Archive for February 2007

Meaning and Dawkins – Meaningless Dawkins.

Normally things like this do not bother me so much. I could not care less about the actual conclusion if the method to arriving at the finish line were reasonable. And by reasonable or rational I do not want to imply that reason or rationality is the only way by which a conclusion can be drawn. I say this because … Continue reading

It Filters the Good Air from the Bad

The Scientific Method has severe flaws. If the Atheist is correct, then belief in God is a delusion. If the theist is deluded and perceives the world in a particular way (ie. makes an observation) and develops a hypothesis for that then the hypothesis is faulty. However, the hypothesis is then tested by the theist and is proven or disproved. … Continue reading

The Science Delusion

Those of you who know me or have read my previous posts will know that I have been reading The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins. Until the other day I could not put my finger on what concerned me most about the book. His conclusion (and his assumption at the begining) is that God does not exist. I would not … Continue reading

The Stupid Gene

I am having difficulty. The consciousness does not exist. God does not exist. But genes have a desire to copy themselves? I don’t get it. The selfish gene is the one that wants to make copies of itself over and over again. This is true to the extent that, after many mutations, genes control organisms to do or desire things … Continue reading

Godless Dawkins is God

When I seek advice I look to someone who may be qualified to answer any question which I may have. When I don’t know something I look to a person (dead or alive) who is qualified to answer the question. If the person answering my question is condescending, arrogant, pompous and self-absorbed I am less likely to heed the advice … Continue reading