An Evening with Richard Dawkins - Featuring Sam Harris - Night 1

[@ashtonhaggitt216]

Richard Dawkins is a global treasure.

[@saqibkhan1144]

more like a ruinous, egotistical and chauvinistic individual who is devoid of true logic and reasoning. As with Mr Hitchens, these people have made a business out of their position. God says " through logic and reason you can find the truth". Therefore, if you deny the truth, you are lacking and inadvertently, working with satan

[@kawasakiwhiptwo5821]

@@saqibkhan1144 "As with Mr. Hitchens,these people have made a business out of their position." "God says"... And that's where you lost me.

[@MrDaveyboy22]

@@saqibkhan1144 “devoid of true logic and reasoning” followed by “God says” & “working with Satan” without a hint of irony. Brilliant 😂

[@saqibkhan1144]

@@MrDaveyboy22 Atheists are just lazy people who haven't bothered educating themselves and are very opinionated. Any hypothesis without careful study and contemplation is foolish. How did the first human cell just "appear" and then multiply? The GLORIOUS Quran has all the answers. Read and study before you judge. The logic, reason, science is all there if you bothered to study.

[@MrDaveyboy22]

@@saqibkhan1144 This is where you make me laugh, you clearly haven't bothered to educate yourself on even basic biology yet believe the Quran has answers. If the Quran had all the answers it would be studied in Science class, there is a good reason it is not and can not be cited in any study outside of theology. Submit a peer reviewed scientifc study on biology, evolution or any scientific study and see how far that gets you, see what you can add to the field of human knowledge. Nothing. The Quran offers nothing, a deeply unimpressive book except to the gullible whilst masquerading as a perfect text for all times. I can see why it may have impressed 7th century Arabs but the ambitious claim it was written by the all powerful, all knowing entity from outside of time and space? It couldn't even get the morality of enslavement right compared to what we know today, which as always has evolved through trial & error.

[@jeremylevy7801]

I was one of the camera operators on this...was a fun night and great conversation. Should happen again!

[@jeremylevy7801]

@@lancemgy I don't remember anything saying that video was allowed beyond the professional crew, but could've been idk. I can feel your pain to a degree. Good rule when wanting to film events like these is to always reach out to management to volunteer or offer your services for the job. That's what I did and it worked out. If everyone with a camera came in trying to setup a tripod with decent angles, it would be a nightmare to those who are there on a professional level. But yeah, fun times!

[@rahimjibril1332]

Hi.please i am depressed i need help

[@HiAdrian]

@@rahimjibril1332 You should find a camera operator near you and talk to him. All the best 🙏

[@rahimjibril1332]

@@svenred6eard757 hello

[@DrJupiterKing]

Nice flex bro

[@pierluigibelcaro9950]

My sincere and deepest gratitude to Dr. Richard Dawkins and Dr. Sam Harris. Thanks only to brilliant and intellectually honest men like these the whole humanity can have a real hope that our world may one day become finally free from the chains of fear and superstition. Thank you so much for your precious help ...

[@daveydo3231]

Music good old 1966 and 1985 hippy music

[@deconry]

Two left from the titanic trinity including Christopher Hitchens.

[@stoyanfurdzhev]

Anything but honest

[@briansmith3791]

Harris "intellectually honest"? LOL. He attempted to bring the use of torture and first-use nuclear weapons to the discussion table. ( End of Faith). Both he and Dawkins support Israel even as it mass-murders children.

[@danielpaulson8838]

@@stoyanfurdzhevYes, yes you are.

[@andreadiamond7115]

Dr. Dawkins was one of my faith transition journey persons. I’m now an atheist. ✌🏼❤️

[@OddvarAshborn]

That's such a great news to hear!

[@JesusCreatedAllThings]

Hi Andrea, as I read your comment, I was wondering if you know that evolution depends upon Spontaneous Generation for it's genesis? Evolution seems rational and almost irrefutable if you start the conversation anywhere after the genesis of matter. The genesis of matter that science must accept (or disprove) is Spontaneous Generation. In other words, science says there was a time when absolutely nothing existed (no atoms, no protons, no neutrons, no energy) so science must explain how the very first "something" came into existence. Science has many theories but no answer. Don't take my word for it. Search anywhere for a scientific fact that explains the existence of the "very first something". That's one of the keys to unraveling the myth of evolution, it has no materials to start the process. When you realize science can't support evolution, I'd be happy to provide a rational and irrefutable alternative. I hope this is helpful and in no way insulting or condescending. The internet has enough of both already. I'd love to get your thoughts on my comments. Thanks! :)

[@OddvarAshborn]

@@JesusCreatedAllThings Your ignorance runs very very deep. First of all, science NEVER stated that there was nothing therefore we and/or the cosmos came from nothing. You know nothing about the Big Bang (which, again, is NOT something coming from nothing). Secondly, you absolutely don't know the meaning of a scientific theory. A theory is a proven concept, which can be studied and reproduced. What you were thinking about is a hypothesis, but it's pointless since the Evolution is not a hypothesis, but a theory (therefore proven). I wonder though what your rational and irrefutable alternative is. And please don't tell me it's some sort of god of pixies. Otherwise you also wouldn't know the meaning of both "rational" and "irrefutable".

[@johnsignorino3586]

Hi Oddvar, thanks for engaging. I appreciate your enthusiasm for the topic. I sincerely apologize if I've failed to get my facts straight. It happens. Anyway, about the meaning of Scientific Theory, I checked the definition on Wikipedia and I'm wondering if you find it accurate. Here's what it says (below). If you're satisfied that you may have been mistaken about the definition of a theory I will move on to your next point. If not, please provide your definition and it's source. Thanks, I look forward to our further discussion. A scientific theory is an explanation of an aspect of the natural world and universe that has been repeatedly tested and corroborated in accordance with the scientific method, using accepted protocols of observation, measurement, and evaluation of results. Where possible, theories are tested under controlled conditions in an experiment.[1][2] In circumstances not amenable to experimental testing, theories are evaluated through principles of abductive reasoning. Established scientific theories have withstood rigorous scrutiny and embody scientific knowledge.[3] A scientific theory differs from a scientific fact or scientific law in that a theory explains "why" or "how": a fact is a simple, basic observation, whereas a law is a statement (often a mathematical equation) about a relationship between facts. For example, Newton’s Law of Gravity is a mathematical equation that can be used to predict the attraction between bodies, but it is not a theory to explain how gravity works.[4] Stephen Jay Gould wrote that "...facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts."[5] The meaning of the term scientific theory (often contracted to theory for brevity) as used in the disciplines of science is significantly different from the common vernacular usage of theory.[6][note 1] In everyday speech, theory can imply an explanation that represents an unsubstantiated and speculative guess,[6] whereas in science it describes an explanation that has been tested and is widely accepted as valid.[1][2][3] The strength of a scientific theory is related to the diversity of phenomena it can explain and its simplicity. As additional scientific evidence is gathered, a scientific theory may be modified and ultimately rejected if it cannot be made to fit the new findings; in such circumstances, a more accurate theory is then required. Some theories are so well-established that they are unlikely ever to be fundamentally changed (for example, scientific theories such as evolution, heliocentric theory, cell theory, theory of plate tectonics, germ theory of disease, etc.). In certain cases, a scientific theory or scientific law that fails to fit all data can still be useful (due to its simplicity) as an approximation under specific conditions. An example is Newton's laws of motion, which are a highly accurate approximation to special relativity at velocities that are small relative to the speed of light.[citation needed] Scientific theories are testable and make falsifiable predictions.[7] They describe the causes of a particular natural phenomenon and are used to explain and predict aspects of the physical universe or specific areas of inquiry (for example, electricity, chemistry, and astronomy). As with other forms of scientific knowledge, scientific theories are both deductive and inductive,[8] aiming for predictive and explanatory power. Scientists use theories to further scientific knowledge, as well as to facilitate advances in technology or medicine. hings, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts."[5] The meaning of the term scientific theory (often contracted to theory for brevity) as used in the disciplines of science is significantly different from the common vernacular usage of theory.[6][note 1] In everyday speech, theory can imply an explanation that represents an unsubstantiated and speculative guess,[6] whereas in science it describes an explanation that has been tested and is widely accepted as valid.[1][2][3] The strength of a scientific theory is related to the diversity of phenomena it can explain and its simplicity. As additional scientific evidence is gathered, a scientific theory may be modified and ultimately rejected if it cannot be made to fit the new findings; in such circumstances, a more accurate theory is then required. Some theories are so well-established that they are unlikely ever to be fundamentally changed (for example, scientific theories such as evolution, heliocentric theory, cell theory, theory of plate tectonics, germ theory of disease, etc.). In certain cases, a scientific theory or scientific law that fails to fit all data can still be useful (due to its simplicity) as an approximation under specific conditions. An example is Newton's laws of motion, which are a highly accurate approximation to special relativity at velocities that are small relative to the speed of light.[citation needed] Scientific theories are testable and make falsifiable predictions.[7] They describe the causes of a particular natural phenomenon and are used to explain and predict aspects of the physical universe or specific areas of inquiry (for example, electricity, chemistry, and astronomy). As with other forms of scientific knowledge, scientific theories are both deductive and inductive,[8] aiming for predictive and explanatory power. Scientists use theories to further scientific knowledge, as well as to facilitate advances in technology or medicine.

[@franksignorino5170]

@@OddvarAshborn the something from nothing, according to Lawrence Krauss is still nothing. He talks about how the negative and positive energy cancel each other out, giving a zero total for the energy in a given space. The issue here is that is based on theoretical science, because there is really no way to prove that. Is space without any objects or energy truly nothing, or is it just empty space. Is that empty space nothing, or still something? Personally, regardless of which system of faith you have, theism or atheism, we are left with trying to figure out where the first thing or Being came from. The real question is, if science is still trying to figure out how to make stable and beneficial changes to DNA, why would anyone believe that such changes can happen randomly? If the environment is constantly changing, how can it provide enough stability for beneficial changes take place at a molecular level? Evolution came from a person’s emotional response to not wanting to believe in God. That is what you are basing your faith on. Someone’s hurt feelings.

[@henrybyrd5402]

The most thought-provoking and entertaining hour and a half I have spent for some time. My only concern is that the people who should watch this are the same people who wont.

[@jayashreebardapurkar2146]

S

[@jayashreebardapurkar2146]

S

[@jayashreebardapurkar2146]

Wsws

[@jayashreebardapurkar2146]

Sss

[@jayashreebardapurkar2146]

S

[@fragasm726]

I love listening to these two men speak. I miss Hitchens so much too.

[@OddvarAshborn]

He was another treasure...

[@Talia.777]

Indeed 😔

[@stoyanfurdzhev]

Me too.

[@BrokenArrow685]

Dawkins and Harris have been a true blessing in my life. 😅 But seriously, I appreciate how they’ve articulated so many difficult concepts. A truly meaningful contribution to society.

[@w.donald9066]

Sam has a very relaxing presentation style. Almost hypnotic at times. I love Dawkins , Hitchens and Fry when they talk so passionately but I'm really enjoying catching up on mr Harris debates.

[@stoyanfurdzhev]

Aristotle should've had the same enchanting mantra

[@Moriah7913]

Because he's a meditator

[@AitanaVargas]

Two of the world’s most enlightened thinkers these days. I adore them :-)

[@charles_preston]

Enlightenment is bogus, without God. ✝

[@A.I.Silicate]

@@charles_prestonBelieving in things without reason is bogus. Blind faith isn’t a position of reason.

[@charles_preston]

@@A.I.Silicate 'reason' is a dead end. Joyless.

[@briansmith3791]

@@A.I.Silicate " Physicists say the Physical Constants are fine-tuned for Life".- Dawkins. We have observable evidence for one universe fine-tuned for Life. How's that for Reason?

[@rorygilmoreNZ]

⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠@@briansmith3791 What an inane argument for a reasoning creator! Of course our tiny corner of the universe is fine tuned for our type of life, we’ve evolved in them and thus adapted to the conditions our ancient ancestors found themselves in. If we weren’t adapted to our conditions we would have gone extinct. Like the 99.99% of creatures that predate us. So we wouldn’t have evolved to suit them. The conditions come first, we then change to accommodate them. As long as we continue changing (ie evolving) we will always be in conditions suited to us.

[@crazieguy7]

i love how Richard Dawkins actively explains things like "the turing test", "the trolley problem" etc which would be very simple and understandable for listeners who are used to scientific jargon but not so for people who are just getting interested in these kind of talks. MAD RESPECT!

[@2fast2block]

Richard deserves no respect. Richard Dawkins teaches the universe came from "literally nothing." Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. We can't get anything from "literally nothing." We can't even get science without God. The laws of nature only can come from a Lawgiver, God.

[@2fast2block]

@butch oblick in your gas relief reply to me, do copy and paste any parts that got around the science I gave. You sure skipped that part.

[@jude_foster280]

@@2fast2block your attacking science from speculating and forming hypothesis while your religion is based off demonstrably false assumptions made by uneducated, like my friend said over here so eloquently, GOAT HERDERS. Let's suppose science is all speculative, your religions is lower than that, it's fairy tales. Fairy tales made for two reasons .1) to try and answer big questions by making them up. And 2) to keep people fearful and obedient with rewarding them if ‘ good ‘ to go the heaven and if they are ‘bad’ they will go to hell. Never mind the thousands of other religions. If it's ok to base your ‘ facts’ off belief then why Is your religion ‘ fact ‘ and others that have the same “ logic and remaining “ as you wrong. Hypocrisy

[@2fast2block]

@butch oblick "Real science makes no absolute claims.... " It makes many. I gave a few of them in thermodynamics and you can't get around them. You are empty. "I mean, why question anything? " As your shallowness can't give one reason to question the laws I gave. You went to 2 and never got around the laws I gave. You sure come across that you ran from science your whole empty life. Now try again. Stop running and tell me how you got around those laws you keep ignoring.

[@ApothecaryGrant]

@@2fast2block No , you deserve no respect . You deserve compassion for being fooled by conmen into vacating your own mind .

[@jlzepeda33]

The world needs millions of people like these two. I hope to see one day the brilliance that was Christopher Hitchens manifest itself into another human being.

[@ApothecaryGrant]

There probably are a million of them ....thats not even 1%

[@noname-by3qz]

@Pood De Screwch In lots of countries there's 20% and more. More and more people have no affiliations at all.

[@stoyanfurdzhev]

Anymore science-fiction?

[@markcynic808]

People like these are only available in Caucasian and Jewish forms.

[@cleftturnip7774]

Hitchens was a fraud. He said he wants religion to keep going because he would have nothing to argue about. He wasn't joking either. Richard Dawkins called him on it aswell. So Hitchens didn't really stand for anything except his own ego.

[@goldpython2263]

A good talk, and I always enjoy Sam's understated sense of humor.

[@Milenrama1220]

on the aside that just screwed up dinner, it got me thinking about pain caused by eating plants haha

[@asdfffs]

So rejoiced to see Richard being so energetic and active! I haven't seen a lot of him the last couple of years and then after the stroke I was worried his strength had seeped away, so happy to see him again

[@diaryofnricom163]

This is from 2016 though. Published in 2021

[@asdfffs]

@@diaryofnricom163 Aaaaaaaawwww, yeah this is the talk they had on sam harris's channel but this time with video

[@qwerty69600]

@@diaryofnricom163 This took place in November 2016. He had the stroke in February 2016.

[@allebasaiadartse3951]

Indeed!

[@2fast2block]

He's back and still a loser. We only get life from life...the law of biogenesis. We can't get anything without God. Richard Dawkins teaches the universe came from "literally nothing." Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. We can't get anything from "literally nothing." We can't even get science without God. The laws of nature only can come from a Lawgiver, God. God is the reason for us and all we have. kzbin.info/www/bejne/gJqwoq2ElL6Gjrc “However improbable the origin of life might be, we know it happened on Earth because we are here.” -Richard Dawkins. The odds are NOT there. kzbin.info/www/bejne/jWLCfHiMlqisl6M kzbin.info/www/bejne/r4icmJStr79_qc0 kzbin.info/www/bejne/mpXEooarqdlol9k

[@mehdibaghbadran3182]

Dear mr Dawkins, happy birthday , for your 80 years celebrating your birthday, I wishing you long life , full of health & happiness, I believe that you’re, one of the scientists who’s giving values to the scientific ideas.thanks

[@sonofsparda3767]

Sam's right eyebrow is the answer to everything

[@souravbasu6285]

It does not necessarily mean if someone able to make his right eyebrows same like Sam, he gets all the answers

[@souravbasu6285]

Its the time he spends dedicated to what he wants to do, makes him what he is

[@mariamalhotra8228]

@@souravbasu6285 It's a joke

[@rintje6507]

@@souravbasu6285 wooosh

[@skyhawk747]

And his tune talking with his sentences always ending on a higher note

[@spridle]

Richard reading hate mail is the best video on KZbin.

[@susangowda28]

Richard Dawkins... the voice of reason and saviour of generations misled by devious propagandists of religion. We are indebted to him. 🙏

[@mariamalhotra8228]

According to Dr. Hawkins' research on consciousness, Love calibrates at 500 whereas the most that Reason or the intellect can reach is 499. That's Dr. David R Hawkins. He believes in Intelligent Design but not an anthropomorphic God.

[@PaulOReilly712]

Another voice of reason ( Jonathan Sarfati) the other side to the argument! He plays 12 people at one time Blindfolded ( at Chess)and wins all 12 mtaches. Dawkins it terrified to debate him kzbin.info/www/bejne/gGKth5aCpqytqs0&ab_channel=100huntley kzbin.info/www/bejne/nmXJpp2FfJunhbc&ab_channel=100huntley I know you will not like my post you love Richard Dawkins but he is wrong very intelligent people have proved that.

[@TheIfifi]

@@PaulOReilly712 what claim is that even? This guy can win 12 chess matches blindfolded therefore god?

[@josephpaul4548]

Why do you need a saviour like Dawkins to defend you? Why do you feel so put upon by religious folk? Have you tried indifference?

[@TheIfifi]

@@josephpaul4548 can only speak for myself. But when people tell me i deserve eternal torment for not believing as they do. That i am not a real human being. That i am immoral. That they hold answers to everything and some outright threaten me with physical violenece? Sometimes being indifferent is hard. I'll even argue sometimes its immoral. There are people who suffer greatly because of religion and dispelling the illusion could help. We dont need dawkins for any of this. I personally just respect the man for his intellect and kindness.

[@majajackson777]

Oh I love Richard Dawkins. So witty and funny. I can't thank him enough for his work.

[@2fast2block]

You thank a liar. Wow. Richard Dawkins teaches the universe came from "literally nothing." Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. We can't get anything from "literally nothing." We can't even get science without God. The laws of nature only can come from a Lawgiver, God.

[@ukaszrybkowski2769]

@@2fast2block with the best intentions, even if you would assume that there was some kind of a creator of the universe, it's still just a hypothesis, because there's no evidence, only some kind of common sense that tries to explain it and we know how often common sense is wrong about complicated matters. And even if you would make that hypothesis, any claims about this creator is just pure fantasy. And even if there was a creator, there's no evidence for his connections with any of the known religions. Science doesn't say that the universe came from nothing. Science says that as for know there's just no known way how we can find out about what happened before the big bang.

[@2fast2block]

@@ukaszrybkowski2769 "because there's no evidence" Says the clueless misfit that gave NOTHING to prove me wrong.

[@ukaszrybkowski2769]

@@2fast2block nice ad personam, you seem frustrated. And I don't have to prove to you that fairies, Santa or Russell's teapot don't exist. You have to prove to me that they exist, if that's your claim.

[@2fast2block]

@@ukaszrybkowski2769 nope, you failed again to get around the laws I gave. No need to keep on showing how empty your life is.

[@nicholashughes7226]

This is my first time listening to Dawkins but gotta say he's got a good sense of humor.

[@INounCf]

Two of my favorite people to listen to. I love this.

[@mysunnybird]

I loved listening to these two wonderful intelligent people discussing my favorite subject. Long time ago I bought and read all the books of Richard Dawkins. Sam Harris is unbelievable smart and eloquent. Both of them should live forever !!!! WE NEED THEM.

[@pjflynn]

I enjoy listening to these brilliant gentlemen, their conversation is erudite, fun, intelligent and I learn from them. Thank you, dear Dawkins and Harris.

[@2fast2block]

They are loony and so are you. Richard Dawkins teaches the universe came from "literally nothing." Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. We can't get anything from "literally nothing." We can't even get science without God. The laws of nature only can come from a Lawgiver, God.

[@ApothecaryGrant]

@@2fast2block Show me with the aid of this Doll where reason touched you ...

[@logicalatheist9077]

@@2fast2block Christianity is an unoriginal fairy-tale stolen from ancient beliefs that existed long before it was ever conceived.

[@stoyanfurdzhev]

Fare enough

[@getgle]

@@2fast2block Who created God?

[@adventurexperience]

great to see modern thinkers on this platform, amazing discussion.

[@2fast2block]

He's just a common F00L. Richard Dawkins teaches the universe came from "literally nothing." Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. We can't get anything from "literally nothing." We can't even get science without God. The laws of nature only can come from a Lawgiver, God. God is the reason for us and all we have. kzbin.info/www/bejne/gJqwoq2ElL6Gjrc “However improbable the origin of life might be, we know it happened on Earth because we are here.” -Richard Dawkins. We only get life from life...the law of biogenesis. We can't get anything without God. The odds are NOT there. kzbin.info/www/bejne/jWLCfHiMlqisl6M kzbin.info/www/bejne/r4icmJStr79_qc0 kzbin.info/www/bejne/mpXEooarqdlol9k No, the eye did not evolve into various eyes. Your mere chance mutations are absurd. kzbin.info/www/bejne/jmjLY3uNmLmql5Y Even Dawkins admits we can't know what is true because of natural selection... The God Delusion, “Since we are creatures of natural selection, we cannot totally trust our senses. Evolution only passes on traits that help a species survive, and not with preserving traits that tell a species what is actually true about life.” Oh, but Dawkins knows what's true about life...killing those who don't meet his expectations for living. dailycaller.com/2021/05/19/richard-dawkins-down-syndrome-roe-v-wade/

[@Weebs76]

Concerning the myth that people can’t be reasoned out of their faith: I credit you guys and others for doing just that. I’d venture to say that even the most hardcore “true believer” has serious qualms in areas of their belief systems that they can’t wave away. I was one of them. When the cracks in my faith started to grow, I sought answers and over time became an Atheist. Thank you for caring so much about bringing science and reason to the table in this way.

[@Weebs76]

@H L get out of here. You know literally nothing about me.

[@Weebs76]

@H L your response is nothing more than nonsensical word salad. Good job 👍

[@Weebs76]

@H L run along now. I wasn’t talking to you, nor do I care to.

[@Weebs76]

@H L buhbye! GFYS ❤️

[@2fast2block]

I have no issue with believing God created. Richard Dawkins teaches the universe came from "literally nothing." Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. We can't get anything from "literally nothing." We can't even get science without God. The laws of nature only can come from a Lawgiver, God.

[@joryiansmith]

Richard and Sam at their best. A wonderful talk to listen to.

[@johnlinden7398]

It is truly remarkable to hear two profoundly insightful and intelligent persons who are experts in their own fields discuss these deep questions and concerns and to which are contributing so widely toward enlightening our worlds citizenry ! BRAVO !

[@valinorean4816]

in what field is Sam Harris an expert?

[@AGILISFPV]

Stumbled upon this! Loved it.

[@sirdukesalot218]

Let’s give praise to Odin for these two wonderful men. Let’s thank Athena for granting them such powerful wisdom. May Vishnu protect them and protect us all. Glory be to Ninkasi !!

[@souravbasu6285]

what if these two people themselves made them wonderful ? what if they themselves developed such powerful wisdom ? what if they themselves protect them ? what if they are the only, painting the Glory ? with whatever is available on this planet

[@gessie]

@@souravbasu6285 Pretty sure that was a joke. Plus, we can never fully credit a person with their effectiveness as biological coincidence is not within their (or our) control... yet. But yeah, they certainly put a lot of effort into their thoughts when compared to the average, casual buffoon.

[@kankanisimone4846]

U welcome 😊

[@renupathak4442]

Richard Dawkins is the ultimate guide for our youth. I am 74 years old and in india, but his reach is phenomenal

[@samdoyle3945]

Are you 75 yet? How's India?

[@arjanwesselink3418]

One of the benefits of youtube is the ability to be share this kind of discussions with the world. We need more of this. Keep fighting ignorance.

[@eckhartmaister4404]

2:51 There you go.

[@z33z11]

Thanks

[@anatolydyatlov963]

Thanks

[@ricksanchez8407]

Thanks mate👍

[@Julian-we6qg]

there they go

[@racketmuseum]

Thanks

[@nishantintouch]

The two out of four horsemen. I miss Hitch, in all possibility, we all do.

[@pikapuff123]

@@Seeds-Of-The-Wayside He died of esophageal cancer in 2011.

[@TheIfifi]

@@Seeds-Of-The-Wayside you must be new here. haha. look up his farewell... its terribly sad

[@Seeds-Of-The-Wayside]

@@TheIfifi That really sucks. The world could have used another 20 or 30 years of him

[@positronhaberdashery1583]

Sam harris is a crypto Zionist

[@TheIfifi]

@@positronhaberdashery1583 the fuck are you even smoking xD

[@MrSidney9]

“ this story went on without a hitch” Clever. Great audience reaction too

[@durg8909]

That probably took serious balls to say, so props to him as it lead to some great answers.

[@EzraB123]

I'm an observant Jew but I do enjoy listening to Richard Dawkins lecture (Sam Harris too). Both insightful men.

[@BeachsideHank]

As an Atheist I really get down with Rabbi Singer; he gets to the point at light speed and refutes Christianity with ease, I call it "a zinger from Singer", almost makes me want to wear a yarmulke when he speaks.☺

[@EzraB123]

@@BeachsideHank I love him lol, dude dismantles evangelism beautifully.

[@robertwhite2449]

Wonderfully enjoyable and easy going conversation, but also really thought provoking. Love both guys dry, wicked wit and humour 😁

[@loriw2661]

Two of my favorite atheists!! Loved this and can’t wait to watch part II.

[@woodytheduke]

don't forget the the late great Christopher Hitchens....

[@loriw2661]

@@woodytheduke NEVER!! He’ll always be my absolute favorite!!!

[@2fast2block]

You make a great fellow atheist to them. You don't think either. Richard Dawkins teaches the universe came from "literally nothing." Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. We can't get anything from "literally nothing." We can't even get science without God. The laws of nature only can come from a Lawgiver, God.

[@loriw2661]

@@2fast2block The irony just flies straight over your head, doesn’t it? Please, get a science education because you’ve got it all wrong. I understand that you probably get your science “education” from religious people so it’ll be tough but you can do it.

[@2fast2block]

@@loriw2661 hey, shallow person, let me know when you are not so afraid to actually deal with what I wrote rather than running from it.

[@barbaragemin5117]

Thoroughly enjoyable. Looking forward to the next conversation! Such great minds.

[@2fast2block]

Such weak minds. Richard Dawkins teaches the universe came from "literally nothing." Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. We can't get anything from "literally nothing." We can't even get science without God. The laws of nature only can come from a Lawgiver, God.

[@onemondaynight]

I was reasoned out of my faith, though reason wasn't the only element, and it took a long time. Speak reason even when it's not received, because I heard the evidence against faith over the many years I was a Christian, and though I argued against it, I still heard it, and over time it had a cumulative effect on me. The other main ingredient was finding myself removed from the religious echo chamber for a while.

[@schmetterling4477]

All you really have to give up is the belief that the people who raised you are sane. Once you are willing to let go of that, losing god is easy.

[@db7777]

Isaiah 53 (written 700 years before Jesus birth), Isaiah 7:14 (same), Zechariah 11:13 (480 BC), Micah 5:2 (700 BC), Genesis 22:16,17,18 (2066 BC?), Proverbs 30:4 (960BC?) Daniel 3:25 (540BC), Psalm 22 (1000 BC)-------------google these scriptures--------live & learn--------Merry Christmas!!!!!!!!!!!!!!🎀🎀🎀🎀🎀🎀

[@JustinLHopkins]

We need Dawkins more than ever. Who will take up the mantle when these guys retire? We need a new generation of intellectuals who’re willing to get up and fight the immoral religious right.

[@briansmith3791]

It is Dawkins who is immoral. His support for Israel even as it massacres thousands of children shows his moral degeneracy.

[@BM-zd3vs]

May be it's my selfish genes that want people like Richard, Sam and many others live very long lives.

[@chordogg]

Watching this, realized I've been using the word "compelled" wrong my whole life. Probably always meant "impelled". Thanks Richard.

[@AndrewK209]

I put on my socks and realized they were not the same and it reminded me of Richard Dawkins and i immediately put on a matching pair lol

[@NeilTurnbull007]

In todays world where madness and idiots seem to have gained a certain currency , its is reassuring to listen to objective thinkers speak.

[@2fast2block]

You are so braindead. Richard Dawkins teaches the universe came from "literally nothing." Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. We can't get anything from "literally nothing." We can't even get science without God. The laws of nature only can come from a Lawgiver, God. God is the reason for us and all we have. kzbin.info/www/bejne/gJqwoq2ElL6Gjrc “However improbable the origin of life might be, we know it happened on Earth because we are here.” -Richard Dawkins. We only get life from life...the law of biogenesis. We can't get anything without God. The odds are NOT there. kzbin.info/www/bejne/jWLCfHiMlqisl6M kzbin.info/www/bejne/r4icmJStr79_qc0 kzbin.info/www/bejne/mpXEooarqdlol9k No, the eye did not evolve into various eyes. Your mere chance mutations are absurd. kzbin.info/www/bejne/jmjLY3uNmLmql5Y Even Dawkins admits we can't know what is true because of natural selection... The God Delusion, “Since we are creatures of natural selection, we cannot totally trust our senses. Evolution only passes on traits that help a species survive, and not with preserving traits that tell a species what is actually true about life.” Oh, but Dawkins knows what's true about life...killing those who don't meet his expectations for living. dailycaller.com/2021/05/19/richard-dawkins-down-syndrome-roe-v-wade/

[@TheNameCannotBeFound]

Thank you so much for this. I absolutely appreciate these conversations.

[@StuftBanana]

My Dad, a mormon man and degreed mechanical engineer, brought home Dawkins’ first book, “The Selfish Gene” when I was 17. Being an avid reader, I would read the books I checked out, the true crime books my Mom checked out and the books my Dad checked out. Dawkins’ work inspired me greatly and my Dad and I had wonderful discussions about whether the idea of memes that Dawkins introduced in “The Selfish Gene” held any weight. I thought they did; my Dad was skeptical. It took my Dad a little longer than myself to recognize that religion paints a delusional picture of reality, but he did eventually get there! ❤️ Richard Dawkins. He helped many formerly religious rational men like my Dad overcome the dogmas they were raised in.

[@earnestlycontendingforthef5332]

Following Jesus Christ leads to "Eternal life" and "Everlasting Joy". Following Dawkins leads to severe punishment at Judgment Day, and "Everlasting Destruction".... Your choice!!!

[@elly3359]

@@earnestlycontendingforthef5332 you are deceived! It's following the Magical unicorn that leads to eternal life! Do i have proof? Of course not. You just need to welcome the unicorn to your heart and you will know that im speaking the truth. We dont need evidence. Have faith in the unicorn.

[@earnestlycontendingforthef5332]

@@elly3359 ..............Following Jesus Christ leads to "Eternal life" and "Everlasting Joy". Following Dawkins leads to severe punishment at Judgment Day, and "Everlasting Destruction".... Your choice!!! "2 Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt. 3 Those who are wise will shine like the brightness of the heavens, and those who lead many to righteousness, like the stars for ever and ever." Daniel 12:1-3 (ANIV) Why follow a dead loser, when you can follow the risen Lord and be granted "Everlasting life" and "Everlasting Joy" in the age to come.

[@ApothecaryGrant]

Churches exist to reconvict because no one can keep deluding themself without external aid . Its my opinion that no one believes nonsense for long , eventually reason triumphs .

[@GruntDestroyarChannel]

@@earnestlycontendingforthef5332 funny you say that, since you follow a dead loser who promised you an afterlife

[@muhammadzubi4095]

Looking forward to watching this tonight with a dark AF cup of coffee 👌🏼 Only thing missing is The Hitch 😔

[@ianyboo]

I just wish we could have Hitch, Sagan and Feynman in a room. I was born too late and I never got to see any of them speak live.

[@DavidTa2]

😢

[@anatolydyatlov963]

Yep, though it's worth realising that one day the same will happen to Harris and Dawkins, so it's good to appreciate that we still have them.

[@DWAGON1818]

So did you watch it? Was anything said that hadnt been said before?

[@joshward1148]

Professor Richard Dawkins is my hero along with Christopher Hitchens. I just regret I wasn’t aware of Christopher before he passed because I was brought up a Jehovah’s Witness. I have my God Delusion book ready to be signed after locked down!

[@alexisjuillard4816]

he wouldn't like to be your hero :p like hitchens. they would want you to have your own glorious life

[@joshward1148]

Can’t deny that!

[@james-r]

Why do you want it signed, isn’t the knowledge and information within the book enough? Elton’s glass or Elvis’s guitar (some people might know what I’m referring to)

[@briandbeaudin9166]

This discussion was a real gem. Intelligent thought, surprising humor, and very thought-provoking questions all wrapped up in a relaxed atmosphere which reminds me of my College days!

[@TheWorldTeacher]

Dick Dawkins is INDEED an intelligent individual, although he is thoroughly deluded by what the ancient Indians called "maya". ;)

[@logicalatheist9077]

@@TheWorldTeacher There once was a man from the sky, Who made a son who could not die, An old book was writ, Which is full of shit, And churches just rephrase the lie.

[@TheWorldTeacher]

@@logicalatheist9077, stop it. Seek help! ✋

[@logicalatheist9077]

@@TheWorldTeacher If anyone needs to seek help, it's YOU.... There's no such thing as a god or satan or heaven or hell.... it's all in your mind....

[@TheWorldTeacher]

@@logicalatheist9077, is it logical to STRAWMAN? ☝🏼

[@amirhosseinahmadi3706]

Thank you so much for uploading this!

[@TracyWhite-es5zz]

Thank you Dawkins, Hitchens and other's for their fight to save humanity from religion. True saints if there was such. Leaders of religion have raped killed enslaved masses while spreading religion. All Dawkins and like request is to simply listen to the truth

[@venugopal2227]

it is really great that Dawkins turns active again after a break....how beautiful he thinks....

[@elkinsuaza6394]

Thanks to Richard Dawkins I´m an atheist. Mr. Dawkins reasoned me out of it.

[@presidentobummer447]

What made you see reason?

[@estefania517]

I like the way you put it "reason out of it". Good for you!

[@MegaSage007]

@@estefania517 😊 You must be born again to see the kingfom of God." Jesus

[@estefania517]

@@MegaSage007 🤨🤐🤣🤣🤣

[@MegaSage007]

@@estefania517 🙄 Romans 1:28, St Matthew 25:41, Psalm 52:5 "God will destroy you forever."

[@ViktorEremita]

This is the most I've seen Sam Harris smile.

[@souravbasu6285]

Even if he didn't smile before or smiled less, He did very good job. This is undoubtedly wonderful job he did, but previous non-smiling or less smiling Sam Harris did undeniably helpful job for humanity

[@mysteriousways9]

I've enjoyed so much over the years listening to intelligent people who think outside the box, I had to leave Twitter yesterday CJW , twitters toxicity and lack of realism was painful. BTW did this just get republished, I've watched this a few years ago or have I been living on another planet...?

[@Davidfooterman]

It’s extraordinary how the ghost of Christopher Hitchens always lurks within, or looks down from above upon, these events!

[@bhajandaniel9771]

I'm not an atheist. I'm an advocate of process-philosophy (or process theology) but I appreciate people like Dawkins and Harris because they help purify thinking on spiritual subjects.

[@Anicius_]

@Glenn Heston lmao

[@ApothecaryGrant]

I do not think they do .

[@matthelm5209]

Pity it took 5 years to become available. Wonderful to watch for those of us who are atheists.

[@johnnysprocketz]

the atheist movement sunk like a stone.

[@davidhailstone7794]

@@johnnysprocketz not according to the facts. Remember them? We atheists like them, like census and other data showing the growth of secularism and decline in religious affiliation and attendance, even in religion ruined America. It's a long haul, but history is on our side.

[@roby.3428]

@@johnnysprocketz Ok boomer.

[@johnnysprocketz]

@@roby.3428 yielding to the class of young voters throughout history in all arenas has caused incomprehensible harm to every milieu it wished to aid, our college grades (youth) are perhaps the most unqualified group to render judgement mostly due to undeveloped frontal lobes, and an inability to reason critically.

[@roby.3428]

@@johnnysprocketz What's your point?

[@catkeys6911]

So perfect the way this ended with a tribute (unscripted) to Christopher Hitchens. The only way this evening could have been even more inspiring would be if we could have had him there. DAMN!- I guess I'm STILL not over mourning his leaving us.

[@stoyanfurdzhev]

Change allegiances! You may start filling better.

[@kylebowles9820]

Oh man, 3 uploads each 1.5 hours?!? My night just got so much better!

[@anandhua.b4589]

i don't need sleep *I NEED ANSWERS*

[@jeffcolorado]

I'm colorblind, and I've been wearing mismatched socks since the 80's. I steal a line from Steven Wright and tell them they do match. I go by thickness.

[@roccohowell7557]

I’m not colorblind I just grab whatever socks are in front of me

[@roccohowell7557]

@Fainer Fug I’d still get them mixed up.

[@gessie]

Even that's unnecessary: Socks match as long as wearing them does not overly stimulate one foot when compared to the other. They're there to keep the feet warm, not to win a beauty contest. :)

[@SebastianLundh1988]

Dawkins used to be a hero of mine. Still a great science communicator.

[@HernandeztheHero]

Pfffft.

[@sharismad]

9:46 thank you for doing what you do. You have no idea how much you have changed my life. Also, people can be reasoned out of their faith. I’m a living example of that.

[@danielcevallos8643]

Hopefully one day all humanity will abandon the religious beliefs and we will have a much better world.

[@db7777]

Isaiah 53 (written 700 years before Jesus birth), Isaiah 7:14 (same), Zechariah 11:13 (480 BC), Micah 5:2 (700 BC), Genesis 22:16,17,18 (2066 BC?), Proverbs 30:4 (960BC?) Daniel 3:25 (540BC), Psalm 22 (1000 BC)-------------google these scriptures--------live & learn--------Merry Christmas!!!!!!!!!!!!!!🎀🎀🎀🎀🎀🎀

[@gordonbartlett1921]

Some can and some cannot. Look at db 7777. Not much hope there.

[@marcuscross8051]

Whenever Sam Harris is talking, it's always worth listening.

[@manuelmanuel9248]

Witty speculation. If you like that

[@eddieclark9802]

When he talks, not whenever, unless you don't know. Whenever I got up this morning, it was raining. So wrong. 😎

[@gatmyne]

I’ve listened to him enough to know that he’s intellectually dishonest. Articulate? Yes. Coherent? Yes. Informative? No.

[@HernandeztheHero]

Not articulate nor coherent lol. The guy doesn’t even know fallacies.

[@marcuscross8051]

@@eddieclark9802 speakspeak.com/resources/english-grammar-rules/conjunctions/whenever "The conjunction whenever means ‘every time that’ or ‘any time that’." Any time that Sam Harris is talking, it's always worth listening. Am I missing something here?

[@mjk2023T]

What a beautiful conversation. I thoroughly enjoyed this one, focused on content, and exchange of interesting opinions, no recurring to cheap rhetoric of irony and personal attacks. Two heroes I deeply admire. Thank you for putting it to public domain.

[@2fast2block]

Yes, your tiny brain loves to listen to other tiny brains who think we got all this on its own. The 1LofT states that energy can't be created or destroyed, it can't happen naturally. One aspect of the 2LofT shows that the universe is winding down, usable energy is becoming less usable. It is clear creation had to be done supernaturally at some point yet it is still denied because people are just too proud to accept that, among other things.

[@alexandermartin2713]

Bravo! What these two do seems simple. Speak earnestly, honestly, eloquently, and with no agenda other than to do just that. Why does this seem so rare? The discussion about Hitchens had me tearing up.

[@a740g]

This is an epic exchange. Thank you!

[@sandreid87]

1:29:49 Oh the irony. 2020 would like to say hello to 2016

[@YLLPal]

Came looking for this comment 😜 ^

[@peterronchetti1736]

Funny how a throwaway line became a true nightmare for us all!

[@alrdye]

Thank you Robin for the introduction. It was quite heartfelt.

[@pyhw]

Mr. Dawkins is the only person who comfortably counters Sam's arguments like AI being capable of suffering more pain. Sam is a beast.

[@sanefran6482]

Thank you guys for your honesty and your humanity to share your wisdom...my life wouldn't have been saved from repeated mistake of praying for miracles if it wasn't for u guys...and Hitch.... And all thanks to Bill Maher and his show....

[@gullibleskeptic3237]

I take it you also know of Matt Dillahunty. Otherwise i recommend checking him out. Absolute heavyweight skeptic.

[@juanReflex37]

I love this conversation

[@Seeds-Of-The-Wayside]

If I got stranded on a deserted island with these two guys, honestly it wouldn't be too bad.

[@mraganksingh58]

Sam has the best subtle sense of humor

[@MrSaemichlaus]

Finding truth is an attempt at finding a perspective which we can all agree on. Ultimately, science is not just a struggle for technological progress, but a struggle for world peace. So it is a noble profession, and it is an honorable purpose to one's hours and years.

[@LoftyAssertions]

These two have perfectly complimentary energies

[@JoshWiniberg]

These guys are always very witty but this conversation was exceptionally funny. Better than 99% of actual comedy!

[@2fast2block]

Your brain is pathetic as theirs. We couldn't have got all this on its own. You sure don't think much. The 1LofT states that energy can't be created or destroyed, it can't happen naturally. One aspect of the 2LofT shows that the universe is winding down, usable energy is becoming less usable. It is clear creation had to be done supernaturally at some point yet it is still denied because people are just too proud to accept that, among other things.

[@liquidminds]

"'gonna', we're not going to put that into artificial intelligence, we're not gonna" auto-generated subtitles: "we are not going to" me: it has started!

[@Knowformo]

Love these two

[@MrRABC1]

*I've seen this discussion before but am eagerly gonna watch it again.*

[@raubhautz6281]

I went to this show the following evening that this was taped (my tix for 11/02/2016). I have to say that I wish we had more time with Richard and Sam dialoging; on our evening, it seemed we had a bunch of folks selected to ask questions that did nothing but ask repetitive questions -- if you watch any of these sort of engagements or related debates, the questions were already answered ad-nauseum. I was disappointed with many of the people selected to ask, seemed pre-arranged; I made attempts to ask but she (looked like it was Robyn E. Blumner on the bottom floor, right side aisle) kept passing me on the aisle as if I was not there. Anyway, it was worth hearing these great men speak, only the Q&A part kind of waned.

[@Conn30Mtenor]

He's right about the socks. I've been an emancipated odd-pair socks user for years now.

[@isaacmathews4693]

This was surprisingly hilarious throughout their discussion. 🤣

[@joesikic6531]

Nothing better than a friendly conversation / debate

[@captainzappbrannagan]

Always an interesting conversation. A lot of current time relevant topics covered here. Thanks team!

[@dennisevans6544]

I have enjoyed a high-quality tertiary education which has equiped me to think well enough and to express my thoughts adequately. However I feel so stupid in the presence of superb minds such as Dawkins, Hitchens et al. Perhaps if I had been exposed to minds such as these at an earlier age I would have thought much better and further. Then again, the old story is true. The best time to have planted a tree was 20 years ago. The next best time is today. Thank you so much Richard, for salvaging my mind from the superstitious nonsense that is religion, guiding me as you have to the calm enlightenment of atheism.

[@stoyanfurdzhev]

That's the whole point.

[@stoyanfurdzhev]

Not so calm if you are able to think with your own head.

[@easyguy625]

Top video!!

[@fionagregory356]

In the UK we are not very religious (apart from Muslims I think). Why is America still so religious? They need to catch up.

[@DanielFenandes]

These guys are so fun together 😂

[@msimp0108]

If by fun you mean enraging, dishonest obtuse and self satisfied.

[@k-3402]

@@msimp0108 Dishonest? How so?

[@logicalatheist9077]

@@msimp0108 Christianity is an unoriginal fairy-tale stolen from ancient beliefs that existed long before it was ever conceived.

[@msimp0108]

@@logicalatheist9077 Agreed. Christianity, or atheism/religion has nothing to do with my comment.

[@mrvegardeide]

As always with these two gentlemen - fantastic!

[@dp1582]

Cheers guys. And props to the last question bringing up Hitch, great way to end it.

[@leebal321]

I hope Dawkins lives 100 more years so he can squash religion for good

[@nene_san]

hope for life extension then ig

[@TheWorldTeacher]

Good and bad are RELATIVE. ;)

[@souravbasu6285]

@@TheWorldTeacher considering bad exists

[@TheWorldTeacher]

@@souravbasu6285 😇 सत्यमेव जयते! 😇

[@Badass_37]

Jay nastik.... Jay vigyan.... Atheist from India

[@MrPedur]

I also go with two different socks - funnily enough, I have two more socks in my drawer that are similar

[@jarnalyrkar]

My solution to the sock problem is pretty simple. All my socks are black and of a certain type. If I get a hole in one sock, just throw it away, and keep the other. It's bound to happen again anyway, and then I have a pair again. As the sock drawer gets thinned out, I just buy more black socks of the same kind 😂

[@anthill1510]

Same here. One problem down in my life :)

[@fasttrack9395]

I'm a humanist who believes that our movement would be much more successfull if we more overtly subsumed the human values within conventional religion including community, compassion and love of nature, music and poetry.

[@taryn.gesmundo]

Dr Richard Dawkins is such a living treasure. His intelligence and eloquence are so awe-inspiring. And I much prefer "The Selfish Gene" although I do love Carl Sagan as well.

[@raspberrypi2430]

Richard Dawkins is an Encyclopedia.

[@abrahammulder]

With no words!🤣🤣

[@spaarkingo102593]

Sam should get the next RD award🤩

[@DexterDexter123]

Ooh lovely. Thank you.

[@mrsgingernoisette]

These people are so special..

[@JustinLHopkins]

And we need them more than ever.

[@willmpet]

Sam’s attitude that books are hard to read only proves that many authors pad the books they write! Brevity is important!