Trevor Noah

There's a certain rigidity to it.

Now, here's my proposal for the question for the discussion tonight.

Do you believe that the end of our civilization will be through religious strife or scientific advancement?

What do you think will, in the long term, be more damaging to our prospects as a human race?

Doesn't it, though, let scientists off the hook to some extent to suggest that their work could only be misused by those whose minds are boggled by religious fanaticism when, in fact, isn't there a strong probability that we are not necessarily in control of the unintended consequences of our scientific advancement?

I'm not suggesting to ever stop it, but don't you think it's even possibly more likely

that we will create something that the unintended consequence of it is worldwide catastrophe.

And it seems to provide us for every scientific advance.

There is, I guess it would be the, what is the third law for every equal action?

There's an opposite reaction.

So you have nuclear energy.

You split an atom.

You go this way and you can light the world.

You go this way and you can blow up the world.

And it seems like we always try this part first.

And so... Why do you think it only takes them a few centuries?

And does that make us... Oh, no, that's just a speculation.

So you feel like we are low-achieving when it comes to destroying ourselves.

At this point, the only speculation I've heard from you is somewhat pessimistic.

I have yet to hear you say... You invited a pessimist.