time to watch Hitchens videos. Still I'm glad to be the person a am although unhelpful in some cases. Don't be lazy if you actually do want something bad enough like being on time for work takes energy and hustle.
@@JosephNordenbrockartistraction100% with you Joseph! I got lucky and discovered him on C-Span in the mid 80s since then I’m proud to have read every single one of his works (books, not Vanity Fair) the which I proudly display in my home library, this word (special) may have different connotations to many, but yes, this man was special.
It seriously pains me that I cannot share a bottle of scotch with Mr. Hitchens.
Yeah, talking with one of the smartest MF'S ever to stride Earth, a good idea would be to get drunk.
What a wonderful thought. But I think were I to be given the chance I would be shrinking and running away in awe of this mans intellect. I don’t think I could last 3 minutes in conversation.
@@starboy1100Same here, wish I could have given him a hug and tell him everything he’s done to help me and my family think for ourselves..Love this man, wish he could have toned down his smoking habit. Terrible loss to freethinkers everywhere.
Read a bio on him with all your heart mind and soul.
He'll turn up in your dreams.
He turned up in mine.
He was laughing his head off!!!
Johnnie Walker Black with some Perrier... that was his drink
Richards reminds me of the guy in contact who blows up the first launch site.
The part I remember from that movie is when Jody Foster is being driven to the launch site and the albino preacher (the guy who blew up the first launch) says ".....And these scientist....do you want them speaking to your God for you?" (....and then Jody Foster rolls her window up). That was a good movie!
Gary Busey and his offspring rules all!!
@@rekunta lol
...Christopher ...i miss your mind... genius ...
Just the facts man, just the facts...
read alot of comments and I can't find one saying Jay won the debate,,,he just got slaughtered !
Even the less gifted religious fools dare not suggest a victory
Hitchens owns this one.
I saw a werewol having a Pina Coloda at trader Vic's ...his hair was PERFECT
Hitchens is amazing in this. Love it!
I swear if this blonde guy cut his hair he would look exactly like Turek
I've been watching a lot of Hitchens debates the past couple days and this is definitely one of the better ones in my opinion... Even the antagonist (Richards) brings up interesting topics for once, which just reaffirms Hitch's extreme depth of knowledge in so many areas. So much BRILLIANCE!
Antagonist? Richards is the hero and truth teller in this debate.
Ben Stein... famous for a bit part in an 80s movie. Had his own game show with Jimmy Kimmel. Tries to convince everyone that because he studied under Milton Friedman he is an economist. Uses that status as a springboard for entering any serious academic discussion. Releases a documentary about creationism titled, "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed" which lives up to its name, and would actually be quite a good title for his biography.
If not you could always use "Ben Stein: A Bad Joke."
He's debating all fucking three of them at the same time. Each one of them challenged him multiple times and he just kept going. The supposed moderators were just bullpen relief when the starting pitcher blew his arm out in the 3rd inning.
I've seen this dozens of times. It just shows the absolute weakness of the theist argument and I loathe that we even still have it.
Freudian Slit! Hilarious!
This is like watching Tyson fight McEnroe.
And his ball boy
No philosophy, no religion, has ever brought so glad a message to the world as this good news of Atheism.
Richards salad bar nearly exceeds Jordan Petersen by a tomato.
Working while listening to this. No time wasted. I love Hitch so much. He's long dead but his words live on.
"Oh come on" hahaha I miss Hitchens!
I never thought about that. The Sun and the Moon are the same size in the sky and one covers the other sometimes, so that means God sent himself to Earth to be tortured to death to forgive us for torturing him to death. It all makes perfect sense now!
Anyone else burst out luaghing when the guy mentioned Willaim Lane Craig as the leading Christian philospher?
Lmao, imagine Low Bar Bill being a leading philosopher.
I laugh when you refer to Hitchens as a leading atheist philosopher…so…
@@bronwhitley4350 He stopped leading ages ago when he died of cancer.
@@bronwhitley4350Does god speak to you Bron?
It's pretty sad if he is the best they got
I hope this chairman learned how unwise it was to take jabs at Christopher Hitchens.
Riiight up until Jay avoided the young earth creationist question and deflected on to the ontological argument which in this case is nothing more than an argument from ignorance.
Anyone in their right mind should be skeptical about the capacity to educate when they're too deluded to recognize the wishful thinking of religion despite the mountain of evidence supporting evolution by natural selection.
PS, you KNOW it's propaganda whenever they say "teach darwinism."
I propose we forget about Jesus & resurrect 'Hitch'.
👏
You believe in a book that has talking animals, wizards, witches, demons, sticks turning into snakes, food falling from the sky, people walking on water, and all sorts of magical, absurd and primitive stories, and you say that we are the ones that need help?
Dave Dennison You sir are a man who has not abandoned reason for absurdity. This is encouraging ,thank you.
Ethan Sutton You are welcome!
Exactly
Thanks for the upload and your time in fixing it.
This is a good debate, by the way, thank you for uploading it and your attention to the sound, too.
Just for the sake of the truth: Andromeda galaxy won't collide with Milky Way, they will merge peacefully and create a greater galaxy, because the distances between stars are too great for the stars to possibly collide ^^
Still, mr Hitchens was a brilliant person.
Jay makes the very contradictory point that there can't be something from nothing, but when faced with the question, where did god come from he cops out and says god always was. That is an extremely illogical answer. That is the basic problem with theism.
If God can be infinite so can the universe. And if you believe in the muliverse then it is. And you don't need God for that.
When I had my first discussion with my 5 year old daughter about God her first question was but dad who made god ? 5 years old ?
Thank you so much for restoring this footage!
They ask Hitchens a question. Hitchens answers their questions and then they complain he isn't speaking about the topic.
TY for this treasure. No biggie with the audio. Just gratitude.
If it's morally wrong to kill children , why did God slaughter so many in the bible? Or is it ok for him , but we know it's wrong ,doesn't that mean we have far better moral code than God .
Bingo your on to something here
It is NOT a competition. Human even animals can do the right thing for their own kind, without religion. God is what you want to believe ,it is your personal point of view . Religion spoil your freedom
+ShadeyBladey :WE? speak for yourself!! and i have observe that you swear a lot,,perhaps you are not a kind lovable person.
.God ,the one we wish to believe exist:is the great indifferent.
+Maribe Ugarte are you an atheist yet ? a month has passed already :)
+khaled zakaria hello to you..whether I am or not it doesn't matter.
We should all live without labeling on and other .just be happy,we will find when our time come up..Christopher Hitchens has find that out!
What a terrible performance by the moderator! This should be titled 'Christopher Hitchens Vs. Jay Richards and Ben Stein'.
C. HITCHEN 'S every word/sentence so easy to understand,makes sense,logical.J.RICHARDS on the other hand,very difficult to understand,what he is trying to say .PENZIAC never said it went to zero,because it is not allowed by the laws of physics(i forgot the scientists name),universe bounced back before it reached zero.sigularity is not zero.
Missing Mr.Hitch. the only youtube search forever constanst in my searchbox
The summary of Jay Richards argument is: "Reality exists, therefore something akin to a very specific thing in the reality must have not been reality and then it must have done things that are found in reality so there would be a reality, otherwise reality would not be reality." Jay Richards is not worthy of the title: "Analytical Philosopher."
1:14:30 Jay claims we KNOW that the universe began to exist. But we DON'T KNOW that. He claims a LOT that he doesn't and cannot know. Hitchens makes so much more sense than Richards.
I love what the guy talking about theism said at around 16:30 - 17:50. He said "everyone knows that torturing children is wrong". It's ironic that his infinitely good being does just that but is still all loving.
b24harman
If you are referring to Noah's flood, get your facts straight...
The human population had been corrupted by breeding with evil spirit creatures, resulting in hybrids called nephilim:
*The fallen sons of God corrupted the earth with false doctrines by intermarrying with humans and thus teaching them their ways
*God sent preachers to plead with the people to change their ways, but they would not repent. He therefore said told Noah that He would not always strive (diyn/plead/contend) with them (v 3)
*God therefore said that He would reduce human lifespan from centuries to 120 years because there was great wickedness in the earth and people’s spirits were full of evil from their youth (v 5)
*The people of the earth were corrupt (shachath/morally corrupt) - Gen 6: 11, 12) and there was violence in the earth (Gen 6: 11,13)
Part of the corruption included the worship of idols, and the sacrifice and canabilism of multitudes of small children as well as adults. the nephilim even ate each other....The nephilim were giants. They ate everything... consuming all of the herds the produce of the fields, and wild animals.
The nephilim were destroying creation, and all but Noah and his family worshipped them.
Some of the grizzly details are on this string.....bear in mind, there are legends of giants in human history.
ancientlosttreasures.yuku.com/topic/4663/Giants-Ate-Human-Flesh-drank-his-Blood
Noah, and his family warned these (human) people for 100 years to repent or die. He was laughed at...
I will speculate that perhaps by the time of the flood...all of the innocent children were already dead.
Elaine Powell God did kill all the first born children of Egypt. Id love you to explain that one away.
davelanger
The plagues set upon the people of Egypt, were relative to the gods of the land...demonstrating that God was the true God and that their gods were weak, ineffective, and false.
1. Turning the Nile to blood (Isis and Khmom)
2. Frogs (Heget)
3. Gnats (Set)
4. Flies (Re and Uatchit)
5. Death of livestock. (Hathor and Apis)
6. Boils (Sekmet and Sunu)
7. Hail (Nut and Set)
8. Locusts (Osiris)
9. Darkness (Re, Horus and Hathor)
10. Death of firstborn (Min and Isis as well as Pharaoh himself)
After each plague, Moses begged Pharaoh to "let my people go" in each case, Pharaoh stubbornly refused.
After 9 plagues, Moses demanded his people go free, or the 10th plague would come from Pharaoh's own lips.... Pharaoh threatened Moses, saying that he would kill all of the Hebrew first born....
By saying this, Pharaoh declared the next plague upon Egyptian citizens, having witnessed 9 plagues and knowing full well what would happen.
The Hebrews put lambs blood on their door, causing the spirit to pass over their household and all within some Egyptian converts were saved by staying safe in Hebrew marked homes....thus "The Passover".
Pharaoh had seen in the 9 preceding plagues and witnessed the power of God, and if he had only let the Hebrews go...the first born sons of Egypt, including Pharaoh's own son, would have been spared...
.
After the 10th plague, Pharaoh drove the Hebrews out of Egypt...there were also many Egyptian religious converts (and their children) leaving with the Hebrews...
Please also keep in mind the Egyptian Pharaoh would routinely execute the first born sons of the Hebrew families to keep the population down...
Moses (as a baby) was only saved by his mother who hid him in the reeds, He was found by Pharaoh's daughter and raised as her son ie, royalty.
God created us all, and had the right to end the lives of the pagan Egyptians, including children.
There will be a resurrection... including the hope for all in the grave to have eternal life, which is made possible by the blood of the Lamb of God, Jesus.
Today, un-believers have the chance to repent and accept this gift as long as they draw breath and have heard the good news...
Perhaps eternal life will be offerred to resurrected children who died before they could hear about Jesus.
The whole story of the exodus and the parting of the Jordan is in the book of Exodus..
davelanger, you have just heard some of the good news...the rest is up to you.
The first commandment given to Moses:
"I am the Lord thy God, thou shalt have no other gods before me."
Right, so God sent all those plagues on man and that is a loving and caring God in what way? So God your God killed thousands of innocent children, killing innocent peoples food and water supplies just because some of the Pharaohs believed in other gods? LOL. So much for God giving us free will right? And I love how you say well Godhas the right to kill what he created. Again how is that a loving God? Its not.
davelanger
Haha its always easier for them to come up with 55 lines of an explanation or something rather than to admit the obvious. Lol.
God created man in his own image. And man, being a gentleman, returned the favor.
Lol 😂😂😂
Thank you Christopher....forgive the fools ignorance.
I'm glad the word debate was not used in the caption heading. This was no debate anymore than Mike Tyson vs Michael Spinks was a fight.
The difference between this and the Tyson vs Spinks fight is that it lasts much longer and is even more one sided.
Richards was not effective at all.
This must be the 5,681,254th time I've watched this debate. Ugh... I miss this man!
Why do theologians always have to say that their worldview is correct because it's the most hopeful?? So what if it's more hopeful...I want the truth...not to live a lie. Reality doesn't care about our hopes or dreams. It just IS. As humans we can accept that and make the most of our lives or we'll always be waiting for someone who's never going to come. And people naturally have morals. No God needed for that. Humans are social beings so we'll go by what's culturally accepted guidelines for the success of the species. Period. Atheists are mostly good people and Christians are mostly good people. But both can be moral regardless of belief.
turns out jay doesnt understand gravity..
Man is so important, yes he is. He was not created, his mind was not given, he made it himself.
Jay Richards - Pet Detective
The Bajau, of the South Philippines, have evolved a much larger spleen to help them deep dive.
Hitch was a master!
"...everything that begins to exist must have a cause for its existence." This is not true, and even if it was, there is no reason to believe the cause would be a divinity.
It's called the Kalam Cosmological Argument for the existence of God. But it's really just the fallacy of special pleading.
Although I rest and agree with Hitchens almost entirely, there’s no denying the eloquence of Richard’s and his arguments here. He’s one of the better and more articulate theological debaters I’ve heard.
LOL to me Richards was an absolute joke , he went to the beach. Nothing he said made sense or was in any relatable to our knowledge of the world.
Theology has nothing to offer reality, and has never contributed one thing to opur knowledge of the world, It always had to dragged screaming and kicking back into reality.
Ben Stein is nauseating
Chloroform in oratory
comanchio1976 What did you expect? Car chases and explosions?
David Fahey Yes. I mistook him for the famous stunt driver and pyrotechnician of the same name. I feel like such an idiot, thank you for pointing out the error of my ways... Oh wise onlooker!
comanchio, my apologies. I thought you were talking about the debate it's self. But clearly now, you were referring to Stein. Your comment was a bit vague.
I was replying to a comment about Ben Stein, I thought the subject matter was pretty obvious... But no problem :-)
thanks for posting i enjoy all hitch slaps
I'm mesmerised by this guy's hair....0o
I have been watchin Hitch shows for years and can never tire of them...how can this man ALWAYS make debating counterparts seem like whining children at his feet? Its like watching in usa NFL super running backs make grown ass linebackers look so lame....
Do people *really* believe this theistic crap?? Amazing.....
December the 15th 2011 - the day the world became a much dumber place. For the life of me I just cannot even begin to understand how some people can be so gullible. Must be something to do with our wiring.