"Why do you care what other people believe?" - well, we live in a democracy, the majority decides the rulers, the rulers decides the laws, and this influences and changes life for all. If the majority of people are ignorant and believe various stories not based on facts the chances for a catastrophic society are much greater. Truth is important for living a better life.
You actually believe that's how things work in the world? Niaive in the extreme...........'democracy' is an illusion to control the masses, it does not exist......
Religion becomes dangerous once it starts interfering with personal lives, education, sociocultural life and political life of humans. Religion is intrinsically authoritarian and dictatorial with NO encouragement to freely think outside its dogma.
What I love most about Dawkins is, the way he looks at people, when they are talking. What I mean by that is, that he looks like, he is listening really carefully and with much focus and concentration. This is a rare skill and an important key to success. Just look at the people around you. This is something I definetely take from Dawkins. Don't forget to 100% focus on one thing, if you want a clear understanding!
And if I may add, there's an excellent book, a reference, though by now dated since published in 1979, but it has been a guide for me, is by Robert J Gula, called Nonsense, How to Overcome it, and then years later as far as politics go, in 2002,and a later 2nd edition and both annotated US Constitution, Linda Monk's The Words We Live By, and while this one I used generally for better discussions[1979-2003] and on to 2022[I just put it away a few minutes ago]creating better relevant arguments and identifying others' best arguments, etc [Also from Richard Mitchell, Less Than Words Can Say and he has 3 more and 1977-1991, yes, before the IBM-PC, he even had a printing press he used for the monthly newsletter, he hand pressed himself, The Undergroung Grammarian, see sourcetext.com/grammarian and see all his stuff a real legacy. The newsletter made me think of the children's books that had cardboard popups that surprised you when you'd open them up. It was information, sometimes about poetry or an United Kingdom format of teaching Lit just a different English method or style of teaching, or well, like I said it was a surprise, you never could predict what, but each was a delight anyway.
That's one of the first things mental health professionals learn in their studies. Listen very carefully to the person who you are talking with. It's a joy watching him do that.
Two intellectual giants from very different fields but who share a passion and dedication for truth. We should all be profoundly grateful for them both.
Tyson, himself, would be the first to disagree with your comment, as do I. He is an effective science communicator, a teacher. But, as he would agree, far from an, “intellectual giant”. He merely communicates things discovered by other people, the real intellectual giants.
@@NorthernChev well, perhaps, in the overall scale of scientific contribution and expanding the frontiers of knowledge. But compared to the average American Tyson is indeed a giant :)
Yeah, but they're not talking about stars. Maybe if we had two different stars, who were on the surface of two different stars and they were talking about other stars who lived on the surface of yet other stars (assuming a star has a surface for this flight o fancy), maybe then could they really live up to the name Star Talk. Until then it's either hyperbole or a misnomer...
When Neil asks Dawkins "why he cares what people believe" I wish Dawkins would respond that "your beliefs inform your actions" instead of simply responding that it makes him sad that people have a non-scientific view of the world. It is so important that people have a true (scientific) view of the world else they make poor real life decisions and sometimes even decisions that harm others. This is the important point to communicate.
Yes, but most of the time, sadly, people's decisions are not based on a logical reasoning. That is one of the greatest ironies ans conundrums but yes, education should help alleviate this.
I was feeling exactly this and waiting for it to come up. People who believe harmless nonsense are far more susceptible to harmful nonsense. The pandemic has shown us plenty with people refusing the vaccine thinking it contains microchips, refusing to comply with mask guidelines, insisting the virus is a hoax even in their last breath as it kills them, etc.
@@Malpheron Presuming my apparent lack of education without knowing anything about me shows a lack of education on your part. Nice try to look cool on RUclips...
Loved this. I welled up at the beginning when they were discussing Richard's mortality. His unrelenting humility got to me. I wish him all the best for his twilight years. An extraordinary mind. I personally owe him so much.
Richard and Neil have no humility, they are devoted losers. Richard Dawkins teaches the universe came from "literally nothing." Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. We can't get anything from "literally nothing." We can't even get science without God. The laws of nature only can come from a Lawgiver, God. God is the reason for us and all we have. ruclips.net/video/JiMqzN_YSXU/видео.html “However improbable the origin of life might be, we know it happened on Earth because we are here.” -Richard Dawkins. We only get life from life...the law of biogenesis. We can't get anything without God. The odds are NOT there. ruclips.net/video/W1_KEVaCyaA/видео.html ruclips.net/video/yW9gawzZLsk/видео.html ruclips.net/video/ddaqSutt5aw/видео.html No, the eye did not evolve into various eyes. Your mere chance mutations are absurd. ruclips.net/video/X7h2HWcTwa4/видео.html Even Dawkins admits we can't know what is true because of natural selection... The God Delusion, “Since we are creatures of natural selection, we cannot totally trust our senses. Evolution only passes on traits that help a species survive, and not with preserving traits that tell a species what is actually true about life.”
Atheist Dawkins spent all his life in order to support that all living creatures could be the creation of a purposeless, random and unintelligently supported evolutionary process directed by a blind watchmaker that the great prophet Darwin called natural selection. At 80 it is important for atheist Dawkins to secure his faith in the finality of death.
i don't like the way i seen him (here on RUclips at least) where he names specific individuals, points his finger and gets his audience to laugh in an unpleasant way.. he's just another priest of science..
An English comedian once said, 'In the not so distant past England had two problem groups of people, we had the fundamental religious nutcases, so we sent them to America. The second lot were the convicts, so we sent them to Australia. The convicts evolved into a better society'.
This wouldn’t have been possible a few decades ago. Watching two great minds speak to each other in private but for everyone to see. Great way of spreading knowledge and inspiration. All thanks to science ♥️
These two losers ignore science. Richard Dawkins teaches the universe came from "literally nothing." Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. We can't get anything from "literally nothing." We can't even get science without God. The laws of nature only can come from a Lawgiver, God. God is the reason for us and all we have. ruclips.net/video/JiMqzN_YSXU/видео.html “However improbable the origin of life might be, we know it happened on Earth because we are here.” -Richard Dawkins. We only get life from life...the law of biogenesis. We can't get anything without God. The odds are NOT there. ruclips.net/video/W1_KEVaCyaA/видео.html ruclips.net/video/yW9gawzZLsk/видео.html ruclips.net/video/ddaqSutt5aw/видео.html No, the eye did not evolve into various eyes. Your mere chance mutations are absurd. ruclips.net/video/X7h2HWcTwa4/видео.html Even Dawkins admits we can't know what is true because of natural selection... The God Delusion, “Since we are creatures of natural selection, we cannot totally trust our senses. Evolution only passes on traits that help a species survive, and not with preserving traits that tell a species what is actually true about life.”
@ A Darwinian evolutionary creation myth is a silly science fiction creation myth masquerading as a science supported by a pagan deity, vested as a law of science, called natural selection. Although theism has no provision for miracles, atheist darwinist Dawkins is claiming that apes mutated up into men, and that land mammals returned to the ocean in order evolve into all kind of sea mammals
Information technology according to the conditions, rules and laws of the originator and owner of the universe. “The works of the LORD are great, Sought out of all them that have pleasure therein. His work is honourable and glorious: And his righteousness endureth for ever.“ Psalm 111, 2-3
@@Morewecanthinkscience progresses and discovers knowledge despite the best efforts of the religious. If the religious had their way, we would still be living out our short lives in hovels.
I appreciate that you consider the “non-readers”. I work 60-70 hours a week and I have 5 very active kids. I love to read but I don’t have the time like I once did in the pre-children days. You, Dr. Dawkins, and so many other people are responsible for opening up my eyes to reason and evidence based, not faith based, thought. Thank you! Because of your efforts I can listen to your shows and lectures while I work (I repair electrical propulsion systems on rail vehicles) and I get a lot out of it and learn a great deal even though I don’t have the time to read and study like I once did before kids.
That's the nice part about YT, Audible and other audio/video based services. Can pop on something and listen to it. That's the part about doing security system installs for large stores I loved, plenty of time I could just pop on audio books and enjoy a good story or a lecture while working. If you need your ears for work, like I did, consider something like Aftershockz headsets where it vibrates against your bone leaving your ears wide open for external sounds like your supervisor.
My guy, get on some audio books. It takes some getting used to, but I listen to them while I clean the house, mow the lawn, drive, or any other mundane task that doesn't require too much critical thinking.
Now, this is what I call a "Star Talk." Two giant stars with their high gravitational pull collide and create a Bright hole to pull you in and leave no room for escape if you approach its event horizon with skepticism and enter the Bright hole with your reason and logic. Wow! I was waiting for this collision for years since I have been reading Richard Dawkins' books since 1990 and following Neil deGrasse Tyson since 2010. It's amazing to see that Tyson and Dawkins interview each other back and forth, a true Star conversation/talk. If this conversation does not turn you into an atheist/Bright, then nothing will. I just forwarded the URL of this clip to all the people on my contact list. Thank you, Neil. :)
Too true. I have to reign myself in sometimes bc people might feel I'm being aggressive or I'm somehow angry when I'm really just enjoying an engaging conversation and passionately involved.
Claiming that Islamic people cannot do maths, when they literally invented modern mathematics, or that the private sector has higher productivity than the state providing services, after the last 40 years of direct comparison, is hardly rational.
@@unitedfools3493 who here said that? Maybe your comment was meant for another thread? Because it's literally not even directly related to anything said here.
It is a shame. I think it is an unfortunate part of human nature. When someone tries to point out holes in your beliefs it is easier to come up with a counter argument than to actually consider if you were wrong. You can't help but feel emotional and a need to defend yourself, as if they are attacking you by attacking your stance. I consider if I am wrong about things all the time but I rarely ever change my mind so I'm clearly biased about certain things, even when I try to be open minded to new evidence.
Here’s some advice for you Neil. And I do like you and have learned a lot from you. But you really should try and ask open ended questions when interviewing somebody as brilliant as Richard. Your long windedness, though extremely articulate, is so full of info and takes so long to get to the point/question that there’s little left for the interviewee to respond. Try letting the interviewee be the star of the show. That would serve you better!
@@whykoks Shashi Tharoor is idiot compared to these guys...All he is , is an eloquent Marxist bereft of honesty and transparency of argument. Add to it he is diplomat and a politician to top it, with congress wala being the cherry on the icing.. checkout watch?v=jw3dDbc1BHE...Hitchens tears apart apologist Tharoor's arguments.
*that are publicly known. Both of these speakers are great, don't get me wrong. But try talking to the people whose job is figuring out stuff on the field day to day =)
A friend and I were lucky enough to have been invited to this three-day conference in La Jolla, and still agree that it was probably the best experience of our lives! We were privileged to have met literally *dozens* of top-level scientists from many fields, after which I described it as enjoying it as a huge relief from everyday life because no one talked about sports or had to explain their jokes! There was a second conference a year later that was also enjoyable but which was not quite as inspiring and was cut short by some emergency, but still worth attending. I hope it is still available online somewhere.
@@HopDavid ... you must not have a life then to sit thru this if you don’t like it. Seems odd to me. Let’s see... what do I hate listening to?.? Think I’ll go listen to it and complain.
@@GetawayFilms Maybe you're projecting and mistaking it for his excitement as he clearly showed throughout the episode. Notice that neither had an issue with some interjection and were still able to carry out fascinating conversation. It's also not uncommon for people to do so and even make related references during the conversation.
I read The Magic Of Reality last week and I’m looking forward to reading more. Richard’s arguments against religion are fantastic too, as is his enthusiasm to spread the results of science research in such compelling ways. A massive value to humanity.
The Cabrera Collection is the Evolutionist’s Nightmare These carved ICA stones where first recognized in the 1500’s by the Spanish Conquistador that not only depicted dinosaurs but surgical operations which modern medicine today was just starting to practice. In obscure and ancient journals it has been mentioned that strange engraved stones were found, predating the peasants who have been accused of carving these images on the stones by 450 years. Catholic priests and Chroniclers remarked about these stones who also accompanied the Spanish Conquistadors as they invaded South America. Convention Dr Javier Cabrera spoke at the first Convention of the Director’s of the Department of Culture in Peru. He made his case for a study of the ICA Stones to archaeologists present in June 1968. The Convention gave unanimous support at the time of Dr. Cabrera’s proposal, so he prepared his case for official authorization to have a systematic excavation in archaeology in the zone of Ocucaje. Suddenly when the government authorities became aware of his intentions, they without notice relieved him from his position of Director of Cultural Affairs of Ica with immediate effect. What were they afraid off? The new Director of the Museum, who had been set up, refused to allow the institution’s collection of engraved stones to be put on public display. They were immediately stored in vaults. As you might say, out of sight, out of mind. This man of sin said no tests were necessary because a friend of his said they had been carved by local peasants in Ocucaje. This was a cover-up and a denial of the evidence 10,000 stones which looked exquisite showing a variety of species which peasants have never seen before and had no knowledge of them except trained paleontologists. Local peasants had carved them, I don’t think so! Authentication of the ICA Stones by NASA Scientist Joseph Bullrich who developed the design of the Saturn V missile and worked on the design of the Skylab also studied the ICA Stones. His conclusion, “There is no doubt in my mind about the authenticity of these stones’ pictures.” What a testimony from a highly qualified scientist. Pterosaurs and flying pteranodons were also pictured on the perplexing ICA Stones. Engraved stones have been recovered from tombs in the Ocucaje Desert. These authentic archaeological specimens particularly of dinosaurs; should have been the focus of worldwide attention. The scholars scoffed at them out of fear and cowardice and then let them mysteriously disappear in silence to the back rooms of the ICA Regional Museum, out of public sight. That is where they are today in 2023. Any enquiry about viewing them is met with silence through bureaucratic red tape. I have no doubt in my mind today, that if evolutionists felt threatened by them, that if anybody tried to put them on public display, they would destroy every single one of them in order to protect the Sacred Cow of Evolution. Herman Buse reopened the issue of the engraved stones in 1972 at the Congress of Andean Archaeology. Many foreign and national archaeologists had gathered at Lima. Buse pointed out to the participants their duty to give an official opinion of the ICA Stones. The Lima newspaper EL Comericio published an article on the Herman Buse lecture at the conference, blasting the incredulity of these archaeologists for refusing to address the authenticity of these stones as other qualified men believe in them that is in their legitimacy and certifiable antiquity. The establishment rejected his request out of hand, showing no interested in studying the stones. These foreign and national archaeologists are terrified of the ICA Stones, if shown to be authentic would destroy with a pedestal blow the evolutionary Tower of Time: the ideal geologic column, shattering contemporary ideas of the origin of man and indeed life itself. Scientific denials make good headlines and propaganda for media outlets. In those days newspapers working for the government were spoon feeding the populace as in the case of the media of television today and the internet their propaganda etc.
@@CollinLutz-p9e “arguing against something you don’t believe in” is actually the basis for every argument ever. Every religious, scientific, social, legal, every argument EVER is because you don’t believe in the thing you are opposing. You don’t start an argument against something you DO believe in, do you? idiot. 😂 I mean, you don’t believe in my point so you are arguing against it. Do you see how this construct works yet? 😂😂😂😂😂 Awesome.
It's like complete black and white lol... Neil wearing all black including black hair While dawkins wearing all white including white hair 😂 Not skins tho don't skins
@@yokokurama5174 lol when u say "not skins" you realize it means you've considered skins and that it brought you shame, so you have to say "not skins." If you were actually not thinking about skins, you wouldn't have to say that you aren't. hahaha
It is a SAD TREND though that many Science-Fans and -Enthusiasts reject the idea to fwatch and support Science-RUclipsrs blood-related Sibling: The Atheist-Channel. That Atheist-RUclipsrs have nothing to say is a silly Myth, so lemme; excuse the Randomness; recommend you some: Belief It Or Not, Genetically Modified Sceptic, Viced Rhino, Godless Grandma, Hbomberguy and Illuminaughtii. Oh, and Forrest Valkai. Science and Atheism is blood-related, so to speak, for a Myriad of reasons.
Also worth checking out: NIGHTWISH - The Greatest Show on Earth (with Richard Dawkins) (OFFICIAL LIVE) ruclips.net/video/qrMwxe2ya5E/видео.html Pro tip: The (CC) button enables subtitles for the lyrics.
@ A Darwinian naturalistic creationist myth is obviously a religious concept masquerading as a science. Atheist Dawkins preaches that natural selection would be the unique creative force that could have behind the creation of all the creatures, clearly gives it divine properties. Believing that man evolved from apes or that sea mammals evolved from land mammals does indeed requires a lot of faith.
@@MikkoRantalainen I understand that the idea that hummingbirds, peacocks, tigers, roses. etc., could not have been created through a purposeless, unintelligently supported random evolutionary process as preached by Darwinist evangelist atheist Dawkins.
Wow, two losers and you enjoy them. Richard Dawkins teaches the universe came from "literally nothing." Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. We can't get anything from "literally nothing." We can't even get science without God. The laws of nature only can come from a Lawgiver, God. God is the reason for us and all we have. ruclips.net/video/JiMqzN_YSXU/видео.html “However improbable the origin of life might be, we know it happened on Earth because we are here.” -Richard Dawkins. We only get life from life...the law of biogenesis. We can't get anything without God. The odds are NOT there. ruclips.net/video/W1_KEVaCyaA/видео.html ruclips.net/video/yW9gawzZLsk/видео.html ruclips.net/video/ddaqSutt5aw/видео.html No, the eye did not evolve into various eyes. Your mere chance mutations are absurd. ruclips.net/video/X7h2HWcTwa4/видео.html Even Dawkins admits we can't know what is true because of natural selection... The God Delusion, “Since we are creatures of natural selection, we cannot totally trust our senses. Evolution only passes on traits that help a species survive, and not with preserving traits that tell a species what is actually true about life.”
I hope we get to have Dawkins around for a long time still. I know he's getting older but the thought of such a brilliant mind passing away, whilst a part of nature, is deeply saddening. He has influenced my life so much through his literature and enlightening talks over the years. His personality is very entertaining and I count myself lucky having grown up in a world with Richard in it. One of my biggest wishes is to be present at one of his talks or book tours. He has such a profound understanding of the world as we know it and I wish more people will discover him while he's still around. I love you Mr. Dawkins! :)
Logically, as those like Richard Dawkins want people to be, there's no reason to be sad or feel any way about anything. You can come up with reasons to think emotions matter, but if you want logic and reason to be the be all and end all of everything done and said, you'd better be a nihilist.
@@jwb52z9 So that also extends to why get married / fall in love at all? Which Richard Dawkins has been married / in love at least 3 different times now.
Sorry for the wall of text but I felt the need to dump this somewhere. You (and some other (german) science communicators) have inspired me to commit on becoming a scientist or at least work in the scientific field. I dropped out of school 12 years ago and for 8 years I felt like I wasn't good for anything and basically played computer games all day. I also watched science videos here on RUclips. I'm now almost 26 y/o. At my deepest point I decided to go get my school degrees (I think it's similar to a GED and takes 2 or 3 years in Germany if you left regular school with nothing at all, depending on how fast you want to go and which school you are attending). And in my first year I got a 1 (equivalent to an A) in every subject and only dropped to an average of 1.6 the years after. I am currently doing a school sided apprenticeship to become a biological technician which will also allow me to study at an university. I do not know exactly what I will decide on doing in a few years with education I'm getting but at least now I feel like I have a perspective and paths to walk on. I really like working in a lab, plan experiments and do research, but I also really like to educate people about how science works and what you can do with it. (I love to drop random science facts. :) ) As a bonus: with the things the teachers taught us in cell and microbiology I was able to explain to my parents what a virus does, how the vaccine works and how the testing kits work. That took some of their scepticism about the pandemic. My dad didn't test himself up until that point and wanted to quit his job because german regulations required you to test yourself for covid. My mother even got the vaccine back in January (even though the testing regulations helped to convince her) So this is already a win Why am I writing all this?: I want to thank you. I was going through some bad times back then, you sparked my love for science and learning new things. It was basically my last grasp that held me on earth. Thank you again, the videos and podcasts are well explained, well illustrated and even entertaining. They even put me at a small advantage as I sometimes already know how something works, just because I watched so many of them.
Larear No need to apologise. It's good to hear a positive story or comment from someone like yourself. Sounds like you have plans in place for a great future so I'm sure everyone here wishes you all the best as you go forward.
@@maythesciencebewithyou I fully agree with you! Idiots who support silly populist nonsense like 'scientism', 'wokeism' and so on, are literally behaving like human mistakes. They seem unable to differentiate between truth and nonsense. I'm glad I worked in a science based career, I would hate to think with the addled brain these people have. It's akin to a disease of some kind.
Atheist Dawkins ought to be admired for his great humility , and sense of self derision. The Darwinian evolution admitted candidly that his atheist brain could only be a designoid object too badly deficient to be the creation of an intelligent entity.
Richard Dawkins is a man who I admire and respect. He speaks out for the enormous love and kindness to our species. There are many critics out there of Richard that called him close minded and say he speaks out of anger but it is completely the opposite. All of these detractors make these accusations out of their own self interest or economical/political gain but none of these individuals care or have any sympathy the human kind.
RD is just a loser as Neil is. Richard Dawkins teaches the universe came from "literally nothing." Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. We can't get anything from "literally nothing." We can't even get science without God. The laws of nature only can come from a Lawgiver, God. God is the reason for us and all we have. ruclips.net/video/JiMqzN_YSXU/видео.html “However improbable the origin of life might be, we know it happened on Earth because we are here.” -Richard Dawkins. We only get life from life...the law of biogenesis. We can't get anything without God. The odds are NOT there. ruclips.net/video/W1_KEVaCyaA/видео.html ruclips.net/video/yW9gawzZLsk/видео.html ruclips.net/video/ddaqSutt5aw/видео.html No, the eye did not evolve into various eyes. Your mere chance mutations are absurd. ruclips.net/video/X7h2HWcTwa4/видео.html Even Dawkins admits we can't know what is true because of natural selection... The God Delusion, “Since we are creatures of natural selection, we cannot totally trust our senses. Evolution only passes on traits that help a species survive, and not with preserving traits that tell a species what is actually true about life.”
Yes but not these garbage literal JOKES that roam around the internet spreading stereotypes and hate just to make some kids laugh That is something dawkins himself hates
@@yokokurama5174 It is exactly what he thought about. These 'memes' and viral videos are indeed like viruses: they carry some information that helps them spreading like a pandemy, even though we all hate them as much as we hate corona.
Yeah, and they say to me I "insist" too much on the topic! I mean wrf? don't you really want to analyse and understand this? why did you mention it then, in the first place?
Yep. I struggle with this. Just went through reframing the same data 3 times, and for the life of me I can't figure out why the third time convinced them where the other 2 didn't.
@@uninspired3583 People need to be spoken to in ways/manners they will both accept and understand at the same time. Those two thing aren't always one and the same thing.
As a summarized point on this issue; I think people in general have a certain fear of change, or fear of the unknown, that prohibits them from taking up this knowledge. On a very basic level. Like Dawkins says here, "It's sad that they are missing out". Well yes, in a way it is sad, but the transition into it is what people are reluctant to, simply because it's the act of acquiring "logic tools" in their mind. Getting this toolset is a scary "double edged sword" for many, since you cannot JUST apply logic to what you guys are saying, you will automatically apply it to _everything_ The daunting and overwhelming change in thinking, has a BUNCH of caveats in our day to day life. Suddenly, talking with anyone, one is prone to analyze and think more critically of every minute thing. When one hasn't done this throughout life, it becomes a very big change indeed, and a change that we oppose ourselves quite automatically. It's mostly summarized in saying: "Ignorance is bliss", and "Nobody likes change". A truly religious person has never experienced truly saying "I don't know" to something. And to be at ease with this answer to someone's question, is a process. It's scary not knowing. And it's hard to be content with not knowing.
"When they lose their sense of Awe, people turn to religion. When they no longer trust themselves, people begin to depend on authority" Tao Te Ching. a book i really think can help bridge those manipulated by religious culture & the science minds.
🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation: 03:28 El objetivo principal de la Fundación Richard Dawkins es promover la razón y la ciencia, y también luchar contra la influencia religiosa en la política y la educación. 17:10 Richard Dawkins se preocupa cuando las creencias religiosas intentan influir en la legislación y la educación, pero no se preocupa por las creencias personales de las personas en su vida cotidiana. 24:32 Hay personas que se llaman a sí mismas "humanistas seculares" y pueden abrazar la ética secular incluso si tienen creencias religiosas personales. 26:10 Richard Dawkins discusses the biblical story of Moses and the Ten Commandments, highlighting the differences between Hollywood's portrayal and the actual text in Exodus. 28:25 Dawkins mentions how Hollywood often sanitizes religious stories, removing elements that might be considered too violent or disturbing for a wide audience. 29:06 Richard Dawkins and Neil deGrasse Tyson discuss the future of religion in society, acknowledging the long history of religion and its fundamental role in human culture. 30:17 They touch upon the rise of superstitions and pseudoscience as potential replacements for traditional religion, highlighting the importance of promoting scientific literacy. 32:20 Richard Dawkins discusses a classic study involving pigeons that demonstrates superstitious behavior in animals, linking it to human tendencies to seek patterns and meaning. 34:29 The conversation delves into the psychology of humans perceiving risk and how irrational decision-making often leads to misconceptions about the dangers posed by various actions. 36:45 They explore the idea that humans tend to assign blame when things go wrong, such as blaming a doctor for a vaccination-related incident while accepting natural causes without blame. 52:05 Dawkins reflects on the importance of appreciating the incredible luck of being alive and emphasizes making the most of life, as it's the only one we have. Made with HARPA AI
@@thehandsomeknight9449 Tyson is a run-of-the-mill scientist, no single scientific accomplishment to his name. This detracts nothing from his importance as science communicator. Dawkins, on the other hand....
Asked ChatGPT for its 10 commandments (for quality of life): 1. Respect for human dignity and equality 2. Protection of basic human rights, including the right to life, liberty, and security 3. Promotion of justice and fairness for all individuals 4. Practice of empathy and compassion towards others 5. Respect for diversity and tolerance towards differences 6. Responsibility for one's actions and consequences 7. Practice of honesty and integrity in all aspects of life 8. Promotion of cooperation and collaboration towards common goals 9. Stewardship of the environment and natural resources 10. Pursuit of knowledge and understanding through learning and education. Worship the church of CG! :)
So you love listening to these losers. Wow. Richard Dawkins teaches the universe came from "literally nothing." Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. We can't get anything from "literally nothing." We can't even get science without God. The laws of nature only can come from a Lawgiver, God. God is the reason for us and all we have. ruclips.net/video/JiMqzN_YSXU/видео.html “However improbable the origin of life might be, we know it happened on Earth because we are here.” -Richard Dawkins. We only get life from life...the law of biogenesis. We can't get anything without God. The odds are NOT there. ruclips.net/video/W1_KEVaCyaA/видео.html ruclips.net/video/yW9gawzZLsk/видео.html ruclips.net/video/ddaqSutt5aw/видео.html No, the eye did not evolve into various eyes. Your mere chance mutations are absurd. ruclips.net/video/X7h2HWcTwa4/видео.html Even Dawkins admits we can't know what is true because of natural selection... The God Delusion, “Since we are creatures of natural selection, we cannot totally trust our senses. Evolution only passes on traits that help a species survive, and not with preserving traits that tell a species what is actually true about life.”
@@2fast2block But you have no problem *assuming* the existence of some all-powerful entity capable of creating the entire universe! This explains precisely *nothing* because you have simply moved back the mystery to an even greater mystery!
Having been raised in a pentacostal church by parents who expected their children to actually read the Bible, I didn't realize that the other church members (including the pastor and his wife) did NOT read the Bible until I attended several "bible studies" and caught both the pastor and his wife teaching nonsense. No one else noticed it and it was then that I realized no one else had actually read the chapters that the bible study was based on. They all just sat there, waiting to be spoon-fed whatever the pastor decided to teach them. At one point I attempted to correct what was being taught to reflect what was actually in the scripture, and the pastor immediately interrupted me and basically told me to be quiet. I never attended another study and we left that church (along with my beliefs) soon thereafter.
Please add caption in Hindi language so that the subtitle can be seen in Hindi language. This will make your channel most popular in India. Many many congratulations. 💓🌹I am from India
@@jgarbo3541 Weird that atheists would call ridiculous tales of dinosaurs sorcerously evolving into all kinds of birds as being supported by science. Darwinism is only a silly religion masquerading as a science and vying for a share of the religious market
@@jgarbo3541 I would say that Satan is the good guy to be honest. God murders millions in the bible while Satan only kills 10 people. I know which I'd rather meet in the very unlikely event either exists
Atheist Dawkins made himself filthy rich in preaching a Darwinian evolutionary creation. He can utter just about any nonsense but his disciple will swallow the BS as if it were gourmet food. Atheist Dawkins calls the human eyes designoid objects presenting only an illusion of being designed because acknowledging to their being intelligently designed, programmed and engineered would be admitting for the need for an intelligent designer. Also atheist Dawkins has created a farfetched scenario retracing the evolutionary creation of light sensitive cells that would have migrated from the brain.
Honestly, do not wish to be over dramatic but I could not help the moment deGrasse said 'what if we fail', tears just came into my eyes and my chest significantly tightened... the only reason I quickly picked myself up was Dawkins answer. Thanks for being there for all of us. This is IT. Wonderful, good humoured elegant and sincere interview. Gosh!
Not sure who reads the comments but I’m 22yo and grew up with the both of you being idols of mine. You’re both legends of your respective fields and just want to say I appreciate your contributions and your passion
Wow, so you respect losers. Richard Dawkins teaches the universe came from "literally nothing." Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. We can't get anything from "literally nothing." We can't even get science without God. The laws of nature only can come from a Lawgiver, God. God is the reason for us and all we have. ruclips.net/video/JiMqzN_YSXU/видео.html “However improbable the origin of life might be, we know it happened on Earth because we are here.” -Richard Dawkins. We only get life from life...the law of biogenesis. We can't get anything without God. The odds are NOT there. ruclips.net/video/W1_KEVaCyaA/видео.html ruclips.net/video/yW9gawzZLsk/видео.html ruclips.net/video/ddaqSutt5aw/видео.html No, the eye did not evolve into various eyes. Your mere chance mutations are absurd. ruclips.net/video/X7h2HWcTwa4/видео.html Even Dawkins admits we can't know what is true because of natural selection... The God Delusion, “Since we are creatures of natural selection, we cannot totally trust our senses. Evolution only passes on traits that help a species survive, and not with preserving traits that tell a species what is actually true about life.”
I know I’m late to this video but it’s lovely to see these two gentlemen in discussion. Mr. Tyson I think another point in favor of Mr. Dawkins approach to religion is how in some denominations the abuse from the leadership leads to suicide, shunning, depression and other mental health issues. This type of behavior is a detriment to society especially given the fact that most religious people are born into their familial beliefs systems. As an ex Jehovah’s Witness I can vouch that religion when used as a weapon is precise and deadly in many cases figuratively and in extreme instances very literally. Thank you for all your work and tireless fight to promote truth and the sciences.
I love these types of conversations. I love having conversations about science and listening to conversations about science. This was so fascinating. Really, it is. Today just got more interesting!
Completely appreciate you two explorers. Thanks for this amazing piece of amazingness :) This type of conversation is everything. For anyone to think they know what’s going on is truly sad to me. I agree…they’re missing out so much. I know a lot of folks that are simply not willing to explore honestly for various reasons but they seem to get caught up in ego and it’s not honest exploration. Exciting stuff and glad it’s being discussed. Thanks again for existing and I hope to meet your energies in person one day.
@@leiacosta5696 All good, but just stop using computers! which we were able to build using work done by "racionais demais" geniuses! So if you were a little bit consistent with your opinion, you'd be now secluded in a hermitage and I wouldn't be here replying!
No, he's simply a loser who hates science. Richard Dawkins teaches the universe came from "literally nothing." Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. We can't get anything from "literally nothing." We can't even get science without God. The laws of nature only can come from a Lawgiver, God. God is the reason for us and all we have. ruclips.net/video/JiMqzN_YSXU/видео.html “However improbable the origin of life might be, we know it happened on Earth because we are here.” -Richard Dawkins. We only get life from life...the law of biogenesis. We can't get anything without God. The odds are NOT there. ruclips.net/video/W1_KEVaCyaA/видео.html ruclips.net/video/yW9gawzZLsk/видео.html ruclips.net/video/ddaqSutt5aw/видео.html No, the eye did not evolve into various eyes. Your mere chance mutations are absurd. ruclips.net/video/X7h2HWcTwa4/видео.html Even Dawkins admits we can't know what is true because of natural selection... The God Delusion, “Since we are creatures of natural selection, we cannot totally trust our senses. Evolution only passes on traits that help a species survive, and not with preserving traits that tell a species what is actually true about life.”
Atheist Dawkins sense of self depreciation is just awesome. He says that his atheist brain would be a designoid object too badly deficient to be the creation of an intelligent entity. his preaching on the human, brain, and other organs as being designoid object that would present only an illusion of being intelligently design is a gospel of absurdity. You can find atheist Dawkins lecture on designoid on RUclips. Dawkins coined the word designoid over 20 years ago, but no definition that could make any sense could be found for the neologism. Meaning of Designoid: That came up by accident but appears to be designed. This definitionof the word Designoid is from the Wiktionary dictionary, ..
What Niel can do in terms of sharing knowledge is equivalent to the best produced video explanations on RUclips- with all the fancy editing and images. Niel can make you visualise with just himself which is truly a rare talent and a much needed one at that.
Impressive since atheist Dawkins is regarding the human eye, the human brain and all the human organs as having been created through a purposeless, and unintelligently support random evolutionary process.His lecture on designoid object, available on RUclips is a masterpiece of absurdity.
Quite a few years ago when I first found out about Richard Dawkins.I had been agnostic for many years since Jr. High aged, when I witnessed a spectacle at a healing. it was ridiculous and I thought to myself if this is what religion is all about I'll pass. from then on I became an agnostic. then some years ago I was introduced to the Atheist community, and one of the first people I was introduced to was Richard Dawkins. and I couldn't help but think this guy has got to be one of the most intelligent people on the planet. after checking out several of his lectures, I made the decision to become an Atheist. it was one of the best decisions I have ever made for sure. that was back before Christopher Hitchens passed away. Richard Dawkins was at his last lecture, it was one of the saddest things I have seen in a long while. he died about a week later and he is definitely missed. Richard Dawkins had tears in his eyes when he was helping Christopher Hitchens down from the podium, they were good friends. it also show's that Richard Dawkins is not only highly intelligent, but he's also considerate compactionate and has empathy for others. and this also before The God Delusion which by the way is brilliant. since being introducd to the Atheist community, I come to know most all the Atheists that speak out on the benefits of Atheism. such as Neil Degrassi Tyson, and Carl Sagan, (also very much missed) Sam Harris, Aron Ra, Lawrence Krause, Steven Pinker, Matt Dillihunty, and Ed Sheeran, and many more. they all are AWESOME!!!! but I have thank Richard Dawkins for helping me make the decision to become an Atheist. and allowing me to be introduced to all of them.
Believing things that aren't true is never harmless in my opinion. It's hard to imagine ever hitting zero, but really striving to believe as few untrue thing as possible serves the individual and the group well. Hearing these two over the years is something I'm really grateful for.
I cannot possibly express my true gratitude to both Richard and Neil for caring enough to work so hard everyday in making the world more scientifically literate. Where would we be right now if not for champions of science math and technology?
It is a SAD TREND though that many Science-Fans and -Enthusiasts reject the idea to fwatch and support Science-RUclipsrs blood-related Sibling: The Atheist-Channel. Science and Atheism is blood-related, so to speak, for a Myriad of reasons.
One of the best teachers of science I've ever had the pleasure of interacting with is Professor Nick Zentner. Professor of Geology at Central Washington University. His online classes (here on RUclips) have opened up the process of science to thousands of people all around the world. I have a feeling it would be wonderful to watch a conversation between Neil and Professor Zentner.
Dear Neil, Thank you for your years of careful education and teaching in science. My wife has found this, your latest talk with richard Dawkins on combatting Anti-Science and we’ve begun watching. I have to get ready for work, so we've only gotten 10 minutes in. Thank you for your sharing Dr Dawkins’ latest book, Books Do Furnish a Life, which I have found on Google Books with a 28 page free preview. Science communication has become more important to me in these last days. My undergraduate degree is in Mathematics and during the COVID-19 shutdown, I was publishing statistics on the virus, its spread, etc. but as a senior citizen, was shocked at the apathy to truth. My wife an I have a joint celebration and commitment to science. Somehow I stumbled upon Thomas Kuhn’s books, first, The Essential Tension: Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change, and now, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. They are a bit thick and with the free Google preview, enough to whet my appetite for more. Nevertheless, when I encountered the story of Jocelyn Bell Burnell through a New York Times Op-Doc between the two books, I wondered if her discovery of pulsars was normal science. The further I pursued this question, the more contrary it seemed to become. Are there simpler versions of Kuhn’s books and ideas? (I have yet to find them.) I expect great things from Richard Dawkins’ curiously titled book about the life they furnish. Thank you again for cheering us in this direction. Peace.
Personally I loved his book, "The Greatest Show on Earth." It is a wonderful overview of evolution that filled in so many gaps in my knowledge. Recommend to everyone.
I never really understood the whole line of our evolutionary monophyletic taxonomy until the You Tube series 'Systematic Classification of Life' by Aron Ra. I like Dawkins but he always seemed so here and there and never clearly stated it through out monophyletic line. That's generally my critique of most mainstream science stuff, it's either too vague or too all over the place. ruclips.net/p/PLXJ4dsU0oGMLnubJLPuw0dzD0AvAHAotW
@m_train1 The colloquial term "theory" is equivalent to the scientific term "hypothesis"....a "theory" is the highest level in science, it is a grouping of scientific laws ruclips.net/p/PLXJ4dsU0oGMLnubJLPuw0dzD0AvAHAotW
13:45 According to *Quote Investigator*, in 1721 a slim volume titled “A Letter to a Young Gentleman, Lately Enter’d Into Holy Orders by a Person of Quality” was published. The author was Jonathan Swift, and the following salient phrase was included: _Reasoning will never make a Man correct an ill Opinion, which by Reasoning he never acquired_
@@tgstudio85 The definition of a debate is "a formal discussion on a particular topic in a public meeting or legislative assembly, in which opposing arguments are put forward.". Without the "opposing arguments" bit, it's a discussion, not a debate. They don't disagree.
There are few minds in our history that compare to the intellect of Dawkins. There is no shame in recognizing and accepting who you are. Share the knowledge you have with those interested and remember everyone can teach you something. Even if its not what they intend.
The only way to combat "anti science" is not to give talks to biased audiences, is to engage thru the education system. Kids need to be encouraged to use critical thinking according to their age, not to test them after washing their brains with arithmetics and pre chewed facts about the world that they have to memorize to pass evaluation tests. Creativity should be the core of the education system.
Truth matters. That's where science ranks above the myths of religion. Many did not choose their religion - it was pressed upon them, usually at an early age. Science is the antidote to superstition.
"If religious instruction were not allowed until the child had attained the age of reason, we would be living in a quite different world." - Christopher Hitchens
@@RusselKabirTR In North Korea they press fairy tales of the supernatural leader upon the children. Not too different from religion, but very very different from science/ rational thinking.
John hunter . Thats a very narrow minded reflection on religion. I'm a faith based Christian not a religious Christian. Have you ever been taught what the bible actually means or is saying to us . The bible is a one time book with a beginning and an end . Its full of hope and promise where as science has no beginning no end no hope and no promise .
@@jrhunter007 more than I know what ? . My mum was in her early forties and me and my sister were in our teens when we was introduced to christ so not all Christians have it rammed down their throats from an age of not understanding. I do agree that religious people force their kids into it but not all .
Don't all Reptiliomorphs have shoulders? Well, Tetropods like Tiktaalik/Icanthostega/Ichthyostega. Both we and dinosaurs share that line and Pigeons are dinosaurs in monophyletic taxonomy.
It is a SAD TREND though that many Science-Fans reject the idea to fwatch and support Science-RUclipsrs blood-related Sibling: The Atheist-Channel. That Atheist-RUclipsrs have nothing to say is a silly Myth, so lemme; excuse the Randomness; recommend you some: Belief It Or Not, Genetically Modified Sceptic, Viced Rhino, Godless Grandma, Hbomberguy and Illuminaughtii. Oh, and Forrest Valkai. Science and Atheism is blood-related, so to speak, for a Myriad of reasons.
Well, personally I am trying to watch science related programs and documentaries as much as I can in you-tube or other channels, but under one condition. The scientist should be known to me either personally by having read their books in advance or by being introduced by someone or some reliable source. There are lots of them in different channels BBC, NG, Curiosity, etc. so we have to prioritize them wisely. In here I know both of them for a long time now, and have read many books from them especially from Prof Dawkins and even have introduced them to others to enjoy.
@@daryabaghdar4340 "In here I know both of them for a long time now, and have read many books from them especially from Prof Dawkins and even have introduced them to others to enjoy." "We satched this program with family and enjoyed it greatly." Wow, you're so caring that you show lies these two losers give to your family to enjoy. Richard Dawkins teaches the universe came from "literally nothing." Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. We can't get anything from "literally nothing." We can't even get science without God. The laws of nature only can come from a Lawgiver, God. God is the reason for us and all we have. ruclips.net/video/JiMqzN_YSXU/видео.html “However improbable the origin of life might be, we know it happened on Earth because we are here.” -Richard Dawkins. We only get life from life...the law of biogenesis. We can't get anything without God. The odds are NOT there. ruclips.net/video/W1_KEVaCyaA/видео.html ruclips.net/video/yW9gawzZLsk/видео.html ruclips.net/video/ddaqSutt5aw/видео.html No, the eye did not evolve into various eyes. Your mere chance mutations are absurd. ruclips.net/video/X7h2HWcTwa4/видео.html Even Dawkins admits we can't know what is true because of natural selection... The God Delusion, “Since we are creatures of natural selection, we cannot totally trust our senses. Evolution only passes on traits that help a species survive, and not with preserving traits that tell a species what is actually true about life.”
To 2fast2block: Well, apparently you are way way behind in science advancement in subatomic realm. I suggest you follow physicists in quantum realm and find out that thermodynamic laws that you are referring to goes only to certain level down in subatomic atomic level. Beyond that you have to deal with quantum theory. Your answer is there! Search for it. Even my grade 10 kid knows a lot about quantum principles, I’m sure you will enjoy it too. Again my suggestion to you is update your knowledge about physics and and everything around you.
Neil... let Dawkins finish his thoughts! Jeeze! Anyhoo... thank you both. You two changed my life over a decade ago. Without you two, I wouldn't have been able to solidify my exit from religious indoctrination when I was teetering on the edge of logic versus faith. Long story short, you two saved my life. Thank you, Richard. Thank you, Neil.
Agree 100%. I know that NDT just can't help himself... he just loves to talk (and we do love him for it much of the time)... but he really needs to let his guest get in a word too. His questions were longer than Dawkins answers!
This was one of the very few times I had wished Neil would have talked less and allowed Richard to talk more. Still great, but not enough from Richard.
Yes-this is my only complaint about NGT. He loves the sound of his own voice. I do, too, of course, but sometimes he’s not the only one there worth listening to
The Selfish Gene was brilliant. That was one of the books that had a big impact on my understanding of evolution, and it's still as relevant now as it was then.
Two people that I enjoy and respect very much......who also have that feeling for each other. Thank you to both. .......and....... Star Talk is SO enjoyable WITHOUT your "morning juk-yuk DJ" sidekick.
@@theroyalgamer5871 Hi is, but he targets people following Islam with some significant vitriol. Unprompted he regularly drops some dicey stuff on Twitter about Islam and it's followers. His views on Islam are way stronger than on any other religion. Dawkins was awarded a Humanitarian Award in 1996 but it was revoked from him recently for his views that are very contrary to the ideas of humanism. One of their stated reasons for doing so was: "Dawkins has over the past several years accumulated a history of making statements that use the guise of scientific discourse to demean marginalized groups, an approach antithetical to humanist values." I too am an Atheist and against the idea of organised religion, but Dawkins gives us all a bad name. He purpetuates the view of the "angry atheist" way more than he helps in any relevant discussions/arguments on the subject of religion.
Respected professor Dawkins,you are very right in saying that you want that everyone must enjoy the beauty and wonder of the scientific truths through your hard work in writing books.I really enjoy reading your books.Thanks. 🙏🙏
It is also essential to address the societal factors that enable pseudoscience to flourish, such as distrust in authority, economic inequalities, and cultural barriers to scientific acceptance. Building trust requires accountability within the scientific community and inclusivity in research that reflects diverse perspectives and concerns. By fostering an environment where evidence-based reasoning is valued, we can reduce the influence of pseudoscience and empower society to make informed decisions based on reality rather than rhetoric.
A profoundly wonderful interview, Dr. Tyson. Your questions brought out Dr. Dawkins' most interesting insights about religious beliefs and the need to communicate the true nature of science and how it is employed to explain a much greater creation than that which religion portrays.
Eventhough I agree with what you said up into the point when you said the true way the Universe was Created on this wording alone I would reply nobody knows the True way it was created. Only Theory's...
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
"Why do you care what other people believe?" - well, we live in a democracy, the majority decides the rulers, the rulers decides the laws, and this influences and changes life for all. If the majority of people are ignorant and believe various stories not based on facts the chances for a catastrophic society are much greater. Truth is important for living a better life.
My thoughts exactly.
Hear! Hear!
You actually believe that's how things work in the world? Niaive in the extreme...........'democracy' is an illusion to control the masses, it does not exist......
@@soaruk3697 well, the vote of the masses made Trump and Brexit happened.
Religion becomes dangerous once it starts interfering with personal lives, education, sociocultural life and political life of humans.
Religion is intrinsically authoritarian and dictatorial with NO encouragement to freely think outside its dogma.
What I love most about Dawkins is, the way he looks at people, when they are talking. What I mean by that is, that he looks like, he is listening really carefully and with much focus and concentration. This is a rare skill and an important key to success. Just look at the people around you. This is something I definetely take from Dawkins. Don't forget to 100% focus on one thing, if you want a clear understanding!
And if I may add, there's an excellent book, a reference, though by now dated since published in 1979, but it has been a guide for me, is by Robert J Gula, called Nonsense, How to Overcome it, and then years later as far as politics go, in 2002,and a later 2nd edition and both annotated US Constitution, Linda Monk's The Words We Live By, and while this one I used generally for better discussions[1979-2003] and on to 2022[I just put it away a few minutes ago]creating better relevant arguments and identifying others' best arguments, etc [Also from Richard Mitchell, Less Than Words Can Say and he has 3 more and 1977-1991, yes, before the IBM-PC, he even had a printing press he used for the monthly newsletter, he hand pressed himself, The Undergroung Grammarian, see sourcetext.com/grammarian and see all his stuff a real legacy. The newsletter made me think of the children's books that had cardboard popups that surprised you when you'd open them up. It was information, sometimes about poetry or an United Kingdom format of teaching Lit just a different English method or style of teaching, or well, like I said it was a surprise, you never could predict what, but each was a delight anyway.
Mike Tyson has become soooo sooophisticated...
and Dawkins theory of evilution is still valid after 160 years
That's one of the first things mental health professionals learn in their studies. Listen very carefully to the person who you are talking with. It's a joy watching him do that.
@@goofycker Uhm.. you mean Darwin right
Two intellectual giants from very different fields but who share a passion and dedication for truth. We should all be profoundly grateful for them both.
Damn straight! And the fact you and others
are participating means there is a
connection that is vital. Peace.
Tyson, himself, would be the first to disagree with your comment, as do I. He is an effective science communicator, a teacher. But, as he would agree, far from an, “intellectual giant”. He merely communicates things discovered by other people, the real intellectual giants.
@@NorthernChev well, perhaps, in the overall scale of scientific contribution and expanding the frontiers of knowledge. But compared to the average American Tyson is indeed a giant :)
And that's on god 💯
Right.....
That's the real Startalk, between two stars
Yeah, but they're not talking about stars. Maybe if we had two different stars, who were on the surface of two different stars and they were talking about other stars who lived on the surface of yet other stars (assuming a star has a surface for this flight o fancy), maybe then could they really live up to the name Star Talk. Until then it's either hyperbole or a misnomer...
@@Raz.C ive got three words for you mm: fun at parties.
@@tafdiz Me too. These are two of the best scientists in the world who can also communicate so well. Seeing them together is always a treat for me.
ruclips.net/video/SXPmRSHt86c/видео.html
@@いたどり指 vot is misnomer. Pardon my French ;)
When Neil asks Dawkins "why he cares what people believe" I wish Dawkins would respond that "your beliefs inform your actions" instead of simply responding that it makes him sad that people have a non-scientific view of the world. It is so important that people have a true (scientific) view of the world else they make poor real life decisions and sometimes even decisions that harm others. This is the important point to communicate.
100% true
Yes, but most of the time, sadly, people's decisions are not based on a logical reasoning.
That is one of the greatest ironies ans conundrums but yes, education should help alleviate this.
Very true .....very true
Very well said 👍
I was feeling exactly this and waiting for it to come up. People who believe harmless nonsense are far more susceptible to harmful nonsense. The pandemic has shown us plenty with people refusing the vaccine thinking it contains microchips, refusing to comply with mask guidelines, insisting the virus is a hoax even in their last breath as it kills them, etc.
A civil conversation without adults interrupting each other.. a rarity on RUclips. Let's keep this one in the archives for future generations.
No! You don't know what you are talking about... educate yourself before posting.
@@Malpheron Presuming my apparent lack of education without knowing anything about me shows a lack of education on your part. Nice try to look cool on RUclips...
@@seand8534 It's a sad indictment on the state of the comment section that you would not assume I was joking.
@@seand8534 Hostile attribution bias is in vogue, as you've demonstrated. :)~
Bias or not, that was a hostile reply. There is no sarcasm character on the keyboard. Maybe there should be though.
Loved this.
I welled up at the beginning when they were discussing Richard's mortality. His unrelenting humility got to me.
I wish him all the best for his twilight years. An extraordinary mind. I personally owe him so much.
And at the very end too, I’m glad richard is able to be humorous about it; “Over my dead body!”
Richard and Neil have no humility, they are devoted losers.
Richard Dawkins teaches the universe came from "literally nothing."
Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it.
We can't get anything from "literally nothing." We can't even get science without God. The laws of nature only can come from a Lawgiver, God.
God is the reason for us and all we have.
ruclips.net/video/JiMqzN_YSXU/видео.html
“However improbable the origin of life might be, we know it happened on Earth because we are here.” -Richard Dawkins.
We only get life from life...the law of biogenesis. We can't get anything without God.
The odds are NOT there.
ruclips.net/video/W1_KEVaCyaA/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/yW9gawzZLsk/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/ddaqSutt5aw/видео.html
No, the eye did not evolve into various eyes. Your mere chance mutations are absurd.
ruclips.net/video/X7h2HWcTwa4/видео.html
Even Dawkins admits we can't know what is true because of natural selection...
The God Delusion, “Since we are creatures of natural selection, we cannot totally trust our senses. Evolution only passes on traits that help a species survive, and not with preserving traits that tell a species what is actually true about life.”
Atheist Dawkins spent all his life in order to support that all living creatures could be the creation of a purposeless, random and unintelligently supported evolutionary process directed by a blind watchmaker that the great prophet Darwin called natural selection. At 80 it is important for atheist Dawkins to secure his faith in the finality of death.
i don't like the way i seen him (here on RUclips at least) where he names specific individuals, points his finger and gets his audience to laugh in an unpleasant way..
he's just another priest of science..
@@davidevans3227no such thing as a priest in science.
No one is above criticism.
An English comedian once said, 'In the not so distant past England had two problem groups of people, we had the fundamental religious nutcases, so we sent them to America. The second lot were the convicts, so we sent them to Australia. The convicts evolved into a better society'.
Yes, but what was left behind? I wish I’d stolen some bread.
Well, it wasn't funny
@@bertiegallagher7598 Modern British people, the worst of them all
@@ChiknThighTatorPie Except it kinda was (and also true).
Nice
This wouldn’t have been possible a few decades ago. Watching two great minds speak to each other in private but for everyone to see. Great way of spreading knowledge and inspiration. All thanks to science ♥️
These two losers ignore science.
Richard Dawkins teaches the universe came from "literally nothing."
Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it.
We can't get anything from "literally nothing." We can't even get science without God. The laws of nature only can come from a Lawgiver, God.
God is the reason for us and all we have.
ruclips.net/video/JiMqzN_YSXU/видео.html
“However improbable the origin of life might be, we know it happened on Earth because we are here.” -Richard Dawkins.
We only get life from life...the law of biogenesis. We can't get anything without God.
The odds are NOT there.
ruclips.net/video/W1_KEVaCyaA/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/yW9gawzZLsk/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/ddaqSutt5aw/видео.html
No, the eye did not evolve into various eyes. Your mere chance mutations are absurd.
ruclips.net/video/X7h2HWcTwa4/видео.html
Even Dawkins admits we can't know what is true because of natural selection...
The God Delusion, “Since we are creatures of natural selection, we cannot totally trust our senses. Evolution only passes on traits that help a species survive, and not with preserving traits that tell a species what is actually true about life.”
@ A Darwinian evolutionary creation myth is a silly science fiction creation myth masquerading as a science supported by a pagan deity, vested as a law of science, called natural selection. Although theism has no provision for miracles, atheist darwinist Dawkins is claiming that apes mutated up into men, and that land mammals returned to the ocean in order evolve into all kind of sea mammals
Information technology according to the conditions, rules and laws of the originator and owner of the universe.
“The works of the LORD are great, Sought out of all them that have pleasure therein. His work is honourable and glorious: And his righteousness endureth for ever.“
Psalm 111, 2-3
@@Morewecanthink
Pffft!!!
Superstitious jibber jabber.
👎
@@Morewecanthinkscience progresses and discovers knowledge despite the best efforts of the religious.
If the religious had their way, we would still be living out our short lives in hovels.
"You're being rational again, Richard."
"Sorry."
😂
claiming to be rational using the human brain is irrational..
The issue is, that rationality without empiricism often becomes irrational.
[richard dawkins intensifies]
Very wholesome moment :D
The 2 individuals that changed my entire life. Respects to all of you.
Same here. Definitely two of my favorite people in the world.
Me too.
Only Tyson for me. The guy hit my chest with wonder ! I allready had the idea. And Carl sagan pale blue dot.
I’m so sorry
@@averagesauceenjoyer7209 u should read prof. Dawkins books, its revolutionary.
I appreciate that you consider the “non-readers”. I work 60-70 hours a week and I have 5 very active kids. I love to read but I don’t have the time like I once did in the pre-children days. You, Dr. Dawkins, and so many other people are responsible for opening up my eyes to reason and evidence based, not faith based, thought. Thank you! Because of your efforts I can listen to your shows and lectures while I work (I repair electrical propulsion systems on rail vehicles) and I get a lot out of it and learn a great deal even though I don’t have the time to read and study like I once did before kids.
Perhaps you can learn more from other people than you think.
That's the nice part about YT, Audible and other audio/video based services. Can pop on something and listen to it. That's the part about doing security system installs for large stores I loved, plenty of time I could just pop on audio books and enjoy a good story or a lecture while working. If you need your ears for work, like I did, consider something like Aftershockz headsets where it vibrates against your bone leaving your ears wide open for external sounds like your supervisor.
My guy, get on some audio books. It takes some getting used to, but I listen to them while I clean the house, mow the lawn, drive, or any other mundane task that doesn't require too much critical thinking.
@@Tybren Even when you drive?
@Hein Pereboom Absolutely! Driving feels pretty subconscious and automatic. It makes an hour long commute go by quick.
Massive fan of Dawkins. Love this show. I'm just happy right now.
Now, this is what I call a "Star Talk." Two giant stars with their high gravitational pull collide and create a Bright hole to pull you in and leave no room for escape if you approach its event horizon with skepticism and enter the Bright hole with your reason and logic.
Wow! I was waiting for this collision for years since I have been reading Richard Dawkins' books since 1990 and following Neil deGrasse Tyson since 2010. It's amazing to see that Tyson and Dawkins interview each other back and forth, a true Star conversation/talk. If this conversation does not turn you into an atheist/Bright, then nothing will.
I just forwarded the URL of this clip to all the people on my contact list.
Thank you, Neil. :)
🏅
Richard Dawkins is an absolute treasure. I have so much love, respect and adoration for this man.
yes - me too :) - Poland say somthing ...
What a priviledge to be able to sit here and listen to these intellects having a conversation.
It is a shame that being rational is seen as being aggressive.
Too true. I have to reign myself in sometimes bc people might feel I'm being aggressive or I'm somehow angry when I'm really just enjoying an engaging conversation and passionately involved.
Claiming that Islamic people cannot do maths, when they literally invented modern mathematics, or that the private sector has higher productivity than the state providing services, after the last 40 years of direct comparison, is hardly rational.
@@unitedfools3493 who here said that? Maybe your comment was meant for another thread? Because it's literally not even directly related to anything said here.
@@unitedfools3493 ah, you were high. I get it, no worries lol. Much love, brother.
It is a shame. I think it is an unfortunate part of human nature. When someone tries to point out holes in your beliefs it is easier to come up with a counter argument than to actually consider if you were wrong. You can't help but feel emotional and a need to defend yourself, as if they are attacking you by attacking your stance. I consider if I am wrong about things all the time but I rarely ever change my mind so I'm clearly biased about certain things, even when I try to be open minded to new evidence.
Here’s some advice for you Neil. And I do like you and have learned a lot from you. But you really should try and ask open ended questions when interviewing somebody as brilliant as Richard.
Your long windedness, though extremely articulate, is so full of info and takes so long to get to the point/question that there’s little left for the interviewee to respond.
Try letting the interviewee be the star of the show. That would serve you better!
I got the same thought later in the interview. Mike likes talking.
Two people with the largest science vocabulary around interacting. Love it.
@@whykoks add Russell Brand
I was talking about science jeez!
@@whykoks Shashi Tharoor is idiot compared to these guys...All he is , is an eloquent Marxist bereft of honesty and transparency of argument. Add to it he is diplomat and a politician to top it, with congress wala being the cherry on the icing.. checkout watch?v=jw3dDbc1BHE...Hitchens tears apart apologist Tharoor's arguments.
*that are publicly known.
Both of these speakers are great, don't get me wrong. But try talking to the people whose job is figuring out stuff on the field day to day =)
@@sahalamer7279 dont go to kindergarten and be surprised your peers are childen
I'm delightful with this interview.
I'm brazilian and "the cost of pseudo science" here, during the pandemic, is 455.000+ lives, until now.
Yeah, USA is right up there.
Lamento muito, amigo.
That's the one on the face, we have an hidric catastrophe waiting to happen too.
@@jonnyso1 Yo también lo lamento.
What are we calling pseudo science?
A friend and I were lucky enough to have been invited to this three-day conference in La Jolla, and still agree that it was probably the best experience of our lives! We were privileged to have met literally *dozens* of top-level scientists from many fields, after which I described it as enjoying it as a huge relief from everyday life because no one talked about sports or had to explain their jokes!
There was a second conference a year later that was also enjoyable but which was not quite as inspiring and was cut short by some emergency, but still worth attending. I hope it is still available online somewhere.
Just wonderful. A pleasure to watch and listen to two great brains exchanging ideas.
@@HopDavid ... you must not have a life then to sit thru this if you don’t like it. Seems odd to me. Let’s see... what do I hate listening to?.? Think I’ll go listen to it and complain.
@@HopDavid You sill boy.
@@HopDavid yea dude wt heck
@@HopDavid I came for Dawkins, but unfortunately 90% of his comments and statements were rudely interrupted by Neil and his urge to talk about himself
@@GetawayFilms Maybe you're projecting and mistaking it for his excitement as he clearly showed throughout the episode. Notice that neither had an issue with some interjection and were still able to carry out fascinating conversation. It's also not uncommon for people to do so and even make related references during the conversation.
Never thought 50 minutes would feel too short
Was just thinking the same.
I know right
just realised it's a 50 minute video
I guess we're not doing the "That's what she said" jokes anymore
50 minutes is an incredibly short amount of time xD
I read The Magic Of Reality last week and I’m looking forward to reading more.
Richard’s arguments against religion are fantastic too, as is his enthusiasm to spread the results of science research in such compelling ways.
A massive value to humanity.
I wish Rev Dawkins could be as good in making sense of the ridiculous idea of an illusion of design
The Cabrera Collection is the Evolutionist’s Nightmare
These carved ICA stones where first recognized in the 1500’s by the Spanish Conquistador that not only depicted dinosaurs but surgical operations which modern medicine today was just starting to practice. In obscure and ancient journals it has been mentioned that strange engraved stones were found, predating the peasants who have been accused of carving these images on the stones by 450 years. Catholic priests and Chroniclers remarked about these stones who also accompanied the Spanish Conquistadors as they invaded South America.
Convention
Dr Javier Cabrera spoke at the first Convention of the Director’s of the Department of Culture in Peru. He made his case for a study of the ICA Stones to archaeologists present in June 1968. The Convention gave unanimous support at the time of Dr. Cabrera’s proposal, so he prepared his case for official authorization to have a systematic excavation in archaeology in the zone of Ocucaje. Suddenly when the government authorities became aware of his intentions, they without notice relieved him from his position of Director of Cultural Affairs of Ica with immediate effect. What were they afraid off? The new Director of the Museum, who had been set up, refused to allow the institution’s collection of engraved stones to be put on public display. They were immediately stored in vaults. As you might say, out of sight, out of mind. This man of sin said no tests were necessary because a friend of his said they had been carved by local peasants in Ocucaje. This was a cover-up and a denial of the evidence 10,000 stones which looked exquisite showing a variety of species which peasants have never seen before and had no knowledge of them except trained paleontologists. Local peasants had carved them, I don’t think so!
Authentication of the ICA Stones by NASA Scientist
Joseph Bullrich who developed the design of the Saturn V missile and worked on the design of the Skylab also studied the ICA Stones. His conclusion, “There is no doubt in my mind about the authenticity of these stones’ pictures.” What a testimony from a highly qualified scientist. Pterosaurs and flying pteranodons were also pictured on the perplexing ICA Stones. Engraved stones have been recovered from tombs in the Ocucaje Desert. These authentic archaeological specimens particularly of dinosaurs; should have been the focus of worldwide attention. The scholars scoffed at them out of fear and cowardice and then let them mysteriously disappear in silence to the back rooms of the ICA Regional Museum, out of public sight. That is where they are today in 2023. Any enquiry about viewing them is met with silence through bureaucratic red tape. I have no doubt in my mind today, that if evolutionists felt threatened by them, that if anybody tried to put them on public display, they would destroy every single one of them in order to protect the Sacred Cow of Evolution. Herman Buse reopened the issue of the engraved stones in 1972 at the Congress of Andean Archaeology. Many foreign and national archaeologists had gathered at Lima. Buse pointed out to the participants their duty to give an official opinion of the ICA Stones. The Lima newspaper EL Comericio published an article on the Herman Buse lecture at the conference, blasting the incredulity of these archaeologists for refusing to address the authenticity of these stones as other qualified men believe in them that is in their legitimacy and certifiable antiquity. The establishment rejected his request out of hand, showing no interested in studying the stones. These foreign and national archaeologists are terrified of the ICA Stones, if shown to be authentic would destroy with a pedestal blow the evolutionary Tower of Time: the ideal geologic column, shattering contemporary ideas of the origin of man and indeed life itself. Scientific denials make good headlines and propaganda for media outlets. In those days newspapers working for the government were spoon feeding the populace as in the case of the media of television today and the internet their propaganda etc.
Arguing against something you don't even believe in is a serious sign of a mental disorder.
@@CollinLutz-p9e “arguing against something you don’t believe in” is actually the basis for every argument ever.
Every religious, scientific, social, legal, every argument EVER is because you don’t believe in the thing you are opposing.
You don’t start an argument against something you DO believe in, do you? idiot. 😂
I mean, you don’t believe in my point so you are arguing against it.
Do you see how this construct works yet?
😂😂😂😂😂
Awesome.
@@CollinLutz-p9e What’s a “serious” sign?
I’m here more for the funny, melancholic or facetious signs, frankly. 🤣
I can’t believe that Richard is finally on StarTalk , I’ve been looking for this episode, woohoo
It's like complete black and white lol... Neil wearing all black including black hair
While dawkins wearing all white including white hair 😂
Not skins tho don't skins
He's been here before
He's been on before
@@yokokurama5174 lol when u say "not skins" you realize it means you've considered skins and that it brought you shame, so you have to say "not skins." If you were actually not thinking about skins, you wouldn't have to say that you aren't. hahaha
@@yokokurama5174 Richard's shirt appears blue to me.
The teary eyed moment in the end, much respect to both of you who have deeply influenced my life and my understanding of the sciences
It is a SAD TREND though that many Science-Fans and -Enthusiasts
reject the idea to fwatch and support Science-RUclipsrs blood-related Sibling: The Atheist-Channel.
That Atheist-RUclipsrs have nothing to say
is a silly Myth, so lemme; excuse the Randomness; recommend you some:
Belief It Or Not, Genetically Modified Sceptic, Viced Rhino, Godless Grandma,
Hbomberguy and Illuminaughtii. Oh, and Forrest Valkai.
Science and Atheism is blood-related, so to speak, for a Myriad of reasons.
Also worth checking out:
NIGHTWISH - The Greatest Show on Earth (with Richard Dawkins) (OFFICIAL LIVE)
ruclips.net/video/qrMwxe2ya5E/видео.html
Pro tip: The (CC) button enables subtitles for the lyrics.
@ A Darwinian naturalistic creationist myth is obviously a religious concept masquerading as a science. Atheist Dawkins preaches that natural selection would be the unique creative force that could have behind the creation of all the creatures, clearly gives it divine properties. Believing that man evolved from apes or that sea mammals evolved from land mammals does indeed requires a lot of faith.
@@piertinence Do you understand the idea of "scientific method"? It doesn't require belief or faith of any kind.
@@MikkoRantalainen I understand that the idea that hummingbirds, peacocks, tigers, roses. etc., could not have been created through a purposeless, unintelligently supported random evolutionary process as preached by Darwinist evangelist atheist Dawkins.
Two of my favorite people. Such a joyful experience to listen to their conversation.
Wow, two losers and you enjoy them.
Richard Dawkins teaches the universe came from "literally nothing."
Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it.
We can't get anything from "literally nothing." We can't even get science without God. The laws of nature only can come from a Lawgiver, God.
God is the reason for us and all we have.
ruclips.net/video/JiMqzN_YSXU/видео.html
“However improbable the origin of life might be, we know it happened on Earth because we are here.” -Richard Dawkins.
We only get life from life...the law of biogenesis. We can't get anything without God.
The odds are NOT there.
ruclips.net/video/W1_KEVaCyaA/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/yW9gawzZLsk/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/ddaqSutt5aw/видео.html
No, the eye did not evolve into various eyes. Your mere chance mutations are absurd.
ruclips.net/video/X7h2HWcTwa4/видео.html
Even Dawkins admits we can't know what is true because of natural selection...
The God Delusion, “Since we are creatures of natural selection, we cannot totally trust our senses. Evolution only passes on traits that help a species survive, and not with preserving traits that tell a species what is actually true about life.”
missing Christopher Hitchens who fought and gave so much light about this kind of topic with Richard Dawkins.
I hope we get to have Dawkins around for a long time still. I know he's getting older but the thought of such a brilliant mind passing away, whilst a part of nature, is deeply saddening. He has influenced my life so much through his literature and enlightening talks over the years. His personality is very entertaining and I count myself lucky having grown up in a world with Richard in it. One of my biggest wishes is to be present at one of his talks or book tours. He has such a profound understanding of the world as we know it and I wish more people will discover him while he's still around. I love you Mr. Dawkins! :)
Probably 10 or so more years
Logically, as those like Richard Dawkins want people to be, there's no reason to be sad or feel any way about anything. You can come up with reasons to think emotions matter, but if you want logic and reason to be the be all and end all of everything done and said, you'd better be a nihilist.
@@jwb52z9 So that also extends to why get married / fall in love at all? Which Richard Dawkins has been married / in love at least 3 different times now.
@@jwb52z9 edgy
I just want to see his opinion and rebuttal Stephen Meyer books before he left us
Sorry for the wall of text but I felt the need to dump this somewhere.
You (and some other (german) science communicators) have inspired me to commit on becoming a scientist or at least work in the scientific field. I dropped out of school 12 years ago and for 8 years I felt like I wasn't good for anything and basically played computer games all day. I also watched science videos here on RUclips. I'm now almost 26 y/o. At my deepest point I decided to go get my school degrees (I think it's similar to a GED and takes 2 or 3 years in Germany if you left regular school with nothing at all, depending on how fast you want to go and which school you are attending). And in my first year I got a 1 (equivalent to an A) in every subject and only dropped to an average of 1.6 the years after. I am currently doing a school sided apprenticeship to become a biological technician which will also allow me to study at an university. I do not know exactly what I will decide on doing in a few years with education I'm getting but at least now I feel like I have a perspective and paths to walk on. I really like working in a lab, plan experiments and do research, but I also really like to educate people about how science works and what you can do with it. (I love to drop random science facts. :) )
As a bonus: with the things the teachers taught us in cell and microbiology I was able to explain to my parents what a virus does, how the vaccine works and how the testing kits work. That took some of their scepticism about the pandemic. My dad didn't test himself up until that point and wanted to quit his job because german regulations required you to test yourself for covid. My mother even got the vaccine back in January (even though the testing regulations helped to convince her)
So this is already a win
Why am I writing all this?:
I want to thank you. I was going through some bad times back then, you sparked my love for science and learning new things. It was basically my last grasp that held me on earth.
Thank you again, the videos and podcasts are well explained, well illustrated and even entertaining. They even put me at a small advantage as I sometimes already know how something works, just because I watched so many of them.
Larear No need to apologise. It's good to hear a positive story or comment from someone like yourself. Sounds like you have plans in place for a great future so I'm sure everyone here wishes you all the best as you go forward.
Dawkins is one of my intellectual heroes!
Yes, but he has a lot of idiotic and irrational science haters unfortunately.
I wish more scientists would have the guts to stand besides him and not avoid public discourse.
@@maythesciencebewithyou I fully agree with you! Idiots who support silly populist nonsense like 'scientism', 'wokeism' and so on, are literally behaving like human mistakes. They seem unable to differentiate between truth and nonsense. I'm glad I worked in a science based career, I would hate to think with the addled brain these people have. It's akin to a disease of some kind.
Mine too.
@@maythesciencebewithyou money money monay!
There seems to be a "quotient of nonsense."
Best line of the interview! Professor Dawkins is a master of turning a phrase!
Unfortunately the denominator is incredibly small.
Atheist Dawkins ought to be admired for his great humility , and sense of self derision. The Darwinian evolution admitted candidly that his atheist brain could only be a designoid object too badly deficient to be the creation of an intelligent entity.
@@piertinence only Creationists call it Darwinian.
Richard Dawkins is a man who I admire and respect. He speaks out for the enormous love and kindness to our species. There are many critics out there of Richard that called him close minded and say he speaks out of anger but it is completely the opposite. All of these detractors make these accusations out of their own self interest or economical/political gain but none of these individuals care or have any sympathy the human kind.
13:45 "You can't use reason to argue someone out of a point that they didn't use reason to get into."
The day we lose Richard Dawkins will be a sad day indeed. Such a bright, humble and charming person.
Agreed. But my dear, the editor in me must point out in this case it’s lose not loose. Probably that wretched auto correct?
@@skonther0ck Error on my part corrected, sorry, but english isn‘t my first language. 😉
RD is just a loser as Neil is.
Richard Dawkins teaches the universe came from "literally nothing."
Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it.
We can't get anything from "literally nothing." We can't even get science without God. The laws of nature only can come from a Lawgiver, God.
God is the reason for us and all we have.
ruclips.net/video/JiMqzN_YSXU/видео.html
“However improbable the origin of life might be, we know it happened on Earth because we are here.” -Richard Dawkins.
We only get life from life...the law of biogenesis. We can't get anything without God.
The odds are NOT there.
ruclips.net/video/W1_KEVaCyaA/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/yW9gawzZLsk/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/ddaqSutt5aw/видео.html
No, the eye did not evolve into various eyes. Your mere chance mutations are absurd.
ruclips.net/video/X7h2HWcTwa4/видео.html
Even Dawkins admits we can't know what is true because of natural selection...
The God Delusion, “Since we are creatures of natural selection, we cannot totally trust our senses. Evolution only passes on traits that help a species survive, and not with preserving traits that tell a species what is actually true about life.”
The Intellect, respect, just the emotions from these podcasts is so moving. You are both incredible people.
Ah yes Professor Richard Dawkins, inventor of the term "meme"
Yes but not these garbage literal JOKES that roam around the internet spreading stereotypes and hate just to make some kids laugh
That is something dawkins himself hates
@The Truth of the Matter do you enjoy a nice little tiktok binge?
@@yokokurama5174 It is exactly what he thought about. These 'memes' and viral videos are indeed like viruses: they carry some information that helps them spreading like a pandemy, even though we all hate them as much as we hate corona.
@@yokokurama5174 ideas being spread? That’s still technically a meme though.
@@JesusChrist-vq6lk Jesus so ripped my schwang got all shwippity dippity
"And if you make a great effort to talk clearly, it's sometimes too in-your-face." I've noticed that even at work.
And if you explain in clear and concise terms, using logic and science, you're being patronizing.
Yeah, and they say to me I "insist" too much on the topic! I mean wrf? don't you really want to analyse and understand this? why did you mention it then, in the first place?
Especially at work. Showing an effort to communicate suggests to people "dumbing things down" rather than more precision.
Yep. I struggle with this.
Just went through reframing the same data 3 times, and for the life of me I can't figure out why the third time convinced them where the other 2 didn't.
@@uninspired3583 People need to be spoken to in ways/manners they will both accept and understand at the same time. Those two thing aren't always one and the same thing.
As a summarized point on this issue; I think people in general have a certain fear of change, or fear of the unknown, that prohibits them from taking up this knowledge. On a very basic level. Like Dawkins says here, "It's sad that they are missing out". Well yes, in a way it is sad, but the transition into it is what people are reluctant to, simply because it's the act of acquiring "logic tools" in their mind. Getting this toolset is a scary "double edged sword" for many, since you cannot JUST apply logic to what you guys are saying, you will automatically apply it to _everything_
The daunting and overwhelming change in thinking, has a BUNCH of caveats in our day to day life. Suddenly, talking with anyone, one is prone to analyze and think more critically of every minute thing. When one hasn't done this throughout life, it becomes a very big change indeed, and a change that we oppose ourselves quite automatically. It's mostly summarized in saying: "Ignorance is bliss", and "Nobody likes change".
A truly religious person has never experienced truly saying "I don't know" to something. And to be at ease with this answer to someone's question, is a process. It's scary not knowing. And it's hard to be content with not knowing.
"When they lose their sense of Awe, people turn to religion. When they no longer trust themselves, people begin to depend on authority" Tao Te Ching. a book i really think can help bridge those manipulated by religious culture & the science minds.
@@am824 I believe the book the quantum shart is referring to is the aforementioned Tao Te Ching by Laozi (Lao-tzu)
Thank you Neil, Richard, Stephen Jay, Carl, and all the rest who shared their knowledge and allowed me to learn.
🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation:
03:28 El objetivo principal de la Fundación Richard Dawkins es promover la razón y la ciencia, y también luchar contra la influencia religiosa en la política y la educación.
17:10 Richard Dawkins se preocupa cuando las creencias religiosas intentan influir en la legislación y la educación, pero no se preocupa por las creencias personales de las personas en su vida cotidiana.
24:32 Hay personas que se llaman a sí mismas "humanistas seculares" y pueden abrazar la ética secular incluso si tienen creencias religiosas personales.
26:10 Richard Dawkins discusses the biblical story of Moses and the Ten Commandments, highlighting the differences between Hollywood's portrayal and the actual text in Exodus.
28:25 Dawkins mentions how Hollywood often sanitizes religious stories, removing elements that might be considered too violent or disturbing for a wide audience.
29:06 Richard Dawkins and Neil deGrasse Tyson discuss the future of religion in society, acknowledging the long history of religion and its fundamental role in human culture.
30:17 They touch upon the rise of superstitions and pseudoscience as potential replacements for traditional religion, highlighting the importance of promoting scientific literacy.
32:20 Richard Dawkins discusses a classic study involving pigeons that demonstrates superstitious behavior in animals, linking it to human tendencies to seek patterns and meaning.
34:29 The conversation delves into the psychology of humans perceiving risk and how irrational decision-making often leads to misconceptions about the dangers posed by various actions.
36:45 They explore the idea that humans tend to assign blame when things go wrong, such as blaming a doctor for a vaccination-related incident while accepting natural causes without blame.
52:05 Dawkins reflects on the importance of appreciating the incredible luck of being alive and emphasizes making the most of life, as it's the only one we have.
Made with HARPA AI
Titans of intellect, two of my biggest heroes.
When the one of the greatest biologists and physicists meet
@@HopDavid someone’s mad he’s not as smart as Tyson
Intellects? Psalm 14-1 says otherwise...
@@thehandsomeknight9449 Tyson is a run-of-the-mill scientist, no single scientific accomplishment to his name. This detracts nothing from his importance as science communicator. Dawkins, on the other hand....
@@analoguejerry9066 I’m not sure I’m getting your point here
This has been the most delightful episode to watch in months.
Asked ChatGPT for its 10 commandments (for quality of life):
1. Respect for human dignity and equality
2. Protection of basic human rights, including the right to life, liberty, and security
3. Promotion of justice and fairness for all individuals
4. Practice of empathy and compassion towards others
5. Respect for diversity and tolerance towards differences
6. Responsibility for one's actions and consequences
7. Practice of honesty and integrity in all aspects of life
8. Promotion of cooperation and collaboration towards common goals
9. Stewardship of the environment and natural resources
10. Pursuit of knowledge and understanding through learning and education.
Worship the church of CG! :)
Watching these two talk with each other is just a privilege, every single time. Thanks, guys!
So you love listening to these losers. Wow.
Richard Dawkins teaches the universe came from "literally nothing."
Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it.
We can't get anything from "literally nothing." We can't even get science without God. The laws of nature only can come from a Lawgiver, God.
God is the reason for us and all we have.
ruclips.net/video/JiMqzN_YSXU/видео.html
“However improbable the origin of life might be, we know it happened on Earth because we are here.” -Richard Dawkins.
We only get life from life...the law of biogenesis. We can't get anything without God.
The odds are NOT there.
ruclips.net/video/W1_KEVaCyaA/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/yW9gawzZLsk/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/ddaqSutt5aw/видео.html
No, the eye did not evolve into various eyes. Your mere chance mutations are absurd.
ruclips.net/video/X7h2HWcTwa4/видео.html
Even Dawkins admits we can't know what is true because of natural selection...
The God Delusion, “Since we are creatures of natural selection, we cannot totally trust our senses. Evolution only passes on traits that help a species survive, and not with preserving traits that tell a species what is actually true about life.”
@@2fast2block But you have no problem *assuming* the existence of some all-powerful entity capable of creating the entire universe! This explains precisely *nothing* because you have simply moved back the mystery to an even greater mystery!
@@deborahkeesee7412 atleast we're not making false assumptions like theists
RichardDawkins and Neil DeGrasse Tyson! Two of my favorite people to listen to 💜💚💜
Having been raised in a pentacostal church by parents who expected their children to actually read the Bible, I didn't realize that the other church members (including the pastor and his wife) did NOT read the Bible until I attended several "bible studies" and caught both the pastor and his wife teaching nonsense. No one else noticed it and it was then that I realized no one else had actually read the chapters that the bible study was based on. They all just sat there, waiting to be spoon-fed whatever the pastor decided to teach them. At one point I attempted to correct what was being taught to reflect what was actually in the scripture, and the pastor immediately interrupted me and basically told me to be quiet. I never attended another study and we left that church (along with my beliefs) soon thereafter.
“There seems to be a quotient of nonsense”
Richard Dawkins.
Just today I was listening to some older videos of them talking and debating, and then this pops up. Brilliant
RUclips algorithms do that recommendation thing.
Please add caption in Hindi language so that the subtitle can be seen in Hindi language. This will make your channel most popular in India. Many many congratulations.
💓🌹I am from India
"Alarmingly long career" made me giggle! Seriously though, I hope it will be a lot longer! Great work, Richard! Keep it coming!
Each day he lives, the religious despair. Why can't Satan take him? Satan's afraid...
@@jgarbo3541 Weird that atheists would call ridiculous tales of dinosaurs sorcerously evolving into all kinds of birds as being supported by science. Darwinism is only a silly religion masquerading as a science and vying for a share of the religious market
@@jgarbo3541 I would say that Satan is the good guy to be honest. God murders millions in the bible while Satan only kills 10 people. I know which I'd rather meet in the very unlikely event either exists
Atheist Dawkins made himself filthy rich in preaching a Darwinian evolutionary creation. He can utter just about any nonsense but his disciple will swallow the BS as if it were gourmet food. Atheist Dawkins calls the human eyes designoid objects presenting only an illusion of being designed because acknowledging to their being intelligently designed, programmed and engineered would be admitting for the need for an intelligent designer. Also atheist Dawkins has created a farfetched scenario retracing the evolutionary creation of light sensitive cells that would have migrated from the brain.
what a wonderful treat - tyson and dawkins together. two giants in one clip. thank you
Dawkins who wants to discuss the topic... Tyson who wants to talk about himself and laugh at his own jokes... I only saw one giant
@@GetawayFilms yeah, Tyson is more of an entertainer.
@@jameswest8280 a talented, brilliant entertainer, none the less. Dawkins intellect has very few rivals, living or dead.
Honestly, do not wish to be over dramatic but I could not help the moment deGrasse said 'what if we fail', tears just came into my eyes and my chest significantly tightened... the only reason I quickly picked myself up was Dawkins answer. Thanks for being there for all of us. This is IT. Wonderful, good humoured elegant and sincere interview. Gosh!
Not sure who reads the comments but I’m 22yo and grew up with the both of you being idols of mine. You’re both legends of your respective fields and just want to say I appreciate your contributions and your passion
FYI; I am 67 and I read the comments. As do at least 3 others.
this was a 'real star' talk....so much admiration and respect for Mr.Dawkins...thank you!
Wow, so you respect losers.
Richard Dawkins teaches the universe came from "literally nothing."
Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it.
We can't get anything from "literally nothing." We can't even get science without God. The laws of nature only can come from a Lawgiver, God.
God is the reason for us and all we have.
ruclips.net/video/JiMqzN_YSXU/видео.html
“However improbable the origin of life might be, we know it happened on Earth because we are here.” -Richard Dawkins.
We only get life from life...the law of biogenesis. We can't get anything without God.
The odds are NOT there.
ruclips.net/video/W1_KEVaCyaA/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/yW9gawzZLsk/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/ddaqSutt5aw/видео.html
No, the eye did not evolve into various eyes. Your mere chance mutations are absurd.
ruclips.net/video/X7h2HWcTwa4/видео.html
Even Dawkins admits we can't know what is true because of natural selection...
The God Delusion, “Since we are creatures of natural selection, we cannot totally trust our senses. Evolution only passes on traits that help a species survive, and not with preserving traits that tell a species what is actually true about life.”
I know I’m late to this video but it’s lovely to see these two gentlemen in discussion. Mr. Tyson I think another point in favor of Mr. Dawkins approach to religion is how in some denominations the abuse from the leadership leads to suicide, shunning, depression and other mental health issues. This type of behavior is a detriment to society especially given the fact that most religious people are born into their familial beliefs systems. As an ex Jehovah’s Witness I can vouch that religion when used as a weapon is precise and deadly in many cases figuratively and in extreme instances very literally. Thank you for all your work and tireless fight to promote truth and the sciences.
I love these types of conversations. I love having conversations about science and listening to conversations about science. This was so fascinating. Really, it is. Today just got more interesting!
Did professor Tyson just say "I'm glad you're not dead"?...... Lol
Well i'm glad too. Nothing funnyl
Yep.
That's old people's 'nice to see you'
Keepin it real.
I mean they are both quite old
I love listening to Professor Dawkins almost as much as I love listening to Christopher Hitchens speak. Thanks Professor Tyson.
Great interview of Dr Tyson interviewing Dr Tyson. Also, great to see Sir Richard Dawkins in the audience.
It's always wonderful to listen to Dawkins talk. Especially when we have Tyson and Dawkins. Great interview
Completely appreciate you two explorers. Thanks for this amazing piece of amazingness :) This type of conversation is everything. For anyone to think they know what’s going on is truly sad to me. I agree…they’re missing out so much. I know a lot of folks that are simply not willing to explore honestly for various reasons but they seem to get caught up in ego and it’s not honest exploration. Exciting stuff and glad it’s being discussed. Thanks again for existing and I hope to meet your energies in person one day.
51:40
Neil: Richard it's been great talking to you again
Richard thought bubble: Neil it's been great listening to you again
Quando nos tornamos racionais demais, perdemos a essência que existe dentro de cada ser humano!
@@leiacosta5696 All good, but just stop using computers! which we were able to build using work done by "racionais demais" geniuses! So if you were a little bit consistent with your opinion, you'd be now secluded in a hermitage and I wouldn't be here replying!
@@leiacosta5696 what you mean is unemotional.
Dawkins is so wise that he takes criticism gratefully.
No, he's simply a loser who hates science.
Richard Dawkins teaches the universe came from "literally nothing."
Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it.
We can't get anything from "literally nothing." We can't even get science without God. The laws of nature only can come from a Lawgiver, God.
God is the reason for us and all we have.
ruclips.net/video/JiMqzN_YSXU/видео.html
“However improbable the origin of life might be, we know it happened on Earth because we are here.” -Richard Dawkins.
We only get life from life...the law of biogenesis. We can't get anything without God.
The odds are NOT there.
ruclips.net/video/W1_KEVaCyaA/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/yW9gawzZLsk/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/ddaqSutt5aw/видео.html
No, the eye did not evolve into various eyes. Your mere chance mutations are absurd.
ruclips.net/video/X7h2HWcTwa4/видео.html
Even Dawkins admits we can't know what is true because of natural selection...
The God Delusion, “Since we are creatures of natural selection, we cannot totally trust our senses. Evolution only passes on traits that help a species survive, and not with preserving traits that tell a species what is actually true about life.”
Atheist Dawkins sense of self depreciation is just awesome. He says that his atheist brain would be a designoid object too badly deficient to be the creation of an intelligent entity. his preaching on the human, brain, and other organs as being designoid object that would present only an illusion of being intelligently design is a gospel of absurdity. You can find atheist Dawkins lecture on designoid on RUclips. Dawkins coined the word designoid over 20 years ago, but no definition that could make any sense could be found for the neologism. Meaning of Designoid: That came up by accident but appears to be designed. This definitionof the word Designoid is from the Wiktionary dictionary, ..
What Niel can do in terms of sharing knowledge is equivalent to the best produced video explanations on RUclips- with all the fancy editing and images. Niel can make you visualise with just himself which is truly a rare talent and a much needed one at that.
i'm glad richard dawkins was born. i love him from deep in my heart.. i grow watching him on tv and reading his books.
I love these two human beings! So eloquent and insightful . This interview made my week
Impressive since atheist Dawkins is regarding the human eye, the human brain and all the human organs as having been created through a purposeless, and unintelligently support random evolutionary process.His lecture on designoid object, available on RUclips is a masterpiece of absurdity.
Quite a few years ago when I first found out about Richard Dawkins.I had been agnostic for many years since Jr. High aged, when I witnessed a spectacle at a healing. it was ridiculous and I thought to myself if this is what religion is all about I'll pass. from then on I became an agnostic. then some years ago I was introduced to the Atheist community, and one of the first people I was introduced to was Richard Dawkins. and I couldn't help but think this guy has got to be one of the most intelligent people on the planet. after checking out several of his lectures, I made the decision to become an Atheist. it was one of the best decisions I have ever made for sure. that was back before Christopher Hitchens passed away. Richard Dawkins was at his last lecture, it was one of the saddest things I have seen in a long while. he died about a week later and he is definitely missed. Richard Dawkins had tears in his eyes when he was helping Christopher Hitchens down from the podium, they were good friends. it also show's that Richard Dawkins is not only highly intelligent, but he's also considerate compactionate and has empathy for others. and this also before The God Delusion which by the way is brilliant. since being introducd to the Atheist community, I come to know most all the Atheists that speak out on the benefits of Atheism. such as Neil Degrassi Tyson, and Carl Sagan, (also very much missed) Sam Harris, Aron Ra, Lawrence Krause, Steven Pinker, Matt Dillihunty, and Ed Sheeran, and many more. they all are AWESOME!!!! but I have thank Richard Dawkins for helping me make the decision to become an Atheist. and allowing me to be introduced to all of them.
I like listening to people like these guys! Richard has a fantastic sense of humour!!! 😁😁😁
I always find it cool when highly respected amazing people are in awe of other amazing people.
Believing things that aren't true is never harmless in my opinion. It's hard to imagine ever hitting zero, but really striving to believe as few untrue thing as possible serves the individual and the group well. Hearing these two over the years is something I'm really grateful for.
im a simple man, i read "R. Dawkins", i click.
I'm simpler, I see this tired & overused type of comment and I give it a thumbs down.
@@mavfan1 🤣🤣🤣🤣💀💀💀💀
This whole conversation was like pleasant melodies in my ears. I'm so drained from work and University so this lifted my mood. I'd love part 2.
Oh,yeah,a part 2 would be awesome!
I can relate, uni does overwhelm me and these videos help me relax.
I cannot possibly express my true gratitude to both Richard and Neil for caring enough to work so hard everyday in making the world more scientifically literate. Where would we be right now if not for champions of science math and technology?
This man is just a treasure! We are so lucky to be living along such a man! Keep going strong Professor!
It is a SAD TREND though that many Science-Fans and -Enthusiasts
reject the idea to fwatch and support Science-RUclipsrs blood-related Sibling: The Atheist-Channel.
Science and Atheism is blood-related, so to speak, for a Myriad of reasons.
The episode we've all been waiting so long for! Thank you Neil and Richard!
One of the best teachers of science I've ever had the pleasure of interacting with is Professor Nick Zentner. Professor of Geology at Central Washington University. His online classes (here on RUclips) have opened up the process of science to thousands of people all around the world. I have a feeling it would be wonderful to watch a conversation between Neil and Professor Zentner.
Besides all that Richard also took the time to send in some voice overs for Nightwish's the greatest show on earth. Thanks alot for that :)
So glad to see my two favorite science advocates together. Long live Tyson and Dawkins.
Dear Neil,
Thank you for your years of careful education and teaching in science.
My wife has found this, your latest talk with richard Dawkins on combatting Anti-Science and we’ve begun watching. I have to get ready for work, so we've only gotten 10 minutes in. Thank you for your sharing Dr Dawkins’ latest book, Books Do Furnish a Life, which I have found on Google Books with a 28 page free preview.
Science communication has become more important to me in these last days. My undergraduate degree is in Mathematics and during the COVID-19 shutdown, I was publishing statistics on the virus, its spread, etc. but as a senior citizen, was shocked at the apathy to truth. My wife an I have a joint celebration and commitment to science.
Somehow I stumbled upon Thomas Kuhn’s books, first, The Essential Tension: Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change, and now, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. They are a bit thick and with the free Google preview, enough to whet my appetite for more. Nevertheless, when I encountered the story of Jocelyn Bell Burnell through a New York Times Op-Doc between the two books, I wondered if her discovery of pulsars was normal science. The further I pursued this question, the more contrary it seemed to become.
Are there simpler versions of Kuhn’s books and ideas? (I have yet to find them.) I expect great things from Richard Dawkins’ curiously titled book about the life they furnish. Thank you again for cheering us in this direction. Peace.
What an incredible duo! I watch this podcast and practice my rudiments, very inspiring.
Personally I loved his book, "The Greatest Show on Earth." It is a wonderful overview of evolution that filled in so many gaps in my knowledge. Recommend to everyone.
@m_train1 Read the book. You will have a much better understanding of what that means afterward.
@m_train1 So he shouldn't love and recommend the book then?
I never really understood the whole line of our evolutionary monophyletic taxonomy until the You Tube series 'Systematic Classification of Life' by Aron Ra.
I like Dawkins but he always seemed so here and there and never clearly stated it through out monophyletic line. That's generally my critique of most mainstream science stuff, it's either too vague or too all over the place.
ruclips.net/p/PLXJ4dsU0oGMLnubJLPuw0dzD0AvAHAotW
@m_train1
The colloquial term "theory" is equivalent to the scientific term "hypothesis"....a "theory" is the highest level in science, it is a grouping of scientific laws
ruclips.net/p/PLXJ4dsU0oGMLnubJLPuw0dzD0AvAHAotW
13:45 According to *Quote Investigator*, in 1721 a slim volume titled “A Letter to a Young Gentleman, Lately Enter’d Into Holy Orders by a Person of Quality” was published. The author was Jonathan Swift, and the following salient phrase was included:
_Reasoning will never make a Man correct an ill Opinion, which by Reasoning he never acquired_
It´s so refreshing to listen Richard Dawkings debating with someone who isn´t a creationist or terraplanist.
It's not a debate when 2 people agree.
I like the 'terraplanist'. 😸
@@jwb52z9 No, it's still debate.
@@tgstudio85 The definition of a debate is "a formal discussion on a particular topic in a public meeting or legislative assembly, in which opposing arguments are put forward.". Without the "opposing arguments" bit, it's a discussion, not a debate. They don't disagree.
Seeing Neil this starstruck reminds me how intellectually insignificant I will always be
Be inspired not depressed - don't take anything negative from the conversation! I'm sure you can beat them both at SOMETHING!!
There are few minds in our history that compare to the intellect of Dawkins. There is no shame in recognizing and accepting who you are. Share the knowledge you have with those interested and remember everyone can teach you something. Even if its not what they intend.
The only way to combat "anti science" is not to give talks to biased audiences, is to engage thru the education system.
Kids need to be encouraged to use critical thinking according to their age, not to test them after washing their brains with arithmetics and pre chewed facts about the world that they have to memorize to pass evaluation tests. Creativity should be the core of the education system.
Truth matters. That's where science ranks above the myths of religion. Many did not choose their religion - it was pressed upon them, usually at an early age. Science is the antidote to superstition.
"If religious instruction were not allowed until the child had attained the age of reason, we would be living in a quite different world." - Christopher Hitchens
@@RusselKabirTR In North Korea they press fairy tales of the supernatural leader upon the children. Not too different from religion, but very very different from science/ rational thinking.
John hunter . Thats a very narrow minded reflection on religion. I'm a faith based Christian not a religious Christian. Have you ever been taught what the bible actually means or is saying to us . The bible is a one time book with a beginning and an end . Its full of hope and promise where as science has no beginning no end no hope and no promise .
@@michaelmarshall9132 More than you know...
@@jrhunter007 more than I know what ? . My mum was in her early forties and me and my sister were in our teens when we was introduced to christ so not all Christians have it rammed down their throats from an age of not understanding. I do agree that religious people force their kids into it but not all .
Neil said “I didn’t know pigeons had shoulders”🤣😂🤣☺️
Well some people call our Shoulder Blades, Angel Wings so what's the Pigeon Wings connect to???
Don't all Reptiliomorphs have shoulders? Well, Tetropods like Tiktaalik/Icanthostega/Ichthyostega. Both we and dinosaurs share that line and Pigeons are dinosaurs in monophyletic taxonomy.
Thanks to both of you. We satched this program with family and enjoyed it greatly.
It is a SAD TREND though that many Science-Fans reject the idea to fwatch and support Science-RUclipsrs blood-related Sibling: The Atheist-Channel.
That Atheist-RUclipsrs have nothing to say
is a silly Myth, so lemme; excuse the Randomness; recommend you some:
Belief It Or Not, Genetically Modified Sceptic, Viced Rhino, Godless Grandma,
Hbomberguy and Illuminaughtii. Oh, and Forrest Valkai.
Science and Atheism is blood-related, so to speak, for a Myriad of reasons.
Well, personally I am trying to watch science related programs and documentaries as much as I can in you-tube or other channels, but under one condition. The scientist should be known to me either personally by having read their books in advance or by being introduced by someone or some reliable source. There are lots of them in different channels BBC, NG, Curiosity, etc. so we have to prioritize them wisely.
In here I know both of them for a long time now, and have read many books from them especially from Prof Dawkins and even have introduced them to others to enjoy.
@@daryabaghdar4340 "In here I know both of them for a long time now, and have read many books from them especially from Prof Dawkins and even have introduced them to others to enjoy."
"We satched this program with family and enjoyed it greatly."
Wow, you're so caring that you show lies these two losers give to your family to enjoy.
Richard Dawkins teaches the universe came from "literally nothing."
Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it.
We can't get anything from "literally nothing." We can't even get science without God. The laws of nature only can come from a Lawgiver, God.
God is the reason for us and all we have.
ruclips.net/video/JiMqzN_YSXU/видео.html
“However improbable the origin of life might be, we know it happened on Earth because we are here.” -Richard Dawkins.
We only get life from life...the law of biogenesis. We can't get anything without God.
The odds are NOT there.
ruclips.net/video/W1_KEVaCyaA/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/yW9gawzZLsk/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/ddaqSutt5aw/видео.html
No, the eye did not evolve into various eyes. Your mere chance mutations are absurd.
ruclips.net/video/X7h2HWcTwa4/видео.html
Even Dawkins admits we can't know what is true because of natural selection...
The God Delusion, “Since we are creatures of natural selection, we cannot totally trust our senses. Evolution only passes on traits that help a species survive, and not with preserving traits that tell a species what is actually true about life.”
To 2fast2block:
Well, apparently you are way way behind in science advancement in subatomic realm. I suggest you follow physicists in quantum realm and find out that thermodynamic laws that you are referring to goes only to certain level down in subatomic atomic level. Beyond that you have to deal with quantum theory.
Your answer is there! Search for it.
Even my grade 10 kid knows a lot about quantum principles, I’m sure you will enjoy it too.
Again my suggestion to you is update your knowledge about physics and and everything around you.
@@daryabaghdar4340 your blah-blah gave nothing to address what I gave and prove it wrong.
Neil... let Dawkins finish his thoughts! Jeeze!
Anyhoo... thank you both. You two changed my life over a decade ago. Without you two, I wouldn't have been able to solidify my exit from religious indoctrination when I was teetering on the edge of logic versus faith. Long story short, you two saved my life. Thank you, Richard. Thank you, Neil.
I know, right? It was 80% Neil and 20% Richard -- and Richard was the guest.
Agree 100%. I know that NDT just can't help himself... he just loves to talk (and we do love him for it much of the time)... but he really needs to let his guest get in a word too. His questions were longer than Dawkins answers!
This was one of the very few times I had wished Neil would have talked less and allowed Richard to talk more. Still great, but not enough from Richard.
Yes-this is my only complaint about NGT. He loves the sound of his own voice. I do, too, of course, but sometimes he’s not the only one there worth listening to
The Selfish Gene was brilliant. That was one of the books that had a big impact on my understanding of evolution, and it's still as relevant now as it was then.
Neil: " You are being rational again Richard!"
Richard: "sorry".
That made my day.
since there's no comments on Spotify thank you Neil for JRE on Wednesday this week
@Stàr Tàlk fake
Two people that I enjoy and respect very much......who also have that feeling for each other.
Thank you to both.
.......and.......
Star Talk is SO enjoyable WITHOUT your "morning juk-yuk DJ" sidekick.
I really love Richard darkens a lot. his mind is beautiful!
> his mind is beautiful
Considering his views of trans people and his outright Islamaphobia, I don't think that's an accurate statement.
@@Eleglas well he is against religion in general so I’m not sure islamaphobia is the correct term to describe his views
@@theroyalgamer5871 Hi is, but he targets people following Islam with some significant vitriol. Unprompted he regularly drops some dicey stuff on Twitter about Islam and it's followers. His views on Islam are way stronger than on any other religion.
Dawkins was awarded a Humanitarian Award in 1996 but it was revoked from him recently for his views that are very contrary to the ideas of humanism. One of their stated reasons for doing so was: "Dawkins has over the past several years accumulated a history of making statements that use the guise of scientific discourse to demean marginalized groups, an approach antithetical to humanist values."
I too am an Atheist and against the idea of organised religion, but Dawkins gives us all a bad name. He purpetuates the view of the "angry atheist" way more than he helps in any relevant discussions/arguments on the subject of religion.
Respected professor Dawkins,you are very right in saying that you want that everyone must enjoy the beauty and wonder of the scientific truths through your hard work in writing books.I really enjoy reading your books.Thanks. 🙏🙏
It is also essential to address the societal factors that enable pseudoscience to flourish, such as distrust in authority, economic inequalities, and cultural barriers to scientific acceptance. Building trust requires accountability within the scientific community and inclusivity in research that reflects diverse perspectives and concerns. By fostering an environment where evidence-based reasoning is valued, we can reduce the influence of pseudoscience and empower society to make informed decisions based on reality rather than rhetoric.
A profoundly wonderful interview, Dr. Tyson. Your questions brought out Dr. Dawkins' most interesting insights about religious beliefs and the need to communicate the true nature of science and how it is employed to explain a much greater creation than that which religion portrays.
Eventhough I agree with what you said up into the point when you said the true way the Universe was Created on this wording alone I would reply nobody knows the True way it was created. Only Theory's...
@@steve-o6413 that's not what he said, but you're still wrong.