@@IssyFishyy It has nothing to do with religion. There are other social factors at play, stuff like liberalizing crime isn't in anyway connected to a collective disbelief in god. Atheists just like theists are mixed with people who hold moral values in high regard and the ones that don't.
@@vignesh1065 Yes, i know that correlation doesn’t imply causation. But the fact that there is correlation indicates something. For example, child sacrifice was considered a barbaric act once Christianity came around. And the fact that laws themselves were based off religions. Whether you believe in it or not, you can’t deny that religion does a great job (Albeit, not perfect) at stabilizing morality.
Evolution is a fact. People who say “it’s a theory” are missing two main points. 1) they do not understand the actual meaning of what a scientific theory. 2) Even saying it’s “a theory” doesn’t exclude the fact that evolution is a FACT. The theory explains how evolution happens.
@Monica Merino The common link among all life can be found in DNA. All creatures on Earth share the same genetic code. If we didn't all have common ancestors, all the way back to the first single-celled organisms, we might expect to then see different genetic codes in the present set of extant species. If even a single exception were to be found that couldn't be explained, we would have to re-think our theory of evolution and the origin of species.
Steven, you are really stoo-pid. Richard Dawkins teaches the universe came from "literally nothing." Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. We can't get anything from "literally nothing." We can't even get science without God. The laws of nature only can come from a Lawgiver, God. God is the reason for us and all we have. ruclips.net/video/JiMqzN_YSXU/видео.html “However improbable the origin of life might be, we know it happened on Earth because we are here.” -Richard Dawkins. We only get life from life...the law of biogenesis. We can't get anything without God. The odds are NOT there. ruclips.net/video/W1_KEVaCyaA/видео.html ruclips.net/video/yW9gawzZLsk/видео.html ruclips.net/video/ddaqSutt5aw/видео.html No, the eye did not evolve into various eyes. Your mere chance mutations are absurd. ruclips.net/video/X7h2HWcTwa4/видео.html Even Dawkins admits we can't know what is true because of natural selection... The God Delusion, “Since we are creatures of natural selection, we cannot totally trust our senses. Evolution only passes on traits that help a species survive, and not with preserving traits that tell a species what is actually true about life.” Oh, but Dawkins knows what's true about life...killing those who don't meet his expectations for living. dailycaller.com/2021/05/19/richard-dawkins-down-syndrome-roe-v-wade/
@@jamespalmer980 He's a public spokesperson for rational thinkers, an advocate for free thinking. Freeing the mind from all delusions of Religion. People are scared to think outside the bubble because they can't comprehend rationalism
@@jamespalmer980 No, he mocks people who are massively ignorant and proudly spew out their ignorant nonsense. He is quite accepting of people who have a different point of view. You are welcome to your own opinion - you are not welcome to your own (alleged) facts.
Let's face it your still can't see the truth only made up nonsense Evolution is brainless blind has no mind can't think .you people do the thinking for the false reason for intelligent life
@AllSeeingEye ofGod Which god are you referring to? One of the thousands of current ones or some of the previous ones that people don't believe in anymore?
@@user-jy2sz1jr9p Easy - only stupid like you believe the THEORY of evolution is real - but you can't provide a single missing link to verify it - so that make you and your silly THEORY stupid!
He adds meaning to clarity, what a brilliant guy. I am so lucky to have been born and around his time. It's an honour. Thank you so much Richard Dawkins Sir for cracking all lunatic nuts around. You will be remembered for ever SIR. LONG LIVE SIR RICHARD DAWKINS.
Kian Swami I by no means deny evolution but still there is a reason I don't like Dawkins anymore. Dawkins is promoting evolution like religion and you just to believe in it as a fact. Sounds familiar? It's kinda like saying *Jesus died for you believe it or go to hell*.
@@al7422 Evolution is a fact regardless of what others believe because it's been verified through countless studies. The main difference is that evolution has empirical evidence to back it up while religion makes nonsensical claims that relies on wishful thinking, willful ignorance, and blind faith. Dawkins is simply stating facts to try and relieve people of their ignorance of an ancient book with no proof to support the claims made
@@kraokingxyz1397 Did I ever say anything against evolution. And studies have proven evolution empirically but not the origin of human( because you can't go back in time or recreate the same scenario) My problem with Dawkins is the way he preaches evolution is just wrong. And his followers have made a cult around him which makes it hard to disagree with him without getting an outburst from the toxic following.
+saxmanchiro Isaac Newton, Nikolas Kopernikus, and Galileo Galilei all believed in God. According to your logic, all these three scientists suspended "all logic, reason, sense and facts".
One of the smartest men around. One of the smartest at the explanation and the easiest to understand. I have often been held in awe of this man. Cheers Richard.
I do like RD but he doesn't go for the throat like Hitchens, he is a bit too soft on his opponents.......admittedly, he has little time for mindless fools who are beyond reason, but hitch loved to ridicule everyone regardless of their intellect & he did so with ease, slapping the shit out of their argument for the supernatural.
@@stevelaw3886 Christ knows, it is mind boggling how their beliefs, views & reasoning can be polar opposites. Maybe Peter thought he would forever be in Christopher's shadow if he shared the same perspective & opinion?
@@dyschromotopia perhaps that's it. Unfortunately for him, the end result is he's still in his shadow, except he's also a smug w***** and a disinformation peddler with it.
Would you mind to tell what you mean by religious nonsense and what would be your favorite example for your belief? Also I need to say that your post is ambiguous and the meaning may only be known to you.
Absolutely Its heart breaking to watch, I've watched it several times and I would watch it many more times. but it's quite painful to watch, it was Christopher Hitchens last public lecture and he died about two weeks later. yes Hitch was something else.
IAmAnApeJustLikeYou Ape OMG you might actually be right about their misconception lol. The Pokemon phenomenon should actually be called 'metamorphosis' to not be confused with darwinian evolution
IAmAnApeJustLikeYou Ape But also it would be nice if Americans would have proper education in school, so that they cannot think this much bullshit about that so metaphysically important scientific theory.
@@davidreinhart418 you are not being directed nor ordered to purchase a ticket to listen to Mr. Dawkins, if you don't feel like listening to the man don't.
I was already in my 40's before I lost my faith and became an atheist. Why did it take so long? Perhaps because all my family and friends, my neighbors, my countrymen (USA) are mostly religious. I was afraid to be different.
Bill's last comment really made me laugh. It was very well said. But still, very few atheists are respectful and none condescending. The worst of all to me is Sam Harris. I prefer Dawkins and deGrasse Tyson approach to atheism. I could listen to those two for hours.
Nope. Only some shit floats. If you have enough fiber in your diet it will float. If not, it sinks like a rock. So that statement is bullshit, so to speak.
Dawkins did'nt understand... what they say to him. Two oceans dont mix. But such is Dawkins... He hear only him self. I think that Dawkins laying about this school, just to look like smart on television.
truthhurts101 ...... oh my word all you people are totally and utterly daft to believe this nonsense. We are not monkeys . Where is the evidence where is the skeletons of the evolution in motion.
@@roberthawkes2023 Evolution is a fact. The theory of evolution explains those facts. A theory in science is different from how we use it in everyday language. A scientific theory is the interpretation of observations and facts; the pinnacle of achievement in science. Correct, we are not monkeys. We share a common ancestor with them. This is just one of countless examples that creationists don't understand how evolution works. We are all that our ancestors were. We are still apes; we are still primates; we are still mammals; we are still tetrapods; we are still vertebrates; we are still animals; and we are still eukaryotes. Evolution is basically that populations of animals change over time. The most commonly known aspect of evolution is natural selection which is the idea that organisms which are most suited to their environment will survive longer, therefore have more offspring, and therefore their genes will be more prevalent in subsequent generations. This has been observed. Another definition is change in the heritable characteristics of biological populations over successive generations - or to put it another way; change in allele frequencies over time. That is a FACT, no getting around it.
I _came out_ as an atheist in my late teens early twenties and had to leave my country. Well, I did not have to leave _because_ I became an atheist, but an overly religious society just did not seem appealing to me, and anyway, I really could not fit. Exactly like Dr Dawkins says, everyday you are reminded how stupidly blind people are. People who are otherwise very intelligent, but yet choose to follow some book because they think it was sent from the heavens by a mystical all-knowing character. That was depressing, and annoying. So I left. Arrivederci.
Thanks for sharing your story. My upbringing was non-religious. It isn't an achievement to be an atheist if you were never religious, so people like you are the true champions or reason in my eyes. I salute you!
When you think that everyone around you is stupid and you are the only wise person, trust me, you are probably at least as stupid as the people around you, if not more stupid. I say this from personal experience.
Yobany depending on your definition of life it’s possible that’s not true. whether viruses are alive is up for debate. And it frankly depends on your definition, but it’s very likely that they are separate from the evolutionary tree of animals, plants and bacteria. I tend to think pockets dna/rna which propagate and change over time due to natural selection is life. But there is the argument to be made they aren’t self propagating and therefor aren’t alive.
6:20 - Kim Jong Il?! - that’s nothing: the Greeks awarded Nero a victory in all 1,808 events during a single Olympiad because he gave them a tax break...
Sure, but as he is an evolutionary biologist rather than a cosmologist, he may not be the one to ask. You are making something of an assumption that it "came exactly from nothing" sic
@@tonysuffolk "Sure, but as he is an evolutionary biologist rather than a cosmologist, he may not be the one to ask." Then why is he saying it if he does not know? "You are making something of an assumption that it "came exactly from nothing" sic" "sic", really? Richard Dawkins sums it up in his afterword: “Even the last remaining trump card of the theologian, ‘Why is there something rather than nothing?,’ shrivels up before your eyes as you read these pages. If ‘On the Origin of Species’ was biology’s deadliest blow to supernaturalism, we may come to see ‘A Universe From Nothing’ as the equivalent from cosmology. The title means exactly what it says. And what it says is devastating.” Shove that up your sic assuming ass.
Just a small point. The term "sic" does not mean "sick". I would not suggest anything you said was sick; that would just be offensive. Sic means a direct quote, ignoring any grammatical errors. In this interview Dawkins does not say anything about the origin of the universe we live in. I'm sorry if you thought I was being rude. There is little to be gained by flinging insults. The origin of the universe is a huge puzzle and we may never manage to understand how it came into existence. It's a work in progress for Science.
@@tonysuffolk "Sic means a direct quote, ignoring any grammatical errors." I know exactly what it meant. "Sic means a direct quote, ignoring any Sic means a direct quote, ignoring any grammatical errors. What are my "grammatical errors." Dawkins believes in "exactly" nothing created the universe. Would you prefer "literally nothing"? He says that too. ruclips.net/video/UT3dfPOdAYU/видео.html "In this interview Dawkins does not say anything about the origin of the universe we live in." I didn't say he did specifically. He said atheist many times and evolution many times. There's also cosmological evolution. Do you feel ashamed of what Dawkins is saying about nothing and want to change the subject to spare you the embarrassment? "The origin of the universe is a huge puzzle and we may never manage to understand how it came into existence. It's a work in progress for Science." Really? Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. So you had no idea nothing does nothing. You have no idea about the 1LT and 2LT. You're saying we don't know them? We know them and have NO doubts about them. None. "There is little to be gained by flinging insults." They are not insults when I prove the person deserves the title. Doubting a supernatural creation and not what I call a smart person. Saying exactly nothing and literally nothing created the universe is not what I call an intellectual. Maybe you do but not me. Again, "The origin of the universe is a huge puzzle and we may never manage to understand how it came into existence. It's a work in progress for Science." If it was such a puzzle why does Dawkins claim to know nothing created the universe? Golly jeepers you walk right into these traps. Science shows it could not have happened naturally. Resorting and hoping in science fiction is for fools. And if that is not stupid enough, to think the laws of nature just came about on their own. You people are not insane, you just chose to be dumbasses. ALL we know without a doubt proves creation HAD to be supernatural and thus done by a supernatural creator, but you want to be a dumbass along with dumbass Dawkins as he brags about how nice it is to be an atheist. I will say though, it does make me wonder if you all did evolve from a scum pond seeing the scum you all are. You don't go where the truth leads, you go where your pride leads.
After months of following his work, I finally bought The Selfish Gene and The God Delusion today. Starting with the latter, it's gonna be one hell of a reading sesh 🤣
You're doing what Dawkins wants you to do. Buy his books and line his pockets instead of think for yourself. Save your money as you can witness The Selfish Gene in any Walmart or sketchy neighborhood. Some men become baby daddies and a woman has kids from three different fathers. If the woman finds a simp male to give her a place to live and help raise the kids, the baby daddies and the mom win. That sums it up and you can save your time with the useless reading.
@@AmanExplorerBoy Ah! Richard, after all this time you have finally got around to facing the real question which you and your compatriot Atheists have been avoiding for so many years. That question is ‘’why should religion and faith not be just as much a vital part of evolution as Ducks and frogs having webbed feet to survive. “Now you can get your secretary to start typing out the next book with this your latest revelation. Yet the reason you haven’t dared to face such a truth is because, along with all the other Atheists you have known that such an admission would end much of your book signing and lucrative lecture tours forever. Placing your Atheism, and much of your claimed expertise in the ‘’SOLVED’’ BASKET.’’
@AllSeeingEye ofGod thank you for you comment mate, it is really helpful to debunk the myth of evolution, i'll just suggest to you to do some research about the Holy Coran and take some insights from the Islamic perspective about the Origin of life and the features of The intelligent designer according to the Holy Coran ! Good luck brother and thanks again
You don't believe evolution. You either understand it or you don't. It remains proven in either case. I don't understand Fermat' s last theorem, but it has been proven.
Non-biogenesis just doesnt happen and life defys entropy..when bowling balls roll uphill thats when molecules will self-arrange into unstable molecules and genetic codes and trillion cell animals ..its like thinking sand and limestone and iron ore and water will defy their present chemical stability and spontaneously form a concrete and steel building “The intelligent layman has long suspected circular reasoning in the use of rocks to date fossils and fossils to date rocks.” [ J.E. O’Rourke, American Journal of Science 1976, 276:51] “It cannot be denied that from a strictly philosophical standpoint geologists are here arguing in a circle. The succession of organisms has been determined by a study of their remains embedded in the rocks, and the relative ages of the rocks are determined by the remains of organisms that they contain.” Rastall, R. H., “Geology,” Encyclopedia Britannica, vol. 10 (1949) University of London. P. 168 “Paleontologists cannot operate this way. There is no way simply to look at a fossil and say how old it is unless you know the age of the rocks it comes from.”[date the fossil by the rock] Eldredge, Niles “The rocks do date the fossils, but the fossils date the rocks more accurately. Stratigraphy cannot avoid this kind of reasoning if it insists O’Rourke, J. E Evolution is based on two faulty assumptions: 1. mutations make something new and 2. natural selection makes it survive and take over the population. Evolution is a religion of death not life. “No matter how numerous they may be, mutations do not produce any kind of evolution.” Pierre-Paul Grasse, Evolution of Living Organisms 1977, p. 88 *They rearrange existing information but do not increase genetic complexity * . “In all the reading I’ve done in the life-sciences literature, I’ve never found a mutation that added information. . . . All point mutations that have been studied on the molecular level turn out to reduce the genetic information and not increase it.” Lee Spetner, Not By Chance!: Shattering the Modern Theory of Evolution (Brooklyn, N.Y.: Judaica Press, 1997), 131, 138. “Natural selection may have a stabilizing effect, but it does not promote speciation. It is not a creative force as many people have suggested.” Daniel Brooks “A downward Slope to Greater Diversity,” Science, Vol. 217, 24 September 1982, p. 1240 “Natural selection can act only on those biologic properties that already exist; it cannot create properties in order to meet adaptational needs.” Parasitology, 6th ed. Lea & Febiger, p. 516. Survival of the fittest does not explain the arrival of the fittest! By the way: “Survival of the fittest” is a tautology. Q. Why did it survive? A. Because it is the fittest. Q. How do you know it is the fittest? A. Because it survived. ^ circular reasoning if survival of the strongest or fittest was real, then humans would'nt even exist today. There are many animals in the animal kingdom much stronger and fitter than the average human. or even the strongest human. if you find a fossil in the dirt, all you know is it died. you can't prove it had any kids, and you sure can't prove it had different kids
Paul K Paul K the age of a rock is determined by measuring the relative amounts of radioactive decay products in the rock sample to their parent material (the decay products accumulate at a known rate). From this ratio and the decay rate, you can easily determine how old the rock is. This technique is called radiometric dating. So everything you said about circular reasoning of geologists is flat wrong. Sorry man, I’m not trying to be rude but you really need to know that. Also, I think you said something like evolution falsely assumes that mutations lead to changes. Evolution does not assume that. Who told you that?... Most mutations have either no effect on phenotype or a negative effect (in which case the organism is less likely to survive in its particular environment). Over time, whole populations of organisms accumulate and pass on beneficial mutations, so their phenotypes change to make them better suited to survive and reproduce in their environment. I didn’t exactly read all of your referenced quotes, but I did see one that said something like: I have not seen a mutation that adds “information” to the organism. What on earth does that mean? Finally, in regard to your argument that humans shouldn’t have even survived based on natural selection because they are way weaker than other animals on the African savannah. I’ll challenge that argument... Sure, I’ll grant that a single human is really weak compared to other animals. But what important ability do we have that none of the other animals have?.. The ability to communicate complex thoughts through language! This allowed us to build effective tools, coordinate hunts and easily bring down animals that are much bigger, stronger, and dumber than us... Hopefully that example can help you see that fitness is not simply about individual brute strength.
count69 here are the “elements” of evolution: 1. Every time DNA replicates, there is a small chance that the replication enzymes will make a mistake (i.e., mutation) and produce a new strand with a slightly different sequence. 2. Mutated DNA will either lead to 1) no effect on the organism’s likelihood to survive or reproduce in its environment (i.e., fitness), 2) a negative effect, or 3) a positive effect. 3. Mutations that lead to increased fitness are more likely to be passed down to future generations, so over time a population of organisms will accumulate mutations. Mutations that lead to decreased fitness are less likely to be passed down, so these mutations tend to not accumulate in populations over time. Mutations that don’t affect fitness have neither an increased nor decreased likelihood of being passed down to future generations. These are really the basic features of evolution. They have been observed time and time again... That is really what science is all about: finding explanations of natural phenomena that reliably explain observations. And in that regard, the theory of evolution is on par with the theory of gravity. They both explain their respective natural phenomena with high reliability.
But why do so many people try to dogmatically force their opinions on others in the name of science which is supposed to be the free enterprise of inquiry? Why does Dawkins try to militantly promote atheism when he’s an advocate of free thought? Why does he try to say that any one who opposes him necessarily is wrong? Because his beliefs are no longer in the realm of science but in the realm of religion. A thought directed to everyone watching this video.
" Good people do good things, Bad people do bad things. It takes religion to make good people do bad things" I am unable to remember the source if this quote but how true.
I am not sure what you mean here and I mean which passage especially you refer to, but the Professor is one of the reasons of the world going more irrational every day. He is in fact so unbelievable irrational that he pretends to believe that random mutation plus natural selection does produce complex meaningful interdependent software. It cant get much much more irrational. I personally believe he his lying on this for money. Before people told him that he should need to reduce his illogicality and random ignorance he was saying that there is no God. This is not to top and he also suffers the idea that he knows waht God would do he pretends not to exist if you look at his giraffe video - which btw is a Dawkins worship video if you ask me, but again, thats subjective and you may say he has deserved it. But hey, according to his definition he is a mass child abuser and student abuser and lets just for a second imagine that the bible is right on eternal justice for criminals then Dawkins will have more pain at his hands then Hitler and Stalin together. Dawkins is either foolish and irrational (some say illogical = irrational =insane) or a gifted deceiver or both.
@@marcob9124 "Dawkins will have more pain at his hands then Hitler and Stalin together." Marco - do you see how believing in religion is making you a hate-filled person. Religious people like you, Marco, love talking about the pain others will suffer after death. If only you would step back & look in the mirror, maybe you'd see how following religion is our world's real evil.
@@Rich7714 Hi Rich, good to meet you and joining the search for truth. Rich - I understand your subjective illogical emotional response and your utter disrespect for reality. And I cant answer such post. If you have a meaningful response I am very much happy in trying to answer you. Give it a try please. But rants are not a mature response, would you agree? See please tell me why you are so fundamentalist that your believe you have the true religion? Stalin thought so, Hitler thought so, the pope I think does not, ...why do you have the arrogance and believe that you have the right belief (Please spare me your definition what religion is, got about 600 mails with it in the last 10 years. Whats your reason to tell me that you have truth? And there are other things I dont understand about your strange thinking, but we can discuss it later. For now I am only interested why you even have the audacity to claim truth. Thx for your meaningful and consistent and hate speech free response in advance. (If you can - also spare me from empty phrases which you have not checked before using - got tons. See, you need to know that 99% of all people come out of state school and parrot the same stuff. So I get the same over and over and over again. I mean the nonsense here, I have no problem if you repeat truth!)
@@marcob9124 You could almost be considered the personification of Passive Aggressiveness, Marco. Interesting. You may want to work on your grammar & spelling though, as it contributes to your incoherence, which is already near the extreme due to your religious fanaticism. When you complain that my perfectly reasonable response is a "rant", when you yourself then go on to provide a rant 10x larger, you show a rather excessive amount of hypocricy. If you misinerpret logic & reasoning for "ranting", then you will forever be unable to engage in dialogue with people. As you say "And I cant answer such post.", which I find rather predictable; opposing oneself to logic & reason rarely grants the religiously insane a successful rebuttal. I notice you also enjoy putting words in peoples' mouths: "you have the true religion?" -I never claimed to have "a religion" - on the contrary, I'm am not religious. The one thing I do believe is that you have 600 emails against you; maybe you should spend less time fighting in your futile religiously insane scheming. Then maybe people wouldn't dislike you so much. Give it a thought! "And I cant answer" - So Marco, since you refuse to answer for your case against logic and reasoning, we may go no further in our discussion; I hence bid you farewell. I await your doubtless predicable religious fanatic response, and after you're done typing away, you may then continue spending your time attacking others online. Goodday Marco
@@Rich7714 Hi Nick, good morning as it is here. Good to see you interested in truth, truly curious what you got... You: "You could almost be considered the personification of Passive Aggressiveness, Marco." >>> Do you think I should be a bit more aggressive like Dawkins and his disciples (not all of course!, maybe not even many since humans do like to reduce life to a comfortable level... )? Ok, I will work on my skills to get into the real fights. You: "Interesting. You may want to work on your grammar & spelling though, as it contributes to your incoherence, which is already near the extreme due to your religious fanaticism." >>> Sure I am a fan of my world view, are you not? Why are you writing me? To get your thoughts more clear? To defend your religion (of course you have none, right?) To be honest, I have no clue what you mean here, since I usually dont write much about what I believe to be true, so please tell me what you are referring to here. The subject cant be Evolution since it is not religious or is it? I consider it a gullible faith which makes many people who kind of militantly believe in it - religious. Some I have met are true religious fanatics about their faith. Its shocking how they can put a good old roman catholic or believing muslime to shame. Anyway, lets see what else you got, but please dont forget to inform me what you think about my religious content in order that I may understand you. Sadly I have not much time to learn English. So if you are unable to catch the content please move somewhere else unless you have a religious need to mission and to convert me to your faith/religion - then I will understand your desire to understand me correctly. My spanish is worse then my English. Whats your second language Nick? You: "When you complain that my perfectly reasonable response is a "rant", ..." >>> Would you please c&p your perfect reasonable response again? I have not found a logical argument Nick. You do know that some people do actually think they have perfect reasonable beliefs while all it is is tales. So please give me the exact quote what you are referring to that I may see what you in your belief system call perfect reasonable response. It may be reasonable to you but not valid at all, right? You: "...when you yourself then go on to provide a rant 10x larger, " >>> I love it to parrot the religious gullible evolutionists. BTW I learn dit from them I think (again, not all are militant aggressive religious missioners and ranters!, but see, the silent one I dont read often since they are silent, so most people at plataformas are quite "active" in their zeal to say it carefully, right? You are an excemption of course I tend to believe. ) You: "...you show a rather excessive amount of hypocricy." >>> No Nick, that does not fly, its hopefully obvious or I need to increase my copying of militant Atheists in order to make it absolutely and unmistakably clear that I am doing the parody and trying to mirror those guys. If you are not among the task force of that sect - just dont feel triggered at all and smile and watch the games. You: " If you misinterpret logic & reasoning for "ranting", then you will forever be unable to engage in dialogue with people." >>> I understand what you are saying here, but you presume that you have reasoned logically. I have not seen it yet. See, there are people out there who believe that the theory of evolution is a good sound their and that evolution is a fact. Great faith! But is just deception. And they brag and wallow in their supposed scientific educated enlightened superstition. Is such not painful to see? What say you? How can one think that random mutation and natural selection is writing complex software? Whats wrong in the mind? You: "As you say "And I cant answer such post.", which I find rather predictable; opposing oneself to logic & reason rarely grants the religiously insane a successful rebuttal." >>> Sorry, please quote the section you are referring to. You: "I notice you also enjoy putting words in peoples' mouths: "you have the true religion?" -I never claimed to have "a religion" - on the contrary, I'm am not religious." >>> Oh you believe you are not religious? Thats quiet interesting. You made my day for sure! Hey Nick all world view is religion or all religion is world view. You may have a definition for religion that does tell you that it involves eating fish on Friday and having a supranatural power being worshipped and I dont want to disturb you in your sleep, but I am not bying such special talk. Its like "I dont have believe in NOgod, I just lack faith in a deity. Whats that? I give you list with premises and you make your cross (*x*) or *o* in every line and when you are done: thats your belief system. Your religion. Your faith. Your creed. Your world view. You may play with words and make yourself happy to tell yourself you are not religious. Fine. Ok. I see it rather simple: There is ONE true religion out there since I believe that truth real exists. And if your faith is not that true one then you have a false religion. So you can call it a false faith - fine with me. Believe that you have no religion but faith - fine, be happy! You: "The one thing I do believe is that you have 600 emails against you; " >>> It was a fictive number but I understand your faith since it fits your faith! I get this one. Thats why evolutionists like to read about evolution - it fits the faith, You: "..maybe you should spend less time fighting in your futile religiously insane scheming." >>> Thats your religious preset and I tend to understand your programming, so you have few choice to put me in any other box but such as your religion has for me. And you feel so good if you think that you are none religious and you can look at me and think: poor religious fellow. Again, what do you believe that I believe why you call me religious insane schemist? What was I confessing that you are referring to? You last line looks rather as you are a victim of religious framing of your camp Nick? Awake? Or dulled into all kinds of stereotype and thinking put on holidays? I cant wait for your answer where you will put things together for me! BTW, I could call you exactly the same and you have no arguments to refute it. Thats the problem when you do the parrot of phrase form your church, you need to substantiate it. Cant wait .... Then maybe people wouldn't dislike you so much. Give it a thought! You: " "And I cant answer" - So Marco, since you refuse ..." >>> Nononono Nick, thats your faith! But since you still beloieve you made an argument - please qute it and I will be happy to have fun with it. I just have not seen a locical valid argument yet. Not even in this opost is even a remote argument, Its rant only. No fact, no theory, no quote of any other person, no reference no own thought yet. Only stereotypes against me. Its a failed argument, except the one you posted which I have not seen. Please post it as a quote. thx. You: "to answer for your case against logic and reasoning, we may go no further in our discussion;" >>> Sorry, you have started a discussion? Are you sure Nick? Not in this post and some can see! (people with your programming will not see it since they think like you think which is likely for most people coming out of 10 years constant programming and framing. (Do you know foren where people thumb up each otghers nonsnese? Amazing to see how programming works. And all thats contrary to their faith will be attacked but notb argued. They cant argue the case most often since they never thought through their own position - some can live even for decades without having heard any contrary opinion. Thats the framed world we have arrived at after 70 years public school in the west. And logic is not even taught. Is this not crazy? Its also called indoctrination and Dawkins would call it child abuse in his religious zeal. Poor fellow, but I think he is playing the game ... anyway, he is almost done and will pass as we all will maybe. You: " I hence bid you farewell." >>> Have a good time Nick and enjoy the great world. You: "I await your doubtless predicable religious fanatic response, " >>>Sure, I need to answer your predictable religious fanatic position. But I am also looking forward to your empty religious predictable answer from the program playback. Its all in the 600 mails/posts. 99% of all people are inline with the program. Very predictable. Its so tough that they are almost identical. >That in itself is not a problem since if something would be true ..... the confessing of that truth would be identical. But so it is with your church and their creed - identical for all subscribers. And so they confess together: WE believe...... You: "...and after you're done typing away, you may then continue spending your time attacking others online. " >>> What I wonder is why you wasted your time attacking me. Any idea Nick? If you are aware - there is a lack of clear self view. If you are not aware - there is another problem de to the program. Get out Nick, save your mind. Its a dead religion you serve. A false religion. Materialism is a false premise of a world view (religion)
I love that man! I have a man, brain crush on him. He has thought me so much watching his videos and reading his books and even better he has helped me learn how to think and how to ask myself proper questions.
I like his barbed retorts, but that does put others off listening to what he says. Have you seen his 90s Christmas Lectures at the Royal Science Institute on Evolution? Pure science without the distraction of controversy.
"and the people who say evolution is not real, because we can't see it." We can't see creation happening, so I guess that means creation isn't real either.
@@BedsitBob the world is in a state of regression which is evident in the condition of global affairs which we are all aware of. I simply cling on to the hope that regression is not infinite but at some point, all things are going to take a turn for the better. Indeed, I believe in the evolution of the human race to become a better version of ourselves such that we may be rid of our present faults. I contend that we share in same hope. Let us not lose hope in humanity even in these dire times. Peace brother.
The real argument is that we see zero transitional forms. The idea that all the transitional forms died out is ridiculous. Statistically, if animals evolve over millions of years, we should end up with more transitional forms than both the beginning and ending forms combined.
All living things are transitional forms. If you're looking for a half-fish, half-lion, you'll have to use a book of fairy tales like the bible. You are a transiotnal form between your parents and your childre. The changes are slow and graduated. There are however famous fossils that clearly demonstrate this process. Archeopteryx clearly shows the link between dinosaurs and birds. It has features of both.
It is very lucky that we have fossils at all. Most bones do not fossilize. Every fossil we have is a transitional form, though. It is an intermediate stage between what came before and what came after. Also remember that fossils are only one branch of the evidence for evolution.
Why? He is lying more then most others - so why do you want more people who spread lies and abuse kids (his own judgement). This man is a professional liar and deceiver, so what do you mean with your comment? You want MORE people like him so that you can swallow more of the lies? I dont understand you!
@Keel hi Keel, that's a subjective statement and i welcome your search for truth. Do you have a littlr time to give an argument! I mean there is some entertainment in exchanging some statements but i would prefer a bit of meaning, virtue, argument. Thx. Its easy, just quote me and ad your critic/refutation.
@@marcob9124 pls try debunking scientific research without referring to a bible which has no correlation to whatever scientific research i give you, aka the one they talk about in the vid, the lizard -evolving- to adapt into the new environment it was placed in in a couple decades
@@charlestonianbuilder344 Hi Charlestonian, good to see you in search for truth again! Appreciate it much! You: "pls try debunking scientific research without referring to a bible which has no correlation to whatever scientific research i give you,..." >>> I mentioned the bible? Are you sure you mean me? >>> Please give me the research you have in mind and I will be happy to have a look at it. If you dont give me one I cant refute it, right? You: "..aka the one they talk about in the vid, the lizard evolving to adapt .. >>> Sorry to interrupt you, but has it evolved or has it adapted? Adaptation is when you have a feature in the genome that is beneficial in changing environment and will be promoted by the known and understood principles of natural selection. Whats not there cant be promoted. So you (by faith in the content of the vid) claim that the lizard did actually evolve - which means that they received by random mutation or copying errors in the early hours/days of growing life form a new feature which was not there before. I would be happy if you can give me the theory how that would be done by random events. I am simply suggesting here that you know something of how much information is needed for a protein or a cell. So I am highly interested in that case how new traits actually came into this world. Thats something like white mice getting somehow color over some decades..... I mean are you sure you believe what you have heard and seen? Or is it rather that the lizard was promoted with different features then he was using in the past where they have had no advantage? You: "....the lizard "evolving" to adapt into the new environment it was placed in in a couple decades. >>> I think I answered it in well understandable terms . Your turn please.
R. B.L. Ahh, at the great creator of miracles, Jesus, had to curse a fruit tree for not bearing in fruit out of season. One would think that making fruit appear on the tree regardless, would be easier than the bread and fishes story.
no, it's not. there isn't one. since you say that, do you also "believe in" "souls"? that's a requirement according to all woowoo belief systems for an "afterlife". "souls" originate from when humans didn't know that air was particulate matter. they saw and felt the effects of air and noticed that you'd die if you couldn't breathe. this is also why they called dust "devils" "dust devils" - because they appeared out of nowhere, threw stuff around and then disappeared. they thought air was a "spirit"/"god" that would infuse you with a "soul" when you were born and that you'd "give up the ghost" (breathe your last) when you die and that your "soul" (hot air that you exhaled before dying) would go wherever any woowoo made-up claimed magical place a particular population wanted it to go to. the reason strong alcohol was and still is called "spirits" is because those people (who didn't know what gases are) saw that when they opened a bottle of strong alcohol, there would be alcohol vapour, didn't know what it was and called that a spirit too. meanwhile we still haven't gotten rid of any of that woo, even after learning it wasn't magic. same with humans thinking they have a "soul" now and that they'll "go somewhere when they die". no, not in the ground where you won't "rest in peace" - you're not there anymore, the chemical processes in your brain that produces you ends. instead your "soul" (hot air from your lungs) goes wherever you were brought up "believing". because they don't know that the primitive people thought that air was a spirit, nor do they care. after all, they'll just make-believe otherwise, as do those who know "their" stories aren't real but it makes them feel good because they were indoctrinated since before toddlerhood to think otherwise - "believe in" whatever your society largely repeats to you before you're even able to process information.
While growing up in Bombay (Mumbai now), we had a neighbour in an apartment above us who became mentally ill at some point. He regularly threw his faeces wrapped up in a newspaper out of his window onto the courtyard below. Ah, memories...
The error in the quoran comes from the two seas that meet and have slightly different colours so to explain it they say salt and fresh water does not mix. Due to the fact they didn't understand what was going on.
“He released the two seas, meeting [side by side]; between them is a barrier [so] neither of them transgresses.” That is the quote. That is reletively specific and from 1400 years ago, that is insane (and not even mentioning the hundreds of other facts). The term transgress merely means, that, the salt water cannot take over the other density water. They meet, but Do Not transgress, exactly how the quran states. I understand it was hard for you to understand, but dont make false statements and just falsify the entire religion and quran off a statement which u did not properly understand. All the scholars say this, and if you want to make your own definition of a statement in the quran, you have the right to do so as we we live in a ‘free’ society.
@@libansheikh7067 here is a little clue into the "skill of God" www.adn.com/science/article/mythbusting-place-where-two-oceans-meet-gulf-alaska/2013/02/05/ The barrier doesn't remain and over time the seas do mix. It's just that 1400 years ago people didn't know enough to know this.
@@deanmoncaster the article that you read was written to prove that sediment rich rivers and generl ocean water do indeed mix. The quran does not refer to this example as this photo took place in 2010. Alaska and modern day saudi arabia are on different parts of the map. by giving this example, you r assuming that prophet mohhammed saw something similar to that photo and made that verse. "He is the one who has set free the two kinds of water, one sweet and palatable, and the other salty and bitter. And He has made between them a barrier and a forbidding partition." Modern science has discovered that in estuaries, where fresh (sweet) and salt water meet, the situation is somewhat different from what is found in places where two seas meet. It has been discovered that what distinguishes fresh water from salt water in estuaries is a “pycnocline zone with a marked density discontinuity separating the two layers.” The human eye cannot see the difference between the two seas that meet, rather the two seas appear to us as one homogeneous sea. Likewise, the human eye cannot see the division of water in estuaries into the three kinds: fresh water, salt water, and the partition (zone of separation). heres another articlewritten a couple monthsafter than the one u linked www.geologypage.com/2017/11/atlantic-pacific-ocean-not-mix.html read what it says "It’s not two oceans meeting, its glacial melt water meeting the off shore waters of gulf of Alaska. The reason for this strange phenomenon is due to the difference of water density, temperature and salinity of the glacial melt water and off shore waters of gulf of Alaska, making it difficult to mix." this does not contradict wht the quran says because, they become part of the otherbodyof water, butdo not transgress. transgress would refer to a body of water overtaking another,which does not occur.
Hoping you are doing well Richard, I know it has been exhausting for you to reach out. And that it is hard work. But, your hard work helped me see the absurdity of a literal Adam and Eve.
@@helenhollis3984 Wow, so much for the civilizing effects of religion. But to be fair, there are also atheists who are crude and rude. Sucks to be them. Good on you. Cheers from sunny Vienna, Scott
@@therealzilch Scott, if you want fair, try posting anything in North Korea! I am ecstatic that religious people talk the way they do. Let the world see their hypocricy.
@@jpturner9452 It's only due to migration. Those who travelled north became paler skinned to compensate for the lack of sunlight. Humans need sunlight to begin the synthesis of cholesterol to Vitamin D. The more melanin (pigment) in the skin, the harder it is for the body to absorb the sunlight. Therefore people in areas with less sunlight have paler skin, in order to absorb more when the sun is actually out.
actually salt water and fresh water do not mix (instantly and without energy)... 2 reasons for this, first density and second osmosis (as far as i am aware of). Salt water is more dense and osmosis isent an instant process. You can try this at home by putting a fresh water ice cube in a glass of salt water, and at the end just add ever so slightly a drop or two of food die.
Primate life in the trees safe from grounded predators caused the evolution of the agility and dynamic brains(and hands) that have made humanity so powerful. I understand evolution and I also know spirituality to be real. My brother and I both enjoyed Sir Dawkins' book "The Selfish Gene" in our youth... and Dawkins is still on top of it. Yes, "We are all Africans."
no I saw that episode the girl talked about natural phenomena that quran describes that in some place on earth salt water and fresh water don't mix she didn't mean that in general salt water and fresh water don't mix and now I see why edward wilson called richard dawkins a journalist search for that phenomena please
Look what Jesus said in John 14:27, Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid. Please note, Jesus also did not denied that world can give us peace too but He said My Peace is not like as world gives to you. True follower of Christ live in peace during time of hopeless situation too. Sir, No cancer, no tribulation, no failure, no terrorist, no death can steal peace and joy of True Christians
I can't really say when I stopped believing but it took at least 20 years of reading, studying religion, and science. Belief systems die hard in some of us. I'm 69 years old now
Jeffrey Phillips I take my hat off to you Jeffrey. I can't imagine how difficult it would be to leave a worldview, I was not born into a theistic family and I'll never know what that's like.
It is sad and infuriating to me how children are taught to be against science today. It isn't that they are not taught science anymore. They are taught contempt for it. In a time we know so much more. Discoveries made daily. These children. are kept in the dark. There is a small window, until about age ten. If a child is not curious, questioning and interested science, they are likely never to be in their life. How many extraordinary minds are we losing?
Saying "Richard Dawkins on evolution" is like saying "Lawrence Krause on astrophysics" and "Stephen hawking on quantum physics.." (I understand what the title meant and I'm only making a joke, no need to get offended)
What he said about the muslim school was false though, the quran does not say that salt and fresh water dont mix but rather mentions on the boundaries that exist in large water bodies i.e oceans and lakes, and that has been scientifically proven that boundaries develop in large water bodies primarily due to the density difference between fresh and salty water and even between salt waters themselves as it has been observed that their exist a clear boundaries between the different oceans
I have most often seen the argument when it is made about estuaries. Yes differences in salinity establish a pycnocline characterized by differences in specific gravity of the waters which can appear persistent. Nevertheless at the point where the water masses meet, there is significant homogenization of the two masses, and eventually, you can't tell what came from where.
getting greatest show of earth in a couple of weeks :) can't wait! his videos are great and I'm sure his books are too. I've always been going for atheism and for science for years now but his videos has made me so confident in science, I could walk around the house alone with all the lights off without showing the least bit of worry cause I know nothing paranormal exists.
Thanks to Nightwish I got to know Richard Dawkins and I am ever so grateful! I am reading 'The greatest Show on Earth' now (I actually just read the lizard-part) and I have learned so much already. I too was in religious schools (christian in my case) and was never taught anything about the evolution theory. Thanks to Richard Dawkins I also got to know Christopher Hitchens and they both are and will be true heroes. By the work they did they will live on forever. In Dutch there is a song that says 'I have laid a stone in the water and its course will never be the same again'. This is what Richard Dawkins and Christopher (and many others) have done for mankind.
How nice you love being stoooo-pid too. Richard Dawkins teaches the universe came from "literally nothing." Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. We can't get anything from "literally nothing." We can't even get science without God. The laws of nature only can come from a Lawgiver, God. God is the reason for us and all we have. ruclips.net/video/JiMqzN_YSXU/видео.html “However improbable the origin of life might be, we know it happened on Earth because we are here.” -Richard Dawkins. We only get life from life...the law of biogenesis. We can't get anything without God. The odds are NOT there. ruclips.net/video/W1_KEVaCyaA/видео.html ruclips.net/video/yW9gawzZLsk/видео.html ruclips.net/video/ddaqSutt5aw/видео.html No, the eye did not evolve into various eyes. Your mere chance mutations are absurd. ruclips.net/video/X7h2HWcTwa4/видео.html Even Dawkins admits we can't know what is true because of natural selection... The God Delusion, “Since we are creatures of natural selection, we cannot totally trust our senses. Evolution only passes on traits that help a species survive, and not with preserving traits that tell a species what is actually true about life.” Oh, but Dawkins knows what's true about life...killing those who don't meet his expectations for living. dailycaller.com/2021/05/19/richard-dawkins-down-syndrome-roe-v-wade/
I love the fact that Bill Maher could make Richard Dawkins laugh. that ought to show everyone that Richard has a great sense of humor. but he should still be taken seriously.
Why the hell do we have mohamedans in Britain, to begin with? If Christians tried to teach Christianity in Saudi Arabia, they would literally lose their heads.
@@SimSim-zf9if ...but they can not preach, let alone open schools (or drink, hold hands, allow women to drive, and so on). Once again, who the hell needs them?
Can't believe humans are still questioning logic & scene in 21st century! Makes scene though , took us beasts millions of years to get here & even question anything . Can't expect us to just forget & let go the primal survival technique of "if others believe then it must be true " !
@K Chandra Prakash (lmfaao) Err so what do YOU believe happened? What do YOU believe how this whole planet was created? How human beings came about? What? What was that you said? Ohhhh right. YOU think that some magician in the sky suddenly,spontaniously made a 'man'. But later on he thought, hang on a sec, lets give this man a mate. So he reached into his body,ripped out 1 of his ribs and .. viola, woman was created? But it does'nt stop there does it? Oh no. This 'God'? he created the WHOLE universe, the entire cosmos AND the stars, the galaxies, everything. He then went on to create Earth too. Yep, EVERYTHING on this planet, 'God' created' .AND, not ONLY thats, but he managed to do it in (wait for it), 6 DAYS! WOW what a truly magnificent God he MUST be huh?(and YOU call ME the 'idiot'?) pmfpl. Get a life dude. :)
@@kitty87888 ...yea if u understand tamil ..u can check out the Tamil chintanai peravai channel, I think that's the name of the channel, I'm not a tamilian, so I can't pronounce it to properly.. he has made a video about it,..
I was around 10 or 12 when i started questioning the existence of God.I'm 55 now,and i lived a good life without him. :) Meanwhile,a lot of my religious friends are long gone,so i am asking you,where is the advantage ?!
They weren't and scientists claim. Cells evolved at a later point. Scientists believe life began as a relatively simple self-replicating molecule. Scientists have created RNA molecules that self-replicate and do so at an exponential rate.
@@torotanaka3788 Yeah, scientists 'claim' and 'believe' lots of things when it comes to abiogenesis - but they prove nothing They are practicing scientism, not science
They have shown how a self-replicating molecule can form. How does that prove "nothing"? How is that not "science"? (By the way evolution and abiogenesis are separate topics. Evolution would function in the same manner regardless of how life first arose.)
You lack basic logic and make no sense. The science of chemistry can demonstrate how and why a chemical process can work in nature. Chemists cannot create a molecule in violation of the laws of chemistry. Cells aren't "randomly" created but rather via the decidedly non-random process of natural selection. Moreover, molecules do not form or interact "randomly" but rather according to their inherent chemical properties. (Carbon molecules are particularly prone to forming long, complex chains.) If it were otherwise the science of chemistry would not work. You really have no idea what you are talking about.
Not against any religion but that's a fact even I can relate to , I personally have lot of Muslim friends they accept what they hear from Qur'an , no argument no thoughts no sophisticated questions at all .. which is quite dangerous Nooffense
I'm guessing you're a Christian that wants to bash Islam. Though they share similarities, Islam and Christianity are different in their own ways. For example we don't believe in a _global_ flood - literally historically impossible We don't believe in a god on earth + the trinity- logically impossible We don't believe the earth was created in 6 defined periods of time (days, millennia) - scientifically impossible Bash Islam if you want to, but Christianity will never make much sense
I do believe Muhammed made the moon appear to be split. This could mean he actually split it or it appeared to be, for example he could have forced the phenomenon known as a "moon dog" to appear, but yes I do believe he performed the miracle
What? We believe the Arabs asked him for a sign of his prophethood and they saw the miracle, it's not a mircale to be seen for the people of today. And the verse says the shooting stars are for jhins who try to steal information from heaven, quite frankly I don't see the problem with that, there's no counter evidence for the meta-physical
Not a Muslim but I think the Quran was referring to how the Pacific and Atlantic Ocean do not mix and how deep-sea underwater does not mix with top water.
Why does every evolution video have people bickering about God? Why can't we debate on what ancestors whales had or Dolphins. Or if the turtles double back to the ocean or not.
Dustin Arthurs Because unfortunately religion tends to be the main opposition to evolution (and science in general), thus it gets in the way of scientific endeavors all too often.
![Run Away - Tzuyu(TWICE) ツウィ 쯔위 [Music Bank] | KBS WORLD TV 240906](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/KnHNNyAYiu0/mqdefault.jpg)
"Keep religion out of schools. And politics." 👏👏👏👏👏
Then i wonder why abortion rates, theft and murder rates went significantly higher than before once the Bible stopped being taught at school.
@@IssyFishyy It has nothing to do with religion. There are other social factors at play, stuff like liberalizing crime isn't in anyway connected to a collective disbelief in god. Atheists just like theists are mixed with people who hold moral values in high regard and the ones that don't.
@@vignesh1065 Yes, i know that correlation doesn’t imply causation. But the fact that there is correlation indicates something.
For example, child sacrifice was considered a barbaric act once Christianity came around. And the fact that laws themselves were based off religions.
Whether you believe in it or not, you can’t deny that religion does a great job (Albeit, not perfect) at stabilizing morality.
@@IssyFishyy False. Religion damages morality.
@@Mr-DNA_
Sure, talk is cheap. Give evidence.
Holy shit , that guy became an atheist at the age of 16!!! I became an atheist at the age of 39 after a long slavery in the terror of islam.
I was Atheist from birth on...
Selvatore bonucci :: Well done mate, every credit to you for doing your own thinking .
Haaa very funny
oof
We all evolve at different rates. I was 40
Evolution is a fact. People who say “it’s a theory” are missing two main points. 1) they do not understand the actual meaning of what a scientific theory. 2) Even saying it’s “a theory” doesn’t exclude the fact that evolution is a FACT. The theory explains how evolution happens.
Indeed, a scientific theory is something that is almost certain. The word in science for ideas is hypothesis.
@Monica Merino smh
@Monica Merino three letters: D N A
@Monica Merino The common link among all life can be found in DNA. All creatures on Earth share the same genetic code. If we didn't all have common ancestors, all the way back to the first single-celled organisms, we might expect to then see different genetic codes in the present set of extant species. If even a single exception were to be found that couldn't be explained, we would have to re-think our theory of evolution and the origin of species.
@Monica Merino Is this what you mean?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transitional_fossil
There are not enough people of Richard’s calibre around. Thank you Richard for your stamina, bravery, character and clarity of thought
Indeed. I'm making a point of replying primarily to remind you 3 years later.
First time I've personally seen it, and yes, I am drunk.
@@stevelaw3886 q
LMAO
Steven, you are really stoo-pid.
Richard Dawkins teaches the universe came from "literally nothing."
Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it.
We can't get anything from "literally nothing." We can't even get science without God. The laws of nature only can come from a Lawgiver, God.
God is the reason for us and all we have.
ruclips.net/video/JiMqzN_YSXU/видео.html
“However improbable the origin of life might be, we know it happened on Earth because we are here.” -Richard Dawkins.
We only get life from life...the law of biogenesis. We can't get anything without God.
The odds are NOT there.
ruclips.net/video/W1_KEVaCyaA/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/yW9gawzZLsk/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/ddaqSutt5aw/видео.html
No, the eye did not evolve into various eyes. Your mere chance mutations are absurd.
ruclips.net/video/X7h2HWcTwa4/видео.html
Even Dawkins admits we can't know what is true because of natural selection...
The God Delusion, “Since we are creatures of natural selection, we cannot totally trust our senses. Evolution only passes on traits that help a species survive, and not with preserving traits that tell a species what is actually true about life.”
Oh, but Dawkins knows what's true about life...killing those who don't meet his expectations for living.
dailycaller.com/2021/05/19/richard-dawkins-down-syndrome-roe-v-wade/
What a great reason for faith 😂
I worked in a prison for 25 years.
Some humans DO throw their feces.
I work with developmentally disabled adults.... Can confirm.
lol oh man, that comment is, already, my fave comment of 2019.
TheNeonRabbit That might’ve been me. Sorry!
I have shit in a bag and put a firecracker down the bag
Or maybe you say shat in past tense? Yeah i shat in a bag
It's good to see him have a nice time in an interview.
For once.. 😂😂
This man brings a smile on my face every time.. He’s my role model and my hero!
Why? He is a bitter little man who thinks he knows it all and mocks anyone with a different point of view.
@@jamespalmer980 He's a public spokesperson for rational thinkers, an advocate for free thinking. Freeing the mind from all delusions of Religion. People are scared to think outside the bubble because they can't comprehend rationalism
As a woman, he gives me the creeps. His association with Jeffrey Epstein is a big red flag.
@@jamespalmer980 Religion deserves to be mocked.
@@jamespalmer980 No, he mocks people who are massively ignorant and proudly spew out their ignorant nonsense. He is quite accepting of people who have a different point of view.
You are welcome to your own opinion - you are not welcome to your own (alleged) facts.
British people. So polite that they complement before insulting.
Nice comment - fucktard.
We also love irony.
@@inkwellflood8276
...abd maideny !
😉
inkwell flood Perfect.
Compliment?
We build you up and then strike you down.. its an art.
Let's face it, anyone who says evolution is a lie , hasn't been able to shake off their childhood religious indoctrination
Let's face it your still can't see the truth only made up nonsense
Evolution is brainless blind has no mind can't think .you people do the thinking for the false reason for intelligent life
@@rayolight9744 how god damn ironic
@@w8m4n God before there brainless theories that's true
@@rayolight9744 ...what?
@@w8m4n GOD before you being anything at all do you understand
I wish he would live forever...greeting from Slovakia :)
Yeah, seeing him now is a bit sad, but that's life :)
@AllSeeingEye ofGod That is spectacularly stupid
@AllSeeingEye ofGod Which god are you referring to? One of the thousands of current ones or some of the previous ones that people don't believe in anymore?
@AllSeeingEye ofGod This has to be the weirdest parody account on youtube.
@AllSeeingEye ofGod why are you so desperate for evolution to be false? It's almost like you have your mind already set on something else.
Richard Dawkins like Christopher Hitchenson will live forever in our hearts and mind. We are blessed that they walk this planet
Forever only exists in the belief of eternity
His surname was Hitchens not Hitchenson.
@LOLYOU DOOF yep thank God he exist right?
Respectfully, what did Dawkins and Hitchens do for us?
I was thinking the same
" that is spectacularly stupid"- the great Richard Dawkins
michael Lombard was it always a was it naturally that way no
That line needs to become a meme!
Evolution is spectacularly stupid!
But don't forget Dawkins is possessed by a demon.
Check his handwriting.
@@rosewhite--- evolution is a process; how can you characterize a process as stupid?
@@user-jy2sz1jr9p Easy - only stupid like you believe the THEORY of evolution is real - but you can't provide a single missing link to verify it - so that make you and your silly THEORY stupid!
He adds meaning to clarity, what a brilliant guy. I am so lucky to have been born and around his time. It's an honour. Thank you so much Richard Dawkins Sir for cracking all lunatic nuts around. You will be remembered for ever SIR. LONG LIVE SIR RICHARD DAWKINS.
@@rickrandomites What a lucky guy you are all the best.
Did you know that Dawkins got eleven holes in one first time he played golf?
Evolution is a fact not a belief
Kian Swami
I by no means deny evolution but still there is a reason I don't like Dawkins anymore. Dawkins is promoting evolution like religion and you just to believe in it as a fact. Sounds familiar? It's kinda like saying *Jesus died for you believe it or go to hell*.
Use the Scientific Method to prove it right now then.
@@al7422 Evolution is a fact regardless of what others believe because it's been verified through countless studies. The main difference is that evolution has empirical evidence to back it up while religion makes nonsensical claims that relies on wishful thinking, willful ignorance, and blind faith. Dawkins is simply stating facts to try and relieve people of their ignorance of an ancient book with no proof to support the claims made
@@kraokingxyz1397
Did I ever say anything against evolution. And studies have proven evolution empirically but not the origin of human( because you can't go back in time or recreate the same scenario)
My problem with Dawkins is the way he preaches evolution is just wrong. And his followers have made a cult around him which makes it hard to disagree with him without getting an outburst from the toxic following.
“Evolution” is a fairy tale and fairy tales are fictitious...... to the OPPOSITE of facts, Slappy!
If ever a movie needed to cast a college professor, Dawkins could play the role perfectly. Damn, he LOOKS like what you'd expect one to look like.
To be a Theist, one must suspend all logic, reason, sense and facts.
you would think that, but you'd be surprised when you break down what belief aligns the most with our beliefs that right and wrong do exist.
saxmanchiro not really.
Dawkins is agnostic.
saxmanchiro well said
+saxmanchiro Isaac Newton, Nikolas Kopernikus, and Galileo Galilei all believed in God. According to your logic, all these three scientists suspended "all logic, reason, sense and facts".
"That is spectacularly stupid"😂😂😂😂
Winston Grettum are you talking about Richard Dawkins?
One of the smartest men around. One of the smartest at the explanation and the easiest to understand. I have often been held in awe of this man. Cheers Richard.
I do like RD but he doesn't go for the throat like Hitchens, he is a bit too soft on his opponents.......admittedly, he has little time for mindless fools who are beyond reason, but hitch loved to ridicule everyone regardless of their intellect & he did so with ease, slapping the shit out of their argument for the supernatural.
@@Mark3-16 source?
@@dyschromotopia wtf is with his brother?
@@stevelaw3886 Christ knows, it is mind boggling how their beliefs, views & reasoning can be polar opposites. Maybe Peter thought he would forever be in Christopher's shadow if he shared the same perspective & opinion?
@@dyschromotopia perhaps that's it. Unfortunately for him, the end result is he's still in his shadow, except he's also a smug w***** and a disinformation peddler with it.
Evolution, The Greatest Show on Earth is more spiritual and amazing than any religious nonsense out there.
agreed it is bullshit....
Give this a watch Jon. With all respect.
ruclips.net/video/fXFKJhUGNS8/видео.html
Who create that greatest show on earth.
Would you mind to tell what you mean by religious nonsense and what would be your favorite example for your belief?
Also I need to say that your post is ambiguous and the meaning may only be known to you.
"That is spectacularly stupid" 😂🤣😂🤣
Saddest vid is Dr Dawkins hugging Christopher Hitchens at one of his last appearances.
Tracy LF that was indeed a very sad moment, we truly lost a powerfully moral and witty man...
Absolutely Its heart breaking to watch, I've watched it several times and I would watch it many more times. but it's quite painful to watch, it was Christopher Hitchens last public lecture and he died about two weeks later. yes Hitch was something else.
I imagen people are thinking pokemon when evolution is the topic.
IAmAnApeJustLikeYou Ape OMG you might actually be right about their misconception lol. The Pokemon phenomenon should actually be called 'metamorphosis' to not be confused with darwinian evolution
IAmAnApeJustLikeYou Ape But also it would be nice if Americans would have proper education in school, so that they cannot think this much bullshit about that so metaphysically important scientific theory.
Apes evolve into humans at level 36. You can use a moon stone on them before that but they only evolve into theists and don't learn any new moves.
Some Christian guy asked me why I haven't evolved. He actually had a degree in engineering and maths.
Athiesm was literally created to push communism. Marx invented it lol
Don't you wish you could hear professor Dawkins speak in person? It would be awesome!!!
Why would I want to pay to see and hear an intellectually blind person?
@@davidreinhart418 you are not being directed nor ordered to purchase a ticket to listen to Mr. Dawkins, if you don't feel like listening to the man don't.
"Whether water is salt or fresh, shit floats"
Shit does float better in salt water coz of the density.
If your shit is floating you are eating way to much fat.
Hilarious 😂😂😂
Pure Science is not sewer science the evolution revolution is a pollution, not a solution ? ? ? 😁 😁 😄
@@lwmaynard5180 okay thanks
I was already in my 40's before I lost my faith and became an atheist. Why did it take so long? Perhaps because all my family and friends, my neighbors, my countrymen (USA) are mostly religious. I was afraid to be different.
it's good that you're not GAY too--are ya?
perfect ending! whether waters salty or fresh, shit floats! amen...
C.W Dervin please respect others values.
@@dicktrickle875
Interesting that you go by "Dick."
Bill's last comment really made me laugh. It was very well said. But still, very few atheists are respectful and none condescending. The worst of all to me is Sam Harris. I prefer Dawkins and deGrasse Tyson approach to atheism. I could listen to those two for hours.
Nope. Only some shit floats. If you have enough fiber in your diet it will float. If not, it sinks like a rock. So that statement is bullshit, so to speak.
Dawkins did'nt understand... what they say to him. Two oceans dont mix. But such is Dawkins... He hear only him self. I think that Dawkins laying about this school, just to look like smart on television.
Professor Dawkins is an inspiration and a brilliant educator. Bill Maher is no slow coach either.
you are easily impressed
@Jingoist
There's a 2016 article on the Piltdown fraud, but I don't see a mention of Darwin. What are you looking at?
oh yes he is
truthhurts101 ...... oh my word all you people are totally and utterly daft to believe this nonsense. We are not monkeys . Where is the evidence where is the skeletons of the evolution in motion.
@@roberthawkes2023 Evolution is a fact. The theory of evolution explains those facts. A theory in science is different from how we use it in everyday language. A scientific theory is the interpretation of observations and facts; the pinnacle of achievement in science.
Correct, we are not monkeys. We share a common ancestor with them. This is just one of countless examples that creationists don't understand how evolution works.
We are all that our ancestors were. We are still apes; we are still primates; we are still mammals; we are still tetrapods; we are still vertebrates; we are still animals; and we are still eukaryotes.
Evolution is basically that populations of animals change over time. The most commonly known aspect of evolution is natural selection which is the idea that organisms which are most suited to their environment will survive longer, therefore have more offspring, and therefore their genes will be more prevalent in subsequent generations. This has been observed.
Another definition is change in the heritable characteristics of biological populations over successive generations - or to put it another way; change in allele frequencies over time. That is a FACT, no getting around it.
Refreshing to see Dawkins get to talk with someone who's also intelligent
Yeah but not in this video.
wow you are a good exsample of stupid is as stupid was
He must be speaking of the time he spoke to Neil Tyson
Stephen Yin it's an interesting thought.
typical religious response (meant for David btw)
I _came out_ as an atheist in my late teens early twenties and had to leave my country. Well, I did not have to leave _because_ I became an atheist, but an overly religious society just did not seem appealing to me, and anyway, I really could not fit.
Exactly like Dr Dawkins says, everyday you are reminded how stupidly blind people are. People who are otherwise very intelligent, but yet choose to follow some book because they think it was sent from the heavens by a mystical all-knowing character. That was depressing, and annoying. So I left. Arrivederci.
Thanks for sharing your story. My upbringing was non-religious. It isn't an achievement to be an atheist if you were never religious, so people like you are the true champions or reason in my eyes. I salute you!
When you think that everyone around you is stupid and you are the only wise person, trust me, you are probably at least as stupid as the people around you, if not more stupid. I say this from personal experience.
We do have a common ancestor with bananas! They were protozoa eukaryotic life forms.
Rocky Alfresco yep, with all living things.
Yep
Yobany yes, you can see that all animals look alike in some way or another
Yobany depending on your definition of life it’s possible that’s not true. whether viruses are alive is up for debate. And it frankly depends on your definition, but it’s very likely that they are separate from the evolutionary tree of animals, plants and bacteria. I tend to think pockets dna/rna which propagate and change over time due to natural selection is life. But there is the argument to be made they aren’t self propagating and therefor aren’t alive.
😂😂😂
6:20 - Kim Jong Il?! - that’s nothing: the Greeks awarded Nero a victory in all 1,808 events during a single Olympiad because he gave them a tax break...
This is a man who I would love to be a friend.
Tony, if you ever do befriend him, can you ask him how the universe came exactly from nothing?
Sure, but as he is an evolutionary biologist rather than a cosmologist, he may not be the one to ask. You are making something of an assumption that it "came exactly from nothing" sic
@@tonysuffolk "Sure, but as he is an evolutionary biologist rather than a cosmologist, he may not be the one to ask."
Then why is he saying it if he does not know?
"You are making something of an assumption that it "came exactly from nothing" sic"
"sic", really?
Richard Dawkins sums it up in his afterword: “Even the last remaining trump card of the theologian, ‘Why is there something rather than nothing?,’ shrivels up before your eyes as you read these pages. If ‘On the Origin of Species’ was biology’s deadliest blow to supernaturalism, we may come to see ‘A Universe From Nothing’ as the equivalent from cosmology. The title means exactly what it says. And what it says is devastating.”
Shove that up your sic assuming ass.
Just a small point. The term "sic" does not mean "sick". I would not suggest anything you said was sick; that would just be offensive. Sic means a direct quote, ignoring any grammatical errors.
In this interview Dawkins does not say anything about the origin of the universe we live in.
I'm sorry if you thought I was being rude. There is little to be gained by flinging insults.
The origin of the universe is a huge puzzle and we may never manage to understand how it came into existence. It's a work in progress for Science.
@@tonysuffolk "Sic means a direct quote, ignoring any grammatical errors."
I know exactly what it meant.
"Sic means a direct quote, ignoring any Sic means a direct quote, ignoring any grammatical errors.
What are my "grammatical errors." Dawkins believes in "exactly" nothing created the universe. Would you prefer "literally nothing"? He says that too.
ruclips.net/video/UT3dfPOdAYU/видео.html
"In this interview Dawkins does not say anything about the origin of the universe we live in."
I didn't say he did specifically. He said atheist many times and evolution many times. There's also cosmological evolution. Do you feel ashamed of what Dawkins is saying about nothing and want to change the subject to spare you the embarrassment?
"The origin of the universe is a huge puzzle and we may never manage to understand how it came into existence. It's a work in progress for Science."
Really? Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it.
So you had no idea nothing does nothing. You have no idea about the 1LT and 2LT. You're saying we don't know them? We know them and have NO doubts about them. None.
"There is little to be gained by flinging insults."
They are not insults when I prove the person deserves the title. Doubting a supernatural creation and not what I call a smart person. Saying exactly nothing and literally nothing created the universe is not what I call an intellectual. Maybe you do but not me.
Again, "The origin of the universe is a huge puzzle and we may never manage to understand how it came into existence. It's a work in progress for Science."
If it was such a puzzle why does Dawkins claim to know nothing created the universe? Golly jeepers you walk right into these traps. Science shows it could not have happened naturally. Resorting and hoping in science fiction is for fools. And if that is not stupid enough, to think the laws of nature just came about on their own. You people are not insane, you just chose to be dumbasses.
ALL we know without a doubt proves creation HAD to be supernatural and thus done by a supernatural creator, but you want to be a dumbass along with dumbass Dawkins as he brags about how nice it is to be an atheist.
I will say though, it does make me wonder if you all did evolve from a scum pond seeing the scum you all are. You don't go where the truth leads, you go where your pride leads.
After months of following his work, I finally bought The Selfish Gene and The God Delusion today. Starting with the latter, it's gonna be one hell of a reading sesh 🤣
Both are great reads, enjoy!
You're doing what Dawkins wants you to do. Buy his books and line his pockets instead of think for yourself. Save your money as you can witness The Selfish Gene in any Walmart or sketchy neighborhood. Some men become baby daddies and a woman has kids from three different fathers. If the woman finds a simp male to give her a place to live and help raise the kids, the baby daddies and the mom win. That sums it up and you can save your time with the useless reading.
@@riproar11 retard alert!!!
Christine O' Donnell probably thinks that evolution works like in Pokemon.
@K Chandra Prakash Hahahahahahahaha
K Chandra Prakash I think you’re just interested in what happened to to Malaysian airlines lol
@K Chandra Prakash Nice try troll
@K Chandra Prakash fuck off please
@@AmanExplorerBoy Ah! Richard, after all this time you have finally got around to facing the real question which you and your compatriot Atheists have been avoiding for so many years. That question is ‘’why should religion and faith not be just as much a vital part of evolution as Ducks and frogs having webbed feet to survive.
“Now you can get your secretary to start typing out the next book with this your latest revelation.
Yet the reason you haven’t dared to face such a truth is because, along with all the other Atheists you have known that such an admission would end much of your book signing and lucrative lecture tours forever. Placing your Atheism, and much of your claimed expertise in the ‘’SOLVED’’ BASKET.’’
Richard Dawkins and Christopher hitchens are my hero’s
He speaks the truth and the religious can't take the truth
@AllSeeingEye ofGod I'm not interested in you're copy paste nonsense. Thanks though
@AllSeeingEye ofGod thank you for you comment mate, it is really helpful to debunk the myth of evolution, i'll just suggest to you to do some research about the Holy Coran and take some insights from the Islamic perspective about the Origin of life and the features of The intelligent designer according to the Holy Coran ! Good luck brother and thanks again
people like Richard Dawkins make me proud to be human
Raymond S. Same for me.We need these types of persons to be happy.Because they teach us
I don't know arrogant , I'm the smartest person in any room I walk into types , just rub me wrong .
@@geraldlee7137 But when Dawkins walks into a room he most likely is the smartest person present.
Confidence and arrogance aren't the same.
Only if the room is empty.
@@geraldlee7137 you're probably the smartest person in that room because you're probably the only one in that room lol dumbass comment from a dumbass
You don't believe evolution. You either understand it or you don't. It remains proven in either case. I don't understand Fermat' s last theorem, but it has been proven.
Well said
Non-biogenesis just doesnt happen and life defys entropy..when bowling balls roll uphill thats when molecules will
self-arrange into unstable molecules and genetic codes and trillion cell animals ..its like thinking sand and limestone and iron ore and water will defy their present chemical stability and spontaneously form a concrete and steel building
“The intelligent layman has long suspected circular reasoning in the use of rocks to date fossils and fossils to date rocks.” [ J.E. O’Rourke,
American Journal of Science 1976, 276:51]
“It cannot be denied that from a strictly philosophical standpoint geologists are here arguing in a circle. The succession of organisms has been determined by a study of their remains embedded in the rocks, and the relative ages of the rocks are determined by the remains of organisms that they contain.”
Rastall, R. H., “Geology,” Encyclopedia Britannica, vol. 10 (1949) University of London. P. 168
“Paleontologists cannot operate this way. There is no way simply to look at a fossil and say how old it is unless you know the age of the rocks it comes from.”[date the fossil by the rock]
Eldredge, Niles
“The rocks do date the fossils, but the fossils date the rocks more accurately. Stratigraphy cannot avoid this kind of reasoning if it insists
O’Rourke, J. E
Evolution is based on two faulty assumptions:
1. mutations make something new and 2. natural selection makes it survive and take over the population. Evolution is a religion of death not life.
“No matter how numerous they may be, mutations do not produce any kind of evolution.”
Pierre-Paul Grasse, Evolution of Living Organisms 1977, p. 88
*They rearrange existing information but do not increase genetic complexity
* .
“In all the reading I’ve done in the life-sciences literature, I’ve never found a mutation that added information. . . . All point mutations that have been studied on the molecular level turn out to reduce the genetic information and not increase it.”
Lee Spetner, Not By Chance!: Shattering the Modern Theory of Evolution (Brooklyn, N.Y.: Judaica Press, 1997), 131, 138.
“Natural selection may have a stabilizing effect, but it does not promote speciation. It is not a creative force as many people have suggested.”
Daniel Brooks “A downward Slope to Greater Diversity,” Science, Vol. 217, 24 September 1982, p. 1240
“Natural selection can act only on those biologic properties that already exist; it cannot create properties in order to meet adaptational needs.”
Parasitology, 6th ed. Lea & Febiger, p. 516.
Survival of the fittest does not explain the arrival of the fittest!
By the way: “Survival of the fittest” is a tautology.
Q. Why did it survive? A. Because it is the fittest.
Q. How do you know it is the fittest? A. Because it survived.
^ circular reasoning
if survival of the strongest or fittest was real, then humans would'nt even exist today. There are many animals in the animal kingdom much stronger and fitter than the average human. or even the strongest human.
if you find a fossil in the dirt, all you know is it died. you can't prove it had any kids, and you sure can't prove it had different kids
It is not proven, and it is barely a theory. 'Evolution' contains a number of elements, with varying degrees of evidence proposed to them.
Paul K Paul K the age of a rock is determined by measuring the relative amounts of radioactive decay products in the rock sample to their parent material (the decay products accumulate at a known rate). From this ratio and the decay rate, you can easily determine how old the rock is. This technique is called radiometric dating. So everything you said about circular reasoning of geologists is flat wrong. Sorry man, I’m not trying to be rude but you really need to know that.
Also, I think you said something like evolution falsely assumes that mutations lead to changes. Evolution does not assume that. Who told you that?... Most mutations have either no effect on phenotype or a negative effect (in which case the organism is less likely to survive in its particular environment). Over time, whole populations of organisms accumulate and pass on beneficial mutations, so their phenotypes change to make them better suited to survive and reproduce in their environment.
I didn’t exactly read all of your referenced quotes, but I did see one that said something like: I have not seen a mutation that adds “information” to the organism. What on earth does that mean?
Finally, in regard to your argument that humans shouldn’t have even survived based on natural selection because they are way weaker than other animals on the African savannah. I’ll challenge that argument... Sure, I’ll grant that a single human is really weak compared to other animals. But what important ability do we have that none of the other animals have?.. The ability to communicate complex thoughts through language! This allowed us to build effective tools, coordinate hunts and easily bring down animals that are much bigger, stronger, and dumber than us... Hopefully that example can help you see that fitness is not simply about individual brute strength.
count69 here are the “elements” of evolution:
1. Every time DNA replicates, there is a small chance that the replication enzymes will make a mistake (i.e., mutation) and produce a new strand with a slightly different sequence.
2. Mutated DNA will either lead to 1) no effect on the organism’s likelihood to survive or reproduce in its environment (i.e., fitness), 2) a negative effect, or 3) a positive effect.
3. Mutations that lead to increased fitness are more likely to be passed down to future generations, so over time a population of organisms will accumulate mutations. Mutations that lead to decreased fitness are less likely to be passed down, so these mutations tend to not accumulate in populations over time. Mutations that don’t affect fitness have neither an increased nor decreased likelihood of being passed down to future generations.
These are really the basic features of evolution. They have been observed time and time again... That is really what science is all about: finding explanations of natural phenomena that reliably explain observations. And in that regard, the theory of evolution is on par with the theory of gravity. They both explain their respective natural phenomena with high reliability.
Being wrong in science is suppose to happen, it's part of the scientific process of finding what is true.
But why do so many people try to dogmatically force their opinions on others in the name of science which is supposed to be the free enterprise of inquiry? Why does Dawkins try to militantly promote atheism when he’s an advocate of free thought? Why does he try to say that any one who opposes him necessarily is wrong? Because his beliefs are no longer in the realm of science but in the realm of religion. A thought directed to everyone watching this video.
There in lies it's strength. Science NEVER claims to know all the answer's---yet ! but the god botherer's claim that God does.---without proof.
" Good people do good things, Bad people do bad things. It takes religion to make good people do bad things" I am unable to remember the source if this quote but how true.
michael rimmington I think that quote is from the documentary version of the god delusion
Its from physicist steven weinberg
Religion is taking care of widows and orphans, even bad people do that I'm sure.
It is true
"It takes religion to make good people do bad things" especially Roman Catholicism, I must add.
Thank you Professor Dawkins. Your logic and reason is greatly appreciated in world of irrationality.
I am not sure what you mean here and I mean which passage especially you refer to, but the Professor is one of the reasons of the world going more irrational every day.
He is in fact so unbelievable irrational that he pretends to believe that random mutation plus natural selection does produce complex meaningful interdependent software. It cant get much much more irrational.
I personally believe he his lying on this for money.
Before people told him that he should need to reduce his illogicality and random ignorance he was saying that there is no God.
This is not to top and he also suffers the idea that he knows waht God would do he pretends not to exist if you look at his giraffe video - which btw is a Dawkins worship video if you ask me, but again, thats subjective and you may say he has deserved it.
But hey, according to his definition he is a mass child abuser and student abuser and lets just for a second imagine that the bible is right on eternal justice for criminals then Dawkins will have more pain at his hands then Hitler and Stalin together.
Dawkins is either foolish and irrational (some say illogical = irrational =insane) or a gifted deceiver or both.
@@marcob9124 "Dawkins will have more pain at his hands then Hitler and Stalin together." Marco - do you see how believing in religion is making you a hate-filled person. Religious people like you, Marco, love talking about the pain others will suffer after death. If only you would step back & look in the mirror, maybe you'd see how following religion is our world's real evil.
@@Rich7714 Hi Rich, good to meet you and joining the search for truth.
Rich - I understand your subjective illogical emotional response and your utter disrespect for reality.
And I cant answer such post.
If you have a meaningful response I am very much happy in trying to answer you.
Give it a try please. But rants are not a mature response, would you agree?
See please tell me why you are so fundamentalist that your believe you have the true religion?
Stalin thought so, Hitler thought so, the pope I think does not, ...why do you have the arrogance and believe that you have the right belief (Please spare me your definition what religion is, got about 600 mails with it in the last 10 years.
Whats your reason to tell me that you have truth?
And there are other things I dont understand about your strange thinking, but we can discuss it later. For now I am only interested why you even have the audacity to claim truth. Thx for your meaningful and consistent and hate speech free response in advance. (If you can - also spare me from empty phrases which you have not checked before using - got tons. See, you need to know that 99% of all people come out of state school and parrot the same stuff. So I get the same over and over and over again. I mean the nonsense here, I have no problem if you repeat truth!)
@@marcob9124 You could almost be considered the personification of Passive Aggressiveness, Marco. Interesting. You may want to work on your grammar & spelling though, as it contributes to your incoherence, which is already near the extreme due to your religious fanaticism.
When you complain that my perfectly reasonable response is a "rant", when you yourself then go on to provide a rant 10x larger, you show a rather excessive amount of hypocricy. If you misinerpret logic & reasoning for "ranting", then you will forever be unable to engage in dialogue with people.
As you say "And I cant answer such post.", which I find rather predictable; opposing oneself to logic & reason rarely grants the religiously insane a successful rebuttal.
I notice you also enjoy putting words in peoples' mouths: "you have the true religion?" -I never claimed to have "a religion" - on the contrary, I'm am not religious.
The one thing I do believe is that you have 600 emails against you; maybe you should spend less time fighting in your futile religiously insane scheming. Then maybe people wouldn't dislike you so much. Give it a thought!
"And I cant answer" - So Marco, since you refuse to answer for your case against logic and reasoning, we may go no further in our discussion; I hence bid you farewell. I await your doubtless predicable religious fanatic response, and after you're done typing away, you may then continue spending your time attacking others online. Goodday Marco
@@Rich7714 Hi Nick, good morning as it is here. Good to see you interested in truth, truly curious what you got...
You: "You could almost be considered the personification of Passive Aggressiveness, Marco."
>>> Do you think I should be a bit more aggressive like Dawkins and his disciples (not all of course!, maybe not even many since humans do like to reduce life to a comfortable level... )? Ok, I will work on my skills to get into the real fights.
You: "Interesting. You may want to work on your grammar & spelling though, as it contributes to your incoherence, which is already near the extreme due to your religious fanaticism."
>>> Sure I am a fan of my world view, are you not? Why are you writing me? To get your thoughts more clear? To defend your religion (of course you have none, right?)
To be honest, I have no clue what you mean here, since I usually dont write much about what I believe to be true, so please tell me what you are referring to here. The subject cant be Evolution since it is not religious or is it?
I consider it a gullible faith which makes many people who kind of militantly believe in it - religious. Some I have met are true religious fanatics about their faith. Its shocking how they can put a good old roman catholic or believing muslime to shame. Anyway, lets see what else you got, but please dont forget to inform me what you think about my religious content in order that I may understand you.
Sadly I have not much time to learn English. So if you are unable to catch the content please move somewhere else unless you have a religious need to mission and to convert me to your faith/religion - then I will understand your desire to understand me correctly. My spanish is worse then my English. Whats your second language Nick?
You: "When you complain that my perfectly reasonable response is a "rant", ..."
>>> Would you please c&p your perfect reasonable response again? I have not found a logical argument Nick.
You do know that some people do actually think they have perfect reasonable beliefs while all it is is tales. So please give me the exact quote what you are referring to that I may see what you in your belief system call perfect reasonable response. It may be reasonable to you but not valid at all, right?
You: "...when you yourself then go on to provide a rant 10x larger, "
>>> I love it to parrot the religious gullible evolutionists. BTW I learn dit from them I think (again, not all are militant aggressive religious missioners and ranters!, but see, the silent one I dont read often since they are silent, so most people at plataformas are quite "active" in their zeal to say it carefully, right? You are an excemption of course I tend to believe. )
You: "...you show a rather excessive amount of hypocricy."
>>> No Nick, that does not fly, its hopefully obvious or I need to increase my copying of militant Atheists in order to make it absolutely and unmistakably clear that I am doing the parody and trying to mirror those guys. If you are not among the task force of that sect - just dont feel triggered at all and smile and watch the games.
You: " If you misinterpret logic & reasoning for "ranting", then you will forever be unable to engage in dialogue with people."
>>> I understand what you are saying here, but you presume that you have reasoned logically. I have not seen it yet. See, there are people out there who believe that the theory of evolution is a good sound their and that evolution is a fact. Great faith! But is just deception. And they brag and wallow in their supposed scientific educated enlightened superstition. Is such not painful to see? What say you? How can one think that random mutation and natural selection is writing complex software? Whats wrong in the mind?
You: "As you say "And I cant answer such post.", which I find rather predictable; opposing oneself to logic & reason rarely grants the religiously insane a successful rebuttal."
>>> Sorry, please quote the section you are referring to.
You: "I notice you also enjoy putting words in peoples' mouths: "you have the true religion?" -I never claimed to have "a religion" - on the contrary, I'm am not religious."
>>> Oh you believe you are not religious? Thats quiet interesting. You made my day for sure!
Hey Nick all world view is religion or all religion is world view. You may have a definition for religion that does tell you that it involves eating fish on Friday and having a supranatural power being worshipped and I dont want to disturb you in your sleep, but I am not bying such special talk. Its like "I dont have believe in NOgod, I just lack faith in a deity. Whats that?
I give you list with premises and you make your cross (*x*) or *o* in every line and when you are done: thats your belief system. Your religion. Your faith. Your creed. Your world view. You may play with words and make yourself happy to tell yourself you are not religious. Fine. Ok.
I see it rather simple: There is ONE true religion out there since I believe that truth real exists. And if your faith is not that true one then you have a false religion. So you can call it a false faith - fine with me. Believe that you have no religion but faith - fine, be happy!
You: "The one thing I do believe is that you have 600 emails against you; "
>>> It was a fictive number but I understand your faith since it fits your faith! I get this one. Thats why evolutionists like to read about evolution - it fits the faith,
You: "..maybe you should spend less time fighting in your futile religiously insane scheming."
>>> Thats your religious preset and I tend to understand your programming, so you have few choice to put me in any other box but such as your religion has for me.
And you feel so good if you think that you are none religious and you can look at me and think: poor religious fellow.
Again, what do you believe that I believe why you call me religious insane schemist? What was I confessing that you are referring to? You last line looks rather as you are a victim of religious framing of your camp Nick? Awake? Or dulled into all kinds of stereotype and thinking put on holidays?
I cant wait for your answer where you will put things together for me! BTW, I could call you exactly the same and you have no arguments to refute it. Thats the problem when you do the parrot of phrase form your church, you need to substantiate it. Cant wait ....
Then maybe people wouldn't dislike you so much. Give it a thought!
You: " "And I cant answer" - So Marco, since you refuse ..."
>>> Nononono Nick, thats your faith! But since you still beloieve you made an argument - please qute it and I will be happy to have fun with it. I just have not seen a locical valid argument yet. Not even in this opost is even a remote argument, Its rant only. No fact, no theory, no quote of any other person, no reference no own thought yet. Only stereotypes against me. Its a failed argument, except the one you posted which I have not seen. Please post it as a quote. thx.
You: "to answer for your case against logic and reasoning, we may go no further in our discussion;"
>>> Sorry, you have started a discussion? Are you sure Nick? Not in this post and some can see! (people with your programming will not see it since they think like you think which is likely for most people coming out of 10 years constant programming and framing. (Do you know foren where people thumb up each otghers nonsnese? Amazing to see how programming works. And all thats contrary to their faith will be attacked but notb argued. They cant argue the case most often since they never thought through their own position - some can live even for decades without having heard any contrary opinion. Thats the framed world we have arrived at after 70 years public school in the west. And logic is not even taught. Is this not crazy?
Its also called indoctrination and Dawkins would call it child abuse in his religious zeal. Poor fellow, but I think he is playing the game ... anyway, he is almost done and will pass as we all will maybe.
You: " I hence bid you farewell."
>>> Have a good time Nick and enjoy the great world.
You: "I await your doubtless predicable religious fanatic response, "
>>>Sure, I need to answer your predictable religious fanatic position. But I am also looking forward to your empty religious predictable answer from the program playback. Its all in the 600 mails/posts. 99% of all people are inline with the program. Very predictable. Its so tough that they are almost identical. >That in itself is not a problem since if something would be true ..... the confessing of that truth would be identical. But so it is with your church and their creed - identical for all subscribers. And so they confess together: WE believe......
You: "...and after you're done typing away, you may then continue spending your time attacking others online. "
>>> What I wonder is why you wasted your time attacking me. Any idea Nick?
If you are aware - there is a lack of clear self view. If you are not aware - there is another problem de to the program.
Get out Nick, save your mind.
Its a dead religion you serve. A false religion.
Materialism is a false premise of a world view (religion)
I love that man! I have a man, brain crush on him. He has thought me so much watching his videos and reading his books and even better he has helped me learn how to think and how to ask myself proper questions.
I like his barbed retorts, but that does put others off listening to what he says. Have you seen his 90s Christmas Lectures at the Royal Science Institute on Evolution? Pure science without the distraction of controversy.
i would love to come out as atheist but i am hindu in india and intolerance is increasing fast here.
You have my vote.
@@quanitaatkinson834 Great advice, well said Quanita.
Dude I am Indian and atheist
Indian atheist here buddy!! You really shouldn't give a shit about what others think about you
@@ramanasai6150 That is awesome !!
"and the people who say evolution is not real, because we can't see it."
We can't see creation happening, so I guess that means creation isn't real either.
I don’t see any evolution happening but I do see regression happening. Judge for yourself if what I say is true.
@@allanliang9072 I take it you mean regression, in people's behaviour?
@@BedsitBob the world is in a state of regression which is evident in the condition of global affairs which we are all aware of. I simply cling on to the hope that regression is not infinite but at some point, all things are going to take a turn for the better. Indeed, I believe in the evolution of the human race to become a better version of ourselves such that we may be rid of our present faults. I contend that we share in same hope. Let us not lose hope in humanity even in these dire times. Peace brother.
@@allanliang9072 When scientists talk about evolution, they're talking about *biological* evolution.
@@BedsitBob I think we all want to know the truth and we should test everything we’ve been told including the theory of evolution.
Dawkins is the only guy I've seen looking good while doing self-advertisement
@K Chandra Prakash shut the fuck up you fucking imbecile!!! sorry for the harsh words! :)
@K Chandra Prakash fuck off
we are all africans
Why did H. Sapiens evolve in Africa and not Asia, Europe from Homo Erectus?
danpt2000 Don't be too disappointed.
WarwickkkT101 why do you assume I'm disappointed?
danpt2000 Homo Erectus is a species like us that is an offset of the homo genus. Sapiens and Erectus share an ancestor but we can't evolve from them.
WarwickkkT101 so what species did the African Homo Sapiens evolved from?
I love Richard Dawkins
Thank you Dr. Dawkins for your teachings.
Professor Dawkins to be pedantic.
They are not teachings. He is not a preacher. He relays scientific facts backed up by solid and tested evidence.
@@petyrkowalski9887 and religious people relies on a man-made book
The real argument is that we see zero transitional forms. The idea that all the transitional forms died out is ridiculous. Statistically, if animals evolve over millions of years, we should end up with more transitional forms than both the beginning and ending forms combined.
All living things are transitional forms. If you're looking for a half-fish, half-lion, you'll have to use a book of fairy tales like the bible. You are a transiotnal form between your parents and your childre. The changes are slow and graduated. There are however famous fossils that clearly demonstrate this process. Archeopteryx clearly shows the link between dinosaurs and birds. It has features of both.
It is very lucky that we have fossils at all. Most bones do not fossilize. Every fossil we have is a transitional form, though. It is an intermediate stage between what came before and what came after.
Also remember that fossils are only one branch of the evidence for evolution.
My hero, Richard Dawkins. If only the religious would give him a serious listen. I've encountered some who simply refuse to hear him. How sad.
They fear ''Gods''s wrath, and there in lies the root of all subservience.
Love Dawkins. We need more people like him
Why? He is lying more then most others - so why do you want more people who spread lies and abuse kids (his own judgement).
This man is a professional liar and deceiver, so what do you mean with your comment?
You want MORE people like him so that you can swallow more of the lies?
I dont understand you!
@Keel hi Keel, that's a subjective statement and i welcome your search for truth.
Do you have a littlr time to give an argument!
I mean there is some entertainment in exchanging some statements but i would prefer a bit of meaning, virtue, argument. Thx.
Its easy, just quote me and ad your critic/refutation.
@@marcob9124 pls try debunking scientific research without referring to a bible which has no correlation to whatever scientific research i give you, aka the one they talk about in the vid, the lizard -evolving- to adapt into the new environment it was placed in in a couple decades
@@charlestonianbuilder344 Hi Charlestonian, good to see you in search for truth again! Appreciate it much!
You: "pls try debunking scientific research without referring to a bible which has no correlation to whatever scientific research i give you,..."
>>> I mentioned the bible? Are you sure you mean me?
>>> Please give me the research you have in mind and I will be happy to have a look at it. If you dont give me one I cant refute it, right?
You: "..aka the one they talk about in the vid, the lizard evolving to adapt ..
>>> Sorry to interrupt you, but has it evolved or has it adapted? Adaptation is when you have a feature in the genome that is beneficial in changing environment and will be promoted by the known and understood principles of natural selection.
Whats not there cant be promoted. So you (by faith in the content of the vid) claim that the lizard did actually evolve - which means that they received by random mutation or copying errors in the early hours/days of growing life form a new feature which was not there before.
I would be happy if you can give me the theory how that would be done by random events. I am simply suggesting here that you know something of how much information is needed for a protein or a cell. So I am highly interested in that case how new traits actually came into this world.
Thats something like white mice getting somehow color over some decades..... I mean are you sure you believe what you have heard and seen? Or is it rather that the lizard was promoted with different features then he was using in the past where they have had no advantage?
You: "....the lizard "evolving" to adapt into the new environment it was placed in in a couple decades.
>>> I think I answered it in well understandable terms .
Your turn please.
I went out in my yard and looked at a tree for six whole minutes. I concluded that trees do not grow.
Evolution = just add millions of years and magic things happen.
@@neilarmstrongsson795 Quite so, tell him to be a bit more patient. Oh and tell him, his dad didn't go to the Moon.
@@MrDaiseymay
I'm well aware that my dad never went to the moon.
We're all Africans..so, commiting racism is like insult all of us.
Great interview. Very respectful and well-mannered.
The fruit flies living on a Sequoia don't "see" the tree change so it is a myth the tree grows?
R. B.L. Ahh, at the great creator of miracles, Jesus, had to curse a fruit tree for not bearing in fruit out of season. One would think that making fruit appear on the tree regardless, would be easier than the bread and fishes story.
@@rickydarcilover5581 As you said - just a Story.
evolution on the other hand does not need anyone to talk about it for it to exist all the same.
R. B.L. 🤗
Not knowing if there is an afterlife is both terrifying and comforting.
97 Dark 3 Light. 97 JDNA. 3 DNA. This comforts me.
no, it's not. there isn't one. since you say that, do you also "believe in" "souls"? that's a requirement according to all woowoo belief systems for an "afterlife". "souls" originate from when humans didn't know that air was particulate matter. they saw and felt the effects of air and noticed that you'd die if you couldn't breathe. this is also why they called dust "devils" "dust devils" - because they appeared out of nowhere, threw stuff around and then disappeared. they thought air was a "spirit"/"god" that would infuse you with a "soul" when you were born and that you'd "give up the ghost" (breathe your last) when you die and that your "soul" (hot air that you exhaled before dying) would go wherever any woowoo made-up claimed magical place a particular population wanted it to go to.
the reason strong alcohol was and still is called "spirits" is because those people (who didn't know what gases are) saw that when they opened a bottle of strong alcohol, there would be alcohol vapour, didn't know what it was and called that a spirit too. meanwhile we still haven't gotten rid of any of that woo, even after learning it wasn't magic. same with humans thinking they have a "soul" now and that they'll "go somewhere when they die". no, not in the ground where you won't "rest in peace" - you're not there anymore, the chemical processes in your brain that produces you ends. instead your "soul" (hot air from your lungs) goes wherever you were brought up "believing". because they don't know that the primitive people thought that air was a spirit, nor do they care. after all, they'll just make-believe otherwise, as do those who know "their" stories aren't real but it makes them feel good because they were indoctrinated since before toddlerhood to think otherwise - "believe in" whatever your society largely repeats to you before you're even able to process information.
While growing up in Bombay (Mumbai now), we had a neighbour in an apartment above us who became mentally ill at some point. He regularly threw his faeces wrapped up in a newspaper out of his window onto the courtyard below. Ah, memories...
The error in the quoran comes from the two seas that meet and have slightly different colours so to explain it they say salt and fresh water does not mix. Due to the fact they didn't understand what was going on.
It still doesn't refute the Quranic verse because it doesn't mention sweet and salt water
@@DotyFuzz sweet and salt? We're talking about seas not popcorn.
“He released the two seas, meeting [side by side]; between them is a barrier [so] neither of them transgresses.”
That is the quote. That is reletively specific and from 1400 years ago, that is insane (and not even mentioning the hundreds of other facts). The term transgress merely means, that, the salt water cannot take over the other density water. They meet, but Do Not transgress, exactly how the quran states.
I understand it was hard for you to understand, but dont make false statements and just falsify the entire religion and quran off a statement which u did not properly understand. All the scholars say this, and if you want to make your own definition of a statement in the quran, you have the right to do so as we we live in a ‘free’ society.
@@libansheikh7067 here is a little clue into the "skill of God" www.adn.com/science/article/mythbusting-place-where-two-oceans-meet-gulf-alaska/2013/02/05/
The barrier doesn't remain and over time the seas do mix. It's just that 1400 years ago people didn't know enough to know this.
@@deanmoncaster the article that you read was written to prove that sediment rich rivers and generl ocean water do indeed mix. The quran does not refer to this example as this photo took place in 2010. Alaska and modern day saudi arabia are on different parts of the map. by giving this example, you r assuming that prophet mohhammed saw something similar to that photo and made that verse.
"He is the one who has set free the two kinds of water, one sweet and palatable, and the other salty and bitter. And He has made between them a barrier and a forbidding partition."
Modern science has discovered that in estuaries, where fresh (sweet) and salt water meet, the situation is somewhat different from what is found in places where two seas meet. It has been discovered that what distinguishes fresh water from salt water in estuaries is a “pycnocline zone with a marked density discontinuity separating the two layers.”
The human eye cannot see the difference between the two seas that meet, rather the two seas appear to us as one homogeneous sea. Likewise, the human eye cannot see the division of water in estuaries into the three kinds: fresh water, salt water, and the partition (zone of separation).
heres another articlewritten a couple monthsafter than the one u linked www.geologypage.com/2017/11/atlantic-pacific-ocean-not-mix.html
read what it says "It’s not two oceans meeting, its glacial melt water meeting the off shore waters of gulf of Alaska. The reason for this strange phenomenon is due to the difference of water density, temperature and salinity of the glacial melt water and off shore waters of gulf of Alaska, making it difficult to mix." this does not contradict wht the quran says because, they become part of the otherbodyof water, butdo not transgress. transgress would refer to a body of water overtaking another,which does not occur.
Hoping you are doing well Richard, I know it has been exhausting for you to reach out. And that it is hard work. But, your hard work helped me see the absurdity of a literal Adam and Eve.
@AllSeeingEye ofGodWith all due respect, please fuck off.
@AllSeeingEye ofGod You need help. Your comment is not deleted. What are you accusing me of? Why?
@AllSeeingEye ofGod sharing with Homeland Security
@@helenhollis3984 Wow, so much for the civilizing effects of religion. But to be fair, there are also atheists who are crude and rude. Sucks to be them.
Good on you. Cheers from sunny Vienna, Scott
@@therealzilch Scott, if you want fair, try posting anything in North Korea! I am ecstatic that religious people talk the way they do. Let the world see their hypocricy.
We all are Africans. Awesome. 👍✌
Races evolved differently though. It's obvious and plain to see
@@jpturner9452 Yes.
No, we are not. Different race, or breed, if you will.
@@yahulwagoni4571 Different races and sub-races and more divisions even further.
@@jpturner9452 It's only due to migration. Those who travelled north became paler skinned to compensate for the lack of sunlight. Humans need sunlight to begin the synthesis of cholesterol to Vitamin D. The more melanin (pigment) in the skin, the harder it is for the body to absorb the sunlight. Therefore people in areas with less sunlight have paler skin, in order to absorb more when the sun is actually out.
actually salt water and fresh water do not mix (instantly and without energy)... 2 reasons for this, first density and second osmosis (as far as i am aware of). Salt water is more dense and osmosis isent an instant process. You can try this at home by putting a fresh water ice cube in a glass of salt water, and at the end just add ever so slightly a drop or two of food die.
Alex Crnojacki Who said anything about instantly and without energy?
Primate life in the trees safe from grounded predators caused the evolution of the agility and dynamic brains(and hands) that have made humanity so powerful. I understand evolution and I also know spirituality to be real. My brother and I both enjoyed Sir Dawkins' book "The Selfish Gene" in our youth... and Dawkins is still on top of it. Yes, "We are all Africans."
The logo at the beginning is in serious risk of coming to a grinding halt
no I saw that episode the girl talked about natural phenomena that quran describes that in some place on earth salt water and fresh water don't mix
she didn't mean that in general salt water and fresh water don't mix
and now I see why edward wilson called richard dawkins a journalist
search for that phenomena please
Mohamed Shalaby The phenomenon you speak of entails two bodies of salt water...one having a denser level of salt.......do your research
This is the only time I’ve ever seen Bill Maher not interrupt someone constantly. Thx bill for shutting up.
Bill has a lot of respect for Richard; he realizes Richard is way smarter than him, at least in science.
I love his tie!
It evolved from an Ebay tie he bought for £3.75.
He got a cool flamingos one also 😌
His wife makes his ties.
Look what Jesus said in John 14:27, Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid.
Please note, Jesus also did not denied that world can give us peace too but He said My Peace is not like as world gives to you. True follower of Christ live in peace during time of hopeless situation too. Sir, No cancer, no tribulation, no failure, no terrorist, no death can steal peace and joy of True Christians
Did you not hear a word he said?
I can't really say when I stopped believing but it took at least 20 years of reading, studying religion, and science. Belief systems die hard in some of us. I'm 69 years old now
Jeffrey Phillips I take my hat off to you Jeffrey. I can't imagine how difficult it would be to leave a worldview, I was not born into a theistic family and I'll never know what that's like.
Whether you believe in Jesus Christ ..His story of of hope faith and charity and love for your fellow man
Resounds As goodness for mankind ....
Do you feel like you've lost anything?
Jeffrey Phillips
The devil got the better of you in the end then?
It is sad and infuriating to me how children are taught to be against science today. It isn't that they are not taught science anymore. They are taught contempt for it. In a time we know so much more.
Discoveries made daily.
These children. are kept in the dark. There is a small window, until about age ten. If a child is not curious, questioning and interested science, they are likely never to be in their life.
How many extraordinary minds are we losing?
In America you mean. It's not a global phenomenon.
I love Dawkins
Wow, I love dawks Necktie :'D
Its been 10 years, how are you?
Saying "Richard Dawkins on evolution" is like saying "Lawrence Krause on astrophysics" and "Stephen hawking on quantum physics.."
(I understand what the title meant and I'm only making a joke, no need to get offended)
Bill Nye on science
The Lost Cosmonaut isn’t bill bye more chemistry?
@@talosq7982 he's actually an engineer
Matthew Ray Comfort on bananas?
@@MrPicklekvGygA Bill Nye is an imbecile.
What he said about the muslim school was false though, the quran does not say that salt and fresh water dont mix but rather mentions on the boundaries that exist in large water bodies i.e oceans and lakes, and that has been scientifically proven that boundaries develop in large water bodies primarily due to the density difference between fresh and salty water and even between salt waters themselves as it has been observed that their exist a clear boundaries between the different oceans
The guy is a liar and spreading false information to attack religions and Islam.
I have most often seen the argument when it is made about estuaries. Yes differences in salinity establish a pycnocline characterized by differences in specific gravity of the waters which can appear persistent. Nevertheless at the point where the water masses meet, there is significant homogenization of the two masses, and eventually, you can't tell what came from where.
getting greatest show of earth in a couple of weeks :) can't wait! his videos are great and I'm sure his books are too. I've always been going for atheism and for science for years now but his videos has made me so confident in science, I could walk around the house alone with all the lights off without showing the least bit of worry cause I know nothing paranormal exists.
Was it any good?
Thanks to Nightwish I got to know Richard Dawkins and I am ever so grateful! I am reading 'The greatest Show on Earth' now (I actually just read the lizard-part) and I have learned so much already. I too was in religious schools (christian in my case) and was never taught anything about the evolution theory.
Thanks to Richard Dawkins I also got to know Christopher Hitchens and they both are and will be true heroes. By the work they did they will live on forever.
In Dutch there is a song that says 'I have laid a stone in the water and its course will never be the same again'. This is what Richard Dawkins and Christopher (and many others) have done for mankind.
How nice you love being stoooo-pid too.
Richard Dawkins teaches the universe came from "literally nothing."
Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it.
We can't get anything from "literally nothing." We can't even get science without God. The laws of nature only can come from a Lawgiver, God.
God is the reason for us and all we have.
ruclips.net/video/JiMqzN_YSXU/видео.html
“However improbable the origin of life might be, we know it happened on Earth because we are here.” -Richard Dawkins.
We only get life from life...the law of biogenesis. We can't get anything without God.
The odds are NOT there.
ruclips.net/video/W1_KEVaCyaA/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/yW9gawzZLsk/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/ddaqSutt5aw/видео.html
No, the eye did not evolve into various eyes. Your mere chance mutations are absurd.
ruclips.net/video/X7h2HWcTwa4/видео.html
Even Dawkins admits we can't know what is true because of natural selection...
The God Delusion, “Since we are creatures of natural selection, we cannot totally trust our senses. Evolution only passes on traits that help a species survive, and not with preserving traits that tell a species what is actually true about life.”
Oh, but Dawkins knows what's true about life...killing those who don't meet his expectations for living.
dailycaller.com/2021/05/19/richard-dawkins-down-syndrome-roe-v-wade/
Such a good song.
Based on your name and the fact you went to a religious school. Bijbelbelt ergens?
Thank you for articulating reality in such a brilliant way Richard....you are an immense human being.
Richard Dawing is in many cases just an arrogant human being.
@@kimdanielsen4368 Example, please
Instead of throwing poop, humans throw metaphorical poop. We shit post to throw poop and humiliate each other
I loll'd at the end. "Shit floats"
Love Richard :D
Dawkins is plugging that merch better than Jake Paul
haha you know it
Thank god (and I mean that figuratively) atheism is totally normal, common, and accepted in Australia
I’ve always wondered when and why we became “naked apes”.
has to do with persistence hunting and temperature regulation.Check this out :
ruclips.net/video/E76vqlhmBlc/видео.html
I love the fact that Bill Maher could make Richard Dawkins laugh. that ought to show everyone that Richard has a great sense of humor. but he should still be taken seriously.
Nice way to argue for people taking Prof. Dawkins seriously. Did you forget a _not,_ kemo sabe?
Since when did Richard Dawkins start watching Pokemon?? XD
Why the hell do we have mohamedans in Britain, to begin with? If Christians tried to teach Christianity in Saudi Arabia, they would literally lose their heads.
@@SimSim-zf9if ...but they can not preach, let alone open schools (or drink, hold hands, allow women to drive, and so on). Once again, who the hell needs them?
Can't believe humans are still questioning logic & scene in 21st century! Makes scene though , took us beasts millions of years to get here & even question anything . Can't expect us to just forget & let go the primal survival technique of "if others believe then it must be true " !
I love this guy!!!!!!!
Richard Dawkins? BRILLIANT as he ALWAYS is.
@K Chandra Prakash (lmfaao) Err so what do YOU believe happened? What do YOU believe how this whole planet was created? How human beings came about? What? What was that you said? Ohhhh right. YOU think that some magician in the sky suddenly,spontaniously made a 'man'. But later on he thought, hang on a sec, lets give this man a mate. So he reached into his body,ripped out 1 of his ribs and .. viola, woman was created? But it does'nt stop there does it? Oh no. This 'God'? he created the WHOLE universe, the entire cosmos AND the stars, the galaxies, everything. He then went on to create Earth too. Yep, EVERYTHING on this planet, 'God' created' .AND, not ONLY thats, but he managed to do it in (wait for it), 6 DAYS! WOW what a truly magnificent God he MUST be huh?(and YOU call ME the 'idiot'?) pmfpl. Get a life dude. :)
I recently watched a video of ancient Africans speaking in Tamil. The words they said pounounces same as Tamil words.
..did you see the video of the cameroonians ...??
@@universeofopulence yes, I think that's the one.
@@kitty87888 ...yea if u understand tamil ..u can check out the Tamil chintanai peravai channel, I think that's the name of the channel, I'm not a tamilian, so I can't pronounce it to properly.. he has made a video about it,..
@PARTH K ...I think the channel is called '"tamil chintanaiallar peravai" , just search that channel name in YT and add Cameroon , ull get the video
I was around 10 or 12 when i started questioning the existence of God.I'm 55 now,and i lived a good life without him. :)
Meanwhile,a lot of my religious friends are long gone,so i am asking you,where is the advantage ?!
You don't have to pay taxes for your busin-I-I mean church if you are a priest.
Imagine a Heaven that's full of Republicans. No thank you.
Well, acknowledging him is a start.
Look at solar eclipses, birds, butterflies, etc. It's all just a big accident.
Well to quote Christopher Hitchens here, the real fun starts only after you're dead (a celestial North Korea). Man I miss him. I'm an atheist btw!
tirpitz19 The eternal life there is the prolem
It's okay to assume religious people are dumb, and follow godly dictators. Impressive critical thinking there.
Religious people ARE Dumb F***S. End Of!
tell me again about how replicating cells were just randomly created one day
They weren't and scientists claim. Cells evolved at a later point. Scientists believe life began as a relatively simple self-replicating molecule. Scientists have created RNA molecules that self-replicate and do so at an exponential rate.
@@torotanaka3788 Yeah, scientists 'claim' and 'believe' lots of things when it comes to abiogenesis - but they prove nothing
They are practicing scientism, not science
They have shown how a self-replicating molecule can form. How does that prove "nothing"? How is that not "science"? (By the way evolution and abiogenesis are separate topics. Evolution would function in the same manner regardless of how life first arose.)
You lack basic logic and make no sense. The science of chemistry can demonstrate how and why a chemical process can work in nature. Chemists cannot create a molecule in violation of the laws of chemistry. Cells aren't "randomly" created but rather via the decidedly non-random process of natural selection. Moreover, molecules do not form or interact "randomly" but rather according to their inherent chemical properties. (Carbon molecules are particularly prone to forming long, complex chains.) If it were otherwise the science of chemistry would not work. You really have no idea what you are talking about.
What kind of utterly stupid reply is this? They are composed of atoms like all other chemicals. You are a first class moron.
Evolution is fact. We don’t know everything about how it works, but there’s no arguing against evolution.
“Dont be afraid to come out”😂😂sounds very gay😆got to love Dorkins
7:56 distortion of information.
Not against any religion but that's a fact even I can relate to , I personally have lot of Muslim friends they accept what they hear from Qur'an , no argument no thoughts no sophisticated questions at all .. which is quite dangerous
Nooffense
We've been scrutinizing christianity for decades. Islam is not any more special and deserves equal criticism.
I'm guessing you're a Christian that wants to bash Islam.
Though they share similarities, Islam and Christianity are different in their own ways.
For example we don't believe in a _global_ flood - literally historically impossible
We don't believe in a god on earth + the trinity- logically impossible
We don't believe the earth was created in 6 defined periods of time (days, millennia) - scientifically impossible
Bash Islam if you want to, but Christianity will never make much sense
I do believe Muhammed made the moon appear to be split. This could mean he actually split it or it appeared to be, for example he could have forced the phenomenon known as a "moon dog" to appear, but yes I do believe he performed the miracle
What? We believe the Arabs asked him for a sign of his prophethood and they saw the miracle, it's not a mircale to be seen for the people of today.
And the verse says the shooting stars are for jhins who try to steal information from heaven, quite frankly I don't see the problem with that, there's no counter evidence for the meta-physical
Cool, I'll get on with my life and you get on with yours
Well there isn't
And it was narrated in a hadith, so his words could have been altered, I don't really believe this one
But what is your point
Not a Muslim but I think the Quran was referring to how the Pacific and Atlantic Ocean do not mix and how deep-sea underwater does not mix with top water.
That's not true i mean the quran doesn't say that
If you have to pretend your book says something other than it says then your book is almost certainly a load of nonsense.
. .i love you Richard Dawkins!
Science is greatest of all
Why does every evolution video have people bickering about God? Why can't we debate on what ancestors whales had or Dolphins. Or if the turtles double back to the ocean or not.
Dustin Arthurs Because unfortunately religion tends to be the main opposition to evolution (and science in general), thus it gets in the way of scientific endeavors all too often.
Dustin Arthurs whales had this awesome platypus dog hair croc looking thing for their ancestor and cannot remember name but it was awesome
(Pst! because the 2 theories could NOT be further apart!)
Because both questions are fucking stupid seeing as Whales and Dolphins both still exist on this planet.
What do you like to debate about? Evolution is a stupid THEORY without any evidence.
Dude, you can say what you want, my diagnoses are there, I had depression, to a severe degree, and I got cured.