Piers Morgan Presses Richard Dawkins on Atheism
Go to https://piavpn.com/alex to get 83% off Private Internet Access with 4 months free.
For early, ad-free access to videos, and to support the channel, subscribe to my Substack: https://www.alexoconnor.com
To donate to my PayPal (thank you): http://www.paypal.me/cosmicskeptic
– VIDEO NOTES
Piers Morgan debates Richard Dawkins on the question of God’s existence, and what if anything came before the big bang.
– LINKS
Piers’ recent interview with Richard Dawkins: https://youtu.be/pA4Hx-dJAn4?si=kVmqHHrF9WGdVkfb
Piers’ previous interview with Richard Dawkins: https://youtu.be/505UazMNgLg?si=z5rQoBY1D-6RXQQB
– TIMESTAMPS
– SPECIAL THANKS
– CONNECT
My Website: https://www.alexoconnor.com
SOCIAL LINKS:
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/cosmicskeptic
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/cosmicskeptic
Instagram: http://www.instagram.com/cosmicskeptic
TikTok: @CosmicSkeptic
The Within Reason Podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/within-reason/id1458675168
– CONTACT
Business email: contact@alexoconnor.com
——————————————
@CosmicSkeptic
January 23, 2026 at 2:39 pm
Go to https://piavpn.com/alex to get 83% off Private Internet Access with 4 months free.
For early, ad-free access to videos, and to support the channel, subscribe to my Substack at http://www.alexoconnor.com
@tslfrontman
January 23, 2026 at 2:39 pm
A shame Dawkins is really such a daft bigot, though. I read The God Delusion in HS, and it's sad to see him regress into a conservative robot.
@Opinionator9000
January 23, 2026 at 2:39 pm
Atheists: "We don't know"
Theists: "Magic!"
Atheists: "So you don't plus stupid?"
@seancostello7608
January 23, 2026 at 2:39 pm
Piers, with all of his common sense? You’re being far too charitable, Alex.
@Keepcool233
January 23, 2026 at 2:39 pm
Atheists are so good at picking a subject and make it look too complicated to create confusion and sound more smart. People nowadays embrace atheism because it sounds cool and trendy, and sacrifice their brain and common sense. They look at the complexity of the universe the trillions of galaxies, the uniqueness of the DNA, the beauty of the sky, of nature, of animals and they will look at you in the eyes and say yeah all that came from nothing, like this comment.
@uwu2250
January 23, 2026 at 2:39 pm
7:15 fantastic analogy
@CharlotteDiana-r2u
January 23, 2026 at 2:39 pm
15:37 what ????
@envybartowski8519
January 23, 2026 at 2:39 pm
Pierce is a hack, interview with the butthurt weinstein proved it immensely
@TheLan-g6j
January 23, 2026 at 2:39 pm
The most important message and honest philosophical position i have heard in this whole video is the warning of the wise man. If someone claims they a worldview that can explain everything, be skeptical. There are a set of axioms that are unprovable inside of the "framework" that are assumed to be true in order to extract truth from the world using the axioms as conceptual tools of measurement. The biggest problem, is the foundation of thier axioms were rooted in a seperate philosophical framework that was using a "parent set" of axioms to extract the "truth" of the new axioms, meaning the axioms are flawed foundationally, the logic of thier being axioms are dependent on a separate framework, which was built on a separate set of axioms, the "truth" just becomes convoluted after the first axiom split.
There is a real parallax error in humans not keeping a proper log of thought. Imagine the foundation of your house failing and you keep repairing the surface of your walls floor and ceiling, to make them look even from the inside thinking thats gonna "fix" the real problem. It will eventually crumble around you. And you wont know anything is wrong until it does. Because you accepted the idea that this concept was true, until you caught that reality check. The worst part about that, is when your framework is proven wrong, that adjustment of "what is true" and "what is not" is not an easy fix. Especially when you are so dependent and fixed on a specific thought process.
@TheLan-g6j
January 23, 2026 at 2:39 pm
I dont understand how people cannot think of nothing. Ok this is less difficult than you may imagine. Thank of every "thing" you can think of and assign it a color. Now imagine you can have two different types of space, "the area things are occupying" and "the area things are not occupying". Now imagine an area with no color. That is nothing. And it has a behavior that directly interacts with "things". Space as we know it cannot encompass the definition we give it, because we cannot observe it in a falsifiable manner relative to its definition. If space can exist in the absence of "things" the concept of imagining "nothing" becomes impossible. But how can nothing exist without space? And how can "something" exist without nothing? For nothing to not exist, EVERYTHING has to exist somewhere. Period. And that cannot be true, because nothing would then exist paradoxically in both iterations of understanding. Nothing is INCLUDED in the set of everything. Space is the water and the bubbles in your bath, energy is the soap you put in the water, and nothing is the bathtub.
@TheLan-g6j
January 23, 2026 at 2:39 pm
Physics is not by any means incomprehensible nor is it unintuitive. Nothing literally means no-thing. There is no "time" before the big bang from our perception because we cannot create a chronological order or even distinguish any change at the point of the "singularity". The term time does not represent a coordinateless dimension.
There are multiple philosophical reasons why this is a "barrier" in logic. Mostly this barrier exists because of the inherent mechanics of creating or communicating understanding. Its not a limit on reality itself, just a limit on the observer/communicator. In reality, its like looking at the surface of a black hole. All you see is what is happening on the surface, that doesn't mean nothing is happening, it just means we have not been able to peer further than that surface. It doesn't mean something is happening either. Black holes could be the non-euclidean edges of the universe, but that would be a mathematical nightmare to explain using dimensions and quantification. In fact limiting yourself to this scope of understanding almost makes actually understanding it a super task of delegating significance, which is all science is anymore. The delegation of significance. The arrogant posture of knowledge without true discipline.
Anyways, physics is easy as long as you are a philosopher not strictly a mathematician. Its the math that creates the problem, not the reality. The absence of inference and the study of adherence.
@DerNesor
January 23, 2026 at 2:39 pm
Piers tries to argue with Einstein before knowing anything about his theory
@tynystanniiazakunov5595
January 23, 2026 at 2:39 pm
The guy basically said "I don't understand it therefore it's false" and "I don't understand it therefore it's God" within the same topic.
@6558369
January 23, 2026 at 2:39 pm
Morgan seems to be quite narrow minded individual
@tcgdiscussions
January 23, 2026 at 2:39 pm
When you close your eye: You see the inside of your eyelid that isn't lit internally or externally to see the different colors.
@tcgdiscussions
January 23, 2026 at 2:39 pm
I can explain the trinity but it would take to long for this post.
Divine Hiddenness is probably a rational breakdown in the faith required within you as the individual vs the intellectual presuppositions you have in the first place. God is real to others and yet not to some. Just because he is not to some, doesn't mean it is not real. It was real to Galileo that the Earth rotated around the sun, and they locked him up for it. The concept that people can believe in something that is true and others not see it happens all the time. Look at Modern America.
Evil is just knowing that something is wrong and doing it anyway.
Children get cancer is an emotional appeal to saying that bad things happen to good people. Bad things happen to bad people. People die. Some before life really began and others after a long one. Assigning purpose to death is or why outside why it actually occurred is fruitless. We already live in a world of death. There isn't a reason to assume that the why question of cancer has value when you probably don't believe that the why actually matters. If you did, then Piers's question in this video would be taken far more seriously beyond basically saying that science can be okay not answering a fundamental origin of the universe claim, while claiming knowledge of its origin while remaining logically consistent.
People in different parts of the world value certain things and teach them to their children. People believe in God based on where they are, "yes" but there are others who are born in closed countries that leave Islam to convert to Christianity and are willing to die for it. So its possible. I don't understand what the point of this question is.
God reveals himself to people in the ways God does. Saying that it is a problem of Tai people not knowing about Jesus in 2026. Either way the Great Commission is to solve the fundamental problem here. To the Tai people and the lonely 3rd world island with no outside contact.
@tcgdiscussions
January 23, 2026 at 2:39 pm
Honestly the lack of not knowing the before of the Big Bang is the biggest detriment to the argument that there is not God. It is just intellectually dishonest to ask Christians to prove the Ethereal and lambast them for not being able to do so or relying on God was and is. Then this question is posed about the conditions that created the Big Bang/the origin, and this "lack of before" is the same response for the explanation of where matter, their conditions, and the causation that created the conditions to create the anomaly itself.
@jjp-w8y
January 23, 2026 at 2:39 pm
My god, as a physics student watching theists trying to invoke physics to support their arguments is actually excruciating. They're always so confidently incorrect about basic facts, and misunderstand everything. Alex seems quite well-read on the subject, and it's refreshing to see somebody that actually knows what they're talking about.
@jasonbradley6132
January 23, 2026 at 2:39 pm
No one should be giving Stephen Meyer any publicity.
@jasonbradley6132
January 23, 2026 at 2:39 pm
Every part of Morgan's tiny brain tells him it doesn't make sense
@N1NJ4B345T
January 23, 2026 at 2:39 pm
Piers' argument is so easy to deal with here and Dawkins is getting unnecessarily frustrated. Just asking "What did God come from? Nothing as well?" puts everyone on the same playing field. You can also just ask what necessary relationship there is between creation out of nothing and religious depictions of God as a subject. Why must what created us be intelligent or care about us? Why can't it just be more physics?
@philipswain4122
January 23, 2026 at 2:39 pm
I’m on the Roger Penrose bus – the infinite big bang, contraction, big bang, contraction ad infinitum.
@MrPorkncheese
January 23, 2026 at 2:39 pm
I believe that Alex will eventually become a theist, a believer in God. Iv listened to his thoughts for years, since he was a teen, and he is an amazing thinker
@TiCail50
January 23, 2026 at 2:39 pm
One of the most ignorant and naive things to say is "we can't explain it so there's proof for existence of a god". No, there's no obligation for a god to exist just because you can't comprehend something. In fact, the more we learn, the more science keeps explaining things that were once taught to come from god. At what point do you tell yourself "well, I guess it's just a matter of time before we can explain what we still don't understand". Of course "time" is subjective. Just because the answer doesn't come during your lifetime (which is extremely short in the grand scheme of things), doesn't mean it won't down the line.
@justbecause882
January 23, 2026 at 2:39 pm
What came before their god?
@Astrophotographer3.0
January 23, 2026 at 2:39 pm
Oh, you think the universe is all intelligent design? Okay, let me pick one thing off top of my head. Earth takes 365 and a quarter days to return to same point in relation to it's start point to the sun (ie, a year). So every 4 years, we have to add a day to keep the calendar screwing up. The "God" isn't smart enough to calculate this accurately?
@macktravels68
January 23, 2026 at 2:39 pm
Professor Brian Cox talks about this at length and actually has an extensive video on Youtube about this very topic. Richard Dawkins, rightfully so, is differing to people like Brian Cox. Piers should have him on his show (perhaps he has–I do not watch Piers Morgan).
@F1nndegamer
January 23, 2026 at 2:39 pm
How many people even know that it is a posibility the universe always existed? How many people know that the big bang says NOTHING about beginning? Im 6 minutes in and exploding for both sides
@nac6930
January 23, 2026 at 2:39 pm
How was god created and by what?
@ThoughtfulHumanism
January 23, 2026 at 2:39 pm
@cosmicSkeptic I have tremendous respect for you but perhaps you should stick to logic and philosophy and stay out of cyber security. VPNs don’t do a damn thing to secure your data.
@johnappleyard6892
January 23, 2026 at 2:39 pm
OK – let's suppose for a moment that God created the universe. Where did God come from? Haven't we just replaced one mystery with another that is just as intractable?
@공창목-z6p
January 23, 2026 at 2:39 pm
수컷 속이기 개숩다😂 누굴조롱거리 맨들지
@VictorE1030
January 23, 2026 at 2:39 pm
Pretty sure Einstein came up with 4D spacetime. Who preceded him at 2:50
?
@damienmurphy3390
January 23, 2026 at 2:39 pm
This is stagnant way of thinking, it would be better if they provided evidence that there's no God 😂that is no different from saying God created everything 😂take the border out of your eyes then you'll be able to see clearly
@yomamma.ismydaddy216
January 23, 2026 at 2:39 pm
One little inaccuracy towards the end. You do actually still have a field of vision even when your eyes are closed
@midnitecro3915
January 23, 2026 at 2:39 pm
Piers is proving how limited his brain capacity is yet again. 😂
@Reaperog111
January 23, 2026 at 2:39 pm
If time stops at the end of the universe, but the universe is cyclical; then time would start again alongside the universe. Time is relative to mass, things around large masses experience time differently; so therefore it is a property not a function. It's emergent in the sense that, when mass emerges; so does time. Nothing doesn't exist, and cannot exist; so something was there. Be it innate energy (potential), or just energy without mass. Considering the laws of conservation of mass, and how the universe is not infinite; essentially what existed before big bang was potential massless energy. That energy reacts, and becomes mass; with mass time begins.
@colinmul981
January 23, 2026 at 2:39 pm
Very painful listening to Morgan , saying the same thing in a dozen ways ,getting an answer ,then asking it again !
Comments are closed.