If you're talking about Dawkins, you're completely off base. He's a highly qualified scientist and fellow at Oxford University, England (one of the world's most respected educational establishments). He is completely qualified to talk about evolution and the crazy notion of creationism.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Just read the review in question. "Qualified" he may be - the terribleness of the book should tell you quite a lot about just what such "qualifications" actually signify.
And I was referring to his philosophical and metaphysical diatribes. He's definitely not qualified to make any such statements.
Hmm. I don't know about that tbh.
I do know that it's an awesome book, very educational, well researched, thorough. Fun to read too. I loved it. Suppose it all comes down to personal taste.
He's not my favourite atheist, like. I don't think he's the best at debating. He's too polite :P
Laters Abo
It isn't surprising that you find such an ignorant and poorly reasoned work to be "awesome" and "thorough".
Why isn't it surprising? Are you trying to accuse me of ignorance and poor reasoning too?
Most definitely - your performance throughout this debate has revealed shallow thought and an inability to self-examine.
Thank you for your feedback.