Richard Dawkins says he won't debate William Lane Craig

Richard Dawkins explains why he won't debate William Lane Craig

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• Richard
• Dawkins
• William
• Lane
• Craig

[Pirate44444]

@AlexiusMoore One more fucking time. If you watch the video where Dawkins talks about the gay gene, he gives THREE explanations. The first two you ridicule. The third one, the one Dawkins prefers, the one he thinks is most likely, the one that he suggests you totally ignore.  Lame, pathetic, pointless, useless, ignorant, waste of time.

Being a member of FRS means you're not an idiot, not that you know everything.

[Pirate44444]

@AlexiusMoore You on the other hand are bitter, you cherry-pick, your beliefs about Dawkins's ulterior motives are baseless and irrational. I'm saying that because it's what I think, not because I worship Dawkins. When you realised you were wrong about the gay gene thing you ignored it instead of admitting you were wrong. That is pathetic.

[Pirate44444]

@AlexiusMoore Yeah ask a real scientist, not one of those fake scientists they have in the FRS. Only an idiot would write books to get rich, since it almost never works. If you do write a book to get rich, it's usually to promote something else you do (eg. selling health foods). That's how I know, not because I am deluded and bought in by Dawkins. I like his science books but I have no intention of reading the God Delusion since friends have told me it's mostly a big rant.

[AlexiusMoore]

@Pirate44444 Your defending Dawkins so ferociously u don't even allow the possibility of Dawkins having his own motive of being Rich and Famous.

Your completely deluded and bought in by him.

The selfish gene had many misconceptions and false statements, ask a real scientist to read it and he will know. being in the FRS just means that the FRS decided it would benefit them to have hime. that is all,

[AlexiusMoore]

@Pirate44444 being a Member of the FRS, doesn't mean everysingle scientists agrees with him and that Dawkins knows everything. u really so ignorant???

[AlexiusMoore]

@Pirate44444 Oh come one u really so nieve, if u see an opportunity even if its small you go for it,.

What fundamental misunderstanding did i make?????

[Pirate44444]

@AlexiusMoore and what are you talking about? The selfish gene had brilliant reception. Do I have to point out again that he's a member of the FRS? Do you think if his books were poorly received by scientists he would still be in the FRS?

[Pirate44444]

@AlexiusMoore Again you cherry pick. You ignore all the other books and just focus on that one, which you ridicule, and one other. Also I bet you wouldn't have made that comment if the reporter had used the word "refraction" instead.

Once again, there is no basis for saying his books are there to make money. How the fuck do you know? Maybe he genuinely cares? Again, he would have written a sequel to The God Delusion, his best seller.

Please address the gay gene comment.

[AlexiusMoore]

@Pirate44444 My opinion is always humble, so what u trying to prove?

Wow explaining the rainbow to kids.... u for real wow this man is a mastermind.

In one of his books Dawkins writes a disclaimer " that this is unabashed advocacy" meaning its his opinion

and

"contains no hypotheses that are testable" meaning its non scientific

and his selfish gene was poorly received by other Scientists.

His books are there to make money, just cleverly worded

[Pirate44444]

@AlexiusMoore Are you going to address the fact that you made a fundamental misunderstanding on Dawkin's explanation of the gay gene or just pretend that never happened?