Father George Coyne Interview (1/7) - Richard Dawkins

This is the full uncut interview with Father George Coyne which was omitted from Richard Dawkins' television program "The Genius of Charles Darwin" for Channel 4 in the UK. See more videos like this at richarddawkins.net - We will be releasing many more uncut interviews from "The Genius of Charles Darwin" on DVD soon through RichardDawkins....

[@lulusperspective269]

Fr. George Coyne was brilliant. So sad that he passed. Memory Eternal and may he rest in peace.

[@joezilla07]

As a Catholic who takes debates about God and religion very seriously, I deeply appreciate that your organization posts and maintains this interview in its entirety. It is a great example of thoughtful and respectful dialogue.

[@2fast2block]

These two jokes don't take science seriously. 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.

[@dariuszestkowski7683]

every religion is based on mythology

[@dariuszestkowski7683]

every religion is based on mythology ,amen

[@joezilla07]

@@dariuszestkowski7683 Not so. Study comparative religion and you will see that this is not always the case. Some religions are based on mythology, but most of the ones that have stuck around to the present are based on philosophy, history, or both. Modern science itself was born at Catholic universities that saw truth in all its forms as reflections of God's goodness. To equate all religion with mythology is an inaccurate caricature of what religion (at its best) truly is.

[@genghisthegreat2034]

​@@dariuszestkowski7683there's a fine example of the obverse.

[@refik13203]

I had a chance to take several classes that Father Coyne taught at Le Moyne college, and i can tell you that he is without a doubt one of the most humblest and nicest individual i have ever met in my life. I went in to the class (not knowing anything about him) with a very biased opinion knowing he was a priest, and i came out a much better human being. If people had even a small fraction of the characteristic Father Coyne possesses, the world would be a much better place.

[@heldinahtmlhell]

He didn't fuck you then?

[@Lerian_V]

@@heldinahtmlhell Everyone isn't your dad.

[@gabboet]

R.I.P Fr Coyne

[@hansenbee123]

if everyone went around accepting everything everyone said all the time, the world would end in 1 year.

[@hansenbee123]

Religion holds 60% of the world back, and therefor the remaining 40% by default...It is LIES, Lies lies lies...and in 2021 I feel like we now are WAY past the point of giving a damn about peoples imaginary friends. Time to WAKE up and let the world grow up.

[@astrosw582]

RIP Fr. Count 2/12/2020 Eternal rest grant unto him , O Lord, and let perpetual light shine upon him. May the souls of all the faithful departed, through the mercy of God, rest in peace.

[@buujeyknight5337]

Rest in peace, George Coyne. May many catholics likewise carry on the spirit of openness and dialogue.

[@2fast2block]

Many are losers like this joke priest and Dawkins. 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.

[@MrLlurati]

I'm a Catholic, and what I really like about this conversation is that both Fr. Coyne and Rchard Dawkins are talking to each other respectively.

[@Ayna123]

Jesus is not a lord, he was a servant of Allah and a great prophet, he used to prostrate and fast, the Bible was corrupted by human hands, now the last religion Islam is a religion of brotherhood, a religion of compassion and mercy Muslims love each other and are honest, right words and deeds are important.

[@jerrylijah]

So much love for the mutual respect both of them show each other throughout. Also appreciate the nuances and careful thought in every response! Such a rare treat, thanks for the upload!

[@2fast2block]

Then respect the two losers. 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.

[@ianinkster2261]

Good faith changes everything.

[@andrew123456ish]

This man Coyne is brilliant. so refreshing to find this vid in 2018

[@2fast2block]

He's a loser like Dawkins. 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.

[@weirjwerijrweurhuewhr588]

@@2fast2block How do you explain God? Where did he come from? The response you'll probably give "God always existed" is not satisfactory.

[@2fast2block]

@@weirjwerijrweurhuewhr588 You are a graduate of Loser University. All you have to do is remember "Who created God?" and you can mix things up a bit with the same basic question. All the laws of nature somehow suddenly disappear for you losers, that one STU--P1D question is your cure-all. So in your way of shallow thinking, if a supernatural creator created the natural realm, then that supernatural creator who created the natural realm with its natural laws has then become also bound by those natural laws the supernatural creator created. So explain why a supernatural creator is also bound by the laws the supernatural creator created. Or, show how smart you are and just give your science for creation happening naturally and don't forget to give your science how the natural laws were created, too. If you want to act smart, it may be a good idea to actually show you are.

[@theblueclue3843]

the way i got SO excited when the priest talked about how a theory means something else in science. so few people recognize thid

[@drsatan7554]

I agree. He's a very honest and respectful theist

[@2fast2block]

The two losers ignore science. 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.

[@DonCorelone007]

@@drsatan7554 He is an astrophysicist with tons of papers published and was the former director of Vatican observatory.

[@Austin_Schulz]

Most Catholics accept evolution. It's sad that a lot of people don't know that.

[@janabell3810]

Absolutely!!! The two co-exist! Evolution and God go hand in hand.

[@CostaZaf]

They dont though. In the bible, it was told that god created the garden of edan, and then the rest of the nonsense. That is what people believed to be true, and alot still do. But just because we have disproved alot of the bullshit in the bible, does NOT allow you to say "oh, it shouldn't be taken in a literal sense". Your religion is false. Get over it!

[@khabbad]

RollerCosta..while I am no longer religious I can tell you, you are absolutely incorrect. I was taught evolution in Catholic grade school and visited again in catholic high school. Catholics have accepted evolution for a very long time.

[@quickrat3348]

Catholics don't believe that. This is a Protestant believe, that everything in the Bible is absolute truth. Catholics believe the Bible (and specially the Old Testament) is not a book written by God, but rather by people that was inspired by God. Thus, these scriptures were written between 2,000 BC and 200 AD, so these are not scientific or historical texts.

[@khabbad]

Quickrate There is some historical validity to the Bible, however it isn't 100 percent accurate.

[@noelshafi1314]

Definitely one of the most insightful and inspirational theological discussions I have seen. I appreciate the ideas expressed on both sides, and respect them both.

[@2fast2block]

You respect losers. 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.

[@josegallegosdds]

What a wonderful exchange and interview. No disrespect, no yelling, no anger or insults. Just intelligent dialogue.

[@2fast2block]

Actually it was one loser talking with another. 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.

[@josegallegosdds]

@@2fast2block . I believe the loser would be you.

[@2fast2block]

@@josegallegosdds wow, that was some science you gave there that somehow in your delusional mind proved me wrong... "I believe the loser would be you." It's so obvious your small brain has given this a lot of thought. Now you can go back to your cartoons.

[@janabell3810]

Great interview. Two brilliant men having a calm, rational discourse.

[@darkmoon2503]

king Lyon And one unintelligent fellow above having a strange, hate-filled rant.

[@mkjk2534]

king Lyon You called the priest a paedophile without any evidence.

[@LittleVboh]

no, not really ^^'

[@dterm8526]

That's what it's all about. People should listen to other points of view you might learn something.

[@2fast2block]

They are two losers lost in their loser world. 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.

[@AdamTCWallace]

What a pleasant guy.

[@forgednotcast612]

The Plebeian Podcast exactly what Satan says

[@M_Faraday]

Coyne is a true scholastic. a living thomas Aquinas.

[@georgepenton808]

Just because a priest jumps on the evolution bandwagon he automatically becomes another Thomas Aquinas? I don't think so.

[@oliveraeternus3285]

A jewish Aquinas. Incredible!

[@Kitiwake]

Nice to know.

[@hansenbee123]

he`s litterally wasted his WHOLE life going around believing lies, JUST because he was told to believe them as an infant / child, by adults who were lied to in the exact same way. time to grow up and accept we`re all meatsuits on a ball in space and we all die. After death its nothingness, and we wont even know ,because we`re dead.

[@hermeticchonk371]

@@hansenbee123 lol okay cutie

[@lxcaldero]

Rest in peace Father George Coyne 11/02/2020. I feel very sorry for the loss of such a great human being. I am an atheist who feels thoroughly respected by father Coyne when he spoke about his religious beliefs and is people like him that makes me feel proud of my western heritage which, even-though I reject being part of any church or god existence, I accept that christianity is part of my cultural heritage that makes my disbelief possible. The rest of this interview is highly recommended, it is really touching to hear father Coyne about his god not being a god of explanation, I understood that for him is a matter of faith that I nor Dawkins have and it is implicit that the lack of faith is not a reason to condemn anybody, as atheist that statement disarms any belligerence and the rest is just to let yourself go and enjoy a true sage.

[@2fast2block]

Only losers respect that joke. He was a loser like Dawkins. 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.

[@alexicoff]

Richard is such a reasonable and capable man when in a calm discussion like this. I love how he's going through this interview

[@charlespeterwatson9051]

I wish the camera operator would just keep the camera still during the exchange instead of cutting corners on film cutting with just turning the camera.

[@ConsumeristScroffa]

@The Truth of the Matter I lost it. lol

[@cormchm2853]

I just made a similar remark about the panning and running about the place like a rookie.

[@Oscarman746]

You guys must see the bigger picture. We record interviews dynamically, missing crucial angles and so on, to cut later into a film. This is an unedited interview released simply for your viewing pleasure. The camera person understands the bigger picture of the film and records the dynamics. Don't always assume you know more than the professionals.

[@Camille-accessories]

RD is such a courteous and polite man which creates the perfect environment for discussion and debate

[@vkorchnoifan]

This interview is so informative, so insightful, it must be seen by everyone who believes that religion and science both seek the truth. Mr. Dawkins has so many penetrating questions and Fr. Coyne gives the best rational (not perfect) answers that both men come to an lucid and cognitive narrative of religion and science.

[@georgepenton808]

"Faith is above reason but not opposed to it." --St. Thomas Aquinas

[@AnthonyAtheist]

Religion does not seek the truth! It is corrupt to the core and wants to hide the truth.... it certainly does that when it sends child molesters from one place to another . Rotten to the core and kids abused in the name of your fake god

[@2fast2block]

They are NOT rational, they are jokes. 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]

@Jack Probert "Why not just admit that you do not understand the basics of physics, chemistry, astronomy, cosmology and biology - in other words, a man without any decent reasoning skills." And since you DO understand such things in your list, this is what you gave to prove what I gave is not correct... (blank) You DO understand how to let your bowel gas out. You must be so proud.

[@2fast2block]

@Jack Probert stop with such gassy foods as you keep on letting your gas out in your comments that never get around the science I gave. You already showed what a loser you are... "Why not just admit that you do not understand the basics of physics, chemistry, astronomy, cosmology and biology - in other words, a man without any decent reasoning skills." And since you DO understand such things in your list, this is what you gave to prove what I gave is not correct... (blank) You DO understand how to let your bowel gas out. You must be so proud.

[@reinforcedpenisstem]

Father George Coyne seems to have his head screwed on pretty well. Good stuff.

[@DonCorelone007]

He is an astrophysicist with tons of papers published and was the former director of Vatican observatory.

[@taurtue]

George is what my mother called me when I behave myself, I grew up not knowing my name. What a killer!

[@GrubKiller436]

I don't understand when he says that.

[@thescorpiuslibra1676]

Wow, this George Coyne guy is great. I may disagree with his belief in a deity, but this guy seems like a thoroughly good dude. Incredible how such faith and such reason can reside within the same person. Really beautiful mind.

[@drsatan7554]

Couldn't agree more. The man is the perfect role model for Christians in my opinion. Faced with adversarial concepts he kept his cool, was polite and engaged in honest debate

[@2fast2block]

@@drsatan7554 They are both jokes who are clueless. 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.

[@anirudhkashikar2300]

Father George Coyne you are a wonderful man. You indeed are.

[@josea.1720]

I consider myself as an atheist but with these words I can say that there's a great understanding between R. Dawkins and this George Coyne. There are lots of things that traditional faiths (monotheistic religions nowadays and in the past polytheistic) can't ignore anymore about scientific discoveries but even so there is a gap that science can't explain so far and I'd dare to say that this gap, even narrowing, will remain to the infinity. So guys there will always be room for faith. I particularly think that we will be continuously learning about the workings of the universe but we will never know the truth because is an intellectual creation. Within that gap you can have your own belief, I believe that there is no God, it's not a fact and as I can make this rational choice of believing that, a person who choose to believe in God can make this decision in the same rational manner. I think that what Richard Dawkins wants is not to persuade people not to believe, he just wants to raise the level of the intellectual social debate to consolidate and develop moral values that are, in my opinion, far beyond the moral values of past religions. Respect for animals is one of those that are not contained in religious books and I think no one right now in western countries would dare to say on TV something against that because he would be metaphorically "stoned" (it's interesting that we continue to stoned people nowadays but in a more humane manner, in the past to death). This is one of lots of clear examples that demonstrate that our moral values in these days are overwhelmingly passing the Christian, Muslim and Jewish Values (which represent the values of another age) and the Catholic Church and the Jewish and Muslim Institutions know that you have to cherry-pick in their Holy Scriptures to create a decent support of a human moral set of values similar to the one we have in our time. That is what they don't want you to know because they want to keep on maintaining their power over you. In a nutshell, what R.Dawkins wants to say with his massage is basically: Think for yourself and discover your own truth (which both mean the same as truth is an intellectual creation), don't let anyone tell you what to believe, because this right, freedom of thought, is the one the humanity has been looking for since the early days, don't waste it, it's not just an incredible "gift" (who will ever be able to explain how and exactly when intelligence just appeared?) it is your most powerful weapon to fight against your environment.

[@georgepenton808]

The so-called proof of the macroevolution hypothesis reminds me of the old Wendy's commercial---where's the beef?

[@2fast2block]

Richard and this joke priest hate truth. 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.

[@LouPicardo]

I am an atheist and I respect this man. He is certainly very careful when he chooses words and seems to be a very smart and humble man.

[@CommanderDragonLily]

Lets face it. If all Christians (and if were lucky), all religious people had a similar mindset to George Coyne, the world would be a much better place. If there's any hope that religion could be a force for good, that's it.

[@alverygrissom2544]

the vocal minority is the one you hate, most of us are not terrible people

[@mikebrunet54]

George is a heretic to believe God did not Create Adam and Eve..

[@zimbabwe_twinnedwithanfield]

Mike B yes a lot of these Bishops and priests who went to theology college have had thier faith twisted because inuniversity they teach that the bible is not 100 percent true they can pick and choose, the devil was very clever to infiltrate the study of the bible but luckily God is no fool and home bible studies are more frequent

[@charles13773]

Ohh man. He spoke really well. I really loved his careful selection of words.

[@coyoacan73]

What a great man; highly intelligent, charming and deeply spiritual; just what keeps attracting me to the Catholic Church.

[@stevefmelb]

I was raised as a RC (alter boy/guilt et al). A bunch of hypocrites who have mellowed only because they have been forced to (or go out of business)

[@jeffreyjackson5229]

A man attracts to the church? I pray that you grow beyond, because you are setting yourself up for disappointed and spiritual shipwreck if you don't.

[@Johnnyhardcore4ever]

Pure light was this man ❤

[@warrenhalpin]

Fantastic interview, beautiful and fascinating.

[@MrBluemanworld]

Fascinating. It's been a while since I've seen it and it's refreshing.

[@johnpathadan]

RIP father Coyne

[@andrewwelsh131]

As a Catholic who was educated by Marist brothers the big bang to Darwin to us was taught as fact not a problem, and that was in the 1980s.

[@TheRedfire555]

Wow, why was this omitted from his program? This is a great interview. I thought it would piss me off like most of these things do but this was really interesting to watch. It helps prove to atheists that not all Christians are like the evangelical fundamentalists who believe the Bible literally. People like that are really a minority in the Christian faith.

[@soldatheero]

You answered your own question.

[@soldatheero]

***** Ignore John Smith! hes a confirmed troll! (Tip)

[@ConsumeristScroffa]

I love your picture. Obscured By Clouds by Pink Floyd, right? Great album.

[@rickydarcilover5581]

TheRedfire555 . I cannot come to terms with what you said. If you’re going to believe in the Christian God then you have to take the Bible “literally.” If you don’t you’re more or less cherry picking. The book is the work of primitive uneducated, myth believers, who invented another God following on from the god they called Zeus, who controlled thunder and lightning. Their new Harry Potter-esque god, created a man out of dust, used one of his ribs to create a woman who is told to eat an apple by a talking snake. This God was into slavery, stoning disobedient children to death, etc etc. so you can’t just buy into all the lovey-dovey Jesus stuff and omit the rest. Perhaps your reference to literally, involves the thing I hate most as a nonbeliever. That is changing the context of the written words. Most Christians can’t cope with the evils I listed above, believing it to be a book of children’s riddles, for them to figure out a different meaning. For example slavery DOES NOT mean paying off a debt. That’s easily proven by their God stating that you can beat your slave with a stick to within an inch of his life. People who are determined to change the contents of the wording are only deceiving themselves. So the bottom line in my opinion is that you either buy into the complete story exactly the way it’s written with all the savagery, evil, and immorality, Or you write it off as the ancient mythical nonsense that it is and become a clear thinker.

[@rickydarcilover5581]

oskrrr92 . That’s an odd comment. So after all I’ve written, you think I believe that a god exists that teaches all that stuff???

[@AM-sl9bq]

the thing about this interview that is important, regardless of faith or non faith, is that it's from a position of thought and discussion about an opinion/philosophy

[@tobiasbremner9623]

Two intelligent people having a respectful discourse on something they profoundly disagree on. In today's world of constant bickering this is music to my ears.

[@cristianfcao]

I'm an atheist but MAN! how I wish more religious people were as rational, sincere, open, kind, broadminded and thoughtful as Coyne is! Excellent interview.

[@opencurtin]

The Catholic faith has had a huge impact on science all down through the ages but Atheists just ignore this fact the person that came up with the Big Bang Theory was a Catholic priest Georges Lamaitre a professor of physics .

[@goatneck]

what does that have to do with anything? ... it doesn't matter where or who the information comes from.. it only matters the evidence that backs it up to know if its true or not. Any reference to the person who generates this knowledge to support a position would be an argument from authority.

[@georgepenton808]

Goatneck, I think Mortimer was only trying to say that the Catholic Church is not against science.

[@goatneck]

@The Truth of the Matter the argument from authority fallacy is a well grounded and valid logical fallacy. It's not made up just to avoid good points, you can consult it in logic and debate literature. And the reason is that experts in the same fields have different opinions between themselves, so is not a valid piece of evidence to indicate that some other guy that knows a lot have certain opinion. It does give that opinion certain status and credibility in some instances but is not a valid form of argument.

[@stephengaudin4022]

Sure many scientific discoveries were by priests or brothers, etc. The problem is with the way the Church handled the discoveries and those who made them. Often with censure, torture, and imprisonment.

[@squawkback]

Pardon the technical comment, but I think the cameraperson deserves a compliment for some very smooth handheld work.

[@edlajoie4267]

This is very refreshing to see. I feared that this was going to make me angry but seeing a priest being so progressive gives me hope that one day religion can coexist with, and not threaten, our species.

[@patrickbinter3715]

Eddie Lajoie religion will always cause problems. Christians like Fr. Coyne have been around since the beginning. Unfortunately people are flawed and will always use religion in bad ways. However, that's not to say religion has truth.

[@sithersproductions]

Progressive...what lad im a conservative and completely agree with the father

[@mikebrunet54]

Progressive..bingo ..liberal theology and lies...that leads to the pit..why do you think Dawkins appreciated this quack because he believes in evolution over the Word of God...The priest is taught to reject the Book of Genesis because the Catholic Religion is not built upon the whole of Gods Word...Catholicism is counterfeit christianity..

[@holdingspace]

Mike B any chance youve read the introductions of the bible books?

[@Mateus.007]

Mike B no. The counter church of vatican II and antipope francis is not the catholic church. Catholic church denies evolution and cannot change. Vaticancatholic.com

[@ActuarialNinja]

George Coyne is a BOSS!!! I mean a true BOSS, someone who leads rightly and commands respect everywhere.

[@truthtalker49]

Well put. Backing it up with scripture. Good stuff!!

[@teogarno]

@CrossTheGrigori Well, I wouldn't say that he's just "a regular guy". Father Coyne is a mathematician, has a doctorate in astronomy and was the director of the Vatican Observatory, which is the main scientific body in the Vatican. But then again, I've met a bunch of "regular" priests that are just as calm and rational as he is, so your point is well taken.

[@gerardomolina9768]

Great video thematic, but what the hell is wrong with the camera man 😅😂

[@Xgya2000]

nice interview, They don't cut themselves off, as they don't need to They both stay calm and their arguments fit in

[@2fast2block]

Doesn't matter, they're both losers. 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.

[@Xgya2000]

@@2fast2block "We can't get anything from "literally nothing." That's what a pantheist would say. That the Universe was made from part of God or that the Universe is God himself, because nothing comes from nothing, and the only thing available to create anything from was God. Of course, that's ignoring a lot of what we know about quantum mechanics where particles popping out of seemingly nothing is a common occurrence.

[@2fast2block]

@@Xgya2000 "Of course, that's ignoring a lot of what we know about quantum mechanics where particles popping out of seemingly nothing is a common occurrence." Wow, so nothing has quantum mechanics now. And apace, matter, and time are now nothing because losers like Krauss and Dawkins say so. All they give is a comedy routine and losers don't even see it.

[@Xgya2000]

@@2fast2block I can't help but see you've ignored my first objection. I know reality doesn't always correspond to our intuition. Saying that time slows down as things move faster, or that time is something that's relative to each object goes against our intuition, but we can prove that's how it works. You'd also have to understand what the curvature of the Universe means to understand why we live in a flat Universe, how we know that and what that entails.

[@kick08ful]

WOW... an elderly catholic official with an intellectual mind... incredible.

[@danielamgs1]

Very common in Catholicism. Thanks the church for basically all experimental physics of the 17th century, the Big Bang theory, the father of genetics (Mendel) and theological geniuses like Aquinas

[@jonnysupreme]

I, like Mr Dawkins am a militant atheist but I've gotta say that I really enjoyed listening to this priests point of view. THIS is what KZbin was made for

[@schmetterling4477]

To see idiotic priests humiliated? :-)

[@patrickbinter3715]

I just want atheists to understand that this very new concept of "fairies at the bottom of the garden" is a caricature that completely misses the mark of what the Judeo-Christian tradition concept of God is all about. The highest intellectual tradition of the West wouldn't be defending such a simplistic claim for over 2000 years!

[@mrdfac]

2 years late, but oh well. I would like you to delve into the history of Xianity. Not through religious texts, but through historical sources. One may read the Greeks and Romans and get an idea of the religions and philosophies that both predate and inspire much of Xianity. I am sorry, but your post expresses ignorance of this history. IHTH.

[@Atomic419]

Patrick Binter, Christianity is the "highest intellectual tradition in the west"? Are you insane??? Ever hear of philosophy? Philosophy is THE intellectual Western tradition. NOT anything faith based. Sorry pal, take a philosophy course.

[@ConsumeristScroffa]

@The Truth of the Matter Yup. It's sad that people don't read, think, and write carefully.

[@TheReaper569]

as an atheist i swear to god radical atheists are retarded.

[@marksomers8126]

Hakan Karaağaç atheists who say shit like this are really irritating. Like gays who were against gay marriage or protests for gay rights. Living in a world under religious doctrine, a world where in many countries being an atheist is punishable by death, if you are an atheist you should be enviable of the courage atheists like Professor Richard Dawkins shows challenging powerful institutions and belief systems

[@MsHburnett]

Bishop barron bought me here via his Genesis discussion

[@sleepyhead4]

@RavenMad101 The Church has contributed to a plethera of sciences. Thank you for calling it "the church"...btw.

[@Blackdragon1331]

George Coyne such a fantastic man, so calm. :)

[@rlburton]

This is a conversation for a coffee shop; I don't like it being held in front of the tabernacle.

[@faustoaguilar6527]

The images!! they burn my eyes!!!

[@patrickbinter3715]

Rodney Burton Oh, calm down mate. At least it's a beautiful setting :)

[@JackMooney]

the taberwhat.. is that a sex toy?

[@NeveranticStory]

Such epic discussion. So many respect from both of the sides,

[@richarddawkins]

Check out Richard’s interview with Father George Coyne which was omitted from the program "The Genius of Charles Darwin”. Father George Coyne Interview (1/7) - Richard Dawkins

[@RicardoRuvalcaba-rnr]

One of my favorite interviews Dr. Dawkins has had. I've shared this with Christian friends and allays have said that perhaps if I had seen this before I turned away from religion I might not have changed my mind about it. Father George Coyne is very hones and level headed for a person who practices in one of the many religions.

[@templar23]

+Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason & Science If God would exist (he doesn't), his spirit would channel through Father George Coyne. Thank you for this interview Richard. Here in Sweden, most priests recognize science as the primary source, they mainly look to religion in a philosophical way. I'd still prefer it if they worshiped Socrates rather than Jesus, but you can't get everything.

[@santiagoz.s.1024]

@@templar23 He does, and this man is a clear exampe of someone who lives by the example and doctrines of Christ and our faith. Curiously enough, your profile name is about a religous order now extint. That last part of Socrates is really unncesesary. So you are either trolling or not serious enought to understand this interview.

[@giggletronics]

I absolutely love getting you to respond. Every post is pure gold. If your goal is to stay alive then self-preservation is obviously not a waste of time. I enjoy life, therefore, self-preservation is not a waste of effort. Would you care to clarify what you define as self-preservation? You obviously practice self-preservation (eating, drinking, etc) or you would not be able to respond. You're just precious.

[@JamesExcell-InterJex]

Great set of videos. Amazing what a good amount of respect does for people.

[@My2Cents1]

I've watched all parts of this video. I am a huge fan of Mr. Dawkins as a scientist, public educator and orator. This discourse between these two very enlightened gentlemen is the best I've ever seen. Both their standpoints sound equally valid, which shows that it doesn't take just ONE opinion to solve the mysteries of the universe, it takes several. This is what's wrong with most religions. They claim to have all the answers and seek to dismiss all who do not swear to them particularly.

[@jeffreyjackson5229]

Man and his own insight will never solve the mysteries of the universe, not in totality. If he could, he would be God. Why can't we just accept that there are some things we are just not going to understand? Faith is required. If man understood everything, he would make the critical mistake that he doesn't need God or is equal to God, the created thinking that he is greater than the creator? That's a recipe for disaster. Don't you think?

[@BloodHawkNZ]

Richard Dawkins is the man. Father George Coyne is also awesome and should be the pope. :D

[@TharosTheDragon]

3:05 That was so suspenseful, the way he led up to that. I had no idea what he was gonna say!

[@duck8712]

nice to see the film crew from the office is still getting work

[@siluandintambov]

Awesome man! Good work!

[@pratimasrivastava4194]

After 9 years still in heart😃😄

[@Transfixed]

Probably the most intelligent and reasonable religious representative i've heard. I wonder how he can be that clever and still be a believer.

[@iqgustavo]

🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation: 00:00 🌍 Father George Coyne clarifies that he is not an official spokesperson for the Catholic Church on the evolution issue. 02:32 🧬 George Coyne advocates for neo-Darwinian evolution as the best scientific explanation for the origin of the universe and all living systems, and he believes this view is compatible with Catholic teachings. 05:33 📚 Cardinal Schönborn distinguishes "evolutionism" from "evolution" in his book, emphasizing the importance of considering other disciplines, like religion and culture, when discussing human existence. 08:23 🧪 The concept of the supernatural lies outside the realm of strictly methodological scientific investigation, and George Coyne argues that positive evidence for the supernatural exists in religious traditions and literature.

[@roush26]

Father Coyne would make a great politician, i love how he makes his points yet distances himself from attacks

[@RomanticRebel267]

I only seen a few debates about different subjects. What I enjoy most is studying on my own time. debates are fun but they go on and on. I enjoy being able to study at my own speed.

[@dewexdewex]

I agree; two cams on tripods with monitors wouldn't have cost that much.

[@XGralgrathor]

« You have not listened to one word I have said » I have answered the question "have you seen a fish with legs?" in an accurate and factual manner, and that is all that I've done.

[@WhereJohnFrum]

Thanks for comment. To be clear though, I didn't say that love in this context meant only romantic love. In my mind, it would be any expression of love including, for example, that which a parent has for her child.

[@vivianmari]

this is excellent, extremely interesting

[@ivlfounder]

Oh dear it would seem that someone has confused the words "great" and "good". I'm just glad I wasn't talking about the Great Chicago Fire.

[@qbarnes1893]

Father George should be a politician, never answering a single question directly, he’s a bad excuse for the reality of truth.

[@mvrz6]

God damn that camera man

[@DookieJuice1111]

"what evidence do you speak of?" .... "oh I'm talking about uhhh the ummm derp derp derp derp derp derp"

[@XGralgrathor]

« Archaeopteryx is considered to be an extinct bird species » It is. Per definition. It has all the hallmark traits of bird - and clades are defined per hallmark traits; not per descent: if it looks like a bird, has the reduced or absent post-temporal fenestra of a bird, the feathers of a bird, the furcula of a bird - then it probably is a bird.

[@michaelfearon1756]

Brilliant speaking by two very intelligent men 👌🏻

[@priyanthawijayatunga624]

George Box said that "All models are wrong but some are useful". These guys are talking about a model that is useful, in terms of human thinking. contemplation, even economically.

[@ShiftyWeasel]

Not that you asked for my opinion, but when I eventually discarded my faith (as a witness, as well) I began to re-examine how I viewed all of the Elder's and very intelligent Brother/Sister's. I went from having held them up in high regard as being very intelligent and well-spoken, to seeing that I had been viewing them through rose-tinted glasses, and that they weren't really the paragons of thinking people I had remembered.

[@XGralgrathor]

« some apologist told me » Great source. And so verifiable. You can find all of Darwin's works online, freely accessible. See for yourself whether or not he made such a comment about the Cambrian explosion. Ignorance is no longer an excuse.

[@w00tehpwn]

Coyne seems to know a few things about the neo-darwinian synthesis, which is great! Funny though how Dawkins agrees when Coyne says that evolution is the best explanation for the whole universe and everything in it. Evolution deals with life, not with matter!

[@asrarhassan]

Nice camera work, but discussions like these deserve at least 3 camera setup :D

[@WuManGroup]

the first worthy debate ive seen richard dawkins take part in, onto part 2..this could get interesting..

[@georgepenton808]

(I am a Catholic but the following is not Catholic doctrine, it is my personal opinion only. Father Coyne is right to say the Church has never definitively declared the macroevolution hypothesis to be true or false. Father Coyne is also right when he says that Catholicism is not monotholictic on this issue---some Catholics believe in the hypothesis, some don't.) I do not see, either from a religious or scientific point of view, how the macroevolution hypothesis could possibly be correct. From the religious point of view, the hypothesis utterly contradicts the original sin doctrine. The hypothesis is that man developed from lower species by natural selection, a process that involves eons of various species competing for food, with inferior species dying off, but the doctrine of original sin says there was no suffering or death in the world until Adam and Eve sinned. (Original sin and that Adam and Eve were real persons are non-negotiatible bedrock Catholic doctrines. Any Catholic who denies either of these two propositions puts himself outside the Church.) Another reason I don't believe on religious grounds: the immortality of the soul. If a Catholic were to believe that Adam and Eve were real persons that evolved from lower species (homo erectus?) then both their respective sets of non-human homo erectus parents must have had mortal souls, but bang! in just one generation here comes baby Adam with an immortal soul, and bang! at just about the same time in the same general locale here comes baby Eve with an immortal soul. Now God could have, in His all-powerfulness, created Adam and Eve like this, but this strains credulity. Is this really something God would do? And if He did create them like this it wouldn't really be evolution because evolution is gradual change, not sudden change. Had God created Adam and Eve this way it would have had to have been a double miracle, two miracles that would rival the immaculate conception. On scientific grounds I object I object because there just plain isn't any evidence for it. None. Nada. Zero. What is this so-called evidence? (1) Some species are similar in structure to others. So what? How is that proof, or even evidence, that one species evolved from another? (2) Some species have similar DNA as other sprcies. So what does that prove? It could be God saw it was good to use the same or similar DNA in various species. (3) Everybody believes in it! The folly of that is self-evident. (4) If people didn't believe in evolution they might have to believe in God, and belief in God means (shudder horrors) reforming onr's life, and belief in God makes people uncool, and we all must be cool at all costs, mustn't we? Believers in the macroevolution hypothesis like to say "evolution is the best explanation we have as to how life developed on Earth". First, when they make this statement they admit that the evolution hypothesis is just that---an hypothesis, a conjecture. Second, it most certainly IS NOT the best explanation as to how life got here. The best explanation is that God created all the species pretty much as they are now, minor changes within each species notwithstanding ("microevolution"). But scientists don't want to consider this possibility because (1) it can't be proven in a laboratory (so what?---not all truth can be proved in a laboratory, something scientists don't want to admit), and (2) as already stated, they do not want to reform their lives. The macroevolution hypothesis has always been an excuse not to believe in God.

[@DarkLady1313]

Oh wow, this is probably the first debate I've seen with Dawkins that the Theist is being polite. I would like to discuss with this Father.

[@Geremia08]

@obdami It is also not uncommon. Read about St. Thomas Aquinas and his "perennial philosophy." E.g., one of the fathers of quantum physics, Werner Heisenberg, said in his book Physics and Philosophy that the "concept of the soul for instance in the philosophy of Thomas Aquinas was more natural and less forced than the Cartesian concept of 'res cogitans,' even if we are convinced that the laws of physics and chemistry are strictly valid in living organisms." (p. 80).

[@father042]

amazing interview

[@giggletronics]

I need to save these and put them in a book.

[@SonoftheLivingGod7]

@UltimateTomato Most religious people pray to god because they feel guilt about something, can be anything. They feel guilt about not believing in god, it's safer to believe in god than not to (which is false) etc.

[@sapthadas2594]

Only interview probably where Dawkins isn't irritated by the end 😂😂😂

[@berosi]

The priest was doing ok until Richard's last question about the evidence on supernatural occurrence. Then he just started talking about tradition and when he was about to get humiliated, the video stopped! Well done! Bravo!

[@LovelyYTRocks]

Oh my god... one of the best interviews ever. This man knows what the fuck he's talking about.

[@XGralgrathor]

« Have you seen a fish with legs » Yes. Two ways: - transition from sea to land: mudskippers, lungfish. - transition from land to sea in a class of mammals: whales (which have hips and atrophied legbones).

[@patrickjs166]

Great discussion

[@pnadin123]

I am a Christian and couldn't agree more. At the end of the day I believe God has created mankind with a definite mind of thought process that can lead to discovery. The fact we have science that is undoubtedly exploring the mysteries of the world works with this belief. I believe God loves his creation, and given us the ability to explore it, simply because it is so interesting. I think these two gentlemen are very enlightened and God is definitely a God of love on a personal faith level.

[@XGralgrathor]

« Cars and airplanes have similar parts and engine structure » But they do not follow a nested hierarchy of similarities AND differences. Not even within the category of cars can you find such an adherence to this pattern as you find in life.

[@eucks535]

He wasn't fired, he retired. Also. the Pope hasn't taken up Intelligent Design. The Pope said in his Easter service address back in 2007 that Creationism and Evolution are not mutually exclusive. The Catholic Church takes up the position of Theistic Evolution

[@10290gilmore]

“God gave the universe a certain structure so we could come about, but he didn’t predetermine it,” he said. “He created the universe and then let it go.”---Father George Coyne

[@homtyy]

This is great. I believe science and faith can be together as many people has shown. Those atheist who claim that science and logic will eventually put an end to religion are mistaken on how the faith works.

[@XGralgrathor]

« seeing the complexity of the human dna he comes to a final conclusion » Personal incredulity is not an argument, no matter who brings it up.