Remember, the presumed enemy these threads fight is not evolution — which is religion neutral — but godless evolutionists (of which there are some, I guess).
the latest news is that apes evolved from humans. apparently a million years ago two groups separated, one became human and the other were liberals.
“an advocate of the ‘new atheism’”
How can there be a new or old atheism? Nothing more is covered by the term than that there is no God. What do Old and New sects discuss at the summit meetings? Issue #1: Is there a God? Unanamous answer: No. Summit adjourned.
I don't know how he is on Evolution, but I really liked him on Family Feud, Hogan's Heroes...not so much.
Why would anyone engage the poo-flinging creationist monkeys in debate?
Dawkins is smarter than that.
I don’t blame him after the shellacking he got in Expelled speculating that Aliens planted the first life on earth.
Quote...“Dawkins says that there is no evidence for intelligent design in life, and yet he also acknowledges that neither he nor anyone else has an evolutionary explanation for the origin of the first living cell. We know now even the simplest forms of life are chock-full of digital code, complex information processing systems and other exquisite forms of nanotechnology.”
That pretty much says it all! or we could just ignore the evidence???
Dawkins is a coward. He says he does not debate creationist or intelligent design advocates, yet takes opportunity to ‘dry gulch’ cretionists and intelligent design advocates in his appearances and his writings. He know Dr.Meyer would eat his launch. Meyer’s credentials are impeccable to the secularist, atheist. Beyond that he is an expert debater. Dawkins snivels and retreats beneath the rock he believes is his mother. Dawkins reminds me of Obama out in San Francisco referencing Pennsylvanians as clinging to their guns and Bibles, with antipathy towards the government. Damnable coward.
If there's no evidence for intelligent design in life, how could the universe give the illusion of design?
No wonder Dawkins doesn't have the wherewithal to debate.
The guy shoots himself in the foot every time he opens his mouth.
Richard Dawkins is an amateur liberal philosopher who behaves like a spoiled brat when he is not behaving like Bill Maher, Rosie O’Donnell or some other radical leftist fraud.
Dr. Meyer who received his Ph.D. in the philosophy of science from the University of Cambridge in England.”
Obviously another buffoon who got his degree from a degree mill
George Bush dodged debate with Cindy Sheehan
The immature people who defend him in spite of his secular religious evolutionary dogma wrapped in the typical cowardice along with his painful sophomoric leftism, all end up sounding exactly like the emotional adolescent that Richard Dawkins has proven himself to be.
Radical leftist clowns like Dawkins do not deserve any respect, nor should they be defended for their Barney Frankish hissy fits.