[Kizzy]

Fair point, I also think that faith from a religious perspective can be almost considered as fickle as fashion... as they are moulded to conform to the social norms of the day.

[Kizzy]

Difference of opinion is advantageous in religion. The several sects perform the office of a Censor morum over each other. Is uniformity attainable? Millions of innocent men, women, and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one half the world fools, and the other half hypocrites. To support roguery and error all over the earth. Let us reflect that it is inhabited by a thousand millions of people. That these profess probably a thousand different systems of religion. That ours is but one of that thousand. That if there be but one right, and ours that one, we should wish to see the 999 wandering sects gathered into the fold of truth. But against such a majority we cannot effect this by force. Reason and persuasion are the only practicable instruments. To make way for these, free enquiry must be indulged; and how can we wish others to indulge it while we refuse it ourselves?
Thomas Jefferson

[lostalex]

I liked his point about the word ignorance. calling someone ignorant is not some sort of low class insult, people are ignorant, all of us are in various ways. we need to stop treating words like "ignorant" or "bigot" as if they are offensive terms, they are not. they are not insults. they have real meaning and they apply to everyone in one way or another. There is nothing wrong with pointing out someone's ignorance or bigotry.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by lostalex

I liked his point about the word ignorance. calling someone ignorant is not some sort of low class insult, people are ignorant, all of us are in various ways. we need to stop treating words like "ignorant" or "bigot" as if they are offensive terms, they are not. they are not insults. they have real meaning and they apply to everyone in one way or another. There is nothing wrong with pointing out someone's ignorance or bigotry.

I agree, it's as misinterpreted as 'offensive' things can only be offensive if the intention was to offend.

[Christmas Dynasnow]

Youtube video

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

Youtube video

This video is bull LT.

There is no debate, just a series of sound bites - mainly - Dorkins spouting - mainly - juvenile drivel.

The video has been produced to favour Dorkins so without seeing the full 'debates' we cannot appraise how effective Dorkins was in his arguments or who 'won', but based on what we do see, I could have readily dismantled his weak propositions and left him looking foolish - and I am no intellectual.

[Christmas Dynasnow]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

This video is bull LT.

There is no debate, just a series of sound bites - mainly - Dorkins spouting - mainly - juvenile drivel.

The video has been produced to favour Dorkins so without seeing the full 'debates' we cannot appraise how effective Dorkins was in his arguments or who 'won', but based on what we do see, I could have readily dismantled his weak propositions and left him looking foolish - and I am no intellectual.

Youtube video

This is a fave of mine with Howard at Revelation TV (which I am a bit addicted too and have been for years )

Dawkings has the patience of a fictitious saint

[Kizzy]

Thinking of the current situation in the UK the neo liberal ethos that we are all governed by, if you compartmentalise the actions and the ideology how do they measure in comparison to Christian or religious teachings...
Could we hand on heart say that judging by the actions that as a country our government currently exhibits a Christian ethos?

[kirklancaster]

The word 'ignorant' is like a bullet - in itself it may be harmless, but once loaded into a gun with other words; namely; 'Stupid' and 'Insane', then 'it' and 'they' become potentially wounding. Once that gun is pointed at a group of innocent people for no other reason than that they legitimately disagree with your opinion, and the trigger is pulled, then such an action can only be deemed as unjustifiable and 'offensive'.

There are hundreds of millions - if not billions - of people in this world who do not believe in Darwin's theories or in Evolution, and a huge proportion of these are eminent scientists - experts in such fields as; Molecular Evolution, Organic Chemistry, Biology, Bioengineering, Biomechanics, Microbiology, Entomology, Molecular Biology , Anatomy & Cell Biology , Botany, Bacterial Genetics ,Protein Chemistry, Thermodynamics and Combustion, Bioprocess Engineering etc. etc.

Specially notable scientists Include:

1945 Nobel Prize winning scientist Ernst Chain.
Malcom Muggeridge, Pascal Lectures, Ontario Canada, University of Waterloo
Dr John Sanford (Geneticist and inventor of the GeneGun
William J. Arion, Emeritus Professor of Biochemistry Cornell University
Vladimir L. Voeikov, Vice-Chairman, Chair of Bio-organic Chemistry, Faculty of Biology Lomonosov Moscow State University (Russia)

Along with hundreds of millions of 'lay people', Dorkins branded all these eminent, highly intellectual, extensively knowledgeable scientists as; "Ignorant, stupid or insane", and it is beyond dispute that he was being arrogant, unfair, and wholly offensive when he did so, and beyond dispute that he attacked these notables for no other reason that they DARED to disagree with his extreme, close-minded views.

[Christmas Dynasnow]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

The word 'ignorant' is like a bullet - in itself it may be harmless, but once loaded into a gun with other words; namely; 'Stupid' and 'Insane', then 'it' and 'they' become potentially wounding. Once that gun is pointed at a group of innocent people for no other reason than that they legitimately disagree with your opinion, and the trigger is pulled, then such an action can only be deemed as unjustifiable and 'offensive'.

There are hundreds of millions - if not billions - of people in this world who do not believe in Darwin's theories or in Evolution, and a huge proportion of these are eminent scientists - experts in such fields as; Molecular Evolution, Organic Chemistry, Biology, Bioengineering, Biomechanics, Microbiology, Entomology, Molecular Biology , Anatomy & Cell Biology , Botany, Bacterial Genetics ,Protein Chemistry, Thermodynamics and Combustion, Bioprocess Engineering etc. etc.

Specially notable scientists Include:

1945 Nobel Prize winning scientist Ernst Chain.
Malcom Muggeridge, Pascal Lectures, Ontario Canada, University of Waterloo
Dr John Sanford (Geneticist and inventor of the GeneGun
William J. Arion, Emeritus Professor of Biochemistry Cornell University
Vladimir L. Voeikov, Vice-Chairman, Chair of Bio-organic Chemistry, Faculty of Biology Lomonosov Moscow State University (Russia)

Along with hundreds of millions of 'lay people', Dorkins branded all these eminent, highly intellectual, extensively knowledgeable scientists as; "Ignorant, stupid or insane", and it is beyond dispute that he was being arrogant, unfair, and wholly offensive when he did so, and beyond dispute that he attacked these notables for no other reason that they DARED to disagree with his extreme, close-minded views.

There are hundreds of millions - if not billions - of people in this world who do not believe in Darwin's theories or in Evolution, and a huge proportion of these are eminent scientists -


?

[Nedusa]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

The word 'ignorant' is like a bullet - in itself it may be harmless, but once loaded into a gun with other words; namely; 'Stupid' and 'Insane', then 'it' and 'they' become potentially wounding. Once that gun is pointed at a group of innocent people for no other reason than that they legitimately disagree with your opinion, and the trigger is pulled, then such an action can only be deemed as unjustifiable and 'offensive'.

There are hundreds of millions - if not billions - of people in this world who do not believe in Darwin's theories or in Evolution, and a huge proportion of these are eminent scientists - experts in such fields as; Molecular Evolution, Organic Chemistry, Biology, Bioengineering, Biomechanics, Microbiology, Entomology, Molecular Biology , Anatomy & Cell Biology , Botany, Bacterial Genetics ,Protein Chemistry, Thermodynamics and Combustion, Bioprocess Engineering etc. etc.

Specially notable scientists Include:

1945 Nobel Prize winning scientist Ernst Chain.
Malcom Muggeridge, Pascal Lectures, Ontario Canada, University of Waterloo
Dr John Sanford (Geneticist and inventor of the GeneGun
William J. Arion, Emeritus Professor of Biochemistry Cornell University
Vladimir L. Voeikov, Vice-Chairman, Chair of Bio-organic Chemistry, Faculty of Biology Lomonosov Moscow State University (Russia)

Along with hundreds of millions of 'lay people', Dorkins branded all these eminent, highly intellectual, extensively knowledgeable scientists as; "Ignorant, stupid or insane", and it is beyond dispute that he was being arrogant, unfair, and wholly offensive when he did so, and beyond dispute that he attacked these notables for no other reason that they DARED to disagree with his extreme, close-minded views.

Totally agree Kirk........and if you study the so called Theory of Evolution there are gaps, vast gaps that cannot be bridged where the theory cannot account for the changes from one species to another.

The "missing link" is probably the most famous ie how did we get here from apes ? why are there still apes ? But the jump from ape to Cro Magnon man is not explained by the Theory of evolution.

Don't get me wrong I do believe the theory helps us understand how we have come about but I still think the final blueprint when known will have some major differences from this theory.

How arrogant of Mr Dawkins to claim it is 100% proof........rubbish, it is still only a theory and as stated has many holes in it.

[Christmas Dynasnow]

Originally Posted by Nedusa

Totally agree Kirk........and if you study the so called Theory of Evolution there are gaps, vast gaps that cannot be bridged where the theory cannot account for the changes from one species to another.

The "missing link" is probably the most famous ie how did we get here from apes ? why are there still apes ? But the jump from ape to Cro Magnon man is not explained by the Theory of evolution.

Don't get me wrong I do believe the theory helps us understand how we have come about but I still think the final blueprint when known will have some major differences from this theory.

How arrogant of Mr Dawkins to claim it is 100% proof........rubbish, it is still only a theory and as stated has many holes in it.

[Nedusa]

:

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

:hmph

[Kizzy]

There's a gap.....quick! put god in it!

[ChristmasNeeve]

[Kizzy]

The thing that annoys me the most is the constant reference to the numbers involved, as if the minority shouldn't and can't have a voice.... In what areas is this tolerated let alone accepted?...Oh yes... in a fascist state.