Total Posts:10|Showing Posts:1-10
Jump to topic:

Richard Dawkins

thegodhand
Posts: 361
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2011 1:38:29 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Personally I think if your gonna be an atheist, at least don't base it on Richard. He might affect swing voters, but seriously he's a pathetic fagg.
"Modern atheism is Richard Dawkins."- thegodhand

"Thegodhand likes to misquote people"- Benjamin Franklin
annhasle
Posts: 6,657
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2011 5:29:05 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I would advise against it based upon his weak arguments and emotional rants. Not because he's a "pathetic fagg", as you call him. >.>
I'm not back. This idiot just upset me which made me stop lurking.
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2011 5:36:21 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/5/2011 5:33:55 PM, socialpinko wrote:
How many ridiculous bigots are on this site again.

lol, the OP is a troll, possibly a multi-accounter.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,253
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2011 5:36:52 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/5/2011 5:29:05 PM, annhasle wrote:
I would advise against it based upon his weak arguments and emotional rants.

He doesn't have weak arguments nor does he appeal to emotion. I think people just see his simple arguments being most popularly being presented and never actually see his good stuff.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
annhasle
Posts: 6,657
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2011 5:43:23 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/5/2011 5:36:52 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 3/5/2011 5:29:05 PM, annhasle wrote:
I would advise against it based upon his weak arguments and emotional rants.

He doesn't have weak arguments nor does he appeal to emotion.

Yes, his arguments are weak when compared to other arguments put forth by atheists. And I never said he committed the fallacy "appeal to emotion" . I simply stated that he rants quite emotionally about God. And even though that appeals to militant atheists (like myself) at times, it is not part of effective debate.

I think people just see his simple arguments being most popularly being presented and never actually see his good stuff.

What "good" stuff are you referring to?
I'm not back. This idiot just upset me which made me stop lurking.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,253
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2011 6:04:16 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/5/2011 5:43:23 PM, annhasle wrote:
At 3/5/2011 5:36:52 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
He doesn't have weak arguments nor does he appeal to emotion.

Yes, his arguments are weak when compared to other arguments put forth by atheists. And I never said he committed the fallacy "appeal to emotion" . I simply stated that he rants quite emotionally about God. And even though that appeals to militant atheists (like myself) at times, it is not part of effective debate.

I know, that's what I meant. I don't think he invokes emotion. And if he does, he has it greatly concealed.

I think people just see his simple arguments being most popularly being presented and never actually see his good stuff.

What "good" stuff are you referring to?

Well, I think his interview with Alistair McGrath was pretty good (it's been awhile since I've seen it though). However, I do actually see where people are coming from because I have noticed a few philosophical flaws with assertions, but only because he approaches the question of God scientifically.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
annhasle
Posts: 6,657
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2011 6:12:35 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/5/2011 6:04:16 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 3/5/2011 5:43:23 PM, annhasle wrote:
At 3/5/2011 5:36:52 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
I know, that's what I meant. I don't think he invokes emotion. And if he does, he has it greatly concealed.

In the God Delusion, I came across many passages which were emotionally based.

Well, I think his interview with Alistair McGrath was pretty good (it's been awhile since I've seen it though). However, I do actually see where people are coming from because I have noticed a few philosophical flaws with assertions, but only because he approaches the question of God scientifically.

Exactly. I respect him and enjoy reading his material -- but in comparison to others, his are inferior (albeit slightly) at times.
I'm not back. This idiot just upset me which made me stop lurking.
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2011 4:43:05 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/5/2011 1:38:29 PM, thegodhand wrote:
Personally I think if your gonna be an atheist, at least don't base it on Richard. He might affect swing voters, but seriously he's a pathetic fagg.

Dawkins.. dismantled.
The Cross.. the Cross.