Richard Dawkins: Faith School Menace?

Richard Dawkins: Faith School Menace?The number of faith schools in Britain is rising. Around 7,000 publicly funded schools - one in three - now has a religious affiliation.

As the coalition government paves the way for more faith-based education by promoting 'free schools', the renowned atheist and evolutionary biologist Professor Richard Dawkins says enough is enough.

In this passionately argued film, Dawkins calls on us to reconsider the consequences of faith education, which, he argues, bamboozles parents and indoctrinates and divides children.

The film features robust exchanges with former Secretary of State for Education Charles Clarke, Head of the Church of England Education Service Reverend Janina Ainsworth, and the Chair of the Association of Muslim Schools, Dr Mohammed Mukadam.

It also features insights from child psychologists and key players in faith education as well as insights from both parents and pupils.

Dawkins also draws on his own personal history as a father, arguing that the government must stop funding new faith schools, and urges society to respect a child's right to freedom of belief.

Watch the full documentary now (playlist)

328
9.03
12345678910
Ratings: 9.03/10 from 63 users.

More great documentaries

220 Comments / User Reviews

  1. Jonathon Wisnoski

    Well of course, religion if not a replacement for science or an alternative.

    Religion should be in addition to getting an education not an alternative.

  2. Wendy

    Thanks for posting this one! I was hoping it would be up soon.

  3. DD

    amazing. it worries me just as much thats why i think schools would benefit from this website.

  4. secular fahime

    well we can't watch it here in UK for copyright ground of channel 4

  5. Juancho

    This was an excellent documentary, once again i'm extremely satisfied and continue to believe that me stumbling onto this website is one of the greatest things thats happened to me.

    As far as the topic goes, I dont believe ANYONE can argue with the fact that children are extremely gullible and do not question what authority figures tell them at an early age.

    Which is precisely the reason why they should not be brainwashed into a belief that they just cannot understand at that point in their lives.

    I was raised catholic, went to a private school and I went through the holy hoops of communion and so on. I did it all not because I wanted to, but because it was what was expected of me from my family.

    The worst part is that as I went to sunday school and church, as I'm there I remember thinking things like ... "I dont want to be here." or "WHY do I have to learn these songs and stories?" I didnt get it, I just memorized everything and treated it pretty much as it were a regular school where i'm learning math and reading comprehension.

    As I grew older I became more and more distant from religious activities once I was given more and more choice in the matter.
    At one point in life after I thought that I always HAD to go to church ... my parents began to give me the option of whether or not I wanted to go to church or not, and I always said no, until they pretty much stopped asking me and let me do what it is I wanted.

    If my parents had continued to nurture my religious side, I hate to think what I would've become.

    School and Religion should be two completely different entities and should never be taught in the same establishment. Religion only divides us as a civilization and creates conflict and all types of resentment for absolutely bogus reasons.

    When you think of a world without religion, all you see is peace and love and everyone striving for a better future for the species as a whole.

    A world with religion is stuck and cannot advance.

  6. Philonous

    @Juancho
    Interesting point you made there, and I have empathy for your past circumstances because I didn't want to be in church anymore; I felt like this whole time I've been forced to go to church and I've been indoctrinated to be loyal to my parent's world-view.

    I didn't like it because as I slowly grew up I didn't feel like I could relate myself to the religious narratives/myths, and I was never satisfied with the theology at the time. As I read the bible I became very discouraged because most of the accounts or description of God contradicted what I thought God was like; It's not just what I personally thought of God but what people generally taught me about God. But all I found was this completely anthropomorphic deity who is seems cruel and disturbing. From then on I didn't feel the need to depend on revealed religions.

    Nonetheless I disagree with you that a world without religion is free from the social injustice we find in the world; most of the problems that we have in the world is not produced by religious conflicts, most of them are generated by the flaws of social institutions and corrupt political practices. The problem with religion, in my opinion, is not that it creates conflict but that it becomes irrelevant to the conflicts in the world.

    I'm not saying this to all religions, because I know or heard of many theologians and religious intellectuals who feel that religious institutions should help the world instead of simply converting people. But these group of people are a minority (although influential). They are distinct from the more popular faith represented by the born-again evangelical; they present social policies that doesn't seem relevant to social progress. Most of them are against abortion, gays, evolution, euthanasia, etc. Their solution and diagnosis of the problems in society is irrelevant to us because they depend on presuppositions that we, as a open and free society, do no feel obliged to accept as a absolute world-view.

  7. vicki

    <<>>

    Oh puhleeeeeze...... and add a whopping dose of naivte to your Utopia!! Or haven't you noticed that war and hate usually collide around very non-religious topics like peak oil and political control and control of diminishing resources? I'm always amazed at the naivte of atheists who claim that human beings will at last achieve world peace if they just give up their faith in God. What a load of post-hippie doped-up horse hockey! It is human nature to love and to hate, to wage peace and to wage war. The one doesn't exist without the other, and they exist with or without belief in God, you dingbat.

    I work with several atheists in my office, and they are by far the most difficult, belligerent people I've ever met. Of course, they are also spoiled brat Millenials, so I guess it could also be a generational thing. I can hardly wait for the national debt to fall squarely on their meagre little taxpaying shoulders, ha. I laugh at their pain.

    Atheist Utopianism is a lame excuse for a new religion (yes, you are a new religion!), if it offers no better understanding of the human condition than that.

    Having said that, I'm astonished the UK funds religious schools at all, but I'm not very familiar with the way you do things in the UK.

  8. ez2b12

    Wow, I can totally relate to you guys. I grew up in a baptist family and my grandfather was the preacher of the local church. So I was indoctrinated and brainwashed thoroughly. When I got to school though it all changed. I began to learn about science and history and see the world for what it really is. Then I went to college and majored in theology and history, thiers an eye opener for you. Of course I could no longer accept this pathetic world view that had been crammed down my throat all my life. Now I know all the religees will say that this is the reaosn i hate religion but they are dead wrong. Many of the things that my family supported and pushed on me I still support, for instance I am still a democrat and a liberal- just like my family. The truth is once you have a degree in theology and history you will never be able to swallow christianity as nothing more than what it is- a extension of polytheistic religions and symbols. I will not go into that any deeper though as I have done it too many times on this site and I am sure others have something valuable to say. If you want my opinion look around at other threads and you'll see what i think. It's good to see others that were indoctrinated got out of it as well, good luck to you both.

  9. ez2b12

    @ Vicki

    Well its good to see your religion has made you so well adjusted and easy going. Your right about war being centered around other things most of the time. Religion is just the way they talk you into going out and dying for a system that has done nothing but lie, cheat, and steal. I love the way you beligerent christians get so angry and upset, what happened to all that inner peace that your obviousely empty god is supposed to deliver I wonder. You have a nice day Vicki, try weed next time it works better.

  10. Angel R.

    parents have the right to make choices. the choice to beat their children into believing something and nobody can tell them that is wrong. the system is there to tell them that beating up children is wrong. Dawkins is there to tell them that making children go to a church school is morally wrong because church schools separate people. they implant different ideas.

    An idea is only respected if its a good one, not if its one that makes no sense.

    Mr. Flanagan does not know how to process these words.

  11. Achems Razor

    @vicki:

    Well, you sound very belligerent to me, I take it then you are an atheist. You can't be religious? if you are then heaven forbid!

    More wars and bloodshed...Hmmm

  12. eireannach666

    @viki

    You stereotype atheism like a racist. What's your deal? Are you trying to get another inquisition started?

    Atheism is nor new at all and has been around as long as anything else. Also it is not a religion its a way of life and a way of thinking. Its the belief in no belief. Its the belief of fact , logic , reason and evidence.

    I don't know who you work with but they do not speak for or represent the rest of us.

    Why so hateful?

  13. ez2b12

    @ Angel
    Surely you are not supporting parents beating children? Are you? Your post is kind of vague and hard to follow.I am giving you the benefit of the doubt here though dont get me wrong. Please explain as I do not want to mislead others about what you meant.

  14. Angel R.

    @ ez2b12

    haha, yeah your right. i prolly wasnt very clear although i wanted to sound sarcastic in the first sentence. im sorry its not my 1st language.
    but no im not in favor of beating children.

  15. ez2b12

    @ Angel

    Whoo!! what a relief. Just kidding I knew you couldn't be in favor of that. You are completely excused I only know one language, my native tongue- and I'm not very good with it. You guys that know more than one language impress me. Thanks for clearing it up though.

  16. ez2b12

    This video will not buffer right for me for some reason. I have no issues with watching anything else on this site so what's up? I keep having to pause it and let it buffer for a long time then hit play. Eventually it catches up and I have to do it again, anyone having this issue themselves?

  17. ez2b12

    I give up!! I cant watch this and Richard Dawkins is my favorite, this sux. I even tried to go to you tube and it does the same thing. I have it set at a low resolution but still it will not work.

  18. ez2b12

    O.K. its not just this doc it is every one on the entire site running as slow as possible tonight. I went out and did a speed test and my connection is running just fine. I'll come back tommorrow I guess, maybe it will work then. The one night I have nothing else to do and this happens, love my luck.

  19. Achems Razor

    @ez2b12:

    I have, and had no problem watching the doc, buffers very nicely, I run linux systems, don't know if that has anything to do with it, but runs perfectly for me.

  20. Achems Razor

    @ez2b12:

    Are you on cable, cable will run slow if a lot of subscribers, or if you are on phone line, make sure your phone line from your dsl filter is under 10 ft long. the shorter the better.

  21. eireannach666

    Works for me on the computer but not the blackberry.

  22. Jane

    What's going to happen to these kids when they hit university and come face to face with ideas that have developed from a much wider view of the universe than is given by the Bible, the Koran or other religious texts?

    Dawkin's has, I believe, blundered in his approach to this problem by allowing the religious institutions to frame the question as one of a parents vs society rights over their children. Society, by law, has a clear and long established right over a child's education; kids have to go to school from, roughly, the ages of 5 to 16. Parents have no choice, no 'rights' in this.

    Even though a secular education is mandated by law, every parent has the right to seek the best secular education they can for their child nor does society stop parents from teaching their children the religion of their choice.

    The real question is "Does a parent have the right to force all of society to pay for their childrens religious education?"

    Religious institutions may argue that, as parents are taxpayers, and society is formed of taxpayers, they are paying. However, everyone pays school taxes, not just parents.

    Or they may argue that some religious schools receive a portion of public funding so therefore all religious schools should receive public funding.

    While it is true that some religious based schools have received public funding, the historical context must be considered; society was dealing, for the most part, with only two dominant religious groups: Catholics and Protestants.

    The school funding situation arose because of the way society was structured; the structure of society has changed and so, too, should the public education system. Rather than restructing it based on religion it is more practical to remove religion from the equation as, while yesterday there were two dominant religions, today there are four, tomorrow there may be six or eight or a dozen until at some point public education will become completely impractical at which point we will all lose; parents, children, and society.

  23. HardToFathom

    It is hard to fathom that this is still a daily topic in the 21st century. People are too stupid and ignorant to acknowledge scientific knowledge but seek out all kinds of clever ways to justify being a sheep.

    No wonder our civilization is crumbling like apple pie crust on a Sunday morning. War, killing, using, abusing and exploiting is what defines the majority of the human animal.

    Although people should have the right to believe in whatever they wish, religious indoctrination should be considered a crime against humanity especially when it comes to children.

  24. Dr. Dunkleosteus

    I love the Richard Dawkins "stare". Whenever he is interviewing someone and they spout some complete BS, he doesn't get angry...initially. Instead he just stares at them with this expression that seems to say "are you completely bats*** crazy?!"... but always in a calm, reserved manner. Hahaha, ah, he is a joy to watch.

  25. Charles B.

    "Dawkins also draws on his own personal history as a father, arguing that the government must stop funding new faith schools, and urges society to respect a child’s right to freedom of belief."

    Yeah, right! He means freedom to believe in evolution only, otherwise, he'd be supporting faith-based schools! Eveolutionists are some of the most intollerant non-choice people on earth, but like to say that they are. If he had his way I'm sure there'd be zero faith based schools. Now where's the choice in that?!?

  26. Charles B.

    P.S. If I don't homeschool, my kids are going in a private faith-based school just to avoid the such as forced atheistic indoctrinators such as Dawkins until they are old enough to make wise decisions on their own.

  27. SunCharriot

    @charles b

    you believe in brain washing because religion is based on absolutely no facts. Since thats the case I'm sure we can come up with better made up stories that stand up to basic login. Since man edited and re edited the bible so can we. We should add evolution and big bang into the bible so the kids dont realize what a bunch of bs it is. They wont know any better bcause we can just forced them to learn from an early age and scare them with eternal hell. /sarcasm

    If its between home schooling or private faith based school..please send them to school. How can you send them to a school based on a particle faith then in the next breath say, "until they are old enough to make a wise decision on their own." Wow. If you really felt that way wouldnt you send them to a school that taught all faiths? Then they can make a decision on their own?

    Funny thing is you cant comprehend what I just said because you cant imagine life without religion. Not an attack on you personally, just pointing out what brain washing can do to a person.

  28. Tor

    I loved the ending!

  29. Jack

    Salty water and fresh water don't mix. You're the one that wants to be a doctor is that right?

    LOL

  30. Cliff T

    Is there an alternative source because this is blocked.

  31. ez2b12

    @ Jack

    Who are you adressing your vague post to? What exactly does it even mean? I can't tell if you support or oppose the points made in this documentary. I think you were addressing it to Dr. Dunkleosteus but I am not sure, even if you are what did it mean? Maybe I'm stupid here I don't know, no one else seems to have been confused about it.

  32. coyote03

    put them fangs away ez haha :P Jack was just quoting a hilarious line from the movie when Dawkins asks a young muslim girl that question :) The scene where he is at the Muslim school is very well done! The entire thing is very well done! Another amazing documentary!

  33. abc

    I totally agree with Prof. Richard Dawkins. Religion is the main cause of seggregation in this modern world. Nobody knows whether god exists or not, it is just a possibility. Whether there if life beyond Earth is also just a possibility. So when two possibilities combine in this scenerio, it could very well be inferred that God as we know it is just another species from another solar system or galaxy. It is high time the modern world dumped religion in favour of a new more inclusive religion, Science. Faith schools to say the least is like sending your children to school in the medieval ages.

  34. ez2b12

    no fangs, I was confused thats all. I could not watch this as I am having connection issues, I think. Maybe I would have gotten it if I could have. Not a problem though, no fangs I promise to be a good boy.Some guy on another thread has hi-jacked my name and is spreading bs because I got ill and went off I suppose. Maybe I should chill, huh. Time to go see the good dr. mary jane green I suppose.

  35. Cliff T

    I love it when people say Atheism is the new religion like vicki did. People are all born as atheists (to be an atheist you don't have a belief in a deity or any set of beliefs) so really, atheism is older than any religion.

    If you ask an atheist if the chicken or the egg came first they would all say (if they think about it logically) the egg. If you ask a theist of most religions it was the chicken (as it was created from supernatural entity). If you say chicken you don't even think about the process, it just happens.

    Religion is also a very dangerous tool as it can be used to set up barriers against others from other beliefs. It can be used to justify wars (it's the equivalent of putting on a blindfold and plugging your ears) on religious grounds even if the real motive isn't at all.

    Atheists just see how dangerous it is to indoctrinate these dogmatic views upon impressionable youngsters. When any action is taken, theists get very angry because they have been brainwashed to the point of no return already. Theists don't, can't see that they have been taken in by the long con so it is natural for them to defend their (directed) choices in a belief in a god.

  36. gulli

    good film and a good point

    religion is a way too influential with people
    living isnt complicated
    and it pretty much happens by itself

    science is the way to go
    that is is you wanna go smart

    but you are always free to be dumb so maybe religion is good in that way. the freedom of dumbness

  37. j.

    Great doc, i am so glad that i was given the freedom of choice by my parents. I have a catholic mum and a c of e dad, and i am an atheist, through and through.
    Really glad that after their schooling in faith based schools, they came to the decision to let me make my own mind up.
    People have the right to believe what they want and parents should be there to give ALL the information, not the bits that fallin line with their own religious beliefs.
    Imagine what the world would be like if we all followed our parents without question. OMG that is a scary thought.

  38. ez2b12

    I finally got see the documentary, hooray for me. I loved it, as always when Dawkins is involved. This one was particulary good though as I also love children. Wasn't that ending just beautiful, it really touched me to see children asking Dawkins questions and him replying in such a gentle and correct way. He was very careful not present anything that is not absolutedly known for fact as if it where.

    Of course we always have someone like Charles that wants to disagree.Thats o.k. though that was too beautiful for me to get angry right now. Of course he wants them to only believe in evolution as the true mechanism of how we got to be human. It is a fact and can not be questioned seriousely, much too much proof for this. Sure we can debate about how evolution works to some degree and this has happened through out the years. It has been refined many times since it was first proposed by Darwin. But surely anyone of any intelligence knows that it is the way we came to be and has been proven beyond doubt.

    I can not believe that the Muslim science teacher did not know why apes still existed. I did think Dawkins could have been more clear about this to the children, i don't think they really understood his explanation. He should have told them that the ape we evolved from doesn't exist anymore and was called a hominid. That when speciation takes place several different species may come from a common ancestor, in this case a hominid. That we did not decend from any of the now existing species of apes but we all came from a common ancestor. He did say this but it was a phrased a little over thier heads I thought and I hated to see them miss what may be thier only chance to get the truth.

    Now I get your post Jack- hahaha!! He did kind of make a sly point thier didn't he. i hope the kid didn't get it though. No need to make her feel bad, its not her fault at all. She will get thier one day maybe, I hope so.She has some real indoctrination to fight her way out of though. Mine was nothing compared to that.

  39. Garro

    This is Dawkins at his cherry-picking best. How can people not see through this man? I don’t believe in a god, but I wish there was one just so he could smite this new breed of militant atheists. It is Dawkin’s followers who really give me the heebie-jeebies though, they keep on repeating the same arguments like some type of cult. Their narrow-minded view of the world is on a par with any other fundamentalist – scary people. I found this documentary painful to watch. If only Dawkins was half as concerned with the real problems in the British education system; the fact that you have to come from a rich family like he did to get a good education. Sorry if my rant is offensive to athiests; I know their beliefs are important to them.

  40. Joe_nyc

    This doc gives me a smile knowing that we(USa) isn't the only country with religees messin with public education. :)

  41. Charles B.

    SunCharriot: You parent your kids and I'll parent mine. Send them to public school if you wish, but if you have another choice, then choose something better! The reason why I want to homeschool is to avoid i-d-i-o-t-s such as yourself that want me to jeoprodise my kids' education, safety and perhaps even their very soul by letting people like you teach them material contrary to everything I hold to be true. Yeah, right! If you were half as open minded as you think you are, then you'd support options such as homeschooling and private faith-based schools, but you don't want diversity, you want atheistic non-religious conformity. Don't you? Well, don't you? I thought so.

  42. Achems Razor

    @Charles B:

    You are not truthful to yourself or anybody else, on this forum.

    You want to be lord and master of your children's education and fate, even on their thoughts, because of your beliefs. You will give them no quarters, absolutely no alternatives on anything that you deem contrary to your beliefs,

    Therefore you want them to be puppets only on your wishes and demands, heaven forbid that they might have thoughts of their own, minus any of your man-made gods... Now are you going to call me a liar.

  43. i am become death

    Numbers 31:17-18 (King James Version)
    17Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.
    18But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.
    quran 4'34
    Men are in charge of women by what Allah has given one over the other and what they spend from their wealth. So righteous women are devoutly obedient, guarding in [the husband's] absence what Allah would have them guard. But those [wives] from whom you fear arrogance - advise them; [then if they persist], forsake them in bed; and [finally], strike them. But if they obey you [once more], seek no means against them. Indeed, Allah is ever Exalted and Grand.

  44. i am become death

    don't blame me its gods joke.

  45. Lisa O

    @Achems Razor

    Thank you for being so direct with Mr. Charles B. I was brought up with parents like him. I went to Christian school for four years of my childhood, and it did a lot of psychological damage. I hope watching documentaries gives him a wider perspective. It takes longer for some, than others.

    While I believe parents have the right to teach their children about what they believe, I feel they only have the right to do so if they teach them about other viewpoints and belief systems. Parents should also be prepared to tell children WHY they believe the way they do. Because my family does or because this is the one true religion is not appropriate.

    I don't think Richard Dawkins is suggesting we indoctrinate children with the belief (or non-belief) oF atheism. He said he believes studying religious texts is important, but should not be limited to one religion or presented as science. I agree.

    Children should be taught about many different perspectives, and should be allowed to make up their own minds, as adults. Indoctrinating or forcing beliefs of any kind on a child is not fair, and should not be the right of any parent, teacher, or clergy. In addition, children should never be discriminated against for the belief of their parents!

  46. silkop

    I think Dawkins got it a little wrong this time.

    Q: Conan, what's good in life?
    A: To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their women.

    Not "to be an inquisitive little brat, pester parents with difficult questions, and hear the exasperation of their answers".

  47. The ImPoster

    Jonathon Wisnoski
    "Well of course, religion is(correction?) not a replacement for science or an alternative. Religion should be in addition to getting an education not an alternative."

    Glad to see it start off like this.
    ---------------------------------------
    Juancho
    "children are extremely gullible and do not question what authority figures tell them at an early age."

    A well nurtured mind questions everything presented to it; which sadly falls mostly on the parents shoulders since they are the true *authority* figure in the child's mind.

    "When you think of a world without religion, all you see is peace and love and everyone striving for a better future for the species as a whole.
    A world with religion is stuck and cannot advance."

    Response from Philonous (a like minded individual to Juancho)
    "I disagree with you that a world without religion is free from the social injustice we find in the world; most of the problems that we have in the world is not produced by religious conflicts, most of them are generated by the flaws of social institutions and corrupt political practices. The problem with religion, in my opinion, is not that it creates conflict but that it becomes irrelevant to the conflicts in the world." <---- extremely accurate cause he says most which doesn't exclude *holy* wars
    ---------------------------------------
    vicki
    "Atheist Utopianism is a ...... new religion"

    eireannach666 responded "Atheism.... is not a religion its a way of life and a way of thinking. Its the belief in no belief. Its the belief of fact , logic , reason and evidence."

    Is this not a definition of religion being religion is a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe.
    ---------------------------------------
    Angel R.
    "church school is morally wrong because church schools separate people. they implant different ideas."

    I have to disagree as this is indoctrination against religion; they co-exist and should both be taught separately in the same institutions. Furthermore on this anything *questionable* should be left til after the age of reason (Including Science). Children are able to learn much faster at a younger age teach them the skills that fit in with society (Compassion, Math, Language, or Art). All these are MUCH more important topics to teach a small child to increase their potential and open their mind to new ideas.
    -----------------------------------
    Jane
    "What’s going to happen to these kids when they hit university and come face to face with ideas that have developed from a much wider view of the universe than is given by ... religious texts?"

    Good question if they have a inquisitive mind they will reach their own conclusions on both subjects. Which is more important then forcing ideas on people.

    "more practical to remove religion from the equation"

    I must disagree as religion is sadly one of the last bastions of teaching love and harmony.
    --------------------------------------
    HardToFathom
    "It is hard to fathom that this is still a daily topic in the 21st century" <--- because its a very important topic maybe?
    "....human animal. Religious indoctrination should be considered a crime against humanity"

    Glad to see you consider us still animals and not *biological machines* but its only indoctrination if the individual involved cannot reason and is a sheep. (as you put it)
    --------------------------------------
    @ Dr. Dunkleosteus ...... yes he dose have the ability to *reasonably argue* while remaining calm which is a way to get other humans to believe the same thing as you. (win a argument)
    --------------------------------------
    Charles B. "If I don’t homeschool, my kids are going in a private faith-based school" <---- i support this because they at least learn the moral values that religion entails before science and can *reason* their way into their own life understanding.

    Response from SunCharriot "If you really felt that way wouldnt you send them to a school that taught all faiths?" <-- they exist?

    Response from Charles B.
    "You parent your kids and I’ll parent mine... open minded... you’d support options such as homeschooling and private faith-based schools." <--- Freedom of choice

    Response from Achems Razor
    "You want to be lord and master of your children’s education and fate, even on their thoughts, because of your beliefs. You will give them no quarters, absolutely no alternatives on anything that you deem contrary to your beliefs." <--- is that not what you attempt to do when discussing thiesm with others on this forum :-)

    Obviously if the education system is a good one the child will grow up with the ability to reason and decide for themselfs so this whole arguement is outlandish.
    -------------------------------------
    @abc "Religion is the main cause of segregation in this modern world." I
    disagree -isms are the main cause of segregation (nationalism, racism) which is mainly caused by not having compassion to understand other humans.(understanding or life)
    -------------------------------------
    Cliff
    "I love it when people say Atheism is the new religion like vicki did. People are all born as atheists"

    This is amusing to me because you eventual make a concise decision what to believe.

    "chicken or the egg came first... atheist say the egg... theist..... chicken" <--- lol chicken came first it had to *evolve* after all who kept that egg warm ;-)

    "Religion is also a very dangerous tool"
    As any tool goes it can be used for good or bad means.

    "When any action is taken, theists get very angry because they have been brainwashed to the point of no return already."
    That would be plausible as i see atheist get angry at people who challenge their non-belief but brainwash no because we have the freedom to change our beliefs at any time.
    ---------------------------------------
    gulli
    "religion is good in that way. the freedom of dumbness"
    its only *dumb* if they are slow to learn or understand. The majority of theists are more compassionate and therefor they could say your nonacceptance in their beliefs are *dumb*. Since most will learn of evolution and understand it.(acceptance not required to be classified as dumb)
    ---------------------------------------
    abc
    "He was very careful not to present anything that is not absolutely known for fact as if it where." <-- Reasonable arguing at its best
    "he wants them to only believe in evolution as the true mechanism of how we got to be human. It is a fact and can not be questioned seriously" <---- Indoctrination?
    "It has been refined many times since it was first proposed by Darwin. But surely anyone of any intelligence knows that it is the way we came to be and has been proven beyond doubt."

    If its refined obviously its not fact (verified information) yet hence Theory of Evolution.

    "Dawkins could have been more clear about this to the children.... He should have told them .... speciation ..... That we did not descend from any of the now existing species of apes but we all came from a common ancestor."

    This is way to complex a idea to introduce to children. Which is why he didn't explain it that way.
    ---------------------------------------
    Garro
    "Dawkins at his best. How can people not see through this man? .... Dawkin’s followers.... repeating the same arguments like some type of cult. Their narrow-minded view... is.... fundamentalist.... If only Dawkins was half as concerned with.... the fact that you have to come from a rich family.... to get a good education. Sorry if my rant is offensive to athiests; I know their beliefs are important to them."

    VERY good post not only are you able to relate to athiests; You can also address a true concern for the education system.

  48. The ImPoster

    My opinions on this film are as follows it is extreamly biased by taking a conflicting opinion into a system that is f*ed up much more by other means then religion; Is not a major concern to the progression of human education. Uses passive argument to instill a ideology on the viewer and takes no look at the opposite side of the argument.

    THEREFORE
    Only recommended to people who are atheists(non-believers) or en-lighted theists looking for a good laugh or theists looking to understand a atheist standpoint.

    PS since it will become of concern(by people who use this forum) i am neither theist or atheist because i don't need a definition to define myself. Philosopher maybe? Also Regardless of belief i present this.

    Creationism - religious belief that humanity, life, the Earth, and the universe are the creation of a supernatural being.

    Big Bang - an event which led to the formation of the universe

    Seems to me the only difrence is the *supernatural* being part. Big bang = big ball of everything that exploded out and eventually consolidated into everything. Where did this big ball come from (how did it come to existence). What was the cause of the eventual explosion (Creation) of the universe; possibly the willingness for matter to *experience* itself. Absurd idea but leads me to this bit. Even Science has holes that can be poked all through it.

    I believe we are all connected (i.e. part of the creator) an the only way you can be happy yourself is if the ones around you are also happy (religion) or accept things that others tell you and not question things as the scientific method dictates. Anyone who hasn't used the scientific method against our current understanding of Evolution, Big Bang, etc. cannot see the similarity's of religion and science. Hence why Darwin, Einstein and other exquisite people were all religious to some degree. Wake up and use your mind...... reach your own conclusions......... and question everything.... that is the true human potential anything less can be considered *indoctrination*. You are a experiencing creature and if all you do is support a idea you are missing out on alot of the equation.

    Peace, Love, and Harmony to all

  49. Achems Razor

    @The ImPoster:

    Read your blog with interest, seems that you are not an empiricist, a tabula rasa type, more into Kant philosophy maybe? or is it new age type supernaturalism? Of course quantum mechanics say we form our own reality, since you are basically talking about a conscious universe, the observer effect, is that what you had in mind? Hmmm

  50. gulli

    to The ImPoster

    It starts with Santa , be nice or no presents. Here where I live Santas mother Grýla came and ate you if you didn't behave and her cat ate you or took you i cant remember if your clothes were dirty.

    So Santa / god is a way to learn when back in times people needed a system like that. But its not needed now days. This carrot technique. Or donkey follow carrot technique.

  51. The ImPoster

    @Achems Razor
    Very possible; like i said i don't find interest to define myself but would defiantly say i believe in a conscious universe. Hadn't heard of Kant philosophy so gonna go do some research on it right quick (so much interesting stuff out there). From initial findings though the part on Immortality looks keenly accurate on my belief of that matter so maybe. Might also be tapping into his knowledge who knows. :-P

  52. The ImPoster

    @gulli
    Yes i agree the religious system is outdated due to advancements; but at this point in time i would contest our monotheistic system of barter is outdated also. (We consume resources for short lived objects using materials that could be used for better objects of the same classification). The real advancement of spirituality is long coming and may be what the mayans predicted maybe..... I hope this time we will come out on top and not need representation to benefit the sheepole. As this seems to me to be the eventual disease that causes problems for us as a species. Democracy works in theory if its not converted to a Marxist State over time. (happening in the US and UK from what i can tell correct me if i'm wrong)

    #Achems Razor
    CI is indeed the fundamental principle of morality. To refrain from suicide is a perfect duty toward oneself; to refrain from making promises you have no intention of keeping is a perfect duty toward others; to develop one's talents is an imperfect duty toward oneself; and to contribute to the happiness of others an imperfect duty toward others. (an example of where it breaks down in the philosophy for me ).

    Morality in my opinion would dictate that we treat others how we wish to be treated. Hence developing skills/happiness and contributing to others skills/happiness also works in our favor as a singular unit and the whole of humanity.

    Many religions do speak of what goes around comes around; So i try not to poke fun at (attack) people or wall people off (defend). From experience this usually progresses into quite the intellectual conversations of shared knowledge and advancement. Though i must admit there are some loonies out there :-)

  53. esmuziq

    @ vicki so your must be a christian ?

  54. Achems Razor

    @The ImPoster:

    Yes, I understand where you are coming from. Have a good evening.

  55. Charles B.

    Lisa O09/03/2010 at 20:23 @Achems Razor

    Thank you for being so direct with Mr. Charles B. I was brought up with parents like him. I went to Christian school for four years of my childhood, and it did a lot of psychological damage. I hope watching documentaries gives him a wider perspective. It takes longer for some, than others.

    Lisa: Sorry you turned your back on your parent's faith (whatever that may have been). Nonetheless, I have a different story. I was forced in public school to learn evolution (including tests on it) starting with elementary school. I even believed my dad was "evolving" by his lips getting bigger and bigger every time he drank from the Pepsi bottle! I believed black people were closer to the original monkey and were lower on the evolution scale because to me they looked more like the picture, and it ended with a white man, not black. I can say that I was psychologically "damaged" by such teachings which went against my parent's faith, but they didn't even think such would be taught in school, and had no idea the damage it was causing. I felt a personal sense of worthlessness. I remember it. If we all evolved, then we are ultimately without purpose; accidents. Even in my young mind, I had concepts of this as the logical conclution to evolution. It wasn't until I was much older that I learned it was all just "theory!" and not the "Gospel Truth" that my teachers lead me to believe.

    I would have loved to have gone to a faith-based school where they honored God and taught pure science without the fallacy. If I wanted to study evolution in college, I could have. To endanger a child's soul when they cannot yet make that decision for themselves is utter foolishness. As a parent you make the choice to let your kids eat candy or not; you make the choice to let them play with knives and guns or not (BB guns, I should say); you make the choice to let them go to the movies with friends alone or not. All of those are moral choices in some ways as you are exposing them to ideas and concepts by your parenting.

    My choice to give my children the very best start in life is by giving them the concept of God's love first. If they choose to not accept it later on, that is their choice while an adult. You yourself chose to turn your back on all things sacred, didn't you? Hopefully if I do a good and loving job with my kids, they shall not do the same.

    Razor: My kids are more valuable to me than life itself. Did you teach your kids your own personal (atheistic) values, or just neglect them totally while they were growing up? Did you ever even suggest that aliens might be real, or not, or what they see on TV, or did you let them make thier own choices at age 3 about the matter? Why can't I do the same? What you said really hurt me. :-(

    The ImPoster: You seem pretty sharp. Hard to believe you read every post that carefully. Remind me never to try and debate you at anything, right or wrong!

  56. Enzo

    @ The ImPoster

    Karma dude

  57. ez2b12

    @ charles B.

    Its not our problem or fault if you where/are too simple to understand evolution. I have witnessed your pathetic brand of trolling one too many times on this site. If it where up to me you wouldn't have any children as someone so simple shouldn't be allowed to raise a mirror image of them selves and pollute the world with more idiocy.Maybe your kid will think you are a big lipped monkey drinking form a pepsi bottle to, i hope not but from the way you talk I would not doubt it.Poor Charles exposed to the truth in public school. You got beat up a lot didn't you. I would have took your lunch money daily.

  58. ez2b12

    By the way Charles where is this soul that we are endangering? Can you tell us?Is it in the head, lungs, balls, where is it? What is it? How does it work and whta isd its purpose. Im glad you are not a doctor. "I see you have a broken soul thier, take this pill and call me in the morning." You are a laugh man.

  59. ez2b12

    Quickest way to get me to flame- mess with my Dawkins or call me a liar.

  60. Epicurus

    @Charles, its so sad that you were taught such terrible inaccurate things about reality. that is certainly not what evolution or science ever thought. you must have had a terrible teacher or as a normal child, many questions but no one to ask so you formulated your own weird ideas like you just stated up there.

    now you realize how your kids feel.

    you were also forced to learn the theory of gravity...and germ theory (i thought demons made you sick...maybe germ theory is another lie right?)

    i hope you actually watch this video and listen Charles. because what you are doing is child abuse. NO parents are NOT allowed to teach their children whatever they want. just like you cant teach them the alphabet goes backwards, or to be racist, you also shouldnt be able to lie to them and deny them certain facts like evolution.

    i really didnt want to comment on this one because this is one of the reasons i am most against religion and i really dont want to get heated.

    but teaching your children lies makes them stupid. you forget children ALSO have rights such as the right not to be indoctrinated into believing nonsense or into denying fact.

  61. Achems Razor

    @Charles B:

    You know as well as I do, that by instilling your religion on your children at such an early age, that you will forever mar them from even examining other venues in life, because they will be scared, scared to delve into anything that goes against the grain of what you have taught them. And also scared of faltering on their allegiance to your gods, for fear of reprisals.

    They will then question all science, especially evolution. You will put them into a quandry, you will formulate there minds by your own beliefs, will they have a choice? no they will not! just as yourself was because of your parents instilling there religion on you at a young and impressionable age, because all they will think is that your creationism is the get out and go as you thought when young. period.

    I personally think it should be against the law to instill religion that way on young undeveloped minds.

    If this hurts you , then am sorry, am not picking on you personally but all religee's in general that take this venue.

  62. ez2b12

    I can't believe people are still talking about evolution being a theory, this is so old and i@#$%&*. I think that they know that in science theory means something totally different but they still use it as a tool to deny with. This type of lie, yes lie not mistake, is indicative of the Christian mentality. Yet they claim to have superior morals.

    Christians in the defense of thier twisted beliefs and denial of scientific fact are the most immoral people I have ever met. How many times must we catch them lying and intentionally misrepresenting facts before the world realizes they are the very definition of immorality. People like Charles are the leaders of this type of behavior, they know better but do not care how many of their own moral standards they violate to get their point across or brainwash another child.

    I'm sick of it and have started to practice militant atheism again. I had stopped as I felt maybe they needed their childish beliefs in order to cope. This is not the case though as much as I want it to be.They are the wolves and their sheep clothing is all in tatters and rags leaving them exposed for what they really are.

  63. eireannach666

    Ok I'm coming back here again. The other thread is giving me dejavu. Its like being a broken record while someone humps a cat.

  64. eireannach666

    @EZ

    Yeah I'm with you on that one. Don't pop off about Dawkins.

    @Chuck B

    I was wondering if you can tell me one scientific theory that you do support and why. It needs to be about either the origins of life and/or man or about life outside our galaxy. I didn't pick those for any specific reason. Just want to see if you can at least give an opinion of science without god. Please no bible talk. Jusyt tell me what your thoughts are. Not what you fee$ like jesus would say.

    Of course any religious person can also try to talk without god. I'm tired of hearing nonsense for a while.
    O

  65. right2bwrong

    Children should be exposed to spiritual life as well as science.

  66. Garro

    I think that reading posts from the modern atheist certainly convinces me for the need to instil some type of positive religious doctrine into children. Whether these beliefs are right or wrong is beside the point - so long as they prevent the child from being as vile and bitter as your average atheist (at least the ones you see posting on the different forums these days). The average Bible-bashing Christian might be deluded but at least they seem a bit chirpier about life. I think that we should be teaching children more religion (with the exception of the atheist religion) in school.

  67. i am become death

    sorry about this but garro is obviously ignorant and blind- these 2 are a minute fraction of what religion is on about and children should not think this to be ok-

  68. i am become death

    Numbers 31:17-18 (King James Version)
    17Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.
    18But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.
    quran 4’34
    Men are in charge of women by what Allah has given one over the other and what they spend from their wealth. So righteous women are devoutly obedient, guarding in [the husband's] absence what Allah would have them guard. But those [wives] from whom you fear arrogance – advise them; [then if they persist], forsake them in bed; and [finally], strike them. But if they obey you [once more], seek no means against them. Indeed, Allah is ever Exalted and Grand.

  69. Enzo

    How is it a lie, if that is what one believes to be the truth? I'm sick of the arrogant pricks who populate these forums acting like the authority on all matters. Who are you to say what's right and wrong for someone's children? Raising a child in a religious manner will not 'forever mar them from even examining other venues in life, because they will be scared, scared to delve into anything that goes against the grain of what you have taught them'. They will not 'then question all science, especially evolution'. Ultimately we have a choice to believe what we choose to believe.

  70. i am become death

    Bosnia, Afghanistan, Cyprus, East Timor, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Kashmir, Kosovo, Kurdistan, Middle East, North Ireland, Sudan, Tibet, Uganda - once again a fraction of the list. But holy scripture has told these people their particular god has given them providence and righteous freedom to kill others for their own devices. theres a particularly nasty one about killing pregnant women and suckling infants in the OT if you actually read it. the 10 commandments only has 2 or 3 moral virtues, which obviously pertain to any civilized human or culture outside yahweh. and yes evolution is a theory just like all the rest- gravity,germ,cell and atom. a theory is made up of facts you biased m@#$%&. facts this is what religion and faith avoid.

  71. i am become death

    bosnia,afghanistan,cyprus,east timor,india,indonesia ,iraq,kashmir,kosovo,kurdistan,middle east,north ireland,sudan,tibet,uganda-once again a fraction of the list.but holy scripture has told these people their particular god has given them providence and rightous freedom to kill others for their own devices.theres a particularly nasty one about killing pregnant women and suckling infants in the OT if you actually read it.the 10 commandments only has 2 or 3 moral virtues, which obviosly pertain to any civilised human or culture outside yahweh. and yes evolution is a theory just like all the rest- gravity,germ,cell and atom. a theory is made up of facts. facts this is what religion and faith avoid.

  72. Garro

    Hi IATBD, I judge the worth of things on how they improve or hurt a person's quality of life. I have seen how religion can make people happy; I can’t say the same for atheism.

    While there is a lot of hysteria at the moment against religions like Islam in many countries I think that we will eventually realise that this is just people being ignorant and bigoted. There will always be hate mongers and they tend to attach onto the current trendy belief and pick on whatever group it is fashionable to dislike. At the moment the fashionable belief is atheism and the popular kicking dogs are the Muslims - I have no doubt that this will all change in a few years a people will look back on this as pure folly. One day people like Dawkins will be recognised for the hate-mongers they actually are. I actually have a lot of sympathy for the atheist religion; I personally don’t believe in God/gods – I think though that this belief system has been currently taken over by zealots who are causing a lot of damage.

  73. i am become death

    no theory has ever been proved nor can be,they can only be disproved and when that happens-the theory that doesnt work must be replaced by one that does.
    daewins theory is better supported than newtons.
    only religion will pretend to have absolute proof although they are talking about something that noone can know, and that they all disagree on. now tell me are you a teague or a prod.

  74. i am become death

    garro-i don't see how, here in oz a preist molested a girl the church covered it up she killed herself and the cardinal told the family to get over it. the pope hides/protects paodophiles, says that condoms are worse than aids in africa- just today a sydney cleric just called for the beheading of a dutch MP,salmon rushdie if you want i have thousands more of these for you. now give me one thing atheists do to hurt anyone,they have no justification for it. a religious person will do something cause their brain says god is telling them to- an atheist is dictated by social morals.

  75. Enzo

    @ i am become death

    Mate don't quote from scripture without first giving context. That verse refers to a command given by the God of the Israelites to destroy the Midianites. This of course was the period when the Israelites where wandering the desert looking for the promised land. Any of the peoples they encountered were destroyed in the name of their god. I wont comment on the verse from the Qur'an since I don't know anything about Islam.

  76. i am become death

    did you not read the verses i gave you. this means the jews own israel, america can conquer any one and the taliban will cut of the noses and ears of their women not to mention stoning them. now i think the criminal teachings of these backward bronze age nomads should not be taught to children over the facts of the natural world, which we can see and prove.

  77. Garro

    IABD, while it would be nice to think that things like child molestation would disappear if we did away with religion I think most people would agree that this is nonsense. Paedophiles would just find another way to get their jollies. Most child molesters aren't priests. Whether a person does something bad because a god told them to do it or because they just happened to have a boner does not matter to me. Religion does not make people bad; people can be bad with or without religion. Those who think that removing religion will make the world a better place are real deluded ones – in my opinion.

  78. i am become death

    thou shall not murder- what context do you want. murdering children and babies! its a virtue for these people- they all believe that israel is having all its problems because the jews didn't do a good enough job back then, if any of them new history they would still deny it.because they were raised to believe it under threat of eternal damnation if questioned.today everything is done in the name of someones god. allahua akbar.

  79. i am become death

    the church locks up these priests and says you cant marry, and you have to spend all day dealing with little children. it is depriving people of there natural human instincts so they break and commit savagery.then the church says dont worry god'll sort em out do you really wanna arrest a defenseless old man.

  80. i am become death

    and its not just the priests its everyone around them biting their tongue. no the next step will be to stop the muslims from thighing little girls- look that one up. abhorrent.

  81. Enzo

    @ iambd

    Er what? Did you read what I wrote? I don't claim to be an authority on Islamic matters. But from what I can infer, that verse is simply saying that men are the dominant force within society and family. If the man isn't present authority passes to the woman. Any woman whom is perceived to have too much authority will be put in her place. You must be joking to arrive at those conclusions from the verses you have given :/

  82. john

    @charles b
    let me guess, you vote republican.

  83. ez2b12

    To say religion makes people happy is just not true. Happy is what happy does, I am happy and I am an atheist. Check out the threads here, the christians continually lie, curse, insult, spread intolerance, hatred, and intentionally misrepresent things- sounds real happy to me. Athiest simply stand up for the truth.

    If you need to believe in fairy tales and lies in order to be happy something is wrong. Go ask little children in Ireland just how happy religion makes them. Go ask women in any predominately Muslim country and if they tell you the truth and are not indoctrinated into fearing what will happen to them from some fake diety or thier real husband you will see just how "happy" religion makes people.

    Religiouse happiness is very shallow and not real- it is based on false beliefs and ignorance and if you scratch below the surface- no more happiness. Saying that religion brings happiness is like the old phrase "ignorance is bliss" In my experiance it may look like bliss but its not. True bliss comes from knowing the truth, understanding your place and importance in a world that treats you as an equal, and having enough true scientific knowledge to spurr curiosity and the freedom to pursue said curiosity.

    By the way if you do not like the predominate beliefs and comments on this site, maybe you should not read them. Do not come to a place where the very site owner is an athiest and has intentionally set up a place for athiests and thiests to have discussion and then start getting angry because that very thing is happening. Just watch the documentaries you agree with and do not bother reading the threads and your sheltered view of the world will not be challenged at all. You can go on in your ignorance for ever and ever, riding the theist marry-go-round in the wonderful candy city of gumdrop falls.

  84. i am become death

    now what do atheists do?
    under the title atheist.

  85. i am become death

    enzo this stuff happens read some world news it happens every day.

  86. i am become death

    and god forbid a women with authority- smite he.
    for good men to do evil it takes religion.

  87. The ImPoster

    @Vlatko Hey man gotta thrown you the props you deserve for bringing such a excellent documentary site together. Definitely the best organized and LOADED site out there.

    Alas though i must criticize and give you a idea at the same time. Where is the BB Forum? Such a simple internet tool for your site would give a organized place for discussion and LAUNCH your user base (only 1 of 10ish documentary sites that i have visited have this feature). So you could dominate the documentary sites by implementing it i *think*. :-)

    @Enzo & Charles B...... Thank you for your kind words one man is only worth so much...... but with all you guys expressing opinions and having discussions i have grown alot. Which is why i am suggesting the BB Forum. :-P

    @IABD
    While i do agree that this things are morally wrong it is not the church institution (read the qur'an before saying its scripture) that causes these things. This would imply that choice doesn't have a part. That's like saying government should be done away with cause there are people richer then i am. This is where personal accountability comes into play if a pastor would lose his job if he committed these vile acts or be put in jail (my preference also) as you suggest then it would remove the potential or the parasites that do the things. Furthermore these Muslim things are being propagated now by people who want them to be hated to start another holy war.(Not much chance of success i hope.) I'm sure these laws have been around (or were recently created) and is probably why they(mostly females) are moving to the united states in flocks to escape ridiculous persecutions for living in the area of their religion. Not much opportunity here atm so i see no other reason.

    @IABD & @ez2b12 to say that religion or non-religion makes a person happy or unhappy is ludicrous. Especially since i have proven Atheism is a religion and so have others. Agnostic is not a religion by definition. Happiness is a hard thing to obtain when your in that 75%+ of the impoverished population. Religion may not instill happiness but it instills morals much better then atheism or agnosticism.(I refer to the scriptures.... we can discuss this further if you don't get derogatory). Also IMBD it dosn't take religion to do anything it takes a person..... religion in and of itself is not evil just like non-religion in and of itself is not evil... its a tool... its how you use it.

    ez2b12
    "I am happy and I am an atheist. Check out the threads here, the Christians continually lie, curse, insult, spread intolerance, hatred, and intentionally misrepresent things- sounds real happy to me. Atheist simply stand up for the truth."
    Define this truth I'm sure theist would love to hear you disprove the possibility of a creator as much as vice versa. i have no problem incorporating a creator into the science (truth) I'm sure you will bring forth. Ill back the 'theists in this since its hard to be calm without awnsers and I'm a master of my own mind.

  88. Enzo

    @iabd

    Yeah I know it happens but its more a spite on our humanity than it is on religion. These crimes only serve to show the failings of us as human beings.

    @ez2B12

    Are you talking from experience mate? Or are you just saying words which will appease the beast?

  89. Enzo

    @Imposter

    Just like to clarify my position. I am not a theist, rather I am simply angry at the general preconception that all religion is bad religion

  90. Epicurus

    enzo, why is it okay for god to tell the israelites to kill all people they come across including women and children? how do you just say that and act as if its normal or okay or at least dont realize that hey maybe the people doing this DIDNT have word from any god and are lying?

    and you also said if someone believes something isnt it truth?.....what kind of question is that?!?! are you 10?

    okay lets do a SIMPLE experiment...two fold just to show how wrong you are.

    FIRST: i believe that i am superman and have a billion dollars in my bank.....doesnt make it so, okay next one.

    SECOND: christians believe their god is the ONE AND ONLY GOD, hindus believe their god is the only god (granted it has billions of avatars)....now these two BELIEFS held at the same time contradict one another...either one is right and one is wrong or BOTH are wrong....

    do you see how simple that is? okay i hope you never make that mistake again, and i hope you feel like you have grown up a little more after reading this.

  91. Garro

    I beg your pardon ez2b12. I was not aware that you had to think a certain way to post on this forum. Thank you for putting me straight. You obviously have all the inside information on truth - I suppose some people might envy your certainty. Anyway as you say, perhaps I shouldn't read the comments - I just might disturb the nice echo chamber you have here. I didn't realise that the owner of the site was an athiest and that there was a certain agenda to the website; perhaps they should make that clearer on the front page. I won't bother this forum again.

    Go raibh maith agaibh

  92. i am become death

    my point is that religion gives justification for evil actions they would not otherwise commit. for example, the women who had their ears and noses cut off, the justification is in the quranic verse i gave before. the punishment for apostasy in islam is death. so if i was a muslim who sat down and thought about it, and decided i simply did not believe what islam says, i would face death for choosing not to live a lie. any religion that threatens people, especially vulnerable children, with eternal suffering is morally bankrupt. the verses are there, whether you want to act on them or ignore them they are there. the leaders put out decrees which their flocks have to follow, and the moderates allow the extremists to exist.

  93. The ImPoster

    @Enzo
    Me also which is why i stopped lurking enjoying the comments and documentary. Its hard to support a belief when people want facts. Science is a COMPLICATED interconnecting field that you have to understand to be able to disambiguate... sadly something most people cant do or fully understand. I myself am also not 'theist on any religion we know nowadays but can *associate* with them as a way of life.

    @Epicurus
    You answered your own question obviously god isn't telling them its ok. Its he who cant be pictured or spoken because he is the prophet a MAN. Also you speak of multiple diety's who is to say they are not both right and their *creators* one in the same. Maybe they just don't have all the facts of their religion yet. Science works this way.

    @Garro
    More likely he is either a Agnostic or Enlightened Atheist and able to relate to others that don't share his particular beliefs. This site is not biased it has doc's for all types. (reason i prefer this site)

    @IABD
    This may be because of their prophet since he is seen as their god. So maybe hidden agendas ill read the qur'an tomorrow and search for these things but again its a tool. Obviously with a religion that absurd its easy for it to fail and one religion being bad doesn't spoil the rest.

    @everyone wheres the comments about atheism not being a religion?

  94. Enzo

    @ Epicurus

    ffs! I was imply providing a backdrop to the verse given by iabd. I you read what I said you would see that I was simply against him quoting verses without giving any context. Your misinterpreting what I wrote and making me look like some sort of i@#$%&* zealot. Read what is bloody said.

    'How is it a lie, if that is what one believes to be the truth?'

    Here I am simply stating that what may be false to one man, can be truthful to another. You may consider the teachings of religion to be false but what authority do you have to look down on one who believes in them. Let me rephrase the above statement in a simpler form, truth is relative! Perhaps you should grow up a little bit and accept that not everyone subscribes to a universal way of thinking.

  95. i am become death

    Enzo i think all religion is bad- we cant live our lives from ancient books created to control people- the ideas beliefs and social morals and taboos of the bronze aged people are not congruent with modern society- ok most people are good people that is society- confucious said it before christ- live and let live-this is the basic principle of civilisation. lets get together and help each other from the dangers of the world we could not survive as solitary animals. some people are sociopathic,etc this is why we have laws. religious people- the good will say everything we teach is good pure and true and live an otherwise normal life, the evil will say this book justifies my actions and besides there are 1 billion more people who support my views. society needs to move forward- if religion still ruled-women,ethnic groups,homosexual,freedom of speech,freedom of thought etc would be repressed and nothing our particular society has reaped from the emancipation of these stated would be.

  96. i am become death

    definition-religion
    the belief in the existence of a god or gods, and the activities that are connected with the worship of them.
    oxford online.
    a=without - theism=god

  97. The ImPoster

    Not surprised oxford had that definition

    The Oxford Atheist Society, a student society which aims to introduce and help broaden the understanding of Atheism amongst the University of Oxford populace. (wouldn't be good to promote non-religion if their definition included it as a religion)

  98. Charles B.

    Imposter:

    No one used the forums. We all were rather lazy and didn't do much there so Vlatko deleted it to free up server space.

    John: Yes, I was an elected republican figure in my hometown. I cas a prcinct committee person, in fact. Why do you ask?

  99. Enzo

    @ iabd

    by all religion I mean the different aspects of religious teaching not the different types of religion. The fundamentals on basic morality and kindness are timeless however I do agree that certain teachings have no place within modern society.

  100. Charles B.

    666:

    I was wondering if you can tell me one scientific theory that you do support and why. It needs to be about either the origins of life and/or man or about life outside our galaxy. I didn’t pick those for any specific reason. Just want to see if you can at least give an opinion of science without god. Please no bible talk. Jusyt tell me what your thoughts are. Not what you fee$ like jesus would say.

    Theory? I believe in Bigfoot. I think he's a real creature (few and far between) and I hope that he doesn't go extinct before we can help preserve them for future generations to enjoy.

    As far as science, I blieve nearly all aspects of science, but evolution is not fact, nor should it be taught as fact. It's speculation.

    I also believe in String Theory. It sounds good to me. I don't think the "brane" theory is valid however. That just doesn't ring true with me. Colliding branes made the universe and it happens ever several trillions of years. Ok. Yeah. Wo where did the first "branes" come from? If we only had a brain!

  101. i am become death

    Faith seems to be the key word to most of that -strong or unshakable belief in something, esp without proof or evidence. This is the key no proof or evidence doesn't make sense promotes violence and ill will that doesn't make sense to me.

    Atheism just says all the c@#$ you guys have come up with doesn't make sense and for good reason. There is no set rule for how or why we are here, not everyone who rejects the god idea embraces science, there are some religions that are atheistic it isn't a blanket denomination.

    There is no bible, congregation, set of conditions proclaiming you will suffer if you don't agree. Believe what you believe just keep it in your bedroom. yes its in the constitution, the government may not uphold one over any other. Christians are trying to destroy this idea with id.

  102. i am become death

    faith seems to be the key word to most of that
    -strong or unshakeable belief in something, esp without proof or evidence. this is the key no proof or evidence doesnt make sense promotes violence and ill will that doesnt make sense to me. atheism just says all the stuff you guys have come up with doesnt make sense and for good reason. there is no set rule for how or why we are here, not everyone who rejects the god idea embraces science, there are some religions that are atheistic it isnt a blanket denomination.there is no bible,congregation,set of conditions proclaiming you will suffer if you don’t agree. believe what you believe just keep it in your bedroom. yes its in the constitution,the government may not uphold one over any other. christians are trying to destroy this idea with id.

  103. Yunya

    Religion is mindless garbage for the purpose of division and control of the masses and those so indoctrinated are not worth the trouble saving from it. Exploit them.

  104. i am become death

    okay 1st its the prophet which they all emulate, you need to take of the rose coloured glasses before you can see them for what they really are. jesus killed 200 pigs as he drove a demon into them, think of the farmers livelyhood if he is god he could just make the demon disappear not resort to some kind of shamanism. now to the real problem-if you didn't believe there was a god you would rape children,cut babies out of mothers, torture the elderly.and we should keep all the 3rd world religious so they don't become as affluent as us. this is something i see all to common in the religious. i would lesson my comfortable life if i knew others could have the happiness and joy i do. how much did you donate to the pakistani flood 20 million starving homeless, i certainly did and told all my friends to. now god would condemn me to hell for boasting about it while you go to heaven happy that there are less people breathing you're valuable air. it is scary that the good religious people think like this, its a threat isn't it we are all psychopaths under the control of an unseen dictator and if this disapears you better watch out.

  105. ez2b12

    @ Garro

    You misunderstood me. You are welcome to post here, as far as I am concerned.You may even post exactly what you posted. I am only saying that if it offends you so badly thier is a simple way to avoid that offense. Let me make that clear to everyone. I am not the owner of this site and hold no authority here what so ever. I just think that if it really offended you guys so badly, and you obviousely know what you ar going to hear ahead of time- don't listen.If you are going to come here for healthy disscussion that doesn't include crying foul just because someone posted an alternate belief.

    I do not get offended by the religiouse people here until they start either intentionally misrepresenting or crying foul.This is a place of disscussion and therefore disscussions will take place. These disscussions will most of the time be between two oppossing view points, thats to be expected.Both sides will state thier case vehemently and since this is such a personal and explosive subject thier will be fights and people that lose thier temper. Just hold it to actuall verifiable facts and do not intentionaly misrepresent and all will be fine, IMHO.

    i'm not perfect, not at all.At times I get tired of being called dense, stupid, immoral,uninformed,a liar, etc., etc. But i suppose when I lose my temper i dish it out as quickly as I take it.For that I apologize, I'm only human.But I do try to hold this to a minimum.There is nothing wrong with challenging anyones belief system. Just do so without all the crying and moaning that I see so often from the religees.I would rather see angry defiance than prissy crying.

  106. ez2b12

    @ charles

    you said "That just doesn’t ring true with me." and that is this absolute worse reason to believe or disbelieve anything, period. You said "I believe in bigfoot." as if this a a scientific theory. It is rubbish and as far from science as your fake and empty religion. Your poor child is growing up with a simpleton for a daddy.I would venture a guess the he/she knows this already.

  107. Charles B.

    Actually, my one of my co-teachers just the other day said I was the brightest foreign teacher their school has ever had, and she meant it.

    The "brane" theory is a theory and just one in many to try and explain the "Big Bang" which is also a theory! The Big Bang in some way probably did happen (by the will of God), but their purpose in putting forth this rediculous theory is to devoide the universe of God, who is the ultimate mind, or "Brain" if you please. You have to conclude like Hawkings that matter just came out of nothing and exploded and we're all just a crap shoot.

    Bookfoot is most likely a highly sophisticated ape that is very good at avoiding human contact and now may be so rare that it may never be fully documented. We find even primate new spiecies often. You certainly are a rude one. I hope they find a Bigfoot tomorrow, so you can say, "Oh. I was wrong on that one too!"

  108. Achems Razor

    @Charles B:

    Ha,Ha, thats why I like you Charles, you have a sense of humour, even though you are a complete religee, not like some "Pascal Wager" fence sitters on these forums.

    You believe in Bigfoot? well, that makes sense, since you already believe in a invisible man in the sky. "WHO LOVES YOU"

    You say you believe in most science? that means you also believe in "Leonardo" the 77 million year old Dino. they are working on right now.

    If you believe in most science, and you have already said on other docs. that you admire "Stephen Hawking" then you should be interested in his latest book "The Grand Design" coming out on Sept. 9th

    Where he states...That is was "not necessary to invoke any Gods"

    "The Universe can and will create itself from nothing" Hawking wrote.

    He also says..."Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something, rather then nothing, why the Universe exists, why we exist,

    Brings to mind my "null physics that I have included on other docs.

    And it seems you are skirting the outer boundaries of quantum theory also, Hmmm? Branes and all that?

    String theory is good, at least it is theory, not a belief!

    Peace.

  109. Vlatko

    @ez2b12,

    I never claimed to be Atheist, Theist, Agnostic etc. so please do not assume and present to the people that the site owner is Atheist and set up a forum where Atheists and Theists can have a discussion. I'm neutral at this place. However from time to time I can express my thoughts which may lean to a side.

    And do not tell to people not to read the comments if they don't like them. Simply do not tell them what they should do or not to do.

    TDF is not a forum in the first place and it's not just about Atheists and Theists. There are 25 categories there and 1300 different films. It is a place for watching documentaries and under every documentary there is a place where people can post comments regarding the documentary. It can be a discussion as long as is polite, civil and stays on topic.

    Nothing personal. I hope you understand.

  110. Charles B.

    Razor and Vlatko: We were posting simultaneously, I see. Yes, yes. I read all about Hawking's latest book!

    Anyway, I gotta get to bed. So tired. No internetting tomorrow except for sermon prep.

    Good night Razor.

  111. Vlatko

    @The Imposter,

    As @Charles B. said, TDF had a forum but was rarely used. People prefer to comment here, so I've removed the forum. It was just consuming resources.

  112. ez2b12

    @ Vlatko

    No offense taken. I wasn't trying to tell people what to do just SUGGESTING that if it hurt thier feelings that is easily rectified, my bad. No you haven't declared your beliefs at all and i suppose I was presumptiouse to assume you where an athiest, you hold simular beliefs as one though this you have disclosed.And I certainly did not mean this site was only for atheist vrs. theist disscussion. I have a lot of disscussions here that have nothing to do with religion or the absence thier of.

    @ Charles B.

    I can't stop laughing. Yes we and the universe are a crap shoot, with natural selection appplied to even things out. Why is this so hard to accept? It in no way deminishes our importance or abilities.It doesn't say who threw the dice in the first place either, in my opinion it was no one.And you may believe in Bigfoot all day long, but it is no scientific theory.Most scientists would laugh at you for believing in it. I on the other hand have no issues with it as long as you do not try and make it science.Yes i have become much more rude than I usually am, its catchy I suppose. I am tired of being rudely attacked and my way of life being belittled.So insted of crying foul, which I tried and it doesn't work. I've decided to return to militant atheism as I feel the other side is militant and intentionally misrepresents the facts.

  113. ez2b12

    OMG a Jehovah witness just interrupted me watching a video concerning Hawkins new book and M theory. I tried to get her to come inside and watch but she was in a hurry once I told her i was a militant atheist. You know it is kind of hard to keep this up though. I am acting sort of counter intuitively to my nature to be honest. I am usually a very peacefull and sort of quite guy. I just get tired of feeling run over though and so I decided I would try to bite first insted of just biting back. Maybe I should just be myself, huh?

    When I read over some of my comments I don't like what i sound like. I guess this is just a role for someone else and not me. I'm sorry if I have offended you guys, you included Charles.I still believe what I have stated but I should not state it so angrily and intensely, especially since I am not angry and I do not feel intense.

    Its a beautiful day outside and i think i should get out of this room and absorb it. Again if you are one of the people I have jumped at please know that this is not really me and i am going back to who i am. Just a normal guy that happens not to be religiouse, not a militant anything. Peace yall.

  114. fifi

    You know, I hear s@#$ all the time about America being so religious and stuff. But as a teacher in America I can at least say our public schools are not religious and our constitution separates church from state. In the school I work in Has Buddhist and Christians of the Vietnamese background, Somalian Muslims, CHristians of that are Hispanic and we even had some Iraqi children for awhile. All under the same roof and nobody even thinks about the religion most the time. So you guys can say what you want about us intolerant Americans but the truth is we are the ones intermingling, not you. I'm not saying that America is the best place or that there aren't better places, I'm just saying that we've live more intermingled than most people think.

  115. Epicurus

    no you dont live intermingled, if anything you live in a society that demands other cultures integrate and if they do not they must segregate to outside communities.

    no one is saying that is exclusive to the USA, but to think you are a good example of multiculturalism is a joke...you want to see a good example look at Canada.

  116. fifi

    Epicurus

    I didn't say anything about cultures, I said religions. Religion is a part of culture, but I didn't say that. Look at Canada. Well since my dad is French Canadian I guess I have done that. I was giving you an example from the school I work at. If we demand this, then why does our school teach the Hispanic kids in their native language and hire paras of the other native languages to help them. I'm not saying it's perfect but it my community I'm telling you what goes on. You can attack me thinking I'm some patriotic i@#$%. I can tell you that I'm not and I often am judged by other Americans and told to leave if I don't like the country. I'm letting you know that amongst all that, I live in a varied community and they do get along.

  117. ez2b12

    @ fifi

    Who said we didn't mingle religions within our schools here in America?This documentary is about the U.K. isn't it? I didn't read this statement in any of the posts either.I'm not trying to start soemthing I am just asking who said that.
    @ Everyone
    Does the US also support faith based schools with tax payer money?I didn't think they did because of seperation of church and state, but you never know what they will do when your not looking.It's been my experience that the people of faith in this country always want to spread thier particular beliefs. Even if that means doing underhanded and covert things in order to achieve thier goal.

    I am not syaing that all the people of faith would do this, I've met some good people that had faith. The Baptist association and other rich and powerful religiouse organizations though are horrible.Some of the average joes will do it as well but, they make less impact and are not as often guilty of dishonesty and underhanded tactics.

    I suppose the ones that do it think that the end justifies the means, not so. They drive people away from religion and cheapen the whole experience of faith.Those that are truly devoted and honest people should try and weed out these bad apples.

    I for instance speak out against the church and religion, mainly because these people turned me off to the whole experience.Its always the ones that are out to convert you that try this underhanded dishonest stuff.When you meet really good people that are religiouse they are like, "suit yourself we dont care." The net affect is that no one of real conviction or honesty and integrity ever tries to convert you, which really reduces the number of converts.

    Its too late for me, i am set in my secular beliefs at this point. In fact i probably never would have been able to be converted. But I am sure thier are those that might come to the faith if someone worth a you know what would try and convert them in an honest sincere way.Maybe its for the best that they don't. We have enough religiouse people trying to put religion into science and schools, not the place for it in my opinion.But I suppose it does have its place, just not for me.

  118. Epicurus

    LOL @ truth is relative.

    if truth is so relative answer me this. if you were in a building on a 27th floor and you wanted to safely leave, would you take the elevator or would you jump from the balcony? remember you statement truth is relative? would gravity be true? would it be relative?

    you saying the quote needed to be in context @enzo didnt provide anything to the point being made. if anything it strengthened what was said by showing that their god or the people who wrote it are very immoral.

    @theimposter, if the case is that they are interpreting their gods wrong and it happens to be the same person then that would follow under the category that they were both wrong. they held mutually exclusive beliefs that were both false. that makes them wrong. but yes it is another option.

    i also find it very revealing that so many of you feel no need to be moral without a god...that is a hell of a statement of admission. you are essentially a bad person but you only behave a certain way out of fear of punishment or want for reward....that is just screwed up and if there is a god and it is omniscient it will know that you arent really a good person and you are only acting like one.

    if we compare the less religious countries to the more religious countries and look at crime rates i think we would see a strong correlation between theism and criminal behaviour.

    I think the realization that this life is all anyone has is a good enough reason to treat others the way we want to be treated. if one believes that they will be rewarded with a wonderful eternity after this life as long as they believe a certain being is real then they can make excuses for being immoral and even ask some imaginary being for forgiveness allowing them to feel that what they have done has been atoned for.

  119. over the edge

    @ ez
    i was already looking into that when you posted. separation of church and state forbids it but i found something called the " D.C voucher program" that seems to direct money to faith based schools in the D.C area. i just started reading up on it so i will not claim that as fact but it appears true

  120. over the edge

    @ ez
    the voucher program did exist but the program period expired this year and congress voted not to renew it.

  121. wp88

    Simple solution, every religious person, communist, socialist ect. into a re-education camp until they are fixed, then the world would have very few if any problems

  122. The ImPoster

    Sorry came down with slight case of food poisoning last night lol good old 14 hours sleep heals all wounds.

    quote from ez2b12
    "This is a place of disscussion and therefore disscussions will take place. These disscussions will most of the time be between two oppossing view points, thats to be expected. Both sides will state thier case vehemently and since this is such a personal and explosive subject thier will be fights and people that lose thier temper. Just hold it to actuall verifiable facts and do not intentionaly misrepresent and all will be fine, IMHO."
    "I am tired of being rudely attacked and my way of life being belittled." (This would apply to both sides IMO)

    quote from Charles B.
    "The “brane” theory is a theory and just one in many to try and explain the “Big Bang” which is also a theory!"

    Achems Razor @ Charles B taken over by me :-)
    ”Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something, rather then nothing, why the Universe exists, why we exist"

    Spontaneous generation or Equivocal generation is an obsolete theory regarding the origin of life from inanimate matter... See updated theory Abiogenesis

    "theory is good, at least it is theory, not a belief!"

    Is not the definition of a theory a looking at, viewing, beholding... here ill introduce Spiritual Evolution (theory)
    --------------------------------------
    ez2b12
    "they make less impact and are not as often guilty of dishonesty and underhanded tactics... I suppose the ones that do it think that the end justifies the means, not so. They drive people away from religion and cheapen the whole experience of faith.Those that are truly devoted and honest people should try and weed out these bad apples... no one of real conviction or honesty and integrity ever tries to convert you, which really reduces the number of converts... We have enough religiouse people trying to put religion into science and schools, not the place for it in my opinion."

    Exactly the reason they must co-exist... how can you expect a religous person to understand science if they don't teach both together or neither... Also until science is *complete* which it never will be because of loop-holes in theory's its no better then religion only the Scientific Method is truly *worth* teaching in school.
    --------------------------------------
    @i am become death
    "okay 1st its the prophet which they all emulate"

    Exactly what i was stating about the Muslim thing... its not the religion or the people who believe in it but the prophet who is the root cause of the problem.

    "now to the real problem-if you didn’t believe there was a god you would... cut babies out of mothers, torture the elderly."(see end of post)
    "how much did you donate to the pakistani flood 20 million starving homeless...i did... god would condemn me to hell for boasting about it"

    Ah depends on which god your referring to... can you be specific; alot of gods don't mind you boasting about it if you arn't *lying* in the process. :-)

    "we are all psychopaths under the control of an unseen dictator and if this disapears you better watch out."

    This is why i say abolishment of religion is crazy unless you can replace it with something better at the same time.
    -------------------------------------
    @Epicurus
    "god or the people who wrote it are very immoral."

    Since *god* cant write, logic dictates man wrote it.

    "@theimposter, if the case is that they are interpreting their gods wrong and it happens to be the same person then that would follow under the category that they were both wrong. they held mutually exclusive beliefs that were both false. that makes them wrong."

    Two events are mutually exclusive if they cannot occur at the same time... this dose not state that one cannot be misrepresented but correct i.e. creator being referred to in different ways... also doesn't state that both would be wrong just that one would have to be false and one correct.

    "find it very revealing that so many of you feel no need to be moral without a god... you only behave a certain way out of fear of punishment or want for reward"(see end of post)"if we compare the less religious countries to the more religious countries and look at crime rates i think we would see a strong correlation between theism and criminal behaviour."

    Would you provide facts and or references for such a strong statement?

    "I think the realization that this life is all anyone has is a good enough reason to treat others the way we want to be treated. if one believes that they will be rewarded with a wonderful eternity after this life as long as they believe a certain being is real then they can make excuses for being immoral and even ask some imaginary being for forgiveness allowing them to feel that what they have done has been atoned for."

    This comes down to personal choice... I'm not religious per say but i am actively defending their beliefs because i am moral and scientific... this in turn doesn't mean everyone is moral or understand science.
    ----------------------------------
    Now what you want to see about why so many people feel that without religion; chaos would ensue.

    Chaos theory is a field of study in mathematics, physics, economics and philosophy studying the behavior of dynamical systems that are highly sensitive to initial conditions. This sensitivity is popularly referred to as the butterfly effect. Small differences in initial conditions (such as those due to rounding errors in numerical computation) yield widely diverging outcomes for chaotic systems, rendering long-term prediction impossible in general. This happens even though these systems are deterministic, meaning that their future behavior is fully determined by their initial conditions, with no random elements involved. In other words, the deterministic nature of these systems does not make them predictable. This behavior is known as deterministic chaos, or simply chaos.

    i.e. you remove a predictable behavior; the worship of a god to control actions and replace with nothing the external conditions will decide the result. Meaning that whatever things are happening in their life will change their decisions... with over 3 Billion people having to survive with less than $2.50 per day seems like they might just overthrow their systems without the need to remain *moral* since their treatment is *immoral*... this would in turn butterfly effect into the major systems... i.e. china revolts... inflation skyrockets... USA and EU revolt... i can explain further if you need but am still waiting for that compelling argument that without religion the world would be perfect.

  123. eireannach666

    @imposter
    I enjoyed reading your last post. You made som$e pretty valid statements. Only thig I'm going to say is if we removed religion gradually we would still never get rid of it. Wed have "back room islam" and "closet christianity" etc. But we do have something ti replace it with and have had it forever. Sciences. Evolution is something that really can't be debated without being unresonable and just plain hard headed. Yes some wrinkles are there but why not let these young minds coming up iron them out. Not enough emphasis on math and science these days.

    Now in response to an earlier post;
    You say"Is this not a definition of religion being religion is a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe."

    Now you should know better. Religion is based on nothing whatsoever. Just unfounded,untestable fairy tales and superstition. Atheism is kind of a label and a tag that one could use to sum a view in short. its nott a religion. It is the belief of no belief. It is no. Lord shall stand before myself. And if you have no evidence than you have squat.

    Someone said once that we are all born atheists. Which I'd an outstanding point. There is no such thing as a Christian child or a Muslim child. It is installed and taught. So shame on religion once again..

    Religion says they are truth-seekers and preachers of the words of god but when in fact ,if you consider yourself a truth-seeker at all you shiuld be excited about being wrong when evidence is presented and teaches you new things you thought otherwise about. That is the scientific method, and the killer of the fundy religious idea..

    Saying that atheism is a religion shows that you don't really know what the difference between religion and atheism are. They are not mutually exclusive. The Buddha was kind of an atheist; he didn't belive in whst we would call a soul. He says that the idea was the reason why there was all this suffering in the world. He said that believin in the eternal soul or that you have a unique self identity, excludes you from others in the world.

    Religion gives nothing but an easy solution to big questions and throws evn bigger claims. Pretty much just tells people what to think, but philosophy and science teaches how to think.

    Slainte.

  124. The ImPoster

    @eireannach666
    "we do have something to replace it with and have had it forever. Sciences. Evolution is something that really can’t be debated without being unresonable and just plain hard headed."
    I have no problem at this time with evolution and spiritualism being marriageable. There are theory's out already that support this idea. Sadly evolution is really one of the *few* things that makes it doubt-able and if you ask me it is a convenient case to throw doubt into the equation... if we found *proof* of a creator that would defeat the purpose of belief...

    "let these young minds coming up iron them out. Not enough emphasis on math and science these days."
    I am one of these young minds... i am a author and one of the hardest topics i am addressing is this :-)

    "if you have no evidence than you have squat."
    This is a good statement and as far as scientific method goes they still have no evidence that a creator doesn't exist or the possibility that one could. In fact it has expanded to include new ideas such as Universal Conciseness, Intelligent design, ect. So i would say spiritualism has grown.

    "Someone said once that we are all born atheists."
    This is a easy claim to refute as that is based around a single persons idea or view... you are neither theist or atheist until you are aware of the possibility of a creator. This in turn is the self-awareness trigger that makes you one or the other requiring a choice (children are pure). Like i said i am neither because both are equally wrong and right. With any argument its always in the *gray area* that truth lies.

    "if you consider yourself a truth-seeker at all you should be excited about being wrong when evidence is presented and teaches you new things you thought otherwise about. That is the scientific method, and the killer of the fundy religious idea.."
    Then i hope that people who read my arguments about this can embrace the opinions that i present it is not biased and mostly fact based.(open to interpretation) To say that they are wrong though and that the scientific method has killed religion; just means you haven't used it against the sciences you implore to disprove it i.e. the big bang, evolution, ect.

    "Religion gives nothing but an easy solution to big questions and throws even bigger claims. Pretty much just tells people what to think, but philosophy and science teaches how to think."
    Ah this is a good statement also but you miss the underlying principles of religious texts they also teach lots of very important moral values like compassion, selflessness, charity, patience, humility, kindness etc and warn of the evils of wrath, greed, pride, gluttony, ect. which science has no means to teach children at this time or a use too.
    (post above this awaiting moderation)

  125. Achems Razor

    @Imposter:

    I was quoting Hawking's on his new book, what he says is that the Universe "itself" was created spontaneously, not just life from inanimate matter.
    And you are referring to Abiogenesis. that not what I meant!

  126. Achems Razor

    @Imposter:

    Am trying to figure out exactly were you are coming from, you are sounding to me like you believe that consciousness is the driving force behind existence, or are you referring to the observer effect? quantum physics?

  127. The ImPoster

    @Achems Razor
    I like the observer effect it summarizes alot of good knowledge but i embrace every idea presented and weigh it against its own merit always looking for facts to support it... With that said do i believe it is undeniably true; course not man made it and we have proven to be half-arsed in all our work (usually to support our own ends):-)

    The driving force behind my existence is truth... i brushed with religion at a early age... hated the fact my church used all its money to purchase new land instead of helping the community... Stopped going at age 7... Read the scriptures myself (Christianity) took the morals and understanding i could grasp and embraced science and math completely (mostly math). Which brought me to this point in my life where i have realized knowledge (should be) free and our profit motives are destroying humanity and progress. So i accept poverty... love life and aspire to be the best free author i can be... because i understand how to win a argument by being one sided and giving leeway. Something dawkins dose extraordinarily. Though this is not true representation of the science we love. True knowledge comes from complete understanding of both sides and reaching the conclusion yourself. When more truth is found further understanding can be reach.

    On the closing note i will add my only aim in all this discussion is just to inspire thought; since anyone can follow a man blindly but only a thinking man can truly lead or understand who he follows. :-)

  128. Enzo

    'True knowledge comes from complete understanding of both sides and reaching the conclusion yourself' Gem of a statement

  129. Achems Razor

    @Imposter:

    So then you are a seeker only of what you deem truth to yourself, well, nothing wrong in that, we all are, nobody on Earth hardly knows anything. I can relate to people who ask questions, but for me there is no relating at all to the religious, because their answers are set in stone, they figure they already know it all. Period.

  130. ez2b12

    @ The Imposter

    You said: "...you are neither theist or atheist until you are aware of the possibility of a creator."

    A very good point. It really has made me think.I have to say that i would have agreed with Eireannach666 this morning full heartedly, but you have a good point thier, Hmmmm.well done mate.

  131. The ImPoster

    I will make one more comment about the film after watching it again; it seems to me that the money is the only real problem in this education system (all over the world?) since they still have to adhere to class structure and curriculum. I did enjoy his comment on why there are no dinosaurs though. I figure you nurture the child and introduce them to science; curiosity will take them along just fine.

    @Enzo
    Thank you

    @Achems Razor
    Nah though I am a truth seeker I don't deem anything as truth unless it is provable. The rest i just provide both views and leave the reader to make conclusions.
    Like evolution... which he addressed and is a universally verified fact now since religion and science met in the middle(i do love peace).

    Scientific... Evolution is the change in the inherited traits of a population of organisms through successive generations... The main source of variation is mutation

    Theistic evolution and evolutionary creationism are similar concepts that assert that classical religious teachings about God are compatible with the modern scientific understanding about biological evolution. In short, theistic evolutionists believe that:
    1. there is a God, and God is (either):
    a. the creator of the material universe, who employed
    evolution to develop life within or..
    b. the creator of human life (via the gift of the soul),
    based on a physical body, which was..
    1. formed through evolution. or
    2. formed through evolution with divine guidance.

    Now for my 420 moment. What if... religion was the earliest science.... i present an example of this thinking.
    What if Adam and Eve is the merely a representation of the male and female primate that produced the first mutations; before we achieved our intellectual identity and DNA sequence; that caused our cerebral cortex to continue progress for our brains to get bigger.
    Adam = mutation carrier(most likely the X chromosome to ensure lasting continuation. science buffs will know why this matters)...
    Eve = His first offspring being created of Adam seed from his *hip*... or his *wife* he took that produced the first sapians...

    Either way i feel Peace(with each other) and Harmony(with nature) are definitely the things that we need to achieve as a species to continue a meaningful existence and eventually explore the universe further.

  132. The ImPoster

    @Epicurus
    After much searching i was not able to find something to compare it to(way to much searching). Either way i figure its all up to interpretation with something like that; since there's so many factors that are involved. Though i did find it funny that Russia was ranked one of the lowest; not so surprising that Afghanistan and Iraq where there (US is just leaving war with them).

    "if you are moral why would you defend a belief"
    I feel spiritualism has something to offer... and also want there to be more acceptance or understanding between the two.

    "why encourage delusion?"
    This i do not... you put it best "adaptation is the key."

    As for the rest there is no reason to think atheism = evil or religion = evil; but it's a delicate system that must be approached carefully. As far as the rights, research, and regulations go; (and the children) This is why education is so important; we give a die hard religious person ability to think freely they very well may see things another way; i know gay Christians for instance. They disagree with a portion of their own text but still believe. After asking "Do you think you will go to hell for this?" Ive been given good intuitive responses like; "Well if god only looks at that yes... but i feel its the overall that he would be interested in."

    I'll check back here in a few days; Gonna comment some of the other really good documentaries that i slacked on and work on my literature some more. (not dare approaching this subject yet) :-)

    Peace and Harmony

  133. i am become death

    @ imposter- its good to see you've put some thought into your position.
    the religion is the emulation of the prophet- he also had a 9 year old wife.religion teaches you to accept what the authority wants you to, as the bible was also constructed under this premise they can spin any nonsense to support their own filthy biases like female circumcision and cutting off the hands of thieves-
    Jeremiah 9:23
    Thus says the Lord: “Let not the wise man boast in his wisdom, let not the mighty man boast in his might, let not the rich man boast in his riches.
    psalms
    4 In his pride the wicked does not seek him;
    in all his thoughts there is no room for God.

    you should look at (bertrand russell on god) (1959)
    on youtube its a very interesting point on the usefulness of religion.

  134. The ImPoster

    @IABD
    i did notice you post and will check him out since i hadn't heard of him yet; it was before my birth. Thank you for more insight. *Shoots some karma your way* :-)

  135. Richie

    Those wankers blocked it in the UK & Ireland

  136. Wayne

    Clearly, it's not about a parent's right over their child, but a parent's responsibility for their child. However, parents who grow up in a culture that reinforces the notion of control, will end up being directed to their children. If there is no mechanism that can break that link, then there will be perpetuity. The politics of religion requires peretuity to remain relavent...only modifying ocassionally when confronted with unmoveable reality.

  137. Enzo

    @IABD

    First verse from Jeremiah is on about humility mate. Don't know how that supports your argument. The second refers to the state of none believers who have no need for God. Why do you feel the need to put those two verses into your post when they don't really relate to what your on about? Namely the crimes committed in the name of god, or the restrictive interpretation of the rulers of certain countries. Its funny but the majority of people who slate religion don't really know or understand much about it. Thats not directed at you mate, just a general observation.

  138. ez2b12

    @ Charles

    Don't leave man, I would feel really bad if you did. We are all learning here even if we disagree today who knows what tommorrow will bring. I will probably never be a theist or a christian even if I was but I still learn from you guys a lot. If you leave we have just lost someones valueable input, thats never a good thing.

    If you do leave know this, you have helped me learn to respect other peoples views. Even if I disagree I should never attack or insult. Your patience and ability to shrug it off and keep going are enviable and have helped me learn. Thank you for all your input and putting up with us. I really hope you will change your mind about leaving TDF.

  139. ez2b12

    P.S. I went to church today Charles, believe it or not. I went and enjoyed myself, very interesting soicial interaction. I may never go back and I am not saying that I have changed my mind about religion and all. I just thought this might help you see that we are not as die hard and militant as we may come off. Have a good one man.

  140. Achems Razor

    @Charles always says he is leaving, but then he always comes back, right Charles? doesn't want to miss all the fun.

    He knows I and others would miss him! What possible challenges could you have on a religious forum Charles? when everyone is agreeing with everyone else...Hmmm?

  141. ez2b12

    I thought about not posting anymore one time, Vlatko helped me see that no one meant me any harm. I know what it feels like when you get ganged up on, it can be pretty disheartening. But it is better than never being challenged, that would be boring. Thank goodness we don't all agree on everything.

    Wow, see you learn on here all the time. Just earlier I was discouraging alternate view points in a way. Now I see why I shouldn't. Sorry again yall, really. I am learning, take that for comfort I guess. I'll try not to be so corrosive to good healthy discussion during the process in the future I promise.

  142. i am become death

    @enzo-the verses on greed refer to a long conversation i had with the imposter- starting 09/04/2010 at 11:39- if you want the context i think it starts there.i couldn't think of the exact verse i was referring to, but these were the closest i could find. in reality you could derive that the inherent ambiguity of religious texts - not to mention its archaic foundation so removed from the complex nature of modern ethics - allows anyone to translate whatever text to fulfill their own agendas. so wouldn't it be good if it was just dropped and everyone had to stand alone with their own moral convictions and not pretend they are sublimely bestowed by the divine.

  143. Epicurus

    @IABD,

    PERFECTLY SAID.

    "...you could derive that the inherent ambiguity of religious texts – not to mention its archaic foundation so removed from the complex nature of modern ethics – allows anyone to translate whatever text to fulfill their own agendas. so wouldn’t it be good if it was just dropped and everyone had to stand alone with their own moral convictions and not pretend they are sublimely bestowed by the divine."

  144. ez2b12

    @ The imposter

    You said: Exactly the reason they must co-exist… how can you expect a religous person to understand science if they don’t teach both together or neither… Also until science is *complete* which it never will be because of loop-holes in theory’s its no better then religion only the Scientific Method is truly *worth* teaching in school.

    You said this in reference to the fact that i had said i did not want religion taught in science or in a public school at all. To answer your question I never said that a religiouse person should not be taught science at school. If they want to learn about religion in my opinion this is what the respective church for their faith is for. You go to church to learn religion and school to learn science.

    While I agree with you that the scientific method is the best and most important part of science that can be taught, science is much better than religion for its respective purpose. The purpose of science is to give us the most objective information possible about our physical surroundings, to attempt to assert theories that are the best explanation of certain naturally occurring phenomena, and to give us a method for discovering the truth behind what our minds can not easily comprehend. I feel it serves these purposes very well. Much better than religion ever could.

    I will not pretend to understand the true purpose of religion, I only have my opinions and they would probably offend a lot of religiouse people, and I do not want to do that. So i will not go their, especially on a thread where I already showed my ignorance once by being militant toward well meaning people- sorry again yall.

    I can only assume that what ever the purpose of religion is to you it serves that purpose well enough for you to continue your faith. I imagine science would fail at this purpose or you would not need religion logically. My point is they both serve a respective purpose and can not be substitutes for one another.

    The loop holes you reffer to are left thier purposely and should not be seen as "loop holes" in my opinion. Theories in science are considered not complete so that they may be added to through out the years as knowledge progresses. It is the genuise of science that it never attempts to say this or that theory is the end all be all of any subject. we always leave room for improvement and above all room to question the validity of any theory. We do this so as to never blind ourselves with absolutes, in the hope that up and coming minds may discover new truth behind old mysteries, to always question even the most established facts. That said theories are not just flimsy assertions or best guesses. They are the truth as best we can ascertain it at the time.

    Thanks for engaging in a healthy disscussion with me, I wish you the best.

  145. The ImPoster

    @Epicurus & @IABD
    In response to this check out #4 an #5 below "wouldn’t it be good if it was just dropped and everyone had to stand alone with their own moral convictions and not pretend they are sublimely bestowed by the divine." and IABD on Bertrand Russel; he isn't religion friendly but that fact he was brought up in it... then released the dogmas... should show you something. :-P

    @ez2b12
    I never said i had faith in a particular religion buuuuut i have come to the conclusion early religions are basically based off of the earliest sciences of man. Also i still cant say they aren't needed after doing some particular precursor research earlier for my book. I'll re post the *garbage* i spewed in The Enemy of Reason...(again im a truth seeker so take it all with a grain of salt but anything in quotes is googable for referencing)

    After watching another of Dawkins films i can’t help but place all 3 (Richard Dawkin, Sam Harris, an Christopher Hitchens) into a intellectual comedy branding.(don't mean to offend anyone with this statement but they are hilarious to me now personally.)

    My reasons are many…

    1. They fully support creating a dogma for atheist(that religion is unacceptable); This is just as destructive to humanity as it creates bigotry for people who don’t NEED to understand the universe in its infinitesimal detail. (you do not *need* intelligence to live… dose it help sweatshop workers?)

    2. This film made me do it… because the real enemy of reason is greed and governments. (the fact that so many country’s perform the same experiments and there’s no leash on these high dollar experiments; some of which haven’t satisfactorily proved to not be dangerous to the earth).

    3. Their ability to exemplify greed by sucking in atheists money; Thereby promoting greed itself. Why not provide their literature for free… like the bible(probably same reason churches cant run for free; they have to pay off their property and lifestyles.)<— Though most do 'eventually' release a free documentary version.

    4. Religion still trumps science in human morality see these two Wikipedia articles for proof… Eupraxsophy and Science of morality. (even though its been thought about teaching a moral system contrived through science; there is not enough thought on it cause morality appears to impede scientific progress?)

    5. Since suicide is one of leading cause of death in our scientific based community nowadays… I cant say that science is bringing us happiness; "suicides in the U.S. outnumber homicides by nearly 2 to 1" people would rather kill themselves then kill another(this isn't excluding gang violence ect); "Suicide is responsible for 12 percent of all deaths among the 20-44 age group" and this is Europe. Now lets check out good old developing world where our society leaches "More than half the suicides (54%) in the world occur in China and India."(of documented cases) Maybe its religion causing them to suicide? "Religious beliefs discourage suicidal behaviour. A study in India found that religiosity was a protective factor". Wonder how many people felt it necessary to take their life in jesus's day if he existed?

    Peace(with others) and Harmony(with nature) is the only way forward not science or religion. Then we can study things after we fix our world. :-)

  146. ez2b12

    @ The imposter

    We agree on a lot of things, thats good. I wouldn't say that Richard supports creating a dogma for atheists at all, he wants to implant a question into everyones mind. In the end it is up to every individual as to agree with him or not. I have never seen him become disrespectful or vulgar with anyone in his work, he simply asks questions. The people he interviews give their answers and thats that. You can't get mad that he is asking questions can you? He does make certain assertions and sumations that probably offend people, so do religiouse leaders when they try and spread their faith, both have good intentions in the end. A lot of atheists do not like Dawkins or buy into his ideas. I for one do not see the problem with religion as long as it does not try to impede on science or vice versa. To me the genuise of Dawkins is in the work he has done in science, not in his crusade against religion though we do agree on alot in this respect as well. I grew up listening to him speak in documentaries and have grown accustom to his voice, this may sound strange but it is true.

    As far as early religions being based off the earliest sciences of man, I assume you mean mans study of the heavens. This study of the heavens did lead to certain pagan beliefs but we can not define this as a science. It lacks the one thing that defines all science, the scientific method. I would say that early mans obsession with the sky led to the invent of pagan religion, symbols, and rituals. But I would not say that the study of the heavens is what prompted religion to come into existence, it merely gave a foundation to a need which was in mans nature from the time he began to recognize his individual self. The need to seperate himself from nature, in order to feel safer and allow himself dominion over his resources.

    Once we see ourselves as the supreme creation of the supreme being we feel safer in that we are no longer part of the natural cycle of life feeding on life. Since we have mentally removed ourselves from this process we can then feel we have a right to exploit those in this system, animals and plants, for our benefit, without feeling guilt or having to question our own actions. We can feel as if we are above being used as fuel for someother animals biological functions. And most of all the regular reoccurrence of things like the sun coming up and the lunar cycles allow us to predict the near future to some degree. Again we are attempting to remove ourselves from the system of life feeding on life. If we can predict we can control, if we can control we can manipulate the future, through this minupulation we feel seperated, exhaulted, and most of all safer.

    Its fine if you do not like Dawkins style or even the things he has to say, i feel the same about many that you probably do like. I didn't mean to assume you where religiouse either, my bad. It just seemed so from your responce. I am of the opinion that man will one day be past his need for religion, i hope so any way. I wouldn't say that time is here yet though, maybe it will never be. But I do think we should keep religion and science where they belong and not mix them together. They are not complimenting subjects but couter intuitive to one another.

  147. ez2b12

    Well actually I suppose this was a science, just not in the modern definition. The scientific method was creted by Bacon and many contributions to science came befor that invention. So I retract that statement and concede that early religion was based on the stufy of the heavens and therefore could be said to be bassed on a loose type of science. You have me thinking, thanks.

  148. coyote03

    @ The ImPoster

    The first religions were animistic in nature, believing in spirits that inhabited every part of the natural world. They looked for symbols and meaning in nature. These symbols then became naturally associated with certain objects/practices/places/spirits and rituals began. I don't believe in any god or spirits, yet I promote peace with others and nature. Harmony with nature doesn't always suggest harmony with each-other, if it did then native tribes would never have fought.

    The whole post on suicide is just incredibly misleading, I'll start off by saying we are genetically predisposed to be more likely to commit suicide either by being programmed that way or by having some sort of mental illness. That being said, there are many different kinds of suicide undertaken by many different kinds of people for many different reasons. There are mass suicides undertaken by groups such as the 'People's Temple', suicide bombings carried out in the name of Allah or any higher power, and then there's any religious fanatic who is ready to die for their cause or to be with god.

    Euthanasia or assisted suicide is used when someone is in an incredible amount of pain and can't stand to go on or their quality of life is just incredibly low. Then there's just when someone is incredibly depressed and feels like they can't go on anymore, something that we all feel at one time or another (even if just for a fleeting moment). Suicide in 'Western' culture became popular with Goethe's book 'The Sorrows of Young Werther' which popularized and romanticized the idea. The point is that we are all influenced by many factors, genetics, our surroundings and even by popular culture, to suggest suicide is directly related to science and therefore science isn't making us happier is an incredibly far-fetched statement!

    I'd like to ask you if one person killing themselves is equal to one suicide bomber killing thousands (like with 9/11), what is worse? Citing this example, is religion more likely to bring us happiness or is science more likely to do that? Sciences tell us we are all equal, religion (for the most part) tells us it's okay to kill those that are different, and throughout history has even promoted that idea.

    "More then half the suicides (54%) in the world occur in China and India" yes and nearly half the world's population lives there, a more accurate figure to look at is suicides per 100,000. China just cracks the top 20 and India doesn't even crack the top 40 for suicide rates. The only conclusive piece of information that can be drawn from looking at suicide rates is that men kill themselves on average much more often then women. Anything else is quite speculative.

    "Their ability to exemplify greed by sucking in atheists money; Thereby promoting greed itself. Why not provide their literature for free…like the bible" This has got to be one of the funniest quotes I've ever seen. Christianity, and religion in general empties the pockets of its followers. The church has literally been doing this for over 1500 years! The Mormon church is one of the worst promoters of this!!! Evangelicals and Televangelists sit in massive churches while their preachers live in mansions, wouldn't that money be better spent building homes for and feeding the poor? Isn't St. Peter's Basilica itself a slap in the face of everything Jesus believed in?

    Here's just a quote I enjoy: "(Religion) With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion." - Steven Weinberg

    Sorry for the length of the post and any inconsistencies in my arguments :)

  149. Enzo

    @ ez2b12
    Nice points there but I disagree when you describe early religion as an attempt to isolate man from nature, that development can be attributed to monotheistic belief systems. The earliest religions were rather an attempt to understand our place within nature . The earliest forms saw man as one with his natural environment and being one with it man should not exploit it. A look at ancient cultures shows there was a deep founded respect of the life produced by the earth, indeed this was manifested through many myths and legends. The notions of control and authority over creation are synonymous with organised religion. When a hierarchy is organised and doctrine formulated then we begin to see what you mention.

  150. ez2b12

    @ Enzo

    Very good point, I will concede it to be somewhat correct. I was thinking of montheistic traditions as that is all I have ever studied. I majored in theology in college, but you must remember where I live. I live in the southeast US, the bible belt. Theology as it is taught here is centered on the monotheistic traditions. These montheistic traditions came long after the advent of religion itself so i should have been thinking of the nature based polytheistic religions insted.

    We touched very breifly on the older pagan religions, which to me are more palatable in their beliefs. This is a shame really as the monotheistic traditions have their roots in the older polytheistic religions, although this fact often makes people upset when I bring it up. The simularities are hard to miss though and it in no way cheapens the monotheistic faiths, so i really don't get what makes them so angry about it. Besides I didn't make it so, I only realized it was so, along with hundreds of others.

    We did spend some time studying the Greek gods and myths, remember we are the west. Since the US has it's roots in western civics we tend to study them alot, along with the Romans. I would like to know more about the older polytheistic pagan faiths but it is hard to find unbiased material about them. Can any one point me in the right direction?

    I still say that to some degree religion was created to help seperate man from the natural cycle of life feeding on life. Even if they did worship parts of nature and try to find their place within it, I feel the ultimate goal was to know that place so we could better control and predict. The need to manipulate and predict is based in fear. Fear of death, fear of natural disaters, fear of predators, fear of starving, etc., etc. led man to want to know more about nature and to explain these tradjedies in a way that let us seperate from them.

    Think about the practice of human sacrifice, a not so common polytheistic ritual. It's main purpose was to stave off natural disaters. Like throwing a beautiful maiden in the volcanoe so it will not erupt, or cause earth quakes. Many polythesitic faiths sacrificed animals or humans to stave off drought or other disaters that could spoil the crops. It is almost as if they are saying, "O.k. someone is going to die so, we will choose who and give them willingly to the gods so they do not take many by other means." They are attempting to control and manipulate the gods that they worship in order to seperate their mortality from natural cycles. Often giving reverence to something is a means by which to control that something, i hope that made sense.

    I will also concede that science has sprung from the same fear and need to predict and control, in my opinion. I think it does an even better job at this particular task than religion does. It gives us objective data and well formed hypothesis and theory in an attempt to let us understand our suroundings. This need to understand our surroundings is born of fear. Of course we have become so removed from the natural cycles of life that now we often have this same need for a whole different purpose. We have learned that we can make money by exploiting the natural world, and inorder to exploit it you need to understand it better and be able to predict tommorrow.

    That said science may be its own redeemer as it also tells us ways to get to our needs without exploiting the future. It all comes down to the motive of the people directing science I suppose, much as with religion. It is up to those that practice and to some extent control religion to make sure it is not misused, which it definetly can and has been in some cases. Again I think they both have their respective purposes now days but, they may have sprung fourth from the same purpose or need.

    Thanks again for every one that is discussing this with me, you guys are making me think and that is the best. I wish you all happiness and passion for whatever you may be involved with.

  151. ez2b12

    @ The Coyote

    Goooood post man, well said. I didn't want to get into that with imposter as i thought it might get a little ugly, I have caused enough ugliness already. I agree with you though, his suicide example really threw me off. I felt it was misleading but had no facts to back up my arguement. Well done mate, you win again- in my humble opinion.

  152. Enzo

    @ ez2b12

    Well living in the Bible Belt I can see why you dislike Christianity. Condolences dude. More to the point, when you talk about 'life feeding on life', what exactly are you referring to?

  153. ez2b12

    @ Enzo

    I'm sorry that is a Tool lyric that i use to stand for what most would just call the natural cycle of death and decomposition and how it feeds new life, the predatory cycle, or the circle of life. This is still not really to the point I suppose though. What I meant to say is that man was afraid of death and suffering and how fickle your life really is. He saw this taking place all around him so he found away to say, "This will not happen to me or mine. We will find a way to seperate ourselves from being just another animal in the grand scheme of things." Since he had to first figure out what controlled this cycle in nature, he came up with Gods. Heres a list of the first gods to be in literature, well a short list any way. These gods are from Mesopatamian decent.

    ANU The god of the sky
    APSU The Abyss
    ANSHAR Father of Anu and all the other gods.
    EA Also ENKI "Lord of the Sacred Eye." God of water
    SHAMASH Also BABBAR, UTU The sun
    SIN The moon god.
    TAMMUZ Also DUMUZI God of the harvest

    As you can see most of these gods are symbolic of things in the sky or things that control weather and therefore agriculture. I would guess the gods that represent things in the sky seemed logical as they move in cycles much like the natural cycles of death and life and are very important to agriculture. The gods that symbolize the elements are logical as the elements also control agriculture, which of course is of the upmost importance to these people. So it seems to me that by worshipping these gods the people of Mesopatamia thought they could understand or possibly predict the weather, the harvest, and the cycle of life and death that depends on said agriculture.

    Many other ancient peoples worshipped Animistic gods as someone pointed out earlier. Perhaps they thought that by doing so they could better improve their hunting by understanding the natural patterns they felt where controlled by these gods. They may have felt they could to some extent protect themselve from predation by a certain animal by worshipping (pleasing) that respective god. No one really knows why, as they didn't exactly write it down. But this is my opinion.

    It is very true however to say, which you did, that we do not see man asserting his dominion over nature until we get to the monotheistic traditions. In the very ancient past man claimed very little dominion over nature and spent most of his time in awe of it, worshipping it, trying to understand it. My point though was that even this is an attempt to seperate yourself from just another animal living within the fickle cycle of life.

    I hope this cleared it up for you, i am not the best at articulating my ideas sometimes.

  154. The ImPoster

    @coyote03
    First off would like to thank you for challenging my statements. :-D This is what i want to start a intellectual discussion on anything. According to Wikipedia China is 19.5% of our population India 17.3% that equals 36.8% according to 2010 survey. That's closer to 1/3rd not half. "if one person killing themselves is equal to one suicide bomber killing thousands". To that i say no it is not equal but is no worse then some scientific advancements that have cost equal or greater life from political control i.e. the atom bomb or genetic warfare. While they have 'beneficial' uses to mankind they are often taken advantage of for bad reasons; before the population gets to reap the benefit's. Now onto "suicide rates... quite speculative". I do agree its is quite speculative BUT that is in comparison to total population and last date of inquiry when you are using the rankings. Last for China and India being before 2000(wiki rocks but you gotta use all data with it :-D). What i meant by that whole earlier statement is merely that as a few suck the resources and money out of the many(to speed up the advancement of science); They many are more likely to not have the means to support their life or mental ability to deal with the situation... which could lead to this.

    ez2b12 put it greatly "It all comes down to the motive of the people directing science I suppose, much as with religion. It is up to those that practice and to some extent control religion to make sure it is not misused, which it definetly can and has been in some cases." Just like radical religion examples are bad apples in the bunch; With 1.1 billion claiming Secular/Nonreligious/Agnostic/Atheist of the 6.6 billion people (5/6th) of the world having a religion or another this is still quite low in occurrences. Course this is still speculative.

    While i enjoy the Steven Weinberg quote i think he missed the big point(blindly following); unless he considers governments to also be a religion; They are and will remain to be the biggest loss of life from here on out. Now i can't justify or contest anything a radical will do government or religious its not my place. 9/11 & pearl harbor are good examples of possible *hijackings* of events to advance political gain(non-religious). One to test the nuclear bomb another to continue cheap petrol prices. Again speculative...

    @Enzo and @ez2b12
    Very good discussion which leads me to ask and contemplate this. MAYBE religion is still so important for these two reason...

    1. As Coyote says "Sciences tell us we are all equal" yet most don't live or treat others like this.

    2. As ez2b12 said "We have learned that we can make money by exploiting the natural world" isn't this *in the most grand sense* our home which we should nurture and protect according to both.(at least til we become intergalactic civilization.) :-)

    Either way still doesn't destroy my statement bwhaha

    Peace(with each other) and Harmony(with nature) is our best means forward.

  155. ez2b12

    @ The Imposter

    you said: "MAYBE religion is still so important for these two reason…
    1. As Coyote says “Sciences tell us we are all equal” yet most don’t live or treat others like this.
    2. As ez2b12 said “We have learned that we can make money by exploiting the natural world” isn’t this *in the most grand sense* our home which we should nurture and protect according to both."

    I don't see how religion could remedy either of these. We have tons of religion now, certainly more religion than science, yet these problems as you pointed out yourself run prolifically through our society. While most religions preach about the brotherhood of man or morality, they continue in practice to segregate and cause violence.

    I in no way dislike or think bad of religiouse people but I cannot be blind to the negative results of belief in general. Once we define our beliefs of what is true we tend not to accept anything other than those beliefs. This is human nature i suppose but it can have horrible consequences like war, segregation, shame, guilt, murder, etc., etc.

    I love this song that really says what i am trying to say.

    "belief is a beautiful armor, but makes for the heaviest sword. Just like swinging underwater you never can hit who your trying for."

    In fact we often hit ourselves effectively and destroy what we have worked so hard to build in mere seconds with just a few words. This is happening right now in my country, the US. We are saying things about Muslims and the Islamic faith that are unforgivable, taking actions that will destroy us in the future. All because of the belief systems being so different and uncompromising. Our very constitution is being thrown in the trash over religiouse belief, the very thing we left Europe to get away from.

    Still we must believe in somethings or we have no standards. So who says what beliefs are o.k. and which ones are not? I think this gets into a very coomplicated disscussion at this point. Certain principles all men seem to believe in to some degree, i would hope any way. I believe in freedom, acceptance of others, mans need to understand, that murder is generally wrong, etc., etc. But where do we draw the line? I say we draw the line at beliefs that begin to segregate insted of unite, with beliefs that condemn insted of inspire, with beliefs that devalue morality or human life. These are very vague guide lines though, I suppose the perpencity to distort and destroy will always find a way. But we can do better, lets start their- We can do better.

  156. ez2b12

    @ the Imposter

    By the way to say Peace with one another is the best way forward is true, we all know that. But how, that is the question. How do we have peace with one another. This was the down fall of my generation, we thought we would just have peace and love and be happy. But none of us stopped to think, how. We spent too much time high and listening to music, not enough time really working on the problems. Just food for thought.

  157. coyote03

    @ the ImPoster

    The statistics were just semantics! My point was that you can't blame suicide on science, as suicide affects all cultures. A point I'd like to further establish is that religious SUICIDE was not just about killing ones self, but about taking others with them as well. Other forms of suicide involve more of a personal choice, whereas suicide bombings are an indoctrinated belief based on faith.

    The nuclear bomb was no doubt a horrible idea, but its not suicide, the kamikaze pilots on the other hand were committing suicide in the name of their heavenly sovereign, or emperor. Obviously both are terrible, but the whole point you made was about suicide. The a-bomb killed many, and killing that many innocent people is wrong, but in no way is killing a construct of science itself. Taking one's own life is one thing, taking others with you in the name of god is something totally different and sick, and in my opinion, far worse!

    Dawkins is not out for any personal gain, he's not trying to get on god's good side by helping others reach salvation, he simply wants people to learn! The church no doubt sucks its patrons dry for the most part and has done so through many clever guises throughout history, one such example is the selling of indulgences, there's about a billion other scams employed by religious leaders all over the world. Not to say others don't employ scams and tricks, but it has undoubtedly been a hallmark of religion since its inception!

    As for government being responsible for the most deaths, up until pretty recently church and state weren't separate, kings/emperors held divine power and in Western culture have mostly answered to the Pope for around 1500 years. This is how it has been in almost every culture until the past 200 years or so. Leaders for the most part have used divine descent as a way to justify their position and actions, rarely have they used science, and even if they did claim it was science, it was generally rooted in some kind of religious ideology (early Eugenics for example).

  158. Enzo

    @ ez2b12
    Just a quick post before I head to work.
    I thought that people left Europe because it wasn't religious enough. The whole puritan business and all that. Also, the way I see it is that by his very nature man was somewhat 'separate' to begin with. Also I would have to argue that religious concepts developed overtime. The creation of gods was never a tool to control nature but rather a manifestation of man's awe, fascination and ignorance of the natural world. I would love to say more but gotta make a move.

  159. coyote03

    "The creation of gods was never a tool to control nature but rather a manifestation of man’s awe, fascination and ignorance of the natural world."

    Lends itself pretty nicely to controlling other people though!

  160. The ImPoster

    @ez2b12
    They definitely don't fix either of those. Normal people like easy options though. This is same reason why people who are rich don't work much; why do they need to. I live in US and i can tell you the solution to all this but its to logical to happen. Obviously separation of church and state is important so keep religion outta politics. Next since we have so many people who need jobs let some of the soldiers that just got back take a break. Now make all the federal institutions get audited and weed out the corruption. Then employ some more state police with the extra money by giving money to the states. Get rid of marshal law some time before this though would probably be a good idea. Then close em down if they cause trouble(the churches). Stop the war on drugs(ha); we have enough non-violent criminals as it is. Isn't that what the DEA is for; getting the big ones and stopping it from getting in. So we just cut spending don't; they work for us? Invest in renewable energy. Create jobs don't give big bonuses to CEOs. Give states back more power. Heard somewhere auditing the federal reserve would be a good idea for our long run. Definitely reinforce the constitution why would you mess up a good thing(and yes that's the reason for separation of church and state). More transparency of government could help. Some of that in a different order would be good start IMO. What do i know though I'm probably on that yellow list. ;-) The thing that strikes me odd is we advertise ourselves as a police state. Now peace though that's the reason i am writing a book; i couldn't fit all that here; haven't done enough research either.

    Ah and the most important thing fix education and pump out more smart people.

    @coyote
    Like i was sayings its all speculative on the suicide thing with out proper research. I was talking about side-effects; not everything is direct relation; you know super volcano's explode causes ice age type of deal. So i concede if that's what your looking for there. To this though "up until pretty recently church and state weren’t separate". Would it not be possible that the state was just using the church to accomplish its will; and if so half the problems fixed now. Not to mention that not everything can be directly blamed on the religion itself. I just like to inspire thought and alot of what i say is speculative so don't read everything with a grain of salt. I do like Richard Dawkins though... til he starts talking 'militant atheist'. He is quite wise and defiantly able to get smart people to think.

  161. Epicurus

    @imposter.

    i wonder how many atheist people have killed their children to save them from the devil.

    or maybe blown up a wedding of innocent people just because they believed differently than them

    how does religion make one moral? if anything it makes them fearful of retribution which doesnt make them moral at all. it makes them do good things out of fear.

    In "The New Criminology", Max D. Schlapp and Edward E. Smith say that two
    generations of statisticians found that the ratio of convicts without
    religious training is about 1/10 of 1%. W. T. Root, professor of
    psychology at the Univ. of Pittsburgh, examined 1,916 prisoners and said
    "Indifference to religion, due to thought, strengthens character," adding
    that Unitarians, Agnostics, Atheists and Free-Thinkers are absent from
    penitentiariers or nearly so.

    During 10 years in Sing-Sing, those executed for murder were 65% Catholics,
    26% Protestants, 6% Hebrew, 2% Pagan, and less than 1/3 of 1% non-religious.

    Steiner and Swancara surveyed Canadian prisons and found 1,294 Catholics,
    435 Anglicans, 241 Methodists, 135 Baptists, and 1 Unitarian.

    Dr. Christian, Superintendant of the NY State Reformatories, checked
    22,000 prison inmates and found only 4 college graduates. In "Who's Who"
    91% were college graduates, and he commented that "intelligence and
    knowledge produce right living" and that "crime is the offspring of
    superstition and ignorance."

    Surveyed Massachusetts reformatories found every inmate religious, carefully
    herded by chaplins.

    In Joliet, there were 2,888 Catholics, 1,020 Baptists, 617 Methodists and
    0 non-religious.

    Michigan had 82,000 Baptists and 83,000 Jews in their state population.
    But in the prisons, there were 22 times as many Baptists as Jews, and 18 times
    as many Methodists as Jews. In Sing-Sing, there were 1,553 total inmates with
    855 of them Catholics (over half), 518 Protestants, 177 Jews and 8 non-
    religious. There's a very interesting qualified statistic.

    Steiner first surveyed 27 states, and found 19,400 Christians, 5,000 with
    no preference, and only 3 Agnostics (one each in Connecticut, New Hampshire,
    and Illinois). A later, more complete survey found 60,605 Christians, 5,000
    Jews, 131 Pagans, 4,000 no preference, and only 3 Agnostics.

    In one 29-state survey, Steiner found 15 unbelievers, Spirtualists,
    Theosophists, Deists, Pantheists and 1 Agnostic among nearly 83,000 inmates.
    Calling all 15 "anti-christians" made it one half person to each state.
    Elmira reformatory overshadowed all, with nearly 31,000 inmates, including
    15,694 Catholics (half), and 10,968 Protestants, 4,000 Jews, 325 refusing
    to answer, and 0 unbelievers.

    In the East, over 64% of inmates are Catholics. In the national prison
    population they average 50%. A national census found Catholics 15%. They
    count from the diaper up. Hardly 12% are old enough to commit a crime.
    Half of these are women. That leaves an adult Catholic population of 6%
    supplying 50% of the prison population.

    Liverpool, England produces three percent as many young criminals as
    Birmingham, a larger city, 28% coming from Catholic schools.

    What does this tell you about parochial school systems or claims that religion
    is the guardian of morals?

    Fifty-two percent of people belong to no church, yet live clean lives and supply less than 1% of the total criminal population.

  162. The ImPoster

    @Epicurus
    It just tells me that a lot of people have been introduced to a religion at some point in their life. If we had a ideal society yea that would bother me but we don't. Also are you saying those people; put in same situations in life; having no religion wouldn't be there?

  163. The ImPoster

    Also the quality of that article you sighted is defiantly not top notch.

    "Michigan had 82,000 Baptists and 83,000 Jews in their state population.
    But in the prisons, there were 22 times as many Baptists as Jews, and 18 times as many Methodists as Jews."

    Where did those dirty Methodists come from(i know, i know, they are in the state); not in the article though. Also i wonder if you get special religious privileges in jail; i know they have church sessions/groups in a lot of them. That might contribute to higher numbers. I read the full article you referenced; it just leaves a lot out of it. I would never buy such a book. :-)

  164. Epicurus

    im saying that the religion doesnt make someone more moral as the numbers all over the planet show. and possibly if some of those people were different religions or no religions they wouldnt be there but of course there is no way for me to positively argue that. but im sure for a couple atheists that are in prison they also wouldnt be there had they been a different belief.

    although Steven Weinberg would argue:

    "With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion."

    dont get me wrong though. i fully agree with you that we need unity and harmony and understanding of one anothers right to live before we can expect science OR religion to save us. without the peace the two will be used for negatives, however one will actually provide us with technology and medicine and predictive theories....lol

  165. The ImPoster

    @Epicurus
    I do agree with you there; science provides us much more useful tools. Just need to wrestle it back into the good peoples hands. I've had many people explain to me why we cant cure cancer; gut instinct still tells me this isn't true... :-)

  166. Enzo

    @ coyote03

    True that. But imo if you want to be a sheep and follow instead of finding the answer through your own mental capacity, then its your loss. :/

  167. i am become death

    @ imposter-Science never pretended to answer moral questions for us except psychology but there are still other disciplines, philosophy and ethics which deal with the problem in a dynamic and contemporary manner in relation with its society. Which brings up the point on suicide, the bible doesn't deal with suicide except in verses like judges 16;26-31 where it glorifies murder-suicide. Now the catholic church says you must have your sins absolved before death and suicide is self murder- how dare they instill fear and distress into these suffering families and friends of these poor people which i have known a few. Not to mention my previous anecdote on the girl who killed herself because a priest raped her, when her dad asked to see the pope on world youth day was told to go away and get over it- how compassionate. Religion is our first attempt at science and philosophy, its what we tried when we didn't know anything. It had its uses, its been wrong on so many counts and a single error destroys the myth of an omniscient god. We don't need to take the moral affirmations of bronze age nomadic warlords as our final say on what right and wrong. We have the responsibility to engage in discussion and bear history in mind as we realise we have a future whether we like it or not. The shape it takes is not in the lap of the gods but up to us.

  168. Enzo

    @ IABD

    Nice stuff there. I started looking over some J.S. Mill and he has a similar stance against dogmatic religion and belief systems. Basically he saw religious dogma as a major barrier to the progression of society. Dogma here, being those beliefs which are set in stone and are irrefutable. He believed that man should have the liberty to think for himself rather than be taught what to think. At the end of the day I don't think banning religion is the answer, after all, is that truly a sign of a liberal society. Each should have the right to believe what one chooses to believe. 'If mankind minus one were of one opinion, then mankind is no more justified in silencing the one than the one - if he had the power - would be justified in silencing mankind'. We just gotta learn to co-exist, that has always been the major challenge.

  169. coyote03

    @ Enzo

    Totally! I for sure wasn't backing religion, just posted that comment on your quote cause I thought it was funny :) Blindly following anything is a sad way to live! Being on this site I definitely feel like we're all expanding our horizons, well most of us at least haha

    @ the ImPoster

    The state was definitely using the church for its own means, and the church was definitely using the state for its own means. The point is just that using divine descent or the name of god is a cop-out in order to justify ones actions. Yet it's done all the time throughout history :(

  170. ez2b12

    @ Enzo

    I never said we left Europe because it was too religiouse, I was reffering to freedom of religion, something we seem not to want to afford the Muslims. On the rest we will have to agree to disagree, who knows for sure why man started religion. My opinion is based on several years of study in theology and many other theologian's opinions- I happen to agree with them. This doesn't mean we are right though, not by a long shot. Thanks for discussing this with me, good luck.

    @ The Imposter

    Again you give me a list of ends with no means, not being arguementative though. Do you have any plans for instigating these policies or how you would work through congress, the house, or any other government opposition? I hope so because your list sounds pretty good, not exacxtly what i would want but a vast improvement. It is not enough to be a arm chair quarter back though, just remember that. Good luck with your book, peace sounds wonderful just figure out the "how" and you have it whooped.

    P.S. You said: "Normal people like easy options.." Easy options don't work, their are no easy answers or genuise people that can just step in and make it all go away( as we Obama supporters are finding out). Its much more complicated than what you are giving it credit for, in "my" opinion. You have a perfect right to "your" opinion though. Good luck again, I would like to read that book when its done.(not sarcasm)

  171. Enzo

    @ ez2b12

    Really? hmm I must have read that off another post and assumed it was you, sorry man. Suppose we will have to agree to disagree. Its been a good discussion. Karma

  172. ez2b12

    @ Enzo

    No you read it from my post but misunderstood what i meant. Maybe it was my fault for not be clear though. To clear it up I meant to say we left Europe for freedom of religion, among other things, and now we are playing with the idea of not affording that right to every religion. At least that's what it seems we are "playing with" when we do not allow certain religions to have their places of worship were ever they choose. That said I can clearly see why people do not want a mosque at ground zero, it is a reminder of those that were blamed for the tradgedy.

    If we do not allow ther mosque at ground zero I think we should ban all christian churches from being located within so many feet of were an abortion doctor was murdered in cold blood by a christian fanatic. Terrorism is terrorism no matter who commits it domestic or foreign.

    Hope this is clearer, good luck again and thanks for your opinions.

  173. Randy

    I relish everything Richard Dawkins ever wrote, and his documentary works... pretty much, everything he does. Great minds like his come rarely in each generation...

    I'm just talkin' Richard Dawkins...

    I'm just sayin' Carl Sagan...

  174. ez2b12

    Randy said "I’m just sayin’ Carl Sagan…"

    And I am seconding that declaration, Sagan was one of the best minds I ever had the priviledge of trying to understand. He will be missed for ages to come, amongst the sane and reasonable. I have as of late been trying to find all of his work that i have not already read, watched, or listened to. If anyone knows of a good place were i can find his stuff as a collection, please let me know.

    I also agree about Dawkins. I know a lot of people see him as a militant person or the enemy of faith but, thats not how I see him at all and only takes in to consideration one part of his work. He also is a brilliant biologist that has contributed a lot to the field. His "growing up in the Universe" is the most beautiful and well thought out presentation I have ever seen on evolution.

    It is natural for a scientist such as himself to view faith, which is belief in the absence of evidence, as misguided. His entire carreer has been built around believing only the objective evidence and drawing logical conclusions. I feel by asking questions and letting people of faith answer he has tried to give religion a fair chance to explain itself. But these people he asks seem to get angry only at the fact that he is asking questions at all. Anything we can't question is radical and dangerouse, in my opinion. If religiouse people can assert that religion is a good thing that all should subscribe to, why can't he express his opinion?

  175. TonyH

    @The ImPoster
    You said:
    "Is this not a definition of religion being religion is a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe."
    and
    "Not surprised oxford had that definition [of religion]"
    and
    "i am neither theist or atheist because i don’t need a definition to define myself."

    I just wanted to clarify some things, Oxford Online dictionary defines religion as:
    the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods:
    [count noun] a particular system of faith and worship:
    [count noun] a pursuit or interest followed with great devotion:

    Atheism is not a religion! We do NOT believe in superhuman(s), we do not worship or use faith as a guidance (faith is ANYTHING but advocated), and it's not even followed with great devotion -- although it would be fair to say anti-theism IS a bit religious in that definition. Think of it this way, how religiously does your average Christian follow their non-acceptance of Zeus? If someone was constantly challenging them on the subject they may be forced to defend their position, but it hardly seems to accurate to claim they are in the religion of not believing in Zeus.

    Furthermore, a belief as defined by Oxford is:
    1 an acceptance that something exists or is true, especially one without proof: [ A non acceptance of a god or gods hardly qualifies as acceptance that something exists or is true ]
    something one accepts as true or real; a firmly held opinion:
    [ Atheism is a lack of a belief in a god, it is not the assertion that there is not, or could not be, a god. Many atheists can agree on two points 1) God COULD exist, maybe. 2) Given gross provable inaccuracies in holy texts, it's highly unlikely that anyone on earth actually knows anything about who/what/when/why god is and what it likes/dislikes/cares about the sexual preference of ]
    a religious conviction:
    [ we covered this ]

    No evidence for a diety has been brought to light that didn't involve massively misunderstanding or bastardizing current scientific research, often ignoring large chunks of data, outright lying, gaps, or at best "a personal feeling", at least I have never been made aware of such evidence and when I ask I always get "I try to figure out how I can explain a feeling"... You don't, people have feelings all the time that turn out to be downright wrong, if you think that a strong feeling is evidence of anything then you should ask some racists how far feelings get them when faced with actual evidence that should be contradicting their ideas.

    Just like good ol' Charles there, looked at a black person, looked at a monkey, became a racist... see where feelings instead of using your brain and actually looking at the research will get you? I imagine that was the last time he was an ignorant fool that didn't take the time to throw his presupposed opinions out the window and do some actual real impartial research.... right? Oh, right...

    As far as not being an atheist or a theist, you're one or the other, you start with a disbelief in gods (no child knows about god until it's taught to them) and then generally either hold on to that or for whatever reasons believe in god(s).

    This is aimed at anyone this is applicable to; it is often said that Atheists are know it alls that have all the answers. That's interesting, considering when asked what came before the big bang we say "we don't know" and you say "God". When asked the purpose of life we say "We don't know, currently it doesn't appear to have a purpose specifically" yet you say you know the answers to this. When asked about morality we have to derive our morality by looking at the world and the people in it and how they live and what things negatively impact them, religious folks claim to have all the answers to that written in their one book. WHO KNOWS ALL THE F-CKING ANSWERS AGAIN?!?!

    I just finished getting in a debate with 3 of my closest friends now over evolution because they did not believe "we came out of a monkey". 3 more friends that now have a line drawn between us, because I don't deny reality. My friend said this debate really tears people apart -- he's right, fundamentalism really does tear people apart, doesn't it? They won't even look at evidence, no interest whatsoever, they don't like it so it can't be true and as long as they ignore it then it won't be true and they can just keep treating people like it's not and everyone else must be crazy.

    What a ridicious world, I'm with ez2b12, going millitant again.

  176. bigdaddy_RO

    i so wanted to strangle the muslim teacher. and indeed all religion-pushing teachers. it's outraging.

    and thank you for posting this doc., dawkins rules.

  177. TonyH

    @ Charles

    I was thinking, Christians might want to consider something. When asked for evidence of god it is very common for someone to say something like "How do I prove a feeling". They also mention something of a "God Filter" being some mysterious device that let's them interpret science research with God. Be careful though, because if one day evolution becomes so overwhelmingly proven that only the crazies don't accept it (like flat earthers, or geocentrists) the validity of that "feeling" is going to be coming under some serious critisism. Think of it this way, if god had genesis innacurately presented, then sent Jesus and didn't have Jesus correct the mistakes, and then in the face of evidence didn't reach down and implant "these creationists are lying and using psuedoscience to 'lie for god' which they consider appropriate, and the real truth is..." in your invisible soul, at some point it will beg the question... exactly when does god implant the CORRECT answer in people? Remaining ignorant to the evidence wouldn't be a benefit, god would be quite capable of leading you to the truth without you wanting to go there. He knows this has drawn a huge dividing line across society, if he continues to lie to his flock then we have some serious concerns. So when you pray, and pay attention to that filter, make damn good and sure you're actually hearing what god wants you to hear, because it directly relates to disproving the existence of any such thing. As it stands, if a god created the process of evolution, a process that is capable of applying trial and error to itself and essentially engineering itself to it's environment, then god is awesome. If god is accidently putting tails in some humans -- I have some interesting questions about the omnipotence of that deity.

  178. Henry

    Holy c@#$ every time there is a video with anything related to religion people get all emotional. Keep your beliefs to yourself, there is no need to try and make someone believe in something they don't WANT to believe in. I mean look at this comment section, it's so long that if I used my mouse the wheel would fall off by the time I reach the top of the page.

  179. corey

    @Garro

    Yes! I'm on the same boat as you. Although our beliefs are slightly different, at least from what I could tell from your post.

    Dawkins aggrivates me to my core. I'm not religious, however I don't discount or reject the presence or idea of a "greater-being". However I wont continue with my beliefs here, since I would expect no one to care xD

    I've seen all of his documentaries and I've had enough of him. He proclaims that he thinks religion is a terrible principle and that people who believe it are irrational to others beliefs, yet when confronted with a rational religious individual he tries his hardest to prove their beliefs wrong or try to pursuay them to understand that evolution is right and they're wrong.

    Along with his blantant disregard for anyones ideals he's a king of; like you said "Cherry-picking". When speaking to the one principal (The guy talking about a parents right to choose education) or whoever he was, Dawkins argues like any other fool because he knew he was cornered. He has a problem with answering questions.

    He's a self-rightious, self-proclaimed leader of causing the problems he's trying to fix.

    Anyway. That's my opinion of the guy.

  180. A. T. Heist

    Thinking critically is a necessary but, religion we can do without because it damns discernment essential to critical thought.

  181. Randy

    Yes. Everyone hates the smartest kid in the room. I know that dynamic very well, and have recieved ample beatings from football jocks because of my high IQ.

    Eventually, I learned to beat them back...

    But, those guys are all balding, credit-drowning, miserable, people struggling to make it on 25,000 dollars (US) a year.

    I'm just sayin'-- Carl Sagan

    I'm just talkin'-- Richard Dawkins

    Stop your b*tchin'-- it's Christopher Hicthens

    Religion is the refuge of the unwashed, uneducated masses.

  182. The ImPoster

    Figured I would pop back in since I've reached my final conclusion on this subject.

    @ez2b12
    Yea I'm still working on the details maybe if i figure it out people can go easy way on me and ill just lead by example ;-)

    @coyote03
    I do agree religion is used as a cop-out to validate injustices but i think it sounds like a egotistical malfunction over a idealogical.

    @TonyH (going to rant for you pleasure or nightmare)
    I did correct my statement about it not being a religion by definition; in this section or another. What you refer to is Agnosticism though... Atheist do not believe... Anti-theist believe its been dis-proven... no matter what; i still don't consider myself any of it. I am merely a man... what i know and what you know; is a small part of "thousands of confident religions, ideologies... a fraction of a dot" - Carl Sagan's The Pale Blue Dot. Though i still stand by a earlier statement i made about him creating a dogma; ill classify it as Spiritual-Racism for the moment. Dogma doesn't create a religion though since the only requirement is a "set of beliefs concerning the origin(big bang) and purpose(unknown) of the universe". Now the reason i don't define myself and made up spiritual-racism. Its what I'm trying to avoid in my life. I figure the more people trying to convert me and willing to socialize with me; Definitely going to provide more information and possibility's that i might not even have dreamed up.

    You say "No evidence for a diety has been brought to light that didn’t involve massively misunderstanding or bastardizing current scientific research, often ignoring large chunks of data, outright lying, gaps, or at best “a personal feeling”".
    I must disagree if your clumping all religions together... Pagan's, Humanists, Transcendentalists, Pantheists, and Deists would have no problem grasping the "scientifically correct" version of evolution, the big bang, quantum mechanics, ect. you and I are familiar with. Now I'm going to compare god to infinity; WARNING OBSESSION WITH INFINITY CAN CAUSE YOUR PSYCHOPATHIA TO LEAK... Since it is easily the best thing in science that is associative to the entirety of everything in the universe(chance, time, concepts, matter, energy, gravity). Just like god you cant give it a finite answer and its outcome's are even infinite numbers with only one chance of null... for example, if X is an infinite number, then X + X = 2X, X - X = 0(or non-existence), X * X = X^2, X + 1 are all distinct infinite numbers. That's just using one set infinity; what if there was multiple distinct infinity... X and Y maybe different X*Y=XY ect. Proving its existence is easy since people who like string theory already believe in "infinitely thin" vibrating strings; to compensate general relativity's blowing up when quantum mechanics was introduced to it. In other ways (the most common ones). Eternity: linguistically the opposite of finite, having no edges, limits, or end: How can I write down the largest possible number? Indefinite: How could God be sure that there is no-one greater? Circularity: The line defining a circle does not have an end.(unless defined a start) Then two I contemplate often as thought exercises. The usefulness to define infinite numbers example being Pi or 3.14159265(I'll stop here since it never ends). Also our absurdity that we claim we can date the universe at this time (i know on 23 April 2009 a gamma-ray burst was detected which was later confirmed at being over 13 billion years old). Now I'm not beyond a reasonable doubt the rate of constant by which the universe cooled in early time due to hyper inflation is verifiable with limited testing scope of testing done at the moment. Also as a closer on this i consider time merely a constant necessary to experience existence that is used as a tool to explain other phenomena relative to us better. Its another useful infinity because how much time was before the big bang...

    "WHO KNOWS ALL THE ... AWNSERS"(we all know part of it involving the important things; just need to work together better) I can answer one of those hard ones for you and provide evidence for it. "When asked the purpose of life we say “We don’t know, currently it doesn’t appear to have a purpose specifically” yet you say you know the answers to this". Existence is the purpose of life... scientifically its the last one because organisms don't live for any purpose other then to exist. Chance by sheer numbers shows that it had to happen so we exist because we had to. Then the defining characters of our existence(over monkeys); Our ability of profound understanding and social constructs. Even in evolution we have always been social creatures and have developed profound emotions that is mostly unique to us(I know animals experience pain and pleasure but i refer to the higher levels like love, valor, justice, charity, kindness). These are tied directly to experiencing existence better. Stephan Hawking did put it well... "It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going". Since the only answer that comes from god is he started it then whats the problem: science only cares about after because we cant understand before yet. So work together and keep your "love" interests to yourself; its a perfect duty to society in Immanuel Kants brand of thinking.

    I also realized why i laughed Dawkins after watching enough of his documentaries... The fact him and others of brilliant stature, are wasting energy to criticize a insignificant part of the real equation; suggests they have run out of capacity to break ground or be successful in a useful field... Please show me his merits again to place him among the ranks of true genius... Sagan, Kent, Einstein, Nietzsche, Epicurus, Newton, Aristotle types of genius... in all honesty hes rating a low George Carlin type of brilliant and i love that man. I see Dawkins stuff and cant help but think he would be a better teacher then theist hate monger.:-P

  183. TonyH

    "I did correct my statement"

    Cool, thanks, I find it personally insulting when people try to treat this like we're just doing the same thing they are.

    "What you refer to is Agnosticism though"

    The only time I can see myself referring to agnosticism is when I mention the second thing that atheists generally agree upon, there's a reason I didn't say all atheists though, not all make that assertion. Agnosticism (as I'm sure you know) is not the friendly middle ground that so many like to cling to when they don't have the balls to admit they lack a belief and thus are atheist, but rather a belief that nobody knows or can know god and by extension an assertion that religions on earth currently must be wrong.

    "I am merely a man…"

    Oh come now, don't pull the "I'm just a feeble human stuck in a big complicated world" card. Nobody is asking you if you think you know everything. Do you currently hold a belief in a god? If you don't, then you are an atheist. Let's not get caught up thinking we're on different planes of existence here. Just because one is an atheist, doesn't mean one can't become something else when others "provide more information and possibility’s that [one] might not even have dreamed up".
    "Pagan’s, Humanists, Transcendentalists, Pantheists, and Deists would have no problem grasping the “scientifically correct” version of evolution, the big bang, quantum mechanics, etc. you and I are familiar with."

    Certainly, as with many Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, and so forth. The smart ones realize that they're not evidences of god, which was my point. Many grasp evolution, but don't then turn around and say "See, there's my evidence, God's doing that, he's just really really slow and s@#$%^".

    I'm an ex-creotard, I spent a good majority of my life waiting on Jesus. I honestly did not see a reason why science was important, my familiarity with those above mentioned concepts is surface deep at very best (most of my energy towards learning biology), I certainly wouldn't claim to be anything more. What I have seen though, is a consistent failure to verify any of the certain claims that are made, when put under a real test they always fail. Any questions I have ever put forth have eventually broken down to "You have to have faith". The reason I have such a firm stance against religion is because I am well aware of the brainwashing capabilities of such an institution. I used to do the whole arms in the air, tears a flowin' b@##$%&*! It is only now that I can say with 100% absolute, beyond any reasonable doubt certainty, I (and I strongly suspect everyone else there) made this s@#$ up in my head. That might be an insult to the product of a designing god, but when one considers what we used to be as a species, is it really that surprising? If a chimp did the same thing, would it blow your mind?

    With the last paragraph in mind, I'm not even going to touch your math, I have a strong suspicion that the "evidence" lies in a god even being possible, not actual evidence for a god. But I'll leave the Randy's of the world to take that one on.

    "Also our absurdity that we claim we can date the universe at this time"

    I don't know enough about it, but I suspect you're right, I do leave room for the many things humans haven't figured out yet, even god. I just don't think we (that's anyone, religious or not) know enough about our universe yet to make any serious claims about much beyond what we can see / work with here.
    "Existence is the purpose of life"

    I get what you're saying, but it's a pretty meaningless expression, it also might get into some heavy word play since 'purpose' is defined by Oxford as :

    "1 the reason for which something is done or created or for which something exists"

    I'm not sure if "The reason it exists is because it exists" is of much use, it's certainly not going to satisfy someone that believes in any mainstream religion. Personally, I don't see a purpose behind any of it, I certainly wouldn't propose a purpose just like that by playing with words. The closest I might come is in simulations things that cooperate seem to win out, things that fight amongst themselves seem to die out, if there is a god or a creator maybe he/she/it wants us to overcome our silly nonsense about pretending to know everything, and work together to ensure our species continued survival. This is based on a VERY LOW level of Biology knowledge, I'm willing to bet someone here could give me a dozen examples of when this hasn't been the case.

    Regarding the Dawkins bit, perhaps this is "insignificant" to you, but to many of us separating people into schools of belief so that they grow up consistently learning that the other is wrong, IS A F@#$%^& S@#$%^ IDEA AND I CANNOT FOR THE LIFE OF ME GRASP HOW PEOPLE DON'T GET THAT! Segregation is the enforced idea that people are different. It is actually going out of your way to say "You, are not them". Even worse if you make the assertion that god is on their side. We already have religion segregation, many call it the East and the West, look how well that's working out for us! Let's call it what it is, they don't want people to challenge their beliefs, and when you put religions together people are often forced to defend their beliefs. If you're talking about his stance on life history, 42% of Canadians [granted in 2008, I don't know anything more current, but I know a lot of people that don't accept evolution] believe dinosaurs and humans co-existed. Define insignificant for me. If you're talking about his anti-theist stance, ask yourself WHY 42% believe that, and you will see Dawkins (and mine, and many others) problem.

    You have the right to form your own opinions, you don't have the right to form your own facts.

    Thanks for your reply.

  184. The ImPoster

    @TonyH
    First definitely not forming my own facts that/this isn't a scientific institution style of analysis its a rant. When you said “I’m just a feeble human stuck in a big complicated world”... your right; no one man can possible have all the answers; which is why i said no one can know everything. Like you said biology is your thing. So i can't expect you to understand computer programs, energy production or distribution systems, psychology, health procedures ect. My point being we need all of these things and more to even make our existence possible. We rely on all of these to progress continually, further, and/or faster. So yes we are stuck in a big complicated world(though i am not feeble i can understand and accept that). So the only resource of real value is more intelligent humans. Which is the reason i commented in this particular Dawkins video.

    FULL REVIEW OF DOC
    The only purpose for creating a documentary such as this is(that i see); To purpose that religion is indoctrinating children through the education system. Lets consider the education system figures Dawkins uses. He says taxpayers pay up to 90% of religious schools funding and they currently number 1/3rd of the schools so only 30% of the tax money used on education is for faith schools. This is a bit misleading if you don't consider amount of GDP spent on education to begin with. Best information I could find showed it at 5% in Europe. That's a pathetic amount of money to reinvest in the quality and competition of your education system. Since you cant discriminate against religion its probably easier to get a school grant under those premise. He says they have to travel miles to get to a non-faith based schools... is the choice not better then the tertiary system (in US you are restricted to a school based on region) that doesn't have to compete; so seems to bottoms out in standards; probably why Europe has over-qualified workers and US struggles to give everyone a job cause they all get outsourced for cheaper labor. He suggests taking away their money at the beginning; then switches to a education standard; This could fix the problem of religious discrimination in the first place. Having a one or two year class "Religious Education" that is spent studying all religions; would help to let people understand others at a deeper level; Since a decent amount agree most religions have something to offer on one level or another. The reason this would work is because if they are getting money from taxes a curriculum could be established on them or lower the funding. Then he switched back to indoctrination. We don't need to predispose humanity to religions but drastic change doesn't work out well in the end... this is a social issue and indoctrination is just another wordplay based on the assumption that humans don't have free thought. Converting wouldn't be possible then and unbelieving things would also not be. Plus then what about social indoctrination and military; are they not just as bad or do we only attack the mostly non-destructive ones in a civilized society. In science we indoctrinate to kill for your country's belief; in religion for your spiritual beliefs; a difference is not clear to me since they are both based on assumptions you know whats right. You and him both feel X% of people don't believe in evolution is a crime to science. "Evolution is only one small thing" it simply says how we came to be and continue to receive undeserved bigger brains... Our discovery of its defiantly not more useful then our understanding of fire, electricity, or geometric mathematics; So using religions don't believe this small detail in the tapestry of life is a weak argument to me. It becomes insignificant when you compare how many of those are going into Evolutionary Research(probably 0 so wheres the problem). A child said "The koran is evidence of science" Just prior to that Dawkins says "Christianity has reconciled with it"; Good thing i have read both the koran and bible and can say they share alot of similarity's. Ive also already suggested a scenario that combines evolution and most of the "aggravating" religions and makes the entire thing a moot point for me; if Adam and Eve is just a profoundly advanced insight into the first human's; Then evolution confirmed what someone in b.c. was thinking. A guy at the beginning of doc says "to separate yourself off from the rest of society is deeply tragic". I'm glad not everyone thinks like this; since being a unique individual separate from (but working with) society is the best way to bring about change. "They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown. ~ Carl Sagan"; they were separating themselves from society laughing stocks(of their time) but profoundly change life as we know it. :-)

    Last Rantings
    Yea the comparison to infinity is just a means of showing why it may never be solved... Understanding god to me is equivalent to reductionism of infinity. Its why i prefer it as a thought experiment. Though if we ever do crack the grand unifying theory... Things will happen :-P. The reason i stress existence is the meaning of life is because existence is such a broad and encompassing term. Mathematically the only way you can balance something is with itself; or a set of equal representative terms. So stressing over why we are here is akin to stressing over why the universe exists. We are here because we are here; so enjoying life and spreading happiness is the best thing for a part of our species to accomplish; If we learn something in the mean time its good for humanity as the whole.
    Existence Ripped from Merriam Webster
    1 a: reality as opposed to appearance b: reality as presented in experience c: the totality of existent things d: sentient or living being(life)
    2 a: the state or fact of having being especially independently of human consciousness and as contrasted with nonexistence b: the manner of being that is common to every mode of being c: being with respect to a limiting condition or under a particular aspect
    3: actual or present occurrence

    The Last Thing
    I do agree with you here alot "The closest I might come is in simulations things that cooperate seem to win out, things that fight amongst themselves seem to die out, if there is a god or a creator maybe he/she/it wants us to overcome our silly nonsense about pretending to know everything, and work together to ensure our species continued survival." Don't have to worry about reminding me why i admired Dawkins til recently; he did do work in Evolutionary biology and was a professor... Oh yea and he was Anglican; converted to Christianity after discovering the "argument from design"; then went atheist... So he himself is a proof of indoctrination being a iffy term.

  185. jordan

    there is no god, religions are a brain washing cult, children are grown up getting all the rubbish forced into their brains so they grow up and have no real life, and instead serve this great being who does not exsist. you get one life, it's sad to see people wasting it away.

    THERES PROBABLY NO GOD. now stop worrying and enjoy your life! (quote i saw on a billboard)

    peace xox

  186. Creatio-whaa!?

    Wow, I'm shocked... one area where the US is light-years ahead of the UK in a major public education and church/state separation issue. We have our own problems, no doubt, but nothing so ridiculous.

    1/3 of "public" schools are flat-out, openly operated by religious institutions? They hand taxpayer money to these "public" schools and still allow them to regulate themselves? Wow. I'll have to keep this in mind next time a Brit tries to tell me how "advanced" UK society is. =P

  187. 47

    @Creatio-whaa!?

    Thought that one too. I can very much relate to this whole problem. Born in central asia and raised in Germany I had to comply with the rules of adventist, christian theology. I was brainwashed since the days I can remember. As I am very loyal to those I care about I've hesitated to doubt the christian faith. As time went on the opportunity was given to me to go to New York and to live there for a month. That experience made a lasting impression in my mind. To sum it up, I met so many people for diffrent places, of different thinking and most important: the culture of "you become what you choose to be".

    So it came to my decision to challenge the beliefs I got and to find evidence, if there was any.

    At the end I knew, everything I stood for, my famly stands for, the whole system of values is based on a lie, a myth.

    As of today I doubt that humans are capable to think reasonable consistently. I dont need to be convinced to live in a matrix made by machines, a real matrix made by humans is enough.

    To focus on the key point I want to make here I will describe it in one sentence:

    There is nothing good nor bad, the human mind is able to create its own reality for every purpose

    But there is only one truth

  188. Mystico09

    Religion and Science are in Harmony- The Baha'i Faith! Might be of interest to some... leave it to you to investigate.

  189. Trish

    Although I applaud the Islamic school for opening it's doors to critique ... I was literally shocked and aghast while watching that school's science teacher unable to answer the very simplest of questions regarding evolution.

    And then it struck me. That teacher must have, at some point, been provided the correct answer to that very question, and she knowingly refuses to teach that answer even alongside the faith based answer - completely conflicting the school's original disposition.

    Teach the controversy? How is that even possible?

  190. Lary Nine

    The cenral idea of this Dawkins-doc that education should be entirely open to inquiry by young minds. Also, he rather courageously questions whether it is ethical to consider children as the property of their parents 100% when it comes to deciding curriculum in schools. Dawkins asks: Do they have rights as far as education is concerned? The problem arises when schools teach the parental religion concurrently with science, for example, because the religious doctrine becomes an overriding context within which religion falsely occludes and modifies the science. The professor has faith, in a way, that if you just teach the basic, naturalistic subjects, unalloyed with religion, then the truth will win out in young minds. I agree and raised my own children accordingly.

  191. Lary Nine

    PS: Of course, sea water does mix readily with fresh water.

  192. The dust foot philosopher

    Organized religion was never meant to keep the community honest and moral. The whole scheme was designed to teach people to accept abuse and mistreatment without retaliating. The same people who are telling you not to kill and to turn the other cheek are some of the same people who are out to kill you and slap you in the face. Not that I would defend either action.

    Its part of our culture many argue. So was slavery. The is always a compass to the future, it is how you interpret the compass. Although the compass always points to the destination, it is often hard to accept you have been going the wrong way for so long. I was thus.

    It doesn’t always take two to fight, just one to decide he wont be killed. As a born again agnostic :-) I fight, albeit meekly as I have yet to be able come out to my family.

    It seems to me, religion is mainly growing rapidly in the improvised world. Is there a correlation between those that need god and those that believe in him? I think so. We are quite needy creatures. We need food, water, shelter. Many of us feel we need redemption, and assurance. Maybe. But can we not redeem ourselves and assure each other without dividing ourselves more than we are already divided? Is the need for emotional security as important as another’s need to exist, or another need to get a REAL education?

    Certainty, even perceived, offers a form of stability. For stability in the world as a whole to be attained, I think our world can no longer afford certainty. When alchemy died, true chemistry was born. When astrology was discredited astronomy began in earnest. When organized religion has its last death through, true philosophy will begin to take place.

  193. The dust foot philosopher

    The Past is always a compass to the future*

  194. Lary Nine

    @dust foot~
    The problems arise when civilizations argue over the layout of the compass dial. It gets even worse when the citizens of said civilizations are self-blinded by religion.

  195. Fender

    Offcourse wars are about oil prices and political powers.
    Then Religion is a handy tool to let soldiers fight for you.
    Lots of soldiers willing to die for their 'good' religion to kill the 'bad' religion.
    How many soldiers do you think would be willing to fight if they wre told the truth, that they should fight in another country to control oil prices or to gain political power? not many!

    So in my opinion
    'politics and resources and conflicts are the spark, but religion is the flames '

  196. LP

    We owe it to our children to give them the best possible education and let them have exposure to all philosophies and beliefs so that they can make up their own minds. Faith based? Let's call it superstition based.

  197. Gary V

    We need to stop paying for these schools to miseducate childeren

  198. vivek soley

    Thanks Richard for all your work. You are my voice.

  199. Fiona Chu

    I grew up in Hong Kong and a lot of the schools are faith based. In fact, most of the top schools are catholic/protestant. However, student's admission is not based on their parents faith as much as what i saw in this film. You know how asians want their child to get in the best school and stuff and they will even fake an address to stay in the school district. Too many parents are faking the religion and eventually being faithful or not doesn't matter any more. A lot of the students in faith schools are non-religious, and apart from mandatory RE lessons ( grades from this class is not considered in grade average) , the school does not force any believe on the students.

    I don't really think there's a need to eliminate faith schools, but children should not be barred from admission for being not religious when they are running on gov. money ( I would say if the faith schools fund themselves they can choose to admit whoever they want)

    In fact I think infiltrating faith schools with non-believers is a faster way to destroy religion. No need to eliminate them, just make them accept pupils without excluding them based on believes, and not force believes on children once they are in there.

  200. Myra McQueen

    There is freedom of religion in most areas, but Richard hates religion, and so may not go along with any who dare to tread on his pet theories

  201. jonathan jackward

    google this unified field of consciousness

  202. jonathan jackward

    google this .....unified field of consciousness

  203. AUWR

    There is. But this freedom comes at a price called ignorance. Which is very dangerous, especially when it comes to children's education.

  204. Jim Moore

    Schools should concern themselves with education and academics and leave theology to the grown ups to argue over

  205. zureal

    Dawkins should get in to politics.

  206. Marnie Watson O Brien

    I greatly admire this man.

  207. Marnie Watson O Brien

    in fact, in religion class in ireland we watched part of this documentary, read richard dawkins and debated over ecclesiastical issues.

  208. Hollis Evon Ramsey

    faith teaches the glory of ignorance in the face of facts, and the arrogance that comes with that glory. it is frightening that children are being indoctrinated -- the perfect word for it -- while their brains are so pliable and trusting. it makes for a long and arduous journey of the self to release their minds from servitude, and many do not make that journey.

  209. Shane

    Just skip to part 3/4 at 6:52. Pretty much sums everything up.

  210. Michael Jay Burns

    He certainly does not want to support it with public taxes. His "pet theories" happen to be main stream science. They could be wrong but so far the evidence is on their side.

  211. Bella Button

    Evolution has been scientifically proven, there are of course gaps in knowledge scientists have to piece together from yet to be found fossils. It is worth reading about evolution in depth if you are willing.

  212. Jon

    If people realize the circumstances of the Dark Ages that the scientific method supposedly cured, religion was made an excuse for everything. Religion then was fused with the political system and no one can challenge authority unless he or she is prepared to defy the law.

    Today, science has been hijacked by a religion called environmentalism. Yup, we are now stuck in another dark age where political authorities dictate the terms we ought to know and understand. Education is given priority to create an illusion of progress despite the huge fail of many a science prediction. The Scientific Procedure has been replaced by science credentials and congressional approval or certifications. Public opinion is used to proclaim science facts as global warming in the same fashion of witch hunting during the dark ages.

    I hate to be a kill joy but the obvious is many are misled. Read Scriptures and understand that the problem is ignorance. Genesis was specific about mankind' s condition.

    The first man was the first atheist. The knowledge of God was hid from him. This removed him from paradise. It made him suffer and he got to work hard.

    We live in a world of knowledge. But this knowledge includes GOSSIP and hear say which are products of poor and ineffective communications. We tend to relate knowledge with power but the same power that creates, can also destroy. And it is the destructive side of Knowledge that is the ruin of this world.

    Tell us about the new religion craze, environmentalism. Look closely how it works and then relate it to Scriptures. The curse of Knowledge is echoed by this religion which is FEAR of World Destruction. Death is the fear of many environmentalists. With this in mind, many want to enjoy whatever life is left of them. Health and social welfare have become the priority. Many religious fanatics stuck in this FEAR make them want to stop human development completely. However, the book of Genesis was quite specific about this as the curse of Knowledge.

    Environmentalism, our new religion, has fooled even the elect. The Gospels declare that he who tries to save his life will lose it. Environmentalism is about saving the planet to save human life but the planet is now acting strangely different with more and more unforeseen natural calamities. The world has made a U-turn after discovery of the scientific procedure and it is taking civilization to bankruptcy as its fear of global warming has become a license for anthropological control leading men to borrow huge sums in an effort to pay for oil profits alone and shut off industrial production. Now isn't the world losing it completely due to knowledge?

Leave a comment / review: