Video Not Working?
Processing your request, Please wait....The Root of All Evil? – Richard Dawkins
A shocking and controversial look into the effect of religion on on our society with special focus on the contradiction between religion/faith and Science. Written and presented by Richard Dawkins, in which he argues that the world would be better off without religion.
Please bookmark or share this documentary using the social buttons on the right to help increase awareness of important issues raised in each documentary. It only takes 1 second/click and is gratefully received!
Think you could write a better description for this documentary?
Fancy earning a few bucks in the process?
If the answer is YES! then we could be in business! Read on for more information...
How does it work?
We understand there are more knowledgeable and passionate people out there watching our documentaries, we also know many of our documentary descriptions could be, well, more descriptive! So, we're calling for your help and want you to join our team!
OK, so how exactly does it work?
Simple... you submit your documentary description/review to us, if we like it and host it in this designated section, we'll split our revenue (generated from advertisements on this page) with you, 50/50, straight down the middle! Paid monthly via PayPal, with no minimum payout!
How much can I earn?
Well it does vary, some of our more popular documentaries earn upwards of $4/day (at the moment...) and are increasing daily. The more traffic we get to our site (or the page where your description is located) the more you can earn! If your work is selected to show on our site, why not promote it? Send traffic to your documentary page and you'll earn more!
How Can I Be Sure I get Paid What I Earn?
We send out proof of your earnings through a Google Adsense Report on pay day! We're not in the market to rip off our visitors. If you're happy, we're happy. And, if you ever want to know how much your earnings are during a month, simply email us and we'll let you know!
The not so SMALL print...
There are obviously some small clauses (as with everything in today's world!). All we ask of you is that all content submitted is unique, in good taste, none-offensive, well written and over 300 words (the more the better!). The higher quality your work, the more likely we are to put it on our site, and the more likely it is to stay there earning you money every day!
So What Are You Waiting For? Send us your documentary review now and we'll let you know if we're happy for it to go up!
Please feel free to subscribe to our RSS feed to have future documentaries delivered straight to your feed reader.Related Videos:
Scientology And The Business Of Cults
911 was a inside job. World Trade Center 7 was not hit by a plane at 5:30 P.M 9/11/01 and was brought down like WTC1 and WTC2 by explosions planted by the U.S. government and Israel. Google: (911 revisited 2) news videos filmed that day that you have not seen for over ten years.
I do not believe in religion. Most wars are caused because of religion and corruption for money and wealth.
If your going to make a comment about religion, please use respectful language, not impuslive vulgar terms, as it only makes your argument sound more incredulous than it already is. Even Mr. Dawkins does not demote himself to using such language, or call religion ‘Bullshit’. And another thing, anyone that has faith is an idiot. Scientists have faith without faith they cannot have the gut’s to prove what thier faith dictates. If you are a secular scientist, you still must have faith in what you are trying to prove to prove it. On an ending note, if Chrisitans are idiots, does that make Galileo, Copernicus, Newton, Pascal and many other famous Christian scientists idiots? I thought not.
one difference between science and religion is evidence vs faith. science uses conclusions drawn from repeated testing, religion does not. those tests used in the scientific method can be repeated and confirmed again by an outside/independent source. religion has no such tests, and if a religion does, it has failed many times. stop thinking that science has no evidence and get out and actually find out for yourself.
ur big bang is my Gods voice
how is that people who have faith n science have 2 tiptoe around anything religous? as of late im seeing more and more documentarys bashing religon n the name of sceince and anyone that says science is wrong is looked at as ignorant. science is continually changing. finding new discoverys that changes the history of the world by a few billion years here and there. everyone has the right 2 belive what they want 2. people who belive in science over religon are only taking someones elses word for it. have u anything 2 prove we evolved from a monkey or has someone told u that enough u belive it. have u urself seen proof of it. no. but since uve been told by people u blindly belive. how r u any different than someone with faith n God. u just place ur faith in urselves as gods. were not allowed to talk religon but u force feed evolution on our children as fact. dont play along and they fail. how is forcing ur religion of science on me and mine rite for u to do?
I find it interesting that many religious people seem to think that non-believers don’t care about other people suffering or dying. Do you really mean, that the only thing preventing you from killing or hurting other people is that God says that you shouldn’t?
In that case, please continue to believe (unless you think God says you should kill others, of course). We other have this feeling of compassion to others integrated, we don’t have to ask God to know.
It’s always interesting to observe how the opposition perceives you. I guess I fit into the category of Evangelical “fundies” that Dawkins refers to as he slams all religion to the ground. Before I offer a rebuttal, I do agree with Dawkins on some key observations. Dawkins brings up some valid points to which the Christian church needs to listen. It is sadly true, in an effort to make the Bible answer all of life’s questions they have naively posited simplistic answers which invalidate and minimize human suffering and loss. I agree that in an attempt to separate from the world they have dismissed good reputable science and psychology. The richness of the Biblical text, the grand story of how God initiated and accomplished His plan to restore creation to what was lost to human sin and rebellion, sadly gets trivialized to an inspirational blurb at the least, or wielded as a sword and justification for shed blood at worst.
But while Mr. Dawkins was busy denouncing God and faith he failed to recognize his own faith assumptions. Is modern science truly an unbiased, empirical observation, or does science operate under a faith assumption as well?
Mr. Dawkins was quick to authorize science as the only credible, objective, and trustworthy means of acquiring knowledge. By implication then, science can offer the only adequate understanding of reality. In contrast, he defined faith as a “suspension of critical thinking” assigning it as outdated , used only by the weak and those seduced by the established religious system of their time. In Dawkins view, faith and science cannot play side by side, for the one is intellectual and sound, while the other is fanciful, a flimsy structure for measuring actual “truth” and an unreliable source for knowledge. To sharpen his point, Mr. Dawkins cleverly draws his audience into agreement by showcasing the worst case examples of faith expressions to represent the norm.
Mr. Dawkins too has been conditioned by his culture and past thinkers. Thinkers that built a system of understanding reality and human purpose divorced from a transcendent authority. Science claims to be the only unbiased ,objective way to obtain objective truth. If looked at closely, science operates under a faith assumption as well, that is, the material world is all there is. Science has proceeded under a method that adopts the philosophical assumption that the “natural” world of matter and energy is all that exists, ruling out the existence of God or immaterial reality. This way they can easily “prove” scientifically that God doesn’t exist, since they begin with the premise that there is no God. So all their conclusions will naturally supply the evidence they need to support their theory, that is, God doesn’t exist.
If Mr. Dawkins and the others truly operating in an unbiased fashion as he claims, shouldn’t he and the other scientists be searching? Mr. Dawkins posits that there is no evidence for God, but he has never demonstrated any evidence to show clearly otherwise. His demonstrative evidence against the existence of God is hardly scientific. He has attempted to disprove God by deductions based on the deeds of religious fanatics which demonstrate more of humanity’s evil heart then the non-existence of God.
Maybe this problem has nothing to do with religion, or non religion, but with people. Maybe what is evident is that humanity has ignored the transcendent God, rebelling against his moral and protective authority? Maybe what is clearly evident is humanity needs redemption, to which the Biblical God, properly portrayed speaks.
I would ask of Mr. Dawkins and his followers to consider two things. I will do my part to carefully listen to your arguments, not drawing conclusions from only those who oppose you. But I ask you to do the same, and in fairness allow the Bible as whole to speak on its own term, offering a holistic view of God and his redemptive plan, weaving around four major themes of creation, the Fall(man’s rebellion) Redemption and Restoration. I don’t wish to give an airtight argument to prove the existence of God, but describe briefly the central tenets of the Christian faith, culminating at the cross. Genesis, records that God created everything in perfect harmony, wishing to glorify himself as humanity reflected his character and found fulfillment through harmonious, trusting, self-giving relationships as we stewarded his earth. Evil resulted when man acted independently, choosing his own way, thus breaking relationship with God and sending creation into distortion and decay. History records the manifestations of that one act ever since, the tragedy of broken human relationships, death, sickness, and suffering. Evil was not the way it was supposed to be. Yet the Biblical God did not leave mankind and without hope. The love of God intervened at the cross where God himself, in the person of Jesus Christ, died to satisfy the just requirements of God’s holiness and also provide a way of dealing with the plight of the human condition and save the guilty. At the cross God took on the guilt and punishment himself. God paid the price. The biblical authors, as eyewitnesses, testified that that God himself took on flesh to redeem mankind from their rebellion and self-incurred suffering. Scholars have found the writings of the gospel accounts date close to the time of Christ, giving further evidence to an actual resurrection, giving credence to their story. The biblical gospel message depends on the life, death and resurrection of Christ, although received through faith, is not without evidence. God continues to speak today, asking us by faith trust His story and participate in his task of reconciliation. Certainly not without flaws, the church has faithfully testified to gospel’s message of grace and reconciliation for the past 2000 years. Although not yet complete, the Christian message of hope lies in the fact that one day God will ultimately fix what sin has broken.
So, Mr. Dawkins, I will admit I live by faith, but I ask you to recognize the same. You claim science hold the keys to the future. But what evidence do you have to support that? Where is the evidence for the belief of that claim. There is no evidence from the past to secure such a claim. You take that on faith. Faith in a system that is predicated with the assumption that the material world is all there is. Surely, science has made medical and technological advances that have enhanced life, but science hasn’t provided any solid solutions to the problem of human suffering and evil, except to blame God, or put trust in education and technology.
Further, science can’t answer the central questions of meaning and purpose and existence. If we are just a combination of atoms, why do we think in moral categories? We all can bear witness that our souls long for love and acceptance. We know in our inner recesses, we are more than a sum total of atoms involuntarily reacting to stimuli. Further, science
Mr. Dawkins may have given an apologetic for the existence of God more than he wants to admit. I suppose Dawkins, according to his title wants to indict religion as the root cause of evil. Well, I will concede that many evil acts have been unjustly committed in the name of “God” , but it goes without saying, that just as many evil acts have been committed by people that call themselves atheists, agnostics or don’t ascribe to any label. He failed to mention that.
Perhaps, the root cause of evil should not be blamed on God, or be used to disprove God, but actually serve as a signpost pointing to God. Perhaps it time to acknowledge a transcendent Creator, whose name has been maligned by humanity’s choice to rebel. What is promoted as “freedom” has really enslaved us. Perhaps his moral order was for our good not harm so that we could flourish and reflect God’s character in and through our relationships. Perhaps our current evil state is more a reflection of humanity’s alienation from God, instead of the “enlightened era” that Mr. Dawkins wishes for you to subscribe.
In addition, I wish to call those who profess to be Christ followers, to quit harming our witness by cynical responses and unfair name-calling, or firing simplistic answers to opponents about issues the Bible doesn’t even address. We must truly live the gospel we profess, giving an intelligent and visible alternative to a broken world in desperate need of reconciliation and restoration.
Most importantly, its time to expose the truth about what Mr. Dawkins calls science, and reveal modern science is heavily layered in faith, that is faith in philosophical naturalism. For indeed, Mr. Dawkins, perhaps its faith in naturalistic philosophy that is the deceptive teapot circling the universe?
I just think it,s quite funny that the only place that Jesus ever got pissed off was,it was at a church!Not that I believe in any of this bullshit,people with pious values and morals well your always the first fuckers to trip yourselves up.So I decide to sit on the fence with the whole thing, but not because I can,t make my mind up but you just get a better view of all you idiots.
If religious people are offended by this, you shouldn’t be – you’re going to heaven and if you truly believe you are right, then we are going to hell. Stop being spoiled and accept your percieved fate.
Well, I thought about weighing in on this and decided to after much internal debate. Part of me feels that to get involved just “stirrs the pot” farther. At the same time…isnt’ it an untended pot that tends to boil over? I guess i decided that dialogue is healthy, as long as we all listen.
I listened to Richard and I’ve read the ensuing comments. I’m sad that people have taken the worse parts of “religion” (hate the word) and pasted that up as the model by which it should exist. Why not show the other side? Are we afraid to peel back the ugly surface, in case we reveal a beautiful truth?
Christians contribute more to charities (not church related) than those who are not. This “study” was done by MacLeans magazine last year. In fact, the study went on to say that if not for Christians, charities (especially those that do research on finding cures for disease…science I think) would be in a fair bit of trouble. I know a lot of Christians who have gentle hearts and work hard to help those around them. I think there are Muslims who do the same.
The main message of the Bible is Love. Now, I agree, that we get it wrong…a LOT…in churches, where it suddenly becomes about finger pointing and judgement etc. But you can’t write off the message just because the messenger puts their own spin on it. The message is a great one; selflessness, humility, kindness, meekness, generosity, love, peace, patience, self-control etc. The question should be; how do we get war or hatred or superiority complexes out of that? It’s sad. However, please, don’t write off the message. It’s good.
As for science, I think it is part of God’s plan. We need science. But, let’s not see it as altruistic or as benign. After all, science too has been used for good by good people, and twisted for bad things by bad people. Survival of the fittest…Hitler loved that theory and used it to kill many people who were born imperfect or weak (in his eyes). Nuclear energy…good…nuclear bombs…not so good. Research on cures…great!! Research on germ warfare….well….
So, before any of us become self-righteous in our finger pointing (on either side) let’s face it…we are all flawed. Maybe that’s the problem. By pointing the finger we can blame others for what is essentially our flaws? It’s easy to say you are evil, not so much fun to see the potential for it lurking within us.
McCartney had it right….”All you need is love”
Funny thing…that’s the main biblical truth. Perhaps if we stripped away all the trappings and got down to the core of what we all want and believe, we woudn’t be so far removed in our opinions…..perhaps.
Is Belief in God Reasonable?
Related topics:
HAVE you wondered why everything from atomic particles to vast galaxies is governed by precise mathematical laws? Have you reflected on life itself—its variety, its complexity, and its amazing design? Many attribute the universe and the life in it to a great cosmic accident and evolution. Others give credit to an intelligent Creator. Which viewpoint do you feel is more reasonable?
Of course, both viewpoints involve faith. Belief in God rests on faith. As the Bible says, “no man has seen God at any time.” (John 1:18) Likewise, no human saw the forming of the universe or the commencement of life. Nor has anyone ever seen one kind of life evolve into a higher kind or even into a different kind. The fossil record shows that the major groups of animals appeared suddenly and have remained virtually unchanged.* The key question, therefore, is this: Which faith sits on a firm foundation—faith in evolution or faith in a Creator?
Is Your Faith Based on Solid Evidence?
Genuine “faith,” says the Bible, is “the evident demonstration of realities though not beheld.” (Hebrews 11:1) The New English Bible renders the verse this way: “Faith . . . makes us certain of realities we do not see.” No doubt you can think of a number of unseen realities in which you firmly believe.
To illustrate: Many respected historians believe that Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, and Jesus Christ once lived. Is the faith of these historians sound? Yes, for they can point to authentic historical evidence.
Scientists too believe in unseen realities because of the “evident demonstration” that those realities exist. For example, the 19th-century Russian chemist Dmitry Mendeleyev became entranced with the relationship between the elements, the basic building blocks of the universe. He realized that they had certain things in common and could be grouped by both atomic weight and chemical properties. Because of his faith in the order of the groups, he drafted the periodic table of the elements and correctly predicted the existence of a number of elements unknown at the time.
If ancient structural design is attributed to humans, to whom do we attribute design in nature?
Archaeologists draw conclusions about earlier civilizations, often from items that have lain buried for thousands of years. Imagine, for example, that an archaeologist has unearthed dozens of carefully cut stone blocks of precisely the same size neatly aligned on top of one another. They are also set out in a distinct geometric pattern that does not occur naturally. What would the archaeologist conclude? Would he attribute his find to coincidence? Most likely not. Rather, he would interpret it as evidence of past human activities, and that would be a reasonable conclusion.
To be consistent, should we not apply the same reasoning to the design manifest in the natural world? Many people have taken that view, including respected scientists.
Blind Chance or Purposeful Design?
Years ago, British mathematician, physicist, and astronomer Sir James Jeans wrote that in the light of advancing scientific knowledge, “the universe begins to look more like a great thought than like a great machine.” He also stated that “the universe appears to have been designed by a pure mathematician” and that it provides “evidence of a designing or controlling power that has something in common with our own individual minds.”
Albert Einstein
Other scientists have arrived at a similar conclusion since Jeans penned those words. “The overall organization of the universe has suggested to many a modern astronomer an element of design,” wrote physicist Paul Davies. One of the most famous physicists and mathematicians of all time, Albert Einstein, wrote: “The fact that [the natural world] is comprehensible is a miracle.” In the eyes of many, that miracle includes life itself, from its fundamental building blocks to the amazing human brain.
DNA and the Human Brain
DNA is the genetic material of all cellular organisms and the molecular basis for heredity.# This complex acid has been compared to a blueprint or a recipe, for DNA is packed with information, which is encoded in chemical form and stored in a molecular environment that is capable of interpreting that code and acting on it. How much information is stored in DNA? If the basic units, called nucleotides, were converted into letters of the alphabet, they would “occupy more than a million pages of a typical book,” says one reference.
In most organisms, DNA is bundled up into threadlike bodies called chromosomes, which are safely stored inside each cell’s nucleus. The nuclei, in turn, have an average diameter of about 0.0002 of an inch. Think about that—all the information that produced your unique body is found in tiny packages that have to be observed under a microscope! As one scientist rightly said, living organisms have “by far the most compact information storage/retrieval system known.” That’s saying something when you reflect on the memory capacity of computer chips, DVDs, and the like! What is more, DNA has by no means revealed all its secrets. “Every discovery reveals a new complexity,” says New Scientist magazine.%
Is it reasonable to attribute such perfection of design and organization to blind chance? If you were to stumble across a highly technical manual a million pages thick and written in an efficient, elegant code, would you conclude that the book somehow wrote itself? What if that book were so small that you needed a powerful microscope to read it? And what if it contained precise instructions for the manufacture of a self-repairing, self-replicating intelligent machine with billions of parts, all of which had to be fitted together at precisely the right time and in the right way? To be sure, the notion that such a book just happened would not even enter one’s mind.
After examining current research on the inner workings of the cell, British philosopher Antony Flew, once a leading champion of atheism, stated: “The almost unbelievable complexity of the arrangements which are needed to produce (life), [show] that intelligence must have been involved.” Flew believes in “following the argument no matter where it leads.” In his case it led to a complete change in thinking, so that he now believes in God.
DNA is like a microscopic book that contains precise instructions for intelligent life
The human brain has been described as “the most complicated object in the universe”
The human brain too leaves many scientists in awe. A product of DNA, the brain has been described as “the most complicated object in the universe.” Even the most advanced supercomputer looks positively primitive next to this approximately three-pound pinkish-gray mass of neurons and other structures. In the opinion of one neuroscientist, the more that scientists learn about the brain and the mind, “the more magnificent and unknowable it becomes.”
Consider: The brain enables us to breathe, laugh, cry, solve puzzles, build computers, ride a bicycle, write poetry, and look up at the night sky with a sense of reverential awe. Is it reasonable—indeed, consistent—to attribute these abilities and capacities to blind evolutionary forces?
Belief Based on Evidence
In order to understand ourselves, should we look down, as it were, to apes and other animals, as evolutionists do? Or should we look up to God for answers? Granted, we have certain things in common with animals. We have to eat, drink, and sleep, for example, and we are able to reproduce. Still, we are unique in many ways. Reason suggests that our distinct human traits stem from a Being higher than ourselves—that is, from God. The Bible put that thought succinctly, stating that God formed mankind “in his image” morally and spiritually speaking. (Genesis 1:27) Why not contemplate God’s qualities, some of which are recorded at Deuteronomy 32:4; James 3:17, 18; and 1 John 4:7, 8.
SHOULD RELIGIOUS EVILS JUSTIFY DISBELIEF IN GOD?
Many people do not believe in a Creator because of the well-known abuses and corruptions that blacken the history of many religions. Is that a sound reason for disbelief? No. “The excesses and atrocities of organized religion,” says Roy Abraham Varghese in his preface to Antony Flew’s book There Is a God, “have no bearing whatsoever on the existence of God, just as the threat of nuclear proliferation has no bearing on the question of whether E=mc2.”*
________________________________________
* Energy equals mass multiplied by the square of the speed of light.
Our Creator has given us the “intellectual capacity” to investigate the world around us and to find satisfying answers to our questions. (1 John 5:20) In this regard, physicist and Nobel laureate William D. Phillips wrote: “When I examine the orderliness, understandability, and beauty of the universe, I am led to the conclusion that a higher intelligence designed what I see. My scientific appreciation of the coherence, and the delightful simplicity of physics strengthens my belief in God.”
Some two thousand years ago, a discerning observer of the natural world wrote: “[God’s] invisible qualities are clearly seen from the world’s creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made, even his eternal power and Godship.” (Romans 1:20) The writer—the Christian apostle Paul—was an intelligent man and highly educated in the Mosaic Law. His reason-based faith made God a reality to him, while his acute sense of justice moved him to give due credit to God for his creative works.
It is our sincere hope that you too will see that it is not at all unreasonable to believe in God. In fact, like Paul, may you do more than simply believe that He exists. May you also grow to appreciate—as millions already have—that Jehovah God is a spirit person with endearing qualities that resonate in the human heart and draw us to him.—Psalm 83:18; John 6:44; James 4:8.
@ anti-anti-religion
Well, the day religious people stop indoctrinating their kids their own indoctrinating and dogmatic beliefs, the day religious people cease their dualistic view on humankind, the day religious people stop using their lies to fulfill their own selfish happiness, so on so forth. Thats the day i will stop being anti-religious. But as long as i see all the evil in the name of god around the world i will have what you call a “narrow mind” about religion. I know that some people find comfort in their beliefs but i will never sacrifice everybody elses happiness, everybody that has suffered in the path of all these different religions. Never
Just in case anyone who reads this wants to know, I’M NOT A RELIGIOUS FANATIC!!! To prove it, I’ll give these these reasons:
1. I don’t obsess over religion because I know that it’s wrong to do that. How is it wrong? It alienates others and damages who I am.
2. I don’t agree with everything about religion.
3. There other things that I like.
So basically, I’m an anti-hero like many real people are.
@olive:
“You honestly think that you can ban religion for good? You’re delusional, especially for thinking that people take part it in it are assholes. Also, you’re no better than religious fanatics. And by retaliating at them, you’re just as bad as they are. Same thing goes for other anti-religion bigots like yourself.”
@other anti-religion assholes:
“I hope that you read what I typed to olive. You’re making a big mistake if you’re trying to get rid of religion. It’s here to stay.
How would you like it other people got rid of what you like and love? Let people be religious as long as they don’t do anything to you. It’s their choice.
But know this: If you destroy religion forever, then you’ve become the very people you hate. And those people who I’m referring to are closed-minded fundamentalists. See why two wrongs don’t make a right?”
OOOOooooowwwwaahhh!! Ted haggard is a true, textbook psychopath!! A calculating, manipulative and horribly cunning person! The passive aggression, the narcissistic attitude, and clearly a complete lack of education and knowledge on anything substantial. Oh, and of course, lets not forget the fact that he was caught with a gay prostitute having sex, and preaches “anti-gay”?? He admitted to buying meth from the prosititute he just had sex with as well?
Has the world had enough of these freaks???
Ban religion for good!!! These assholes have WAY TOO MUCH POWER, and only know how to abuse it!!
Hmm.. Ted Haggard didnt know what Dawkins meant by Nurnburg rally or even who Goebbles was. Americans really do lack education about the world outside USA. Anyway, Dawkins was correct it sure was a rethorical show and it sacres me that people like Haggard got such a position of power
/Malacoda
arent muslims known for terrorist related beliefs?? i have nothing against their nationality, but i fear their beliefs.
sorry but richard is a Scientist, not a moron. i find it sad that people post such lengthy ignorant comments. go do some research, then post proven, documented facts to back up your views…,
Oh my oh my.. thought there are plenty of idiots in this world but never did I imagine anyone so ignorant as this guy that wrote the first comment, Abdus Selaam.. no evidence? I guess your evidence has to come in the shape of a fairy tale..
First off, Evolution is no longer a theory. It is all but a law. The fossil record shows overwhelming evidence and a recent 20 year study proved beyond a shadow of a doubt the evolution of a species of bacteria.
I admit, Dawkins may sound like a hypocrite, however if you have seen his other stuff, you would know that he admits that science is not perfect but the beauty of it is that it changes as new evidence comes along. This is something that religion has almost never done. The only evolution a religion has gone through was changing the belief that god lived in the sky once the airplane was invented.
As for the theory of falsification of which atheism is not subject to, it is for the same reason that the teapot argument is not. [You cannot prove that there is not a small teapot orbiting the sun between Mars and Earth, however you know it isn't there because someone made it up.] You cannot prove anything in that sense.
For the record, Hitler was very religious. He was a Catholic. Also, a Catholic priest came up with the big bang theory.
For those who say it is useless to just live and die if there is not a god, the same can be said for you. If god exists and is omnipotent and omniscient, then our choices do not matter, and we just waste our time on Earth waiting for something better.
What is interesting is that I am a scientist, like many greater scientists before me I believe in god and that what I am studying is gods beautiful design.
I think he left me a note:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euler's_identity
also I think for those of you who would enjoy a very interestingly absurd but also comically thought provoking 40 mins please watch south park season 10 – Go God go. Can be found here: http://allsp.com/
feel free to personally harass me or compliment me : dmcelroy0408@googlemail.com
The tea pot is real–I saw it! I <3 Dawkins.
Abdus-Selaam,
Along with forgetting the countless amount of evidence, both genetically and anatomically, in support of the theory of evolution and survival of the fittest; you also seem to have forgotten how to spell offend.
Last I heard money is the root of all evil not faith. And thats why most wars are not holy wars rather the elite playing there usual games. The atheist will fit in comfortably with the NWO agenda afterall when you place humans on such a low level with no eternal value it won’t be as hard for them to watch the millions be extinguished in the name of population control.
I dont think i can ever accept the things religions and its priest (etc) proclaim. This is simply because most of it is just plain lies and speculation that they cant prove. Science itself is based on hard facts and getting those facts trough contanstly testing and researching. This is the biggest gap with religion and science if we want to compare them. Other is based on simply believeng something without proof while at the others core is the need to have the proof to believe in it.
Im sure for some people facts arent even needed. Religion and faith bring consolation/happines/peace or whatever you want to call it to many people. And im ok with that. What im not ok with is the fact that these people proclaim things beeing truths without having any kind of facts. For them faith/belief is enough to justify their doings and things they proclaim.
I really hope more people open their eyes and leave religion at its own place where its supposed to be. That is providing care and consolation for the ones that need it. Leave the absolute truths to science.
this guy is the biggest idiot i ever seen. he flippes out at the christian guy, even the christian guy thinks he’s the best or something. this guycouldnt answer many times against the believers, but still ignores. and he insults religion, but tries to look nice. but actally he’s stupid.
**shit i meant “clarifies”
It is true that there are two sides to every argument. That, however, does not automatically mean that the answers lie in the middle. There is a good amount of time when one side is flat out wrong. It would be a disservice to say that without any evidence backing it, but the fact is that there is evidence. Yes, catholicism may have ACCEPTED evolution and the big bang (25% of the population that make up evangelical christians still choose not to), but that does not automatically mean that a god simply set both of these things in motion. (And yes, there IS an immense amount of hard physical proof of evolution, so debating so with things such as irreducible complexity and fossil gaps is basically a waste of time, being as though the opposite side provides NO evidence). The complexity and improbability of existance itself is outnumbered FAR greater by the improbability of whatever the creator of that existance would be.
Yes, religion provides a great deal of consolation to a lot of people in need; but the fact of the matter is, religion is consoling is NOT equivelant to it being correct. With this stated, why not live and let live?
Things such as the 9/11 attacks, the majority of genocides (other than political), discrimination, and other such evils are the reason. Religion does WAY more bad than good, and we do not NEED religion in order to keep order. Saying that we need to believe in falsisms in order to function is condescending and pathetic, and not true. Just think: how many religious people today can look at their bible or holy book and seperate what is acceptable now versus what was acceptable when it was written (i.e. death penalty for stealing and adultery, etc.) THE MAJORITY CAN. Given this information, it is plain to see that our morals naturally evolve and broaden with time, and we can use our own intellect to decide what’s right, rather than believing everything we read. This shows me that we really dont NEED it at all and there would be less evil without it.
Nothing is the root of ALL evil, and Dawkins agrees. He clarifys this, and the reason for his passionate disdain for religion in his book The God Delusion, which i highly recommend for people who loved this, hated this, want more information or anything else.
Who has read and STUDY the Quran here that left a comment? And if you had, you would see the scientific revelation truth, way before these “scientists” with all kinds of theories. Why were we put here? To just live and die? And if so, its useless to what we do or accomplish while here on earth. A lot of people ONLY hear and read one sided opinions and agree to it cause most likely they are just confused, don’t really know and accept the first so called logical concept that’s in front of them (and say “man that makes sense so it must be”, when it might just only sound good). So again do your study, read and view both sides of the spectrum and don’t believe everything you see on t.v. (or the internet). Couple more things…. You can’t say or put blame on religion for individual actions. See would it makes sense to say all fathers are f!?cked cause someone had a bad father who beat them. I can bet if you were drowning all by yourself in the middle of the ocean, who would you call upon? Yeah. And when on your death bed, do you really think your not going to be questioning yourself whether there is a HELL or HEAVEN, after life? Where will you be heading? Do you really know if there’s a GOD? And do you really know if there isn’t? I do, “you can tell the existence of a man in the sand by his foot print and you can tell the existence Allah سبحانه وتعالى, by just looking all around you.” study what the real message of what Islam is about and stop watching so much CNN and taking and accepting what the next person says about a people or a country you never been in. Allah سبحانه وتعالى, guides who he wills. Walk towards him and Allah سبحانه وتعالى, will run towards you……in shalaah.
Is he aware that catholicism has excepted evolution and I think the big bang aswell they just think them the acts of god, “now isnt that just the root of all delusional evil”
Write on, Mr. Dawkins! I read your book “The God Delusion” and loved it. You make the clear distinction between belief and evidence. As the 17th Century Dutch astronomer Christian Huygens said: “The world is my country, science my religion”. Religious denominations are “irreligious” because the word ‘religion’ means to tie the spirit back with the Atman of Universal Consciousness: to bring us together, not to separate us! In this cinéma-vérité documentary, Jerusalem, the city of the “Holy Land” is shown for what is really is: full of racial hatred and religious bigotry. When young minds are indoctrinated with dogma that teaches them NOT to ask questions about the world in which we live and where we come from, it is denying us and stripping our children of our rightful place in humanity, to be curious and to learn, not to accept on blind faith. And the so-called “great mono-theisms” are Earth-bound. How does any religious worldview “deal with” the reality of the billions and millions of other suns, planets, and galaxies in our Universe as shown in evidence by the Hubble Telescope? Perhaps Buddhism encompasses the entire physical cosmos while asking one to raise his or her consciousness through becoming in tune with one’s breathing. The fact that the Reverend Timothy Haggard kicked Mr. Dawkins off of the premises in the video does not exemplify Christian brotherly love, does it? What a crock. As Carl Sagan said along with Paul Tillich: “God didn’t create man, rather man(kind) created God”. Organized religion is mere organized superstition.
Without faith its impossible to please God, for he that cometh to God must believe that he is and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him….you can’t speak about someone you’ve never met personally. Grace is a gift and is only received through faith. The word of God says that he who is ignorant, let him be ignorant still. We are not to give that which is holy to dogs nor cast our pearls before swine. Strange thing to me that so many believe in things they’ve never actually seen, yet exert plenty of effort to fight against belief in God simply because they’ve never met him. Its been said that ignorance is bliss, but not when it pertains to an eternal soul. Can you prove he doesn’t exist? I remembered an old saying…a man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still. There are thousands of religions, but only one true God. Forget what everyone else says and find that proof yourself…before its to late. You deserve the truth.
Religion will always bring on the most passionate of debates, confrontations, wars, division etc… these are FACTS!!!! proven by history and is on show every day of our lives if we chose to open eyes. Guess this is why it is often good advice to withheld opinion on religion outside the actual place of worship…. so just like death and taxes it will sure create a ripple of some manitude! P.S Any religion that can waive taxes sign me up!!!!!
I proclaim the god’s death and religion, and the emergence of a free being , free to think and make, owner of an individual law.
And god is death, we have created and this is time to realize he never existed. At this point, which is the next step. The strange horizon, black and cold, but so much to see, so much to walk; happyness and pain.
the challenge is yours, you can acepted it or keep warm and ignorant in religion
really you lost your life, becoming convinced that your faith is correct.
I am sure, we do not know nothing, but science make an aproximation of how the world is, thru reason and logic, is a tool not a intention like faith. And certainly it can only investigate some aspects of the world, but do not put attention on it, is insane, a madness.
“Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law.”
” Love is the law,love under will.”
MISSING THE POINT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Do some reading. Anyone who thinks science and religion are against each other simply don’t get it. They are two sides of the same coin. You cannot have one without the other. As for science and religion finding a way to coexist… Religion and science aren’t people with personalities they are just ways of seeing the world, it’s the people who claim to speak for them that the problems lay with. Religion and science have worked fine in other cultures like Buddhism and Hinduism for ages. On that point, Darkins talks about religion but only mentions christianity, judaism and Islam. christianity, judaism and Islam are not the only religions. I would think that Dawkins would have understood that simple point.
Root of all evil? Stalin, Hitler, Pole pot, Mao? They wern’t religious were they? Wow!! non religious mass murderers!!
As for Dawkins, People shouldn’t listen to this pop-theorist. His theories are based on the worse side of religion. Any sensible person would see that he is not being objective.
To be honest, I’m not sure that atheism can work. Surely to say something doesn’t exist it is to invite it’s existence in one form or the other. Imagine saying to someone who has no knowledge of any god or religious believe system (possibly an alien or someone from a ‘lost’ tribe)
“I’m an atheist” says Darkins
“Oh really! What does that mean?” asks the alien/lost tribe member
“I don’t believe got exists” Darkins replies with smug self back patting tones
“What is god then?”
The stranger now is thinking about god and the whole god debate continues because of atheists.
The part that really gets me is this. the debate is presented like this:
–You believe in god (Implying you’re a brainwashed idiot) OR
–you think for yourself and are an atheist.
——————-THERE IS NO THIRD OPTION———————
well actually there is. There is a third option, you could come to your senses, open your mind and leave the arguing to idiots. Accept there is no scientific proof that god exists (if you believe enjoy your faith) and accept that there is no scientific evidence that god DOESN’T exist (Read Popper and Thomas Kuhn on theory of falsification of which atheism is not subject to). Have a look at a third option and read about agnostic thought.
Let me say this to all. First when trying to prove points of an intellectual argument use spell check. Affend is offend and medaphore is metaphor. Just a little tip.
On to the subject of this film. Yes Richard Dawkins is a hypocrite. He’s failing to see he is being just as much of a fanatic about science and it’s purity of fact. I personally believe there should be a compromise between science and religion. I believe in a higher power. Something had to create the two particles of dust or whatever it was that collided and started sciences big bang theory. Which remind you theories are not facts either. Yes science does prove many things to be fact, but there are many more scientific theories than facts.
On to religion. If everyone believes there is a God, whether it’s the Catholics God, the Muslims Allah, or say the Buddhists Buddha, how does anyone know they are following the right God? Who’s honestly to say who’s right or wrong? Imagine the shock of any religious fanatic upon entering the after life only to find out they chose the wrong religion. That’s why I choose to follow simple moral law in my life. I treat other life forms with respect, don’t commit malicious acts such as murder and rape. Simply because if there is an afterlife which in my opinion there is I’ll go to a good place. Because if there is a God do really think he or she would want us all running around killing each other over slight differences in beliefs?
This guy literally has no idea what he is talking about. he obviously doesn’t know that there is a good and bad side to everything. self righteous basterd.
The first half of this was stimulating but I couldn’t take the confrontational shit. I am not religious. The journalist scientist made no effort to find common ground with religious people & went straight for their buttons. No effort was made here to say the obvious that science and religion both look at ways of grasping reality. Their questions overlap but not all questions can be answered by both science and religion. I do like the freedom of the fellow’s thought to be bold enough to say that religion and science cannot co exist. Religion and science will have to find a way to co-exit or there will just be more political instability.
I happy to see finally in my life time people starting to speak out against superstitious bigotry and the dark veil it has put over man’s minds for centuries continually rising against and putting down the thinking man who stands on evidence rather than brainwashed belief which is forever pitting man against man.
Thank you Rrichard Dawkins for your courage and lucidity against the darkness of ignorance
which pervades all of man because of religion.
Finally
In my life time I am seeing the defense and support for the reasoning man over the believer whose position is based in indoctrinated bigotry rather than evidence.
People need something to follow and belong. There is nothing wrong with people supporting a motivational person. The pastors are working as esteem supporters, for those that don’t have selfesteem. A policeman patrols, a baker bakes, a teacher teaches, a preacher gives emotional support.
I don’t need religion, because I don’t need faith.
Once I hit rock bottom, you might see me in at the New Church. =)
I enjoyed the part when he told the Rabbi that the world could not possibly be 5,000 years old. Religion, because it has such primitive roots can not possibly answer the most basic scientific questions regarding the evolution of life.
I am sorry to the Muslim who may be offended from this statement, but there are fossils, there is proof of evolution.
Your religion may serve you well as a moral compass or as a source of spiritual strength, but to presume that an age old religion can surpass scientific experimentation and study in regards to the origins of life is some what dillusinal. I have nothing against religion because I personally believe it is what keeps a lot of fucked up people from going over the edge (the fear of their own eternal demise). However, I think Dawkins is right on for pointing out that religious education is miseducationg our children.
If someone today, given all of the scientific evidence to the contrary truly believes that human beings and other extremely complex life forms on the planet were created in a matter of hours, days, then I am sorry but that is dillusional.
i much enjoyed this video. A reconciliation between the sciences and religion is sure to happen some day; but not soon.
Religion is still the best method for social cohesion and order. The morality police cannot be everywhere all the time. It is coming though. Heaven and hell may not be geographic sites. they defenitely exist. I would enjoy having a conversation/dialouge with someone like sir/mr. Richard Dawkins. He has tremendous courage to debate those fellows and on their territory. I say he has much faith in his beliefs. Religion isn’t evil. He did find the weaknesses in religion(the strengths outnumber them though) and exposed them. As he should in an enlightened post renaissance global society.
That religion should be reduced to being an evil concoction developed by mans thoughts and scribbled into books for the generations; is simply wrong. Religion is the source of faith acquired by men to study the unseen bacterias in medicine. To ponder the spheres of the globe once believed to be flat. Religion is however a work in progress. A foundation for mankind. Unfortunately, it has also become the breeding ground for terrorism. All relgions have been. It is because of the susceptible masses yearning for knowledge about themselves and life. seeking to complete themselves and become injected with hate by men with their own political agendas and vendettas.
In short; don’t throw out the proverbial baby with the religious bath water.
This guys an idiot. When he was speaking of darwins theory against religions and said “Its like someone taking a leap form the bottom to the top of the cliff”, as a medaphore explaining religion and how we became, WHHHHHAAAAT!!!. If we really did evolve from a cell why is there no proof of it. No remains of bones, nothing of evolution. This guys going off no proof and hes trying to justify his means of thought. The only thing he spoke about when in the middle east is war. I figured if your really going to “affend”, nearly the whole world by what they believe. At least come with more proof, a better arguement. Now Im a Muslim, and I felt affended when he was sitting there “whispering” about the catholics while video taping the sick and mocking them. That piece out the whole documentary is the only real part that disturbed me. BUT then again that is his opinion. IDIOT! and thats mine.
i hate to break it to you, but evolution is an established fact. “If we really did evolve from a cell why is there no proof of it. No remains of bones, nothing of evolution.”
one word for you – fossils