[Ethan Clive Osgoode]

You, dear reader, may be a cobbled, emergent, semi-illusion, or so the People of Science tell us. But then, they too may be cobbled, emergent, semi-illusions.

Click here to learn more about the pernicious effects of Darwinism on science and society

[Brilliant]

When I hear atheists say stuff like this, I think, “So what makes us any better than say a roach? We’re just a collection of atoms joined together by chance, and so is a roach.”

[vladimir998]

Richard Dawkins is an educated idiot.

[Ethan Clive Osgoode]

Are you real? ping.

"The best reason for a revival of philosophy is that unless a man has a philosophy certain horrible things will happen to him... "

G.K. Chesterton

[Pablo64]

Some people have waaaayyyy too much time on their hands.

[Old Sarge]

Imbibo ergo sum.

“I drink, therefore I am.”

Also...

Veni, Vidi, Vino.

“I came, I saw, I drank.”

[IWONDR]

I think Dawkins is trying to figure out how he came to be where he is.

[rbg81]

Really? When the heart stops pumping blood, oxygen is not longer to deliver to those “cobbled together, disconnected” cells and everything in the body dies. If you want to experience reality, stop paying your bills. Tell me how those “illusitory” effects work out for you.

Just because simple organisms for complex systems, that does not make those complex systems illusions. Educated idiots indeed.

[Lazamataz]

I am so pissed off right now.

[Hot Tabasco]

Are you quite real?

I have debated this very issue many times with my bellybutton and we have never even come close to a decision. I refuse to discuss it any more.....

[Salamander]

“To be, or not....” *ping*

[Allegra]

I drink.

Therefore, I am.

[onedoug]

Oh, God....

[ClearCase_guy]

Sometimes I think that Dawkins is operating at the level of an apparently smart college freshman -- after encountering marijuana for the first time. "Whoooaaa! What if, like, none of this is reaaalll?"

Really smart people move beyond this type of thought in short order. Dawkins, however, has made a career out of such drivel. Panspermia is a case in point.

[theBuckwheat]

Let us take this question to a level that is more important for humanity: Where is your reality?

Is your “reality” inside your mind, in a world of your own making, where reality is plastic and only pleasant facts are allowed in? A world where truth is what you say it is, where only the rules you like at the moment apply and where only good intentions determine outcomes? A world where the things of the outside world are available to be selected or rejected in making up your present reality.

Or is your “reality” outside of your mind, where you work to keep your understanding of right and wrong in harmony with timeless laws and principles. Where facts do matter and once established, cannot be denied no matter how convenient that would be.

[Graymatter]

Life is but a dream.
Sh-boom!

[MamaTexan]

I originally waded through this piece of egotistical tripe in an effort to learn something, but the argument fell apart right here:

But if the only thing that made people accept such laws was really the rational prudence that he appeals to, societies would certainly never have been invented.

The author's refusal to accept that people can exercise their free will and transcend their basic state of nature makes the rest of the article just so much used cat litter.

[Oztrich Boy]

[Mrs. Don-o]

save fir later reading

[devane617]

take a lit cigarette and stick it in your eye. there's your answer.

[OpusatFR]

Dawson sounds autistic. The ones I’ve seen over the years all believe they are the only “real” being in the world and all others are “not.”