Response to a video by bberchin. This is simply to point out that one does not need a deity in order to have something to celebrate or to feel any kind of meaning. This kind of thinking is not necessarily unique to atheists. Regardless, Richard Dawkins, Neil deGrasse Tyson, and Sam Harris give us something we can ALL celebrate.
The song is Everyday by Carly Comando.
Duration : 0:5:22
[youtube ptwEV0xhTzI]
July 30th, 2009 at 8:34 pm
I think the …
I think the fundamental problem is people don’t understand evolution, atheism, abiogenesis etc to make critical comments about it.
The opening comment to this video doesn’t apply to atheists but to nihilism.
July 30th, 2009 at 8:34 pm
nope, Horus is lord …
nope, Horus is lord and god XD what ever floats ure boat, there are just to many gods for me to choose one
July 30th, 2009 at 8:34 pm
Jesus is Lord and …
Jesus is Lord and God
July 30th, 2009 at 8:34 pm
didnt see ur …
didnt see ur response before i wrote mine
July 30th, 2009 at 8:34 pm
go to his channel …
go to his channel on youtube. its on there, i just cant remember which university he spoke at.
July 30th, 2009 at 8:34 pm
Nevermind. Found it …
Nevermind. Found it. If anyone wants to know, it’s the last part of the UC Berkeley Event.
July 30th, 2009 at 8:34 pm
Does anyone know …
Does anyone know which speech/lecture of Richard Dawkin’s that is?
July 30th, 2009 at 8:34 pm
Absolutely …
Absolutely fantastic! I love that speech given by Dawkins. It is awe striking. The beauty and elegance of our Atheist philosophies can offer so much more than those of the religious. The sheer mystery and wonder of the unknown is, and will always be more inspiring than feigned certainty ever could.
July 30th, 2009 at 8:34 pm
I did not know of …
I did not know of Neil deGrasse Tyson until seeing this video but I must say he has inspired me.
July 30th, 2009 at 8:34 pm
Love the music. …
Love the music. What piece is it?
July 30th, 2009 at 8:34 pm
I can not tell if …
I can not tell if the reply is specifically for me, or more for a group of us. In either case i could go on and try to show how information can be added etc. But at this point i’m board with the discussion and it seams you are annoyed with it, so there would be no point.
sorry if i offended or annoyed. i didn’t mean to.
July 30th, 2009 at 8:34 pm
Cont.
To “macro” …
Cont.
To “macro” evolution as unprovable. Theoretically it is perfect. Minor adaptations compiled through hundreds of generations forced on the species by natural selection create a new and more robust organism. At least as of a few years ago when i studied these things we could not explain how major leaps in genetic code were made even over thousands of generations.
Now. cut the bull zeal. it’s why even i hate the out of atheists some times.you’re worse than religous bigots
July 30th, 2009 at 8:34 pm
I’m going to go …
I’m going to go ahead and clarify something because on the internet people tend to be ish. I’m an atheist and I incorporate evolution into my views on the formation of life. However we have in-so-far found no means by which the genome can be expanded (more information added). Mutations yes, certainly. It is theorized that in the earliest occurances microbes simply incorporated other microbes (why mitocondial DNA differs from others… may not be mitocondrial). This is why i refer…
July 30th, 2009 at 8:34 pm
you’re right, but …
you’re right, but it’s been an undisputed theory for 150 years. the evidence is only piling on to a proof. that’s why creationism is a joke, because it was disputed the same year it was created. several times!
July 30th, 2009 at 8:34 pm
Was about to reply …
Was about to reply to that guy, and noticed you already did and quite well. Good job.
July 30th, 2009 at 8:34 pm
A scientific theory …
A scientific theory is the highest merit you can get in science. Anyone who start saying facts is stupid. Theory of evolution is the theory behind evolution. Evolution itself can be proven over and over again. Even with just the common flue virus.
July 30th, 2009 at 8:34 pm
Micro evolution and …
Micro evolution and macro evolution are stupid terms, evolution is evolution. Alot of small change = big change over time
July 30th, 2009 at 8:34 pm
Macro evolution IS …
Macro evolution IS provable, and has heaps and heaps and heaps of evidence, AND it fits together seamlessly with micro- evolution.
they are the same thing. There is no magic distinction between macro and micro evolution. small change + long time (or even quite short time) = huge change.
look it up man, the evidence is easy enough to find.
I can’t believe i’m doing this, i never argue with people on youtube. ah well, it seemed worth a try at the time.
July 30th, 2009 at 8:34 pm
Evolution is indeed …
Evolution is indeed provable. For example, resistances bacterial populations develop overtime to many antibacterial chemicals.
Now, you may argue that this is “microevolution”, but from my experience, the terms “microevolution” and “macroevolution” are not especially respectable terms in academia. Evolution is evolution. Your “macroevolution” is only an extension of “microevolution”.
July 30th, 2009 at 8:34 pm
Cont.
Separate …
Cont.
Separate species are recognized by their inability to mate with each other and produce fertile offspring. A horse and a donkey are very similar, and it is not difficult to imagine that they both evolved from a common ancestor. Yet, they cannot produce fertile offspring, establishing that they are in fact separate species.
July 30th, 2009 at 8:34 pm
If you understand …
If you understand and agree with the concept of “microevolution” , then it is not so difficult to apply those ideas to evolution over millions of years. This “macroevolution” you mention is simply “microevolution” piled upon itself until enough differences occur until the organism is geno- and phenotypically dissimilar from the original organism it came from, to the point where the two organisms are incompatible mates.
July 30th, 2009 at 8:34 pm
Ahh, good point. …
Ahh, good point. Micro evolution is proven and factual. Macro evolution was the subject i was refering to and it remains unprovable.
July 30th, 2009 at 8:34 pm
i would change but …
i would change but one word “Evolution is a theory, AND a fact. However Creationism is ing silly.”
Look up “Evolution as theory and fact” on wikipedia and you will see what i mean.
In short, there is the FACT that species evolve, and there are explanations of how/when/why etc. evolution happens which is the THEORY of evolution.
Also– “a theory must be based on observed facts and make testable predictions.”
there is more there, go check it out.
Liked the vid =)
July 30th, 2009 at 8:34 pm
Evolution is a …
Evolution is a theory, not a fact. However Creationism is ing silly.
July 30th, 2009 at 8:34 pm
Neil deGrasse Tyson …
Neil deGrasse Tyson is my hero.