The Myth of Religious Wars

[loCAtek]

Um, I gave quotes, not distortions, you can watch Prof. Dawkins saying these things for himself, if you watch the video.

[Sean]

"Science can not answer the elementary questions, 'Who am I?" and 'Where am I going?'"

Neither can you. What's your point?

[loCAtek]

Of course, Dawkins doesn't say anything remotely resembling what you claim he has said. He NEVER said that his study of religion was confined to the time he was a member of the Anglican Church. He NEVER claims that he has no knowledge of Eastern philosophies/religions.

You are hearing what the bottle you are taking swigs from is telling you, not what was actually said.

Very well, what are his exact religious studies? What religions? For how long?

[Sean]

Very well, what are his exact religious studies? What religions? For how long?

What are yours? What religions? For how long?

[loCAtek]

"Science can not answer the elementary questions, 'Who am I?" and 'Where am I going?'"

Neither can you. What's you point?

If science can't explain it, then Dawkins can't either and therefore atheism does not have scientific basis. It is faith; no better, than any other faith.

So, we should all co-exist.

[loCAtek]

Very well, what are his exact religious studies? What religions? For how long?

What are yours? What religions? For how long?

Why do you ask that? Have I said I represent an infallible viewpoint like: science explains everything and God doesn't exist?

You haven't watched the video yet, have you?

[Scooter]

Um, I gave quotes, not distortions, you can watch Prof. Dawkins saying these things for himself, if you watch the video.

Show me. Point out what you have posted which you claim to be a direct quote. Funny, I see no quotation marks or quote tags anywhere, only your alcohol infused fingers typing "Dawkins says this" and "Dawkins says that"

I did watch the video, and Dawkins didn't say any of it.

[Scooter]

Oh, and we'll add to the list of your distortions the claim that Dawkins has said that "science explains everything".

[loCAtek]

He says it himself in the video as well as, 'Religion is the basis of very bad things.'

Pls watch it, before replying again..

[loCAtek]

Wow, I love towards the end, where he says the religious are sociopaths, but that Stalin was not.

[Scooter]

Did I stutter? I said I watched it, and he said nothing of the kind. He said that science provides explanations for a lot of things for which people once looked to religion to understand, but he never said anything remotely like "science explains everything".

Gee, I wonder which one of us heard it correctly, the sober one or the drunk, hmmm, tough call...

[loCAtek]

Scooter, I opened the video at the start of this thread and it's still playing in the background; not finished.

I don't know how it's possible you've finished it, as it's hours long, and I'm still listening to it. Even YouTube has no 'fast forward'

[The Hen]

Scooter, I opened the video at the start of this thread and it's still playing in the background; not finished.

You started playing it on 22 July and it STILL isn't finished?

How do you know what he has said then?

[Scooter]

Wow, I love towards the end, where he says the religious are sociopaths, but that Stalin was not.

Of course, once again, he said no such thing. He says that Stalin did many terrible things, but that there was no logical link between his atheism and the atrocities he committed. He says there is nothing about atheism that should logically lead someone to commit mass murder, whereas there is a logical link between religious belief and the mass murders committed by the 9/11 hijackers, the London underground bombers, etc.

[Scooter]

Scooter, I opened the video at the start of this thread and it's still playing in the background; not finished.

I don't know how it's possible you've finished it, as it's hours long, and I'm still listening to it. Even YouTube has no 'fast forward'

Because refuting your bullshit required that I watch only the parts where Dawkins was speaking, so I skipped through the parts where the other guy was talking, meaning I could watch it in half the time.

[Scooter]

And I find it completely within character for you to be sniping at people about not having watched it when you hadn't even bothered to watch it yourself.

[Scooter]

You started playing it on 22 July and it STILL isn't finished?

You have to account for the number of times she had to start over again from the beginning because she passed out drunk while it was playing.

[Gob]

By "at the beginning of this thread" I'm assuming she means the one at the bottom of the second page of a three page thread? That sort of "beginning"?

By "hours long" she does mean the 42 minutes it runs for?

Ooh look, a study guide on the same page as she linked to;

Lennox does not think that Dawkins has a rational basis for discussing morality. On the basis of what criteria would Dawkins say that “Stalin did terrible things” (as he said earlier in the debate)?

[Scooter]

I guess it would seem like hours when your brain is pickled in ethanol.

[Sean]

Scooter, I opened the video at the start of this thread and it's still playing in the background; not finished.

I don't know how it's possible you've finished it, as it's hours long, and I'm still listening to it. Even YouTube has no 'fast forward'

Hypocrite alert! You chastise others for not watching the video before replying yet you haven't finished watching it yourself...