• Richard Dawkins interviews Wendy Wright
    117 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Sporkfire;25018405]I thought she was a pretty good debater, if it were any creationist they probably would have been stopped dead in their tracks pretty quickly. The entire creationist argument, revolves around inconveniencing your opponent and not using facts that pertain to the argument. She did it pretty well..[/QUOTE] Also using emotional and moral arguments to make your opponent look like a monster.
I had to laugh at the part where the close minded woman called him close minded. :v:
my logic gland exploded
Eh, there was really no point watching all 7 parts. It was basically a back and forth where they had to touch upon the same thing 20 separate occasions. Like they were playing ping pong with tennis rackets. (Not table tennis rackets, the big ones that would basically cover the entire side of a ping pong table) Women like Wendy Wright is exactly why I'm against having women put in any position of power other than over their own children, and even then I'm on edge. And why I'm also against them being behind the wheel, a car is too dangerous to trust in the hands of a woman.
[QUOTE=Sprocket Shit;25032098] Women like Wendy Wright is exactly why I'm against having women put in any position of power other than over their own children, and even then I'm on edge. And why I'm also against them being behind the wheel, a car is too dangerous to trust in the hands of a woman.[/QUOTE] lol
[QUOTE=Sprocket Shit;25032098] Women like Wendy Wright is exactly why I'm against having women put in any position of power other than over their own children, and even then I'm on edge. And why I'm also against them being behind the wheel, a car is too dangerous to trust in the hands of a woman.[/QUOTE] what
[QUOTE=Sprocket Shit;25032098]Eh, there was really no point watching all 7 parts. It was basically a back and forth where they had to touch upon the same thing 20 separate occasions. Like they were playing ping pong with tennis rackets. (Not table tennis rackets, the big ones that would basically cover the entire side of a ping pong table) Women like Wendy Wright is exactly why I'm against having women put in any position of power other than over their own children, and even then I'm on edge. And why I'm also against them being behind the wheel, a car is too dangerous to trust in the hands of a woman.[/QUOTE] exactly, and people like ted haggard obviously prove the instability of the homosexual mind do you even read what you post
"Let's see the philosophies spawned from Darwinism" Bitch, let's look at the philosophies and groups formed from just the top three of the many thousands of religions. Antisemitism, Nazi's, KKK, Al Queada, etc. The list goes on. She was wrong even when she referred to Victorian times because Victorians abused the Darwin theory to try to prove other races were lesser than whites.
Judging by everyones' responses to these videos, I think I'll pass on watching them. I prefer my monitor intact.
[QUOTE=Sprocket Shit;25032098] Women like Wendy Wright is exactly why I'm against having women put in any position of power other than over their own children, and even then I'm on edge. And why I'm also against them being behind the wheel, a car is too dangerous to trust in the hands of a woman.[/QUOTE] :waycool: [editline]04:57AM[/editline] [QUOTE=Onyx3173;25033181]Judging by everyones' responses to these videos, I think I'll pass on watching them. I prefer my monitor intact.[/QUOTE] Watch the first. You don't really need to see any more because it keeps repeating itself.
Richard dawkins has no basis in his arguments. I mean look at him he is scared of debates. Wendy Wright clearly has the upper hand in this argument. Clearly Dawkins is a fool.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;25033191]:waycool: [editline]04:57AM[/editline] Watch the first. You don't really need to see any more because it keeps repeating itself.[/QUOTE] Will do then. One shouldn't be enough to make me head-explodingly rage. [editline]10:00PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Afgman;25033206]Richard dawkins has no basis in his arguments. I mean look at him he is scared of debates. Wendy Wright clearly has the upper hand in this argument. Clearly Dawkins is a fool.[/QUOTE] I hope you're joking... I rated you funny anyways though.
[QUOTE=Onyx3173;25033263]Will do then. One shouldn't be enough to make me head-explodingly rage. [editline]10:00PM[/editline] I hope you're joking... I rated you funny anyways though.[/QUOTE] Im not joking man Richard dawkins was stuttering you can clearly see the fear in his eye. Wendy also had some great points and I guess Richard dawins was debunked by a woman. Sad Mr. Dawkins very Sad.
Oh my god, this broad need to remove the blinders! and Richard Dawkins is a FAR more patient man than I. [QUOTE=Afgman;25033278]Im not joking man Richard dawkins was stuttering you can clearly see the fear in his eye. Wendy also had some great points and I guess Richard dawins was debunked by a woman. Sad Mr. Dawkins very Sad.[/QUOTE] Care to elaborate on these points that one woman made that apparently debunked the entire scientific community?
[QUOTE=Onyx3173;25033574]Oh my god, this broad need to remove the blinders! and Richard Dawkins is a FAR more patient man than I. Care to elaborate on these points that one woman made that apparently debunked the entire scientific community?[/QUOTE] Its to long and if you cannot see Richard dawkins get his ass handed than idk what to tell you.
[QUOTE=Afgman;25033617]Its to long and if you cannot see Richard dawkins get his ass handed than idk what to tell you.[/QUOTE] So what you're really saying is that you don't care to be proven wrong?
Science just explains what happens. She wants to teach faith in a science class. It would be like science class and the evolution theory, but the first species would be subtitled with (made by God) and the rest would be a chain reaction. So what are they arguing about? They both believe it's human choice when it comes to morals, not off scientific data. It seems like that bitch is under the impression that science also teaches morals, which it doesn't. Science is just concerned with how things happen, in detail. Because of science, this bitch can sit here and believe that God made evolution, otherwise, she would believe that God made man from the dust. It's a morality issue to me. She is under the impression that science also teaches morals. Sorry, you can't teach faith.
[QUOTE=Onyx3173;25033671]So what you're really saying is that you don't care to be proven wrong?[/QUOTE] It's always funny when someone makes a sarcastic or facetious comment because someone always takes them seriously.
[QUOTE=Afgman;25033617]Its to long and if you cannot see Richard dawkins get his ass handed than idk what to tell you.[/QUOTE] i dont normally call someone a troll but i think you should tell us your point or you are kinda you know a troll
I like how she says there are only drawings for evolution when all we have for creationism is words. Whenever she has that fucking troll smile I just wanna crush her fucking FACE
[QUOTE=yawmwen;25033991]It's always funny when someone makes a sarcastic or facetious comment because someone always takes them seriously.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Afgman;25033278]Im not joking man Richard dawkins was stuttering you can clearly see the fear in his eye. Wendy also had some great points and I guess Richard dawins was debunked by a woman. Sad Mr. Dawkins very Sad.[/QUOTE] Yes, because he seems so sarcastic. And most people don't carry on the sarcastic joke for several posts.
[QUOTE=Onyx3173;25034006]Yes, because he seems so sarcastic. And most people don't carry on the sarcastic joke for several posts.[/QUOTE] It's called trolling.
[QUOTE=imasillypiggys;25033996]i dont normally call someone a troll but i think you should tell us your point or you are kinda you know a troll[/QUOTE] Trolls, don't feed them. If you think someone is trolling you don't reply. The whole point of trolling is to get a response and by calling them a troll you just gave them what they wanted and they can run with it. [editline]06:08AM[/editline] [QUOTE=Onyx3173;25034006]Yes, because he seems so sarcastic. And most people don't carry on the sarcastic joke for several posts.[/QUOTE] His posts are incredibly outrageous and I don't see how anyone can take them seriously. I do the same thing too when I make a sarcastic comment and someone believes me.
[QUOTE=Afgman;25033206]Richard dawkins has no basis in his arguments. I mean look at him he is scared of debates. Wendy Wright clearly has the upper hand in this argument. Clearly Dawkins is a fool.[/QUOTE] Don't ask how, but I read your post in the voice of your avatar. I don't even know how to be honest
[QUOTE=Sprocket Shit;25034060]It's called trolling.[/QUOTE] Aw, fuck. And I fell for it too...
[QUOTE=Onyx3173;25034091]Aw, fuck. And I fell for it too...[/QUOTE] And now you know, and knowing is half the battle.
[QUOTE=Afgman;25033617]Its to long and if you cannot see Richard dawkins get his ass handed than idk what to tell you.[/QUOTE] She practically (or perhaps literally in videos 3 & 4) debunked herself and Dawkins watched it awe, speechless. I would see she had a fair amount of more stuttering, despite what little she had to say about evolution. If she is so concerned about evolution, she could become a scientist and be a part of that "exclusive" group she tries to label them as, though there really is only one way to be refute evolution and that is by ignoring what has been discovered and paying attention to isolated incidents of purposeful fraudulent research that is far outweighed by legitimate research. I can tell you one thing, I sure as hell didn't know that not teaching faith in a science class is called being hostile towards people such as herself. Also, I know this was trolling, but it's an easy excuse just to repeat what others said.
[QUOTE=Sporkfire;25018405]I thought she was a pretty good debater, if it were any creationist they probably would have been stopped dead in their tracks pretty quickly. The entire creationist argument, revolves around inconveniencing your opponent and not using facts that pertain to the argument. She did it pretty well..[/QUOTE] Ability to ignore opposing points raised and not refute them =/= ability to debate
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.