"The God Delusion" - Prof. Richard Dawkins

[theicidal maniac]

I love this book. Dawkins is a real "go for the throat" kind of guy, but I am interested to see if any religious folk here have read this book, OR either of Sam Harris' books, "The End of Faith" or "Letter to a Christian Nation." They're all best sellers, they're all great reads, whether you agree or not, the logic is undeniable. So have any Religiosos read any of these books and if so, what do you think about them, and about the authors??

[General Septem]

I cannot read your post because I have you blocked (I could if I wanted to but I don't), but I will say one thing: quoting scientists' opinions on religion is as ludicrous as quoting a Pope's opinions on science. Leave each philosophy to their respective professionals.

[something]

I cannot read your post because I have you blocked (I could if I wanted to but I don't), but I will say one thing: quoting scientists' opinions on religion is as ludicrous as quoting a Pope's opinions on science. Leave each philosophy to their respective professionals.

You can't say that. Whatever it is, science or religion, will be complete chaos if you'll keep it from critisism, science have right to talk about religion, and the Pope have right to talk about science.

[General Septem]

You can't say that. Whatever it is, science or religion, will be complete chaos if you'll keep it from critisism, science have right to talk about religion, and the Pope have right to talk about science.

Good point. I'll just say that there's no difference between a scientist's views on religion and a theologist's views on science.

[theicidal maniac]

I cannot read your post because I have you blocked (I could if I wanted to but I don't), but I will say one thing: quoting scientists' opinions on religion is as ludicrous as quoting a Pope's opinions on science. Leave each philosophy to their respective professionals.

That's such a load of garbage. Religion makes claims about the universe. So does science. But science is a discipline that backs up it's claims with evidence, whereas religion tries to overwhelm truth with sheer #'s of ignorant masses. Science is the solution to religion.

I like how Genny has me blocked, so i can no longer make him feel intellectually inferior, yet he still comes to a thread that I started and posts. This is how Genny operates, he will only want to argue with you if your mouth is taped shut.

[Ausinus]

I havent read the God Delusion, but I hear its really good. I love Dawkins:D

[theicidal maniac]

I havent read the God Delusion, but I hear its really good. I love Dawkins:D

It is by far one of his easiest reads, he was definitely speaking to a larger audience in this one than in "the Blind Watchmaker." This one is for anybody, I highly recommend it, it's like the journal of an angry athiest, a log entry of a scientist who is tired of having religion's growth hindered by superstitious masses. I would also think you might enjoy Dawkins's BBC television series, "The Root of All Evil."

Also, I would recommend to ANYONE interested in ANY sort of intellectual discourse to get on iTunes and subscribe to the FREE podcast of "Point of Inquiry." They have interviews Bill Nye the Science Guy, Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Daniel Dennet, Paul Kurtz, Ibn Warraq, Salman Rushdie...it's seriously incredible.

It's fuckin' phenomenal.

[General Septem]

That's such a load of garbage. Religion makes claims about the universe. So does science. But science is a discipline that backs up it's claims with evidence, whereas religion tries to overwhelm truth with sheer #'s of ignorant masses. Science is the solution to religion.

I like how Genny has me blocked, so i can no longer make him feel intellectually inferior, yet he still comes to a thread that I started and posts. This is how Genny operates, he will only want to argue with you if your mouth is taped shut.

Religion makes claims about the spiritual universe. Science focuses on the physical universe. If they'd stop trying to do both, they'd coincide.

I blocked you because you're a dumbass who uses inflammatory rhetoric to invoke heated responses and make your opponents feel inferior, in addition to repeating your same arguments regardless of how many different ways you've been refuted.

I can still read your posts. If I feel like it.

[Ape-Shit]

Blocking someones post is like closing the door on a Jehovah Witness.:p







Closed doors are closed minds...*:rolleyes: Just don't let them in....!:D

[theicidal maniac]

Religion makes claims about the spiritual universe. Science focuses on the physical universe. If they'd stop trying to do both, they'd coincide.
Religion makes a lot of claims about non-spiritual things. IT EVEN MAKES CLAIMS THAT NON-SPIRITUAL THINGS ARE SPIRITUAL! If religion was not overstepping it's bounds with evolution, stem-cells, geocentrism, burning Giordano Bruno, the inquisition of Galileo, Darwins fear of being labeled an outcast, etc...then there would be no need for science to put religious claims in their place.

See a lot of people have FAITH in a lot of things. There are two parts to your awareness, what is believed, and what can be proved. When you can prove something, you should adjust what you believe in order to fit with reality, not the other way around. Religion tries to deny proof and substitute it with unfounded superstition.

I blocked you because you're a dumbass who uses inflammatory rhetoric to invoke heated responses and make your opponents feel inferior, in addition to repeating your same arguments regardless of how many different ways you've been refuted.

you've yet to "refute" me with anything factual, anything other than opinion.

[beelzebub]

Religion makes claims about the spiritual universe. Science focuses on the physical universe. If they'd stop trying to do both, they'd coincide.
I blocked you because you're a dumbass who uses inflammatory rhetoric to invoke heated responses and make your opponents feel inferior, in addition to repeating your same arguments regardless of how many different ways you've been refuted.
I can still read your posts. If I feel like it.

Whats wrong GS - is someone getting on your nerves? Having some trouble????

Hahahahah I am so happy you are getting a taste of what I felt when you and BBQ would gang up on me with a few others.... :)

[theicidal maniac]

Whats wrong GS - is someone getting on your nerves? Having some trouble????

Hahahahah I am so happy you are getting a taste of what I felt when you and BBQ would gang up on me with a few others.... :)

Although here you are. Somehow you didn't puss out and run away, ears plugged like Genny. Huh, I guess Christians really ARE different from the rest of us.

[beelzebub]

Although here you are. Somehow you didn't puss out and run away, ears plugged like Genny. Huh, I guess Christians really ARE different from the rest of us.

Tis true tis true! Do you know if GS still has you blocked?

[General Septem]

Tis true tis true! Do you know if GS still has you blocked?

I do, but it doesn't really mean shit since I can see his posts by clicking a button anyway.

Running away my ass. I blocked you because I didn't come here to have to listen to your bullshit. Sounds to me like someone's a little offended.

[beelzebub]

I do, but it doesn't really mean shit since I can see his posts by clicking a button anyway.

Running away my ass. I blocked you because I didn't come here to have to listen to your bullshit. Sounds to me like someone's a little offended.

Hahahahaha Thats funny. Did you know that I blocked BBQ one time? I was so pissed at him. Then I thought who gives a crap? It's just internet chat.

[Ape-Shit]

Now isn't that the most Childish thing you ever heard of?


I don't like what you're saying, so I'm gonna turn you off like my TV.

However, if I want to see what you are saying about me, I can turn it back on.

Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla:p

[General Septem]

Hahahahaha Thats funny. Did you know that I blocked BBQ one time? I was so pissed at him. Then I thought who gives a crap? It's just internet chat.

See I went through kind of the inverse. I kept putting up with (and responding to) his shit because, among other reasons, I felt like blocking him would be running away. Then I thought the same thing, who gives a shit? He adds absolutely nothing whatsoever. I came here to debate, not baby some dumbass/attention whore who appears to have no interest in debating but rather coming in and telling everyone what's what, and flaming anyone who disagrees. At least I read and try to understand others' viewpoints, and I have believe it or not learned many things in this forum. I cannot say the same for theicidal maniac, who, it seems, repeats himself verbatim every time he's proven wrong, with the only changes being the ignorant and off-topic assertions made, usually pertaining to his opponent's sexual preference. And no, I'm not offended by it in the least, I just don't want to put up with it any more than I want to put up with a spoiled four-year old who screams his lungs out and rips items off the shelf when you don't buy him a bag of potato chips.

[something]

I cannot say the same for theicidal maniac, who, it seems, repeats himself verbatim every time he's proven wrong, with the only changes being the ignorant and off-topic assertions made, usually pertaining to his opponent's sexual preference.

Yeah, I agree, Thecidal Maniac isn't here to debate, his just here to argue, and telling us things, the worst kind of a besserwiser that never will stop arguing, just because he doesn't stand people that dissagree with him.

[theicidal maniac]

Yeah, I agree, Thecidal Maniac isn't here to debate, his just here to argue, and telling us things, the worst kind of a besserwiser that never will stop arguing, just because he doesn't stand people that dissagree with him.

That's an interesting statement from someone who has failed to make a stand any any topic or a valid point since joining, but hey, whatever, most of the time i can't understand what you're trying to say anyway. Funny that you say I'm not here to debate, cuz besides a small handfull of the seculars on this page (Ausi, Beelz) I'm the only one providing any evidence to back my outrageous claims up. I talk a lot of shit, but I always come with the goods, something that the fantasy-based population here doesn't seem to understand how to do.

As far as Genital Slurpem and his claim that "at least I read and try to understand others' viewpoints", well that's pretty laffable. He is by far the most closed-minded person here...AJK is just ignorant, probably due to his Down's Syndrome...but Genny actually CHOOSES to ignore 1)the truth and 2)anyone who doesn't believe that the pope and Jesus hold hands every night at dinner.

I repeat myself verbatim?? Oh what you MEANT to say is I PRESENT SIMILAR SCIENTIFIC FINDINGS REPEATEDLY where ever they apply, and the surrounding words are all mine, rarely repeated.

As I said before, he just can't stand the heat. He's never been able to prove me wrong as he likes to say because he never offers PROOF of anything. You can't PROVE without PROOF Genny, and that is why RELIGION LOSES, and scientific inquiry wins.

God is for suckers.

[something]

That's an interesting statement from someone who has failed to make a stand any any topic or a valid point since joining, but hey, whatever, most of the time i can't understand what you're trying to say anyway. Funny that you say I'm not here to debate, cuz besides a small handfull of the seculars on this page (Ausi, Beelz) I'm the only one providing any evidence to back my outrageous claims up. I talk a lot of shit, but I always come with the goods, something that the fantasy-based population here doesn't seem to understand how to do

I'm not saying you are wrong, it's just that you'r posts are a bit of overeacting, like you were trying crush all kinds of rescistance in the one you debating with. But as I sayed, you're mostly right, how ever, I'm not really trying to make any valid points, I just post them to see if i was right or wrong or see what other people see.

[sinbadbuddha]

... But science is a discipline that backs up it's claims with evidence, whereas religion tries to overwhelm truth with sheer #'s of ignorant masses...

Of course good science uses evidence (i.e statistics), but how do you hope to do that in metaphysics? Dawkins talks as if there is absolutely no evidence for the 'God hypothesis', but he is wrong - religious 'evidence' comes from witnesses - the people who wrote the bible, etc. To make a justified choice about religious faith, it is necessary to evaluate these witnesses.

There's just as much scientific bullshit as religious - most people are not scientists and just trust the professionals, therefore they are just as liable to be called 'ignorant masses'. You say that religion tries to overwhelm truth - I don't really know what you mean. Of course the 'ignorant masses' (I guess that's the majority) are not the anti-truth conspirers; they are just tools. Do you mean that all religious leaders are these anti-truth conspirers? Certainly some are corrupt - you mentioned the Inquisition (so the Catholic Church has sometimes been that evil). Religion certainly often mingles with politics to suppress freedom or truth (most wars - but religion does the other way too!), but then so does atheism (USSR).

I think you mistake 'religion' for 'religious organisations', which is like saying 'Nirvana (the band) sucks because their fans are idiots'. The only way to discredit Nirvana is to discredit their music (or whatever else they did), and the only way to discredit Christianity is to discredit Christ.

Nietzsche is far more interesting than Dawkins (when it comes to philosophy and metaphysics).

[MrJim]

Of course good science uses evidence (i.e statistics), but how do you hope to do that in metaphysics? Dawkins talks as if there is absolutely no evidence for the 'God hypothesis', but he is wrong - religious 'evidence' comes from witnesses - the people who wrote the bible, etc. To make a justified choice about religious faith, it is necessary to evaluate these witnesses.

There's just as much scientific bullshit as religious - most people are not scientists and just trust the professionals, therefore they are just as liable to be called 'ignorant masses'. You say that religion tries to overwhelm truth - I don't really know what you mean. Of course the 'ignorant masses' (I guess that's the majority) are not the anti-truth conspirers; they are just tools. Do you mean that all religious leaders are these anti-truth conspirers? Certainly some are corrupt - you mentioned the Inquisition (so the Catholic Church has sometimes been that evil). Religion certainly often mingles with politics to suppress freedom or truth (most wars - but religion does the other way too!), but then so does atheism (USSR).

I notice how often when someone posts something about ‘metaphysics’ or ‘pseudoscience’, no one wants to talk anymore. It’s like a slap in the face to religious and scientific fanatics, who both hate to hear about it. But I on the other hand get a fucking kick out of it.

[TheSpectacularSecularist]

I love this book. Dawkins is a real "go for the throat" kind of guy, but I am interested to see if any religious folk here have read this book, OR either of Sam Harris' books, "The End of Faith" or "Letter to a Christian Nation." They're all best sellers, they're all great reads, whether you agree or not, the logic is undeniable. So have any Religiosos read any of these books and if so, what do you think about them, and about the authors??

I got half-through all of theese books and realized "Allright, I know all of this".

It's only The End of Faith that is somewhat good, but I recomend Liberals to read it rather than Theists because it has some interesting facts about Islam that they could benefit from.

[Monster_Hangover]

I got half-through all of theese books and realized "Allright, I know all of this".

It's only The End of Faith that is somewhat good, but I recomend Liberals to read it rather than Theists because it has some interesting facts about Islam that they could benefit from.

How could you know this & why is the end of faith a good thing?

[freakazoid]

I love this book. Dawkins is a real "go for the throat" kind of guy, but I am interested to see if any religious folk here have read this book, OR either of Sam Harris' books, "The End of Faith" or "Letter to a Christian Nation." They're all best sellers, they're all great reads, whether you agree or not, the logic is undeniable. So have any Religiosos read any of these books and if so, what do you think about them, and about the authors??

The fool has said in his heart "there is no God."

.... King David

"Thinking themselves wise, they have become fools"

.... Romans 1:22


Richard Dawkins...the ultimate fool.

[TheSpectacularSecularist]

How could you know this & why is the end of faith a good thing?

They're just repeating things that most people that agrees with them already know. I guess they like hearing their ideas over and over again, but I don't.

The End of Faith is good because it has some very interesting points about Islam, of whom I was unaware of untill I read it.

[TheSpectacularSecularist]

The fool has said in his heart "there is no God."

.... King David

"Thinking themselves wise, they have become fools"

.... Romans 1:22


Richard Dawkins...the ultimate fool.

... But Richard Dawkins don't believe in the bible?