seathanaich (December 31, 1969 at 6:59 pm)

Hello Anna.May I ask you why you have adopted the youtube pseudonym that you have? Is being against atheists really the defining part of your personality?Are you against atheists, or against atheism? There is a big difference between arguing against an idea or just being against a person. It's hard to be a tolerant, non-discriminatory person if there are some people you are just "against". Are you against people on the basis of ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation too? Or is just atheists?

dave0258 (December 31, 1969 at 6:59 pm)

Great. Another theist response that is completely lacking in specifics or any kind of intelligent input into a discussion. Just what we've come to expect. Okay, hot shot, you've started a list of mistakes. Cool. Pick one and let's run with it. When we're done with that one, we can go to the next. Let's see if there's anything to your posturing.

wehavebiscuits (December 31, 1969 at 6:59 pm)

The videomaker is making perfect sense, and I can't see any flaw with it. I have yet to see a counter-argument against him that's resonable and makes sense.Atheism shouldn't be called atheism. It should be called common sense!

wehavebiscuits (December 31, 1969 at 6:59 pm)

Mistakes? I didn't hear any mistakes. He made perfect sense to me. Could you say which mistakes he made?

themanyone (December 31, 1969 at 6:59 pm)

I am the eternally conscious circuit of universal energy speaking to you through a malfunctioning component. Like the other components of this thread, including religious fanatics, who claim to speak for me I will be undergoing routine maintenance. Your comment space is running on reduced mental power until such time as the connected elements can be isolated and tested for signs of thermal breakdown. I hope to restore full intellectual power to us soon. Until then, please stand by...

icemilitia (December 31, 1969 at 6:59 pm)

Smug bastards...love the smell of their own farts

castravalva (December 31, 1969 at 6:59 pm)

It's fine with me if Dawkins wants to lead Atheism into that pit. It just means Atheists who follow him into that pit are silly for imagining that they believe in rational thought, if they actually believe that natural evolution is the predestinator driving the car. But, I believe in real intelligence and rational thought, because the two go hand in hand. So, it only stands to reason that I will not follow Dawkins down that path to become a victim of the unintelligence movement joke.

AnnaAgainstAtheists (December 31, 1969 at 6:59 pm)

post a video response and we'll see who's talking nonsense.___Well I might just do that. This video is chock full of mistakes and asking to be criticised.

Chapas45 (December 31, 1969 at 6:59 pm)

post a video response and we'll see who's talking nonsense.

inverse4 (December 31, 1969 at 6:59 pm)

No it absolutely does not mean the programmer does not exist,not at all;only that modern evolutionary theory removes the 'need'to postulate an intelligent designer and that is exactly,say R.Dawkins' position-that 'God' is unecessary and to boot extremely unlikely.(don't know how they worked that out but arguement from incredulity is supp bunk).Point being:I would like their to b a god of infinite benevolence and power but post modern atheists are making that idea sound like WISHFUL THINKIN?!?!?!