Dawkins tweeted this

the selfish gene has not been significantly improved upon since its publication

you dont know shit you yank retard

Watched the debate. Hillary believes being a woman is a good reason to vote for someone! I think most Americans have better judgement.

>Hillary believes being a woman is a good reason to vote for someone!

Dawkins missed the fucking point there. His argument was that he has experience in making economically sound decisions, and american economy is in freefall, so it's a good thing to have someone in the White House who can make economy better.

I am so sick and tired of this commie shit that all rich people are automatically evil. People are much more three-dimensional than this "rich jews are bad, poor working class is good" paradigm.

What an idiot. What has the American populace as a whole ever done to lead you to believe they have decent judgment? Wew lad.

Atheists fucking shits , but muh dawkins is anti islam.

>In response to the Aquinas's first way Dawkins says "Who created the creator?"

Atheists are actually this bad at philosophy

He's right though. Being rich is a terrible reason to vote for someone.

Now, being a woman on the other hand...

He never said that, never even came close to it.

I try not to be biased, but its ridiculous how leftists live in a fantasy within their own head. They just make shit up and love to "believe" in things, despite how destructive their belief system is. They think everyone else but them "hates", but if you refuse to believe in what they tell you, they spew forth a slew of vile hatred to overwhelm that person into submission.

>being a successful business man isn't a good credential for en executive position
>implying if he was completely broke that wouldn't speak against his experience as an executive
>implying that Trump meant the only reason you should vote for him because he is rich
>British intellectuals

Let's not be too hard on that godless heathen.

After all he said this:

A university is not a "safe space". If you need a safe space, leave, go home, hug your teddy & suck your thumb until ready for university.

He then received a shit storm and then doubled down to the infantilized SJWs.

Reported for racism.

Being a billionaire as a result of running hundreds of successful businesses and creating thousands of job is a pretty good trait compared to a woman that has never earned an honest dollar in her life. Especially when you consider how crucial this election is when it comes to the economy. People like Trump have done well in spite of career politicians like Hillary driving us into the ground.

He literally has a 160+ IQ, you absolute retards.

Learn some respect and actually listen to your superiors.

He literally invented memes, that is enough. He is a great man.

Performing well on an IQ test is a reason for me to listen to him?

you tell them fellow anglo

Being rich is evidence of his success in his international business which is evidence of his competence in handling complex matters.

>muh new atheism
>muh reason and logic (TM)
>can't follow an argument.

Dawkins should have retired after The Selfish Gene. He's taken a huge dump all over what was a distinguished career.

And how much experience does he have in the business world and how qualified does that make him on these issues?

British academics and celebs tend to be more liberal than the average population.

He's a fucking idiot

But he never said that?

Dawkins is a pedo anyway.

You are definitely public school educated.

The lack of critical thought it takes to pretend evolution is legitimate can only come from (((statists))) indoctrinating you into their godless religion. The bureaucrat who taught you physical science was an overpaid babysitter who had no idea what she was teaching. You swallowed that bluepill though.

I lost all respect i had for him when he took profit of bashing all religions. He made atheism mainstream in a way that liberals took it and maintained it. People on Cred Forums should always undertand this: atheism doesn't provoke liberalism. Maybe nihilism if you are mentally a 15 year old.
This guy and others have ruined racional thinking in the way they tried to extend it.
>T.agnostic atheist.

>Dawkins advocates voting for Hillary to turn America into something similar to Britain.

Thanks for bringing down western civilization by inviting muslims and niggers and allowing sjws to go crazy.

Seriously, though. No educated person can support him because he thinks the climate change is a Chinese hoax.

Shut up dad.

You don't live here retard, we're almost all conservative.

>Climate change is a bigger threat than some Arab about to kill you.

Thanks for correcting the record!

>christcuck
Evolution is the redpill friend. Most people actually don't really believe in evolution because it just as equally applies to humans as it does to animals.

>global warming

There's nothing wrong with saying that you don't care about climate change. But completely denying it and calling it a hoax? Not a good idea.

It is, imagine you're rich then you would get the disadvantages (such as higher tax) if x being president. I would vote the other side just so x not being president then I wouldn't get the disadvantages.

Having muslims shoved up your ass, raping your daughters and sisters, is enough to make anyone a conservative. Even your pussy millenials will come around eventually.

you missed the whole BRexit shit?

They're not as liberal as you might think, cuck.

Nice misrepresentation.

Don't blindly trust scientists when it comes to politics, they tend to disregard their own bias.

The massive irony is that many Hillary supporters' reasoning is explicitly 'She's a woman! It's 2016!'

Sore loser detected.

I've only recently realized what a complete fucking bitch Dawkins is.

Anti brexit and pro hillary. Hmm... really makes you think.

Why are 'all' Americans so liberal?

I heard what your media and celebs were saying about Brexit. I heard how they were so shocked about Britain's great and courageous choice; I heard how they were so scared that the British right had won.

*tips fecora to the fedora lord*

But... why?

They tend to be more liberal than the average communist.

>trump earns his money through work
>lying cunt through stealing/selling out america

2 rich people, 2 different methods. If this faggot can't tell which is better, he should kill himself to prove there is no God, once and for all.

The problem is that the liberals scream the loudest.

Dad why aren't you nice to me? I JUST WANT YOU TO LOVE ME!!!

Depends on what you watch. Fox thought it was a beautiful historic event.

You do realize they're just bilking you of your money right?

Think about that carbon tax credit. Businesses have to pay extra to the government because of their "pollution." That extra cost is passed down and paid by the consumers. What do you think happens to that money. Governments and businesses don't invest it in alternative energy or research into making current technology more efficient.

Don't fall for the climate change jew.

>being born a millionaire
>evidence of his competence in handling complex matters

Is this honestly what Trump voters believe? Christ.

That tweet is absolutely correct. However, it does not say Clinton is a better choice, although one could interpret it like that.
The fact that he's rich is indeed no good reason to vote for him.

It's amazing how people can be totally logical in one area and completely clueless in another. I wonder what Dawkins' wife's son thinks of him.

Dawkins 20 years ago:
Christianity is evil and stupid. We must vanquish it!

Dawkins today:
Christianity isn't that bad after all! Christians never bombed anyone recently. I consider myself a cultural Christian!

I don't think it's the fact that he's rich that makes him think he should be elected. It's the skills he used to become rich. See, there's a difference.

Dawkins is trying to get off the blacklist he put himself on by retweeting anti-islamist videos, he is compromised.

>more than doubled his fortune
>HURT IT DOESN'T COUNT HE HAD MONEY TO START WITH
Don't even like Trump but holy fucking shit do you a tally have anything better? This isn't anecessarily argument.

>hillary isn't rich
fucking lefty loons

Philosophy is to science as psychology is to neuroscience.

Richard Dawkins is an obnoxious shithead who is destined to burn in hell, what else is new

Being rich isn't but running a huge successful company is. Employees of the Trump Organization all benefit, having the opportunity to work they can pay for their homes, cars, possibly pay for their kids to go to college plus companies like that usually offer to match people investing in their retirements and offer health insurance depending on your position. Nothing to be ashamed about about having a successful business, this is something I always thought Romney should have owned and been proud of instead of indifferent and acting like it's not a good thing.

He's alright.

also THIS! Hillary is rich but for all the wrong reasons no one benefits from her wealth because she's never run an actual business. I hate career bureaucrats

Intelligence doesn't matter, user.

...

Dawkins is a turbocuck, what's the surprise? He's also a (((celebrity scientist))), so he knows better than to go against the Dem narrative.

How anyone can call him liberal is beyond me.

>He literally has a 160+ IQ
source?

He's pretty much /pol before "alt-right" faggots took over.

Yeah, he realized that Islam was worse and came running back for help.

Well you wouldn't vote for a homeless man or a NEET loser would you?

Dawkins is liberal. He's just one that's not completely retarded.

Too bad he doesnt use it for anything other than writing pop bullshit.

meme scientist abused by the atheist cult he helped create

>one that's not completely retarded.

Look everyone - Autism!

>history revisionist
>thinking the alt right exist
this is a shill post

You can pay everyone to say nice things about yourself, even the intelligent ones

I take that back then.

>Dawkins
Lol, who cares. Pepole who listen to him already are 99% Hillshills

No he's not. He's always been ultra-liberal fucking scum. Just because the leftist swarm is now cannibalizing themselves doesn't mean he is, or ever was 'just' or Cred Forums material. He created the people he is now defending himself from, while he's being inconvenienced by anti-white leftist mobs, the average person has suffered for decades under the thumb of leftist thought police and regressive leftist policy.

dawkins hired a feminist to run his twitter after he got banned from that atheism conference for being sexist

I love how Mr. Intellect boiled it all down to a weak strawman argument.

Dawkins created atheism... seems legit

No wonder his wife left him.

Duh dawkins started the fedora generation

>Creationist
>Believes in jewish conspiracy
>Doesn't understand science

You are the dumbest of the dumb.
I wholeheartedly implore you to end yourself.
I'm not even joking.
You set humankind back with every single piece of garbage you spew out of your mouth, and the world would be a much better place without out.

yeah but its been significantly Corrected™ by your Ministry of Thought Crimes for being RAYYYYYYYCIIIIISSSSSSTTTTTTTT

watching those interviews with Dawcuckins gibbering like a retard trying to backpedal and claim he no waycis was just satisfying. He penned nothing of value except to say niggers are inferior and then got nothing but controversy b/c he said what every evocuck thinks anyway and sold more books b/c of it.

Now he's just a shit stirrer who has done nothing of value except whine.

Guess what, anthropogenic global warming will displace millions and millions out of the middle east due to too warm living conditions.
That right there is something I don't get, why aren't more right wingers on board with preventing global warming, seeing as how it's going to create the biggest influx of refugees in the history of mankind?!

Yep, most known for atheism and his scientific accomplishments are sociology tier memes.
I always found it funny how he became what he hated and used religion to get rich.
>buy my book
>attend my lectures
>pay to meet me
And the consumers are all atheists, he's preaching to the choir.

Him and Dawkins also ruined atheism by making it obnoxious antitheism.

Well dawkins
fuck off & kill yourself, thanks

>the selfish gene has not been significantly improved upon since its publication

perhaps it just needs more mutations and time. be patient.

Dawkins is a brilliant evolutionary scientist and behavior biologist, but one thing he needs to stay the fuck away from is politics.
Maybe he's trying to get into the regressive universities' good graces after he got banned for life for stating biological facts.

Whats better was Brexit.
>"I-I'm neutral, I think it's best left to experts"
>BREXIT
>Revote, revote this isnt democracy it was wrong, revote

reminder that dawkins coined the term: "meme"

That doesn't make any sense because you can't even do science without philosophy.

>48% of them

We have lots of conservatives too, Tyrone.

Need I remind you our Conservative Party is currently in power.

Dawkins 20 years ago: Christianity is a delusion
Dawkins today : Christianity is a delusion

they got to him

first trannies, now a hillary supporter, poor faggot

>mfw people in this thread think evolution disproves a grand clockmaker

Most American celebs are the exact same. It's not a brit thing, it's a celeb thing.

It literally does.

If evolution is true, the analogy of humanity being like a clock and needing a maker is false.

It doesn't disprove the existence of "god"... but that's slightly different.

THAT MAKES ME SMART

you dumb nigger it's in the manner they speak and act.

The good ones came here and then we sent the weakest of that bunch packing when we kicked out the redcoats. What was left behind in England was the detritus.

Yes yes, people in power.

Did you remember to praise your Muslims today?

>chats shit about muslim extremism constantly
>wont support the candidate about to actually fight those things

Loooool it was you fat fucks who started this whole extreme left shit

We're not liberal at all speak to an actual Englishman not some London middle class twat and you'll see

We are too polite to be outright conservative, Brexit showed how we really feel

I live in Liverpool which is 93% white, stop generalising
The only place in the UK where Muslims are a problem is London, which thinks its the big-shot 'New York' of the UK when really its just a laughing stock.

Dawkins 20 years from now:

HELP!!!!~ HELP!!! I WAS WRONG!!!! ARRRRRRGGGGHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This tbqh. Look at the celebs supporting Trump, there's like 4 or 5 big names. Compare that to Hillary's celebrity supporters - whatever you personally may think of them, she's got loads more big names on her side.

She's the first prime minister to speak against mass immigration for a long time, but she has to appeal to as many as possible.

HIs beliefs on it are the same, but he's come to realize that it's the lesser of 2 evils.

Dawkin's is in full "cultural Christian" mode right now.

His position hasn't changed, and i doubt it ever will.

>Autismo detected

Yes but Trump has James Woods

Also I'm sure tons of celebs would vote for trump but obviously can't say cause it would end their career

>HIs beliefs on it are the same, but he's come to realize that it's the lesser of 2 evils.

>Dawkin's is in full "cultural Christian" mode right now.

He is not. This is wholly made up by people on this board. You take one tweet that says islam is worse than christianity (something everybody already knew) and you ascribe to it a whole change of character for dawkins.

I bet you his position on childhood religious indoctrination hasn't changed.

Basically Naxalt, Bro.

Atheists, everyone!

>Dawkins

Opinion discarded.

Sharia law will silence his atheist mouth soon enough.

Do some research, jr.

Pop scientists should be executed

Of course it isn't. That's how crazy leftists always spin. They state something similar to but different from the real argument (in case they need to walk it back) to set up a straw man to then argue against. They are liars.

Hillary is poor? Can leftists get any dumber?

>economics is easily the biggest issue in america
>somehow is a bad idea to have an economic expert in charge

Can you point to a time when he denied that claim?

He didnt invent memes, memes are natural, memes are eternal.

He simply gave them the name "memes"

When your house has a plumbing problem, you hire a plumber to fix it.

If your country is trillions in debt, you get someone with experience with the economy and business.

Are you fucking insane? For years he wanted the decline of Christianity, and now that it's here (at least in Europe) he's realized that he dun goofed and has "mixed feelings" about it.

The Dawkins of 2000 wouldn't fucking believe what the Dawkins of 2016 is writing/saying.

And Hillary believes being a woman is a good reason to vote for someone. And unlike the argument Dawkins made up himself, Hillary ACTUALLY HAS USED THAT ONE. What the fuck is this nitwits game?

>the militant atheist who made a career out of debating intellectually inferior people and feeling smug in his superiority
>now he immediately dismisses a person who is widely known (MSM) as an idiot, without considering that he may be right

No surprise here.

Strawman argument. Can't wait to watch this pseudo-intellectual dumbass burn in hell one day.

Richard Dawkins is a closet pedo that coined a word source below:

news.atheists.org/2016/09/28/richard-dawkins-diddles-diddlers/

No matter what you say about trump anyone would be better than Clinton she should be in jail.

He's been saying a lot of stupid shit lately. I guess the lefties must've gotten to him. Maybe threatened his family.
Someone should ask him on twitter.

this.
dawkins is such a fucking pseudo intellectual.
he is literally too lazy to read any of the literature about the topics he likes to talk (and write books) about. a fucking biologist.

It makes more sense when you read it with the proper emphasis

>I wish you a happy & PEACEFUL eid

translation: please, please don't get over-excited and blow something up - especially yourself

Because we cant possibly acknowlage the existance of BOTH a world-ending future threat, and a current threat

he's so intelligent, he can't even spell judgement properly.

>The Dawkins of 2000 wouldn't fucking believe what the Dawkins of 2016 is writing/saying.

People HAD made that argument to him in early 2000's. The idea that humanity needs religion, that society would collapse without it.

His response was something like
>"that may be the case, but it doesn't make god true"

He's a super autist and was only arguing about what's true. He wasn't arguing about the effect on society. He was happy to grant such assumptions because they were irrelevant to his point.

>No educated person can support him because he thinks the climate change is a Chinese hoax.

It's cute how the Jew has to be so specific in their wording, while claiming Trump said something he never said.

Trump said Global Warming. Why do you not use the phrase Global Warming any more, even when you're calling out Trump for saying it?

Is it because your bullshit (((climate scientists))) were predicting a new ice age just forty years ago and you needed a more ambiguous nonsense-phrase that you couldn't be called out on?

>mfw all these anglos in the thread

>Trump earns his money through work
>through work

Lol. Fuck Hillary, but lets be real here, Trump wasnt exactly mowing lawns to pay his way through buisness school

Fuck off, you stupid disingenuous cuck

>People HAD made that argument to him in early 2000's. The idea that humanity needs religion, that society would collapse without it.

That's not the same thing. This isn't about society collapsing without religion, this is about one religion overtaking another.

Quite frankly 20 years ago I don't think ANYONE would have predicted 9/11, the middle east wars, the refugee crisis, and the end result of said refugees/migrants pouring into all of Europe. But during those 20 years Dawkins inadvertently did his best to weaken the one piece of defense that Europe had: their Christian beliefs. He was a proponent of moving European thinking from Christian based to Secular based.

And now he sees the end result. That's why he's backtracking with all the comments.

He fucked up and he knows it. Europe is shithole now because of his way of thinking.

where's his 4 billion then?

I don't know of anyone voting for Trump simply on the basis of him being "rich".

I'm honestly really surprised that someone like Dawkins who is supposedly well aware of the Muslim problem currently plaguing the West can't get on board with a person like Trump. I mean, you don't have to agree with all of his policies, but his foremost positions on Islamic immigration/terrorism are extremely well founded.

Hillary Clinton has plans to massively increase the amount of Muslim "refugees" coming into the United State by upwards of 500%.

It's a good name tbf

I'm reading The God Delusion right now and so far I can't say I disagree with his ideas.
What's wrong with this guy again?

"The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive." Where does he use the word "hoax"?

>. This isn't about society collapsing without religion, this is about one religion overtaking another.

>And therefore the collapse of western society.

It is the same. It's a fallacious appeal to consequences. He didn't care about the effects of a drop in the number of christians. He was agnostic to the results.

He was not arguing against god because he thought the world would be better if there were fewere christians, or fewer religious people... He was arguing against it because it's not true.

He's not backtracking on anything he's said.

>Europe is shithole now because of his way of thinking.

If everyone thought like dawkins, society would be a utopia, friend.

if singles dawkins will be fine

says the guy who hasn't read a single thing Dawkins has produced, and probably knows next to nothing about science.

yfw

lol
script kiddies at play

OH SHIT

Hail Herr Hawkins

Are you retarded?

>It is the same.

No it isn't. People were asking Dawkins about the need for religion in society. But this is about a practically non-violent religious invasion. Not the same thing.

> He didn't care about the effects of a drop in the number of christians. He was agnostic to the results.
I agree. But NOW he does care. He wanted Christianity gone, but now he has "mixed feelings" because he sees that Islam is worse.

>He was arguing against it because it's not true.
We're not talking about God, we're talking about religion.

>If everyone thought like dawkins, society would be a utopia, friend.
You're a fucking retard. Dawkins wanted Christianity gone (in The God Delusion the overwhelming majority was about Christianity) but now he sees the Muslim hordes at his doorsteps and he's backing off.

Dawkins way of secular thinking is what brought about this "koombaya we're all the same lets let in all the muslims because they're just as bad as Christians, etc".

Is this A FUCKING LEAF?

>implying Dorkins was ever good

>Cred Forums still in denial about the fact that Trump is just a rich idiot who only got as far as he has because of name-recognition from his reality TV show.
Richard Dawkins has a well known hatred of SJWs and yet he still has no time for Trump. What does that tell you? I have to believe that on some level, the Trump supporters on Cred Forums (i.e. most of Cred Forums) know that Trump is a moron. We're not average Republicans who get all their information from Fox News

We know that statistically over-stayed visas are a far bigger source of illegal immigration than mexicans crossing the southern border

We know enough about international politics to know that Mexico is never going to pay for the wall. And anyway the idea of a thousand mile long wall is, from a logistical standpoint, insane.

We know that the reason people concentrate on security at the border itself is because the most effective way to stop illegal immigration is to crack down on businesses hiring illegals, and no one in power want to do that.

We know that legally Trump is never going to be able to ban Muslims from the US, and that given America's business interests in the middle east it would be politically impossible anyway.

We know that Trump has next to nothing in the way of actual policies beyond a few vague promises that he'll somehow right America's wrongs (never actually specifying in what way he'll do that).

But because he's telling us what we want to hear - because he's telling us that he's found a way to 'Make America Great Again' - most of Cred Forums is happy enough to wrap themselves up in the warm, fuzzy blanket of denial. Trump is going to crash and burn in November, and when he does you're all going to sit around asking yourselves 'how could this have happened?'. But it was obvious from the very beginning that Trump wasn't up to scratch.

This election is a loss either way, but if you'd all wake the fuck up then maybe we could get a head start on planning for the aftermath.

Dawkins is like an engineer, child-ignorant on anything outside his specialization. In the American political system, your only options are wealthy Zionists, and in our economic system wealth is proof of effectiveness. Please show me the BDS campaigner, buried under student loans, who would be a better candidate.

Just in case you're too retarded to understand that saying that 'global warming is a chinese manufactured concept' doesn't mean a hoax, then here's some absolute data for you :^)

...

...

As opposed to voting for someone simply because she's a woman.

>being a successful business man with deep economic insights and wide knowledge handling a big international empire for his life, is not a pro for being president of the biggest economy on earth

>lets trust that woman talking about fucking solar panels...
>stop whining about hillary what does deleting evidence, lying under oath, incompetently handling state secrets, taking bribes, stealing donations, slandering over children, cheating the stock market with illegal insider knowledge matter? seriously? you just hate here because she is a woman!

We aren't. We're just not extreme in some of them.

Politics in this country have been dead for 70 years. Burkean conservativism makes republicans wet because they can never reach something like that.

When we get serious in politics, it's serious shit. American politics is more of a sideshow recently, as much as ours has turned lukewarm.

We are not interested in guns. We should be perhaps, but we are a small island and that causes issues with this like this.

>Not the same thing.

Right it's not EXACTLY the same thing, but they are both the same in that they are fallacious appeals to consequences.... And they both appeal to the collapse of a society.

>We're not talking about God, we're talking about religion.
We're talking about dawkins, and what he argued against.
My point again is that dawkins did not care about the consequences. Your assertion is that he did.

>He wanted Christianity gone, but now he has "mixed feelings" because he sees that Islam is worse.

He wanted religious thinking gone. He cared about propagating true beliefs. That's it. He still does.

>Dawkins way of secular thinking is what brought about this "koombaya we're all the same lets let in all the muslims because they're just as bad as Christians, etc".

Dawkins was always against islam though. He never said muslims are as bad as christians. He's always held that islam is much worse.

Dawkins never echoed koombaya crap. Show me proof he did.

His way of thinking has nothing to do with the stuff you're against.

I don't think you understand how meaningless evolution is

that's his twitter which isn't handled by him, just because some twitter worker said it doesn't mean Trump meant it

Atheist=Banana in pooper
Not 2 shits given!

Europeans are just smug faggots who cant look at anything from americas perspective

Tons of them hate muslims but then they shit talk americans for not wanting to be overran by mexicans, even though they're arguably putting out more and worse gore videos than fucking ISIS

>63% white

>the selfish gene has not been significantly improved upon since its publication
because it doesn't make any sense

>one of the most revolutionary theories in biology
>meaningless

Scousers are worse than Muslims, fuck off

THE CLINTONS ARE MILLIONAIRES YOU STUPID FUCKS!
THE CLINTONS ARE MILLIONAIRES YOU STUPID FUCKS!
THE CLINTONS ARE MILLIONAIRES YOU STUPID FUCKS!
THE CLINTONS ARE MILLIONAIRES YOU STUPID FUCKS!

>Right it's not EXACTLY the same thing, but they are both the same in that they are fallacious appeals to consequences.... And they both appeal to the collapse of a society.

You're really not getting this. You're just a pathetic Dawkins fanboy.

>My point again is that dawkins did not care about the consequences. Your assertion is that he did.
Retard, I already said he didn't care about the consequences, but he does NOW care. Dawkins would NEVER have written that he had "mixed feelings" for the decline of Christianity 20 years ago. But NOW he sees the alternative.

>He wanted religious thinking gone. He cared about propagating true beliefs. That's it. He still does.
And he sees the consequences, and he's backing off.

>Dawkins was always against islam though.
Did you read the God Delusion? It was 80% about Chrisitianity. Yeah, he's against all religion, but his #1 target was always Christianity. Now his #1 target is Islam and Christianity is under the "well, they never bombed us" category. Quite the fucking swap.

>He never said muslims are as bad as christians.
I never said he did, genius. I said HIS SECULAR THINKING permeated throughout Europe and secular thinking treats all religion as bad, so one is no worse than the other.

> He's always held that islam is much worse.
Funny how 99% of his writings/lectures up until around 2009 are dominated by talk of Christianity.

>Dawkins never echoed koombaya crap. Show me proof he did.
Again, I never said he did. Learn to fucking read.

>His way of thinking has nothing to do with the stuff you're against.
You're really thick in the head.
-guy promotes secular thinking (in particular anti-Christian thinking
-people listen and society changes as such
-due to this, Islam, another religion gains ground
-Dawkins now: "Islam is worse! Christians don't bomb us! I have mixed feelings! I'm a cultural Christian!"

Stop being a deluded fanboy.

>all scientific and essentially all of academia is derived from philosphy
>it's useless guys
>it's just stupid

>heh, take a look at this philosophical statement of meaning i made on philosophy, saying it's useless

they criticise philosophy by saying they don't get it so it can't be true

This
>Muh father was poor
>I was from a middle-class family like everybody else

Fucking fatwhore bitch has millions with the Clinton Fundation under her pillow what the fuck she thinks she is god fuck dammit.

Explain yourself.

We're really not. We just have a liberal elite, like everywhere else.

>Richard Dawkins thinks Trump is an idiot
>Sam Harris thinks Trump is an idiot
>most experienced politicians, both Democrat and Republican, think Trump is an idiot

I thought Cred Forums was supposed to filled with intellectuals? Trump has a cult of personality so strong on here I can smell it through the computer screen.

I have a higher IQ than you. I command you to ignore Dawkins. What do you do?

>thinking I give a shit about the opinion of corrupt politicians and meme celebrities

>On Dec. 30, 2015, Trump told the crowd at a rally in Hilton Head, S.C., "Obama's talking about all of this with the global warming and … a lot of it's a hoax. It's a hoax. I mean, it's a money-making industry, okay? It's a hoax, a lot of it."

politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/jun/03/hillary-clinton/yes-donald-trump-did-call-climate-change-chinese-h/

>inb4 (((politifact)))!!!

So does Trump.

Why are liberals so intellectually dishonest?

Trump clearly said a country that is effectively broke should vote for a guy who knows how to make money

> You're just a pathetic Dawkins fanboy.

Nice deflection. It's a fallacious appeal to consequence.

>I already said he didn't care about the consequences, but he does NOW care.
>And he sees the consequences, and he's backing off.

The same way he's backing off on the selfish gene theory?

Just because he doesn't talk about it all the time doesn't mean he's backing off from the position.

He's just made his point and now he's talking about a new point.

>Did you read the God Delusion? It was 80% about Chrisitianity

It doesn't mean he thought christianity was worse or that he wasn't against islam.

He likely chose christianity because he was most familiar with it (having been raised a christian) and because christian fundies were blocking evolution education.

>I said HIS SECULAR THINKING

His secular thinking includes things he doesn't think and disagrees with. Ok.

>secular thinking treats all religion as bad, so one is no worse than the other.
But dawkins never espoused this. He's not propagating this idea. It's not his thinking that you're talking about.

>Funny how 99% of his writings/lectures up until around 2009 are dominated by talk of Christianity.
Ya that makes me chuckle... But it's not an argument.

>due to this, Islam, another religion gains ground

This doesn't make sense though. Dawkins has been against all religious thinking. If this change was due to his ideas, islam would be reviled and belittled even worse than christianity.

Muslims are much more fundamentalist than christians. Dawkins primarily targeted fundamentalist thinking.

Holy shit do you people ever drop disproven memes?
If I might quote every pompous liberal ever, read a book.

wtf I hate evolution now

>The same way he's backing off on the selfish gene theory?

When did I say he was? Christ you're a fucking moron.

>Just because he doesn't talk about it all the time doesn't mean he's backing off from the position.
Uh, HE FLAT OUT SAID HE HAS MIXED FEELINGS! What the fuck are you not getting?

>It doesn't mean he thought christianity was worse or that he wasn't against islam.
Waaaahh! If a white supremacist writes a book about different races, and said book is 80% about black people, then he hates black people more than the rest. You're doing some insane mental gymnastics here.

>He likely chose christianity because he was most familiar with it (having been raised a christian) and because christian fundies were blocking evolution education.
You're just guessing here with no evidence to back you up.

>But dawkins never espoused this. He's not propagating this idea. It's not his thinking that you're talking about.
Again, I NEVER SAID HE DID you fucking tard. But he promoted secular thinking, and this is one of the tenets of secular thinking.

>Ya that makes me chuckle... But it's not an argument.
You're such a pathetic fanboy.
-guy talks about Christianity non stop for 20 years
-You: he hated Islam just as much!

>Dawkins has been against all religious thinking. If this change was due to his ideas, islam would be reviled and belittled even worse than christianity.
You're optics on this issue is so fucking narrow that I think I might be talking to a 12 year old. Dawkins is against all religions, but he singled out Christianity the most (by far). Due to this Christians in Europe because secular. Secular people dislike all religion equally, so when the refugee crisis hit, they had no problem letting the hordes into their country.

>Muslims are much more fundamentalist than christians. Dawkins primarily targeted fundamentalist thinking.
He didn't target it until 2009. Since the fucking 80's he's been the anti-Christian guy.

>Dawkins doesn't like SJWs or Trump
>what does that tell you

It tells me that you follow your idols too closely. Who cares what Dawkins supports. He's a reptile.
Think for yourself or die cucked beyond redemption.

he is still angry about the honey, right?

guess Cred Forums has decided to ignore this. What a surprise.

bury your heads in the sand all you want, you know I'm right.

Dawkins is a butt hurt atheist. Hes a fucking idiot, and the reason he isn't in research is because he's too dumb. All he can do is whine and bitch

>Uh, HE FLAT OUT SAID HE HAS MIXED FEELINGS!

His position never was that the decline in christianity would make him feel good. He hasn't backed off of anything.

>If a white supremacist writes a book about different races, and said book is 80% about black people, then he hates black people more than the rest.

No, he might just be citing statistics. He doesn't have to hate anybody. You're thinking like an SJW.

>You're just guessing here with no evidence to back you up.
So are you. That's my point.

>I NEVER SAID HE DID

You're saying HIS SECULAR THINKING.

HIS -- belonging to him

If he never thought it, it's not his thinking. It's pretty straight forward.

>this is one of the tenets of secular thinking.

1. Dawkins promotes atheistic critical thinking.
2. atheistic critical thinking is a tenet of secular thinking
3. all religions are equally bad is also a tenet of secular thinking.
4. therefore dawkins promotes the idea that all religions are equally bad.

How retarded are you?

1. Dawkins promotes peaceful behavior,
2. Peaceful behavior is a tenet of christian thought
3. The idea that jesus is god is also a tenet of christian thought
3. Therefore dawkins promotes the idea that jesus is god with his christian thought.

Lmao, no. This line of thinking is retarded. You're retarded.

>He didn't target it until 2009
So what?

You're not targeting them. Where's your book about islam? Didn't write one? That means you must love it.

Why does he think we're voting for him just because he's rich?

>its intellectual to not have your own opinions

>His position never was that the decline in christianity would make him feel good.
You're mental gymnastics is nuts. He WANTED the decline of Christianity, and now that it's happened, he has "mixed feelings".

>No, he might just be citing statistics. He doesn't have to hate anybody. You're thinking like an SJW.
Citing statisitics? What the fuck are you talking about. If a KKK member writes a book on race he's going to single out the ones he hates the most. Same way Dawkins did with his books. You're a fucking braindead mongoloid.

>So are you. That's my point.
No I'm not. Dawkins wanted the decline of Christianity for decades (for whatever reason) and now that it's here, he has "mixed feelings".

>You're saying HIS SECULAR THINKING.
Oh my God, do I have to spell everything out for you. He promoted secular thinking, and secular thinking is a big plate. Does Dawkins (or anyone) agree with everything on that plate? No. But Dawkins brought the plate all the same.

>4. therefore dawkins promotes the idea that all religions are equally bad.
Wrong. Dawkins promotes the idea that all religions are bad, BUT he focuses on Christianity more than the others. As a result, Christians turn against Christianity. Muslims come in with opens because we secular now.

>So what?
So what? According to Dawkins has always said Islam is worse than Christianity, but he barely mentioned Islam until 2009. Facts are like Kryptonite to retards like you.

>You're not targeting them. Where's your book about islam? Didn't write one? That means you must love it.
Wow, this is your dumbest argument yet. I'm not an author, nor am I some atheist activist who wants to be constantly heard on twitter and youtube. Dawkins is. You claim he's always disliked Islam more than Christianity, but 20+ years of writings and lectures prove otherwise. NOW he's against Islam more because he's seen the damage his anti-Christian crusade has wrought.

Seriously, bro, how old are you?

To be fair that was an awful lot of words.

>Same way Dawkins did with his books.
Dawkins is talking about the fact of the existence of god. That the idea is factually false.
YOU'RE acting like an sjw who's mad that somebody cited statistics on black crime.

>Dawkins wanted the decline of Christianity for decades
No he didn't. We covered this. He wanted a decline in religious, anti-scientific thinking. He wanted the truth.

>He promoted secular thinking, and secular thinking is a big plate. Does Dawkins (or anyone) agree with everything on that plate? No.

So it's not HIS secular thinking that caused it. It's somebody else's secular thinking.
gotcha.

>Muslims come in with opens because we secular now.

Plenty of christians want to let the muslims come in. Helping the downtrodden of other religions is a tenet of christian thinking.

If we promote christianity, we're promoting the increase in refugee numbers.

Secular thinking demands we consider our own survival over the muslims.

See the stupid game you're playing?

Probably not....

>According to Dawkins has always said Islam is worse than Christianity
Sorry go back and read again

>but 20+ years of writings and lectures prove otherwise.

No they don't. You're speculating on the reasons for why he wrote the books. I can equally speculate on the reasons.

>bro
...

No one cares about Dawkins anymore. He alienated his lefty fanbase and no one on the right wing gives a fuck about him. He's irrelevant. Just another leftist cuckold who was burned at the stake by his own people.

>Dawkins is talking about the fact of the existence of god.
He brings up Christianity an awful lot, for just talking about "God".

>No he didn't. We covered this. He wanted a decline in religious, anti-scientific thinking. He wanted the truth.
But according to you he focused more on Christianity for some reason. He wanted religion gone, yes, but the only religion in HIS sphere was Christianity. But now that there's ANOTHER religion in his sphere, he's realized that Christianity wasn't so bad after all.

>So it's not HIS secular thinking that caused it. It's somebody else's secular thinking.
I said this 20 fucking times, retard. If someone promotes facism, and the people act on it, he might not agree with all the people are doing.

>Plenty of christians want to let the muslims come in. Helping the downtrodden of other religions is a tenet of christian thinking.
100% false. Christians are charitable, but if they were still a force in Europe there's no way they would let them in en masse like they are now. They would send missionaries and aid to Syria first. This whole "let them in" shit if straight up secular thinking (which Dawkins had a hand in sculpting these last 20+ years).

>Secular thinking demands we consider our own survival over the muslims.
No it doesn't. To secular people muslims and christians are all the same because religion is bad, so one is no better than the other. Christians know the difference. Have you noticed that Christian America is AGAINST the refugees but Secular Europe is FOR them.

>Sorry go back and read again
That's what you said.

>No they don't. You're speculating on the reasons for why he wrote the books. I can equally speculate on the reasons.
I'm not speculating the reasons, I'm stating facts. FACT: Dawkins wrote/talked mainly about Christianity for 20 years. FACT: Once Islam started it's Europe invasion, he pivoted to talking about Islam.

Oh fuck if he's a robot he just entered a logic loop and shut down. You fucking dick!

Where did he say climate change was a hoax? Not that I'm saying he never did, I'm just asking.

When the first post is also the best post

>He wanted religion gone, yes, but the only religion in HIS sphere was Christianity. But now that there's ANOTHER religion in his sphere, he's realized that Christianity wasn't so bad after all.

If you can show me somewhere that dawkins ever promoted muslim immigration as a good thing, I'll concede this point. Otherwise it's not relevant.

He wanted truth then, he wants it now. He never got what he wanted, but his survival is threatened. And obviously everybody prefers to survive.

We're just going around in circles at this point. I'm just going to repeat my point... and you're just going to repeat yours. You're not getting it.

You're grossly generalizing "secular people" as being an equivalent category to SJW's .

But I know many christians who support refugees because it's the christian thing to do.

>Have you noticed that Christian America is AGAINST the refugees but Secular Europe is FOR them.
fallacy.

>That's what you said.
no it isn't

>FACT: Dawkins wrote/talked mainly about Christianity for 20 years. FACT: Once Islam started it's Europe invasion, he pivoted to talking about Islam.
We don't disagree on these points.

It's like "scientific" journalists don't know the difference between gnoseology (physics), epistemology (mathematics) and ontology (fictional writing)

>If you can show me somewhere that dawkins ever promoted muslim immigration as a good thing, I'll concede this point. Otherwise it's not relevant.

When the fuck did I ever say that, retard? I already said that the idea of Muslim mass immigration up until 2009 was pure fantasy. But now it's a reality, and Dawkins realizes that his whole ant-Christian crusade was a mistake because now the Muslims are at their front doors.

>He wanted truth then, he wants it now.
I agree. The truth then was "take down Christianity", the truth now is "Christianity wasn't that bad" HE ADMITTED THIS. Why are you even debating these facts?!

> You're not getting it.
You're the one not getting. I'm stating facts about what he said/wrote and you keep coming up with verbal gymnastics like "that's not what he meant" or "prove to me that's not what he always said", etc.

>fallacy.
No it's not.

>no it isn't
Yes it is.

>We don't disagree on these points.
Then why in the holy fuck were arguining against if for the last hour you goddamn fucking tard? I've been saying the same thing over and over and NOW you say you "don't disagree?" BTFO. Go back to bleddit, faggot where you can get all the upvotes you need on r/atheism.

>Then why in the holy fuck were arguining against if for the last hour you goddamn fucking tard?

I haven't been. You haven't comprehended anything about the argument we've been having at all.

>I haven't been. You haven't comprehended anything about the argument we've been having at all.

Yes you have dummy. I kept saying over and over the same thing and you've been hitting me with nonsense verbal gymnastics like fedora tipping douche that you are. I'm sorry that your hero Dawkins who image you jerkoff to every night no longer believes in your anti Christian campaign.

>Yes you have

nope. We've agreed on those things multiple times. You just can't read.

Is he blind to all the shit that Hillary has done whilst she has been in office?
I think he probably lumps nationalism in with religion.

Our politicians wont have to appeal to Kebab if Kebab is fucking removed.

"""""Conservative""""" party

But Dawkins? How many Americans believe in god?

>nope. We've agreed on those things multiple times. You just can't read.

100% false. Rather than lose you're playing the "we agreed the whole time" game. Fucking pathetic.

Universal healthcare, consumer protection, and free college. That's really all the US needs to get on par with the rest of the first world. Don't know why we have to marry that with this vomit inducing liberalism

I feel like Dawkins have become such a huge cuck lately

Watched the new Frontline documentary. Was heavily slanted against Trump, but Trump definitely has his weaknesses.

I refuse to endorse the further erosion of western society as we once knew it, but I'm not going to go from one extreme to another. Problem is, with the nature of power/war/elections and such, admitting your party's failures is inherently suicide. You cannot, and must not do it, unless it is from a position of rhetorical gain.

The people involved in actively changing the conversation need to continue doing so. That is the only thing that will mold future politicians based on the premise of seeking election/reelection.

Although, currently, I'm not completely convinced that the deep state is in even more control than even Cred Forums suspects.

There are good people promoting Trump. He ran on a platform that was indeed ripe for the taking. Ensure that the war of ideas is won as best we can, and should we win the election, we will hold everyone accountable for their power.

The argument wasn't about the content of dawkins' books, you retard.

It was about dawkins state of mind.

>It was about dawkins state of mind.

No it wasn't, you moron. It was about how Dawkins had a belief in the past, but now he changed said belief. And you went through hours of mental and verbal gymnastics to protect your jerkoff fantasy Dawkins only in the end to say "herr derr we agreed all along".

You're fucking sad.

Bobby Fischer had an IQ of 183 and he said that Jews are liars and the worst scum on Earth. So, let us listen to this smart man.

>It was about how Dawkins had a belief in the past, but now he changed said belief.

You got it.

>.Dawkins published books on christianity
We agree

>Dawkins talked about islam more in 09
we agree.

Rly makes you think.

YOU AGREE NOW. But for the last hour you were arguing like the deluded fanboy that you are.

>Majority of Cred Forums makes under 40,000 USD a year
>Majority of Euro /pols/ make significantly less than 40,000 a year, as Italiggers make a fraction of what French make
>Billionaires who make money from regular people like you giving them money take the money and store it in offshore banks to sit and rot, to the tune of 6 trillion +
>Money that used to be circulating in the economy around small businesses, normal people is now taken out of the economy
>This money will never see the light of day, money will never be back in the economy
>Only option for this wealth to be added back is to be printed
>Fed causes 100 more problems printing this money

Fucking cucks

thery were always huge cucks the lot of em the only decent one related to the group of idiots was chris's brother peter hitchens who has always been the correct one and he isnt part of the group of ledditor atheist tippers

No, i still disagree about the belief thing.

>>It was about how Dawkins had a belief in the past, but now he changed said belief.

I disagree about this. This was the subject of the argument .

>Dawkins talked about islam more in 09
>.Dawkins published books on christianity
These were not.

Imbecil

Your posts are barely making sense now. NOW you're admitting that you're disagreeing with lots of things.

You're a pathetic fucking Dawkins fanboy whose upset that his hero now thinks Christianity isn't that bad.

If you're still an atheist past the age of 18 you can't be very smart.

>IQ

user, I...

you guys are fuckin fags m8s

Isn't it embarrassing for you to come all this way twisting words and getting away with it only to reveal yourself to be a dishonest retard right at the end?

I'm embarrassed for you.

Dawkins is a moron. The man has a peanut for a brain. He actually believes that "natural selection: via Genes as the unit of the selection process" accounts for Humanity (let's not even get starte don life).

I didn't twist anything. We had an argument for an hour, then out of nowhere:

You: I agree

You: I disagree.

You're almost like a bipolar schizo at this point. You don't even know what you're agreeing or disagreeing to.

Call me when you're over 18 you millennial twat. Maybe if you were checking instagram and snapchat every 15 seconds you would be able to properly argue.

>You: I agree
>
>You: I disagree.

>hurrrr what is context?

>Call me
Bye bye then

So long, douche. Have fun jerking off to your Dawkins anti-Christianity quotes from the 90's (because he's not writing too many of those nowadays).

Hey, you have to get out.

I didn't call you

Uh-oh, I think I can smell a certain donation for a pro-Hillary tweet.

Holy fuck, go back to bleddit, jr. Or instagram or wherever you tweens hang out online nowadays.

>He can't walk away

Because believing impossible nonsense for no good reason becomes EASIER after 18?

Nah dood, you fucked up.

The fact is you don't give a shit if what you believe in is real or not, or you'd withhold judgement on such a world altering viewpoint until some convincing evidence came along,
rather than just going with whatevers fucking popular locally.

If thats not the case, why aren't you Hindu?
Face it mate, you fucked up critical thinking, and thats sad.

I don't want to walk away. You're the one who said "bye bye then", not me.

Reel em in folkes he's on the hook.

You're too easy kiddo.

tell me more about
>i agree
>i disagree

So you said "bye bye then", but you keep posting? Schizo...

It's not my fault your so blinded by your love of Dawkins that you can't keep track of what you agree with and don't agree with.

Be honest. You have a ted haggard shrine in your basement don't you.

So you're deflecting the fact that you said "bye bye then", but continue posting, with a bad joke. Typical. Never once did I mention my religious beliefs. You however have made it clear that you would suck Dawkins dick given the opportunity (he is for "mild pedophilia" and given that you're definitely an under 17 twat, you and Dawkins would get along great).

>Trump believes being rich is a good reason to vote for someone!
[citation needed]

>British subject with an opinion

That's not a denial

uh oh. He's a faggard for haggard

Nobody takes Dawkins seriously anymore.

This is some under 18 posting right here. You lost the argument, jr. It happens. Get over it like a man. The fact that you're whipping out obscure religious leaders against me for some reason proves how desperately out of gas you are.

Why don't you say "bye then" another few times. Maybe then you'll follow your own posts.

he wants to share a bed with ted "the hard hat" haggard

See, I've heard people giving him shit over this but I've never heard anybody explain why this is not a valid question in regards to Aquinas' argument. The counterargument never seems to go beyond "lmao Atheists are dumb".

Wait.... you said

>over 18
>...
>under 18

Which is it psycho?

This is getting real pathetic. Now you're double replying a different version of the same pathetic insult. This is too much. Keep going, I'm gonna get some popcorn.

HOLY FUCK.

I said "Call me when you're over 18" and "This is some under 18 posting"

Both imply that you have not yet reached 18 years of age.

JESUS FUCKING CHRIST YOU'RE STUPID.

Holy shit will you pussy reddit faggots go back.

Without Dawkins there'd be no memes you dip so shut your face

Lmao damage control

Face it. You're too busy sucking ted haggards dick to put together a coherent argument.

Call me when you clean the cum off your nose

It's not damage control, it's me straightening your retarded ass out. Go back and read the posts, dummy.

Wow, fucking sad.

The more you lose the nastier you get. Keep it coming loser. You lost the Dawkins arguments, you lost the agree/disagree argument, now you're losing the hurling insults argument.

>over 18
>under 18

You can't get away from this, psycho.

Besides that you're already a confirmed haggard lover.

Seriously there's no point in even arguing with you at this point.

>You can't get away from this, psycho.

I already explained it. Read it again.

>Seriously there's no point in even arguing with you at this point.
So are you done? Because you already said "bye bye then" only to come back 5 seconds later.

I want atheists, leftists, and kikes to create their own "utopia" so the rest of us can live in peace and prosperity.

>I already explained it.

The only thing you explained is how stupid you are.
This is a joke. You can't even read.

>So are you done?
Yea i've been done arguing for a while. Now i'm just making fun of you.
Haven't you noticed?

>Problem is, with the nature of power/war/elections and such, admitting your party's failures is inherently suicide.
which is why there needs to be a new party. Instead of trying to prop up the bloated carcass of the Republicans, we should have been working on destroying them altogether so their voters would be forced to go to a new party.

Incidentally my idea of what a new party would be is pretty neatly summed up by this guy >He ran on a platform that was indeed ripe for the taking.
Yeah, except the trouble with that is now we've let Trump take it, if he crashes and burns that platform goes with him. We've nailed ourselves to a sinking ship.

Yes

>This is a joke. You can't even read.

The joke is that your grammatical understanding is so low that can't understand the context of 2 different sentences with different wording.

>Yea i've been done arguing for a while. Now i'm just making fun of you.
Then why did you say "bye bye then"? Why did you say "Seriously there's no point in even arguing with you at this point."

Your beliefs change constantly. Just like your agree/disagree nonsense.

Don't stop. This is too fucking funny.

Post another Ted Haggard joke, I miss those already.

>this kills the fedora

Christians: ∞
Atheists: 0

The same reason as every country, they would be quickly swept under the rug if they ever came out as "right-wing"

Are you still trying to defend
>over 18
>under 18

Jesus..... If you just admit that you're a dick sucking retard we'll call it quits.

You contradict yourself in every post. And you're even still denying your ted haggard obsession after admiring it.

You couldn't even tell me what this says. That's how stupid you are.

>Are you still trying to defend
>>over 18
>>under 18

I've already explained it, what aren't you getting?

>Jesus..... If you just admit that you're a dick sucking retard we'll call it quits.
I'm not. So I guess we'll have to keep going. You're the one who keeps whipping out things like "bye bye then" and "Seriously there's no point in even arguing with you at this point."

>You contradict yourself in every post.
Give an example.

thanks, I missed those sad attempts at humor.

>You couldn't even tell me what this says. That's how stupid you are.
Says the person who says they're done with the conversation, only to come back 5 seconds later. Says the person who can't even decide what he agrees/disagrees with.

>Call me when you're over 18
>This is some under 18 posting
Neither contradict each other, you're just embarrassing yourself and US with your 3rd grade reading comprehension

>Neither contradict each other, you're just embarrassing yourself and US with your 3rd grade reading comprehension

I tried telling him that. He needs some Hook'd on Phonics remedial shit.

>I've already explained it, what aren't you getting?

LMAO no, I got it. Trust me. You think they mean the same thing.

What a fucking retard.

>Give an example.

>He already forgot the example. He has the brain of a gnat.

OVER 18
UNDER 18

You mongoloid LMAO

>atheism is anti-theism
All of my rage. Fuck Dawkins.

t. mongoloid

>LMAO no, I got it. Trust me. You think they mean the same thing.

They DO mean the same thing. HOLY GOD

>OVER 18
>UNDER 18

>You mongoloid LMAO

I'm going to write it out completely so you understand:

-Call me when you're over 18.
>this is implying that you are NOT 18 yet.

-This is some under 18 posting
>this is implying that you are NOT 18 yet.

Please tell me you get it now. If you don't then I'm real sorry and you're obviously mentally challenged, and I don't want to insult a mentally challenged person.

asking who created god is just a shitty cop out. how can something exist if it wasnt created? when does the chain end? how did reality come to be, what created the thing that created reality? is reality even a concept? what created it if something cant come from nothing? Law of thermodynamics and shit. why are people using earthly logic to comprehend a god? do different realities/universes exist? are laws different in these different realities/universes? its a fucking mess

then you get into people pretending they know how the universe was created and all this shit, and its just a never ending chain of IRL shit posting

nothing is certain. to simply state "lmao that cant happen" is retarded and goes against science itself, just like im sure you will call me retarded and not make a comeback

He's literally still defending
>over 18
>under 18
Keep going retard. Explain it again. I enjoy reading the "thoughts" of your kind.

Our leftists are a fucking minority, didn't Brexit prove that?

It's not my fault you don't get it. I explained to 100%. It makes sense. The other poster agreed with me too.

But seriously, what aren't you getting. I laid out both sentences and explained their meaning. What don't you agree with. Seriously, explain yourself.

LMAO no I told you. I get it. You did a great job kiddo.

There's going to be an extra cookie in it for you after nap time.

>I get it

If you get it then what's the problem? You're posting like an extreme autist. You lost every arguing now your nitpicking 2 sentences (incorrectly nitpicking as well).

Why are you voting for representative of establishment that claims to understand needs of ordinary joe?
Also that wall... he was pussy to a degree that he didn't even mention it.
>wall was just a fancy part of mental 5D checkers

...

Hee is just both anti-religion and coherent about it.
A coherent liberal is a liberal still

>If you get it then what's the problem?

There's no problem. It's a masterpiece of stupidity.

You should display it at the museum of modern art.

Seriously, now tell me about

>yes
>no

and how they mean the same thing

Your posts make no sense now. I already explained the difference between the over/under 18 quotes, and you stick your fingers in your ears and scream like a maniac.

>yes
>no

>and how they mean the same thing

More inane desperation. The Ted Haggard jokes were inane too, but at least they were funny.

You seriously think
>over 18
>under 18
means the same thing.....

How stupid can a person be?

They mean the opposite thing.

Underrated post.

>You seriously think
>>over 18
>>under 18
>means the same thing.....

LET ME EXPLAIN IT AGAIN:

"Call me when you're over 18"
>this is implying that you are NOT 18 yet.

"This is some under 18 posting"
>this is implying that you are NOT 18 yet.

I don't get what you're not getting. EXPLAIN TO ME HOW THESE SENTENCES ARE NOT THE SAME THING. Do you know nothing of context and sentence structure?

>Americans have better judgement

You'd think Dorkins would understand people better than he does given his area of expertise.

Now you're just copying and pasting posts.

At least post original content if you're going to reply to me.

>Now you're just copying and pasting posts.
>At least post original content if you're going to reply to me.

I'm copying and pasting because there's only 1 correct answer. I keep posting it and you keep ignoring it. Are you a retarded autist?

EXPLAIN TO ME WHY I'M WRONG. I ALREADY EXPLAINED WHY I'M RIGHT.

No come on, I already replied to this . Just stop it.

Admit you're you're an idiot and move on. It's ok to be wrong.

I'm not going to keep replying to the same post

TELL ME WHY IT'S WRONG. You're being evasive now.