Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
Never seen this before, bravo
he did very well
did you notice Widecombe not clapping? twat
like a toy dog yapping at things which are too big for it to comprehend. What a detestable hag.
Thought it was jolly good. Stephen was polite and logical, as many people arguing against anything to do with religion often aren't (richard dawkins, I'm looking at you).
He just comes over quite rude, condescending and self ritious.
Perhaps he should just focus on writing his arguments, and let someone else present them.
Because clearly people are unable to discern whether his arguments are valid or invalid, so they have to decide based on whether they like him or not...
and say that i think he's a very talented scientist who is frankly wasting his time on this 'no god' bollocks. He should leave it to people like hitchens who dont have second careers- it shouldnt take a doctorate and professorship in science to argue coherently with the religious, and surely theres someone with a philosophy post whos better at this stuff and jut as televisual. Get back to talking about the mechanics of evolution and genes richard(which he seems to be doing).
hes by no means secretive but i suspect hes just a bit too difficult to work with for TV.
I just don't think he needs to be so sanctimonious and rude about it, he has 0 respect for anyone with any religious connotations, and it shows when he talks to them.
Like 20 years ago when you'd get a kick out of a TV show where they said 'cunt' a lot even though it was still essentially taboo.
they're both dour cunts who seem to be intent on stopping people having fun.
It'd make him an even more insufferable cock and then everyone would hate him.
Dawkins > religion
So he still wins.
but not many salient criticisms really