It is likely that people have what Christians call a `religious gene'.
It need not be one gene, only that the phenomenon repeat itself in
proto-hominids and hominids without cultural requirements.
If the phenomenon requires learning, like kittens learning how to
catch and kill mice from their moth
On 4/9/07, Alberto Monteiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dan Minette wrote:
> >
> > So, in conclusion, while I don't know that Dawkins has such a gene
> > (or even if such a gene exists) Dawkins has not provided sufficient
> > information to falsify that statement. Instead, the correct answer
> >
On 10 Apr 2007 at 6:55, Charlie Bell wrote:
>
> On 10/04/2007, at 2:22 AM, Dan Minette wrote:
>
> >
> > Agreed, but I don't think that's enough to support Dawkins' claim
> > that he
> > definitely does not have such a gene. Now, I'm an agnostic
> > concerning the
> > existence of a "religio
Nick Arnett wrote:
> On 4/9/07, Dan Minette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>> So, in conclusion, while I don't know that Dawkins has such a gene (or
>> even
>> if such a gene exists) Dawkins has not provided sufficient information to
>> falsify that statement. Instead, the correct answer appears
On 10/04/2007, at 3:01 AM, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
> Dan Minette wrote:
>>
>> So, in conclusion, while I don't know that Dawkins has such a gene
>> (or even if such a gene exists) Dawkins has not provided sufficient
>> information to falsify that statement. Instead, the correct answer
>> appears
On 10/04/2007, at 2:22 AM, Dan Minette wrote:
>
> Agreed, but I don't think that's enough to support Dawkins' claim
> that he
> definitely does not have such a gene. Now, I'm an agnostic
> concerning the
> existence of a "religious" gene, but let's assume, for argument's
> sake, that
> one
On 4/9/07, Dan Minette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> So, in conclusion, while I don't know that Dawkins has such a gene (or
> even
> if such a gene exists) Dawkins has not provided sufficient information to
> falsify that statement. Instead, the correct answer appears to be a
> definite maybe
Dan Minette wrote:
>
> So, in conclusion, while I don't know that Dawkins has such a gene
> (or even if such a gene exists) Dawkins has not provided sufficient
> information to falsify that statement. Instead, the correct answer
> appears to be a definite maybe.
>
I would guess there is stron
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Richard Baker
> Sent: Monday, April 09, 2007 2:36 AM
> To: Killer Bs Discussion
> Subject: Re: Not reading statistics gets a Drubbing
>
> Alberto said:
>
> > Samplin
Richard Baker wrote:
>
>> Sampling from friends to prove something is very unscientific. Just
>> to add unscience to the discussion, just because I know lots of
>> vegetarians (and a few almost-pure carnivores) doesn't mean
>> that I must reject the hypothesis that humans are omnivores.
>
> No,
Alberto said:
> Sampling from friends to prove something is very unscientific. Just
> to add unscience to the discussion, just because I know lots of
> vegetarians (and a few almost-pure carnivores) doesn't mean
> that I must reject the hypothesis that humans are omnivores.
No, but you would have
Richard Baker wrote:
>
> So far as I can tell, Dawkins is talking about his friends at
> universities in the UK and US, his point being that there are at
> least some people for whom religion doesn't seem to be an innate part
> of existence. I'd imagine that his friends tend to be more atheistic
>
On 8 Apr 2007, at 22:08, Andrew Crystall wrote:
> On 8 Apr 2007 at 22:06, Richard Baker wrote:
>
>> AndrewC said:
>>
>>> Yes, shame you don't have it.
>>>
>>> "and the US"
>>>
>>> You can quote all you like, the research has been done. De'nile
>>> ain't
>>> just a river in Egypt.
>>
>> So far a
On 8 Apr 2007 at 22:06, Richard Baker wrote:
> AndrewC said:
>
> > Yes, shame you don't have it.
> >
> > "and the US"
> >
> > You can quote all you like, the research has been done. De'nile ain't
> > just a river in Egypt.
>
> So far as I can tell, Dawkins is talking about his friends at
> uni
AndrewC said:
> Yes, shame you don't have it.
>
> "and the US"
>
> You can quote all you like, the research has been done. De'nile ain't
> just a river in Egypt.
So far as I can tell, Dawkins is talking about his friends at
universities in the UK and US, his point being that there are at
leas
On 8 Apr 2007 at 17:49, William T Goodall wrote:
>
> On 8 Apr 2007, at 17:09, Andrew Crystall wrote:
>
> > On 8 Apr 2007 at 14:00, William T Goodall wrote:
> >
> >> Dawkins replied: "Speak for yourself. It is not a part of me. It is
> >> not a part of the great majority of my friends in universi
On 8 Apr 2007, at 17:09, Andrew Crystall wrote:
> On 8 Apr 2007 at 14:00, William T Goodall wrote:
>
>> Dawkins replied: "Speak for yourself. It is not a part of me. It is
>> not a part of the great majority of my friends in universities in
>> England and the US and elsewhere."'
>
> No, speak to
On 8 Apr 2007 at 14:00, William T Goodall wrote:
> Dawkins replied: "Speak for yourself. It is not a part of me. It is
> not a part of the great majority of my friends in universities in
> England and the US and elsewhere."'
No, speak to the people who have actually gathered the data.
http:/
18 matches
Mail list logo
