+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 6 123456 LastLast
Results 1 to 16 of 86

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    724

    Richard Dawkins' Ignorance

    Richard Dawkins is widely quoted and worshiped by the godless left. Dawkins has sold millions of books, and profited handsomely from his atheist narcissism.

    Let's examine some of Dawkins' "science," shall we?

    In order to set natural selection going on a real planet, all that is required is the existence of inherited information.” - Climbing Mount Improbable, page 67
    As opposed to an "imaginary planet" perhaps? And as if "inherited information" is something rather trivial? If it were so trivial, then why bother to mention it at all?


    Either your god is capable of designing worlds and doing all the other godlike things, in which case he
    needs an explanation in his own right. Or he is not, in which case he cannot provide an explanation.” - page 77


    God "needs" an explanation in his own right. "I am" is as simple and elegant and eminently more comprehensible than two "branes" colliding to form the Big Bang. Science deals with the tangible, real world as we know and perceive it. God is forever beyond our purview, rail as Dawkins might, and does.



    To say it again, going down the slopes of Mount Improbable is not allowed by Natural Selection.”- page 134
    Perhaps Dawkins hasn't heard of blind fish, in caves, which have lost their eyes, and eyesight. Gaining eyesight was a move uphill, and so losing it is going down the slopes, which Dawkins repeatedly emphasizes cannot happen. Oops.


    "(Sir Frederick Hoyle) is reported to have said that the evolution, by natural selection, of a complicated structure such as a protein molecule or by implication, an eye or a heart is about as likely as a hurricane’s having the luck to put together a Boeing 747 when whirling through a junkyard. If he’d said ‘chance’ instead of ‘natural selection’ he’d have been right.” - page 101



    What Sir Hoyle said was “The spontaneous generation of a bacterium is about the same as the probability that a tornado sweeping through a junkyard could assemble a 747 from the contents therein”.


    Dawkins can't even get simple quotations right.


    An elephant is a colony of about 1,000 trillion cells, and each one of those cells is itself a colony of bacteria.” - page 287
    Right, an elephant is just one big infection. This is.... *science*.


    More laughable Dawkins to follow.
    Last edited by BarackZero; 03-30-2009 at 10:36 AM. Reason: Edit function does not work. Cannot remove quote function at page 77

  2. #2
    LogicallyYours's Avatar
    LogicallyYours is offline Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings. User Rank
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,352

    Re: Richard Dawkins' Ignorance

    Quote Originally Posted by BarackZero View Post
    Richard Dawkins is widely quoted and worshiped by the godless left. Dawkins has sold millions of books, and profited handsomely from his atheist narcissism.

    Let's examine some of Dawkins' "science," shall we?

    As opposed to an "imaginary planet" perhaps? And as if "inherited information" is something rather trivial? If it were so trivial, then why bother to mention it at all?




    God "needs" an explanation in his own right. "I am" is as simple and elegant and eminently more comprehensible than two "branes" colliding to form the Big Bang. Science deals with the tangible, real world as we know and perceive it. God is forever beyond our purview, rail as Dawkins might, and does.



    Perhaps Dawkins hasn't heard of blind fish, in caves, which have lost their eyes, and eyesight. Gaining eyesight was a move uphill, and so losing it is going down the slopes, which Dawkins repeatedly emphasizes cannot happen. Oops.





    What Sir Hoyle said was “The spontaneous generation of a bacterium is about the same as the probability that a tornado sweeping through a junkyard could assemble a 747 from the contents therein”.


    Dawkins can't even get simple quotations right.


    Right, an elephant is just one big infection. This is.... *science*.


    More laughable Dawkins to follow.
    What's laughable is, you're pissing into the wind and you don't even know it. Evolution is an observed proven fact. The theory of Evolution is and explanation of that fact.

    You can piss and moan all you wish, but you cannot present even the slighest proof of God. Evolution and Big Bang, however, are supported by evidence.
    "Religion is a heavy suitcase: all you have to do is put it down."
    -----------------------------------------------------------
    "I have read the bible...more than once. I was not impressed nor was I so moved to give up my ability to think for myself and surrender my knowledge of facts for the unfounded belief in a mythical sky-fairy." - Me.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,324

    Re: Richard Dawkins' Ignorance

    Quote Originally Posted by BarackZero View Post
    Richard Dawkins is widely quoted and worshiped by the godless left. Dawkins has sold millions of books, and profited handsomely from his atheist narcissism.

    Let's examine some of Dawkins' "science," shall we?

    As opposed to an "imaginary planet" perhaps? And as if "inherited information" is something rather trivial? If it were so trivial, then why bother to mention it at all?
    That's all that's required. Any system with inheritable information and selection pressure will evolve. Do you dispute this? Or do you just not like Dawkins' tone?




    God "needs" an explanation in his own right. "I am" is as simple and elegant and eminently more comprehensible than two "branes" colliding to form the Big Bang. Science deals with the tangible, real world as we know and perceive it. God is forever beyond our purview, rail as Dawkins might, and does.
    Riiiiight.... So your comeback is "God just exists. Shove it."


    Perhaps Dawkins hasn't heard of blind fish, in caves, which have lost their eyes, and eyesight. Gaining eyesight was a move uphill, and so losing it is going down the slopes, which Dawkins repeatedly emphasizes cannot happen. Oops.
    No, you misunderstand evolution. Eyes cost energy to produce. If you can't use them, then having eyes is deleterious, not advantageous. Losing your eyes because you live in a cave is an evolutionary step forwards.





    What Sir Hoyle said was “The spontaneous generation of a bacterium is about the same as the probability that a tornado sweeping through a junkyard could assemble a 747 from the contents therein”.]


    Dawkins can't even get simple quotations right.
    Actually, assuming you got Dawkins' quotation right, what Dawkins said was Hoyle is reported to have said, not Hoyle said. As long as someone, somewhere, sometime has said what Dawkins said, then he was correct.

    Right, an elephant is just one big infection. This is.... *science*.


    More laughable Dawkins to follow.
    Do you disagree with this? Do you know how many bacteria live inside you? Have you ever studied any biology? For every cell in your body, there are 1000 bacteria. It's as true of you as it is of an elephant.

  4. #4
    LogicallyYours's Avatar
    LogicallyYours is offline Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings. User Rank
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,352

    Re: Richard Dawkins' Ignorance

    ...not too mention that the tornado in a junkyard lack on important thing to be used as an analogy....a method of self replication...like sexual reproduction.

    It's a flawed analogy and only an idiot would use it.
    "Religion is a heavy suitcase: all you have to do is put it down."
    -----------------------------------------------------------
    "I have read the bible...more than once. I was not impressed nor was I so moved to give up my ability to think for myself and surrender my knowledge of facts for the unfounded belief in a mythical sky-fairy." - Me.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,324

    Re: Richard Dawkins' Ignorance

    Quote Originally Posted by LogicallyYours View Post
    ...not too mention that the tornado in a junkyard lack on important thing to be used as an analogy....a method of self replication...like sexual reproduction.

    It's a flawed analogy and only an idiot would use it.
    Not to mention Fred Hoyle actually believed in a universe that was infinite in both time and space, and that life on Earth came about through space viruses that arrived here on meteors. He certainly didn't believe in a biblical creation.


    But as long as you can pull a quote of his out of context and use it to support your argument....

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    724

    Re: Richard Dawkins' Ignorance

    Quote Originally Posted by kazza View Post
    That's all that's required. Any system with inheritable information and selection pressure will evolve. Do you dispute this? Or do you just not like Dawkins' tone?
    Dawkins, and you on his coattails, play fast and loose with an elegant system we know as DNA. That is unscientific in the extreme, but it doesn't seem to bother you in the slightest.



    Riiiiight.... So your comeback is "God just exists. Shove it."
    You said "shove it," not I. I quoted the Bible wherein a man asks God's who he should say sent him. God replies "Tell them I am sent you."

    There is an inordinate amount of anger directed at Christians whenever we cite God's promise of redemption, or Gospel phrases. These are somehow attributed to Christians, rather than their true Author. Such confusion is terribly widespread, misguided, hateful, intolerant, and anti-intellectual.




    No, you misunderstand evolution. Eyes cost energy to produce. If you can't use them, then having eyes is deleterious, not advantageous. Losing your eyes because you live in a cave is an evolutionary step forwards.
    Lovely. Gaining eyes is going "up" Mount Improbable, and then losing those eyes is also going "up" Mount Improbable. You are clever with words, but not with science.




    Actually, assuming you got Dawkins' quotation right, what Dawkins said was Hoyle is reported to have said, not Hoyle said. As long as someone, somewhere, sometime has said what Dawkins said, then he was correct.
    Pure speculation on your part. Most unscientific and anti-intellectual. I read the book. I quoted Dawkins correctly. He couldn't even get the "leaving angle" correct in a simple diagram of a prism in Figure 5-10.



    Do you disagree with this? Do you know how many bacteria live inside you? Have you ever studied any biology? For every cell in your body, there are 1000 bacteria. It's as true of you as it is of an elephant.
    Bacteria inside living mammalian cells constitute an infection. Trillions of infected cells would undoubtedly trigger septic shock and death would shortly follow.

    Don't you know anything about biology?
    Even mammalian urine is sterile. We take anti-infectives whenever bacteria are found in our urine.

    Dawkins wasn't talking about the gut, which is outside the body, and its cells.

    You're obviously not well versed in biological science.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    724

    Re: Richard Dawkins' Ignorance

    Quote Originally Posted by kazza View Post
    Not to mention Fred Hoyle actually believed in a universe that was infinite in both time and space, and that life on Earth came about through space viruses that arrived here on meteors. He certainly didn't believe in a biblical creation.


    But as long as you can pull a quote of his out of context and use it to support your argument....
    Hoyle's personal opinions are not the issue. You're changing the subject.

    The subject was Dawkins' laziness in misquoting Hoyle so very badly, and obviously intentionally.

    Nor do you offer a whisper of documentation for what you claim is taken "out of context."

    You mimic Dawkins' laziness and nonsense. You're pretty much a waste of time.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,324

    Re: Richard Dawkins' Ignorance

    I'm not interested in playing these stupid word games. If you want to argue that in certain places a literal interpretation of what Dawkins wrote is incorrect then be my guest. So what if he misquoted Hoyle? In no way did his quote change the meaning of what Hoyle said. So what if bacteria are not inside your cells? It's irrelevant to the point that Dawkins was making. So what if he got an angle wrong on a diagram? It's the publisher that is supposed to pick up mistakes like that.

    If Dawkins was publishing a paper, then these things become important, and trust me, the peer-review process picks up every annoying little mistake like that. But this isn't a paper, it's a popular science book, and it's the meaning behind the words, not the extraordinarily literal reading of them that you insist upon, that is important.



    And for god's sake, it is not "anti-intellectual" to attribute words to the person that actually said them, instead of the person that they claim said them. After all, the flying spaghetti monster told me that.

  9. #9
    LogicallyYours's Avatar
    LogicallyYours is offline Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings. User Rank
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,352

    Re: Richard Dawkins' Ignorance

    [quote]There is an inordinate amount of anger directed at Christians whenever we cite God's promise of redemption, or Gospel phrases. These are somehow attributed to Christians, rather than their true Author. Such confusion is terribly widespread, misguided, hateful, intolerant, and anti-intellectual.[/quoe]

    No, what we, as logical, critically thinking individuals, have a problem with is,.....when Bible-babbleing Asshats like yourself wish to change the definition of Science to allow your religious dogma to be taught as Science.

    You want to believe that God "Poofed" the universe and people into existance???...More power to ya....knock yourself out.

    BUT DON'T pretend that it's a Scientific Theory or a Theory at all.....because it's not...AND DON'T push it on the public school systems to be taught as and alternative to The Theory of Evolution (Real Theory tm)
    "Religion is a heavy suitcase: all you have to do is put it down."
    -----------------------------------------------------------
    "I have read the bible...more than once. I was not impressed nor was I so moved to give up my ability to think for myself and surrender my knowledge of facts for the unfounded belief in a mythical sky-fairy." - Me.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Canton Michigan
    Posts
    1,086

    Re: Richard Dawkins' Ignorance

    [QUOTE=LogicallyYours;740728]
    There is an inordinate amount of anger directed at Christians whenever we cite God's promise of redemption, or Gospel phrases. These are somehow attributed to Christians, rather than their true Author. Such confusion is terribly widespread, misguided, hateful, intolerant, and anti-intellectual.[/quoe]

    No, what we, as logical, critically thinking individuals, have a problem with is,.....when Bible-babbleing Asshats like yourself wish to change the definition of Science to allow your religious dogma to be taught as Science.

    You want to believe that God "Poofed" the universe and people into existance???...More power to ya....knock yourself out.

    BUT DON'T pretend that it's a Scientific Theory or a Theory at all.....because it's not...AND DON'T push it on the public school systems to be taught as and alternative to The Theory of Evolution (Real Theory tm)
    Interesting, I never once in this thread saw him do that?

    Tell me, is that the plan? Just thinking as your name suggest that you begin to call people names to prove your better or smarter than he.

    Great, I can do this quite well. Your a asshat, stupid f**ker. What a tard you are, your meter must be always pointing at yourself.

  11. #11
    LogicallyYours's Avatar
    LogicallyYours is offline Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings. User Rank
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,352

    Re: Richard Dawkins' Ignorance

    You even f'd that up! Try again.
    "Religion is a heavy suitcase: all you have to do is put it down."
    -----------------------------------------------------------
    "I have read the bible...more than once. I was not impressed nor was I so moved to give up my ability to think for myself and surrender my knowledge of facts for the unfounded belief in a mythical sky-fairy." - Me.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Canton Michigan
    Posts
    1,086

    Re: Richard Dawkins' Ignorance

    Quote Originally Posted by LogicallyYours View Post
    You even f'd that up! Try again.
    Your such a tard, even a f**k tard. You are stupid, a moron, try again idiot

  13. #13
    LogicallyYours's Avatar
    LogicallyYours is offline Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings. User Rank
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,352

    Re: Richard Dawkins' Ignorance

    Quote Originally Posted by terry05_99 View Post
    Your such a tard, even a f**k tard. You are stupid, a moron, try again idiot
    God bless you Christian
    "Religion is a heavy suitcase: all you have to do is put it down."
    -----------------------------------------------------------
    "I have read the bible...more than once. I was not impressed nor was I so moved to give up my ability to think for myself and surrender my knowledge of facts for the unfounded belief in a mythical sky-fairy." - Me.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Canton Michigan
    Posts
    1,086

    Re: Richard Dawkins' Ignorance

    Quote Originally Posted by LogicallyYours View Post
    God bless you Christian

    No need to bless me you f**k tard. Im just trying your way of debating. It seems to be a good way.

    Now what do you have to say moron other than God bless stupid?

  15. #15
    LogicallyYours's Avatar
    LogicallyYours is offline Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings. User Rank
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,352

    Re: Richard Dawkins' Ignorance

    Quote Originally Posted by terry05_99 View Post
    No need to bless me you f**k tard. Im just trying your way of debating. It seems to be a good way.

    Now what do you have to say moron other than God bless stupid?
    I'm still waiting for your to post something intelligent. Will this take long?
    "Religion is a heavy suitcase: all you have to do is put it down."
    -----------------------------------------------------------
    "I have read the bible...more than once. I was not impressed nor was I so moved to give up my ability to think for myself and surrender my knowledge of facts for the unfounded belief in a mythical sky-fairy." - Me.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Canton Michigan
    Posts
    1,086

    Re: Richard Dawkins' Ignorance

    Quote Originally Posted by LogicallyYours View Post
    I'm still waiting for your to post something intelligent. Will this take long?
    Ok, I will. You are a moron, f**k tard, idiot and asshat.
    Now sense that is how you respond to everyone on this site, I assume it is intelligent. You really are a asshat, oh and f**k tard. I really do enjoy this way of debating, makes me feel superior and like a big boy.

Similar Threads

  1. Richard Dawkins gets it right again...
    By LogicallyYours in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 143
    Last Post: 09-22-2012, 12:35 AM
  2. Richard Dawkins Ignorance Book 2
    By BarackZero in forum Science Scams
    Replies: 131
    Last Post: 01-13-2010, 03:18 PM
  3. Richard Dawkins vs God(s)
    By aegist in forum Religious Scams
    Replies: 148
    Last Post: 07-23-2009, 08:10 PM
  4. Richard Dawkins on BBC
    By Ronald in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-11-2007, 02:54 PM
  5. Richard Dawkins Q&A
    By ianmatthews in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-26-2006, 04:09 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •