ChemEngineer
Diamond Member
- Feb 5, 2019
- 6,185
- 6,003
- 1,940
After reading nonsense published as "non-fiction" by Isaac Asimov, cited on this very thread, I proceeded to check out books by Carl Sagan and critique those, which critiques I mailed to his publisher. Then it was malicious atheist Richard Dawkins' turn. So much nonsense that I won't burden readers with more than a small fraction of it.
Cover: Subtitle: âWhy the evidence of evolution reveals a universe without designâ
(Never before in all my book reviews have I had to begin my critique at the COVER! A title and a subtitle - both misleading - both wrong. Professor Dawkins contradicts his own subtitle on Page 21:
âWe may say that a living body or organ is well designed if it has attributes that an intelligent and knowledgeable engineer might have built into it in order to achieve some sensible purpose, such as flying, swimming, seeing, eating, reproducing, or more generally promoting the survival and replication of the organismâs genes.â Every living plant and animal you see shows these âattributesâ cited by the author.)
P 37: âOur modern hypothesis (evolution) . . .â
(Ah yes, that âmodernâ hypothesis - evolution. 1859.)
Ibid: âWhenever I read such a remark (as the impossibility of believing in evolution), I always feel like writing âSpeak for yourselfâ in the margin.â
(Let me return the favor. On P 160, Dawkins writes, âOur minds canât cope with the large distances that astronomy deals in, or the small distances of atomic physics...â SPEAK FOR YOURSELF. Dawkins: âOur minds canât imagine a time span as short as a picosecond.â SPEAK FOR YOURSELF.
Dawkins: âOur minds canât imagine a timespan as long as a million years...â SPEAK FOR YOURSELF.
P. 163: âOur own subjective judgment about the plausibility of a theory of the origin of life is likely to be wrong by a factor of a hundred million.â
(SPEAKING FOR HIMSELF.)
Dawkins: âWhen we read in a newspaper about an amazing coincidence . . . we are more impressed by it than we should be.â (SPEAK FOR YOURSELF.)
P. 105: âThere is a considerable surplus of humans.â (SPEAK FOR YOURSELF!! Interestingly, Carl Sagan said the same thing. Sagan hypocritically had five children, an "excess" by his own statements.)
P. 41: âMeasuring the statistical improbability of a suggestion is the right way to go about assessing its believability. Indeed it is a method that we shall use in this book several times. BUT YOU HAVE TO DO IT RIGHT.â
(Emphasis added, again. If there is ONE thing Professor Dawkins does NOT do right, it is measuring the statistical improbability. He defines one chance in 10exp40 as âimpossibleâ, and then says one chance in a universe full of numbers is âpossibleâ. But a criticâs idea is impossible at one chance in 10exp301. Science turned on its head for evolution.)
P. 129: âModern DNA replication is a high-technology affair, with elaborate proofreading techniques that have been perfected . . .â
(Subtitle: "... a universe without design...." but it's "high-technology, with elaborate techniques that have been perfected....")
P 160: â . . .it is possible for a marble statue to wave at us. It could happen....It is theoretically possible for a cow to jump over the moon with something like the same improbability.â
(Atheists will make every effort to defend Dawkins' ridiculous attempts because they never admit that they were wrong. The arrogant, condescending Left is like that. And this is just ONE of his many books fraught with anti-science. Like Asimov, like Sagan, like all their excuse-makers, none of them could bring himself to say, "You make some good points. I overlooked that." No, Asimov and Dawkins simply engaged in attacking ME, failing to address the points I made. Sagan, on the other hand, greedily asked me to buy his newest book, overlooking the fact that I checked them all out at the public library, which by the way, invariably purchases Leftist books, but almost none on apologetics or by Christian authors. Librarians too have been brainwashed at Leftist socialist colleges. I had to borrow the book, The Irrational Atheist, by Vox Day, from the Library of Congress, since not one library outside of it had a copy to loan.
Q.E.D.
Cover: Subtitle: âWhy the evidence of evolution reveals a universe without designâ
(Never before in all my book reviews have I had to begin my critique at the COVER! A title and a subtitle - both misleading - both wrong. Professor Dawkins contradicts his own subtitle on Page 21:
âWe may say that a living body or organ is well designed if it has attributes that an intelligent and knowledgeable engineer might have built into it in order to achieve some sensible purpose, such as flying, swimming, seeing, eating, reproducing, or more generally promoting the survival and replication of the organismâs genes.â Every living plant and animal you see shows these âattributesâ cited by the author.)
P 37: âOur modern hypothesis (evolution) . . .â
(Ah yes, that âmodernâ hypothesis - evolution. 1859.)
Ibid: âWhenever I read such a remark (as the impossibility of believing in evolution), I always feel like writing âSpeak for yourselfâ in the margin.â
(Let me return the favor. On P 160, Dawkins writes, âOur minds canât cope with the large distances that astronomy deals in, or the small distances of atomic physics...â SPEAK FOR YOURSELF. Dawkins: âOur minds canât imagine a time span as short as a picosecond.â SPEAK FOR YOURSELF.
Dawkins: âOur minds canât imagine a timespan as long as a million years...â SPEAK FOR YOURSELF.
P. 163: âOur own subjective judgment about the plausibility of a theory of the origin of life is likely to be wrong by a factor of a hundred million.â
(SPEAKING FOR HIMSELF.)
Dawkins: âWhen we read in a newspaper about an amazing coincidence . . . we are more impressed by it than we should be.â (SPEAK FOR YOURSELF.)
P. 105: âThere is a considerable surplus of humans.â (SPEAK FOR YOURSELF!! Interestingly, Carl Sagan said the same thing. Sagan hypocritically had five children, an "excess" by his own statements.)
P. 41: âMeasuring the statistical improbability of a suggestion is the right way to go about assessing its believability. Indeed it is a method that we shall use in this book several times. BUT YOU HAVE TO DO IT RIGHT.â
(Emphasis added, again. If there is ONE thing Professor Dawkins does NOT do right, it is measuring the statistical improbability. He defines one chance in 10exp40 as âimpossibleâ, and then says one chance in a universe full of numbers is âpossibleâ. But a criticâs idea is impossible at one chance in 10exp301. Science turned on its head for evolution.)
P. 129: âModern DNA replication is a high-technology affair, with elaborate proofreading techniques that have been perfected . . .â
(Subtitle: "... a universe without design...." but it's "high-technology, with elaborate techniques that have been perfected....")
P 160: â . . .it is possible for a marble statue to wave at us. It could happen....It is theoretically possible for a cow to jump over the moon with something like the same improbability.â
(Atheists will make every effort to defend Dawkins' ridiculous attempts because they never admit that they were wrong. The arrogant, condescending Left is like that. And this is just ONE of his many books fraught with anti-science. Like Asimov, like Sagan, like all their excuse-makers, none of them could bring himself to say, "You make some good points. I overlooked that." No, Asimov and Dawkins simply engaged in attacking ME, failing to address the points I made. Sagan, on the other hand, greedily asked me to buy his newest book, overlooking the fact that I checked them all out at the public library, which by the way, invariably purchases Leftist books, but almost none on apologetics or by Christian authors. Librarians too have been brainwashed at Leftist socialist colleges. I had to borrow the book, The Irrational Atheist, by Vox Day, from the Library of Congress, since not one library outside of it had a copy to loan.
Q.E.D.