footprints
Well-Known Member
Yeah Dawkins is funny, I think one of the funniest books I have ever read was the God Delusion, I pretty near laughed from cover to cover.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Question for people that believe in evolution
- Thread starter ftv1975
- Start date
Yeah Dawkins is funny, I think one of the funniest books I have ever read was the God Delusion, I pretty near laughed from cover to cover.
What was funny about it?
Why would you ask him that question? Cant you see that he is just baiting you? What is the point?
Its your time to waste.
Dirty Penguin
Master Of Ceremony
:slap:.....Naw....Wendy Wright was funny. Silly..... It was hilarious seeing her present her circular reasoning. I laughed at Dawkins for wasting 70 minutes of his time with an air heard.....oh....that's my "opinion"....
footprints
Well-Known Member
I am sorry to inform you of this Kerr, this is not how the world has always been. Base root, ancient cultures like the Australian Aboriginal, didn't do this, couldn't do it, simply because all in the community shared exactly the same knowledge. As time went by variations to the original knowledge was created and formed, divisions occurred and new communities were formed. Evidence of this is still found in modern day sociology, it is seen in the divisions of Religions where new sects, even whole new religions are formed, it is seen in the political world, in business and even down to divisions in families.
As for your example, it is very weak. Fear as one example is a very real and testable human emotion, albeit it is personal. The simple fact of life is, 1 person out of 1,000 or more may suffer fear and anxiety over a specific event, just because the majority didn't suffer or feel the same fear, in no way implies that which the one person felt, wasn't real and wasn't genuine. Though there are many idiots around who would say, you are not scared you are just putting it on, wake up to yourself and get over it, I do not feel scared so you shouldn't feel scared, there is nothing to be afraid of, et al.
Directly pertaining to the witches thing, I hope you understand that fear is a very real commodity. Many people were petrified pertaining to witches at the time, as strange as this may seem, witches reeked havoc in communities casting spells all over the place which by human perception at the time appeared to work. Now I am not saying that some people didn't use this to their advantage. The same phenomena can be found in the old west of the USA, just by pure speculation of an alleged crime, lynch parties were formed and people were murdered without trial and without justice. The world is full of such scenarios. Only a very narrow minded person would try to suggest, imply or conclude it was only perpetrated by religions.
That would be a perfect world wouldn't it. But alas, it isn't so.
What I am saying is anything which is viable should be given funding, without prejudice, bias or peer hierarchy. Yes something should be peer reviewed, but I would suggest it should also be reviewed by an independent, arbitrary body, just in case there was common sense there which the peer review missed.
footprints
Well-Known Member
Just my sense of humour, I always laugh at bigots and hypocrites. I find it funny they do not have the intelligence to realise they are just the same as the people they are condemning. That when they demean others, they actually think they are being nice and doing them a favour, or that using derogative terms is somehow intelligent. However when others do it back to them, they can see the bigotry and hypocrisy in it.
Actually you are completely wrong there. People has always lied and manipulated. We have never been able to trust people like that, I know from own experience that the kind of trust you speak of is dangerous. Some people will just use you, they will view you as a tool to achieve their goals. It is nothing new, really, just a darker side of mankind.
Way to ignore the point. Try again.
Fear does not justify anything. Quite frankly it is irrelevant, the only thing relevant was all the innocent people that was burned. The system was flawed, it opened up to be misused, and as a result people died a horrible dead. They shouldn´t have suffered that fate.
Really, so in what way was he being hypocritical?
footprints
Well-Known Member
Kerr that may be true of you, it isn't true of everybody else. I am sorry to say according to you, you have already ruled personal experience out. Now what are you trying to say, personal experience is okay when it suits your purpose?
The point wasn't ignored it was answered. Or do you mean keep trying till I say something which appeases your intelligence?
Yeah and many innocent people were murdered in the old west so what is your point? Every death is horrible, so what is your point? Nagasaki and Hiroshima many died a horrible death so what is your point? In Vietnam, American Services dropped Napalm on Innocent people including children, so what is your point?
Irrespective of what system is in operation it is open to abuse, so what is your point?
Then you don´t know me very well. I just don´t trust people that much, since trust is to be earned and not given. When it is given, you open yourself to be used and exploited. If you have not met people who will do this, then I can only be happy for you. But some of us have not been that lucky.
That what happened back then cannot be justified, what was your point? That it can?
footprints
Well-Known Member
Just so you understand here Tristesse, seeing as how you were so critical of the thread getting off topic, you do understand now and in the post before you are doing the same thing. I do know you will be just as critical on yourself.
And maybe in the above paragraph, I have shown you the hypocrisy in Dawkins.
Actually personal experience is only evidence for the person experiencing it, it should never be considered valid evidence for anyone else. We all know how easily the mind is manipulated.
footprints
Well-Known Member
LOL and I mean what I write.
I realize I was getting off topic, but your bold assertions were getting to me. The above paragraph failed to show any hypocrisy, you just simply stated that he was hypocritical without offering any justification for it, so, thats why I asked.
Still missing the point
.footprints
Well-Known Member
Personal experience can be valid evidence, in many cases as in the previous examples pertaining to fear, it can be measured and investigated via scientific method. And do you know what, it is, has been and continues to be.
A perception can be a personal view, that only one or a few perceive, else it can be global view which everybody perceives and every possible configuration in-between.
footprints
Well-Known Member
Still missing the point
LOL no I get the point, but perhaps not the point which you perceive.