@@Johnnystammy What ??? - you think everyone is a freemason ? Interesting. Can't be though since you'd be one & this shall mean you are not allowed to challenge others :)
I don't think it was necessary. Dawkins has always unfairly been called "strident." There's nothing wrong with speaking one's mind and getting to the point. Hitchens was far more aggressive, and he never seemed to be criticized for it.
"What goes on in your head" Only someone with Richard Dawkins accent can make that sound like a polite question. Anyone else would hear the words: "You are a mental case, aren't you"
Have a look at this mental case situation : en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A._C._Grayling Quote : Among his contributions to the discussion about religion in contemporary society he argues that there are three separable, though naturally connected debates: (a) a metaphysical debate about what the universe contains; denying that it contains supernatural agencies of any kind makes him an atheist; (b) a debate about the basis of ethics; taking the world to be a natural realm of natural law requires that humanity thinks for itself about the right and the good, based on our best understanding of human nature and the human condition; this makes him a humanist; (c) a debate about the place of religious movements and organisations in the public domain; as a secularist Grayling argues that these should see themselves as civil society organisations on a par with trade unions and other NGOs, with every right to exist and to have their say, but no greater right than any other self-constituted, self-selected interest group. Take this line (a) a metaphysical debate about what the universe contains; denying that it contains supernatural agencies of any kind makes him an atheist; Unquote 'THAT is psychic remote viewing psychic special powers dark art not the scientific method. It also explains why every single book written by Dawkins has no science but a novel metaphysical stream of consciousness. Typical Hegelism through Marxism - you remove the obstacles which stand in the way of ALL degrees of freedom with METAPHYSICS. Oh nice !! all the hardship concerned with binary opposition removed & they can just use lie propaganda to fans about 'only using the scientific method' concerning how they draw their conclusions - every covert politically motivated marxist does that. Lets face it Mr Dawkins followers have had absolutely NO IDEA that new atheism is puling this scam after ALL they ranted and ranted and ranted and ranted and ranted. and ranted and ranted and ranted ABOUT THESE SUPERNATURALLY BASED SCAMS !!!!! Thus its really DEFINATLY high time the sickest version of them all it ended in view of the fact he embellishes this blatant confidence trick with rant after rant after rant @ all the other KOOKS just for the realism !!, Dawkins ? - please shut this sordid obscene esoteric level hypocrisy cake hole please. I mean what will new athiem jump out on us suddenly with next ? - an implementation of the teachings of Mao Zedong ???? Hes where he is off the slave trade anyway. www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/9091007/Slaves-at-the-root-of-the-fortune-that-created-Richard-Dawkins-family-estate.html Can hardly tell the difference between them except the outfits !!
As a psychiatrist, I would not venture to say much as I don’t know him, but these are all symptoms of personality disturbances or disorders. Mainly I’m picking up paranoid personality and schizotypal personality characteristics. They would be disorders if he is not functional. Apart from that extremely intelligent, you wouldn’t be able to tell anything. Lovely man tbh
@@Hola-ro6yv no I’m just saying. And just a fast shocker : all prophets were something we call schizoaffective disorder. Manic features predominant. Is that like a sledge hammer? It’s just facts. Not much to do about it really.
@@ahmederfan8983 Are you assuming he's not in any genuine communication with the dead? If so, they why? Also, how are you defining "disorder"? And what is meant by a "personality disturbance"? Are such disorders and "personality disturbances" undesirable? In what way are they, if so?
@@Existentialist946there's no scientific evidence at all to support speaking to spirits and the unseen, it's very interesting how the only looking glass this is supposedly channelling through is also a former marketing specialist and an individual who can clearly convince himself of anything.
@@RobertCro no attack, you project that No disagreement, you also project that The “evidence” is self evident, objective as much as it is subjective If you deny either objectivity or subjectivity, you’re only seeing half the truth, and cast other as shadow
Back in the late 1970s, a friend who was a union stagehand in Texas shared his experience working at a faith healer's "show." The ushers and associates of the faith healer engaged in small talk with attendees to gather personal information. They also noted if someone in a wheelchair could stand or if someone on crutches could walk unaided. During the "healings," an accomplice relayed this information to the faith healer through a tiny earpiece hidden in his ear. They utilized an induction loop system that operates on electromagnetism, not standard radio frequencies. The earpiece, small and discreetly tucked into the healer's ear canal, consisted of a simple electrical circuit and did not need a battery. Had James Randi's engineer investigated this charlatan, he would not have detected any radio signals.
Great interview, thank you very much. Although a hardcore scientist, Richard still has what seems to me like an unconscious or even conscious emerging longing for the world which can’t be described scientifically. I appreciate very much the fact that he let’s his interviewee talk freely, without interrupting. Turns out, the interviewee really has a point..
Or he's on to something currently outside your realm of personal experience? Just because someone is good at selling vacuum cleaners doesn't mean that all of a sudden vacuum cleaners don't exist 😂
@@davidgommeren7283 Which if wholly true, proves my point, and I’m sure you’d never want that. The fact is: the concept of speaking to the dead exists, you cannot deny this, otherwise how do you explain why millions of people engage with the activity, and I would like to suggest that humans will always engage with the activity throughout all of time, this activity occurs within dreams too. Even if your waking mind refuses to engage with this activity, your dreaming mind won't have a problem with it. The dreaming mind is not blocked by rationality. You your self are capable of having such a dream and might even find it emotionally rewarding. This does not prove that there is a 'spirt world' more that there's a part of you that does engage with this type of thinking and there's nothing your rational mind can do about it! The expectation that humans all adopt Dawkins rational mind set, is wholly unrealistic and a ridiculous expectation. The truth is your last statement about vacuum cleaners is half true… you can sell 100 vacuum cleaners and take the money without the 100 vacuum cleaners existing to sell in the first place. Which is essentially what your argument is in regards to Craig Hamilton. I personally would say that I’m open to the idea the Craig Hamilton has the ability to speak to the dead. I can’t claim to know this for certain. Dawkins seems to be coming from a place of certainty in regards to this subject which I find problematic, how can anyone be certain on such a profound topic? Being critical is perfectly acceptable, but certain feels blindsided, unable to see the whole landscape and against the quest for truth. "The left hemisphere doesn't know what it doesn't know, as far as its concerned what it doesn't know doesn't exist!" - Iain McGilchrist
@@dream-analysisUKOh so he's had a unique experience where spirits only speak to him personally but never make themselves known to a group? Sounds like a hot scam.
Richard, thank you very much for this forthright, respectful and insightful conversation that sets the highly constructive tone that needs to be achieved if people of such differing belief systems are ever to make any progress. I have a background in medical science and currently undergoing medium training under the auspices of the spiritualist church. I very much maintained a similar sceptical position as yourself until my daughter died under tragic circumstances in recent years. Shortly following her death certain metaphysical events began occurring in our house, amongst which was a mystifying event of a novelty light - a large sphere that could alternate through various colours - starting turning itself on at certain times and glow red for several minutes before switching off. This would not happen at random times but seemingly in response to significant events: when her ashes were returned and placed next to the light, when a favourite song of hers was played, the moment her mother returned home after a holiday, when her boyfriend visited, when I asked her to visit and in response to many other questions etc. To date I have documented over 60 events in 2 years. It could be put down to some psychic or telekinetic process from us, but it has happened in our (her parents) absence as well, as when a friend of her minded the house, and her sister's presence. These weird events lead me to engage a medium, who behaved very professionally (asked me no questions at all about why I was there, about who I wanted to speak to etc) and she gave me extremely specific information about the event of her passing, who she was as a person with very accurate description of how she dressed, sense of humour, her artistic achievements. Finally she delivered some specific knowledge that only my daughter could have known which related to the name of my business - my daughter had named my company and my wife was the only other person that knew this fact. Around this time my previously held scepticism was in an uncomfortable conflict with the events I had experienced for the past year. I am no dill, I had done well at school, I was aware of what constituted rational and critical thinking and I found that what I was presented with via the senses did not at all cohere with my belief that consciousness exists within the bookends of birth and death. So I started mediumship training with an open mind and in faith, being prepared for whatever the journey would present me with and deal with each step with both my rational and intuitive mind intact. What I have found on this journey of 15 months is: • Most mediums, certainly of the Spiritualist church, are very similar in character as Craig Hamilton Parker - honest, sincere, intelligent, well-motivated, introspective, self-critical, reasonably humble and in search of truth as they perceive and experience it. • Mediumship is trained with standards that strongly discourage "cheating" - cold reading, mentalism, even psychic reading to a degree since it is highly undesirable to pull information telepathically from the mind of a sitter as you brought up in the interview. • Mediumship is normally taught with a very codified method that focuses on making a contact with a spirit that presents themself, then training oneself to remove one's own mental processes and thoughts, opinions, interpretations as those communications are processed and told to the recipient. The training emphasises strongly removing the ego and sense of self from the process. • Most mediums do not train for glamour and glory of TV shows, essentially using mediumship as entertainment, although it certainly exists. Most mediums, in my experience, are initially propelled by some bereavement (like myself) or grief scenario which then evolves into the sort of motivations you see in counsellors, therapists, and allied health professionals. At this stage I hold very similar outlook to Craig and I feel I have been duly vigilant against chicanery, credulity and naivety in this course of investigation. There is as a matter of necessity a question of having to maintain a certain 'suspension of disbelief' as particular questions don't make sense: 'why _doesn't_ spirit communicate the truth about string theory?', 'why is communication so symbolic and not literal?', 'why isn't it more accurate?'. But for each element that induces a return to sceptical disbelief my rational mind is at a loss to explain how there are so many instances of inordinate accuracy that can't be explained by dodgy reading techniques or sheer luck. Accurate information *is* being provided. Some sort of metaphysical consciousness exists and this mystery beckons the curious. I think your conversation with Craig is enormously important because scepticism is as important to mediumship as any other element. Humans are full of failings and holding ourselves to account is all too easy. Mediums need to continually improve their craft, clarify their intention and adhere to ethics. I hope that you find more in this topic that interests you and conduct more interviews.
How ironic. "There will come a day when belief will be replaced with evidence" is an entirely faith-based assertion with no supporting evidence whatsoever.
The intro where Dr. Dawkins said he doesn't seem to be a charlatan like most "mediums" / psychics and that he's articulate and intelligent seems like another way of saying he's smart enough to buy his own bs because he sells himself on it first.
I think that some people believe that what they are doing is supernatural. There are a few people (e.g. Derren Bown) who understand that cold reading, and the like, is a natural skill that can be honed.
@@cameroncameron2826 Saw a HUGE Masonic symbol on a building in Galway once. Odd how they SEEM to have disappeared in this world of conspiracy theorists.
@@mozartsbumbumsrus7750 Quite possible. Whenever I research old Hollyrot quotes more and more sources claim different originators. Frankly I prefer the idea of Groucho as the source as I am a huge fan. Sooo, thank you.
Or Frederico Faggin the acclaimed inventor and scientist who believes that who we are as conscious entities is not in the material universe at all - that material is the symbolic expression or manifestation of consciousness. Or something like that!
Okay, so this "spirit world", do the spirits just live there forever when they die? Like, for eternity? How does that work? What do they do with all their time? Think about that. Eternity. Billions of years would pass. Trillions. Quadrillions. Centillions. What are you supposed to do with so much time? You can read every book ever written, hear every song, do everything, learn about everything imaginable in the entire universe and beyond, take a nap that lasts 900 trillion years, and STILL have ETERNITY left. And it just keeps going. It never ends. It goes on forever, and you can't stop it. Is this really our fate? Or could it possibly be, oh I don't know, a fairy tale? And "talking with the dead" is just as perplexing, because what if someone in the United States is communicating with Abraham Lincoln but somebody else in France is trying to communicate with him? And then four other people around the world at the same time are trying to. Does Abraham Lincoln have to put them on hold, like call waiting? Also, why not interview dead ancient Egyptians to tell us detailed information on how the pyramids were built, or ask Amelia Earhart and Jimmy Hoffa where and how they died, or who killed the Black Dahlia, or who is the zodiac killer, the list just goes on. It's so beyond silly, and truly sad, that adults believe in the supernatural. It sets society back.
There's plenty of research on Near Death Experience and testimonials on the after life....I suggest you do a youtube search for Dr Bruce Greyson on NDE's.
Like a convicted criminal that is in fact guilty, insisting on his innocence (falsely) for years becomes so fluid in his lie that his well honed disingenuous sincerity influences others to believe him. Or an inconsequential event retold years on end evolves into a more extraordinary description of the event. A minor action becomes an heroic life saving intervention. And the person may not realize how the retelling exaggerates the event over time.
To each his own …of course theres genuine readers..they’ve always existed, for one… the indigenous long ago, skilled readers are not ppl pleasers, if a skeptic encounters a genuine one they’ll know because they know…. The belief matters not ..
I wonder why these mediums aren't used or do not offer services the relatives of murdered people to apprehend the killers? Is there a prohibition for those denizens of the "spirit world" to rat out the living who prematurely ended their life? Or do the dead in the spirit world have to go through an apprenticeship of many years before they can go through the mediums mind? I think this is a kind of predation on the grief of people. False seconds of seeming to reconnect with a loved one who has passed. Skilled grifters, even this seemingly "honest" fellow who believes in his "gift". In the event there is a so called spirit world why the F don't they visit their relatives directly? Why go thru a stranger? Bullocks
yep, this is the biggest issue i have with these people and any kind of "medium". at best they are naive and ignorant, at worst the are predatory while pretending to want to help people (for their own profit). disgusting and delusional.
In the U. S. psychics have been consulted in cases (years ago), and proved to be worthless. Seems to me former President Reagan or his wife consulted a psychic.
@@ZER0--hmm I wonder why those agencies would use their services if they were completely useless. It’s almost as though they have some utility. “Shocking “
How many people in spirit would know their murderers, or have knowledge that would provide evidence I wonder? Most murderers are known to the victim and where there isn't successful prosecutions it's generally down to the evidence ie underworld killings and hits etc. Where it's a random killing, well, would the person in spirit necessarily know more than when they were alive? Some random person killed them, that much they would know, but beyond that, what would they know? The question about the 'apprenticeship' is interesting though, maybe that's a skill to be learned? Sounds fair. As far as the second statement, mediums have helped me to a degree to process my daughter's death but it's no panacea, you still grieve your loss in the most painful manner. Having used both a medium and a grief counsellor I would say there isn't a lot of difference between the two, both help you process it, but neither relieve the agony of loss significantly. Lastly, it seems to be an intuitive, not rational connection, so not everybody has the same kind of . Also, I did have unusual experiences that suggested my daughter visited me, so there's that too.
I’m sorry Richard, but if you think all mediums are charlatans, why are you cutting this guy slack? Do you just think he is mentally ill? He has to be one of the other, as what he describes isn’t born out in reality.
In this day and age, Richard Dawkins should acknowledge that the paranormal is a genuine phenomenon; accept it and get over it, which of course is impossible for him to do, that would give religion a foot in the door.
I'm a very firm atheist but I have occasionally re-imagined the 'classic' idea of the afterlife as instead the real physical continuation of the physical and biochemical wave(s) (incl biological offspring) that were put in place whilst one is/was (blurring the distinction slightly on purpose), alive. This concept would also have nothing to do with the legacy idea of 'souls' that are separable from existent-bodies/beings, whatsoever! In addition to some obvious ones like starting a company, country, religion or any kind of coherent group, I think that there are many types of other dynamic (for example meme-based) structures that could well-apply to this 'afterlife' idea: Examples could be the ideas inside collections of words, sounds, pictures, sculptures, movies or code (demoscene) etc. In terms of biology and consciousness, I think we might hopefully be starting to get some idea where some very interesting types of memory really ultimately live too (See Michael Levin's work!) The trained worm remembers the training even if its head/brain gets cut off and it has to regrow it! I definitely lean towards a "telepathy/fancy-cold-reading" explanation for positive readings (there's potential for that to be quite fancy and currently unknown by science!) And I'd say that being-in-the-presence-of the person is more likely to be the conduit for any potential high-density-information to get through (sight/sound/smell/heat/behavior can transmit a great deal of information that could feed ones intuitive inferences) rather than thinking that it could be transmission via some kind of special waves or connection that we can't measure! (there's no evidence for spirit-WIFI afaik!) I would also deny any kind of claim to wholeness-of-being of the dead person if indeed there is real information somehow propagating here. In my view, it must be from the continuation of the dynamic ripples that were made when the person was alive. They (once they're dead-as-an-organism) don't have a body, but the dead person could still be seen to be making decisions or taking actions by having their mind 'emulated' by the remaining-rememberers. Continuing their wishes, as it were, and you can see this as continuing their 'being' a little bit into the afterlife as well, if you're ok with seeing things this way. I thought this was an incredibly worthwhile and so wonderfully neutral discussion of each others point of view and found it deeply fascinating! Keep up the utterly brilliant work Richard!
I understand what the medium is talking about. I had those same "feelings" when I had a psychotic episode and schizophrenia after that. Realizing it was schizophrenia has slowly made the symptoms disappear. It's difficult to hold on to sanity. So many people and things make it so hard to live well, balanced, feel included or understood. We look for the magic in the world. But we must find real magic, see the world in its best light, not make up a world we wished we lived in, in our heads. Unless of course, it's to turn that dream to a reality. Make real magic! ❤
I cannot understand why Prof. Dawkins has 'replayed' this video. He may say Craig Hamilton is not out to deceive people but Prof. Dawkins knows what this man claims to be able to do is something he cannot possibly do.
I think Dawkins is acknowledging that Hamilton may actually believe what he is saying. Whilst I am certain that the vast majority of people who claim to talk to spirits are fraudsters, I am also sure there will be a few who genuinely believe that they are communicating with the dead.
Take a note of what is below : en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A._C._Grayling Quote : Among his contributions to the discussion about religion in contemporary society he argues that there are three separable, though naturally connected debates: (a) a metaphysical debate about what the universe contains; denying that it contains supernatural agencies of any kind makes him an atheist; (b) a debate about the basis of ethics; taking the world to be a natural realm of natural law requires that humanity thinks for itself about the right and the good, based on our best understanding of human nature and the human condition; this makes him a humanist; (c) a debate about the place of religious movements and organisations in the public domain; as a secularist Grayling argues that these should see themselves as civil society organisations on a par with trade unions and other NGOs, with every right to exist and to have their say, but no greater right than any other self-constituted, self-selected interest group. Take this line (a) a metaphysical debate about what the universe contains; denying that it contains supernatural agencies of any kind makes him an atheist; Unquote 'THAT is psychic remote viewing psychic special powers dark art not the scientific method. It also explains why every single book written by Dawkins has no science but a novel metaphysical stream of consciousness. Typical Hegelism through Marxism - you remove the obstacles which stand in the way of ALL degrees of freedom with METAPHYSICS. Oh nice !! all the hardship concerned with binary opposition removed & they can just use lie propaganda to fans about 'only using the scientific method' concerning how they draw their conclusions - every covert politically motivated marxist does that. Lets face it Mr Dawkins followers have had absolutely NO IDEA that new atheism is puling this scam after ALL they ranted and ranted and ranted and ranted and ranted. and ranted and ranted and ranted ABOUT THESE SUPERNATURALLY BASED SCAMS !!!!! Thus its really DEFINATLY high time the sickest version of them all it ended in view of the fact he embellishes this blatant confidence trick with rant after rant after rant @ all the other KOOKS just for the realism !!, Dawkins ? - please shut this sordid obscene esoteric level hypocrisy cake hole please. I mean what will new athiem jump out on us suddenly with next ? - an implementation of the teachings of Mao Zedong ???? Hes where he is off the slave trade anyway. www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/9091007/Slaves-at-the-root-of-the-fortune-that-created-Richard-Dawkins-family-estate.html Can hardly tell the difference between them except the outfits !!
I didn’t think the ‘medium’ was a charlatan and I don’t dislike him. However, what this displays is respect from one of my favourite people on the planet. My no 1 dinner guest is Richard Dawkins.
I don't believe he is tapping into the spirit world. I do however think it is possible that he is tapping into the universal consciousness which can come to us, inspire us and show us many insightful revelations which are discussed briefly at the tail end of the video. Dreams, intuition, meditation are merely pathways into the universal consciousness. The energy that someone has during their lifetime doesn't necessarily go away completely, but becomes part of this and can be drawn from with or without conscious thought.
Some mediums are astounding, in my opinion. My understanding is that we are subconsciously connected to those nearest to us, that that connection remains after death and is transmissable to a medium's receptive mind-as a transmission. An understanding which is a work in progress.
Your response is ignorant and aggressive. Much more learned, more specialised minds than yours have done years of research in this area. I like to listen to them to see how my own research aligns and open my mind to other considerations. I don't necessarily have to agree with everything they say, but often I come to do so by my own further consideration and research. Life is a learning curve.@@anthonyjohnson6973
I said that my understanding is that....my UNDERSTANDING. I don't have to prove anything. It is a matter of considerable interest to me, and I have investigated it broadly with an open mind. Findings boggled my mind,@@anthonyjohnson6973and gave me much to think about.
Please give the clairvoyant a break. Very intelligent person, provides well spoken and fascinating responses. How very interesting the angle he uses covers all bases, never really fell down on a question no matter the difficulty. Regardless if you believe him or not you have to give him credit for standing his ground intelligently and forcing Richard to agree in some cases
it's interesting how he says ''it's usually in the form of claire sentient'' seeing as that's the most difficult for to prove and the easiest to mistake
"The Enemies of Reason" was a great series. It was good to see Prof. Dawkins turn his attention to a subject like pseudoscience, which sorely needed some of his rationality up it but at the same time wasn't a bitterly divisive subject like religion, likely to cause people to reject in advance what they didn't want to hear. I doubt _too_ many felt "personally attacked" when Richard mauled homeopathy, mediums, or dowsing (!) and I thought it would do viewers good to see Professor Dawkins apply his scientific approach to subjects that they weren't so personally invested in. It's shame that Channel 4 insisted on those lurid, tabloid titles for their Dawkins documentaries, e.g. "Root of all Evil?" "Enemies of Reason" "Faith Schools Menace" and so on. They certainly had a "house style" with those titles, but it cheapened things. That said, I do recall seeing an omnibus repeat of "Root of all Evil?" which had the correct title ("The God Delusion") restored, which was an aesthetic relief. I wonder what Richard's preferred title was for "The Enemies of Reason"? I rather like the title that the Sunday Times gave to its review of the series: "The Gullible Age."
I thought Richard was a respectful interviewer, he didn't interrupt Craig, even though he is openly a sceptic about such matters. I believe Craig is genuine, I have experience many things that science can't currently explain. I hope Richard does in time have some experience himself.
If science can’t currently explain something, then it’s unexplained. In all cases where an explanation was previously unavailable, and then an explanation became available at a later time, the explanation has always been scientific and never ‘supernatural’. There’s no shame in saying, “I don’t know”, or, “Currently, I can’t explain this”. Assigning an explanation to a phenomenon that itself can’t be explained is of little or no value.
I sincerely want to believe that all mediumship is a con. Then I came across a medium who so accurately described the macabre means of murder of two children in the Chad & Lori Daybell case, in Idaho. I'm listening to this timely video with well thought out reasoning and questioning. Thank you.
@@jacksonelmore6227 This is so profound of you. I give you another profound quote from Deepak. "In the absence of a conscious entity the moon remains a radically ambiguous and ceaselessly flowing quantum soup"
Charlatan being a charlatan. Awfully convenient answers that 'explain' why they can't just ask a spirit what it's like in the spirit realm. It's always something extremely vague that they ask and also likely to coincide with, at the very least, one person's experiences. If you say "I see a boxy, red car." to a room full of people, where a lot of those people are extremely likely to have seen or had experience with a boxy, red car... you're going to get one person (at least) say something like, "Oh, my father had an old red car that was basically box-shaped." Craig specifically used the example of the spilled green paint as just a way of saying, 'Look. See. How can I be making all this up when it was an event that had happened without the audience member having knowledge of that.' Great, you had a lucky moment to add to your repertoire of tools to con people - often vulnerable people - into believing there is something in this utter nonsense. I'm only 6 minutes and 41 seconds into this video. I'll persevere and watch the rest because - who knows - I might have my mind completely changed by the end of the video. We'll see. I'll edit this comment if that is indeed the case.
Great questions Richard! They're what I'd have asked too. The spiritualist church has the most boring services- nothing uplifting to keep humans engaged with their " higher mind" or giving them food for thought. They really are more interested in their psychics seeing someones pet dog in spirit showing up. Thanks for this ❤
24:57 - here he got him. Then RD changed the subject. Albert Russel Wallace was a confirmed spiritualist by 1866. However, I don't believe he is a true medium or that such things exist. They both seem to be delusional. Hmmm
The problem with Richard Dawkins is that he is a mirror opposite fundamentalist. And, moreover, his atheism is based on a series of presuppositions that he cannot demonstrate to be true, such as metaphysical materialism. He fails to have noticed that some scientism died around the mid twentieth century.
yep he definitely spent time in advertising , he knows how to agree with you but at the same time , sells you his product , bit of truth helps the lies go away .
Many when they get a hit they run with it, embellish it to reinforce it and make it sound more accurate. I like this guy compared to many I've seen. He definitely seems genuine in his beliefs. Many seem to be in for the money and notoriety.
"Why don't the spirits communicate clearly instead of giving these sort of, vague messages?" "Ummmm...." "And how do you go about interpreting or gathering anything of value from these vague messages?" "Ummmm...."
Ok, the "energy" of living beings "sticks" around? Tell me, is that energy subject to physical forces? If not, how does it even move with earth? Earth stays in orbit of the sun, the sun stays in orbit of the galaxy center due to gravity. So is this energy subject to interact with matter and natural forces? So we could detect it easily. If it does not interact with the physical world, how does it keep up with earth? Why is that energy "stuck" at a specific place on earth that is constantly moving? A lot of those ideas aren't really thought through. This is like most movies involving ghosts that can "phase" through matter. How do they actually stick to the surface of earth and keep up with the movement? If they do not collide with matter (earth, the wall of a building, the air molecules), why can they even stay in the same place. When they are actually colliding, they would leave an equal and opposite reaction on that thing they collide with and that could be detected. Imagine how many ghosts are out there... Or do ghosts eventually die as well and are gone for good? There's so much BS attached to the idea that isn't even half-baked.
I spoke to my dead father. I did not believe and asked many questions and each time , my father amswered rightly for all questions. I am MTech post gtadiate in engg and moreratipnal than most people. i say those whp do not nelieve my words can meet me and we can debate.
I know a women who claims she sees dead people. I believe she is sincere, but she is either hallucinating or taking drugs. I do know that some drugs prescribed for depression have caused one of my cousins to hallucinate. She sees ghosts, but she is well aware she is hallucinating, because she has told me so. She realizes the depression drug she takes causes the hallucinations. My late father-in-law had hallucinations of people and objects a year before his death. Oddly, he realized he was hallucinating. The strangest thing my late father-in-law did one day was tell my wife and I he was seeing out of his left eye. He had lost vision in his left eye, years earlier. We had taken him to an eye doctor multiple times over the years. He could barely see a hand waving two feet in front of that eye, so there was no doubt he had lost his vision in that eye. I assumed he was confused and actually seeing out of his right eye, so I decided to test his vision. My wife and I were shocked when he actually was able to read some texts on a clock with his right eye covered. He could also tell us the time. I changed the time on the clock and he got the time right. Later that day he was not seeing out of that eye. The eye doctor thought we were nuts when we mentioned that incident during the next eye test. My father-in-law He was diagnosed with Lewy Body dementia, six months before his death, at age 95. Therefore, I do think some people may be physiologically prone to hallucinations. I do not believe anyone actually communicates with the dead, but some people obviously believe they can do that.
How does an evolutionary biologist challenge a psychic? They ask, "Can you foresee the day when humans evolve the ability to understand your predictions?"
If there's a risidual "spirit" in any given location, does that mean the spirit world is gravitationally (or by some other force) tethered to that location given that Earth is rotating; it's orbiting a star; that star is orbiting a giant black hole; and the galaxy is moving with the expansion of space and also towards Andromeda?
I wonder if he has a split brain condition where the two sides of his brain “talk” to each other. Where for most people this happens unconsciously, perhaps he is slightly conscious of it and it seems as if there is sincerely a second voice.
I believe these two opposite views of the world (scientism and paranormal, or religious) need to both lie down their weapons and get together to answer the biggest problem that humanity has to tackle, "WHAT HAPPENS WHEN WE DIE? AND HOW CAN WE AVOID DEATH OR DEFEAT DEATH?" Can we use scientific inquiry, like unbiased scientific inquiry to find the truth once and for all??? Without attacking each other but rather asking. Maybe some can look in the physical material world while others look at the transcendental dimensions of existence. Let's unite forces to actually do some work.
Alternate title: "Richard Dawkins Calmly Talks to the Brain Dead". When one uses his GUT for thinking purposes we must remember that the gut it full of shit.
You can't prove the psychic is wrong, but the sheer banality of the spirit messages makes you think it's more of a performance between him and his audience. If he could pass on a credible message from Einstein or Tesla, even Richard Dawkins would find that hard to dismiss.
What would be a credible message? A better way would be to scientifically test claims like they’ve tried to do with ESP research, just avoid being too excited when you get results that are slightly better than chance, as we’ve seen before
I’ve been at Gettysburg after the sun set and felt terror, anguish, fear like I’ve never experienced. I was a Marine Sargent, Vietnam vet and don’t believe in a bunch of hocus-pocus bullshit but I know what I experienced there. People don’t die in graveyards but they do in battlefields and perhaps there is something of them remaining at the point of death???
I feel for the mediums clairvoyant n psychics people what they had to go through in the first century they were burn at the stake by religion ignorance n I wish them well that would never happen to this people ever again. Some of this people are very advance and because of them they have solve even murder case. I heard we all connect spiritually so to me some people are very gifted with the unknown and in dream visions come up to there mind could tell you about a love one that's desist. But I think is all in the mind cause we are all connected spiritually
The camera operative must've had a few drinks in preparation for listening to the interviewee. Richard I'm sure had a shot of something strong too to steady himself.
Students asked all my shared "i" AM Judges if will say differ? My Heirs Judges with a smile on their faces! Why? Some with sincere tears from their eyes! I will wiped!
5:48 Richard ask a question, just look at the psychics face. He knows at that moment it's a complete gotcha, the psychic is not stupid, Craig notes the whole psychic is massively problematic. His look is priceless.
I agree. But the 'Gotcha' below is far more shocking. Makes me want to throw up there is such sick and obscene deception involved : Quote : Among his contributions to the discussion about religion in contemporary society he argues that there are three separable, though naturally connected debates: (a) a metaphysical debate about what the universe contains; denying that it contains supernatural agencies of any kind makes him an atheist; (b) a debate about the basis of ethics; taking the world to be a natural realm of natural law requires that humanity thinks for itself about the right and the good, based on our best understanding of human nature and the human condition; this makes him a humanist; (c) a debate about the place of religious movements and organisations in the public domain; as a secularist Grayling argues that these should see themselves as civil society organisations on a par with trade unions and other NGOs, with every right to exist and to have their say, but no greater right than any other self-constituted, self-selected interest group. Take this line (a) a metaphysical debate about what the universe contains; denying that it contains supernatural agencies of any kind makes him an atheist; Unquote 'THAT is psychic remote viewing psychic special powers dark art not the scientific method. It also explains why every single book written by Dawkins has no science but a novel metaphysical stream of consciousness. Typical Hegelism through Marxism - you remove the obstacles which stand in the way of ALL degrees of freedom with METAPHYSICS. Oh nice !! all the hardship concerned with binary opposition removed & they can just use lie propaganda to fans about 'only using the scientific method' concerning how they draw their conclusions - every covert politically motivated marxist does that. Lets face it Mr Dawkins followers have had absolutely NO IDEA that new atheism is puling this scam after ALL they ranted and ranted and ranted and ranted and ranted. and ranted and ranted and ranted ABOUT THESE SUPERNATURALLY BASED SCAMS !!!!! Thus its really DEFINATLY high time the sickest version of them all it ended in view of the fact he embellishes this blatant confidence trick with rant after rant after rant @ all the other KOOKS just for the realism !!, Dawkins ? - please shut this sordid obscene esoteric level hypocrisy cake hole please. I mean what will new athiem jump out on us suddenly with next ? - an implementation of the teachings of Mao Zedong ???? Hes where he is off the slave trade anyway. www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/9091007/Slaves-at-the-root-of-the-fortune-that-created-Richard-Dawkins-family-estate.html Can hardly tell the difference between them except the outfits !!
I loved this respectful, calm and rational discussion about such a highly divisive subject! Thank you.
does not matter where on the line you stand. these 2 men proof that one can always be respectful.
Isn't freemasonry wonderful.
Yes!!!
So no topics matter just how respectful you are.
@@cameroncameron2826🙄 so everyone is a freemason huh.
@@Johnnystammy
What ??? - you think everyone is a freemason ?
Interesting. Can't be though since you'd be one & this shall mean you are not allowed to challenge others :)
Richard Dawkins is one of the nicest and most decent ppl I have encountered when it comes to these difficult subjects. A pleasure to talk to.
I like how the CALMLY is put into video title😂
I don't think it was necessary. Dawkins has always unfairly been called "strident." There's nothing wrong with speaking one's mind and getting to the point. Hitchens was far more aggressive, and he never seemed to be criticized for it.
lol, never noticed
I wish I could speak with my son.
"What goes on in your head"
Only someone with Richard Dawkins accent can make that sound like a polite question.
Anyone else would hear the words:
"You are a mental case, aren't you"
Have a look at this mental case situation :
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A._C._Grayling
Quote :
Among his contributions to the discussion about religion in contemporary society he argues that there are three separable, though naturally connected debates:
(a) a metaphysical debate about what the universe contains; denying that it contains supernatural agencies of any kind makes him an atheist;
(b) a debate about the basis of ethics; taking the world to be a natural realm of natural law requires that humanity thinks for itself about the right and the good, based on our best understanding of human nature and the human condition; this makes him a humanist;
(c) a debate about the place of religious movements and organisations in the public domain; as a secularist Grayling argues that these should see themselves as civil society organisations on a par with trade unions and other NGOs, with every right to exist and to have their say, but no greater right than any other self-constituted, self-selected interest group.
Take this line
(a) a metaphysical debate about what the universe contains; denying that it contains supernatural agencies of any kind makes him an atheist;
Unquote
'THAT is psychic remote viewing psychic special powers dark art not the scientific method. It also explains why every single book written by Dawkins has no science but a novel metaphysical stream of consciousness. Typical Hegelism through Marxism - you remove the obstacles which stand in the way of ALL degrees of freedom with METAPHYSICS. Oh nice !! all the hardship concerned with binary opposition removed & they can just use lie propaganda to fans about 'only using the scientific method' concerning how they draw their conclusions - every covert politically motivated marxist does that.
Lets face it Mr Dawkins followers have had absolutely NO IDEA that new atheism is puling this scam after ALL they ranted and ranted and ranted and ranted and ranted. and ranted and ranted and ranted ABOUT THESE SUPERNATURALLY BASED SCAMS !!!!!
Thus its really DEFINATLY high time the sickest version of them all it ended in view of the fact he embellishes this blatant confidence trick with rant after rant after rant @ all the other KOOKS just for the realism !!, Dawkins ? - please shut this sordid obscene esoteric level hypocrisy cake hole please. I mean what will new athiem jump out on us suddenly with next ? - an implementation of the teachings of Mao Zedong ????
Hes where he is off the slave trade anyway.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/9091007/Slaves-at-the-root-of-the-fortune-that-created-Richard-Dawkins-family-estate.html
Can hardly tell the difference between them except the outfits !!
This guy actually seems genuine, which is not mutually exclusive with him also being self-deluded.
As a psychiatrist, I would not venture to say much as I don’t know him, but these are all symptoms of personality disturbances or disorders. Mainly I’m picking up paranoid personality and schizotypal personality characteristics. They would be disorders if he is not functional. Apart from that extremely intelligent, you wouldn’t be able to tell anything. Lovely man tbh
@@ahmederfan8983you’re the perfect example of the expression “when your tool is a hammer, everything looks like a nail”
@@Hola-ro6yv no I’m just saying. And just a fast shocker : all prophets were something we call schizoaffective disorder. Manic features predominant. Is that like a sledge hammer? It’s just facts. Not much to do about it really.
@@ahmederfan8983 Are you assuming he's not in any genuine communication with the dead? If so, they why? Also, how are you defining "disorder"? And what is meant by a "personality disturbance"? Are such disorders and "personality disturbances" undesirable? In what way are they, if so?
@@Existentialist946there's no scientific evidence at all to support speaking to spirits and the unseen, it's very interesting how the only looking glass this is supposedly channelling through is also a former marketing specialist and an individual who can clearly convince himself of anything.
I've been on this planet for 49 years. I have never seen any genuine evidence of woo woo stuff. Just lots of live human con artists.
Your intellectual ego is the con artist in your head
Woo woo might not be for you, that’s ok
@@jacksonelmore6227 Woo Woo isn't for any open minded thinker. Con artist emerged on the second comment.
@@jacksonelmore6227so you are attacking him for not seeing any evidence? If you disagree, maybe introduce some evidence?
@@RobertCro no attack, you project that
No disagreement, you also project that
The “evidence” is self evident, objective as much as it is subjective
If you deny either objectivity or subjectivity, you’re only seeing half the truth, and cast other as shadow
@@danielpaulson8838 woo woo is for the open minded
Rationality is for “thinkers”
Rationality is an egoistic endeavor
Woo woo transcends that ego
Back in the late 1970s, a friend who was a union stagehand in Texas shared his experience working at a faith healer's "show." The ushers and associates of the faith healer engaged in small talk with attendees to gather personal information. They also noted if someone in a wheelchair could stand or if someone on crutches could walk unaided. During the "healings," an accomplice relayed this information to the faith healer through a tiny earpiece hidden in his ear. They utilized an induction loop system that operates on electromagnetism, not standard radio frequencies. The earpiece, small and discreetly tucked into the healer's ear canal, consisted of a simple electrical circuit and did not need a battery. Had James Randi's engineer investigated this charlatan, he would not have detected any radio signals.
Great interview, thank you very much. Although a hardcore scientist, Richard still has what seems to me like an unconscious or even conscious emerging longing for the world which can’t be described scientifically. I appreciate very much the fact that he let’s his interviewee talk freely, without interrupting. Turns out, the interviewee really has a point..
Reason reversal , damming admissions. Humility, likability, trust, embracing objections.
A very accomplished salesman.
Well, he did say he worked in marketing, so he of all people would know how best to "sell" a concept or product.
Or he's on to something currently outside your realm of personal experience? Just because someone is good at selling vacuum cleaners doesn't mean that all of a sudden vacuum cleaners don't exist 😂
@@dream-analysisUK Vacuum cleaners exist, which is why someone can sell them, not the other way around.
@@davidgommeren7283 Which if wholly true, proves my point, and I’m sure you’d never want that. The fact is: the concept of speaking to the dead exists, you cannot deny this, otherwise how do you explain why millions of people engage with the activity, and I would like to suggest that humans will always engage with the activity throughout all of time, this activity occurs within dreams too. Even if your waking mind refuses to engage with this activity, your dreaming mind won't have a problem with it. The dreaming mind is not blocked by rationality. You your self are capable of having such a dream and might even find it emotionally rewarding. This does not prove that there is a 'spirt world' more that there's a part of you that does engage with this type of thinking and there's nothing your rational mind can do about it! The expectation that humans all adopt Dawkins rational mind set, is wholly unrealistic and a ridiculous expectation. The truth is your last statement about vacuum cleaners is half true… you can sell 100 vacuum cleaners and take the money without the 100 vacuum cleaners existing to sell in the first place. Which is essentially what your argument is in regards to Craig Hamilton. I personally would say that I’m open to the idea the Craig Hamilton has the ability to speak to the dead. I can’t claim to know this for certain. Dawkins seems to be coming from a place of certainty in regards to this subject which I find problematic, how can anyone be certain on such a profound topic? Being critical is perfectly acceptable, but certain feels blindsided, unable to see the whole landscape and against the quest for truth. "The left hemisphere doesn't know what it doesn't know, as far as its concerned what it doesn't know doesn't exist!" - Iain McGilchrist
@@dream-analysisUKOh so he's had a unique experience where spirits only speak to him personally but never make themselves known to a group? Sounds like a hot scam.
Richard, thank you very much for this forthright, respectful and insightful conversation that sets the highly constructive tone that needs to be achieved if people of such differing belief systems are ever to make any progress.
I have a background in medical science and currently undergoing medium training under the auspices of the spiritualist church. I very much maintained a similar sceptical position as yourself until my daughter died under tragic circumstances in recent years. Shortly following her death certain metaphysical events began occurring in our house, amongst which was a mystifying event of a novelty light - a large sphere that could alternate through various colours - starting turning itself on at certain times and glow red for several minutes before switching off. This would not happen at random times but seemingly in response to significant events: when her ashes were returned and placed next to the light, when a favourite song of hers was played, the moment her mother returned home after a holiday, when her boyfriend visited, when I asked her to visit and in response to many other questions etc. To date I have documented over 60 events in 2 years. It could be put down to some psychic or telekinetic process from us, but it has happened in our (her parents) absence as well, as when a friend of her minded the house, and her sister's presence.
These weird events lead me to engage a medium, who behaved very professionally (asked me no questions at all about why I was there, about who I wanted to speak to etc) and she gave me extremely specific information about the event of her passing, who she was as a person with very accurate description of how she dressed, sense of humour, her artistic achievements. Finally she delivered some specific knowledge that only my daughter could have known which related to the name of my business - my daughter had named my company and my wife was the only other person that knew this fact.
Around this time my previously held scepticism was in an uncomfortable conflict with the events I had experienced for the past year. I am no dill, I had done well at school, I was aware of what constituted rational and critical thinking and I found that what I was presented with via the senses did not at all cohere with my belief that consciousness exists within the bookends of birth and death. So I started mediumship training with an open mind and in faith, being prepared for whatever the journey would present me with and deal with each step with both my rational and intuitive mind intact.
What I have found on this journey of 15 months is:
• Most mediums, certainly of the Spiritualist church, are very similar in character as Craig Hamilton Parker - honest, sincere, intelligent, well-motivated, introspective, self-critical, reasonably humble and in search of truth as they perceive and experience it.
• Mediumship is trained with standards that strongly discourage "cheating" - cold reading, mentalism, even psychic reading to a degree since it is highly undesirable to pull information telepathically from the mind of a sitter as you brought up in the interview.
• Mediumship is normally taught with a very codified method that focuses on making a contact with a spirit that presents themself, then training oneself to remove one's own mental processes and thoughts, opinions, interpretations as those communications are processed and told to the recipient. The training emphasises strongly removing the ego and sense of self from the process.
• Most mediums do not train for glamour and glory of TV shows, essentially using mediumship as entertainment, although it certainly exists. Most mediums, in my experience, are initially propelled by some bereavement (like myself) or grief scenario which then evolves into the sort of motivations you see in counsellors, therapists, and allied health professionals.
At this stage I hold very similar outlook to Craig and I feel I have been duly vigilant against chicanery, credulity and naivety in this course of investigation. There is as a matter of necessity a question of having to maintain a certain 'suspension of disbelief' as particular questions don't make sense: 'why _doesn't_ spirit communicate the truth about string theory?', 'why is communication so symbolic and not literal?', 'why isn't it more accurate?'. But for each element that induces a return to sceptical disbelief my rational mind is at a loss to explain how there are so many instances of inordinate accuracy that can't be explained by dodgy reading techniques or sheer luck. Accurate information *is* being provided. Some sort of metaphysical consciousness exists and this mystery beckons the curious.
I think your conversation with Craig is enormously important because scepticism is as important to mediumship as any other element. Humans are full of failings and holding ourselves to account is all too easy. Mediums need to continually improve their craft, clarify their intention and adhere to ethics. I hope that you find more in this topic that interests you and conduct more interviews.
Well said!
Yep that's the saddest w**k I ever had.
there will come a day when belief will be replaced by evidence.
As much as I wish that this will be true some day, I‘m absolutely convinced the majority of human beings is too dumb for this to ever happen.
I sure hope so! 🙂
How ironic. "There will come a day when belief will be replaced with evidence" is an entirely faith-based assertion with no supporting evidence whatsoever.
and then new beliefs will come...
the plural of anecdote is data.
@@notloki3377What are you saying?
I must say, I'm impressed with Craig Hamilton Parker's professionalism in self-deception and pathological lying
The intro where Dr. Dawkins said he doesn't seem to be a charlatan like most "mediums" / psychics and that he's articulate and intelligent seems like another way of saying he's smart enough to buy his own bs because he sells himself on it first.
I think that some people believe that what they are doing is supernatural. There are a few people (e.g. Derren Bown) who understand that cold reading, and the like, is a natural skill that can be honed.
Good clarification at start about what footage looks like in its 'raw' state!
Did you need that clarification
@@jacksonelmore6227 Some people clearly did - and given that, it was well done.
@@Theslavedrivers imagine needing that clarification
@@jacksonelmore6227Without the explanation, some might have thought there were editing errors.
Yes he does seem sincere, But, as George Burns put it, “Sincerity, if you can fake that, you’ve got it made.”
Yup - aside from fact that dawkins would have a rival lodge after him if he chides another mason.
@@cameroncameron2826 Saw a HUGE Masonic symbol on a building in Galway once. Odd how they SEEM to have disappeared in this world of conspiracy theorists.
It was Groucho who said that not Burns although they both might have said that plus many others since.
@@mozartsbumbumsrus7750 Quite possible. Whenever I research old Hollyrot quotes more and more sources claim different originators. Frankly I prefer the idea of Groucho as the source as I am a huge fan. Sooo, thank you.
theres another saying by the chinese also . sincere words are not always beautiful , as beautiful words are not always sincere
The Spirit Delusion
Richard, you've been an inspiration to me. Thank you for opening my eyes to science and reality.
Have you considered bringing on Rupert Sheldrake?
Why not?
Because Sheldrake isn’t low hanging fruit
@@Hola-ro6yvhaha. Nicely put
I had to look up Sheldrake. 😮 oh dear!
Or Frederico Faggin the acclaimed inventor and scientist who believes that who we are as conscious entities is not in the material universe at all - that material is the symbolic expression or manifestation of consciousness. Or something like that!
I was pulled to the direction of laughing in his face. I call it a "gut feeling". 😅
Okay, so this "spirit world", do the spirits just live there forever when they die? Like, for eternity? How does that work? What do they do with all their time? Think about that. Eternity. Billions of years would pass. Trillions. Quadrillions. Centillions. What are you supposed to do with so much time? You can read every book ever written, hear every song, do everything, learn about everything imaginable in the entire universe and beyond, take a nap that lasts 900 trillion years, and STILL have ETERNITY left. And it just keeps going. It never ends. It goes on forever, and you can't stop it. Is this really our fate? Or could it possibly be, oh I don't know, a fairy tale? And "talking with the dead" is just as perplexing, because what if someone in the United States is communicating with Abraham Lincoln but somebody else in France is trying to communicate with him? And then four other people around the world at the same time are trying to. Does Abraham Lincoln have to put them on hold, like call waiting? Also, why not interview dead ancient Egyptians to tell us detailed information on how the pyramids were built, or ask Amelia Earhart and Jimmy Hoffa where and how they died, or who killed the Black Dahlia, or who is the zodiac killer, the list just goes on. It's so beyond silly, and truly sad, that adults believe in the supernatural. It sets society back.
they probably don't view time in the same way.
What about asking Lee harvey Oswald? LOL
@@JewTube001 I'm going with they probably don't exist
Hmm I wonder how we have all this technology despite belief in the supernatural.
It’s as though it doesn’t set society back at all.
There's plenty of research on Near Death Experience and testimonials on the after life....I suggest you do a youtube search for Dr Bruce Greyson on NDE's.
Thank you Mr Richard for all your contributions. I found all your content amazing.
Speaking of ghosts...that intro lol. Do yo not have a real bookshelf to sit in front of? Love this man
I think the ghost whisperer ACTUALLY believes his own bullshit.
Like a convicted criminal that is in fact guilty, insisting on his innocence (falsely) for years becomes so fluid in his lie that his well honed disingenuous sincerity influences others to believe him.
Or an inconsequential event retold years on end evolves into a more extraordinary description of the event. A minor action becomes an heroic life saving intervention. And the person may not realize how the retelling exaggerates the event over time.
True mediums are far and few in between. However, when you find a real one, there will be NO QUESTION.
It's nice to be able to talk from different points of view without becoming uncivil or getting hostile. Very rare these days.
To each his own …of course theres genuine readers..they’ve always existed, for one… the indigenous long ago, skilled readers are not ppl pleasers, if a skeptic encounters a genuine one they’ll know because they know….
The belief matters not ..
I wonder why these mediums aren't used or do not offer services the relatives of murdered people to apprehend the killers? Is there a prohibition for those denizens of the "spirit world" to rat out the living who prematurely ended their life? Or do the dead in the spirit world have to go through an apprenticeship of many years before they can go through the mediums mind? I think this is a kind of predation on the grief of people. False seconds of seeming to reconnect with a loved one who has passed. Skilled grifters, even this seemingly "honest" fellow who believes in his "gift".
In the event there is a so called spirit world why the F don't they visit their relatives directly? Why go thru a stranger? Bullocks
They have been used by the police and oil companies and other agencies. It is quite shocking.
yep, this is the biggest issue i have with these people and any kind of "medium". at best they are naive and ignorant, at worst the are predatory while pretending to want to help people (for their own profit). disgusting and delusional.
In the U. S. psychics have been consulted in cases (years ago), and proved to be worthless. Seems to me former President Reagan or his wife consulted a psychic.
@@ZER0--hmm I wonder why those agencies would use their services if they were completely useless. It’s almost as though they have some utility. “Shocking “
How many people in spirit would know their murderers, or have knowledge that would provide evidence I wonder? Most murderers are known to the victim and where there isn't successful prosecutions it's generally down to the evidence ie underworld killings and hits etc.
Where it's a random killing, well, would the person in spirit necessarily know more than when they were alive? Some random person killed them, that much they would know, but beyond that, what would they know? The question about the 'apprenticeship' is interesting though, maybe that's a skill to be learned? Sounds fair.
As far as the second statement, mediums have helped me to a degree to process my daughter's death but it's no panacea, you still grieve your loss in the most painful manner. Having used both a medium and a grief counsellor I would say there isn't a lot of difference between the two, both help you process it, but neither relieve the agony of loss significantly.
Lastly, it seems to be an intuitive, not rational connection, so not everybody has the same kind of . Also, I did have unusual experiences that suggested my daughter visited me, so there's that too.
Thank you, .Dr. DAWKINS! ❤
I’m sorry Richard, but if you think all mediums are charlatans, why are you cutting this guy slack? Do you just think he is mentally ill? He has to be one of the other, as what he describes isn’t born out in reality.
Belief has nothing to do with reality.
There is nothing wrong with talking to the dead it's when you think they have answered you there is a problem.
In this day and age, Richard Dawkins should acknowledge that the paranormal is a genuine phenomenon; accept it and get over it, which of course is impossible for him to do, that would give religion a foot in the door.
Find some evidence and he would.
@@typ044I believe presenting any evidence for the paranormal to Dawkins futile. He would dismiss the topic outright.
@@rodin2840 If it was evidence instead of claims he would believe it.
I'm a very firm atheist but I have occasionally re-imagined the 'classic' idea of the afterlife as instead the real physical continuation of the physical and biochemical wave(s) (incl biological offspring) that were put in place whilst one is/was (blurring the distinction slightly on purpose), alive. This concept would also have nothing to do with the legacy idea of 'souls' that are separable from existent-bodies/beings, whatsoever!
In addition to some obvious ones like starting a company, country, religion or any kind of coherent group, I think that there are many types of other dynamic (for example meme-based) structures that could well-apply to this 'afterlife' idea: Examples could be the ideas inside collections of words, sounds, pictures, sculptures, movies or code (demoscene) etc.
In terms of biology and consciousness, I think we might hopefully be starting to get some idea where some very interesting types of memory really ultimately live too (See Michael Levin's work!) The trained worm remembers the training even if its head/brain gets cut off and it has to regrow it!
I definitely lean towards a "telepathy/fancy-cold-reading" explanation for positive readings (there's potential for that to be quite fancy and currently unknown by science!) And I'd say that being-in-the-presence-of the person is more likely to be the conduit for any potential high-density-information to get through (sight/sound/smell/heat/behavior can transmit a great deal of information that could feed ones intuitive inferences) rather than thinking that it could be transmission via some kind of special waves or connection that we can't measure! (there's no evidence for spirit-WIFI afaik!)
I would also deny any kind of claim to wholeness-of-being of the dead person if indeed there is real information somehow propagating here. In my view, it must be from the continuation of the dynamic ripples that were made when the person was alive. They (once they're dead-as-an-organism) don't have a body, but the dead person could still be seen to be making decisions or taking actions by having their mind 'emulated' by the remaining-rememberers. Continuing their wishes, as it were, and you can see this as continuing their 'being' a little bit into the afterlife as well, if you're ok with seeing things this way.
I thought this was an incredibly worthwhile and so wonderfully neutral discussion of each others point of view and found it deeply fascinating! Keep up the utterly brilliant work Richard!
I understand what the medium is talking about. I had those same "feelings" when I had a psychotic episode and schizophrenia after that. Realizing it was schizophrenia has slowly made the symptoms disappear. It's difficult to hold on to sanity. So many people and things make it so hard to live well, balanced, feel included or understood. We look for the magic in the world. But we must find real magic, see the world in its best light, not make up a world we wished we lived in, in our heads. Unless of course, it's to turn that dream to a reality. Make real magic! ❤
I used to talk to spirits, then I became an abstainer, now I don`t !!!
Omgosh. 🤭🤭
Haha 😂
I'm confused. He's wearing a pinstripe but is a likeable chap. I'm sure he sold me dodgy plastic windows in 1996.
I cannot understand why Prof. Dawkins has 'replayed' this video. He may say Craig Hamilton is not out to deceive people but Prof. Dawkins knows what this man claims to be able to do is something he cannot possibly do.
I think Dawkins is acknowledging that Hamilton may actually believe what he is saying. Whilst I am certain that the vast majority of people who claim to talk to spirits are fraudsters, I am also sure there will be a few who genuinely believe that they are communicating with the dead.
People always say “its in your mind” well everything is in our mind or from our minds. So thats hardly an argument
Note how Richard is genuinely interested in the facts here rather prejudging anyone as a charlatan.
Lol no buddy he's just being nice to the CHARLATAN. Hes interested to hear his nonsense explanations
No facts to what ol boy been saying
Take a note of what is below :
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A._C._Grayling
Quote :
Among his contributions to the discussion about religion in contemporary society he argues that there are three separable, though naturally connected debates:
(a) a metaphysical debate about what the universe contains; denying that it contains supernatural agencies of any kind makes him an atheist;
(b) a debate about the basis of ethics; taking the world to be a natural realm of natural law requires that humanity thinks for itself about the right and the good, based on our best understanding of human nature and the human condition; this makes him a humanist;
(c) a debate about the place of religious movements and organisations in the public domain; as a secularist Grayling argues that these should see themselves as civil society organisations on a par with trade unions and other NGOs, with every right to exist and to have their say, but no greater right than any other self-constituted, self-selected interest group.
Take this line
(a) a metaphysical debate about what the universe contains; denying that it contains supernatural agencies of any kind makes him an atheist;
Unquote
'THAT is psychic remote viewing psychic special powers dark art not the scientific method. It also explains why every single book written by Dawkins has no science but a novel metaphysical stream of consciousness. Typical Hegelism through Marxism - you remove the obstacles which stand in the way of ALL degrees of freedom with METAPHYSICS. Oh nice !! all the hardship concerned with binary opposition removed & they can just use lie propaganda to fans about 'only using the scientific method' concerning how they draw their conclusions - every covert politically motivated marxist does that.
Lets face it Mr Dawkins followers have had absolutely NO IDEA that new atheism is puling this scam after ALL they ranted and ranted and ranted and ranted and ranted. and ranted and ranted and ranted ABOUT THESE SUPERNATURALLY BASED SCAMS !!!!!
Thus its really DEFINATLY high time the sickest version of them all it ended in view of the fact he embellishes this blatant confidence trick with rant after rant after rant @ all the other KOOKS just for the realism !!, Dawkins ? - please shut this sordid obscene esoteric level hypocrisy cake hole please. I mean what will new athiem jump out on us suddenly with next ? - an implementation of the teachings of Mao Zedong ????
Hes where he is off the slave trade anyway.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/9091007/Slaves-at-the-root-of-the-fortune-that-created-Richard-Dawkins-family-estate.html
Can hardly tell the difference between them except the outfits !!
I didn’t think the ‘medium’ was a charlatan and I don’t dislike him. However, what this displays is respect from one of my favourite people on the planet. My no 1 dinner guest is Richard Dawkins.
ALL mediums are chatlatans and con artists ALL of them. profiting from people lonlyness and misery. Its disgusting and needs to stop.
what if a ghost says the n-word, does his pass that on or ignore the ghost?
Nincompoop? Cos you are one of those if you believe in this stuff.
Haha 😂
DUDE, … I just saw you talked to bill maher… I’m going to watch it now .
I don't believe he is tapping into the spirit world. I do however think it is possible that he is tapping into the universal consciousness which can come to us, inspire us and show us many insightful revelations which are discussed briefly at the tail end of the video. Dreams, intuition, meditation are merely pathways into the universal consciousness. The energy that someone has during their lifetime doesn't necessarily go away completely, but becomes part of this and can be drawn from with or without conscious thought.
Some mediums are astounding, in my opinion. My understanding is that we are subconsciously connected to those nearest to us, that that connection remains after death and is transmissable to a medium's receptive mind-as a transmission. An understanding which is a work in progress.
That is a claim. Prove it
Your response is ignorant and aggressive. Much more learned, more specialised minds than yours have done years of research in this area. I like to listen to them to see how my own research aligns and open my mind to other considerations. I don't necessarily have to agree with everything they say, but often I come to do so by my own further consideration and research. Life is a learning curve.@@anthonyjohnson6973
I said that my understanding is that....my UNDERSTANDING. I don't have to prove anything. It is a matter of considerable interest to me, and I have investigated it broadly with an open mind. Findings boggled my mind,@@anthonyjohnson6973and gave me much to think about.
Please give the clairvoyant a break. Very intelligent person, provides well spoken and fascinating responses. How very interesting the angle he uses covers all bases, never really fell down on a question no matter the difficulty. Regardless if you believe him or not you have to give him credit for standing his ground intelligently and forcing Richard to agree in some cases
Well rehearsed answers don’t prove he’s not talking crap… He sidestepped several, which is as bad as falling down in my books. 😂
@@christopherhamilton3621 So you won't give him credit?
it's interesting how he says ''it's usually in the form of claire sentient'' seeing as that's the most difficult for to prove and the easiest to mistake
Clearly , neither of them have ever seen video's of mediums like Theresa Caputo and Matt Fraser , perhaps they should .....
"The Enemies of Reason" was a great series. It was good to see Prof. Dawkins turn his attention to a subject like pseudoscience, which sorely needed some of his rationality up it but at the same time wasn't a bitterly divisive subject like religion, likely to cause people to reject in advance what they didn't want to hear. I doubt _too_ many felt "personally attacked" when Richard mauled homeopathy, mediums, or dowsing (!) and I thought it would do viewers good to see Professor Dawkins apply his scientific approach to subjects that they weren't so personally invested in.
It's shame that Channel 4 insisted on those lurid, tabloid titles for their Dawkins documentaries, e.g. "Root of all Evil?" "Enemies of Reason" "Faith Schools Menace" and so on. They certainly had a "house style" with those titles, but it cheapened things. That said, I do recall seeing an omnibus repeat of "Root of all Evil?" which had the correct title ("The God Delusion") restored, which was an aesthetic relief.
I wonder what Richard's preferred title was for "The Enemies of Reason"? I rather like the title that the Sunday Times gave to its review of the series: "The Gullible Age."
Grown up people with invisible friends....sorry dont have time for them 😂
Your ego that posted your comment is your invisible friend
I thought Richard was a respectful interviewer, he didn't interrupt Craig, even though he is openly a sceptic about such matters. I believe Craig is genuine, I have experience many things that science can't currently explain. I hope Richard does in time have some experience himself.
If science can’t currently explain something, then it’s unexplained. In all cases where an explanation was previously unavailable, and then an explanation became available at a later time, the explanation has always been scientific and never ‘supernatural’. There’s no shame in saying, “I don’t know”, or, “Currently, I can’t explain this”. Assigning an explanation to a phenomenon that itself can’t be explained is of little or no value.
Bruh the camera man has me rolling everytime lol he be zooming in and everything 🤣
Not sure sincere is the adjective I would use for this guy 😬
Seems more sincere than Dawkins
communicating with the living is hard enough already i'm not even gonna attempt it.
7:14 “Us mediums are working through a very difficult form of communication.”
Me want cookie.
I sincerely want to believe that all mediumship is a con. Then I came across a medium who so accurately described the macabre means of murder of two children in the Chad & Lori Daybell case, in Idaho. I'm listening to this timely video with well thought out reasoning and questioning. Thank you.
Dr Dawkins has been generous. Craig is an English Deepak Chopra - lite version..
If you can’t understand the irrational, you aren’t yet acting rationally
@@jacksonelmore6227 Where can I apply for a certificate from your majesty? 😁😁😁
@@diaryofnricom163 apply within yourself
@@jacksonelmore6227 This is so profound of you. I give you another profound quote from Deepak. "In the absence of a conscious entity the moon remains a radically ambiguous and ceaselessly flowing quantum soup"
@@diaryofnricom163 and that statement is based and redpilled
Charlatan being a charlatan.
Awfully convenient answers that 'explain' why they can't just ask a spirit what it's like in the spirit realm. It's always something extremely vague that they ask and also likely to coincide with, at the very least, one person's experiences. If you say "I see a boxy, red car." to a room full of people, where a lot of those people are extremely likely to have seen or had experience with a boxy, red car... you're going to get one person (at least) say something like, "Oh, my father had an old red car that was basically box-shaped."
Craig specifically used the example of the spilled green paint as just a way of saying, 'Look. See. How can I be making all this up when it was an event that had happened without the audience member having knowledge of that.' Great, you had a lucky moment to add to your repertoire of tools to con people - often vulnerable people - into believing there is something in this utter nonsense.
I'm only 6 minutes and 41 seconds into this video. I'll persevere and watch the rest because - who knows - I might have my mind completely changed by the end of the video. We'll see. I'll edit this comment if that is indeed the case.
You’re triggered
Great questions Richard! They're what I'd have asked too.
The spiritualist church has the most boring services- nothing uplifting to keep humans engaged with their " higher mind" or giving them food for thought. They really are more interested in their psychics seeing someones pet dog in spirit showing up.
Thanks for this ❤
24:57 - here he got him. Then RD changed the subject. Albert Russel Wallace was a confirmed spiritualist by 1866. However, I don't believe he is a true medium or that such things exist. They both seem to be delusional. Hmmm
He's such a spiky bastard I love it.
The problem with Richard Dawkins is that he is a mirror opposite fundamentalist. And, moreover, his atheism is based on a series of presuppositions that he cannot demonstrate to be true, such as metaphysical materialism. He fails to have noticed that some scientism died around the mid twentieth century.
Fool
Another problem with him is that he rails against the societal problems he had a hand in creating.
@@Hola-ro6yv what did he create?
@@Ein_Kunde_wokeism
@@Ein_Kunde_cancel culture
Great video 👍
yep he definitely spent time in advertising , he knows how to agree with you but at the same time , sells you his product , bit of truth helps the lies go away .
Many when they get a hit they run with it, embellish it to reinforce it and make it sound more accurate.
I like this guy compared to many I've seen. He definitely seems genuine in his beliefs. Many seem to be in for the money and notoriety.
haha the squirel sounds
Why talking to spirits is so difficult is because what the spirits tell you is limited to what your imagination can produce.
And wondering why he didn’t read Richard ?
"Why don't the spirits communicate clearly instead of giving these sort of, vague messages?"
"Ummmm...."
"And how do you go about interpreting or gathering anything of value from these vague messages?"
"Ummmm...."
Ok, the "energy" of living beings "sticks" around? Tell me, is that energy subject to physical forces? If not, how does it even move with earth? Earth stays in orbit of the sun, the sun stays in orbit of the galaxy center due to gravity. So is this energy subject to interact with matter and natural forces? So we could detect it easily. If it does not interact with the physical world, how does it keep up with earth? Why is that energy "stuck" at a specific place on earth that is constantly moving?
A lot of those ideas aren't really thought through. This is like most movies involving ghosts that can "phase" through matter. How do they actually stick to the surface of earth and keep up with the movement? If they do not collide with matter (earth, the wall of a building, the air molecules), why can they even stay in the same place. When they are actually colliding, they would leave an equal and opposite reaction on that thing they collide with and that could be detected. Imagine how many ghosts are out there... Or do ghosts eventually die as well and are gone for good? There's so much BS attached to the idea that isn't even half-baked.
I spoke to my dead father. I did not believe and asked many questions and each time , my father amswered rightly for all questions. I am MTech post gtadiate in engg and moreratipnal than most people. i say those whp do not nelieve my words can meet me and we can debate.
The people who know, simply know and there’s no point in trying to convince the sceptics. It’s their loss, but they can’t see that.
Really Dr Dawkins, it's entirely possible and common to talk to the dead!!
They just never respond!
I know a women who claims she sees dead people. I believe she is sincere, but she is either hallucinating or taking drugs. I do know that some drugs prescribed for depression have caused one of my cousins to hallucinate. She sees ghosts, but she is well aware she is hallucinating, because she has told me so. She realizes the depression drug she takes causes the hallucinations. My late father-in-law had hallucinations of people and objects a year before his death. Oddly, he realized he was hallucinating.
The strangest thing my late father-in-law did one day was tell my wife and I he was seeing out of his left eye. He had lost vision in his left eye, years earlier. We had taken him to an eye doctor multiple times over the years. He could barely see a hand waving two feet in front of that eye, so there was no doubt he had lost his vision in that eye. I assumed he was confused and actually seeing out of his right eye, so I decided to test his vision. My wife and I were shocked when he actually was able to read some texts on a clock with his right eye covered. He could also tell us the time. I changed the time on the clock and he got the time right. Later that day he was not seeing out of that eye. The eye doctor thought we were nuts when we mentioned that incident during the next eye test. My father-in-law He was diagnosed with Lewy Body dementia, six months before his death, at age 95.
Therefore, I do think some people may be physiologically prone to hallucinations. I do not believe anyone actually communicates with the dead, but some people obviously believe they can do that.
he said he doesnt even know if theirs a god , wouldnt that be the 1st question youd ask a dead persons spirit , if we even have a spirit ?
"A large body of evidence". Where? And does it count as 'evidence' as properly defined, with an acceptable standard of proof?
I don´t agree with that in the workplace!
Green paint. Ah St Patrick. Well at least RD isnt green. 😊
Clearly that guy can communicate with the spirit world. I wonder if he can communicate with the Tooth Fairy.
How does an evolutionary biologist challenge a psychic? They ask, "Can you foresee the day when humans evolve the ability to understand your predictions?"
If there's a risidual "spirit" in any given location, does that mean the spirit world is gravitationally (or by some other force) tethered to that location given that Earth is rotating; it's orbiting a star; that star is orbiting a giant black hole; and the galaxy is moving with the expansion of space and also towards Andromeda?
Happy birthday season sir. 🎉
I wonder if he has a split brain condition where the two sides of his brain “talk” to each other. Where for most people this happens unconsciously, perhaps he is slightly conscious of it and it seems as if there is sincerely a second voice.
I believe these two opposite views of the world (scientism and paranormal, or religious) need to both lie down their weapons and get together to answer the biggest problem that humanity has to tackle, "WHAT HAPPENS WHEN WE DIE? AND HOW CAN WE AVOID DEATH OR DEFEAT DEATH?" Can we use scientific inquiry, like unbiased scientific inquiry to find the truth once and for all??? Without attacking each other but rather asking. Maybe some can look in the physical material world while others look at the transcendental dimensions of existence. Let's unite forces to actually do some work.
BTW an interesting interview 🤔
5:04
Exacto mundo!
For example:
Benito Trump and Adolf Bonaparte
Im asuming dawkins didnt burst out laughing during these interviews because he was so gobsmacked
We are not allowed to solve these issues. Life after death, telepathy and observer effect in quantum.
Alternate title: "Richard Dawkins Calmly Talks to the Brain Dead". When one uses his GUT for thinking purposes we must remember that the gut it full of shit.
You can't prove the psychic is wrong, but the sheer banality of the spirit messages makes you think it's more of a performance between him and his audience. If he could pass on a credible message from Einstein or Tesla, even Richard Dawkins would find that hard to dismiss.
What would be a credible message? A better way would be to scientifically test claims like they’ve tried to do with ESP research, just avoid being too excited when you get results that are slightly better than chance, as we’ve seen before
Nope Dawkins would just dismiss it like he does everything else
I’ve been at Gettysburg after the sun set and felt terror, anguish, fear like I’ve never experienced. I was a Marine Sargent, Vietnam vet and don’t believe in a bunch of hocus-pocus bullshit but I know what I experienced there. People don’t die in graveyards but they do in battlefields and perhaps there is something of them remaining at the point of death???
When I die, do I also have to spend my afterlife talking to this guy?
I feel for the mediums clairvoyant n psychics people what they had to go through in the first century they were burn at the stake by religion ignorance n I wish them well that would never happen to this people ever again. Some of this people are very advance and because of them they have solve even murder case. I heard we all connect spiritually so to me some people are very gifted with the unknown and in dream visions come up to there mind could tell you about a love one that's desist. But I think is all in the mind cause we are all connected spiritually
The camera operative must've had a few drinks in preparation for listening to the interviewee.
Richard I'm sure had a shot of something strong too to steady himself.
But is there life BEFORE death?
Students asked all my shared "i" AM Judges if will say differ? My Heirs Judges with a smile on their faces! Why? Some with sincere tears from their eyes! I will wiped!
Learn english, man.
This is not comprehensible English. Use a translation service !
5:48 Richard ask a question, just look at the psychics face. He knows at that moment it's a complete gotcha, the psychic is not stupid, Craig notes the whole psychic is massively problematic. His look is priceless.
I agree. But the 'Gotcha' below is far more shocking. Makes me want to throw up there is such sick and obscene deception involved :
Quote :
Among his contributions to the discussion about religion in contemporary society he argues that there are three separable, though naturally connected debates:
(a) a metaphysical debate about what the universe contains; denying that it contains supernatural agencies of any kind makes him an atheist;
(b) a debate about the basis of ethics; taking the world to be a natural realm of natural law requires that humanity thinks for itself about the right and the good, based on our best understanding of human nature and the human condition; this makes him a humanist;
(c) a debate about the place of religious movements and organisations in the public domain; as a secularist Grayling argues that these should see themselves as civil society organisations on a par with trade unions and other NGOs, with every right to exist and to have their say, but no greater right than any other self-constituted, self-selected interest group.
Take this line
(a) a metaphysical debate about what the universe contains; denying that it contains supernatural agencies of any kind makes him an atheist;
Unquote
'THAT is psychic remote viewing psychic special powers dark art not the scientific method. It also explains why every single book written by Dawkins has no science but a novel metaphysical stream of consciousness. Typical Hegelism through Marxism - you remove the obstacles which stand in the way of ALL degrees of freedom with METAPHYSICS. Oh nice !! all the hardship concerned with binary opposition removed & they can just use lie propaganda to fans about 'only using the scientific method' concerning how they draw their conclusions - every covert politically motivated marxist does that.
Lets face it Mr Dawkins followers have had absolutely NO IDEA that new atheism is puling this scam after ALL they ranted and ranted and ranted and ranted and ranted. and ranted and ranted and ranted ABOUT THESE SUPERNATURALLY BASED SCAMS !!!!!
Thus its really DEFINATLY high time the sickest version of them all it ended in view of the fact he embellishes this blatant confidence trick with rant after rant after rant @ all the other KOOKS just for the realism !!, Dawkins ? - please shut this sordid obscene esoteric level hypocrisy cake hole please. I mean what will new athiem jump out on us suddenly with next ? - an implementation of the teachings of Mao Zedong ????
Hes where he is off the slave trade anyway.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/9091007/Slaves-at-the-root-of-the-fortune-that-created-Richard-Dawkins-family-estate.html
Can hardly tell the difference between them except the outfits !!
@@cameroncameron2826 So he's the perfect candidate to be against slavery persecution and everything his family used to be.
What is evidence students? Accompanied with clarity, coherence, adequacy, and witnesses!
Love you Richard......you must be our president.
I see the face of Sam Harris with eyes rolling back in the head, and I'm LMAO...
Cold reading 101 plus self delusion. Or a con man. I’m 50:50 on it.
I'd say he's a charlatan, he said he used to work in advertising, my bet is that he's just a good sales man