http://www.videosift.com/video/Richard-Dawkins-What-if-youre-wrong#comment-214303

Here's a random video of Richard Dawkins, ie: evidence that he does exist, now post your video of God in action, and we'll compare our evidence.

Thanks for wasting my time.

ou have come to a place mute of all light, where the wind bellows as the sea does in a tempest. This is the realm where the lustful spend eternity. Here, sinners are blown around endlessly by the unforgiving winds of unquenchable desire as punishment for their transgressions. The infernal hurricane that never rests hurtles the spirits onward in its rapine, whirling them round, and smiting, it molests them. You have betrayed reason at the behest of your appetite for pleasure, and so here you are doomed to remain. Cleopatra and Helen of Troy are two that share in your fate.-
-Dante
Here is one of the many fabulous hells awaiting you in one of several afterlives, now what'll it be, you hungry ghost??! Door #1....Door#2...or door#3...OR....You can chose the world of pleasure AND torment, behind veil # six hundred and sixty-six!!

lol bicycle repairman, i think this was tongue in cheek, no?

Wow choggie that's great.

"Hell doesn't exist"

Why is what I just wrote any less valid than what Dante wrote? Because he was moved by the hand of gOD? Who moved my hand? Who decides who's right? You?

Here is Religion and Science, contrasted to illustrate what we're talking about:


Religions require faith in supernatural explanations for the big questions (where we're from, what this is, where we go). Faith in the truthfulness of these explanations unites those who believe them, and separates groups with different faiths.

Science is any systematic analysis of anything, used to understand that thing. These understandings and how they were arrived at are then shared with others, who critically and systematically review and test the understanding. Over time, bright people "standing on the shoulder's of giants" are able to explain more and more things, on and on and on. There is only one group, and Sciene will never give ALL of the answers.


'here are some answers; belief in them defines who we are, so they don't change very often'
VS.
'we think these are the answers, but if you see problems please help us out by finding better answers'

Whether it's tongue-in-cheek or not, it's just plain boring. Way too long.

I wish I could vote but I can't
Logical Fallacy, but funny none the less.

This should be titled "The Satire Delusion".

lol bicycle repairman, i think this was tongue in cheek, no?

Well, you never know.. anyway, payle, the poster said the folowing:

I will highlight the ridiculousness of his response by sharing with you my very first sift.

Secondly the intentions of the video is to show that Dawkins arguments about God`s existence are "silly" because they apparantly could be applied to non-fictional characters just as easily, well point in case, my reply. this attempt to get clever doesnt really work, because when you apply these arguments to real things, they are shredded by the existence of real, testable, repeatable, universal evidence, and clearly, thats not the case with god, since no believer seems to be able to come up with a single well-constructed argument against ANYTHING in The God Delusion or anything else Dawkins, Hitchens, Dennett or Harris has said about religion. It all boils down to petty personal attacks, strawmen, misconstrusions (John Cornwell)or wishful thinking (Alister McGrath)in the best of times

Discarding this video. It failed to receive enough votes to get sifted up to the front page within 4 days.