Richard Dawkins is a super coward

Originally posted by borntowatch


Oh awesome post

"probably later praised behind closed doors at churches"
Probably???PROBABLY, wow what an awesome ASSUMPTION

"I bet Dawkins gets numerous death threats from such people daily. "

You bet??? YOU BET, wow what an awesome ASSUMPTION

Sounds like you are far more fear and hate filled than those you accuse, far more dangerous,never mind as sensationalist as Fox news, all those assumptions and bets you make

do you know what an educated guess is?
if there is evidence that people like dawkins frequently get death threats for doing what they do.... and dawkins is very very well known for doing what he does..... would it not be reasonable to assume he gets death threats as well

and a quick google search will show that yes.... vocal atheists do get death threats from religious fundamentalists on a fairly regular basis

......are you following me here?

reply to post by sdb93awd

Guess this guy isn't a coward? Pat Robertson is the coward of cowards ( except the pope), the Cowards King.
Richard Dawkins at least is sincere about what he says.

reply to post by th3onetruth

I see no cowardice here.







And a Sam Harris video as a bonus.

Originally posted by sirhumperdink

Originally posted by borntowatch


Oh awesome post

"probably later praised behind closed doors at churches"
Probably???PROBABLY, wow what an awesome ASSUMPTION

"I bet Dawkins gets numerous death threats from such people daily. "

You bet??? YOU BET, wow what an awesome ASSUMPTION

Sounds like you are far more fear and hate filled than those you accuse, far more dangerous,never mind as sensationalist as Fox news, all those assumptions and bets you make

do you know what an educated guess is?
if there is evidence that people like dawkins frequently get death threats for doing what they do.... and dawkins is very very well known for doing what he does..... would it not be reasonable to assume he gets death threats as well

and a quick google search will show that yes.... vocal atheists do get death threats from religious fundamentalists on a fairly regular basis

......are you following me here?

edit on 18-8-2013 by sirhumperdink because: (no reason given)

and Christians get death threats and killed by non believers but that doesnt matter and wont receive any stars will it

would it not be reasonable to assume Christians get death threats as well

and a quick google search will show that yes.... vocal Christians and non vocal Christians do get death threats from non religious fundamentalists on a fairly regular basis and killed

......are you following me here?

Originally posted by borntowatch

Originally posted by sirhumperdink

Originally posted by borntowatch


Oh awesome post

"probably later praised behind closed doors at churches"
Probably???PROBABLY, wow what an awesome ASSUMPTION

"I bet Dawkins gets numerous death threats from such people daily. "

You bet??? YOU BET, wow what an awesome ASSUMPTION

Sounds like you are far more fear and hate filled than those you accuse, far more dangerous,never mind as sensationalist as Fox news, all those assumptions and bets you make

do you know what an educated guess is?
if there is evidence that people like dawkins frequently get death threats for doing what they do.... and dawkins is very very well known for doing what he does..... would it not be reasonable to assume he gets death threats as well

and a quick google search will show that yes.... vocal atheists do get death threats from religious fundamentalists on a fairly regular basis

......are you following me here?

edit on 18-8-2013 by sirhumperdink because: (no reason given)

and Christians get death threats and killed by non believers but that doesnt matter and wont receive any stars will it

would it not be reasonable to assume Christians get death threats as well

and a quick google search will show that yes.... vocal Christians do get death threats from non religious fundamentalists on a fairly regular basis

......are you following me here?

oh im following quite well
in fact im following well enough to realise that i never claimed they didnt and my post was in response to you trying to belittle another member for making what was a rational assumption

you see what you did there?
somehow... in someway ..... in your head you are having an entirely different argument than what is actually occurring in this forum.... or perhaps just making irrelevant posts

(the angry little mockingbird routine is cute btw)

Originally posted by sirhumperdink

Originally posted by borntowatch

Originally posted by sirhumperdink

Originally posted by borntowatch


Oh awesome post

"probably later praised behind closed doors at churches"
Probably???PROBABLY, wow what an awesome ASSUMPTION

"I bet Dawkins gets numerous death threats from such people daily. "

You bet??? YOU BET, wow what an awesome ASSUMPTION

Sounds like you are far more fear and hate filled than those you accuse, far more dangerous,never mind as sensationalist as Fox news, all those assumptions and bets you make

do you know what an educated guess is?
if there is evidence that people like dawkins frequently get death threats for doing what they do.... and dawkins is very very well known for doing what he does..... would it not be reasonable to assume he gets death threats as well

and a quick google search will show that yes.... vocal atheists do get death threats from religious fundamentalists on a fairly regular basis

......are you following me here?

edit on 18-8-2013 by sirhumperdink because: (no reason given)

and Christians get death threats and killed by non believers but that doesnt matter and wont receive any stars will it

would it not be reasonable to assume Christians get death threats as well

and a quick google search will show that yes.... vocal Christians do get death threats from non religious fundamentalists on a fairly regular basis

......are you following me here?

oh im following quite well
in fact im following well enough to realise that i never claimed they didnt and my post was in response to you trying to belittle another member for making what was a rational assumption

you see what you did there?
somehow... in someway ..... in your head you are having an entirely different argument than what is actually occurring in this forum.... or perhaps just making irrelevant posts

(the angry little mockingbird routine is cute btw)

edit on 18-8-2013 by sirhumperdink because: (no reason given)

belittling??
Wasnt that post by rhino an open attack, slanted to cause hate and animosity?

My angry little mocking bird is to show how petty people can be, its fun


Your post was to defend an atheists attack on christianity, no more

I just wanted to show how shallow the argument was.

Dawkins a coward? I hear he wont debate Kent Hovind.
Thats not cowardice, thats wisdom

reply to post by borntowatch


ok im going to ignore the rest for now..... its just too clever and i honestly have no counter points..... i will have to concede the argument to your brilliance
but would you care to explain how what i said was in any way what so ever defending an attack on christianity?
please i would love to hear your rationale.... it would go a long way in explaining why certain groups feel they are constantly under attack when they hear something they disagree with or just dont like to hear

reply to post by borntowatch

Dawkins a coward? I hear he wont debate Kent Hovind.

When is the good doctor scheduled to get out of federal prison?

Originally posted by Carreau
reply to post by sdb93awd

 

Until Dawkins starts holding his 1v1 debates in Muslim countries and challenges Clerics about Islam, he is a chicken sh*t. Picking on the safe religion and ignoring the others makes him a coward.

Ya, he wouldn't make it past the stoning to death part performed by the opposition for blasphemy.

This quote (taken from another thread) explains quite nicely (imho) why Dawkins has no intention of debating a creationist

"Debating creationists on the topic of evolution is rather like trying to play chess with a pigeon; it knocks the pieces over, craps on the board, and flies back to its flock to claim victory." - Scott D. Weitzenhoffer

I've personally found that there's a thread of dishonesty running every single creationist I've come across. Infact they work very hard at being so dishonest.

William Lane Craig is a complete and utter moron and it says a lot about Christians that they think he gives a good showing in debates, let alone wins them. He has the intelligence of a gnat.

reply to post by th3onetruth


I see a coward in plain sight. So Dawkins picking apart young earth creationists makes him brave? Give me a break. Craig isn't a young earth creationist and his arguments hinge on logic. Where he often traps his opponents is by forcing them on the issue of atheism vs agnosticism. Most atheists are too caught up with faith in their position (and that is what it ultimately is, make no mistake about it) to admit that they don't know how the universe came into existence other than to say "the big bang did it". If they admit that they don't know what caused the big bang, then they are forced to admit that they are closet agnostics, but often refuse to do so.

The only debate I've seen which I would say Craig didn't win, was against Sam Harris. The problem with Harris arguments however, were that they revolved around how God couldn't exist because people suffer, and ignored the fundamental question of how the universe came to be. Still, I thought Harris did extremely well in the debate and it could be argued he won it.

Dawkins picking on young earth creationists does not make him brave. It makes him arrogant.

You can't logically debate the existence of god, so why would he go? He knows it's a trap. Dawkins is more about debating the validity of science, but he does indeed throw in his jabs here and there.

It wouldn't be a debate, it would be the philosopher throwing all kinds of subjective arguments out there and Dawkins letting him know. It will go absolutely nowhere.

That's what I thought. Dbags.

Lets get back to the basics:

-Dawkins makes millions telling people there is no God

-Dawkins debates and speaks with religious leaders all the time

-William Lane Craig is the most formidable Christian apologist

-Dawkins picks on Christians' ideas of creation in his recent books(I guess this would be his wheelhouse?)

-Most atheists and academics have considerable respect for Dr. Craig

-WLC wants to debate Richard Dawkins on the points Dawkins has in his books

-WLC has extended various invitations to Mr. Dawkins

-Richard Dawkins says he isn't worthy; he says he'd rather have discussions with catholic religious leaders

-Dawkins has written formal excuses and published them online. This seems odd for some adversary who is completely unworthy


Shouldn't a top atheist want to show his wits against a top Christian apologist if he was at all confident? (he does make money by creating a talking point against Christian beliefs)


To me it seems like Richard Dawkins might be scared. Maybe I'm crazy.

-

American fundamentalist Christians are not "safe". For example, numerous abortion clinic workers have been murdered by these wackos (probably later praised behind closed doors at churches).I bet Dawkins gets numerous death threats from such people daily. These deranged people think they're acting God's will. Make no mistake, they are very, very dangerous..

I think you might be getting a little carried away.

A huge percentage of this country is "Christian".

How many deaths per year are at the hands of extremist Christians? 10?

Could it be that maybe these people have been taught a deranged form of Christianity in combination with being a little bit psycho?

The chances of dying at the hands of a Christian extremist are near 0 and would be like the 546,790th leading cause of death in America maybe.

Most real Christians are sheepish because they are commanded to love everybody. If everyone loved people the way Christians are taught by Jesus this world would be exceedingly tame. Go ahead........ read what Jesus has to say again.

reply to post by sdb93awd


No, he isn't afraid. As he has said, he doesn't want to waste his time with the type of person who refuses to see logic and reason and instead resorts to made up, fictional writings.

I've seen clips of both Dawkings and Hitchins debate religious people and all it ever resolves to is the religious person refuting each fact simply because they refuse to accept the scientific model.

And at the end of the day, how can you debate someone who doesn't want to accept logic and reason? It must get mind-numbing to have to explain to very stupid people the Earth is in fact, billions of years old, not a few thousand, that "evolution" is not a conscious, thought-out process but just a continual series of mutations that, in the long run, benefit the animal and its survival.

refuses to see logic and reason and instead resorts to made up, fictional writings.

I'm 100% sure you've never listended to Dr. Craig debate.

Also, nobody here is talking about the age of the earth because that is irrelevant to anybody with any sense.

I don't think Dawkins has admitted it to himself quite yet, but I think he's on the verge of pulling a "Flew." I refer, of course, to Antony Flew. I think Dawkins' hands are getting clammy. At least it's looking very much like he has cold feet.

During the course of his career he taught at the universities of Oxford, Aberdeen, Keele and Reading, and at York University in Toronto.

For much of his career Flew was known as a strong advocate of atheism, arguing that one should presuppose atheism until empirical evidence of a God surfaces. He also criticised the idea of life after death,[3] the free will defence to the problem of evil, and the meaningfulness of the concept of God.[4] In 2003 he was one of the signers of the Humanist Manifesto.[5]

However, in 2004 he stated an allegiance to deism, more specifically a belief in the Aristotelian God. He stated that in keeping his lifelong commitment to go where the evidence leads, he now believed in the existence of God.[6]

A book outlining his reasons for changing his position, There is a God: How the World's Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind was written by Flew in collaboration with Roy Abraham Varghese.
en.wikipedia.org...

If Dawkins doesnt want to waste his precious time arguing with Christians then why is he writing books and attacking peoples beliefs so openly and consistently.

He just wants to attack and not ne neld responsible for what he believes and says.

Its a petty argument that he doesnt think highly enough of others opinions, yet makes his money arguing those opinions.

If its so lame to him why doesnt he just walk away from it all together.

little hypocrisy in all that