This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

genesis1's Profile

genesis1's Avatar Joined over 3 years ago
Gender: Male

Latest Discussions Started by genesis1

More Discussions by genesis1

Latest Comments by genesis1

Go to: Faith School Menace? (Now visible in US)

genesis1's Avatar Jump to comment 1 by genesis1

The professor's dislike of faith schools seems a little hypocritical. After all in his book Climbing Mt Improbable he mentions that he once asked his young daughter (I think she was his daughter) as to why flowers existed. She replied (quite correctly) "to make the world pretty". (Out of the mouths of babes and infants, eh). However, the good Doctor felt the need to inform her that this belief of hers was false. If Richard has the right to mislead his daughter into rejecting what is so obviously true why shouln't muslims have a similar right to mislead their offspring. And why shouldn't Xns have the right to have their children educated in a school that teaches the truth: Christianity?

Edited by moderator to remove off topic/spam

Updated: Sun, 15 Aug 2010 10:07:03 UTC | #500518

Go to: BHA condemns “appalling decision” to give education award to creationist zoo

genesis1's Avatar Jump to comment 132 by genesis1

The above mentioned book proves, of course, that if even if the 'creationist zoo' is not by any means the best representative of creationism nevertheless groupslike CMI are soundly beating the evolutionists in the area of science and reason

Fri, 13 Aug 2010 17:57:23 UTC | #499918

Go to: Choosing religious books

genesis1's Avatar Jump to comment 19 by genesis1

^ Smith, Quentin (2007). "Kalam Cosmological Arguments for Atheism". The Cambridge Companion to Atheism. ed. by Michael Martin. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 183. "The Kalam cosmological argument . . . was revived and has been a topic of widespread discussion since 1979, when Craig published The Kalam Cosmological Argument. . . [A] count of the articles in the philosophy journals shows that more articles have been published about Craig’s defense of the Kalam argument than have been published about any other philosopher’s contemporary formulation of an argument for God’s existence. Surprisingly, this even holds for Plantinga’s argument for the rational acceptability of the ontological argument and Plantinga’s argument that theism is a rationally acceptable basic belief. The fact that theists and atheists alike ‘cannot leave Craig’s Kalam argument alone’ suggests that it may be an argument of unusual philosophical interest or else has an attractive core of plausibility that keeps philosophers turning back to it and examining it once again."

(Wikipedia)

Tue, 10 Aug 2010 20:19:43 UTC | #498643

Go to: Choosing religious books

genesis1's Avatar Jump to comment 18 by genesis1

In fact here is the link:

http://creation.com/scientists-alive-today-who-accept-the-biblical-account-of-creation

Check out on this link the above mentioned names as well as

Raymond Damadian Andy Mcintosh Stuart Burgess

all of whom have done far more for testable, empirical applied science than Dawkins has ever done. FACT.

Tue, 10 Aug 2010 20:12:24 UTC | #498635

Go to: Choosing religious books

genesis1's Avatar Jump to comment 17 by genesis1

In regard to Dr Craig he revived the Kalam Cosmological argument WHICH IS A PHILOSOPHICAL ARGUMENT and this has become the most discussed argumentfor God in philosophy of religion see the Stanford Encyclopedia as well as other internet encyclopedias. He is one of the worlds leading PHILOSOPHERS of religion, natural theology, and philosophy of time and I suggest you check out his CV on reasonable faith before you start spouting such nonsense

Tue, 10 Aug 2010 20:06:26 UTC | #498633

More Comments by genesis1