Ihedinobi: Illogicboy still falling hands

Logicboy03:


Are you following, Deepsight's failure? You really believe that Dawkins is silly? Note that there is a difference between being wrong and silly.



BTW, nice escape tactics.

Logicboy03:


Ihedinobi, still supporting his master!

Mr_Anony:
Yawn....

Almost everyone who can string together a half decent argument knows that when it comes to logical reasoning, Dawkins is a layman. Much worse, he makes some of the silliest arguments I've seen when it comes to religion.




As a biologist, he is probably brilliant but when it comes to arguing about God, he is more or less a dunce. In the circle of philosophers, he is the equivalent of Kim Kardashian/Paris Hilton......All Noise and No Brilliance.

Mr_Anony:
About the historicicity of Christ? Are you sure you really watched that video?

Mr_Anony:
You mean just like you have been supporting your oga dawkins?

Logicboy03:



Which philosophers? This is the hypocrisy and foolishness of the theist


Hypocrisy

Dinesh D'souza and William craig have been caught numerous times making fallacious statements- especially Dinesh D'souza with outright lies for religion. One example was where Dinesh claimed that religious people are more likely to be charitable while citing a debunked study- he was corrected live by a member of the audience.

These people are among the most popular christian apologists in the world. Has Anony Ever addressed their numerous fallacies? No. Al he can do is is misrepresent Dawkins well explained thinking on religion.

I am an atheist and I have admiited to Anony's face that Dawkins is a better lecturer than debater. Still, Dawkins makes some excellent points. I have also explained to Anony's face that Sam Harris (another atheist debater) didnt directly address William Craigs points in the debate (this is due to Sam Harris points generally are the opposite of Craig's as a rebuttal)


Foolishness
Dawkins makes clear arguments on religion. Very lucid. It is one thing to say that he is wrong on religion but to claim that his religious arguments are foolish is of the highest arrogance of a religious theist.

Dawkins does not use threats or condemn people to hell to make his points. He didnt cite false statistics like Dinesh D'souza. He didnt run away from atheism like how William Craig ran away from defending his bible God on morality.


Dawkins advanced an argument that all arguments leading to God are false because God by nature is impossible. The logic behind it is very clear. As a scientist, what can not be observed or measured or contradicts known scientific laws are not going to be believed in. How are you going to make an argument for something that has no evidence and contradicts known scientific knowledge?

Mr_Anony:
You mean just like you have been supporting your oga dawkins?

mazaje:

Dinesh D'souza is a right wing nut job that makes a living off telling lies(His latest movie about Obama). . .William Craig is just a smooth dubious liar that actually stands for nothing, if saying parts of the bible are not true will make him win debates he will say it(he has said similar ridiculous things in the past). . .

Reyginus: Logicb, how many times do you need to be told that dawkins is a baby atheist?

Logicboy03:

Do you have to be told that there is nothing like a "baby atheist"?

Reyginus: Wow! Let me in. I really want to know.

Logicboy03:


Go troll somewhere else

Mr_Anony:
...As a biologist, he is probably brilliant but when it comes to arguing about God, he is more or less a dunce. In the circle of philosophers, he is the equivalent of Kim Kardashian/Paris Hilton......All Noise and No Brilliance.

F00028:
not taking any prisioners today, are you, Anony?



yes, logic I've been following from the beginning.

Logicboy03:



Which philosophers? This is the hypocrisy and foolishness of the theist


Hypocrisy

Dinesh D'souza and William craig have been caught numerous times making fallacious statements- especially Dinesh D'souza with outright lies for religion. One example was where Dinesh claimed that religious people are more likely to be charitable while citing a debunked study- he was corrected live by a member of the audience.

These people are among the most popular christian apologists in the world. Has Anony Ever addressed their numerous fallacies? No. Al he can do is is misrepresent Dawkins well explained thinking on religion.

I am an atheist and I have admiited to Anony's face that Dawkins is a better lecturer than debater. Still, Dawkins makes some excellent points. I have also explained to Anony's face that Sam Harris (another atheist debater) didnt directly address William Craigs points in the debate (this is due to Sam Harris points generally are the opposite of Craig's as a rebuttal)


Foolishness
Dawkins makes clear arguments on religion. Very lucid. It is one thing to say that he is wrong on religion but to claim that his religious arguments are foolish is of the highest arrogance of a religious theist.

Dawkins does not use threats or condemn people to hell to make his points. He didnt cite false statistics like Dinesh D'souza. He didnt run away from atheism like how William Craig ran away from defending his bible God on morality.


Dawkins advanced an argument that all arguments leading to God are false because God by nature is impossible. The logic behind it is very clear. As a scientist, what can not be observed or measured or contradicts known scientific laws are not going to be believed in. How are you going to make an argument for something that has no evidence and contradicts known scientific knowledge?