Enjoyed the debate. Well more the aftermath. I came in part way through Moore's turn.
I thought Dawkins was poor value... more of the same. Moore had some good things to say, although he seemed new to this. Grayling equally had some interesting snippets, although I didn't like the first part of his summation. Harries was embarrassing with his ignorance of Dawkins, but apart from that I thought his contributions were good also.
Shockingly the vote went against the motion... and shockingly the audience couldn't understand why the supporters of the motion seemed defensive LOL. ...yet again you wonder at the accusation of 'delusional' emanating from such people.
I thought Dawkins was poor value... more of the same. Moore had some good things to say, although he seemed new to this. Grayling equally had some interesting snippets, although I didn't like the first part of his summation. Harries was embarrassing with his ignorance of Dawkins, but apart from that I thought his contributions were good also.
Shockingly the vote went against the motion... and shockingly the audience couldn't understand why the supporters of the motion seemed defensive LOL. ...yet again you wonder at the accusation of 'delusional' emanating from such people.