Vision and Evolution (A Critique of Dawkins)

[Nay_Sayer]

So John Breezy is a pigeon. I saw that on the first post. The avalanche of evolutionary facts are like fleas to his overwhelming ignorance. Heh, social sciences like psychology are useful, my suster is a psychologist and she's doing a fine job helping people overcome addictions at work. She even invited me to do a lecture at her work, because of my past recovery from drug use. That's good tech job right there.

I learnt many things about that weak science with her, she doesn't accept qualia as decent work in psych research and she is a christian (catholics are christian, right?)

So we see, since the old "eye argument" was shot down, our OP decided to move the goalposts. God of the Gaps.

A lot of people are unaware that psychologists study the brain, and only a subset are clinicians and therapists. So its nice to see someone knows the difference between clinical and experimental aspects of psychology.

---

It's customary. Unless your M.O is to run into random forums flailing your arms around.

Ah its customary. I like customs. Well, since I'm new can you send me the link to your introductory post? It'll help me have a reference for when I write my own.

https://atheistforums.org/thread-59494.html

I see you are proficient in whataboutism.  I'll be praying for you.

Blessings. RAmen