"That's a good deed. That's humanism." David, it's nice to hear this. I know that lots of atheists struggle with being openly critical of specific religions. This video was great, thanks.
I have to admit, I was surprised how badly Nye crushed Ham while seeming friendly. Given Nye isn't an experienced debater, I wasn't sure he would adequately dismantle Ham's dishonest arguments - I was wrong.. While I think Matt and AronRa are far better atheist debaters, I think the Nye/Ham debate was perhaps the most important because it was covered widely in the press due to Nye's popularity and name recognition.
Yeah, I think the fact that Pat Robertson of all people started denouncing creationism after that debate shows what a stunning success that debate was.
Fantastic interview - keep up the good work, both of you. It's truly a great time in history where information is available to everyone and, in that light, superstitions whither and die.
Great interview. Thanks David and Matt. David, thanks especially for fighting in the trenches for us and never forget how many people are on your side!
As an atheist that just debates on RUclips [i.e. just small fry] I enjoyed listening the the 'big gun' of this debates. Very encouraging to me to go on fighting the fight against religion.
With David Silverman, I am part of the anti-christian, war on christmas, ban school prayer, oppose display of the ten commandments crowd! Those who were at the Bellefonte, PA protest know what I am talking about. What I love about David Silverman is he will do anything from debate the top apologist to holding a protest sign on a street corner.
So many good points here. I remember when I was a Christian thinking about the mandate to divorce your spouse and remove them from the temple described in several verses of the new testament. I remember thinking "how the heck is that any punishment at all; so what get new friends". Now that I'm an atheist and my wife, kids, parents, grandparents, and vast majority of friends are all super-religious I can't help but think how debilitating having every single person exit my life would be. I can only hope that I'm around to see the end of faith.
"I remember when I was a Christian thinking about the mandate to divorce your spouse and remove them from the temple described in several verses of the new testament." What verses?
I think silverman vs any of those politicians would be a lame debate. All they would do is cherry pick scripture. Once Silverman keeps repeating that it's circular and question begging to say that there is a God because the Bible says so and the Bible is true because God wrote it therefore they cannot use the Bible, they'd still keep going back to quoting the Bible. *facepalm*
it would not be interesting for most well-versed atheists but for the republican audience it would be devastating. It might just be cringe-worthy for the rest of us
But as he said early on in the interview, it's really about winning the audience over and making atheism main stream by destroying the myths about it. When he says (as I've heard him say in a debate) to Christians "Read your Bible!", i.e. without cherry--picking (Leviticus, Deuteronomy, etc.) he attacks the fundamentalists on their own turf.
This interview wound up being much more interesting than I thought. David articulated every point very well without any rambling. I think it was the friendly atheist interview with him that I found bland but it must have been the type of questions asked
accent77 You can. You can debate religious fundamentalists on RUclips or anywhere you can. You can help support American Atheism by giving regular donations because this movement is not cheap. Some people give their time to this movement for free.
It's nice to hear that David reaffirms, at 8:50, his anti-theism. I cannot understand how an atheist, who recognizes that there is no God, can logically NOT become anti-theist.
Depends largely on how much the atheist in question has looked into religion. It's entirely possible that they just don't believe in god and haven't done much research or interacted with theists very much. Or like ClumsyRoot said, they just don't give a shit.
I would not use the expression "take down", when you talk about religions in general, it could be misunderstood. In a religious person's mind, when you say "I'll take down your religion", it sounds like you are working to "deny them something", like you "take down" walmart and nobody can go there shopping anymore. I think a better expression could be "make it irrelevant", where the mythology still exists, yet nobody takes it seriously...otherwise it sounds like a threat, not a choice. As an experienced debater I'm sure that you know, Matt, that the expressions we use "among us" and the way they could be interpreted from religious people make the difference in a debate.
Christianice, I would agree with you. (Yes I liked your comment) - I am a Christian that enjoys hearing the other side. I can tell you that I have encountered far worse language than "take down" in debates. Do you have faith that is true?
Tom Bailey Sometimes language can be misinterpreted, I am sure David is not going to burn churches to avoid people praying :) If with the last question you mean "do you believe me", sure, I have no reason to doubt you.
ChristianIce He does not come across as the church burning variety of atheist. His wife is a practising Jew accoring to the atheistic wikipedia scriptures. I would like to hear on how religious conversations go with his wife. Maybe he could start by having a "debate" on youtube with his wife. He has not convinced her yet right?
To be fair they have only been married close to 20 years maybe she just needs more time and evidence to see that his arguements are rational. Maybe he could write a paper on how he finally convinced his wife that her faith practising was pointless. He has nearly 20 years of study to draw from but he would have to convince her he is right first. My question would be "How did you convince your wife?" His current answer would have to still be "I am working on it" right?
I would like to see Dave debate one of the big name televangelists like Joel Osteen. I guess the reason he didn't mention them is because they have the sense not to do debates, because their positions would be exposed as incredibly weak. I wish he would do more debates, though.
Nice ending, but not much wisdom in it. Just fun. Of course he would wreck politicians, because politicians never have good arguments, they just win people over with primitive arguments that address their desires. Propaganda in a nutshell.
When Dave tells his Muslim friend that he doesn't respect Islam, he should emphasis that he respects his friend as an individual and his right to believe in Islam, but he doesn't respect the belief itself.
Listing to the Video the Atheist Debates, in-between in his interview he mentions preaching. The facts I loves seeing their shows because its very entertaining, but when it comes to belief the Atheist beyond themselves, like their own spirit is lost and speacks to them from a distance.
I dont think he sould give up one on one debates they are more private adn it can help to get to ones reason and influence and everyone how gets smarter is just better for us as a community and a a whole society...
Would indeed be interesting to see some debates between some intellectuals and some of these politicians. Sadly they never agree to do them, because they know that an honest debater that isn't afraid of losing votes is going to rip them inside out when they start the whole political dancing.
Regarding the annoying theist argument question, the one I hate the most is the 'Stalin/Mao/Pol Pot killed millions in the name of atheism' one. It's just so blatantly disingenuous that the person making it (which includes Reza Aslan, Dinesh D'Souza and David Wolpe) should instantly lose all credibility.
11:40 - He gives prison statistics - I would like to see how they get accurate statistics for a prison population on who is Christian and who is not. A self statement poll? - There are clearly other flaws in statistics that people can think of that make the numbers so flawed they are irrelavent. - It is this type of deceptive thinking and positions that annoy thinking people and should annoy thinking atheists as well unless their position is a faith based "non-belief" position based on emotion and not based on logic and reasoning and critical thinking.
Would you need a God if you lived for 500 years is one of my questions,that makes people think very carefully. Another is, Do you fear Death?. You will get some interesting answers.
Watching the 4min+ section where they talk about how to prepare for a debate with a particular apologist, I can't shake the feeling that it would be fun to play apologist bingo. It would come across as pretty rude, though, so maybe it'd be best to leave that to the audience.... A fine example - www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2014/02/17/this-is-a-powerful-way-to-combat-a-christian-speaker-at-your-university/
At the beginning of the interview he admits that Christianity is "legitimate," then minutes later he says his Muslim friend's religion is not legitimate. That's where he's flat out wrong. Islam is equally as legitimate as Christianity and he could have told his friend that. If you're actually being honest with yourself, you can understand it is perfectly normal for someone to believe a religion they have been taught since childhood and surrounded by a bubble of believers their whole life. If you can't respect their position (which only means you understand why they believe what they believe) you're either lying or are just embarrassingly clueless.
+Richie P Silverman is saying that Christianity is legitimate to most Americans, not that it's legitimate to him. An atheist debating a Christian (and doing it well) gives atheism legitimacy in the eyes of more people (and takes it away from Christianity). In that sense I don't think he would object to saying that Islam is legitimate in countries where it's prevalent. I would also say that, unless you want to use an unusual definition of respect, there is a difference between understanding why someone believes what they believe (e.g. they were brought up in it) and actually respecting what they believe. It's perfectly possible to understand a belief and find it contemptible.
That's the thing I think about if someone killed someone because Jesus said to do it and goes to court the judge believes in jesus why does the judge still lock the killer up because surely whatever Jesus says is right 🤔
Christianity maybe legitimate, but it has no validity or truth. Any book that is full of legends, lies, contradictions, injustice, absurdity, intolerance, and cruelty, violence, has no business for anyone believing in or worshipping it's crazy contends. AMEN!!!!!!
I sincerely do NOT like the conservative side of Silverman, however it is a disgusting job somebody has to do it. I prefer to separate the religious ideas out of the real conservative core.
@10:54 You say "I am done with the whole Atheist morality thing". Yet no self respecting theist will formulate the moral argument the 'straw-man' way that you do. Actually I can only name Atheists who form the argument the way you do. The moral argument has nothing to do with how many Atheists are in prison or whose morality is superior. The bigotry is all in your perception, and if you would only listen to what is actually being said you would see that the argument is not intended as bigotry. If you disagree, can you link to a theist who actually thinks that an Atheist can't be moral without religion?
"That's a good deed. That's humanism." David, it's nice to hear this. I know that lots of atheists struggle with being openly critical of specific religions. This video was great, thanks.
I think the debate with Bill Nye and Ken Ham was brilliant. Nye managed to destroy Ham while being completely cordial. Truly brilliant.
I have to admit, I was surprised how badly Nye crushed Ham while seeming friendly. Given Nye isn't an experienced debater, I wasn't sure he would adequately dismantle Ham's dishonest arguments - I was wrong..
While I think Matt and AronRa are far better atheist debaters, I think the Nye/Ham debate was perhaps the most important because it was covered widely in the press due to Nye's popularity and name recognition.
*****
Ham was counting on Nye's popularity in order to draw attention to his yacht and museum of lies.
***** Yup, it backfired, but the idiot gullible simpletons still donated a lot of money to his Creation Museum (a.k.a. Mecca of Ignorance).
Yeah, I think the fact that Pat Robertson of all people started denouncing creationism after that debate shows what a stunning success that debate was.
Jacob Zentichko I think you meant Pat Robertson denounced "young earth" creationism. Creationism is stupid, but YEC is beyond stupid.
Oh how I would love to watch a Silverman/Santorum debate!
As a Christian I would enjoy seeing him debate Ron Paul over Santorum. Many of my atheist friends love Ron Paul and the stances he takes.
Tom Bailey
As an atheist so would I; perhaps they could debate the age of our planet and evolution.
Hey Matt i really like these new videos. Keep up the good work!
Fantastic interview - keep up the good work, both of you.
It's truly a great time in history where information is available to everyone and, in that light, superstitions whither and die.
Great interview. Thanks David and Matt. David, thanks especially for fighting in the trenches for us and never forget how many people are on your side!
our main man love your passion david
Thanks for these videos Matt.
Great interview Matt!
David Silverman is an excellent spokesperson for american atheist.
He feels like the right person at the right time...
As an atheist that just debates on RUclips [i.e. just small fry] I enjoyed listening the the 'big gun' of this debates. Very encouraging to me to go on fighting the fight against religion.
With David Silverman, I am part of the anti-christian, war on christmas, ban school prayer, oppose display of the ten commandments crowd! Those who were at the Bellefonte, PA protest know what I am talking about. What I love about David Silverman is he will do anything from debate the top apologist to holding a protest sign on a street corner.
Correction: I meant Bedford PA
Too bad he got cancelled.
Excellent interview.
The Conservative Movement in the USA needs more David Silvermans.
The moment he said he would love to debate politicians, particularly Rick Santorum, I was all in.
So many good points here. I remember when I was a Christian thinking about the mandate to divorce your spouse and remove them from the temple described in several verses of the new testament. I remember thinking "how the heck is that any punishment at all; so what get new friends". Now that I'm an atheist and my wife, kids, parents, grandparents, and vast majority of friends are all super-religious I can't help but think how debilitating having every single person exit my life would be.
I can only hope that I'm around to see the end of faith.
"I remember when I was a Christian thinking about the mandate to divorce your spouse and remove them from the temple described in several verses of the new testament." What verses?
nice interview, guys.
With all due respect Matt, but I think you should be the president of American Atheists.
Another chat with BILLO would be enjoyable!
I'm very proud to be an atheist!
I think silverman vs any of those politicians would be a lame debate. All they would do is cherry pick scripture. Once Silverman keeps repeating that it's circular and question begging to say that there is a God because the Bible says so and the Bible is true because God wrote it therefore they cannot use the Bible, they'd still keep going back to quoting the Bible. *facepalm*
it would not be interesting for most well-versed atheists but for the republican audience it would be devastating.
It might just be cringe-worthy for the rest of us
But as he said early on in the interview, it's really about winning the audience over and making atheism main stream by destroying the myths about it. When he says (as I've heard him say in a debate) to Christians "Read your Bible!", i.e. without cherry--picking (Leviticus, Deuteronomy, etc.) he attacks the fundamentalists on their own turf.
Very good on both sides!
This interview wound up being much more interesting than I thought. David articulated every point very well without any rambling.
I think it was the friendly atheist interview with him that I found bland but it must have been the type of questions asked
tides go in, tides go out. he can't explain it.
Captain Dave always amazing
I so wish I could be a part of this movement.
accent77
You can. You can debate religious fundamentalists on RUclips or anywhere you can. You can help support American Atheism by giving regular donations because this movement is not cheap. Some people give their time to this movement for free.
It's nice to hear that David reaffirms, at 8:50, his anti-theism. I cannot understand how an atheist, who recognizes that there is no God, can logically NOT become anti-theist.
Apatheism?
ClumsyRoot Apathy is rarely a useful solution to a problem.
Depends largely on how much the atheist in question has looked into religion. It's entirely possible that they just don't believe in god and haven't done much research or interacted with theists very much. Or like ClumsyRoot said, they just don't give a shit.
Al Bedo What is your solution?
Troy Adams "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke.
I would not use the expression "take down", when you talk about religions in general, it could be misunderstood.
In a religious person's mind, when you say "I'll take down your religion", it sounds like you are working to "deny them something", like you "take down" walmart and nobody can go there shopping anymore.
I think a better expression could be "make it irrelevant", where the mythology still exists, yet nobody takes it seriously...otherwise it sounds like a threat, not a choice.
As an experienced debater I'm sure that you know, Matt, that the expressions we use "among us" and the way they could be interpreted from religious people make the difference in a debate.
Christianice, I would agree with you. (Yes I liked your comment) - I am a Christian that enjoys hearing the other side. I can tell you that I have encountered far worse language than "take down" in debates. Do you have faith that is true?
Tom Bailey
Sometimes language can be misinterpreted, I am sure David is not going to burn churches to avoid people praying :)
If with the last question you mean "do you believe me", sure, I have no reason to doubt you.
ChristianIce He does not come across as the church burning variety of atheist. His wife is a practising Jew accoring to the atheistic wikipedia scriptures. I would like to hear on how religious conversations go with his wife. Maybe he could start by having a "debate" on youtube with his wife. He has not convinced her yet right?
Tom Bailey
I don't have the slightest idea, I solved the problem by picking an atheist wife :)
To be fair they have only been married close to 20 years maybe she just needs more time and evidence to see that his arguements are rational. Maybe he could write a paper on how he finally convinced his wife that her faith practising was pointless. He has nearly 20 years of study to draw from but he would have to convince her he is right first. My question would be "How did you convince your wife?" His current answer would have to still be "I am working on it" right?
"I would salivate to debate Rick Santorum" -David Silverman
Best line.
"...And I would win, mercilessly"
I would like to see Dave debate one of the big name televangelists like Joel Osteen. I guess the reason he didn't mention them is because they have the sense not to do debates, because their positions would be exposed as incredibly weak. I wish he would do more debates, though.
Ask him how the tides goes in and out just so we can see that priceless look on his face again please and thank you
Obviously nobody knows, 'cept god
The last sentence is a nice ending
Nice ending, but not much wisdom in it. Just fun. Of course he would wreck politicians, because politicians never have good arguments, they just win people over with primitive arguments that address their desires. Propaganda in a nutshell.
AWESOME!!
"Get up against and salivate for" 😮
Every time I hear "your debate again sye" I cringe lol good interview guys
When Dave tells his Muslim friend that he doesn't respect Islam, he should emphasis that he respects his friend as an individual and his right to believe in Islam, but he doesn't respect the belief itself.
I really like Silverman, but I think he underestimates politicians , they are better at winning the crowd
What went wrong between these 2...I mean just them 2 alone can take down the whole roaster of the top apologists without breaking a sweat.
OMG! Make the Santorum debate happen!
The problem is, the audience is often too close-minded to figure out who's right.
Listing to the Video the Atheist Debates, in-between in his interview he mentions preaching. The facts I loves seeing their shows because its very entertaining, but when it comes to belief the Atheist beyond themselves, like their own spirit is lost and speacks to them from a distance.
I dont think he sould give up one on one debates they are more private adn it can help to get to ones reason and influence and everyone how gets smarter is just better for us as a community and a a whole society...
Does David Silverman have a personal youtube account?
Would indeed be interesting to see some debates between some intellectuals and some of these politicians. Sadly they never agree to do them, because they know that an honest debater that isn't afraid of losing votes is going to rip them inside out when they start the whole political dancing.
you should bring a hologram of yourself to a debate so that you can get it to answer frequently answered questions for you.
(at the end) Isn't Karl Rove an Atheist?
Regarding the annoying theist argument question, the one I hate the most is the 'Stalin/Mao/Pol Pot killed millions in the name of atheism' one. It's just so blatantly disingenuous that the person making it (which includes Reza Aslan, Dinesh D'Souza and David Wolpe) should instantly lose all credibility.
11:40 - He gives prison statistics - I would like to see how they get accurate statistics for a prison population on who is Christian and who is not. A self statement poll? - There are clearly other flaws in statistics that people can think of that make the numbers so flawed they are irrelavent. - It is this type of deceptive thinking and positions that annoy thinking people and should annoy thinking atheists as well unless their position is a faith based "non-belief" position based on emotion and not based on logic and reasoning and critical thinking.
How bizarre is our civilization where the people who assume an imaginary creator exists are the majority?
Nice
The word in 'normality' The expression 'normalcy' doesn't exist, at least where I come from.
What's new?
Would you need a God if you lived for 500 years is one of my questions,that makes people think very carefully. Another is, Do you fear Death?. You will get some interesting answers.
This is what you sound like when being an atheist becomes your job.
"I would love to get up against Karl Rove." -- Rove is an atheist.
Sadly, l can't take David Silverman seriously any more after I saw him in a Borg outfit :(.
OMG... you mean he actually likes to have FUN?!
LAME!
silverman Carl Rove is an Atheist
Watching the 4min+ section where they talk about how to prepare for a debate with a particular apologist, I can't shake the feeling that it would be fun to play apologist bingo.
It would come across as pretty rude, though, so maybe it'd be best to leave that to the audience....
A fine example - www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2014/02/17/this-is-a-powerful-way-to-combat-a-christian-speaker-at-your-university/
He's like a pitbull anti-theist!! Love it
Back up your camera a tad ey?
Please help me
With what, friend?
At the beginning of the interview he admits that Christianity is "legitimate," then minutes later he says his Muslim friend's religion is not legitimate. That's where he's flat out wrong. Islam is equally as legitimate as Christianity and he could have told his friend that. If you're actually being honest with yourself, you can understand it is perfectly normal for someone to believe a religion they have been taught since childhood and surrounded by a bubble of believers their whole life. If you can't respect their position (which only means you understand why they believe what they believe) you're either lying or are just embarrassingly clueless.
+Richie P Silverman is saying that Christianity is legitimate to most Americans, not that it's legitimate to him. An atheist debating a Christian (and doing it well) gives atheism legitimacy in the eyes of more people (and takes it away from Christianity). In that sense I don't think he would object to saying that Islam is legitimate in countries where it's prevalent. I would also say that, unless you want to use an unusual definition of respect, there is a difference between understanding why someone believes what they believe (e.g. they were brought up in it) and actually respecting what they believe. It's perfectly possible to understand a belief and find it contemptible.
That's the thing I think about if someone killed someone because Jesus said to do it and goes to court the judge believes in jesus why does the judge still lock the killer up because surely whatever Jesus says is right 🤔
only if you can produce Jesus in court as a witness
Christianity maybe legitimate, but it has no validity or truth. Any book that is full of legends, lies, contradictions, injustice, absurdity, intolerance, and cruelty, violence, has no business for anyone believing in or worshipping it's crazy contends. AMEN!!!!!!
He should have leave his mustache
Dmitry Kim
He grew it back.
Dear Mr. Silverman
Please regrow that handsome beard. It makes you look stronger and just a bit more charming. I think we need that :)
Povl Besser
He did.
I sincerely do NOT like the conservative side of Silverman, however it is a disgusting job somebody has to do it. I prefer to separate the religious ideas out of the real conservative core.
Lmao what happened
Is this Matt’s boy or nah
@10:54 You say "I am done with the whole Atheist morality thing". Yet no self respecting theist will formulate the moral argument the 'straw-man' way that you do. Actually I can only name Atheists who form the argument the way you do. The moral argument has nothing to do with how many Atheists are in prison or whose morality is superior.
The bigotry is all in your perception, and if you would only listen to what is actually being said you would see that the argument is not intended as bigotry.
If you disagree, can you link to a theist who actually thinks that an Atheist can't be moral without religion?