- Joined
- 6 Mar 2010
- Posts
- 423
Hate big brother! Worst thing ever on tv!
Well I'm a lawyer so don't claim to be mr science but his writing makes it easy for me to understand without a scientific background, for that alone he should be commended!
Richard dawkins
- Thread starter NormanPorkinson
- Start date
Hate big brother! Worst thing ever on tv!
Well I'm a lawyer so don't claim to be mr science but his writing makes it easy for me to understand without a scientific background, for that alone he should be commended!
People who think he is as bad as the fundamentalist need to take a step back and think before they utter such nonsense.
He may employ a similar up front in your face method of preaching, but his message is not so blindfolded/brainwashed and is there for you to choose not be forced into.
All he every says is that people should choose, research, test, and prove before assuming or believing.
I think its comically idiotic to not follow as similar system in your own life.
He may employ a similar up front in your face method of preaching, but his message is not so blindfolded/brainwashed and is there for you to choose not be forced into.
All he every says is that people should choose, research, test, and prove before assuming or believing.
I think its comically idiotic to not follow as similar system in your own life.
Last edited:
If only he used the same critical caution when considering what the scientific method is...
I was about to post the same thing as there is no way prove/disprove the existence of God, even if you are confronted by an entity claiming to be him.
The thing is, he's not actually that popular with many scientists because of the way he (mis)uses science. There are several branches of philosophy around science and what it means that have no bearing on whether it is 'right' or not that Dawkins completely ignores.
Fine, and like hes says himself. Its better to believe with a blank slate and build apon it with information at hand than to create fictious characters and refuse to change them when proved wrong.
If you think like that then there is a chocolate teapot floating around the sun.
Prove me wrong.
With good reason.
We live in a world where people spend billions on fakes like pyschic readings, astrology, homeopathy, instead of feeding the poor and helping the needy.
I for one think he has the right to take that stance as it will only benefit even if he is only 95% correct according to the righteous. Some times people need to stand up and shout.
Last edited:
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 36,746
- Location
- Southampton, UK
I've not found many if your posts I agree with, but this one is spot on.
OPINIONS M***********! DO YOU GET THEM?
Prove that it isn't there.
The correct scientific stance on anything that hasn't been or can't be tested is that the result is unknown, or irrelevant, not that it's false. Anything else is an expression of faith in the a priori assumptions of the scientific method being applied incorrectly.
Uh, chocolate melts at less than 40 degrees celcius, the sun is a little tiny bit hotter than that. Therefore, a chocolate teapot cannot be floating around the sun.
That enough proof?
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Aug 2008
- Posts
- 10,477
- Location
- Bath, England
he does, but the point it the way in which he conveys that message
Can you prove it, or is that faith speaking?
For this particular chocolate teapot, God has set up a cooling system. Prove me otherwise.
Edit: Sorry, this sounds sarcastic, it's actually a serious (if bizarre) point.
Exactly now employ that to the things he tells you about religion and all the other things on his show, and the only thing you have left is faith.
That is the point. Take the things you have learnt from science and employ it with reasoning.
Opinons are one thing, the way the things he is trying to remove from our lifes like religious schools and wars based apon scribblings from 2000yrs ago are not opinions.
True, and I agree, but it isnt his method to claim false and if i said that then im sorry. It is his method to work in such as way from a blank slate, using the information avaliable to create a picture of a world based on the scientific method. My point was that its not a good idea to try and prove imaginary things when there is no information to believe in them in the first place. The chocolate teapot signifies the mentality of someone who is creating things they cannot prove just because they know you dont have the information available to prove otherwise.
Last edited:
Proving there is/isn't a God is impossible. Proving there is/isn't a simple chocolate teapot orbiting a known point in space is entirely possible.
That implies that he believes that what he says is the truth. He preaches anti-faith, yet has vast amounts of faith in his own beliefs.