As if Meyer needs anything about Dawkins on his resume for God’s sake.

Of course Dawkins and others reserve the right to label someone as a creationist in order to then invoke the defensive mantra, irrespective of a persons credentials or reputation, just label him a “creationist” and move on.

For those who admire the supercillious Dawkins rememebr one thing: He is not a scientist, his academic research is medicore, his contributions to science are minimal, he is a popular science writer, unschooled in history, philosophy, physics, chemistry or mathematics.

Many of those who disagree with him are scientists, who know their subject, Dawkins uses deception to hoodwink the gullible, he appears knowledgable but is he really?

Hugh

For your future reference I would suggest you look up the logical fallacies “poisoning the well”, “appeal to authority”, “ad populum” lest you discredit your arguments further by employing them again.

The Dover Trial, you’ve heard of it , yes? Read the transcript and smell the roses.

http://www.aclupa.org/legal/legaldocket/intelligentdesigncase/dovertrialtranscripts.htm

I’m assuming you won’t bother so I’ll summarise: The Judge was a christian conservative; was considered by both sides to be extremely fair; at one point called some of the creationist witnesses liars, and decided, against his own personal beliefs, that ID isn’t science and must not be taught as such in public schools. The children narrowly escaped your lunacy being indoctrinated into their fertile minds when they were at school. Of course nothing can be done to stop their moronic parents indoctrinating them at home, which is a pity.

Have you read this: http://www.uncommondescent.com/evolution/getting-over-our-love-for-darwin/

Finch beaks and peppered moths are NOT evidence for goo-to-you evolution. If you disagree, then give me an example (real evidence) where there is a gain in information in a genome.

The question though is who told you that your God didn’t have a beginning? It seems absurd that God existed forever. How do you support such absurd hypothesis?

I think chicken is one thing Dawkins is not. Sick and tired of the ignorant – likely.

And the picture of Dawkins above? Does God condone mockery in the bible? I guess not, but however in true Christian style you seem to be able to interpret anything for your own purposes.

Ok, I could be wrong, but the evidence does seem quite obvious to one who has been following this whole thing for a while.

Dawkins could easily shut the mouths of the ID people by trouncing Meyer in a 3 hour formal debate. What is that clucking noise I can hear???

PS. Have you seen this : http://christiannews.co.nz/2009/william-lane-craig-vs-francisco-j-ayala-is-intelligent-design-viable/

Dawkins has also refused to debate Craig – I wonder why!