afdave
Posts: 1621
Joined: April 2006
|
| Quote | When you knew, in fact, that this misquote does not support "design" in any way, and in fact simply argues against random assembly of life in its present complexity, ie: the "tornado in a junkyard" example(which is something none of us believes, anyway).
I mean seriously, Dave. |
Again, let me say VERY CLEARLY. I quoted Richard Dawkins to illustrate to me a FASCINATING phenomenon with this man ...
Here is a man who everyone know DOES NOT accept design, yet he in effect says, "It LOOKS like a duck, WALKS like a duck, QUACKS like a duck, but let me spend the next EIGHT CHAPTERS trying to convince you that it's NOT a duck **cough** (isn't that what this debate is about in the first place?)
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to once again highlight this embarassing paradox of one of science's most brilliant minds.
I'll do my darndest not to quotemine and I trust you will do the same. Now, to quote someone on this thread, "Can we quit arguing about rules and get on with it?"
Do you have any substantive refutation of my logic?
--------------
A DILEMMA FOR THE COMMITTED NATURALIST
A Hi-tech alien spaceship lands on earth ... DESIGNED.
A Hi-tech alien rotary motor found in a cell ... NOT DESIGNED.
http://afdave.wordpress.com/....ess.com
|
