66,302 views
Change Player Size
Watch this video in a new window
Richard Dawkins Reads The God Delusion
Recently at a lecture in Philadelphia The Rational Response Squad recorded Richard Dawkins reading his book in hopes of helping him to boost sales. Buy a copy of the book, today!
Upgrade to Flash Player 10 for improved playback performance. Upgrade Now or get more info.
617 ratings
Sign in to rate
86,391 views
© 2009 YouTube, LLC
im not exactly shocked, because just like an atheist it makes sense for you to ignore my point and correct my spelling
.
(acutally thats more like 99%)
keep believing what your fuzzies in your heart tell you...facts are facts.
You are a redefinitionalist.
i had an atheist friend of mine tell me one time that if God came down to him in a divine theophany and stood right in front of him...he still would believe in him....
So it doesnt matter what the truth is...i cant convince you that there are trees in the forest. youre going to believe what ever you feel like despite the fact your bobbing in the middle of the pacific telling everyone around you there is no such thin gas water.
First: Stories are tools to understand but are not truth in themselves.
Second: The story you used is inconsistent. To paraphrase, you say "An atheist would still believe in God if he came down to him' An atheist does NOT believe in god... basic basic basic. Consider proof reading your argument instead of hurrying into a defensive insult.
Further...
You do not convert to atheism. You simply *Reason*
If prayer and bibles are unconstitutional for schools to have, then what the heck were they doing their in the first place?
they were there during the very beginning.
you have to lie about our founding fathers being secularists, you have no choice.
they were 95% Christian!!!!
to read text...BRILLIANT!
"All anyone has to do... how you misunderstood the question... tried to answer"(Every Schoolboy Knows)
For a stream of comments that are not empirically related, reading all of yours would be mind numbing and pointless.
And by changing the question you only mislead yourself by very basic definitional Retreat only to fall back on the same weak argument:
"they were there during the very begining"(Argumentum Ad Antiquitum)
95%< Lie!
He is stating an opinion. An opinion which is not backed up by reasonable evidence, and is therefore worthless. What about the apendix? What is so brilliant about that? And what about the massive slaughter of living creatures, and humans, in the years of evolution.
"He's so very frighteningly ill, he must have a bad spirit". Please explain to me what is different about this statement to John Locke's.