Quote:
Originally Posted by Angela  That was very slippery of you, Dor. You attack Dawkins with sketchy, misleading pronouncements; |
so you are disagreeing with my assessment that
a. the title of the book is based on keat's quote or perhaps more accurately 'incident'.
b. when bringing up the quotes and incident the reviewer is discussing the content of the book
yes or no to both please.. if not what is he talking about? another book? his personal thoughts?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Angela then when called on it you dodge and weave about Sagan, |
No I specifically was trying to illustrate that science and religion and art and science were not always in conflict and i brought up a specific example of a deliberate attempt to polarize...by ignoring other things and outright lying about others.
'science' is filled with such people - stephen jay gould and franz boas,
- both of whom had marxists beliefs, and dilberately lied or distorted data.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Angela unnamed "people that deliberately try to polarize," other complaints about Dawkins, and a smug attempt to "bring this thread slightly back on topic." |
You're simply ignoring part of what i said, and twisting the other.
It was smug? That's not what i felt when i wrote it...but i guess it says more about you than me, doesn't it?