no.

[TheFearmonger]

since the reactions seem anonymous, could you change the title to the following:
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRGGGGGGHHHHH!!! THE STUPIIIIIIIID!!!!! IT HUUUUUUUUUUURTS!!!!!

Only because no. is a powerful hook, just like "call me ishmael". I want lotsa responses, and not peoples looking for lulz. Besides, if I called it stupid, we'd have to contend with niocan :?

 

[Nogre]

I don't like the effect gravity has on my tits, but I still don't deny it.

:lol: I love this place. You guys provide some of the greatest jokes and greatest conversation I've ever participated in.

 

[TheAnMish]

Thought while watching the first video:
I can't even look at her face anymore.. she has such blank eyes.. you can almost see the void where her brain should've been.
*shudders*

2nd vid:
*facepalm*
Can I hit her, please? Or let me take her to the many examples of evidence, and sacrifice her on the altar of science!

"You seem to believe that it's almost dangerous for people to believe that they were created individually by a creator"

Well, yes... Because it's bullshit!
Go and look at the evidence, it is publicly available!
Of course the original bones and fossils are at special museums; they require better attention and protection.
But the EXACT copies of these things are readily available!

3rd vid:
Her annoyingly fake laugh is starting to trigger twitches around my left eye.
It's degrading and respectless.

Also, the difference between their speech is becoming comical.
His speech is fluid, his wording is understandable and respectful, patient. Everything needed for her to respond well.
Hers is shaky. She repeats herself unnessesarily. She shows no respect for him or his point. Also, um, uh, y'know, um.. hm, um, it's sorta, um, not, hm, very, mmm, intelligently, um.. what's the word? Um... presented.


Also.. I don't know why I'm continuing to watch!

ARGH!

 

[nemesiss]

Only because no. is a powerful hook, just like "call me ishmael". I want lotsa responses, and not peoples looking for lulz. Besides, if I called it stupid, we'd have to contend with niocan :?

i do not think the idea of looking critical at anything is wrong, that some things are not very pursuasive i can understand...
HOWEVER, the audio, comprised from the the movement of her lungs, vocalcords and mouth based on the neuro impulses of her brain, seem to indicate a lack of understanding certain reality based facts due to illogic data previously inserted.

sometimes i meet nice religeous people which who are so nice, that i feel like "live and let live", but when i hear people like that.... there is something in my head that just wants to take an example of evidence and beat the living shit out of them to see if after that they still can ignore it.

 

[MillionSword]

...That patronizing/condescending smile. What a bitch. Is she still alive?

 

[xman]

Is it Ad Hominen(sic) to call somebody stupid when they're actually unequivocally being stupid. Damn, I think it is. Seems unfair somehow.

 

[Nogre]

Is it Ad Hominen(sic) to call somebody stupid when they're actually unequivocally being stupid. Damn, I think it is. Seems unfair somehow.

It's only a fallacy if you're saying that their arguments are wrong because they're stupid as a person. If you're just calling them stupid and concede that it has no weight in logical argument, then it's not really wrong to say that.

 

[TheFearmonger]

Is it Ad Hominen(sic) to call somebody stupid when they're actually unequivocally being stupid. Damn, I think it is. Seems unfair somehow.

It's only a fallacy if you're saying that their arguments are wrong because they're stupid as a person. If you're just calling them stupid and concede that it has no weight in logical argument, then it's not really wrong to say that.

I gotta go with nogre here. sating her ignorance is in addition to the obvious gaps in her sense. This is like calling dawkins smart. No ad hominem, it's gained BECAUSE of the arguments. (note; large text isn't angry, i'm just too lazy yo click italics, but not too lazy to write this explanation )

 

[Asrahn]

I love the fact that she's standing there, staring in the face of someone who is thoroughly educated and experienced in a field, and then proceeds to tell him exactly what his field is about - while just missing the point completely.

I can understand Dawkins "Oh really?" here and there, what the woman is doing is roughly the equalent of walking up to an engineer and stating that computers does not run on electricity. I mean, what the hell do you answer to such remarkable ignorance?

I'm fairly sure she isn't stupid, she is just utterly brainwashed, uneducated and I feel so terribly, terribly sorry for her.

Richard, why would you do such a thing to yourself?

 

[5810Singer]

Richard, why would you do such a thing to yourself?

Because he, like so many others, has been conned into entering into "debate" with religious fundamentalists.

I am certain that the on-going pseudo-debate about evolution vs creation is only furthering the ends of religious fundamentalism, and reducing the credibility of rationalism.

Some believe (and I tend to agree with them) that the opposing sides are engaged in an intellectual/philosophical/moral war for the hearts and minds of forthcoming generations, and that human civilisation as a whole will suffer if religious fundamentalism wins.

If we take this to be true, then I say: "You can not win a war where you consistently let the enemy pick the battlegrounds."

 

[Salv]

I think she's trying not to listen to Dawkins because she realises that her beliefs are fragile. If she admits evolution is factual she starts to question the rest of what she was taught. I watched all the videos, she's constantly implying that "hardcore" evolutionists have zero regard for fellow humans. She wouldn't gtf souls and spirits and what not. Have to have a lot of respect for Dawkins keeping his cool.