This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

  • Topic Archived
You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
  1. Boards
  2. Religion
  3. Richard Dawkins v. Wendy Wright

User Info: squareandrare

squareandrare
8 years ago#41
And neither are they. They're pointing to the Library.

The video was already posted in this topic. Plenty of evidence has been given, and there's plenty more if you're willing to learn and investigate. You can't expect us to come to your house and present a circus of evidence for evolution. A lot of it requires years of studying biology to understand, and people like you and Wright have no business even pretending to understand it.
"Physics is not a religion. If it were, we'd have a much easier time raising money."
-- Leon Lederman

User Info: OrangeWizard

OrangeWizard
8 years ago#42
I'm not talking about Dawkins, I'm talking about everyone else who doesn't have evidence and can only say "Get thee to a library!" to prove Evolution
"this game is about reality. ... when you fire a gun you are not like "what is this am i shooting sausages?""
-General_Dong on Black Ops

User Info: squareandrare

squareandrare
8 years ago#43
So what the hell is your argument? That there isn't evidence? Or that most people who believe in it don't actually know the evidence?

You understand that things can exist whether or not you know about them, right?
"Physics is not a religion. If it were, we'd have a much easier time raising money."
-- Leon Lederman

User Info: squareandrare

squareandrare
8 years ago#44
And you're right. Most people who believe evolution don't know much of the evidence. That is again because the evidence isn't easy to understand. Most people haven't taken advanced biology classes, but they still trust the people that have. When you get someone like Dawkins who is a professional biologist, he'll know all of the examples on the fly.
"Physics is not a religion. If it were, we'd have a much easier time raising money."
-- Leon Lederman

User Info: Jigglysaint

Jigglysaint
8 years ago#45
What can you say? She's a woman, and she's always Wright.

User Info: Kaj_Ketos

Kaj_Ketos
8 years ago#46
In fact, there are very few things in Science you can prove at hand.

"Prove the Earth revolves around the Sun"

You need astrological equipment available only at high tech facilities.

"Prove that water is made from Hydrogen and Oxygen"

You need electron microscopes and high tech graphing equipment.


Put simply, the only thing someone can say when pressed for evidence on the fly is say, "Look in the museum." The fact is, is that the evidence is overwhelming, it exists, and is easily available and omnipresent within historical museums. Dawkins shouldn't be expected to carry around objective evidence, since it's incredibly impractical.

OW has miserably failed in his analysis of the discussion, and I can say that with much courage and conviction.
Fan of the Padres and Chargers
"I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal. - Ron Burgundy

User Info: ledzepfan15

ledzepfan15
8 years ago#47
Please do. We'll laugh you off since the burden of proof is on your ass to prove the intellectually bankrupt garbage you're trying to sell, which means I don't need to bring proof against you. I can simply reject outright, as if you were talking about flying spaghetti monsters or pink unicorns that can't be seen.

As vitriolic as this is, I still burst out laughing.
"If you think, you are late. If you are late, you use strength. If you use strength, you tire. And if you tire, you die." - Saulo Ribeiro

User Info: hero boy

hero boy
8 years ago#48
ITT: OW performing his own rendition of Wendy Wright.
http://www.sirlin.net/ptw

User Info: Guide

Guide
8 years ago#49
I'm not talking about Dawkins, I'm talking about everyone else who doesn't have evidence and can only say "Get thee to a library!" to prove Evolution

Actually, in the near future, when ipads are mandatory and cybernetically linked to your nervous system, we can carry around all the links we want.

Watching the video is hurting me in the back of my jaw.
Of course the game is rigged. Don't let that stop you--if you don't play, you can't win. -- Robert Heinlein
'Would have', not 'would of'.

User Info: the_hedonist

the_hedonist
8 years ago#50
I thought that Dawkins didn't debate creationists?
Everything that doesn't have to do with elephants is irrelephant.
~The Christian Hedonist~
  1. Boards
  2. Religion
  3. Richard Dawkins v. Wendy Wright
  • Topic Archived