It's the forming of the hypothesis that's the problem. Karl Popper's 'falsibility' The Logical Positivists would say that any statement that cannot be tested, even in principle, is not a statement at all, as it's truth or falsehood would have no detectable consiquences. It would be meaningless.
I don't have a problem with backward facing caps, but for some odd reason if a person's hat isn't completely facing forward or completely facing back, I get really pissed off because it looks cocky. Sideways facing caps just look stupid.
The alternative universes you propose would not not allow you to make such remarks. This universe IS the universe, and no designer is required. You have yet to propose the orgiin of your designer.
I'm against respecting a person's views simply because they find it sacred. But I hold extreme views on these matters. However I am still unable to justify how anybody can get away with an immutable belief simply because it's religious. It's not a justified authority; I have yet to hear an agreeable argument that explains how a particular religious belief trumps all personal/political beliefs. The best one can get from me is that it is a personal belief, and consequently I am not bound to it.
Do you believe in the god as he is portrayed in the major religious texts of our time? Or is your statement a proclamation that you believe there is an intelligent designer. If you mean the former than I must ask how your scientific prowess can be dominated by stories and beliefs that have as much evidence of being real as childrens' fairy tales. Please respond. I'm curious as I'm a physicist and an engineer like you.
Someone should make that gesture at 4:22 into a .gif and caption it with "look at all the fucks I give" I know Professor Dawkins wouldn't say that but it would be funny wouldn't it?
gamesbok, you have to remember, just because they can't at this moment provide evidence that would be a Creator, besides the typical "creation evidence", doesn't mean one doesn't exist. Just ike with science, they should give out God, or any creator, as a hypothesis, then find evidence and test it, if testing it is possible, before they make their conclusion. Remember, one might exist, just so far one is not required for what we've discovered and explained and one most likely doesn't exist ^_^
What is the point? Don't you think it a much more reasonable assumption that the universe and everything in it gets on just fine without any supernatural interference? Do you seriously believe in intelligent design and not the obvious truth of evolution? I think that if you are suggesting the former then it is you who is spouting crackpot nonsense. Which god do you believe in? Thor, Zeus, Allah, Ra etc. etc...........?
Why do you think the universe is precisely expanding at the rate it is? What I mean is that if it were expanding a millionth faster the density of hydrogen gas would not be sufficient for life to form. If it was a millionth slower, then the universe would collapse too fast not allowing life to form. I suggest you go research these topics before spouting nonsense. The signs are that of those of an intelligent design to the universe. Go research this topic, i have a few more to tell you after.
Yes I believe god as he is in the major religious texts. A lot of the religious texts have been corrupted by people and their interests, yet the only one in my opinion which hasnt changed is the koran......I mean neither of us can prove our position, but it is interesting seeing other peoples point of view even though i dont agree with it.
My point is that the universe and us could not exist without a design. Of course evolution is true, god designed the universe and set the rules. He made the game, and evolution is just the players in action. We see signs of evolution, but not proof. Why cant people believe in signs of god? I say there is a theory of god.
Please consider that Richard Dawkins thinks you should resist the temptation of deifying entities that came about by evolution. Presumably that includes himself. :-P
People DO believe in signs of god. That's the entire problem. I'm really disappointed to see you, as a man of science, believing this irrational nonsense. Which god do you believe in? Please just answer me that.
"I'm an atheist with respect to the Judeo-Christian God, because there is not a shred of EVIDENCE in favor of the Judeo-Christian God." ~ Richard Dawkins ...Dawkins, that's because you have not visited my channel.
He's brilliant, compelling, and he just referred to Monty Python.
I think I love him.
Go buy Eric Idle's memoir.
Dawkins is a bad ass! i love how he just shuts shit down.
Enlightening and uplifting.
So go and buy it. It is for 3 or 4 EUR or something like that (plus shipping - on richard dawkins online store)
4:22 may be the most awesome thing I have witnessed in my entire life!
Dawkins and Adams. Great men. Great insights upon the human condition. Great philosophers, even though philosophy is/was not their profession.
It's the forming of the hypothesis that's the problem. Karl Popper's 'falsibility'
The Logical Positivists would say that any statement that cannot be tested, even in principle, is not a statement at all, as it's truth or falsehood would have no detectable consiquences. It would be meaningless.
If there is a hell, I hope I go there so I can hang out with Richard Dawkins. He is cool!
I don't have a problem with backward facing caps, but for some odd reason if a person's hat isn't completely facing forward or completely facing back, I get really pissed off because it looks cocky. Sideways facing caps just look stupid.
If only I would have been willing to listen to this sort of thing years ago. It took me way too long to ditch Christianity on my own.
Faith, n. Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel
aaaaah Chapter 2 :D
Anyone know what he's mouthing at 4:19 ?
The alternative universes you propose would not not allow you to make such remarks. This universe IS the universe, and no designer is required. You have yet to propose the orgiin of your designer.
@ocarina2boy I shall take that as a compliment.
what does he mouth at 4:20?
what the fu**
I'm against respecting a person's views simply because they find it sacred. But I hold extreme views on these matters.
However I am still unable to justify how anybody can get away with an immutable belief simply because it's religious. It's not a justified authority; I have yet to hear an agreeable argument that explains how a particular religious belief trumps all personal/political beliefs.
The best one can get from me is that it is a personal belief, and consequently I am not bound to it.
Do you believe in the god as he is portrayed in the major religious texts of our time? Or is your statement a proclamation that you believe there is an intelligent designer. If you mean the former than I must ask how your scientific prowess can be dominated by stories and beliefs that have as much evidence of being real as childrens' fairy tales. Please respond. I'm curious as I'm a physicist and an engineer like you.
@grayziehobbes Wrong. Emotion is reality.
Religion just got OWNED
Could the multiverse univerise theories be infact hinting at a heaven and a hell...? Hmm
I agree. Very Monty Python.
lol bravo!
Someone should make that gesture at 4:22 into a .gif and caption it with "look at all the fucks I give" I know Professor Dawkins wouldn't say that but it would be funny wouldn't it?
I am a physicist, and I believe in God
gamesbok, you have to remember, just because they can't at this moment provide evidence that would be a Creator, besides the typical "creation evidence", doesn't mean one doesn't exist. Just ike with science, they should give out God, or any creator, as a hypothesis, then find evidence and test it, if testing it is possible, before they make their conclusion. Remember, one might exist, just so far one is not required for what we've discovered and explained and one most likely doesn't exist ^_^
i want his A for atheisc pin on is suit
As much as I love Dawkins, I wish he'd stop explaining his own jokes!
What is the point? Don't you think it a much more reasonable assumption that the universe and everything in it gets on just fine without any supernatural interference? Do you seriously believe in intelligent design and not the obvious truth of evolution? I think that if you are suggesting the former then it is you who is spouting crackpot nonsense. Which god do you believe in? Thor, Zeus, Allah, Ra etc. etc...........?
Then you can't be a very good one
Why do you think the universe is precisely expanding at the rate it is? What I mean is that if it were expanding a millionth faster the density of hydrogen gas would not be sufficient for life to form. If it was a millionth slower, then the universe would collapse too fast not allowing life to form. I suggest you go research these topics before spouting nonsense. The signs are that of those of an intelligent design to the universe. Go research this topic, i have a few more to tell you after.
Yes I believe god as he is in the major religious texts. A lot of the religious texts have been corrupted by people and their interests, yet the only one in my opinion which hasnt changed is the koran......I mean neither of us can prove our position, but it is interesting seeing other peoples point of view even though i dont agree with it.
My point is that the universe and us could not exist without a design. Of course evolution is true, god designed the universe and set the rules. He made the game, and evolution is just the players in action. We see signs of evolution, but not proof. Why cant people believe in signs of god? I say there is a theory of god.
There is an assertion of God, but not a theory, it explains nothing.
Please consider that Richard Dawkins thinks you should resist the temptation of deifying entities that came about by evolution. Presumably that includes himself. :-P
People DO believe in signs of god. That's the entire problem. I'm really disappointed to see you, as a man of science, believing this irrational nonsense. Which god do you believe in? Please just answer me that.
Who says you cant believe in science and god? Science verifies the signs of god. Im a better physicist than you, thats for sure.
"I'm an atheist with respect to the Judeo-Christian God, because there is not a shred of EVIDENCE in favor of the Judeo-Christian God."
~ Richard Dawkins
...Dawkins, that's because you have not visited my channel.