1. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #63498 by Science H Logic on August 14, 2007 at 2:32 pm

Comment #63296 by darwin2 on August 13, 2007 at 8:22 pm

"I have read Dawkins book as well as those of Harris and Hitchens. The design argument doesn't go ad infinitum. It stops at God."

Why exactly do you feel that the argument must end at God? Why is he exempt from this logic?

"I am willing to listen openly to any arguments and am willing to engage in a mutually respectful dialogue with anyone who would like to discuss in depth their arguments against the existence of God."

As has been said over and over again, the burden of proof in on the person advocating that existence of God. The only evidence you have given is your space shuttle analogy. And the reason I think so many people (including my self) thought that you didn't believe in evolution was because that argument usually refers to to biological complexity. So since you are not referring to such, I'd like to know what complexity are taking about? What is the space shuttle supposed to be an analogy of?

2. Believing the Unbelievable: The Clash Between Faith and Reason in the Modern World

Comment #56093 by Science H Logic on July 13, 2007 at 5:51 pm

How long has he been working on that?

3. Sean Hannity with Christopher Hitchens

Comment #55546 by Science H Logic on July 11, 2007 at 1:36 pm

Like Hitchens i lost it for a second with his "look at how great and wonderful the universe is, there must be a god", has he read ANYTHING at all from the opposition? I'm really sick of these 10 minute debates. Its allways the same damn arguments from the christains "where did we come from then?", "how do you know what is really right or really wrong?". It seems so pointless.

4. Is Christianity Good for the World? A discussion between Christopher Hitchens and Douglas Wilson

Comment #55538 by Science H Logic on July 11, 2007 at 1:21 pm

In agreement with the last comment, Wilson continued with the worse line of argumentation that Christians seem to make "with out god how do you REALLY know what is right and what is wronge". The thing is,(and what made this debate pointless by page three) was that Hitchens answered it with the obvious observation (one the Dawkins is found of making to) that we certainly don't get that ultimate authority from the bible. Wilson never addresses this. It was the same way with the Sharpton/Hitchens debate. Sharpton kept accusing Hitchens of veering away from the question when he couldn't that that assault on religious moral authority is the best way to do so.