[betty boop]

Crick personalizes his own impersonal universe when he called chance "clever" and says chance "thinks", Dawkins does the exact same thing when he calls chance a "Blind Watchmaker". Chance isn't a watchmaker at all, but the personal language of a watchmaker takes the pressure off.

Evidently Crick (and Dawkins) fail to notice the self-contradictions implicit in their statements, probably because they are blinded by their own ideology. They evidently have constructed alternative realities which are essentially irrational: What is the point of personalizing the impersonal? You cannot enter into rational discourse with such folks. By way of supporting evidence, let me cite the recent (most regrettable) "meltdown" WRT the evo/crevo debate at FR....

Thanks for the great post, FreedomProtector! And thank you Heartlander for your essay re: the "shude!" LOLOL!

[hosepipe]

[ Evidently Crick (and Dawkins) fail to notice the self-contradictions implicit in their statements, probably because they are blinded by their own ideology. ]

What a concept.. "blinded by personal ideology"...
Reminds me of a quote from Reagan..

"How do you tell a Socialist:- It's someone who reads Marx and Lenin. And how do you tell an Anti-Socialist someone who understands Marx and Lenin" -Ronald Reagan

[Alamo-Girl]

They evidently have constructed alternative realities which are essentially irrational: What is the point of personalizing the impersonal? You cannot enter into rational discourse with such folks. By way of supporting evidence, let me cite the recent (most regrettable) "meltdown" WRT the evo/crevo debate at FR....

I strongly agree! We can't get to first base in conversation with correspondents whose sense of reality is so tiny.