• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Dawkins' Profile

tosca1 said:
Although it was a bestseller and controversial, reviews about The God Delusion were not good.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_God_Delusion


bethinking.org - Science + Christianity - Flew Speaks Out: Professor Antony Flew reviews The God Delusion


Science Literature - Michael Ruse on Richard Dawkins

It's not the first time I've heard critics discuss Dawkins as being ignorant about theology and Christianity. The God Delusion is nothing more but a "rah-rah!" book for Dawkins' niche of followers. Being a controversial man himself, and with a very controversial title to boot....even believers bought and read his book.

What more when it got challenged by William Lane Craig, and Dawkins refused to stand by what he wrote.
Click to expand...

So, no you haven't read the book. You should read it. No, it's not the best book ever.
 
Last edited:
afr0byte said:
So, no you haven't read the book. You should read it. No, it's not the best book ever.
Click to expand...

Her attacks will never be more than ad hominem because what Dawkins professes is way too technical and based on facts / evidence to be legitimately refuted by something like religion.
 
Knowledge=power said:
Her attacks will never be more than ad hominem because what Dawkins professes is way too technical and based on facts / evidence to be legitimately refuted by something like religion.
Click to expand...

Plus, most if the time it doesn't seem like she cares to debate. She just posts links for us to read.
 
Knowledge=power said:
And when challenged, an e-tantrum is thrown.
Click to expand...

Cite a link where I had an "e-tantrum."

So what if I provide support and evidence! If the source is explanation enough - it stands as an official argument/rebuttal.
What, you think I should add my own bs into them.....like some of the new atheist posters here do? Do a bs adlib?
A lot of you are all over the map, or all over the place! You can't seem to focus on the issue.
You quote and respond to a comment with total disregard for the context of what the discussion is all about - like as if the previous posts don't count or never existed at all! That is not discussion.

As for Dawkins not wanting to "stoop" that low in debating Craig - like as if he had not done that already if one reads all the critics by people whose opinion are more credible than the peanut gallery here - you're all venting your personal opinion. And you're being very emotional about it to boot!

You're knee-jerking all over the thread like as if it's the latest dance craze! :mrgreen:

But, one tell-tale sign though that you know they know they're losing ground - the personal attacks begin. They inevitably go for the messenger, instead of the message. It's always the same with new atheists. :lol:
 
Last edited:
tosca1 said:
But, one tell-tale sign though that you know they know they're losing ground - the personal attacks begin. They inevitably go for the messenger, instead of the message. It's always the same with new atheists. :lol:
Click to expand...

When there's nothing left, claim you're being personally attacked. Classic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom