Great Quotes by Richard Dawkins - Staunch Opponent of Intelligent Design Theory

[Seymour Flops]

"Biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose.”

{Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker, 1996, p. 1}

Noted biological researcher, our own abu afak disagrees, however:

Take that, Richard Dawkins! Dr. Afak has put you in your place!

 

[Seymour Flops]

I have no explanation for complex biological design. All I know is that God isn't a good explanation, so we must wait and hope that somebody comes up with a better one.

Richard Dawkins

abu afak , will you step up and provide the explanation that Dawkins himself admits he cannot provide?

 

[Seymour Flops]

Let us try to teach generosity and altruism, because we are born selfish. Let us understand what our own selfish genes are up to, because we may then at least have the chance to upset their designs, something that no other species has ever aspired to do.

Richard Dawkins

So, something is designing. Now Dawkins thinks it is genes.

 

[abu afak]

"Biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose.”

{Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker, 1996, p. 1}

Noted biological researcher, our own abu afak disagrees, however:

View attachment 597150

Take that, Richard Dawkins! Dr. Afak has put you in your place!

He put himself in place calling it an "Illusion."

and WTF, Dawkins mis-speak is clearly not only your best, but ONLY 'evidence' of "design."
Unbelievably weak and nonsensical.
What 'debate.'

Evolution has VOLUMES across the sciences AND Scientists.
Pobably 98 percent of Biologists.
But you need a Dawkins mis-speak.

`

PS: the OCD troll 'ding' is on ignore due to endless Stalking and gratuitous harassment of my threads/posts in Environment with repeat/already answered One-Line baits. Recently following me down here to the Sci section where he doesn't post, just to do the same. ie,
Look at his 6, 7, 8. (now 26, 36, 46? and counting) vengeful out of control/one-line/No content snippets. Obsessed Mad Dog even taking third party swipes as well as his usual nonsense one-line 'replies.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

I have no explanation for complex biological design. All I know is that God isn't a good explanation, so we must wait and hope that somebody comes up with a better one.

Richard Dawkins

abu afak , will you step up and provide the explanation that Dawkins himself admits he cannot provide?

How does Dawkins "know" that?

Dawkins believes his dearly held biases and prejudices constitute knowledge.

Isn't he ironically worshiped by some people?, I don't see why.

 

[Seymour Flops]

The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind pitiless indifference.

Richard Dawkins

Not a very good description of the universe, but a dead on balls-accurate description of the life of abu afak.

 

[ding]

If we examine the physical laws we discover that we live in a logical universe governed by rules, laws and information. Rules laws and information are a signs of intelligence. Intentionality and purpose are signs of intelligence. The definition of reason is a cause, explanation, or justification for an action or event. The definition of purpose is the reason for which something is done or created or for which something exists. The consequence of a logical universe is that every cause has an effect. Which means that everything happens for a reason and serves a purpose. The very nature of our physical laws point to reason and purpose.

 

[Hollie]

The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind pitiless indifference.

Richard Dawkins

Not a very good description of the universe, but a dead on balls-accurate description of the life of abu afak.

It does tend to crush your hope to convert Dawkins to religious fundamentalism.

 

[abu afak]

The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind pitiless indifference.

Richard Dawkins

Not a very good description of the universe, but a dead on balls-accurate description of the life of abu afak.

He put himself in place calling it an "Illusion."
as you know/I busted as of Yesterday.

and WTF, Dawkins mis-speak is clearly not only your best, but ONLY 'evidence' of "design??"
Unbelievably weak and nonsensical.
What 'debate.'
IQ 62?

Evolution has VOLUMES across the sciences AND Scientists.
Pobably 98 percent of Biologists.
But you need a Dawkins mis-speak?
Clown.

`

 

[Seymour Flops]

How does Dawkins "know" that?

Dawkins believes his dearly held biases and prejudices constitute knowledge.

Isn't he ironically worshiped by some people?, I don't see why.

It's because of his writing style. It's hard to describe it.

Dawkins, like many writers who appeal to the keyboard warriors of the world, writes in a style that provides almost no actual information, but is heavy on ridicule for anyone who might consider disagreeing with his opinions. The idea is to make the reader feel that they are in on the ridicule, not on the receiving end.

The key is to make the readers believe that they must always agree with Dawkins in order to avoid themselves becoming targets of the ridicule. This induces the credulity so important to a low-information content provider.

Dawkins is at his best when he is writing books that he knows will be hailed as genius for ridiculing religion. I have to think he has learned to avoid interviews with skeptics since Ben Stein reduced him to babbling about ancient aliens "seeding" life on Earth as a legitimate scientific theory.

 

[ding]

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Not that Dawkins would deign to respond to my comment but I welcome his response.

My long time open challenge to atheists is give a better explanation for this universe we all inhabit
than this entity we call "God"... as silly as you think God is.

The usual response is well, I don't know, but I do know God is a total fabrication.
That's cowardly cop out and no answer at all.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Awesome!

Anyone know what "possess your superior eeentelect and education . . ." references?

 

[Hollie]

Not that Dawkins would deign to respond to my comment but I welcome his response.

My long time open challenge to atheists is give a better explanation for this universe we all inhabit
than this entity we call "God"... as silly as you think God is.

The usual response is well, I don't know, but I do know God is a total fabrication.
That's cowardly cop out.

The better explanation is the natural world.

Your gods are not an explanation for anything. ''the gods did it'' answers what?

 

[abu afak]

It's because of his writing style. It's hard to describe it.

Dawkins, like many writers who appeal to the keyboard warriors of the world, writes in a style that provides almost no actual information, but is heavy on ridicule for anyone who might consider disagreeing with his opinions. The idea is to make the reader feel that they are in on the ridicule, not on the receiving end.

The key is to make the readers believe that they must always agree with Dawkins in order to avoid themselves becoming targets of the ridicule. This induces the credulity so important to a low-information content provider.

Dawkins is at his best when he is writing books that he knows will be hailed as genius for ridiculing religion. I have to think he has learned to avoid interviews with skeptics since Ben Stein reduced him to babbling about ancient aliens "seeding" life on Earth as a legitimate scientific theory.

He put himself in place calling it an "Illusion."
as you know/I busted as of Yesterday.
Yet you continue to not only use it but it's your whole pathetic 'evidence.'

and WTF, Dawkins mis-speak is clearly your best 'evidence' of "design??"
Unbelievably weak and nonsensical.
What 'debate?'

Evolution has VOLUMES across the sciences AND Scientists.
Pobably 98 percent of Biologists.
But you need to repeat a Dawkins mis-speak more than a dozen times?

`

 

[ding]

Awesome!

Anyone know what "possess your superior eeentelect and education . . ." references?

I'm not following you Pa trick.

 

[Seymour Flops]

I'm not following you Pa trick.

Sorry. Obscure reference. Thank . . . someone . . . for Youtube:



1:00 in.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

The better explanation is the natural world.

Your gods are not an explanation for anything. ''the gods did it'' answers what?

I'm not going down this rabbit hole but the "natural world" is just another way of saying God,
an all powerful being who is responsible for the laws that govern the universe, without actually
admitting to God for whatever personal reasons you may have not to.

Brilliant minds like Newton and Einstein admit as much.

I don't believe in Gods, plural and God is actually a very good explanation for the whole of our universe.
God is actually the only explanation that makes any "sense" at all and I would be embarrassed to say
otherwise.
As silly as God is as an explanation no God at all is even more silly. And dishonest.

 

[ding]

Sorry. Obscure reference. Thank . . . someone . . . for Youtube:



1:00 in.

I'm usually pretty good with obscure references. Now I have a sads.

 

[petro]

If we examine the physical laws we discover that we live in a logical universe governed by rules, laws and information. Rules laws and information are a signs of intelligence. Intentionality and purpose are signs of intelligence. The definition of reason is a cause, explanation, or justification for an action or event. The definition of purpose is the reason for which something is done or created or for which something exists. The consequence of a logical universe is that every cause has an effect. Which means that everything happens for a reason and serves a purpose. The very nature of our physical laws point to reason and purpose.

Far better said than I could put into words.

Personally not a religious person or believer in the biblical God, but can accept a higher intelligence outside our awareness as having a hand in the laws that govern our Universe.

An accidental existence seems like so much work and evolutionary coincidence for it all to be completely pointless.