Comments on: Dimwits on Dawkins on Darwin

By: Kevin Straw

Kevin Straw — Sat, 18 Oct 2008 11:25:54 +0000

I’m sorry to have been so impolite to you for calling me a dimwit.

By: Apathy Sketchpad » Blog Archive » Only when they read your column. (updated)

Tue, 26 Aug 2008 02:56:07 +0000

[...] turns up to talk to me about it. This is strange. Being rather more polite and generally nicer than Kevin Straw, Justine Hawkins had this to say: I would love to look indepth at the media’s odd [...]

By: Friz

Friz — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 17:40:43 +0000

Andrew, can the captcha simply be “Is There a God” please? It’d save a hell of a lot of time.

Failing that, I love how the quickest coherent argument Mr. Straw can create is “he parades his qualifications and ego like a peacock hoping for a shag”. I can safely say that boasting about qualifications doesn’t really settle when I’m trying to pull.

Also, a lot of Mr. Straw’s comments looks like he’s blended his viewpoints using the Thesaurus tool on Microsoft Word.

Good for him.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 11:53:02 +0000

I understand ad hominem. It’s when you attack your opponent instead of their argument. It involves implicitly invoking the genetic fallacy as well, since even a lying moron can produce a good argument and the fact that they’re a lying moron doesn’t diminish said argument (in theory).

I used the word “dimwits” largely because it sounds good in the title along side “Dawkins” and “Darwin”. You’ll notice I didn’t go for ad-hom, dismissing your argument on the grounds that you were a dimwit — instead I simply said that I had no idea what your point was.

You seemed to start out equating religion and science on the grounds that both were theories to be proved — the exact argument Dawkins makes in God Delusion — then you declared that science had been proved and religion hadn’t — which again Dawkins agrees with — and yet you criticise Dawkins for espousing the view that maybe therefore religion might be false. I have no idea what you’re trying to say.

So if you’re quite done insulting me and telling me off for ad hominem, then maybe you could find the time to make your case more clearly?

By: Kevin Straw

Kevin Straw — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 11:21:28 +0000

This is the site of a not very bright scientist (and there are a legion of those) who covers his lack of intellect with a blanket derision of everyone else’s. He hides his lack of intellect with a facility for catching people out. But his critical powers cannot rise to a rational refutation of their arguments once he does this. He parades his qualifications and ego like a peacock hoping for a shag, but when he gets there it’s all a bit of a flop.

By: Kevin Straw

Kevin Straw — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 11:13:19 +0000

I read your CV with increasing disbelief. I cannot imagine anyone so incapable of entering into rational debate on this subject being a graduate of any kind. It actually makes me proud that you describe me as a dimwit. You clearly have no idea of the verification problem in Philosophy. Nor do you understand the fallacy of ad hominem.

Regards

Kevin Straw

By: Dave

Dave — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 23:29:06 +0000

I’m confused. If God created Adam and Eve 6000 years ago, and the bible turned up 3000 years ago half of the time the humans knew of no God. Are we to assume that they never repented and now burn in hell for their origional sin? Because thats a bit mean. It’s like a card game I know called “Cambridge Wow.”

By: David Jones

David Jones — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 18:51:03 +0000

Googled for the Times link and found this!

Fair enough about 1CE but we only have 300 characters and I needed an abbreviation for “1st Century”. Poor choice in retrospect. Funny take on the thread anyway. :)

By: Andrew

Andrew — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 20:48:22 +0000

That comment looks great in the “recent comments” list.

By: Dave

Dave — Sat, 02 Aug 2008 11:24:09 +0000

That would be interesting if so because then he would have to invent 3 more things for God to invent.

“On the 7th day the Lord did make windmills to make flour to make bread and he saw that it was good.

On the 8th day the Lord did take the bread and heat it with filaments passed with elektricity, he did the same to bagels and tasted that it was good.

On the 9th day the Lord did put dried fruit into bread rolls (not fucking “cobs”) made from perfectly good fruit left to dry and rot so that the bread would taste odd at random intervals. He did this to teach mankind a lesson. Take that mankind

On the 10th day he plotted.”

Also 10 deadly sins.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Sat, 02 Aug 2008 11:13:12 +0000

Maybe he’s an astrophysicist and just uses the nearest power of ten in place of all numbers.

By: Dave

Dave — Sat, 02 Aug 2008 03:31:27 +0000

“Guy has discovered two new planets.”

To be fair, he says there are 10 and if you considered Pluto a planet you have to consider the one in that belt that is slightly larger than pluto. That makes 10. The definition of planet is pretty arbitrary so really he can say there are as many planets in the solar system as he wants. The idiot.