(December 18, 2012 at 4:06 am)clemdog14 Wrote: I did not try to bypass any of Dawkin's credentials. I claimed that he is a brilliant scientist, however, a poor philosopher.
Why all the ad hominems man? Just trying to have a conversation.
Quote:You are a disingenuous cunt,Quote:dolt.
Also, I don't deny that evolution could have happened. I just disagree in that it is unguided evolution in that it is naturalistic. I am fine with guided evolution.
OK Mr. Philosophy major...give me an example of an ad hominem.
I referred to you as a disingenuous cunt because you portrayed Dawkins as having said that evolution was as improbable as a hurricane ripping through a junkyard. I even went so far as to identify your use of a dash, where you could later give a technical explanation to the contrary. My use of 'disingenuous cunt' was fairly objective.
My use of the term 'dolt' was also appropriate in that only idiot christian sheep use the term 'unguided Darwinism' to characterize evolution by natural selection. Consult a dictionary, study the term dolt, and argue that I didn't use the term appropriately.
Again, Mr. Philosophy Major, my use of the terms 'disengenuous cunt' and 'dolt' do not constitute an ad hominem attack.
