Carl Wong
You may want to turn down your speakers first.
Source
(Improved audio) Richard Dawkins, Ben Carson, Daniel Dennett and Francis Collins debate
Similar Posts
Artificial Intelligence Feb 24th
Is Anything Real?
Consciousness | Chris Avantgarde – Massano – Anyma – Mathame – Stephan Jolk – Soel | Anyrise Mix
41 thoughts on “(Improved audio) Richard Dawkins, Ben Carson, Daniel Dennett and Francis Collins debate”
Comments are closed.
Dawkins has time and time again taken a facile and pathetic stance against Christianity. Just because you criticize religion doesn't make you smart. What have you given science Richard? Nothing really all you've done is backbench off of better minds. I respect Dennett he is a brilliant man. As for Dr. Collins he once again proves his immense intellect; he has given much to this world with little praise. Dr. Carsons argument I feel do not resonate with a religion hostile crowd. Nonetheless still a brilliant man. I challenge Dawkins to say what he is saying in Saudi Arabia maybe Iran and then get back to me. Or not I assume it will be a one way ticket.
Carson wins! Dawkins is so stupid.
Collins argument about an enemy drowning,it would depend on how bad an enemy.
"Trying" to stab people,how hard did he try?
Our "big brains" can override same blind, unguided processes that constructed those brains and on whose laws our brain work.
When it comes to nonsense, Dawkins is the king…
I have respect for Collins who doesn't deny science. But Carson is a raging Evangelical nit-wit. Collins did himself no favor by allowing himself to be paired up with that fool.
The word "God" might as well be "Blah" the way people typically use it.
How about a clear definition first? Before any evidence or logic can be evaluated, you need a clear understanding of what is being claimed/discussed.
We All love to hate.
Dawkins and Dennett seem to imply that consciousness and personal experiences are unfortunate anecdotal by-products of empirically measurable neurophysiological activity, and therefore Science should discard these immeasurable messy by-products as if they never existed.
Perfect close by Dennett at 45:00.
Omfg… Carson actually ended by invoking Pascals Wager! Why do religious people never explore the already answered lame excuses to believe in the absurd?
really been that's what you want to be your closing statement is Pascal's wager? A threat? Truly pathetic
really Carson that's what you want to be your closing statement and answer to have we gotten any closer to answering this question is Pascal's wager? A threat? Truly pathetic I mean truly very sad
Evolution is a FRAUD.
Dr. Ben Carson is fantastic ————–Fantastically STUPID -and a pathological LIAR – This IDIOT doesn't believe in evolution, but I don't believe in a single crap that comes out of his mouth !
This is funny listening to Dawkins how he curtails himself from spewing fundamentalist atheistic jargons to toned down listenable talk in presence of someone like Francis Collins.
Dawkins and Dennett DESTROYED Carson
It is just amazing how Dawkins, as a scientist, can devise theories and come to conclusions based on evidence in areas he wants, but in those that he doesn't he just dismisses and says "so what?", it simply is that way. Very unscientific!
They should've brought a physicist, I have a feeling that Collins and Carson are going to hide behind the magical creation of the universe for which neither Dawkins nor Dennett are qualified to explain how it's not magical at all.
Dawkins’ makes an astounding categorical error, calling evolution “a fact.”
Evolution has not been proven.
It has merely been asserted (forcefully), described (voluminously), hypothesized (endlessly), and defended (haughtily)… but not proven.
Evolution is not observed, not tested, not repeated.
Evolution violates the “laws” we do know (scientifically) about physics, chemistry, biology, genetics, & paleontology.
Collins is awesome, I just read his book. Dawkins, when confronted with good evidence says: "so what" and then uses an adolescent type of ridicule. So immature.
"The need to do good…" Oh, for crying out loud, Dennett! Collins did not say that, at all! What he was saying was that morality comes from God as the source of it! Big difference! How many times must we Christians (and possibly theists in general) clarify this point!? Even C.S. Lewis was perfectly clear on how while knowing a deity exists might give incentive to do good, the crux of the matter is the ultimate source of morality, even without believing in a deity, is God.
On a more humours note, Dawkins going "So,k what?" was simply comedy gold, and I bet you the audience was laughing at him instead of with him! "O-Oh! Uh… I-I would go into why morality can exist without a creator, but it's too long, so I'll ask you to read the book, instead!" Right… And, you are suddenly incapable of summarizing it for us to get us interested? He ain't going to be hired to do any sort of marketing, anytime soon!
After Dennett went for that strawman, I knew there was no steam left in the atheistic side of the debate. Why waste time with someo0ne that can't even get a damn argument correct that they possibly heard a million times from watching William Lane Craig and other apologists apply it!?
i have often wondered why evolutionist are so threaten by christians notice they dont take on islam or budist but they always want to debate christians because the bible is a threat to them.
Islam is the enemy, never forget that. Their leader so-called prophet mohammed, one of the worst murderers in world history started the 1400 years of endless killings. Islam is filth, dumbos who never read even one book. War war war and killing. I piss on islam, evil itself itself.
How many here have read any of Richard Dawkins's books? Anyone still not understand Dawkin's arguement? Or Darwins??
20 min mark, Richard Dawkins, "Presumably you believe in evolution"……ah oh, not so fast. 20.15 mark, Ben Carson replies, "In fact I DON'T (proudly emphasised) believe in evolution…..". ???? Then proceeds to speak with the reasoning of a child. A sophisticated, highly trained and qualified person like Carson doesn't accept the overwhelming consilience of evolution and glibly dismisses with childish analogies? How is this? Is Dawkins onto something?
If you look at the difference in Carson and Collins vs Dawkins and dennets contribution to society it’s interesting. I have a lot less respect for that latter two in that sense
Ben Carson and Francis Collins in one team?? Carson is a Young Earth creationist, whereas Francis Collins fully supports evolution.
Francis Collins is just great in this debate. Dawkins is as usual hopeless. Dennett looks to be on his last legs and absolutely rididiculous.
MODERN THEORY OF EVOLUTION
VS
QUR'ANIC ACCOUNT OF CREATION
A COMPARISION OF THE
ARGUMENT
عصری نظریہ ارتقا
اور
قران کا تصور تخلیق
(8)
بدیع السموات و الارض اذا قضی امرا فانما یقول لہ
کن فیکون o
To Him is due
The primal origin
Of the heavens and the earth:
When He decreeth a matter,
He saith to it:" Be,"
And it is.
(Qur'an,2:117)
Robert Corroll, an expert on vertebrate
paleontology and a committed
evolutionist, comes to admit that the Darwinist hope has not been satisfied with fossil discoveries.
" Despite more than a hudred years of intense collecting efforts since the time of Darsin's, the fossil record still does not yield the picturd of infinitely numerous transitional links that he expected . (14)
Another evolutionary paleontologist, K.S.Thomson, tells us that new groups of organisms appear very abruptly in the fossil record:
" When a major group of organisms arises and first appears in the record, it seems
to come fully equipped with a suite of new
chracters not seen in related, putatively ancestral groups. These radical changes in marphology and fuction appear to raise very quickly. (15)
The fossil record reveals that species emerged suddenly, and totally different structures, and remained exactly the same
Over the longest geological periods. Stephen Jay Gould, a Harvardv University paleontologist and well-known evolutionist, admitted this fact in late 70s.
The history of most fossil species include two features particularly inconsistent with gradualism:
1) Stasis- most species exhibit no directional change during their tenure on earth. They appear in the fossil record looking much the same as when they disappear; morphological change is usually limited and directionless.
2) Sudden appearance – in any local area, a species does not arise gradually by the steady transformation of its ancestors; it appears, all at once and " fully formed ".
(16)
Further research only strengthened the fact of stasis and sudden appearance. Stephen Jay Gould and Niles Eldredge write in 1993 that :
" Most species, during during their geological history, either do not change in any appreciable way, or else they fluctuate mildly in morphology, with no apparent directio". (17)
The Adequacy of the Fossil Record
Some 140 years ago Darwin put forward the following argument :
" Right now there are no transitional forms,
yet further research will uncover them".
Is this argument is still valid today? In other words, considering the conclusions from the entire fossil record, should we accept that transitional forms never existedor we should wait for the results of
new research?
The wealth of existing fossil records will surely answer this question. When we look at the paleontological findings, we come across an abundance of fossils. Despite this, not a single transitional form has been uncovered, and it is unlikely that any transitional forms will be found as a result of new excavations.
Niles Eldredgo, the well-known paleontologist and curator of tha American Museum of National History, expresses as follows the invalidity of Darwin's claim that the insufficiency of the fossil record is the reason why no transitional forms have been found:
The record jumps , and all the evidence shows that the record is real :
The gaps we see reflects real events in life's history — not the artifact of a poor fossil record. (18)
REFERENCES:
14) Robert Carroll, Patterns and Process of Vertebrate Evolution, Cambridge University Press, 1997, p.25
15) K.S.Thomson, Morphogenesis and Evolution, Oxford University Press, 1988,
p. 98
S.J.Gould, ' Evolution's Erratic Pace", Natural History, vol.86, May 1977.
16) Ibid
17) S.G.Gould, and Niles Eldredge, ' Punctuated Equilibbiria: The Tempo and Mode of Evolution Reconsidersd', Paleobiology, 3 (2), 1977, p. 115 .
18) N.Eldredge and 1. Tattersall, The Myths of Human Evolution, Colubia University Press 1982, p. 59
Continue:
Just so you "Creationists" understand, Francis Collins believes Evolution not the "Creationism" nonsense.
Dawkins seems to arguing that it is scientifically impossible for people to live in different symbolic universes and that god must live in his.
This is a seriously underrated debate.
For those who think of themselves as intellectually honest and willing to be challenged by a renowned chemist on the immense problems of the origins of life without any guidance or intelligence.
The Origin of Life: An Inside Story – 2016 Lectures (with James Tour)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_zQXgJ-dXM4&t=19s
James Tour: The Mystery of the Origin of Life
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zU7Lww-sBPg&t=2039s
Dr. Tour on the Origin of Life at Syracuse University Cru
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Gsa58Rm8Sk&t=338s
Check the provocative book by a famous philosopher and atheist: Mind and Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature is Almost Certainly False Thomas Nagel
Darwin himself said, in a scientific context, “A fair result can be obtained only by fully stating and balancing the facts and arguments on both sides of each question.”
So, I would like to share with you some resources to investigate and decide in an unbiased as possible way where the truth lies (even though we both realize our own bias and must exercise intellectual honesty and humility to recognize this bias/worldview). These resources have helped me come to my own position and have strengthened it. I have exposed my mind to the strongest points from the leading atheists as well.
Feynman Chaser – The Key to Science (I really love this clip on the difference between experiment & theory)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b240PGCMwV0&list=PLs8SOzOiVcJxKEUSJPNbETAksVLPqNm8I&index=35&t=0s
Watch "Debate | Michael Shermer vs John Lennox Does God Exist" on YouTube
https://youtu.be/y_OPWiXbSDA
Watch "Christopher Hitchens vs John Lennox | Is God Great? Debate" on YouTube
https://youtu.be/5OXPlUCGScY
Watch "Lennox vs Atkins – Can science explain everything? (Official debate video)" on YouTube
https://youtu.be/fSYwCaFkYno
Watch "Richard Dawkins vs John Lennox | The God Delusion Debate" on YouTube
https://youtu.be/zF5bPI92-5o
Watch "Richard Dawkins vs John Lennox | Has Science Buried God? Debate" on YouTube
https://youtu.be/OVEuQg_Mglw
Watch "John Lennox vs Peter Atkins – Can science explain everything? LIVE DEBATE" on YouTube
https://youtu.be/EER1-9nflJY
Watch "Peter Singer vs John Lennox | Is There a God? Debate" on YouTube
https://youtu.be/HoTILnpd3q8
Watch "#92 Debate Lawrence Krauss vs John Lennox Does The Cosmos Leave Space For God 2013" on YouTube
https://youtu.be/B2eZA2kXpc0
Watch "Godless Goodness? John Lennox and Nicholas Christenfeld Discuss the Sources of Beauty and Morality" on YouTube
https://youtu.be/mkKNTs3tbJ4
Watch "Duelling Professors – John Lennox & Peter Atkins" on YouTube
https://youtu.be/5gMS7WTHnho
The Origin of Life: An Inside Story – 2016 Lectures (with James Tour)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_zQXgJ-dXM4&t=19s
James Tour: The Mystery of the Origin of Life
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zU7Lww-sBPg&t=2039s
Dr. Tour on the Origin of Life at Syracuse University Cru
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Gsa58Rm8Sk&t=338s
Subject: Watch "Jim Warner Wallace: Cold Case Atheist Detective Challenges the Bible" on YouTube
https://youtu.be/3FzFTGJc7ZY
Watch "J. Warner Wallace Interviewed on the One Minute Apologist" on YouTube
https://youtu.be/39t5UBOmwOY
Watch "The Resurrection Argument That Changed a Generation of Scholars – Gary Habermas at UCSB" on YouTube
https://youtu.be/ay_Db4RwZ_M
Watch "Faith in Science – Cees Dekker & Ralph Wijers" on YouTube
https://youtu.be/qF9FJVn9DRk
Watch "Scientific Evidence for God – Dr. Strauss" on YouTube
https://youtu.be/V48tBF6teSM
Watch "Lecture at the Ohio State University: Dr. Michael Strauss: Do Scientific Discoveries Point to God?" on YouTube
https://youtu.be/k6orZ4-Ynz0
#######
Watch "J. Warner Wallace: In the Beginning – 2018 Xenos Summer Institute" on YouTube
https://youtu.be/h9bt2SKBSJI
Watch "J. Warner Wallace: Tampering with Evidence – 2018 Xenos Summer Institute" on YouTube
https://youtu.be/Ecxc2uU2sBI
Watch "The Moral Evidence for God – J. Warner Wallace – Ohio State 2018" on YouTube
https://youtu.be/VQI7QST6xk0
Watch "The Cold Case for the Resurrection J Warner Wallace" on YouTube
https://youtu.be/4iF-_zCvmrg
Watch "Cold Case Christianity (Part 2) – J. Warner Wallace at Rutgers University Ratio Christi" on YouTube
https://youtu.be/BQvGSg8H9po
Watch "Cold Case Christianity (Part 1) – J. Warner Wallace at Rutgers University Ratio Christi" on YouTube
https://youtu.be/14JkC5at_Fw
##########
3000 Darwin Skeptics
https://www.rae.org/essay-links/darwinskeptics/
Quotes From Scientists on Evolution
https://www.rae.org/essay-links/quotes/
further resources to challenge the honest seekers and skeptics.
The Big Bang Never Happened
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-B2hACS0dQ
Ape Man and the Bible: Will the Real Ape-Man Please Stand Up
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WqONracE3g
50 NOBEL LAUREATES AND OTHER GREAT SCIENTISTS WHO BELIEVE IN GOD
http://nobelists.weebly.com/uploads/4/0/2/0/4020654/50-nobelists-english.pdf
Here it comes, fuck God!
How dreadfully embarrassing and laughable to have someone as unintelligent and poorly spoken as Carson in this debate. Neurosurgeon? I work as a Recovery room nurse- we have very fine neurosurgeons and one of whom nurses are astounded that he ever attained certification. He is a disaster in the operating room, with patients frequently having serious complications that the other surgeons just don’t seem to have to the same degree. Don’t be mislead into believing that ‘MD’ ( or any other letters) behind anyone’s name necessarily lends credibility. He has no place in this discussion.
A mixture of rationalism and outright stupidity in these comments.
I have absolutely no faith in dumbasses…
That would be you, you religious freaks!