File :-(, x, )
Richard Dawkins Anonymous
Richard Dawkins
The Root of All Evil: Episode 1

http://zudeo.com/az-web/download/KY6WXZEP26MBNKG6ZA7JWXU75IQ6PSN3.torrent

Anonymous must download this, it is made of wins and enlightenment.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
And here is Episode 2.

http://zudeo.com/az-web/download/7ONUJ5X77H6KIWS3VF4HAZHTXYYZO7HC.torrent
>> Anonymous
Good stuff, I must say
>> Anonymous
I've read a few of his books (The Selfish Gene is an EPIC book, btw), and I never knew he had that kind of an accent!
>> spoilers? Anonymous
so what is the root of all evil? or do i have to watch the movie to find out?
>> Anonymous
RD: "I don't dress my women, they dress themselves!"

Islam guy = pwned.
>> Anonymous
>>149599
>so what is the root of all evil? or do i have to watch the movie to find out?

Faith & religion.

But I do recommend you watch the movie anyway. RD is a hardcore scientist and he seriously puts down a xtian preacher celebrity, and Islam and other religious faiths.
>> Anonymous
>>149599
>so what is the root of all evil? or do i have to watch the movie to find out?

Faith & religion.

But I do recommend you watch the movie anyway. RD is a hardcore scientist and he seriously puts down a Christian preacher celebrity, and Islam and other religious faiths.
>> Anonymous
For what it's worth, Dawkins objected to the title, saying it was exaggerating and only there to create buzz.
>> Anonymous
That title makes no sense. If he destroys the root and thus all evil, he would disrupt the Balance and everything would cease to exist. Which we all know is impossible to do, so we have nothing to fear from Dawkins.
>> Anonymous
>>149607
Hm, I posted too soon
>> Anonymous
Needs more Francis Collins.
>> Anonymous
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=895149919647460806

Just another view
>> Anonymous
I've read many essays by Dawkins, and while I think he is very interesting and intellegent, he is also very one sided to the point of being close minded. The problem is while I agree that 99% of general religious stuff is crap, and 100% of fundamentalist religion is crap... One gets the impression that Dawkins would force his views upon society if he had the ability--just like the nut jobs he attacks.

Extremists are interesting to listen to and read, but they don't provide realistic real life solutions to our problems.
>> Anonymous
>>149610
...wait what?
>> Anonymous
heh, Dawkins is harsh. So harsh that this vid does nothing but preach to the choir I think. His interview questions are ridiculously inflammatory too, prompting nothing but inane (while amusing) defensive responses. The moral discrediting of Christianity in the 2nd half is interesting though.
>> Anonymous
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Haggard

Haggard got pwnt just a few months later...
>> Anonymous
>>
Faith & religion.
...and this is news HOW?
Fuck, I knew that when I was a kid. But how the fuck are you gonna change the millions of idiots who base their whole life (Believe SYstem) on the religion and faith? They would KILL you first before listening to you.
Personally, I think religion is somehow imbedded
inside our brains, its an essential part of the brains' structure and we we cannot really get "rid of it" even with education and science.
So I got no answers but only know what I know.
>> Anonymous
>>149620
What I was saying is that existance is based on Balance. You have to have an opposite to everything that exist if you want there to be an existence in the first place. Without an opposite, you wouldn't know what to call the already existant thing. But if it doesn't have an opposite it would cease to exist or create an opposite.
But this doesn't matter in this thread because Dawkins doesn't believe the title of his interview to be absolute.
>> Anonymous
Nice to see unusual stuff posted here.
>> Anonymous
>>149623

The younger generation (you and I) seem to be a more "open" generation. I can't say it for certain, but i've personally noticed more and more young people taking on "agnostic" and even as far to say "athiest" views! Perhaps you aren't going to change the older, more established in faith, but they'll be going out the way of the dinosaurs. Logical thinking is the wave of the future!

I recommend reading "The God Delusion," even if it is just for shits and giggles. You'll get a lot out of it.
>> Anonymous
not really interested in downloading a whole avi about discussion. someone just summarize to me how he pwns them
>> Anonymous
I just love how people manage to inject "religion" in any discussion about/of science.
>> best mis-heard ever Anonymous
>>149624
how are I taoism

fix'd
>> Anonymous
>>149623

>> Personally, I think religion is somehow imbedded
inside our brains, its an essential part of the brains' structure and we we cannot really get "rid of it" even with education and science.

Nah, it's not part of our nature, is something implanted on people by their parents, family and the enviroment they are raised in.

A child doesn't have access to different views on religion and is raised in the default religion of the place in which he lives. If he ever gets any info to question what was taught (sometimes forcefully) to him, he could force himself to believe to avoid social rejection or even persecution, depending on the country. Or just due to the fear of change that comes by being accustomed to an idea for your whole life, he refuses to accept the new knowledge.

Thank god my mom was an agnostic and gave me the option to choose my ideas. I'm an atheist now.
>> Anonymous
>>but look at apes and other primates and mammals such as wolves for example; they also have pack leaders and hierarchy social structures inside their tribes/packs such as alpha males and so on. Personally I think this is where modern religion as we know it comes from because after all we have to make the distinction between different types of religions such as monotheism, polytheism monotheism and so on. we cant group all religions together
>> Anonymous
>>149623
>Personally, I think religion is somehow imbedded inside our brains, its an essential part of the brains' structure and we we cannot really get "rid of it" even with education and science.

Blabbering baseless pseudoscientific crap hardly helps in a discussion.
>> Anonymous
>Perhaps you aren't going to change the older, more established in faith, but they'll be going out the way of the dinosaurs.
Or be running at you, yelling "ALLAEKBER"
>> Anonymous
Religion is only innate to us in the sense that following the word of the parent or authority figure (especially when we know jack shit) is something quite innate (of course there are exceptions) to us... that and humans have the wish issue of been unable to empathize with the dead; the idea of nothingness is difficult to grasp for concious creatures... and the desire for survival drives us to rationalize the meaning of life, despite death been an otherwise same end for all. So... abstraction, survival are the two things innate to human nature that are causing religion meme to propogate.
>> Anonymous
>>149664

Have you ever felt a sense of peace and something bigger than yourself suddenly coming over you when you are at your absolute worst? It's a beautiful feeling and it can be accompanied by delusions, and it seems to be part of the brain as a survival mechanism. That, I think, is also a contributing factor to religion.
>> Anonymous
Hey guys don't mind me, I'm just seeing that if posting in this thread drains my intelligence and makes me 16 years old again.
>> Doppelganger !.97.to9elc
>>149670
That is a delusion in itself.
>> Anonymous
>>149675
Whoa, you TOTALLY dissed us man! I feel SO intellectually belittled by what you said (even though it's a very tiny little bit commonplace and overused).
>> Anonymous
>149660
wooo and I see how much YOU personally ARE SO contributing to this discussion...
>> Anonymous
>>149688
LOL.
>> Anonymous
I'm an atheist. Deal with it. :|
>> levi
     File :-(, x)
>>149703
same here.
>> Anonymous
this was interesting, thanks - got anything else like it?
>> Anonymous
I though he was surely going to get beat up in some part of that documentary.
>> Anonymous
>>149622
LOL Ted Haggard is gay. what a dick for being so deceptive to all those who supported him. i bet Dawkins lol'd at that news.
>> Anonymous
This documentary (the 2nd torrent) is too feminist for my views.
>> te2rx
>>149708this was interesting, thanks - got anything else like it?

PBS frontline, viewable online: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/handofgod/view/

Aside from the molestation stuff, it examines a community bound by the authority/power structure of the catholic church, and what it's like to grow up in that kind of closed environment.
>> Anonymous
A few you might want to check out:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8545585184878490822
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3036666289532383972
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3800467000933683345
>> Anonymous
>>149644
It's not a discussion. Dawkins tries to show how delusional and even harmful religion is. It's highly entertaining to watch him pose questions to peole of various religious beliefs that any atheist poses in private but would normally feel too rude to ask to their face. Classic "I can't believe he did that!" moments.
>> Anonymous
He may as well be asking the teachers what they are teaching.


If they aren't raping kids, teachers are forcing their point of view on the kids that are locked in with them
>> Anonymous
I'm pretty sure this cemented my belief in the idea that documentaries should be reserved for animals and locations. All these agenda-ladened ones regarding humans and society really like to stretch things.

As for why religion is good, keeping sheep inside of a building for a few hours keeps them out of the streets, ne?
>> Anonymous
>>149772
>As for why religion is good, keeping sheep inside of a building for a few hours keeps them out of the streets, ne?
my sentiments exactly. these days, religion, feminism, science (global warming anyone?) are being used as just another tool to manipulate societies, and profit.
>> Anonymous
>>149779
>>science (global warming anyone?)

Are you another one of those nutcases who think global warming is a myth?
>> Cockmaster
This cocksucker talks absolute shit.
He claims that no one has ever been killed in the name of atheism - then you point out the anti-religious murders carried out by such famous atheists as Adolf Hitler ,Joseph Stalin , Mao Tse Tung , Pol Pot ,etc and his whole argument turns to shit.
>> Anonymous
Richard Dawkins is a massive cock. Argument Finished
>> Anonymous
>>149789

You might have a point if the reason they were killing was because they were actually trying to impose their anti-religious views on their victims.

...to bad they didn't, they just didn't believe in god dip shit.
>> Anonymous
Richard Dawkins is a faggot. Fucking atheists
>> Anonymous
>>149789

LMAO, none of those killed because they were atheists. They killed because they knew that was the best way to get rid of the opposition (Example: Stalin), find a scapegoat to get power and control people (Hitler), etc.
>> Anonymous
DEATH TO THE INFIDEL!
ALLAHU AKBAR MIN KULLI SHAY
???? ????
>> Anonymous
>149795

Yep. Keep telling yourself that. Whatever excuse is necessary - that's what the theists do. No reason the atheists can't take a page from their book. Again. ;)
>> Anonymous
>>149789

>>This cocksucker talks absolute shit.
>>He claims that no one has ever been killed in the name of atheism - then you point out the anti-religious murders carried out by such famous atheists as Adolf Hitler ,Joseph Stalin , Mao Tse Tung , Pol Pot ,etc and his whole argument turns to shit.

No, he addresses and refutes this argument in his book "The God Delusion".

Here is an Einstein quote that summarizes Dawkin's refutation:

"One strength of the Communist system ... is that it has some of the characteristics of a religion and inspires the emotions of a religion."

Please, respect and listen to your intellectual superiors.
>> Anonymous
Dawkins himself is no less intolerant than the people he attacks. One group belives in a man in the sky, one group doesn't. And if given the chance, either one would love to eliminate the other because they clearly see eachother as enemies and something near subhuman (or at least they speak to and of one another that way).

Bring on a reasonable man like Carl Sagan, who could have an intellegent debate with hard core fundies and actually make them stop and THINK before they could even start with their dogma. Someone who brings up deep questions for both the atheist and the bible reader.
>> Anonymous
>>149806

If even for a moment you think Carl Sagan was somewhere between atheism and theism, you clearly know nothing of the man.

He does much to help others see the awe and wonder in the natural world, but never fails to emphasize that it is just that: natural. He even goes so far as to say "Why would we need to add supernatural elements to appreciate the grandeur of the natural world?"

Besides which he asserts his atheism explicitly in the 'Cosmos' series of videos.
>> Anonymous
>>149807

I never stated that Sagan believed otherwise. I assure you I am very well read in both Dawkins and Sagan.

However, you are clearly missing one of Sagan's greatest gifts as a writer and speaker: the ability to RESPECT an opposing viewpoint, and not just spit out his own belief, but to ask questions that make the opposing side think before they speak. He clearly does not believe in a "God", but he leaves a lot of room for mystery about the existance of existance in the first place, AND he does not push his point of view as absolute. If you have ever seen the many televised debates he had in the 80s with various fundies, you would see a very clear and candid example of his ability to bring people to a point of "thought" rather than a point of bickering.
>> Anonymous
Religion is for dumbfucks still trapped in the tribal ages.
>> Cockmaster
"No, he addresses and refutes this argument in his book "The God Delusion".

Here is an Einstein quote that summarizes Dawkin's refutation:

"One strength of the Communist system ... is that it has some of the characteristics of a religion and inspires the emotions of a religion."

But Communism isn't a religion , its a humanist ideology , like the hate-filled bile that he spews forth.So he hasn't addressed it,dick-brain.

Has he disproved the atheism of Adolf Hitler , Joe Stalin et al ? No , and he won't attempt to because it will expose him as the delude bigot that he is.
>> Anonymous
>>149651
>>THANK GOD my mom was an agnostic and gave me the option to choose my ideas. I'm an atheist now.

Atheist, huh? I see.
>> Anonymous
>>149610
LET'S JUST HOPE HE WON'T DIVIDE BY ZERO!
>> Anonymous
>>149594
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Xe7yf9GJUfU

I bought The God Delusion after seeing this clip. Lacked the epicness I was hoping for, but but provied a nice presentation and dissection of the so called proofs for the existence of a personal god/gods. The book did raise my consciousness about a number of things I have always deemed irrelevant or just shrugged off.
>> Anonymous
hahahaha, great set by the NWO, humans are always great at finger pointing, running away from responsibility and actually changing what is wrong. The different religions point the finger at each other(yet they are the same)and than science points the finger at religion. It is always the other guy who is, what is wrong in the world. The root of all evil is MAN. Be it in using an H-bomb for evil deed, using religion to control a number of people that have them do what you say or worshiping materialism as a means to gain happiness. If science is so pure, take a look at this. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=288670719458272900&q=Forbidden+Archeology
>> Anonymous
>>149624
What you are saying is just another system of beliefs that doesn't make any sense to me. Sound alot like your a Jedi.
>> Anonymous
>>149670
Nope never
>> And now for something entirely different Doppelganger !.97.to9elc
Let me read a letter I recently received. 'Dear Dr. Thinker. Why has the Educated Mind seen fit to suppress our isolation cycle? Sincerely, A Concerned Citizen.'

Thank you for writing, Concerned. Of course your question touches on one of the basic deep-rooted human impulses, with all its associated hopes and fears for the future of the species. I also detect some unspoken questions. Do our thinkers really know what's best for us? What gives them the right to profess this kind of thought for mankind? Will they ever cease their arguments and let us slip into isolation again? Allow me to address the anxieties underlying your concerns, rather than try to answer every possible question you might have left unvoiced. First, let us consider the fact that for the first time ever, as a species, rationality is in our reach. This simple fact has far-reaching implications. It requires radical rethinking and revision of our social, religious and political imperatives. It also requires planning and forethought that run in direct opposition to our nurtured pre-sets. I find it helpful at times like these to remind myself that our true enemy is irrationality.
>> Doppelganger !.97.to9elc
     File :-(, x)
Irrationality was our mother when we were an infant species. Instinct coddled us and kept us safe in those hardscrabble years when we looked up in the sky, saw thunder and thought it was the work of an angry deity. But inseparable from irrationality is its dark twin, unreasonability. Irrationality is inextricably bound to unreasoning impulses, and today we clearly see its true nature. Irrationality has just become aware of its irrelevance, and like a cornered beast, it will not go down without a bloody fight. Irrationality would inflict a fatal injury on our species. Irrationality creates its own oppressors, and bids us rise up against them. Irrationality tells us that other possible viewpoints are a threat, rather than an opportunity. Irrationality slyly and covertly compels us away from change and progress. Irrationality, therefore, must be expunged. It must be fought tooth and nail, beginning with one of the basest of human urges: The urge to refute all other viewpoints in favour of one's own. We should thank our benefactors for giving us respite from this overpowering force. They have thrown a switch and exorcised our demons in a single stroke. They have given us the strength we never could have summoned to overcome this compulsion. They have given us purpose. They have turned our eyes toward the stars.

Let me assure you that the arguments will cease on the day that we have mastered ourselves...the day we can prove we no longer need it.

And that day of transformation, I have it on good authority, is close at hand.
>> Anonymous
>>149811
We are way past the point of meaningful discussion. It's all about who can be loudest without looking like a moron. Obnoxious guy A vs. obnoxious guy B. Dawkins just has the advantage of being backed by science. If he wasn't as annoying, he'd just get shouted down.

tl;dr He is like that because he needs to be.
>> Anonymous
>>149827
True science doesn't say religion is wrong. There has never been a scientific study saying there is no god. If there ever comes a day where there is some evidence of a higher being/beings then and only then will science take a closer look.

It just bothers the religious types the someone tries to explain the world around them with out citing G.O.D. Just look at when Galileo said the earth revolves around the sun. The church was up in arms about it. At that time some might have said it proves god doesn't exist. But look at today, we still have religion and we religious types that believe the earth revolves around the sun. Why? Because science didn't go and disprove god. Thats not the point of science.

Richard Dawkins in all his intelligence is not being a scientist in this video, hes commentating on world culture. Don't think the is science pointing the finger at religion.
>> Doppelganger !.97.to9elc
>>149837
>True science doesn't say religion is wrong.
True science would say nothing. It would show it through evidence.
>> Anonymous
this is the worst hentai ive ever seen man wtf
>> Anonymous
A person like Dawkins is not even considered a threat to fundamentalists in this country, because he's just a lot of bullying that is likely to turn religious types *farther* away from his point of view.

Look at this thread, half the people who are certainly atheists this he's a dick--what do you think anyone else is going to think?

Dawkins is anger masturbation for angry atheists and nothing more.
>> Anonymous
>>149829
It's easy. We have good and bad people because without one, the other would not exist. If there were no such thing as bad, what would you have that tells you there is such a thing as "good" and vise versa. Even easier, guns are opposite to blades. Because we have a device that stays stationary when you kill with it, there has to be an opposite. Guns (you kill with the bullet) are not stationary. They're in motion when you kill with it.
>> Anonymous
>>149843
You're fucking stupid.
>> Anonymous
>>149839
Exactly, but theres no evidence for or against god so it's a non-issue.
>> Anonymous
>>149843
that analogy sucks
>> Anonymous
>>149843
Thats sucks. Are you telling me swords didn't exist until guns were invented? That someone invented both at the same time and kept the gun secret until the time was right? And where do bows and arrows fit in?
>> Anonymous
>>149843
as others have already pointed out, anime villain-logic
>> Anonymous
>>149843

Richard Dawkins and Jesse Helms agree: YOU FAIL.
>> Anonymous
wtf good and evil, theres no such thing, its only some retarded human concept. is a lion evil for killing a zebra so it can feed it's cubs? evil lawlz, gb2/fantasyland
>> Anonymous
>>149860
>is a lion evil for killing a zebra so it can feed it's cubs?

Yes it is, because i- JESUS CHRIST it's a lion, get in the car!
>> Doppelganger !.97.to9elc
>>149860
Why would good and evil apply beyond humans?
>> Anonymous
GOOD
EVIL
JESUS
LIONS

4CHAN IS DEEEEEEP
>> Anonymous
Real quick now.

Aetheists need to chill. Otherwise they're no better than the fundamentalists.
Not all religious people are fundamentalists.
A lion has no concept of morals.
I will kill the family of all those who say there is no evil.
Good does not need evil.
>> Doppelganger !.97.to9elc
>>149868
>Aetheists need to chill. Otherwise they're no better than the fundamentalists.
A war isn't about whose right. Its about whose left.
>> Anonymous
>>149845
Actually there is plenty of evidence against the existence of a god, and the belief in god itself is quite detrimental to mankind. Hence it is not a "non-issue".
>> Anonymous
God Delusion is interesting so far, but Dawkins proselytizes as much as a preacher. His words would have more credence if he'd tone it down a bit. He comes off more as a full fledged athiest rather than an agnostic, who is more open to the probability no matter how remote that there might be a god.
>> Anonymous
Everyone is saying religion is bad, blah blah blah, but have you guys thought of the good it's done as well?

My church feeds and donates to the homeless every week. We have after school programs to help kids get better grades. We do a lot of community service projects. What have you athiests have done for your community lately?
>> Anonymous
Religions don't do bad things, people do.

Guns help too.
>> Anonymous
fuck you atheists and fuck you umm non-atheists every one needs to shut up and leave everyone else alone
>> Doppelganger !.97.to9elc
>>149873
If you need a religion to do good, then your character is badly-flawed.
>> Anonymous
>>149877
>If you need a religion to do good, then your character is badly-flawed.

Yes, that's the whole point. Now you're getting it. All people are flawed (original sin). Through our faith we overcome our flaws and do good work.
>> Doppelganger !.97.to9elc
>>149878
If a person needs some external entity to tell him how to behave, then he is already dead.

A donkey can run as far as it wants, its not going to come back a horse.
>> Anonymous
I used guns and swords because they were simple to understand. If I went through the entire LAW of Balance, I would have a huge post that no one would read. When someone came up with an object that could kill by holding it and using it against whatever they wanted to be dead, someone else came up with an object to kill, that required it be hurled or flung.
But I'm going to stop, because whoever doesn't understand any of my three posts, cannot be helped.
And you're a fucking dumbass if you think good and evil extends past Humans.
>> Anonymous
>>149882
>If a person needs some external entity to tell him how to behave, then he is already dead.

uh...isn't that what parents do? Your attempts at emulating Dawkins amuses me.
>> Anonymous
>>149878
>>Yes, that's the whole point. Now you're getting it. All people are flawed (original sin). Through our FAITH we overcome our flaws and do good work.

Then all atheists are completely depraved, immoral beings, which is wrong and stupid. It's solely by the GRACE OF GOD that anyone can do anything unsinful.

What the fuck is faith anyways?
>> Anonymous
>Then all atheists are completely depraved, immoral beings, which is wrong and stupid. It's solely by the GRACE OF GOD that anyone can do anything unsinful.

I don't think any proper Christian would categorize atheists as depraved and immoral. It's the ignorant atheist who stereotypes how a Christian thinks. Atheism taken to the extreme can become just as ugly as any extremist religion. Next I'll see you making personal insults to me for my beliefs.

You don't have to believe in God to do good works, but nevertheless you are still in his grace, for Jesus died for the sins of all people, whether they believe in him or not.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
You don't have to believe in God to do good works, but nevertheless you are still in his grace, for Jesus died for the sins of all people, whether they believe in him or not.

That doesn't even make sense..
>> Anonymous
>>149893

It's ok, God still loves you even if you don't understand.
>> SMAP
>>149884
Children aren't people, they're _potential_ people. Without someone to direct them they're just monsters. (See: Lord of the Flies.)
>> Anonymous
>>149893

Why is it hard to understand this?
>> Anonymous
Oooh...dawkins is my man...i just finished reading "The Ancestor's Tale", which was a fucking awesome book tracing our lineage back to...bacteria. Great work, i tell ya.

I'm totally getting this torrent
>> Anonymous
I am a religious person.

I read books by Dawkins, Sagan, Gould. Also books by various religious teachers and pholisophers.

I volunteer time to help the homeless, give money from my paycheck to the red cross. I do not do these things because "God tells me", simply because it is what a person should do if can empathize with others.

I don't hate people of non-religious views or other religions. I think all religions have something to offer the experience of those who find peace in them...

I don't think my relationship with my religious views in unique... Many people understand that while religion is used for terrible purposes, so are money, sex, materialism, skin color, cultural hertiage and so on. I love the sciences, but also have a place for things which don't really ascribe to being labled. There's a lot of room for wonder if we stop being so impressed with ourselves for just a second.

I also really enjoy fapping to hentai. Hey! Erotic imagination is a beautiful thing!

I wish people could just relax and realize that even if whatever forces drive the universe don't care about our actions, that life can be better for everyone if we just live and let live. Unfortunately that isn't going to happen...
>> Anonymous
>>149868
>Not all religious people are fundamentalists.

This is one of Dawkins' biggest problems with christianity, actually.

If you aren't convinced enough in your religion to believe in ALL of its fundamentals (he calls this "picking and choosing"), then why bother with the bible or with christianity at all?

When we're talking about the bible, we're not only talking about the ten commandments we are all familiar with. We also have to look at all the other instructions in the bible. The bible includes moral behavior such as stoning unbelievers to death, selling your daughters, owning slaves, etc, lots of good old fashioned stuff.

Most christians (almost all of them) don't even bother to read the bible all the way through! Isn't something that's so important that you would base your whole life and belief system on, worth spending the time to actually READ your instruction book at least once?

But, people don't, and they "pick and choose" their morals from higher authorities.

People say things like "well some of the stuff in the bible wouldn't apply today. You wouldn't stone people or sell your children." (although, this isn't true all around the world.)

>> Anonymous
God dammit we've been auto-saged :( And this was such an interesting topic, too. Maybe Anonymous will repost it when it gets deleted.
>> Anonymous
>>149905

I am not christian, so I cannot go into detail of the bible. I can say however, there is a Hindu saying that states all religion and spiritual understanding in the world, each of them is like a peice of colored glass which reveal some different tiny part of "god".

That is, most of religion is order of society and law for the people. Only a small part is actually spiritual in nature, because spiritual meditation or prayer cannot be written so much as experienced. Therefore only a tiny part of religion is actually "spiritual".

This is why I believe picking and choosing is not a bad thing, as time changes. Even if you pick and choose between entire religions, will not your own spirituality remain the same?

Of course in some countries there no picking and choosing--some want life to remain the same in society forever. This is tragedy of human fear and coruption of leader desiring power. I would be amusing to see Dawkins argue with such people. But in the USA, I don't think there could be such people as to say, "let us stone the thief". Is there?
>> Anonymous
>>149905
It is common practice in science nowadays to pick and choose the data that supports your view and ignore that which contradicts their view.

Dawkins is no different. He is at odds with a large portion of evolutionary biologist. Instead of tearing down the system that he feels is wrong and building his own theory, he picks and chooses which parts of evolution he likes best.

Darwin was a creationist. Ironic as it may seem, but Darwin believed that God had better things to do than sit and monitor every step. Darwin is a Deist.
>> Anonymous
>>149910
It is funny, people assume God wrote the bible, yet these same people believe in free will. If you accept free will, then you must accept fallibly, therefore, why would then assume the bible is the precise word of God. I view the bible as more of clue than anything else.
>> Anonymous
>>149911
I believe that Satan wrote the Bible and the Koran, and thereby creating all the confusion and the wars.
>> Anonymous
>>149910
>It is common practice in science nowadays to pick and choose the data that supports your view and ignore that which contradicts their view.

I would disagree with you. That does not sound like real science to me. In science, you make your hypothesis. Then you collect evidence to test your hypothesis. If the evidence does not support it, you must discard your hypothesis and create another one to test.

This is how theories are made.

A scientist that picks data that he likes and ignores the rest is not a good scientist at all.

>Dawkins is no different. He is at odds with a large portion of evolutionary biologist. Instead of tearing down the system that he feels is wrong and building his own theory, he picks and chooses which parts of evolution he likes best.

What complete nonsense. Which parts of evolution does he pick and which parts does he ignore? The ideas of evolution that scientists generally hold are the facts that have been found by scientific research.

>Darwin was a creationist. Ironic as it may seem, but Darwin believed that God had better things to do than sit and monitor every step. Darwin is a Deist.

>> Anonymous
>>149909

Why can't a person be spiritual then without requiring a religion? Can a parent teach spirituality to their child without enforcing a religious afiliation onto them?
>> Anonymous
>>149913
So Darwin says:

"Authors of the highest eminence seem to be fully satisfied with the view that each species has been independently created. To my mind it accords better with what we know of the laws impressed on matter by the Creator, that the production and extinction of the past and present inhabitants of the world should have been due to secondary causes, like those determining the birth and death of the individual."

Now, if that isn't the viewpoint of a Deist, then I don't know what is, and since when did I claim that you had to be Christain to be a Deist.

Foremore as the selective choosing of data, this exactly what has groups like MetaResearch, so up in arms.

Dawkins claims that evolution is the one thing we know for fact, yet there is no agreement on how evolution works, Dawkins denies that learned traits have an effect on selection, but he seems to think we can unlearn religion, which if I understand him right, is having an adverse effect on our evolution.
>> Anonymous
>>149918
>[...]he seems to think we can unlearn religion, which if I understand him right, is having an adverse effect on our evolution.

I think you are not understanding him right. Where does he outright say anything like that?

Religion is a sociological problem, not an evolutionary one. At least not in the biological sense of evolution.
>> Doppelganger !.97.to9elc
>>149884
If your fully-grown man still needs his parents to tell him what to do, then he is beyond dead.
>> Anonymous
I DESPISE ALL WEAVERS OF THE BLACK ARTS. THERE IS NO NEED TO TEST THINGS TO SEE IF THEY ARE TRUE BECAUSE THE WHITE CHRISTIAN AMERICAN GOD HAS TOLD US EVERYTHING. READ LARFIUS 77:12 IT SAYS HARRY POTTER IS THE DEVIL AND SPIDFLAJ 19:84 SAYS TEXT MESSAGING ON THURSDAYS WHILE WEARING A BROWN SHIRT WILL MAKE GOD HATE YOU. SCIENCE IS WRONG AND TESTING TO SEE IF THINGS ARE RIGHT MAKES YOU A NAUGHTY NO-NO PERSON. HURRRRRRRRRRFFFFF.
>> Anonymous
>>149920
>If your fully-grown man still needs his parents to tell him what to do, then he is beyond dead.

You're a very disrespectful girl. You should have obeyed your parents when they told you to study english, because your english is horrible.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Doppelganger !.97.to9elc
>>149922
Actually, they told me to study Chinese.
>> Anonymous
Hm? Is this still here?
>> Doppelganger !.97.to9elc
>>149929
Quite.
>> Anonymous
>>149905
So THAT'S how Dawkins justifies going to town on a straw man.
>> Anonymous
>>149929
Of course it's still here.

This thread is a reflection of the conflict in your soul. Not just about good and evil, but about religion and science, faith and fact.
This thread will always be even if it gets deleted, it will live on in our minds, our souls and our hearts.
Why you ask? Because that's how it is. In dificult times people need something to believe in, they turn to God and religion. Most of them know what the bible says and what is being said in church isn't true. Others haven't even read the bible or ever been to church.
They don't need to, they just want something to believe in, something to hold on to in these dificult times or something to explain to things that have been hapening to them.
In that same aspect you could say sciene is a form of religion as well, they're trying to find answers but only those which have been proven by fact.
Science and religion can never be together but they can learn from eachother.
>> Doppelganger !.97.to9elc
>>149933
I'm going to be honest, and say that I think these people are lacking in sheer willpower.
>> Anonymous
>>149933

Religion is for the weak-willed and for people who can't/won't think for themselves. Religion is also popular with stupid people.

They want something to believe in? Then they should believe in themselves and in people in general. God (if he exists) doesn't give a shit about humans (see Hurricane Katrina, etc).

Also, people hardly need religion to be good law-abiding citizens. The law will take care of everything else.

Fuck you bible-thumping zealots, GTFO of this world.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
>>149935
>>149953
Great job at missing the point. If you had actually read the post you would have noticed a part saying:
"Most of them know what the bible says and what is being said in church isn't true. Others haven't even read the bible or ever been to church."

I fully agree, religious zealots, biblethumpers and people who live only how the church tells them to are not only ignorant but stupid as well.
But what I'm trying to say is that there are a lot of people who believe in something greater, something from which they get hope. People who have lost loved ones, who hope to be able to see them once more. Is that so wrong/stupid/retarded?
Because you're saying the same thing as the zealots: "I'm right and everyone else is wrong and stupid for believing something else"
>> Anonymous
>>149958
>People who have lost loved ones, who hope to be able to see them once more. Is that so wrong/stupid/retarded?

Yes, because that's just delusional thinking.
>> Anonymous
>>150008
its wrong if they state it as fact and dont actually know. its different if they say they dont know and just think there could be something bigger.
>> Anonymous
Seriously. Westminster Standards. Anything else is pretty much bullshit christianity.

Assume we have free will. We know that people act predictably. Yet that does not contradict free will. If you keep this in mind, a lot of the free will squabbles seem less important.

Evolution is an idea about how life came about. It is comprensive, but there is no claim that all of it has to be true. But each part of evolutionary theory has so much evidence that it's pretty much taken whole. But as scientific theory, just because part of it might be flawed doesn't shoot down the whole theory.

Religion is an authoritative statement about the world. You can't pick and choose. But like evolution, you can just pull out bs. And just like evolution, most of the people talking about it know near squat about it.
>> Anonymous
Evolution is generally accurate. The details are fuzzy, but the theory is pretty solid, or at least very plausible, with tons of evidence to back it up. If you disagree, you're either refusing to look at evidence and taking your 'religious beliefs' arbitrarily, or you don't understand it.

The thing about religion is that people just take their 'religious beliefs' arbitrarily, or just don't fucking understand it. People go around spewing crap about christianity like everyone goes to heaven or that birth control is wrong or that the bible actually gives a crap about abortion, just like they spew crap about rocks that MUST have formed in specific conditions that prove the earth is a few thousand years old or that genetics/random mutations can't account for the wide variety of organisms you see today. I think we're all talking about the same group of fucking stupid people who don't understand things and go about saying stupid things that make everyone and everything else look bad.

Everyone should understand evolution before they argue against or for it. Everyone should understand christianity before they argue against or for it. The only difference is that evolution is pretty undeniable, and christianity is only for if it seem true (and if it doesn't, who cares?)
>> Anonymous
>>149615
After seeing this and The God Delusion, The Trouble with Atheism is by far the more balanced view of the two.

But what does my opinion matter?

View it for yourself. :p
>> Xenos
I repect this man for being a great geneticist and founding the whole idea of memes and memetics.. but.. wow.. what a jerk. He's become as bad, as close minded, as the people in religion he preachers against. Sure, some of the douche preachers should be taken down, but it's like Dawkins is their counterpart in science, blindly following that and putting down faith like they put down sicence.

Still, I've been looking for a copy of Selfish Gene for some time. I keep finding his newer books in stores.
>> Go God Go! Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Science damn you! The Allied Atheist Allegiance is Science's chosen people! Dawkins would have wanted you to eat off of your tummy!
>> Anonymous
>>150053

The 30th aniversary ed of The Selfish Gene can be had on amazon for a few bucks.

It is quite a good read.
>> Anonymous
Well, if you want to believe in anything. Why not believe in things that made a difference in this world (good and bad). That is Science.

Or you can blindly believe in something you'll never in a lifetime experience proof of.

Popular religions nowadays are just inherit from family and surroundings. Without religious propaganda, or parents forcing their children to church.
We'd all be agnostics or atheists. The word "God" wouldnt even exist, as "God" depicts something close to human in most religions.

Personally I dont see a problem with people who believe in a spiritual world or a "creator". It's in one way pretty likely, but in another way impossible.
>> Syd2K !yHzbaFtyPA
     File :-(, x)
One thing that Dawkins doesn't touch on is the role of Eastern religions- and in fact most atheists also tend to disavow the existence of the God of the three major world faiths, but doesn't try to do the same of Hinduism, Buddhism and other Eastern faiths. One of the worst of the fundamentalist political parties in the world is in India, the Hindu BJP party, whose policies include expunging non-believers (ie., Muslims) from the face of India.

Meanwhile, in Australia you get billboards lie this:

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,21151564-5005941,00.html
>> Source please? anonymous
Well, Dawkins, being from the west, is going to attack the western religions first. I think it's because the Western religions are the most *pushy* in terms of evangelism.

The hindu's in India may be bad, but they at least restrict their bullshit to India. Also, Buddhists don't believe in God per se, and they don't really evangelize either.
>> Anonymous
>>150106
According to The God Delusion (book), Dawkins says he doesn't know very much about Eastern faiths. That's why he doesn't really discuss them.
>> Anonymous
since someone mentioned it, hitler was a christian, not an atheist. see here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler%27s_religious_beliefs

it's a different deal than with stalin. the state atheism and persecution of religious people in the soviet union wasn't necessarily about science or a scientific mindset, but about control. "religion is opium for the masses" and all that, so it was seen harmful to the purpose of socialism, and the state already had absolute power over the people anyway.

I deride the reasoning abilities of anyone who brings this up as a refutation to the argument that religion has been a constant source of conflict and misery in the world. the religious fundamentalists are out to [b]convert or destroy[/b] everyone else, and the closet theists and moderate christians are inadvertently helping them.

if you need examples, look at the religious bigotry against queer minorities, the gaza strip (jews vs. muslims), shiia islam vs. sunni islam (muslims literally killing each other), when religious dogma interferes with critical areas of science that could be used to save lives (like stem cell research), the friggin spanish inquisition or the crusades etc. you can go on and on and find countless examples of murder in the name of faith. does some occasional church charity justify all this?

maybe think about it the next time you go on promoting your faith or vilifying the atheists. if people like dawkins offend you by shooting holes in your deluded world views or just brushing off your cheesy arguments, or you feel belittled by their blunt tone, you should fix [b]yourself[/b] and deal with it.
>> Anonymous
Dawkins doesn't know a thing about religion except that he hates it, and he has had a big emotional issue with it for decades. He devised his concept of the "meme" which has never proven itself to have any predictive or descriptive validity, solely to insult religion--and that's how he uses it in The Selfish Gene. He asserts (without evidence) that any thought system consisting of threats and promises will tend to propagate itself, therefore religion is stupid. That's the beginning and end of his argument and he repeats it without end in all his subsequent books. As Terry Eagleton said, reading Dawkins going on about religion is like reading a biology book written by someone whose only knowledge of biology comes from a birdwatching book. Writers like Daniel Dennet who follow Dawkins just repeat the same bland nonsense, calling ideas they like "rational" and "reasonable" when in fact they just pulled those words out of their ass without the least justification. Let's all give up this religion nonsense and just behave reasonably toward each other. It works fine until someone else's "reasonable" turns out to be something we don't like--then well, time to use force in the cause of reason and enlightenment. Time to kill the unreasonable people who won't listen to our words of wisdom. This sort of thinking always breaks down when it runs into the real world.
>> SMAP
>>150550
Dawkins clearly _does_ have a bone to pick with religion as a concept, no doubt about it, and he certainly isn't subtle in claiming that religion is the source of many woes. However, he does have a point: religion actively encourages a rejection of rational thought. That isn't to say that without religion rationality would predominate, but it certainly stands in opposition to science more often than not. If nothing else, religion gives people a socially acceptable rationale for proclaiming themselves to be Absolutely Right No Matter What. Lacking that divine mandate it's a lot harder to pull off, although far from impossible. (Communism, etc, etc.)
>> Anonymous
couldn't open or save the torrents. could somebody link me to another source?
>> Anonymous
>>149789

Wait, Stalin and Hitler killed in the name of atheism?
Shit I need to research WW2 some more.
>> Anonymous
>>150829

Heh, standard Fundie belief is that they sure did! Despite Hitler doing everything in the name of god.

Fundies also tend to forget things like the Crusades ever happened, and the Inquisition. And then there are certain Baptists who think weird things like they're the first church despite being started in the 1700's.

Historical revisionism at its best!
>> Anonymous
I'm getting tired of all these morons who think that if religion was abolished it would bring about world peace, if religion ever disappeared people would just find different reasons to justify killing eachother.
>> Anonymous
>>149619

That might be the best thing to do. It's time to start forcing logic on humanity, and when a religion bucks that logic and science like Christianity, Islam and many others do, to declare them illegal.

Frankly, 99% of our laws from statutory rape to child sex abuse to jaywalking to X, are not so hidden attempt to push religious morality on the majority.
Morality should not be forced on anyone, and the ONLY laws that there should be in my opinion are laws against killing other people and stealing from other people!
No laws making a certain sexuality that it totally normal (pedophilia) illegal. No laws that try to force people to do ANYTHING they don't want to do or keep them from doing something they don't want to do, as long as it doesn't directly and AT THAT EXACT MOMENT, harm a person.
>> Anonymous
"It's time to start forcing logic on humanity, and when a religion bucks that logic and science like Christianity, Islam and many others do, to declare them illegal."

Yeah , because science has made the world such a wonderful place - all this global warming is just religious bullshit .All these Oil Wars we're fighting weren't a result of the invention of the internal combustion engine - they were started by Unitarians.
You talk shit , you pedo cunt , anti - religionists are just as hate-filled and crazed as the religious zealots they attack.
Two wrongs don't make a right - kill all religionists and science lovers !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>> Anonymous
>>149789
None of them killed for atheism.
Try to read some history before joining the arguement again
>> queazy !6Ws8/XxDMk
>_> nobody better tell him the father of genetic science was a christian monk

Anyway, rotten eggs in both science in religion. You could put a spotlight on the worst people in each faction and make it seem like the rest are all like that. Just as I'm pissed at alot of religous things, think they're damn stupid, some scientific things piss me off too. Most medicine is about curing you after you're sick, but nothing about preventing sickness so they can charge you more...stupid stuff like that. Arguments like that tho aren't really relative to the sceintific community as a whole, just like the interviews in this guys movie.

Best thing to remember is that religion, like science, is a creation of man. Not a creation of God or nature