Hitchens: Why fight religion? Melvin Olontha 2008-10-21 | Christopher Hitchens last words in the debate with Turek, answering a question from the audience. Youtube-atheist Alecs De Large comments the complete debate starting here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-3fgjX2mU4
Hamed Abdel-Samad on the Downfall of the Islamic World Melvin Olontha 2013-11-26 | Hamed Abdel-Samad (Arabic: حامد عبد الصمد, IPA: [ˈħæːmed ʕæbdesˈsˤɑmɑd]; born in 1972 in Gizeh, Egypt) is an Egyptian-German political scientist, historian and author.The son of a Sunni Imam "converted from Islam to knowledge" as he says himself, after studying languages, political science and religious studies in Egypt, Germany and Japan. Abdel-Samad calls for an "Islam light" without shari'a, jihad, gender apartheid, proselytism and "entitlement mentality", aspects of Islam he thinks responsible for the backwardness of the Muslim countries and the Muslim diaspora. He has been accused of heresy in 2010 and condemned to death by various Islamic clerics, notably in June 2013 after a lecture he gave in Cairo.
Christopher Hitchens: The Lessons of 9/11 Melvin Olontha 2012-09-14 | Christopher Hitchens speaking at a panel discussion of the Claremont Institute in Washington D.C. 2006. The entire discussion can be watched here: c-span.org/video/?194349-2/years-september-11I fixed the audio a bit.
Christopher Hitchens on Turkish looting in Cyprus Melvin Olontha 2009-03-31 | Why do humanists care about religious historical monuments? They usually view them as heritage of all mankind. We care about the Buddah-statues of Bamian in Afghanistan and we do care about Cypriot Christian and Hellenic artwork. The behaviour of Turkey in Cyprus is indeed appalling and needs more exposure. Short Camrec of a long discussion concerning "Lost and Stolen Art", min 45 to 47: http://www.c-spanarchives.org/library/index.php?main_page=product_video_info&products_id=283263-1 The discussion is also available on Youtube (here part 1): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=doeNeF3GvOw Uploaded by user pablonoriega89: http://www.youtube.com/user/pablonoriega89
The inauguration of a pragmatic president, Part II Melvin Olontha 2009-03-30 | BBC coverage of the 2009 presidential inauguration, with Christopher Hitchens, Andrew Sullivan, Reihan Salam and Chuck D discussing about the character of the new administration. It's a camrec, therefore the bad audio quality. For the complete and original check: http://www.c-spanarchives.org/library/index.php?main_page=product_video_info&products_id=283489-1 I left the news part at the end to show how weirdly this discussion ended.
The inauguration of a pragmatic president, Part I Melvin Olontha 2009-03-30 | BBC coverage of the 2009 presidential inauguration, with Christopher Hitchens, Andrew Sullivan, Reihan Salam and Chuck D discussing about the character of the new administration. It's a camrec, therefore the bad audio quality. For the complete and original check: http://www.c-spanarchives.org/library/index.php?main_page=product_video_info&products_id=283489-1
Carolyn Porco speaks about the Cassini-Huygens Mission Melvin Olontha 2009-02-03 | CassiniHuygens is a joint NASA/ESA robotic spacecraft mission currently studying the planet Saturn and its moons. The spacecraft consists of two main elements: the NASA Cassini orbiter, named after the Italian-French astronomer Giovanni Domenico Cassini, and the ESA Huygens probe, named after the Dutch astronomer, mathematician and physicist Christiaan Huygens.
Christopher Hitchens on misconceptions about Islamic terrorism Melvin Olontha 2008-12-01 | I uploaded the complete video with fixed audio here:youtube.com/watch?v=go5AGck6e-w
Christopher Hitchens on the September 11 attacks Melvin Olontha 2008-11-21 | Part I of a speech given in a panel at the Claremont Institute in Washington, D.C. on Sep. 18th, 2006 Christopher Hitchens speaks about the threat posed to modern civilisation by Islamic extremists and the failure of the USA government and civil society to react adequately to it. You can read about his arguments in the part "War" of his book "Love, Poverty and War" in essays he wrote for "The Nation" and "Vanity Fair" as well as on www.slate.com. The complete discussion on C-SPAN, with Bill Kristol and Mark Helprin is available in much better quality here: http://fora.tv/2006/09/18/Constitutional_Issues_After_911
Christopher Hitchens on the Rushdie affair and Iraq Melvin Olontha 2008-11-02 | This is part of an interview by Evan Smith at Texas Monthly Talks while CH was on his book tour for "god is not great" May 2007. Watch the whole thing (including wise words on religion) on http://www.vimeo.com/1868492 or http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t3Sq2qxS7Zw
Christopher Hitchens on debating religion and the elections Melvin Olontha 2008-10-31 | The editor of "Patrol" speaks with Christopher Hitchens after the debate with theologian Douglas Wilson at The King's College in New York City. The complete thing: http://www.vimeo.com/2111182 I asked: "Can somebody tell me what the 'red flower' means on CH's lapel?" The answer came quickly, user calcecini said: "In answer to your question about CH's lapel,it's actually a poppy (made of plastic) worn in November in Britain as a memorial for those who have died in war (war remembrance day in on November 11th in the UK). You are given a poppy by people on the street after a donation, and that money goes to veterans charity. The tradition covers all wars, but is especially associated with WW1 1914 -18 - as the poppy grows in the area where the terrible trench wars took place." I checked and read that the tradition is based on the Canadian poem "In Flanders Fields": In Flanders fields the poppies blow Between the crosses, row on row, That mark our place; and in the sky The larks, still bravely singing, fly Scarce heard amid the guns below. We are the dead. Short days ago We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow, Loved, and were loved, and now we lie In Flanders fields. Take up our quarrel with the foe: To you from failing hands we throw The torch; be yours to hold it high. If ye break faith with us who die We shall not sleep, though poppies grow In Flanders fields. — John McCrae I think we should indeed show this kind of stoicism and respect for those who protected our Freedom in the past and now against another dreadful enemy in poppy fields. I hope this catches on also in the USA and other places. more info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remembrance_Day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_Flanders_Fields
Hitchens: religion degrades humanity. Melvin Olontha 2008-10-30 | Q&A part VII of the Hitchens vs. Turek debate at VCU, VA. Full debate: http://www.vimeo.com/1904911 Hitchens repeats a strong anti-theist point: if you do a moral deed "for god" it is done for a reward or out of fear but not out of empathy or solidarity -it thus abolishes morality, individual choice etc. Tureks stupidity (or the credulity of his followers) forces this repetition upon us, his point about the immorality of materialism is old as well. I would guess it is a (corrupted) version of the "argument from despair" against naturalism: humans are supposedly not able to live decently without a "cosmic meaning of life". Also cringeworthy is Tureks announcement that he stops believing in Christianity if the body of Christ is discovered (!?). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_naturalism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_consequences
Hitchens: IC is an infinitely expanding tautology Melvin Olontha 2008-10-22 | Q&A part VI of the Hitchens vs. Turek debate at VCU, VA. Full debate: http://www.vimeo.com/1904911 and (annotated) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-3fgjX2mU4 Turek continues his self-ridiculing (singularity=miracle wtf?), Hitchens argues that the argument from irreducible complexity (IC) -stating that because DNA is so complex or beautiful it must be created- is an "infinitely expanding tautology". Relevant: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tautology http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_ignorantiam http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Hume http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability
Hitchens: the purpose of life (!) Melvin Olontha 2008-10-22 | Q&A part V of the Hitchens vs. Turek debate at VCU, VA. Full debate: http://www.vimeo.com/1904911 and (annotated) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-3fgjX2mU4 Again ethics, Hitchens reference about Sokrates who would feel shame when making a dishonest or shady argument clearly points at Tureks demagoguery (Hitler=Humanist) from before. At 3:03 Hitchens is asked about the purpose of life though, enjoy the answer.
Hitchens: ethics vs. religion. Melvin Olontha 2008-10-22 | Q&A part IV of the Hitchens vs. Turek debate at VCU, VA. Full debate: http://www.vimeo.com/1904911 and (commented) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-3fgjX2mU4 At 4:45 Turek calls Hitler a humanist (!) what a shallow demagogue as well as a very pathetic apologist... even Hitchens (although just for a sec.) is speechless upon so much presumptuousness, but fortunately does not let Turek get away with it. This was not a slip of tongue (Tureks dishonest "a human, a human" is simply defensive drivel of a rhetorical con artist) this was a deliberate smear -known from fundamentalists around the world- that backfired. Besides, this guy uses the word "ontological" like Bush or Palin the word "nucular". If I would have been in the audience I would have probably booed although this usually goes against my nature. I had to laugh watching it anyway though because in this moment I suddenly remembered that "Turak" means "dimwit" in Russian - nomen est omen, as the Romans would say.
Hitchens: Humanism and abortion. Melvin Olontha 2008-10-22 | Q&A part III of the Hitchens vs. Turek debate at VCU, VA. Full debate: http://www.vimeo.com/1904911 Hitchens says here that religion only poisons the debate about abortion and that Humanist values help to decide difficult moral issues concerning the life of the unborn child.
Hitchens: Religion is about power. Melvin Olontha 2008-10-22 | Q&A part II of the Hitchens vs. Turek debate at VCU, VA.Full debate:http://www.vimeo.com/1904911andhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-3fgjX2mU4Hitchens recites Omar Khayyám, translated by Richard Le Gallienne:"And do you think that unto such as you;A maggot-minded, starved, fanatic crew:God gave the secret, and denied it me?--Well, well, what matters it! Believe that, too." Turek answers: god is probable (which is more a deist point and actually contradicts his religion) and hints on something like an argumentum verbosium. Hitchens answers: you need to do better than that if you want to tell us what to do, how we have to behave - the essence of religion.
Hitchens: the universe doesnt need a designer. Melvin Olontha 2008-10-22 | Q&A part I of the Hitchens vs. Turek debate at VCU, VA. Full debate: http://www.vimeo.com/1904911 and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-3fgjX2mU4 "What has been asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence." - CH Watch it happen to the assertion "there must be a creator of the universe". Relevant: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_design http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non_sequitur_(logic) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_poor_design
Hitchens: religious vs. empirical knowledge. Melvin Olontha 2008-10-21 | Turek vs. Hitchens at VCU in Richmond, VA complete at: http://www.vimeo.com/1904911 Here Hitchens talks about the difference between empirical knowledge and assertions of religious "truths".
Hitchens: religion as the source of immorality. Melvin Olontha 2008-10-21 | Turek vs. Hitchens at VCU in Richmond, VA complete at: http://www.vimeo.com/1904911 Here Hitchens makes his arguments about religion as source of immorality. At 4:01 he makes an interesting point concerning the question by the religious of "something out of nothing" drawing on the physicist Lawrence M. Krauss: if the universe is developing in a way that obscures its origins than this explains that it didn't sprung from "nothing" but is rather now in a stadium that we just cannot comprehend anything "beyond" the big bang with the data we have now. I'm not a physicist, so feel free to correct me if I understood this wrong.
Hitchens: deism, theism, wishful thinking. Melvin Olontha 2008-10-21 | Another piece of the debate Turek vs. Hitchens at VCU in Richmond, VA complete at: http://www.vimeo.com/1904911 CH argument: There is an infinite possibility of "god-assertions" (Ra, Jehova, Huitzlopochtli, etc. up to the "personal god") that cannot be disproven. Atheists however do not deny those gods existence, which is logically impossible, they simply say there is no empirical evidence for such an assertion. Deism, while being empirically not necessary -science offers better explanations- is also not Theism: the argument from design does not imply (and cannot) the Christian god or any interventionist god. Further, the spiritual language of many scientists does not necessarily mean they believe in god. Interesting for those who want to learn how to argue consistently: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy
Hitchens: how does god exist? Melvin Olontha 2008-10-21 | This is a small part of the debate Hitchens vs. Turek at VCU in Richmond, VA, complete at: http://www.vimeo.com/1904911 I love the "family guy" reference beginning at 1:11.
