Hitchens rocks!

Thank you so much for this torrent. But HOW can you "give this one to Craig"

His arguments, even if formulated delicately, are overpowered by reason and rationality alone. On top of the comes Hitchen with his charm and humor and intellect and crushes every argument put forth by craig.

This is a HUGE win to Hitchens, who I have never seen lose a debate, even about the Iraq War, where I do not agree with his opinion.

Hitchens win!

thanks sonofcohen! and thanks, friends, for seeding!

I give this one to Craig because he actually makes a case and gives five points none of which Hithens disproves, Hithcens is fun to watch but that doesn't mean he has the best answers

A good solid case for christianity or any other religion.. so far I haven't heard it.

I saw this debate live. I went to the University's campus and was actually there to witness the debate. There is no way Craig lost this debate. He presented his solid case (which, albeit, becomes kind of banal and generic after you watch all of his videos) and Hitchens kind of just ignored the arguments and preferred to retaliate with irrelevant rhetorical jabs and mockeries. How is this professional?

Hitchens, Dawkins and Harris are all naive laymen when it comes to philosophy and theism, and I think that's why the world laughs at them when they come out with juvenile diatribes against religion and then think they've shown how God doesn't exist. Acrid rhetoric, a few fancy historical references, a quote here and quote there from some European guy whom they've copy-catted, all dressed up in a pleonastic facade of pseudo-intellectuality and it's off to the publisher's house!

People who truly have the mind of a diligent philosopher will see right through the crap and feel a bit like St. Augustine when he met Faustus of Mileve.


In any case, I haven't been able to find this video anywhere and was about to go and buy the DVD of the debate myself, but if the video quality of this torrent is decent, I'll just seed instead.


Cheers,

-adamryan

The world laughs at Hitchens, Dawkins and Harris? Sorry, you got it the wrong way around. The world laughs at people who still believe the same things that ignorant desert dwelling peasants believed thousands of years ago.

Thanks so much for making this available. I could download it pretty quick and the quality is good. Excellent job.

Neither of them "won". It's a matter of choice based on how one interprets facts. It is a debate worth listening to though.

@prugio, you're argument is one of chronological snobbery. Wikipedia it if you don't know what that means.

Truth doesn't change with time.

I'm a fan of Hitchens and his debates... he rarely loses them, but in this case, I think that he probably did (or at least came as close as is possible with truth on his side).

The sad thing is that Craigs points were all really generic and easy to refute... Hitchens just seemed to ignore most of them. Perhaps he didn't think they were worth dealing with, but that's no way to win a debate.

I just watched the end of the debate, and I guess I was hasty about giving up on it. Hitchens addressed many of the points later... while Craig refused to accept what atheism is.

What kind of philosopher can't tell the difference between a belief claim (theism/atheism) vs. an epistemic claim (agnostic/gnostic). Very feeble indeed.

You can't disprove the existence of God.
Hitchens could just sit there and tell dirty jokes and still not have to prove anything.
The proof needs to come from the theists.
No proof was given, therefore non-theists win.

Before you say that Hitchens "lost", be aware that this DVD was produced by Biola University, a private evangelical Christian university...

You cant possibly give this to Craig.

I agree this is a good debate, but Craig's arguments are based wholly on challenging Hitchens to prove a negative- that god does not exist - which is logically impossible.

Craig also fails to understand what exactly atheism is and Hitchens has to spend most of his time defining basic concepts.

Anyway, I highly recommend watching this.

adamryan - you have that scared, desperate tone that seems to be so common in modern Christians. You can't influence us with strange and bitter comments like "the world laughs" at people like Christopher Hitches. To say that is, quite frankly, to speak a load of bullshit, and you knew that: after all, here you are downloading a Hitchens debate, which you knew to come online and do a search for because you clearly know of his reputation as a respected public speaker. So we can both agree that you are lying, you know you are lying, and yet you still lied. A true christian...
I don't know if you realise how obvious it is to others that your agressive tone and your need to burden strangers with proven falsities stems directly from that little voice in the back of your head, that slow burning realisation that the time has come, religions are crumbling, and all this time YOU HAD IT WRONG!!! That shit obviously scares you quite badly.
The only way you can fight it is to keep doing what your mother and father did: lie to your kids and create the next generation of goofy, godfearing robots that can roam the earth like ironic walking talking examples of why abortion must remain available and affordable.
One last thing, people who "truly have the mind of a diligent philosopher" would find you an arrogant, insufferable cunt. You really need to stop speaking on behalf of people who are smarter than you are because their credibility doesn't rub off on you - and you aren't smart enough to avoid misrepresenting them.

@KneeButt I don't care if you don't like what I've said, or if you disagree with it. You have your opinions and I have reason. None of what you've said showed how Hitchens won the debate. If you'd like to resuscitate the dead body of his arguments, feel free to. But again, as with Hitchens, the world will laugh at you.

@adamryan You brought this fight to the wrong place. Hitchens is now dead and it's covered on every news station on the radio and TV. Nobody's laughing.

Hitchens wins before he even speaks.
William Lane Craig and those like him must learn to steer clear of arguing from their truly poor understanding of science. When Craig, a philiosopher, begins to make arguments against exceptionally intricate and complicated subjects of astronomy and theoretical physics such as the existence of a possible multiverse (or many), he gives himself away as the charlatan that he really is.
lesson to the religious: stick to what you know.