Latest post of the previous page:
I'm pretty sure he said on his own forum that he wouldn't debate Craig as it would seem to give him (Craig) credibility.INFORMATION
This website uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some of these cookies are essential to make our site work and others help us to improve by giving us some insight into how the site is being used.
For further information, see our Privacy Policy.
Continuing to use this website is acceptance of these cookies.
We are not accepting any new registrations.
This website uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some of these cookies are essential to make our site work and others help us to improve by giving us some insight into how the site is being used.
For further information, see our Privacy Policy.
Continuing to use this website is acceptance of these cookies.
We are not accepting any new registrations.
The Atheist Bus Campaign - is it a good use of money?
Re: The Atheist Bus Campaign - is it a good use of money?
Abstinence Makes the Church Grow Fondlers.
Re: The Atheist Bus Campaign - is it a good use of money?
Indeed, Alan C. IIRC (though I think he was quoting another scientist, possibly Richard Feynman,) Dawkins said that if he debated a creationist it would look great on their CV, but not on his.
Re: The Atheist Bus Campaign - is it a good use of money?
Never thought about Feynman quotes - he has some good ones:
I can live with doubt, and uncertainty, and not knowing. I think it's much more interesting to live not knowing than to have answers which might be wrong.
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015
Me, 2015
Re: The Atheist Bus Campaign - is it a good use of money?
Today's Guardian:
Dawkins on why he refuses to debate Craig
Craig on a story from the OT: "Can you imagine what it would be like to have to break into some house and kill a terrified woman and her children? The brutalising effect on these Israeli [sic] soldiers is disturbing."
Dawkins: "Oh, the poor soldiers. Let's hope they received counselling after their traumatic experience."
Dawkins on why he refuses to debate Craig
Craig on a story from the OT: "Can you imagine what it would be like to have to break into some house and kill a terrified woman and her children? The brutalising effect on these Israeli [sic] soldiers is disturbing."
Dawkins: "Oh, the poor soldiers. Let's hope they received counselling after their traumatic experience."
Re: The Atheist Bus Campaign - is it a good use of money?
Oh dear, yet another, "Death is really salvation for heathens," type! He would have got on well with the priests who slaughtered Central American natives a few hundred years ago so they did not live a life of sin. It was good for their souls you know . . .
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015
Me, 2015
Re: The Atheist Bus Campaign - is it a good use of money?
Beautifully written with devastating force. And I loved this line:
I've cleared my diary to show that I'm making a really special effort not to appear in the auditorium in Oxford. Wouldn't it be nice if it were full of nothing but empty chairs.....?
In the interests of transparency, I should point out that it isn't only Oxford that won't see me on the night Craig proposes to debate me in absentia: you can also see me not appear in Cambridge, Liverpool, Birmingham, Manchester, Edinburgh, Glasgow and, if time allows, Bristol.
I've cleared my diary to show that I'm making a really special effort not to appear in the auditorium in Oxford. Wouldn't it be nice if it were full of nothing but empty chairs.....?
Re: The Atheist Bus Campaign - is it a good use of money?
Alan Henness
There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:
1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?
There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:
1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?