Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss - An Evening With The Unbelievers (at Conway Hall) 

What a wonderful world it would be if it were full of people who think like these two guys and empty of religious myth believing people.

As an Atheist, I choose to spend my Christmas watching videos like this! ;)

These two are true heroes!

I love Richard and Lawrence together like this. Good team.

What a pleasant evening with 2 gentlemen who are as kind as intelligent. Enjoyed every minute

Richard Dawkins makes an interesting point around 29:31. “If you’ve got an independent criterion for deciding which bits of religion you find reasonable and which you don’t, just decide…cut out the middle man of religion.” We can apply a “modern, decent liberal understanding of what’s right and wrong.” Good point, we do not need the Bible to tell us what is reasonable.

Great. I am so satisfied to watch this kind of evolution on human history.

What a beautiful pear, these two. I could listen them 24/7, and still ask for more...

Lawrence always putting a human edge on Dawkin's stoicism.

Too many people watch the wrong videos on RU-vid, these videos need more awareness!

I can understand why the most moving moment of the evening has been omitted , but it will remain with me .

great final question+answer

lmfao richard dawkins donated the money to his own organization...what a boss.

Thank you for sharing this Q&A.

***** Thank you so much for giving us foreigners the opportunity to assist these events, even if not live.

excellent !

apart from the white bed sheet on the table, Great Q & A

Im a very offensive person, and I find this film absolutely religious...

I was at this event and one of the questions from the top was from a teenager who on that same afternoon was diagnosed with a terminal illness. It was very emotional and brave of him to even attend let alone admit this to a crowd but I believe he asked a question of what's the point of doing anything.. Lawrence replied with an incredibly beautiful and meaningful answer. Was this other section edited out? I hope we could get just Lawrence answer perhaps because it was really incredible.

Q and A session was just wonderful

Wow, I really like this video - thank you for recording and allowing me to be part of this fantastic Q&A with two of my favourite people in the world.

i SO enjoyed this...

two great actors

there is hope in the world with these people (including the audience) . I especially loved the Pakistani woman.

I love the goat Dr. Krauss!

A cosmic tombstone. That is 1 of the best ideas I've EVER heard.

Couldn't of had a more perfect end haha

Good video very insightful into the decisions made in the film!

I love how Lowrance said "No Richard you shouldn't" when they were talking about when to use offensive tactics vs "politically correct" because everyone loves Richard's straight answers and no bullshit approach

I read a book called "The God Who Hates" about one woman's life within Islam. Though she was a medical student in her late twenties, when she saw two boys plucking the feathers off two birds and told them they might be causing a problem a mere third grader said to her, "How dare you tell us what to do? Go home and cover your face!" I would never have dreamed saying anything negative to a girl older than myself even a year or so, not twenty years!

Great video

Hahah I love these guys!

I believe that we do not now need the opinion of great people such as Richard and Lawrence to convince us of the stupidity of religion. The overwhelming evidence of evolution and the age of the earth, which contradict of bible, should be enough to raise eyebrows among those believers to question old antiquated writings of fiction

what an inspiring event! I was even feeling a little "spiritual" at the end. never felt that way at any church gathering. only uncomfortable. I'll never understood why these churches would make every body greet each other. that was so uncomfortable because it was forced. I still get a creepy feeling thinking about that. Fortunately I will never have to do that again. I look forward to reaching out to other anti theists in my community for social interactions. Thanks for uploading!

I should be learning with him

I've realized that in every q and a like this one the people who propose the questions are way too into trying to get their intellect and ideas heard that they spend hours rambling about nonsense and then come to a quick simple question in the end. Rather than portraying their answer clearly and without wasting time.

Ken Ham hit the refresh button 34 times....

There’s an amazing new book out called “Bible Stories Mother Never Told Me” by CL Putnam that will blow your mind! It re-tells several Bible stories, but from the point of view of God’s “enemies” and his “victims”. If you really want to know the WHOLE truth about the Bible, read this book!!!

Krauss was worried about the Supreme Court then……he’d be positively furious now.

Great audience but I firmly disagree with the guy who didn't like the humour. I have found humour to be the best antidote to religious studies, particularly with children. When my kids were being exposed to it at school I just threw in a few Eddie Izzard quotes and now they can't hear the words God or Jesus without falling about laughing.

The great 'Chris French' in the audience at 31:42

Strauss has a BEARD!!! Wow

Rational people are those who believe that you need intelligence to create intelligent life.

Saw 'the unbelievers' movie on Netflix

I really do wish people wouldn't clap whenever the panelists state something decisive, it just gets in the way of debate.

it may not mean anything but I wonder how many folks will remember Richard Dawkins 500 years from now and how many will remember Jesus Christ.

Wish I knew what film they were talking about!

This is a channel about finding God, knowing Him, and connecting to Him. We go easy, step-by-step, and simple. We debunk evolution and false gods. We seek the One God, the creator of the cosmos, life, and man. Join the journey. (this is not a monetized channel)

Dr. Krauss says "Ultimately, you should base your actions on empirical evidence and rational thinking". But this feels logically self refuting since, if it is not limited in scope, it is seemingly self referencing. For example, is there empirical evidence or a logical argument that shows that you should take the above quoted position? If so, what would that empirical evidence or rational argument look like? If not, doesn't that make the position quoted above, by its own standards, logically self refuting?

About that early question there about the good effect of religion, I do believe he is referring to the good effect of being ignorant - a well known saying is: "Ignorance is bliss". I think its very human to want to simplify life rather than make it immensely complex (which science is), so the ignorant part of the brain seeks comfort in a simpler explanation to reduce "stress". But I agree with Dawkins, what really matters is the truth. Compare this with a scene from the movie The Matrix, where the guy is sitting at a table eating steak - he wants the comfort of tasting that steak to avoid thinking of the reality that he is hooked up to a machine as a power source to the robots and its all a simulation in his head. Ignorance about reality is a simulation in the same sense, and we have experience varying degrees of self-delusion with regards to anything that interest us in order to cope. So for many I guess religion is a coping mechanism to reduce the chance of simply going insane. Although the solution is like any psychologist would tell you, to let go of the delusions and embrace reality, and understand how lucky you are to be alive and what the infinitely small odds really are that you are here now - alive. Enjoy it while it last and try to be as good as you can. That is the meaning of life.

It's not impossible to irradicate religion from your thinking and decision making. I was brought up with religion forced on me while my parents rarely even talked about it or even went to church themselves and I am very resentful of that. It's such a hypocritical thing and would never do that to my own children - let them decided for themselves what's best for them because they will be independent, decision making adults one day.

Krauss seems to be quite a bit more confident than usual. More mojo.. :D

“I don’t know what caused the Big Bang and I don’t know why there is something instead of nothing and that means you don’t know either” - Bill Maher. “I prefer Rationalism over Atheism because the question of God is unknowable. As a Rationalist you don’t have to waste your time either attacking or defending either position” - Issac Asimov. “You should be skeptical of everything, including yourself” - Bertrand Russell. I had to preface this article with the above quotes because, although I am a Buddhist and believe in a Supreme Being, I am a great admirer of the above people. My two B.A.’s are not in Philosophy or Physics, so feel free to tell me that I don’t know what I’m talking about. You may be right. But I would like to open a discourse with my Atheist friends who have a Philosophy that I also admire. That philosophy is: ‘Your Heart should not accept what your Mind rejects’. One of the tenants of Buddhism is that you should not accept anything without thinking. But, I do have a rebuttal for at least two of the statements by some well known, highly intelligent, Atheists: “If God did not require being created, logic dictates that the Universe did not require being created either” - Michael Shermer. My rebuttal is that the Universe is composed of Matter, Energy, Gravity, Time and Space; all of which require being created. Consciousness however is still a mystery. In fact, if you’re a follower of the Niels Bohr Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, it is Consciousness that creates Matter. A Supreme Consciousness may very well indeed not have required being created. To those whose explanation of Consciousness is that the Human Brain is so complex that Consciousness ‘somehow’ evolved; you should know that using the word ‘somehow’ poses a lot of philosophical problems and questions. For example, Immanuel Kant in ‘The Critique Of Pure Reason’ surmised that Space and Time are only the relationship of one object to another; but, if we did not have the concept of Space and Time ‘A Priori’ in our Minds before we were born, we would not have been able to relate one sense impression to another. There would be no Awareness or Consciousness. “Quantum Mechanics allows for a Universe to come into existence out of Nothing” - Lawrence Krauss. I have several rebuttals for this. First, Quantum Mechanics has become all things to all people. Physicist Fred Alan Wolfe in ‘The Spiritual Universe’ claims that Quantum Physics proves the existence of the Human Soul. John Wheeler believes that the strange results in QP experiments suggest that someone is observing the Universe. Secondly, when Dr. Krauss (if I understand him correctly) talks of something coming from nothing - He is talking about Gravity affecting Negative Energy is such a way that virtual particles ‘pop’ into existence which then become real particles. The problem with this, as even physicists who are atheists have pointed out, is that this occurs in Space and in Time within the Universe. The Big Bang occurred in a no-when, no-place, no-gravity. Krauss’s reply is that a true Nothing (no space, no time, no gravity) is unstable. And like all unstable systems, it will eventually collapse in on itself and produce something. I’m not sure how to answer that. In a no-time, how does nothing ‘eventually’ collapse. It should be noted that by the year 2017, there may be satellites in place (according to the Science Channel - ‘How The Universe Works’) that might be able to detect Gravity Waves from a Universe that existed before the Big Bang. One theory is that a part of 2 separate Universes (each as a wave-like membrane) in a Multi-verse, collided, causing the Big Bang. If these Gravity Waves from a previous Universe are detected, that would obliterate Stephen Hawkings and Lawrence Krauss’s assertion that the Big Bang came from nothing. Of course, that still leaves the question: ‘What caused the first Big Bang ?’. And if the continuous Big Bangs go back in Infinite Regression - the question is: ‘Why is there something instead of nothing ?’ When I talk with some of my Atheist friends, who I highly regard, I always assert that both positions on the existence of God require a Leap of Faith. Whenever I state that I always get what I call ‘The Tooth-Fairy’ rebuttal. My friends will state that they cannot prove or disprove the existence of the tooth fairy. However, they are still not going to believe in the existence of the tooth fairy until there is substantive scientific evidence. My answer to that is: If you want to stay up all night outside your kid’s bedroom after one of them loses a tooth; and the tooth fairy never shows up - you can reasonably assert that there is no tooth fairy. What you can’t do is to go back in Time to the Big Bang and from a position outside the Universe observe the Big Bang and then state: ‘I was there at the Big Bang and I can tell you that there was no Supreme Consciousness. The whole thing was a product of Spontaneous Creation’. Since you can’t do that, comparing the question of God with the question of the tooth fairy or the spaghetti monster, or whatever, is quite disingenuous. This is why Issac Asimov preferred Rationalism over Atheism and why Buddhists, although they believe in God, assert that the Nature of God is unknowable. The bottom line is that if you are an Atheist and you state that you don’t belive in God; that is absolutely and perfectly fine. However, if you state, as a matter of fact, that there is no God, you are taking a Leap of Faith and crossing over into the world of Religious Dogma. If you state that a God-belief is stupid, you are a Religious fanatic. If the Question of God or the Nature of God is unknowable, then why do I believe in God ? Well, for me, God is not something I believe in, God is a Supreme Being that my Consciousness is aware of. Of course, what I think I am aware of is not Scientific Proof. So, as a Rationalist, I am willing to place this ‘Awareness’ down as a Belief and put it down in the category of Faith.

Religious indoctrination is rather like foot-binding. The younger the victim, the more difficult it is to reverse the damage.

What’s the name of the movie

Taxpayers money should be spent on clearing sink estates and buying land,and then building detached bungalows with numerous bedroom totals in each house to suit the number of occupants.

36:17 "...Lewis Thomas said what we should do to advertise the human species is send Bach, Bach, and more Bach." -And if there's not enough room, might I suggest his pipe organ Passacaglia & Fugue in C minor, at the very least. Let whomever out there that hears it think that we are a very advanced species - why not?

where can you find this video?? like the movie they are talking about

Rational Thinking can often come up with completely wrong answers!

Interesting a Cosmic Tombstone

Religion is funny when you try to seriously discuss or debate it lmao

I am against the separation between state and church but I wish both church and science should be under state! However, the state should be far from the theist and atheist debate!

About the question about science for younger children, I saw Once upon a time ..man when I was young and liked it very much. Here is a link to the opening theme: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-dfnLa4B-Pbg.html

Those pictures of them are quite good actually, that's exactly how they look through the eyes of a theist.

you want to teach little kids about science instead of religion. Do it through music and sound. Because it can be so easily explained with some many tools/instruments to show case waves and energy, air, thermodynamics and so on. Books are cool, but little kids need something they can feel.

Lawrence looks like Mark Twain :D

SOUTH CAROLINA WAS HERE....DONT BE AFRAID

45:00 - The great Hitchens sent his kids to a religious private school. Crazy...

Social scientist? How about Jacque Fresco?

"When you are talking to an idiot you are persuading the rest of the audience" You mean to attract the mass? But, who is active? the "idiot". Right? That is so, because the rest of the audience didn't do any thing except listening. The only interactive and active one is that "idiot", but is that "idiot" really idiot? or do we want to escape the mistakes we made by persuading through distortion, by saying, hey we never discussed with idiots, because we cannot convince idiots because they are idiots...Is this real. But, if we are talking to idiots we are talking to them and if we are talking to the audience we are talking to the audience. Right? i am just curious. Thanks.

37:00 - why not include the World’s greatest painting and sculpture in your “tombstone for humanity” ? Surely visual Art is just as valid as Music and Literature ?

definitely have Radiohead in the cosmic tombstone

AGNOSTICISM! I WIN!

I still struggle t think I share an origin with a banana, let me stick to my fairy tales

Great men and scientist Nice to argue all options But they will not be able to prove any thing against any religion But this kind of discussion may improve the religious thinking The religion is like any thing,will not give you the whole truth But our interpretation to the ,,holy,, texts can be changed Religions are not above the mind, they must be developed with the developing human thinking Like all sciences they are changing with time What is appears to be real , tomorrow it is not. And so is the religion , should be interpretated in the direction of the current thinking We cannot take the whole truth from the holy books But we can change our look to the holy books , like physics or biology

Interesting answer from Richard about Islam. He could get arrested for that remark.

Faith is a gift from God, so apparently He wants you to be an atheist. I wouldn't brag about it. To do so unfailingly, He often first infects you with the social disease of liberalism.

Watch Dawkins in epic troll mode here as he totally fucks up Reverend X's mind: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-U8myAq8Ij-Y.html

You know what ???Jesus himself separates religion from the state.

Take two identical twins. The same ones as in Einstein's clock paradox after a hot bath and a nice cup of tea. Let's say that one is tone deaf and the other has perfect pitch. They are identical genetically and let's assume identical physically but their quality of consciousness differs in their respective appreciation of sound. The tone deaf twin hears the same sound as his sibling but to him it's just/merely/only noise without relevence. The twin with perfect pitch hears the sound and recognises beautiful and meaningful music that raises his spirit/mind/consciousness to greater heights. The tone deaf twin takes no pleasure in music. The twin with perfect pitch loves music, learns its secrets and benefits from its gifts. One twin is a theist and one twin is an atheist. It's not difficult to guess which is which and the difference between them lies entirely in their respective mental capacities. Just as blind people lack the capacity to see and deaf people lack the capacity to hear, atheists are people who lack the capacity to appreciate the profound beyond the shallow. This is my belief. p.s. I'm not a Christian so replies that attack literal religion will be more irrelevant than usual. Platonic love to all.

Most children in the UK and the rest of western Europe stop believing in gods at the same time as they stop believing Father Christmas. There is always some people believe in myths. In a meta study of 83 studies it was found Religious people score 6 IQ points lower than non believers and suffer from poor problem solving skills. My atheist friend started going to church to get his son enrolled in a Christian church school. He claimed that was norm. The teaches in most cast were also none believers and only paid lip service to the schools religious status and openly would make jokes in class about religious teaches at their school.

The world is filled with physicist who think they can do biology😂😂😂

70 percent of the questions were obvious and the other 30 percent Lawrence/dawkins didn't answer well

Which interpretations of Quantum Mechanics does Dawkins & Krauss believe?

Mutt and Jeff, the 2 dolts.

Interesting. One thing wrong among several even from a scientific view-all religion aside: 'Nature cannot plan for the future' 26:04 Yes, it can. Every day. The kill-deer calls out a warning of a predator near. It knows this thing is capable of killing. Animals do plan for the future innately via procreation. In fact, they do so with a higher intelligence than humans. They pick healthy mates for offspring for instance. They do plan for a future by attacking humans that are encroaching in their space of territory. Storing nuts is a plan for the future. These are so innate that they are actually higher evolved than humans in this "common sense."

As a believer in Jesus Christ I believe in this: "This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins." (1 John 4:10)

One on its own is bad enough...but two together! (vomits)