This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

← VOICES OF SCIENCE - Available Now on DVD

VOICES OF SCIENCE - Available Now on DVD - Comments

ClemIsMe's Avatar Comment 1 by ClemIsMe

What do we do?

Love the internet.

Why do we do it?

See above article.

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 11:51:00 UTC | #200185

PrexicKehdaki's Avatar Comment 2 by PrexicKehdaki

May the race to see who can get it on youtube first begin!

If only my d/l speed was better..

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 11:59:00 UTC | #200189

Josh Timonen's Avatar Comment 3 by Josh Timonen

I'm uploading it to youtube... so you don't have to do that! - Josh

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 12:01:00 UTC | #200191

PrexicKehdaki's Avatar Comment 4 by PrexicKehdaki

Aw :[


I was only at 11% anyways.. lol

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 12:02:00 UTC | #200192

sane1's Avatar Comment 5 by sane1


Tue, 15 Jul 2008 12:12:00 UTC | #200201

Am I Evil?'s Avatar Comment 6 by Am I Evil?

Great stuff! It's things like this that make me happy! :D

Thanks to all involved, keep up the good work.

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 12:16:00 UTC | #200203

doglived's Avatar Comment 7 by doglived

First off thanks! These videos are going to be great. I'm sure someone has requested this before but needs to use bittorrent to share these videos. I'm downloading this at 208 bbs (kilo-bits per second/not kilo-Bytes) which is really quite sad for a site that is all about science. Well, we scientists of computers respectfully ask for more bandwidth and are willing to use our bandwidth to provide it.

If copyrights allow it (and these are being shared on you tube and are freely available here), why not upload a torrent to a one of the popular trackers or host your own tracker.

Perhaps I overestimate the demand for bittorrent and it's simply too much trouble to upload 3 versions of the files (, youtube, torrent).

Anyone else want to download these files and get them asap? Just as many people here share their cpu cycles for seti and folding@home we would (I'm assuming) also share our bandwidth using bittorrent to share these files, reducing the obviously strained server the videos are hosted on (assuming it has a fixed bandwidth of 10mbs, which if 40 people download a video they each get 250kbs).

Just a thought and thanks again for the great videos!

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 12:40:00 UTC | #200225

Matt H.'s Avatar Comment 8 by Matt H.

There is only one file available to download, you'll have to buy the DVD to see the rest.

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 12:45:00 UTC | #200236

Josh Timonen's Avatar Comment 9 by Josh Timonen

We have an unmetered media server with a 20mbps pipe, but at times like this we could obviously use more. We're just getting hit all at once, unfortunately. I just finished uploading the RD/SW discussion to youtube, so I'll try and get the bittorrent going as well. Hopefully others on here can do the same.


Tue, 15 Jul 2008 12:50:00 UTC | #200242

Thurston's Avatar Comment 10 by Thurston

This is the closest to Heaven an atheist can get!

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 12:52:00 UTC | #200243

varu2005's Avatar Comment 11 by varu2005

a torrent file would solve the problem :D

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 13:03:00 UTC | #200257

robotaholic's Avatar Comment 12 by robotaholic

Thank you so much for putting this up and thanks for putting up youtube as well as quicktime versions- this website is great!

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 13:05:00 UTC | #200262

HourglassMemory's Avatar Comment 13 by HourglassMemory

Forgive my ignorance of how these things work, but isn't it wrong to upload it to Youtube, when you have DVD's available for purchase.
Doesn't the RDFRS loose money because of this?
If not, why ask money for it on the website? Where does the money from people's purchases go?
Into producing more things like this?
Into spreading more science?
But ... if we're spreading science and knowledge and can get the current view of the universe from the experts, and if this is also available for free, who is going to pay for this knowledge?

Oh, and another thing.
I love this sort of talks. It keeps me up till very early in the morning and I don't mind that.
I learn a lot and think a lot.
I also like the ones that are unedited.

The only thing that I have connected to this whole movement of atheism is Dawkins' book "The God Delusion" that I got in 2006. The rest is ALL from the Internet. I have to say that I get a lot of knowledge from the "illegal" practices of a few.

Please, you guys, don't take this sort of stuff from the Internet. It's knowledge and science! It's not porn or super effective medicine.

I don't know how much time and money it would take for me to get the same knowledge and revereance for Science if I limited myself to only books and tv and school.
The internet sped that up insanely.

PS: The DVD cover is awsome. Imagine a whole shelf that goes to Episode 100. With thousands of hours of talks about Science and Reason and so on.
I drool!!!

PPS: I just noticed, while just starting to listen to Weinberg and Dawkins, that I was actually listening to two old men sitting in classical chairs with a fireplace and thunder in the backround having a scientific discussion.
How many people my age would find this boring, and yet I find myself excited about clicking play and listening to every word and thinking both men are COOL.

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 13:14:00 UTC | #200272

Kristopher's Avatar Comment 14 by Kristopher

Judaism does things to honor a tradition? Judaism is a monotheism: This doctrine expresses the belief in one indivisible God. I am sorry to be rude, but I can not listen to people who don't even know the facts; they look foolish. I can't listen; seriously, it is filled with fallacies. We know Richard; business as usual. We don't want any information that would not fit the agenda; right.

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 13:57:00 UTC | #200322

ficklefiend's Avatar Comment 15 by ficklefiend

..but HourglassMemory, free is the currency of the net!

People donate to the charity and buy the DVDs to fund the percentage of that content that gets distributed for free. It's that free content that's really going to reach people, the DVDs are for the ones already on side.

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 13:58:00 UTC | #200323

Synchronium's Avatar Comment 16 by Synchronium

Any torrent seeders? Shipping from America costs a king's ransom. :-(

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:03:00 UTC | #200348

Yadsmood's Avatar Comment 17 by Yadsmood

The discussion with Weinberg is fascinating. Before this I'd never seen Dawkins talk to anyone who's so clearly his intellectual superior.

By the way, when are the rest of the videos going to be posted?

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:22:00 UTC | #200358

Vinelectric's Avatar Comment 18 by Vinelectric

I'm really embarrased as I was unable to understand a lot of what Weinberg was saying and would apprecaite some help. Dawkins appeared to follow comfortably when I failed completely to grasp some of the concepts being discussed!

1. What does the term multiverse mean exactly?

The chaotic inflation model postulates that our bang is one possible event out of many outcomes of random fluctuations of some primordial field. "Successful" outcomes lead to rapid inflations and failed ones go nowhere. Thus a bang is one of mutually exclusive outcomes of the fluctuations of that source field.

Thus one would understand a multiverse to be a term referring to the set of all possible universes not many universes "in parallell" as some cosmologists such as Max Tegmark suggest.

2. What persuades Weinberg that dark matter is fine tuned?

He said that theoretically derived values for the vaccum energy are much larger than observed ones. I understand that the non-measured contributions must be equally impressive and comparable in magnitude in order to cancel the predicted excess and leave us with the tiny observed value.

However that difference can not be explained by contributions from the field energy at shorter wave length. You'd expect that calculating at smaller lengths, for the same field, would yield a more accurate answer. Not come up with a an answer of similar magnitude but negative value sufficient to "cancel" out your first prediction.

What exactly is cancelling the theoretical values?

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:32:00 UTC | #200364

james1v's Avatar Comment 19 by james1v

Light only hits solid objects, planets, dust physical things. This is a beautiful concept and as such is simple. It reminds me of some Jewish philosophy of the light within and the mystical follow ones like cabala, all are basic sun worship. As all religions started. What do we owe those great people who first studied the stars/light and knew when to plant crops? This class of thought was corrupted by organised religion/light worship and became the thoughts of the condemners(if you do not agree with my thoughts we will sacrifice you to our god/light.

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:48:00 UTC | #200368

Vinelectric's Avatar Comment 20 by Vinelectric

And forgot to say, whilst the English are fond of the rhetorical trick of empahsizing a subject by deliberately mentioning it in a disparaging manner e.g I was a bit confused (meaning very confused) or He was a bit rude (well if that were true then it wouldn't have bothered you at wall, wouldn't it?). Dawkins sometimes achieves the exact opposite when being dismissive of a subject by acknowleding its importance in a very limited way.

As an example, Weinberg states how disappointing that the Muslims have abandoned science starting around the 12th century given their role in...(I assume he means their positive role in advancing science).

Dawkins interrupts to do two things: first he states a fact "their role in preserving Greek science". The other thing is that, by intervening to end the coversation there and then he is effectively excluding any other interpretation of what Weinberg ought to say: their additional role in actually contributing to that science as well (which is also a fact!).

Maybe I'm being a bit paranoid but some people are so measured in their speech and so carefull with their choice of words it makes you wonder whether the Prof was making a statement by making an under-statement!

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:52:00 UTC | #200373

LaTomate's Avatar Comment 21 by LaTomate

As always, any discussion with Professor Dawkins is enlightening.

And Professor Steven Weinberg !! Great stuff.

I can't wait to listen to the other discussions too. Thanks for posting this.

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 16:09:00 UTC | #200377

Dhamma's Avatar Comment 22 by Dhamma

Is everything up, or do you have to buy the rest of it?

If people want to buy it, then by all means! I may do so myself.

However, I most definitely feel these discussions should be free. It's far more important the discussions are seen by many, than the few buying it. Especially, the ones we'd like to convert will only come across them if it's free.

Rabbi Schmuley thinks his words are so important he apparently want people to pay for it on his webpage. Had his videos been free, I'd probably watch a few of them.

So, I hope all these videos are free.

I'd have to say I find these videos far more interesting than the ones being moderated, as I know Richard elaborates on in the discussion with professor Krauss. I assume it's easier when the debater agrees with you in the first place, though.

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 16:23:00 UTC | #200386

Cluebot's Avatar Comment 23 by Cluebot

There must be significant production costs involved in creating these videos, not to mention hosting costs for distributing the "free" edition. I think it's fair if there's some incentive for buying, though crippling the content is obviously not wise.

Also, I'll add my support for bittorrent distribution. A dedicated tracker linked to the user accounts here would encourage community members to help bear the costs of digital distribution.

Edit: The current torrent file seems to transfer with the wrong MIME type set. It was necessary to save as and edit the filename extension on my system (Vista x64.)

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 17:03:00 UTC | #200406

Drool's Avatar Comment 24 by Drool

The torrent seemed to be dead so I grabbed the web copy and started seeding with it...

However, it appears to be a tracker-less torrent using DHT (Distributed Hash Table) and I can only see Azureus clients. As far as I know, Azureus' DHT is incompatible with the mainline DHT, which the 'other' most popular BT client, utorrent uses.

So I fired up utorrent to seed and lo, the rest of the peers are there - utorrent, BitComet etc.. Basically, the peer to peer network is split and the two halves aren't peering with each other.

A dedicated tracker would certainly be useful. I'm guessing though, bandwidth only becomes a major issue for when something is first put up - during peak periods when different parts of the world wake up and decide to tuck in all at once. BitTorrent is ideal for these moments.

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 17:27:00 UTC | #200415

jackdavis's Avatar Comment 25 by jackdavis

I always enjoy listening to Dr.Weinberg, a great scientist and a brilliant man. I read one of his books a few months ago, but unfortunately the title escapes me. He also has a great contribution to the "Portable Atheist."

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 17:50:00 UTC | #200421

AlecsDeLarge's Avatar Comment 26 by AlecsDeLarge

It should be said that Weinberg in an extremist in the reductionism community along the lines of Newtonian and Laplacian physics. His ideas are summed up in his famous line, "all arrows point downward." We know that these ideas are no longer tenable in so far as Laplace made the assertion that given all velocities and orientations of all molecules in the universe an omniscient monster could predict all events of the universe. These are ideas Stuart Kauffman discusses in one of my favorites books "Reinventing the Sacred."

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 18:00:00 UTC | #200426

Neuro's Avatar Comment 27 by Neuro

Ah, so, you can only watch the interview with Weinberg & Krauss? Do you have to buy the second DVD to see Buss and Myers, then?

The interviews with Weinberg & Krauss are excellent.

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 18:49:00 UTC | #200432

Josh Timonen's Avatar Comment 28 by Josh Timonen

I'll post the David Buss and PZ Myers discussions soon, so don't worry, they will all be available online eventually.

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 19:55:00 UTC | #200440

philos's Avatar Comment 29 by philos

"With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion." - Steven Weinberg

Pity he and others just happen to overlook the contrary: "but for bad people to do good things, that takes religion"

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 20:17:00 UTC | #200442

Luther's Avatar Comment 30 by Luther


Tue, 15 Jul 2008 20:31:00 UTC | #200444