Krimel, <snip>
>[Krimel] >Google got me 501+ "proofs" so far and none seem worthy of a second thought. >I don't think further Googling is going to produce a 502nd that is any more >worthy of attention. The ball is in your court. mel: Maybe I can save us both time. I did not say the proofs for or against existence of God were convincing, but rather they were more elegant than Dawkins'. I also mentioned that each had a loose thread... My belief is that both side's proofs are untenable. > <snip> > >[Krimel] >I believe that thrust of Dawkin's forays into theology are in response to >religious folks straying into biology and pushing for introducing theology >into the biology classroom. He is well within his area of expertise to speak >out against this. mel: I do not know Dawkins, nor have I asked him his motivation, but while it is true any of us are free to state opinion, the style of doing so can range considerably. <snip> >[Krimel] >Again in the absence of any actual examples of faulty logic and false >distinctions this just sounds like so much grumbling over nothing. mel: Fine, I'll check out the book and give you a few... thanks--mel Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
