Hello I bookmarked this site. Thanks heaps for this!… if anyone else has anything, it would be much appreciated. Great website Super Pianoforte Links http://www.en.Grand-Pianos.org Enjoy!…

Erin, my home girl.

Sounds like you’ve just summarized for me the painfully obvious conclusion that Dawkins would have drawn.

Chap dealt with this easily by quoting the article you refuse to read.

P.S. I don’t need to read Dawkins’ whitewashing of his public buffoonery that I witnessed with my own eyes and ears. He might as well say, “Who are you gonna believe, me or your lyin’ eyes?”

Which is the difference between people like you and people like Chap and I. I will actively search out and read opinions contrary to my own and rebuttals of ideas I hold. You will willfully ignore them.

If he has a better explanation/response than what he gave to Stein, now is the time to put it up.

He has, many times in print and elsewhere, when he wasn’t being edited or cut.

Although, one would think he would have already considered this type of question many times before, and would have been better prepared to respond during an interview.

Riiight, just like those folks in Michael Moore movies!

Sounds like Dawkins thinks “something came from nothing.”

Except that is the exact opposite of what he said.

Sounds like you’ve just summarized for me the painfully obvious conclusion that Dawkins would have drawn. Thanks for saving me the time and effort to read it.

No. Here is a very succinct summary of the conclusions Dawkins drew. Only a simpleton like WE82 could conclude from that interview that Dawkins supported Intelligent Design in any way, shape or form.

I patiently explained to him that life could conceivably have been seeded on Earth by an alien intelligence from another planet (Francis Crick and Leslie Orgel suggested something similar — semi tongue-in-cheek). The conclusion I was heading towards was that, even in the highly unlikely event that some such ‘Directed Panspermia’ was responsible for designing life on this planet, the alien beings would THEMSELVES have to have evolved, if not by Darwinian selection, by some equivalent ‘crane’ (to quote Dan Dennett). My point here was that design can never be an ULTIMATE explanation for organized complexity. Even if life on Earth was seeded by intelligent designers on another planet, and even if the alien life form was itself seeded four billion years earlier, the regress must ultimately be terminated (and we have only some 13 billion years to play with because of the finite age of the universe). Organized complexity cannot just spontaneously happen. That, for goodness sake, is the creationists’ whole point, when they bang on about eyes and bacterial flagella! Evolution by natural selection is the only known process whereby organized complexity can ultimately come into being. Organized complexity — and that includes everything capable of designing anything intelligently — comes LATE into the universe. It cannot exist at the beginning, as I have explained again and again in my writings.

On November 30th, 2009 at 7:08 pm, zeroangel said:
MtsEdge:

Ummm, the interview was edited and cut to make Dawkins look a fool, obviously. Did you read the link? No of course you didn’t.

Sounds like you’ve just summarized for me the painfully obvious conclusion that Dawkins would have drawn. Thanks for saving me the time and effort to read it.

P.S. I don’t need to read Dawkins’ whitewashing of his public buffoonery that I witnessed with my own eyes and ears. He might as well say, “Who are you gonna believe, me or your lyin’ eyes?”

If he has a better explanation/response than what he gave to Stein, now is the time to put it up. Although, one would think he would have already considered this type of question many times before, and would have been better prepared to respond during an interview.

Ummm, the interview was edited and cut to make Dawkins look a fool, obviously. Did you read the link? No of course you didn’t.

On November 30th, 2009 at 6:32 pm, zeroangel said:
MtsEdge:

To whom?
Ben Stein, who told Dawkins that the title was Crossroads and it was to be an unbiased documentary of the issues and was to fairly represent both sides.

Seems unlikely that he would try to be “charitable” by making himself look like a fool.

To whom?

Ben Stein, who told Dawkins that the title was Crossroads and it was to be an unbiased documentary of the issues and was to fairly represent both sides.

http://www.richarddawkins.net/articles/2394

Dawkins does not subscribe to this idea AT ALL and was only trying to be charitable.

To whom?

Yes, don’t believe what Dawkins SAYS ON-CAMERA!

Riiight… then all of the gotchas that Micheal Moore got on camera must be true too!

Pathetic.

MtsEdge:

that somehow life “evolved” somewhere else, then “designed” the life on earth!

Except, Dawkins does not subscribe to this idea AT ALL and was only trying to be charitable.