Richard Dawkins on Religion

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 31, 2011 9:12 PM GMT
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 01, 2011 1:30 AM GMT
    Win!
  • creature

    Posts: 5197

    Jun 01, 2011 1:43 AM GMT
    That is an excellent clip, charlitos. Thank you for sharing.
  • jeepguySD

    Posts: 651

    Jun 01, 2011 1:55 AM GMT
    Prof. Dawkins always makes very elequent arguments, but so often his words fall on deaf ears. I cannot understand why so many people are so credulous.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 01, 2011 2:14 AM GMT
    That's what I'm talking about...a man who tells it how it is
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 01, 2011 3:13 AM GMT
    jeepguySD Prof. Dawkins always makes very elequent arguments, but so often his words fall on deaf ears. I cannot understand why so many people are so credulous.

    jockfever: Is "Nothing Created Everything" eloquent, or irrational?
    Is "a fish sprouted legs and lungs and walked out of the water one day" eloquent, or irrational?
    Is calling the Founding Fathers "secularists" eloquent, or irrational?
    Is denial of fulfilled Bible prophecy eloquent, or irrational?
    Is belief that phenomena which are complex beyond human ingenuity (such as DNA and the living cell) simply happen by accident eloquent, or irrational?
    Is belief that the universe had an origin without an Originator eloquent, or irrational?
    Is denial of the Resurrection of Christ, one of the best forensically validated events in history, eloquent, or irrational?

    Show me a society based on atheism and I'll show you mass murder on a scale which dwarfs anything done in the name of Bible-based religion. Examples: Russia under Stalin, China under Mao, Cambodia under Pol Pot.

    When Dawkins is required to bend his knee and give an account of himself by the God of the Bible, do you think his arguments will sound eloquent, or irrational?

  • creature

    Posts: 5197

    Jun 01, 2011 3:21 AM GMT
    jockfever saidjeepguySD Prof. Dawkins always makes very elequent arguments, but so often his words fall on deaf ears. I cannot understand why so many people are so credulous.

    jockfever: Is "Nothing Created Everything" eloquent, or irrational?
    Is "a fish sprouted legs and lungs and walked out of the water one day" eloquent, or irrational?
    Is calling the Founding Fathers "secularists" eloquent, or irrational?
    Is denial of fulfilled Bible prophecy eloquent, or irrational?
    Is belief that phenomena which are complex beyond human ingenuity (such as DNA and the living cell) simply happen by accident eloquent, or irrational?
    Is belief that the universe had an origin without an Originator eloquent, or irrational?
    Is denial of the Resurrection of Christ, one of the best forensically validated events in history, eloquent, or irrational?

    Show me a society based on atheism and I'll show you mass murder on a scale which dwarfs anything done in the name of Bible-based religion. Examples: Russia under Stalin, China under Mao, Cambodia under Pol Pot.

    When Dawkins is required to bend his knee and give an account of himself by the God of the Bible, do you think his arguments will sound eloquent, or irrational?



    And how exactly did atheism influence those mass murders?

  • Jun 01, 2011 3:28 AM GMT
    I didn't hear anything advocating atheism here. His tone was actually quite humble, especially at the beginning... regardless of whether he views this privilege as the gift of a creator god or a happy circumstance, he certainly resonates with my spiritual beliefs more than any religious channels open to me at the moment.

    Oh... and rationality matters very little as regards the meta/super/extra - rational (which is technically correct lol?) Humility, wonder, discovery pay a lot more respect.
  • calibro

    Posts: 8888

    Jun 01, 2011 3:40 AM GMT
    jockfever saidjeepguySD Prof. Dawkins always makes very elequent arguments, but so often his words fall on deaf ears. I cannot understand why so many people are so credulous.

    jockfever: Is "Nothing Created Everything" eloquent, or irrational?
    Is "a fish sprouted legs and lungs and walked out of the water one day" eloquent, or irrational?
    Is calling the Founding Fathers "secularists" eloquent, or irrational?
    Is denial of fulfilled Bible prophecy eloquent, or irrational?
    Is belief that phenomena which are complex beyond human ingenuity (such as DNA and the living cell) simply happen by accident eloquent, or irrational?
    Is belief that the universe had an origin without an Originator eloquent, or irrational?
    Is denial of the Resurrection of Christ, one of the best forensically validated events in history, eloquent, or irrational?

    Show me a society based on atheism and I'll show you mass murder on a scale which dwarfs anything done in the name of Bible-based religion. Examples: Russia under Stalin, China under Mao, Cambodia under Pol Pot.

    When Dawkins is required to bend his knee and give an account of himself by the God of the Bible, do you think his arguments will sound eloquent, or irrational?



    1. nothing didn't create everything. the big bang wasn't nothing.

    2. a fish never sprouted legs and lungs and walked out of the water. if that's your understanding of evolution you need to go back to ninth-grade biology.

    3. i have a rock outside my house that i say keeps tigers away. there's never been a tiger so far in montana so i guess the rock is working.

    4. several founding fathers were secularists or deists. thomas jefferson was a deist for example. they were just as weary of the church as they were of the british.

    5. actually, we've created organic materials from inorganic ones. read up on oparin and miller-ulrey experiment.

    6. it is completely irrational to believe the universe had an originator as opposed to an origin.

    7. the resurrection of christ has no valid forsenic evidence and any historian would laugh at that claim.

    8. those societies were not based on atheism .

    9. considering how misinformed you are in history, science, and logic, it seems problematic for me to believe that you would be right about the existence of god when you cannot even articulate the opposition's theories correctly.
  • needleninja

    Posts: 713

    Jun 01, 2011 3:47 AM GMT
    calibro said
    jockfever saidjeepguySD Prof. Dawkins always makes very elequent arguments, but so often his words fall on deaf ears. I cannot understand why so many people are so credulous.

    jockfever: Is "Nothing Created Everything" eloquent, or irrational?
    Is "a fish sprouted legs and lungs and walked out of the water one day" eloquent, or irrational?
    Is calling the Founding Fathers "secularists" eloquent, or irrational?
    Is denial of fulfilled Bible prophecy eloquent, or irrational?
    Is belief that phenomena which are complex beyond human ingenuity (such as DNA and the living cell) simply happen by accident eloquent, or irrational?
    Is belief that the universe had an origin without an Originator eloquent, or irrational?
    Is denial of the Resurrection of Christ, one of the best forensically validated events in history, eloquent, or irrational?

    Show me a society based on atheism and I'll show you mass murder on a scale which dwarfs anything done in the name of Bible-based religion. Examples: Russia under Stalin, China under Mao, Cambodia under Pol Pot.

    When Dawkins is required to bend his knee and give an account of himself by the God of the Bible, do you think his arguments will sound eloquent, or irrational?



    But those societies were not based on athiesm


    lol so true, unless its Sweden.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 01, 2011 3:52 AM GMT
    I've always loved Dawkins. If you think he sounds astounding here (and apparently some of us do not...) you should read his books! He's one of the few people around today who can make a discussion about science more poetic than a discussion about love. Kudos, sir! icon_smile.gif
  • needleninja

    Posts: 713

    Jun 01, 2011 4:00 AM GMT
    viitz saidatheist-cartoon-1-550x708.jpg



    5648129339_b8b8f9d1fb_b.jpg


    lol troll face.
  • creature

    Posts: 5197

    Jun 01, 2011 4:01 AM GMT
    Welcome to the forum, viitz! Great first post.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 01, 2011 4:11 AM GMT
    calibro said3. i have a rock outside my house that i say keeps tigers away. there's never been a tiger so far in montana so i guess the rock is working.

    Let us know when the rock itself says that it keeps tigers away.
    Until then it is clear that your imaginary friend is a rock.
    Which, by association, makes you as dumb as rocks.

    I suggest you enjoy it while you can.
    Let's see what you say when one day, rock or not, you get eaten by a tiger.
    Were I single, I'd be your tiger. Maybe then TigerTim?
    Oh, wait. Then you'd be getting your rocks off.

    I think I better quit while I'm behind.
    (:
  • calibro

    Posts: 8888

    Jun 01, 2011 4:16 AM GMT
    Caesarea4 said
    calibro said3. i have a rock outside my house that i say keeps tigers away. there's never been a tiger so far in montana so i guess the rock is working.

    Let us know when the rock itself says that it keeps tigers away.
    Until then it is clear that your imaginary friend is a rock.
    Which, by association, makes you as dumb as rocks.

    I suggest you enjoy it while you can.
    Let's see what you say when one day, rock or not, you get eaten by a tiger.
    Were I single, I'd be your tiger. Maybe then TigerTim?
    Oh, wait. Then you'd be getting your rocks off.

    I think I better quit while I'm behind.
    (:



    face palm....


  • He_Man

    Posts: 906

    Jun 01, 2011 4:28 AM GMT
    calibro said
    jockfever saidjeepguySD Prof. Dawkins always makes very elequent arguments, but so often his words fall on deaf ears. I cannot understand why so many people are so credulous.

    jockfever: Is "Nothing Created Everything" eloquent, or irrational?
    Is "a fish sprouted legs and lungs and walked out of the water one day" eloquent, or irrational?
    Is calling the Founding Fathers "secularists" eloquent, or irrational?
    Is denial of fulfilled Bible prophecy eloquent, or irrational?
    Is belief that phenomena which are complex beyond human ingenuity (such as DNA and the living cell) simply happen by accident eloquent, or irrational?
    Is belief that the universe had an origin without an Originator eloquent, or irrational?
    Is denial of the Resurrection of Christ, one of the best forensically validated events in history, eloquent, or irrational?

    Show me a society based on atheism and I'll show you mass murder on a scale which dwarfs anything done in the name of Bible-based religion. Examples: Russia under Stalin, China under Mao, Cambodia under Pol Pot.

    When Dawkins is required to bend his knee and give an account of himself by the God of the Bible, do you think his arguments will sound eloquent, or irrational?



    1. nothing didn't create everything. the big bang wasn't nothing.

    2. a fish never sprouted legs and lungs and walked out of the water. if that's your understanding of evolution you need to go back to ninth-grade biology.

    3. i have a rock outside my house that i say keeps tigers away. there's never been a tiger so far in montana so i guess the rock is working.

    4. several founding fathers were secularists or deists. thomas jefferson was a deist for example. they were just as weary of the church as they were of the british.

    5. actually, we've created organic materials from inorganic ones. read up on oparin and miller-ulrey experiment.

    6. it is completely irrational to believe the universe had an originator as opposed to an origin.

    7. the resurrection of christ has no valid forsenic evidence and any historian would laugh at that claim.

    8. those societies were not based on atheism .

    9. considering how misinformed you are in history, science, and logic, it seems problematic for me to believe that you would be right about the existence of god when you cannot even articulate the opposition's theories correctly.



    First, I love Dawkins! I want to marry him. Well, him or Sam Harris, who is really cute and smart. I'll have to convert them first I guess.

    Second, Calibro, your sex appeal just went up a total of 500 percent -- Smart, logical, philosophical and good looking. It is a win win combination.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 01, 2011 4:29 AM GMT
    I have always had a love/hate relationship with this guy. I love how he puts organized religion in it's place, but I dislike how he seems so damn sure that there is nothing out there. He can't know there is no God anymore than the Jesus freaks can know there is one.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 01, 2011 4:42 AM GMT
    I'm not here to debate on religion, as I believe most religious systems are as corrupt and misguided as any organization would be after existing for thousands of years, but I think the general viewpoint of people who believe in any god is this:

    0+0 =/= 1

    Given that elementary mathematical/logistical reasoning, we then have to ask; If the laws of physics and science tell us that something cannot come from nothing, then we must look outside the bounds of science and physics to find an explanation for our own existence.

    Therefore any "reasoning" put forth from religions on the "creation" of the universe will always seem preposterous because by its very nature they are trying to answer a question that science and general logic deems impossible.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 01, 2011 4:42 AM GMT
    jockfever saidjeepguySD Prof. Dawkins always makes very elequent arguments, but so often his words fall on deaf ears. I cannot understand why so many people are so credulous.You mean like people who believe that God recited his words to 40 different men 2000 years ago. Like people who believe a virgin can give birth to a child? That people can rise from the dead like zombies?

    jockfever: Is "Nothing Created Everything" eloquent, or irrational?
    Is "a fish sprouted legs and lungs and walked out of the water one day" eloquent, or irrational? If this is your idea of evolution dude.....you need to go back to school!
    Is calling the Founding Fathers "secularists" eloquent, or irrational?
    Is denial of fulfilled Bible prophecy eloquent, or irrational? Nostrodomous has also had a lot of fulfilled prophecies.....does that make him God?
    Is belief that phenomena which are complex beyond human ingenuity (such as DNA and the living cell) simply happen by accident eloquent, or irrational?
    Is belief that the universe had an origin without an Originator eloquent, or irrational?
    Is denial of the Resurrection of Christ, one of the best forensically validated events in history, eloquent, or irrational? Okay, now you've proven you're smoking crack.

    Show me a society based on atheism and I'll show you mass murder on a scale which dwarfs anything done in the name of Bible-based religion. Examples: Russia under Stalin, China under Mao, Cambodia under Pol Pot. Show me a society where the men had facial hair and I'll show you mass murder

    When Dawkins is required to bend his knee and give an account of himself by the God of the Bible, do you think his arguments will sound eloquent, or irrational?

    This is really stupid. The Bible was written by a bunch of old men and you're basing your life on it. Wow.
  • He_Man

    Posts: 906

    Jun 01, 2011 4:49 AM GMT
    Scruffypup saidI have always had a love/hate relationship with this guy. I love how he puts organized religion in it's place, but I dislike how he seems so damn sure that there is nothing out there. He can't know there is no God anymore than the Jesus freaks can know there is one.


    Dawkins would not make the claim that there is absolutely no god. He would claim that the lack of evidence points in that direction, though.

    "You can't say there definetely is no god..." Dawkins

    Skip to 1:05 because the girls voice is annoying. LOL

    [url][/url]
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 01, 2011 4:58 AM GMT
    calibro said

    What are you saying, that you are selling your rocks?
    (There's a word for that, you know....)

    (If you must quote me, please edit it to say: "Caesarea4 channeled Homer Simpson and said"....)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 01, 2011 5:00 AM GMT
    Scruffypup saidHe can't know there is no God anymore than the Jesus freaks can know there is one.

    Beyond what Scruff_Hunter said, consider Occam's Razor.
    And that we should focus not on the myriad of things we "can't know" but on what we can and do know.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 01, 2011 5:44 AM GMT
    Im not expecting this thread to become another Theist vs Atheist thread. I just wanted to share this video cause Dawkins presents really good points about religion and how degrading its to humanity as a whole. This has nothing to do with evolution or the origin of the universe but religion as a tool that cannot be argued against. Like he said it doesnt have to be this way but unfortunately that is what religion is, an intolerant, arrogant, manipulative, and hateful group. However there are some believers who dont deserve to be categorized as such.

    On another note. Dawkins is an Atheist, we shouldnt be surprised about he saying that he doesnt deny the existence of God. Most Atheists are Agnostic Atheists meaning they DONT KNOW that god doesnt exist they simply state that the current evidence does not satisfy scientific criteria to prove to some extent that God does exist. This is a very nice contrast when you compare it to Theists, the majority of them are Gnostic Theist, they say TO KNOW that god does exist. By making such an extraordinary claim as to know the existence of God they are the ones who have to bother to prove it. Atheists dont have to disprove anything since this is a group open to the possibility.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 01, 2011 5:45 AM GMT
    The fundamental issue with religion is that it stops critical thinking!

    Once they throw faith at you ... all discussions are done!

    You can't ask questions! Religion is crazy and stupid for 21st century and very dangerous when it's used by the people in power.

    It's true we can only say probably there is no God as we don't know for sure.
    If there were a God, I don't believe an omnipotent being would give a damn about all the holy books out there and their contents.

    Why doesn't he just get rid of Devil, because God is all powerful and can easily do it. But then the story ends and there's no more need for religion.

    All of you people who are stuck on religion, I feel sorry for you being brainwashed since kids.
    If you are born in Pakistan you believe in Islam and Mohamed, and if you were born in US, let's say, you believe in Jesus. If the fairy tales you were told were switched would you be able to make a difference? It's all so arbitrary.
    It's arrogance parading as humility, the ultimate bureaucracy between man and God.

    The future does not belong to religion.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 01, 2011 11:42 AM GMT
    "Most Atheists are Agnostic Atheists....." "Atheists dont have to disprove anything since this is a group open to the possibility."

    You must be meeting a different class of atheists than I'm meeting. All the atheists I know will tell you very sharply that there is no God. I am a true agnostic and I've had atheists slam me for even being open to the possibility of their being a God.