When do you get a soul??

Originally Posted by Moebius

Well if you scour 'my' posts I construct my arguments without naming anyone. I don't know you well enough to presume you thoughts.
I mention Dawkins now because I feel its relevent, hope that OK.

in an article in 2009 .. Stated ' Why there certainly is NO god' ... I merely mention him because he's probably the most well known atheist.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/richar...l_b_32164.html

You misrepresented the title of the article that you posted, didn't think anyone would click on your link?

Why There Almost Certainly Is No God

Originally Posted by tyler.durden

You misrepresented the title of the article that you posted, didn't think anyone would click on your link?

Why There Almost Certainly Is No God

Youre a complete douche .... I put the link there so peeps would click it.

This thread is has got real heavy under the shear weight of pedants and trolls. I'm not arguing because I like arguments. I'm trying to understand what people believe and in turn explore my own thoughts.

If ALL you want to just argue for its own sake go and take that shit elsewhere.

Originally Posted by Moebius

Youre a complete douche .... I put the link there so peeps would click it.

This thread is has got real heavy under the shear weight of pedants and trolls. I'm not arguing because I like arguments. I'm trying to understand what people believe and in turn explore my own thoughts.

If ALL you want to just argue for its own sake go and take that shit elsewhere.

Pointing out a random grammatical or spelling mistake is pedantry.
Pointing out an incorrectness is not pedantry, but simple rational hygiene. My opinion.

I was unable to find the positive statement which you accused Dawkins of making in the article you linked. Is saying so pedantry? If you continue to believe so, we disagree. cn

Originally Posted by cannabineer

Pointing out a random grammatical or spelling mistake is pedantry.
Pointing out an incorrectness is not pedantry, but simple rational hygiene. My opinion.

I was unable to find the positive statement which you accused Dawkins of making in the article you linked. Is saying so pedantry? If you continue to believe so, we disagree. cn

I was referring to accusing me of intentionally posting a link and misrepresenting it because I didnt think it would be clicked.

IMO ... The constant nickpicking equates to trolling.

Originally Posted by Moebius

Youre a complete douche .... I put the link there so peeps would click it.

This thread is has got real heavy under the shear weight of pedants and trolls. I'm not arguing because I like arguments. I'm trying to understand what people believe and in turn explore my own thoughts.

If ALL you want to just argue for its own sake go and take that shit elsewhere.

I'm only pointing out errors, which is what I expect from others when I post here. You may want to admit when you make an error, or people may think that you're intentionally deceptive. Of all the words you could have left out of the article's title, you just happened to leave out the all important, 'Almost', which if left in proved my point, not yours. If you really want to explore your own thoughts, you may want to drop the pretense and be more honest...

If I error, correct me by all means. Accusing me of intentionally misrepresenting a position is'nt helping move the debate on..

Anyways, Ive nothing to add atm. Time to water hempy's.

Originally Posted by Moebius

I was referring to accusing me of intentionally posting a link and misrepresenting it because I didnt think it would be clicked.

IMO ... The constant nickpicking equates to trolling.

I disagree, that's not a minor point...

It relies on the premise that Dawkins claims absolute certainty no God exists, when he doesn't.

I don't think that's nitpicking, but it doesn't really matter. The point is, most rational people, skeptics, don't claim any kind of 'absolute certainty' because they know it's an irrational stance to take.

Originally Posted by Moebius

If I error, correct me by all means. Accusing me of intentionally misrepresenting a position is'nt helping move the debate on..

Anyways, Ive nothing to add atm. Time to water hempy's.

Cool. You haven't yet admitted your errors, btw...