LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksRichard Dawkins was having an argument with God, and said: “With the state of knowledge today, I can make man from dust too.”
“OK,” said God, “go ahead.” So Dawkins starts.
God then says: “No, no, you don’t understand. Go get your own dust.”
Richard Dawkins was having an argument with God, and said: “With the state of knowledge today, I can make man from dust too.”
“OK,” said God, “go ahead.” So Dawkins starts.
God then says: “No, no, you don’t understand. Go get your own dust.”
The truth is incontrovertible, malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end; there it is.
Funny!Originally Posted by Twin Towers
"Intelligent design" is in itself the most numbnuts copout mindcloser going. As such, closing your mind to it has a sort of double-negative effect: you say "yes" to the possibilities of reality.
Frankly I doubt that Richard Dawkins gives a toss whether one reads this book or not.
And this thread looks to me like an advertisement - is that allowed on P.ie?
I hope my children read it. After they're done with the Miley Cyrus book.
The more of this crap they read as children, the less of it they will accept as adults.
While I'm standing there ..
The ballsy guys -
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
-
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Intelligent Design does not mean a God. Dawkins to his credit admits as much in that YouTube clip, in other words if an Alien life form made us, the originator of that Alien life form still needs to be explained.
Dawkins knows all of this but he also knows that the masses want simple answers. So he says there is no God instead of there is a God but he was made by a no God. Now we must explain who the No God creator is.
And who created him / her ?
Dawkins doesn't have all the answers - he can't prove a thing; he just believes he has the answers. His reply could be taken from an academic work or a comic. He has faith.. in himself.
Faith in God is equally reasonable and valid, but he can't admit that.
Dawkins produces theories and no proof; God produces proof and no theories.
Which is the more valid?
"..
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
and discombobulated secularism, unable to assert itself positively...asserts itself ..repressively."
He constantly drops subtle hints, but if you had millions of Euros and your academic and media career resting on a certain position what would you do?
I note you omitted from your quote the bit about
Does this mean you yourself haven't seen this "God" character demonstrate his/her "proof"?Dawkins produces theories and no proof; God produces proof and no theories.
Which is the more valid?
Here we are on a speck of dust called planet earth hurtling through an infinite (?) universe... for all we know there could be an infinite number of infinite universes! Face it folks, we don't have the answers and we never will. If a priest claims to have all the answers, the 'way' the truth, the light (knowledge) etc, don't trust him .But equally if a (well paid) scientist tells you he has the truth, the 'way' (methodology!) the light, etc. don't trust him either. Of course both religious and scientific zealots will say (in perfect unison) that's outrageous! My way is the way! Quick made donations, pay subsidies and taxes, fork out £19.99 for my latest book, etc. But no matter how much you fork out or who you decide to fork it out to, you will still be sitting on a speck along with all the other billions of people, flying though outer space!
'Climate-Gate' Scandal Should Be Wake-Up Call For Press, Politicians
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Reply With Quote