Part 4 - Dinesh D'Souza Debates Daniel Dennett

You are obviously being ridiculous. If you are going to be as stupid as to suggest that I have the same views as Stalin, Mao or Hitler because I am Atheist is simply because you are a moron with very little understand what you are talking about. Being Atheist tells nothing about my views, and Stalin, Hitler or Mao did none of what they did in the name of being a non-believer. YOu are just applying these events to an invalid word.

The analogy is a failed one. I believe we can settle for, God cannot be proven to exist or proven not to exist. Nonetheless there is no evidence that points to an existent God, and he is using logical falacies when making his assertions. I understand what he is TRYING to say and it is simple to show that much of his arguements are stupid. If you don't see these errors he makes, then you must be too stupid to understand. Which is normal with ignorant people.

Actually you are ignorant, because you have not read the whole of Mein Kampf (or don't understand it). Read what DS has to say about it in WSGAC.
Also, research his personal statements regarding Christianity. He hated Christians and believed that Christianity was the great disease of the West. Much like people like you I suspect.
And if you want to pretend that you are educated, try get the spelling right - it's 'Mein Kampf'.

"This implies that novels in this other dimension are written by an author,". Why does this follow??
He is simply making a point about the nature of causation and it is COMPLETELY VALID. The fact that you don't know how far to take the analogy is not his problem.
Even if you don't agree with D'Souza, to imply that he is stupid or that he makes stupid arguments can mean only one of two things; either you are a liar or you are stupid. Or both (make that three things).

Funny that 'atheists' like you continue solidly in the tradition of Hitler, Stalin and Mao - religion is the opiate of the people, and should be destroyed. I have no doubt that many atheists would do just that if they had half a chance, and would care little for the pain that they caused. I'm sure we have a few more little closet Maos in the atheistic community. I won't be surprised when you show up at my church to put me to death because I am ignorant, irrational, and a hindrance to progress.

Clearly what he is saying is related to the Christian God. More than one person has said 'Reason is God'. So does that make every reasonable atheist a believer in God?? This argument is infantile.
D'Souza makes a very good case (and one that is clear to any honest person), that the policies of SOME secular states where heavily influenced by atheism -- and they just happen to be some of the most vicious and evil states of all time.

Where exactly does he try to make this point? This is not an argument he makes here, or in his recent book.
He says that it is 'reasonable' to 'believe' in an intelligent creator, and he does not claim that there is scientific proof for this.
You use words in an inexact manner because you are not sure what you are trying to say.
People who make arguments like this are not sure what they say, never understand an intelligent response, and always leave thinking they have won.
So well done!

D'Souza is really grasping with that "atheism leads to Nazism" nonsense. The Expelled folks tried that, too, and it's simply untrue.

For one thing, far from atheist, Hitler and the Thule society believed in their own bizarro religion that the Aryans were descended from Atlantians and that cleansing their bloodline would give them back their powers.

That's, um, not atheism.

I didn't get the impression that this was Dennet's intention at all. Seems to me he wanted to teach about other religions so that kids would think "Well, why are these untrue but my religion is supposedly true? Is there evidence? Wait, no... We go by faith. Now what do I do?"

If you start thinking like that, you might be less likely to fight or kill for your religious belief. That is what I thought he was going for.

To call someone atheist is to be as vague as possible aswell. Aunicornist are people who do not believe in the existence of unicorns. Do you know that Aunicornist have slaughtered more humans on one day in history then Unicornist have through out 10 Generations? Pretty absurd of a statement I find...

Sam Harris has given you the three ways a theist argues an atheist. I forget the exact wording but it goes along the lines of..
It is True.
It can't be proven but it gives us morals.
It makes you feel good.
Obviously in modern day, religion falls apart immediately to the first arguement, so now religion seem to be working on morals. This religious Moral bull crap is only surviving because of the word 'atheism' which really isn't a valid description of Nazis.

He believes that we all live in a novel, written by an Author. This implies that novels in this other dimension are written by an author, maybe they are written by other novels that have collapsed in on themselves and opened up another hole to another novel universe. He creates stupid analogies for stupid people to think about, but they make very little sense. And in actuality, they do not make sense. There is no way for him to know there is an author to our universe, it wouldn't make sense.

He blames the holocaust on Atheism? Atheism tells you NOTHING about secular societies ideals. Atheism is a theist word to tell you that someone does not believe in God. We are all Atheist with respect to everyone elses religion. When we are babies, we are born without belief in God, therefore we are all born atheist. Therefore all murder and death in the world can be contributed to atheism. The idea starts out flawed for him. meh... Atheism, an invalid word. Hitler was not an atheist by the way.

He can demonstrate that we can not disprove the existence of 'God', nor can we prove the existence. Stalemate, which is normal for science. There is no such thing as certainty. However! There is no scientific proof or reasonable idea to recognize that a book written sometime in the 2nd century was written by word of that unprovable 'God'. Water tight? There is no reason for him to be Christian or any other religion for that matter.

Ok genius, please give me us example of one of his arguments that "falls apart all over the place".
The fact is that it is you who does not understand what he is saying, not him. Except where he makes statements relating the Christian BELIEFS, his reasoning is watertight. He is much smarter than Dawkins, Hitchens, and of course, Dennett.
The irony. You are insulting the intellects of brilliant atheists like Shermer who recognise the power of his arguments. Hey, maybe Shermer is a also a moron.

why does dinesh always try to bring it down to so called athiest regimes? When in reality its about the existence of "GOD".

"In the name?" What a crock!

Hitler was a nutcase. "He didn't follow catholicism."
If anything he was "acting" like he didn't believe the scripture.

Who else don't believe scripture? atheists?

He was acting like an atheist.

"In the name?" What a crock!

Hitler was a nutcase. "He didn't follow catholicism."
If anything he was "acting" like he didn't believe the scripture.

Who else don't believe scripture? atheists?

He was acting like an atheist.

dinesh destroys dennett here! dennett was trying to make the point of religion has done horrible things, this is why he wants it taught in school, so kids see how bad its been. but when dinesh talks about how many people have died under atheism, and that should be taught too. i wish i could have seen dennetts face!!! dinesh just seems better prepared then dennett

He is educated, but he still does not understanding alot of what he has learned. His arguements fall apart all over the place, and non of his points link up. He is simply playing the role of the person argueing that 'the invisible intangible ball is on the table'... It's ridiculous... Aspecialy when we can proove the idea of 'the invisible intangible ball' was invented by a human. I'm guessing if you can't see all the errors he makes, you must be a moron aswell.

No Dinesh is not a moron, but anyone who writes what you have written above is a moron.

Dinesh Always argues using the same points, points that don't really matter to the topic. For instance, argueing that it cannot be prooven that God does not exist nor can it be prooven that he does exist. Still does not give reason to believing that a book was written by his word. Then he askes cosmic questions that can't be answered... but follows up by asserting a God made the cosmos... he is an educated moron.

D'Souza seems to think that because "atheist regimes" killed more people, they're more bad.

3:05...worst ever way to open a serious lecture

Dennett just got owned sorry.