Nothern Ireland Guy On Dawkins Being Stumped

soloparadox

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6D-c4LcuVY&watch_response

Zillah

Is this a public service announcement or have you an opinion on the matter?

I found him rammbling and annoying. He doesn't seem to understand that the video was edited to make it look like Dawkins was stumped. The long period of thinking had nothing to do the information question, that was when he found out they were Creationists and he was pondering whether to throw them out or not.

Zombrex

I always found this Creationist battle cry that Dawkins was stumped by Creationist questions rather amusing.

Firstly, if he was stumped by a question why does that matter? Creationists still seem to have this ridiculous idea that scientists are supposed to act like priests or popes, and if they don't have an answer to a question that is some kind of flaw. In fact one thing you find about Dawkins is that he says all the time what he doesn't know, or what science doesn't know, as all good scientists should.

Secondly Dawkins had talked about the issue around the question in length many times before this interview. The idea then that this question stumped him seems rather puzzling. Did he forget all the times he has discussed this before, all the books he has written?.

Oh and the guy doing the video is clearly an idiot ... just listen to what he says about Dawkins conflicting with Darwin .. moron :rolleyes:

Dades

Looks like it was filmed in the back of a camper van.

Myksyk

I love the bit where he argues that the film makers were not trying to trap/deceive Dawkins as they used some name linked in some circuitous, cryptic way to Job and that if Dawkins had done his homework he would have made this connection and known they were creationists! This is at the very start and for me sums up the twisted, distorted perspective that creationists and their apologists bring to the real world. It's just incredible that he could make the argument with a straight face. Once he came out with that tripe I couldn't watch the rest. Maybe he belongs to a sub-culture of creationists - the Crosaire Creationists!

stevejazzx

Today I was asked if God came down and preforming miralces would I believe in him? I was stumped.

JimiTime

stevejazzx wrote: »

Today I was asked if God came down and preforming miralces would I believe in him? I was stumped.

I hope this isn't in relation to this question of mine is it:


because I'm sure you know that thats completely different to what you just said. If its not, just ignore.

stevejazzx

Dawkins gives an answer, so do I. If he thinks it means he's stumped??
I must have missed that Descartes lecture..I think therfore I stump...

estebancambias

Bill O' Reilly owned Dawkins back in 2005...FACT.

Dades

I didn't know anyone owned Dawkins, but I'm pretty sure Kaka belongs to Silvio Berlusconi.

estebancambias

*claps*

Wity.

Yeah apparently Dawkins was bought by some pimp a few years back...probably just some rumour.

robindch

For the first few minutes of this you can't say for sure if this is a guy in a hoodie who flunked inter-cert biology trying to make creationists look dumb, or whether it's a genuine creationist, but then "All disease in this world is a result of sin". It could even be our own dear JC.

Anyhow, rather than banging on about Down's Syndrome disproving the idea of beneficial mutations, he could have picked something else:

http://www.gingerkids.org/

.

Zillah

estebancambias wrote: »

Yeah apparently Dawkins was bought by some pimp a few years back...probably just some rumour.

You are amazing.

I can't wait for the sigpo to remove your signature.

Dades

Zillah wrote: »

I can't wait for the sigpo to remove your signature.

And they have... making my earlier reply look very cryptic!
This was the image in the sig in case anyone's wondering.

estebancambias

Are you not allowed a picture signature? If so, sorry.

Dades

estebancambias wrote: »

Are you not allowed a picture signature? If so, sorry.

You are. Maybe an Admin thought your image was too big?
Check out this thread for the sig rules and you'll be good to go.

Acid_Violet

estebancambias wrote: »

Bill O' Reilly owned Dawkins back in 2005...FACT.

What!

Bill O'Reilly says that once man has unraveled all the mysteries of nature he'll believe that there isn't a God, that as long as there's uncertainty of how things came to be there in the first place he'll believe it was because some divine force made all the universe in 6 days, which there's no proof of other than an old book.

Taking a leap of faith in believing in how even the matter got here in the first place? Isn't it taking an even bigger leap of faith to believe in a God that came from nowhere as nothing preceded him?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bA66lP2GkiE

Have a look at this.

Parsley

Reply from one of the related videos:

God and religion are like the evil robot in Terminator 2: Always ready to change shape and meld into any cracks when necessary to stay alive and almost impossible to kill.

Zillah

So you're saying we should shoot religion with a grenade so it falls into a vat of molten iron where it will writhe until dead?

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

how big a grenade would we need to plant under vatican city for it to collapse into the core?

Dades