Dawkins getting slaughtered

And there is the human race's biggest flaw - arrogance.

big bang theory explains that there was a highly energised ball of light which somehow exploded and from which all matter in this universe was born...

I agree, I'm not debating big bang theory, I'm stating that we do not know how the universe came into existence and that as probability as we understand it is a product of this universe we can't apply it to the origins of existence.

and dawkins is the perfect example of this

ok I'll accept that and rephrase - my (as in me) religion effects no-one in a negative light.

Yes but you believe it on evidence which is hilariously pathetic.

You can't answer a question if you require concrete evidence for one theory about it and will accept a glorified old wives tale for another.

I wish it wasn't necessary to say stuff this obvious.

I don't require concrete evidence? I'm saying that no evidence exists either way... so any assumption is a leap of faith.

I've said countless times I am of the Jewish faith, not the Jewish fact.

As a scientist it is you who most prove otherwise like me you are subscribing to a faith based belief.

example:

Jimi starts ranting about how the jews run the world.
Nezza listens and thinks crikey Jimi's right, I'm going to put a brick through Joes skull.

Jimi has directly influenced someone into acting in a neggative way.... haven't you heard of the inciting race hate laws?

I have no faith based belief about the origin of the universe beyond the fact that it is as improbable that a god did it as a yellow lobster and that belief in either is irrational as you can define an infinite number of equally improbable sources.

What evidence will it take to convince you that Judaism is wrong? Will you renounce your faith if it turns out that science can explain the origin of matter and physics without recourse to gods? (like everything else science explains)

Dawkins went to great pains in that debate to emphasise how much we don't know about it, and the whole of the end of the God Delusion is devoted to it.

this is why you're fanatical andy... you're trying to convert others to your way of thinking.

despite the fact you can't substantiate your own beliefs.

why is it irrational or rational, all explanations of the origins of the universe are a probable as each other at this stage of mans history.

Thats exactly what I said and exactly why any belief that a god did it is irrational, which is the point Dawkins was making. Has Dawkins put forward some theory on the origin of matter I don't know about? In the god delusion he claims to be as agnostic as I am about the origin of the universe, which is as agnostic as you say we all should be (except Jews who just know these things of course)

Oh and you didn't answer the question.

thats not what dawkins says at all, he clearly states that he believes the probability of a G-d creating to the universe to be less likely than the probability of something simple causing it to come into existence.

the two are completely seperate and if you don't understand the difference then you really shouldn't be passing comment.

I will stop believing in my G-d if you can prove that he didn't create existence.

I don't know how you can sit there with a straight face and say that thats an unreasonable assumption when you've already told us that you believe very strongly that it was done by a specific, highly complex supernatural intelligence named hashem?

Then your belief has absolutely no place in a scientific discussion, like the origin of life, the universe or anything.

where have I said hashem was highly complex?

but what do my beliefs have to do with what dawkins says?

ITS NOT A FUCKING SCIENTIFIC DISCUSSION!

Religions hold their hand up and say they are faith, it is dawkins that has made it a scientific discussion, if you are to state that science makes it probable that a G-d did not create existence then it is your duty to provide the evidence.

Dawkins has no evidence, thus he has no right to say that a G-d did not create the universe... his current belief is a faith based belief, thats the hypocrisy

Oh, silly me, I thought we were talking about the origin of the universe.

If you want to say that then you have no place trying to answer any scientific question (origin of things included) in any context with religion.

I don't know why you bother trying to warp the vague wording your scriptures to fit what we actually know about the universe - you can live the rest of your life in glorious 'faith' in Noahs ark and the rest of it, and (provided you don't force it on children) thats fine with me. The mindless impossibility of it will cause you no difficulty as IT'S NOT A FUCKING SCIENTIFIC DISCUSSION!

Who the fuck are you to tell me what i can and can't teach my children?

prick.

I am not telling Dawkin his view is wrong, nor is any rabbi (even Rabbi Gluck who featured in his documentary)... We're simply stating this is our belief let us fucking think what we want.

And if you are adament on shattering our belief spectrum, then at least have the courtesy to provide us with some fucking evidence... rather than a hunch.

fucking hypocrit.

You started the thread mate, and whilst you say its Dawkins that started the science thing about the origin of the universe, creationists have been telling us for far longer that god literally and actually did it (just like they did about life).

Personally I think religion-induced scientific ignorance is an insult to human dignity and its a disgraceful reflection on education sustems that in somewhere like the US some 50% of people think the world is 5000 years old or less. I would also think it a disgrace if 50% thought the earth was flat, and I don't think anyone who tried to teach otherwise would be 'fanatical'. By your reckoning, science textbooks are evangelical.

But it seems we have reached an limited agreement and that this is a good place to end the argument - no religion has any place in answering science questions like the origin of life, or earth, or the universe, or the origin of morality. With this limitation accepted, then frankly adults can believe whatever absurdity they want.

I'm off to try to answer one now.....I'll leave you to your 'faith'.