I can't believe I wasted my time on reading this piece of rubbish, there is not even one alternative explanation to problems Richard Dawkins tried to answer in his books. But why should I expect.. Goddidit, didn't she?
Your statement establishes an arbitrary requirement.
The alternate explanation is that his little experiment proved that creation by intelligent design is required to even conceive of, and in order to carry out, an experiment.
Every single experiment that has ever taken place proved the same thing.
But since you believe that evolutiondidit you will have to settle for quaint Victorian era tall tales.
Please note that this blog is in stasis, please go to Atheism is Dead for interaction and continuing posts.
aH your so right. I know what we should do. Lets believe in selective bits of an old book because my great-great grandfather told my great grand-father who told my grand father who told my father who told me it was true.
I understand that, that is why you believe in Dawkins' tall tales but what is the point? Please note that this blog is no longer updated and that further posts on Dawkins will be going to Atheism is Dead.
You just unwittingly got owned by Richard Dawkins on your own website.
He acknowledges his computer program is not guided by natural selection. He explains why he can't program natural selection, but nature can.
Also, if you can't see the advantages in all three aspects of the Orchid that allow it to mimic a wasp, then I kind of feel sorry for you, because I'm pretty sure a 5 year old could come up with plenty. Just because your obviously inferior mind can't pick out advantages, does not mean than they don't exist.
Paradoxes and fallacies exist in all arguments ever made, depending on how language is interpreted. Theological fallacies however, are the most abundent and significant. Everything about theology is a fallacy, and even the parts that appear to be "logically consistent" are never empirically guided.
In other words, don't try to present counter arguments to a theory that you are so obviously not mentally equipped to fully understand.
Professor Richard Dawkins is not only a scientist but a celebrity. He is not only lecturer but a debater. He is not only a teacher but an author.
Prof. Richard Dawkins has long been one of the world’s leading voices for the activists atheist movement, one of the leaders of the “New Atheists.”
This blog, Richard Dawkins : Scientist or Activist?, which was established in Nov. 2007, provides a careful dissection of his various statements on a wide range of issue: biology, evolution, morality, abortion, religion, the Bible, and much more.
Get my ebook, "The Apocryphal Jesus," here
I can't believe I wasted my time on reading this piece of rubbish, there is not even one alternative explanation to problems Richard Dawkins tried to answer in his books. But why should I expect.. Goddidit, didn't she?
ReplyDeleteThank you for your comment.
ReplyDeleteYour statement establishes an arbitrary requirement.
The alternate explanation is that his little experiment proved that creation by intelligent design is required to even conceive of, and in order to carry out, an experiment.
Every single experiment that has ever taken place proved the same thing.
But since you believe that evolutiondidit you will have to settle for quaint Victorian era tall tales.
Please note that this blog is in stasis, please go to Atheism is Dead for interaction and continuing posts.
aDios,
Mariano
aH your so right. I know what we should do. Lets believe in selective bits of an old book because my great-great grandfather told my great grand-father who told my grand father who told my father who told me it was true.
ReplyDeleteI understand that, that is why you believe in Dawkins' tall tales but what is the point?
ReplyDeletePlease note that this blog is no longer updated and that further posts on Dawkins will be going to Atheism is Dead.
aDios,
Mariano
You just unwittingly got owned by Richard Dawkins on your own website.
ReplyDeleteHe acknowledges his computer program is not guided by natural selection. He explains why he can't program natural selection, but nature can.
Also, if you can't see the advantages in all three aspects of the Orchid that allow it to mimic a wasp, then I kind of feel sorry for you, because I'm pretty sure a 5 year old could come up with plenty. Just because your obviously inferior mind can't pick out advantages, does not mean than they don't exist.
Paradoxes and fallacies exist in all arguments ever made, depending on how language is interpreted. Theological fallacies however, are the most abundent and significant. Everything about theology is a fallacy, and even the parts that appear to be "logically consistent" are never empirically guided.
In other words, don't try to present counter arguments to a theory that you are so obviously not mentally equipped to fully understand.