29condorito writes in YouTube comments for Shroud Enigma Dawkins Challenge:
It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out what happens with this challenge, assuming Dawkins accepts it. Dawkins will come out with some pseudo-scientific hair-brained explanation (probably combined with contentions on other "agreed" characteristics), he will have the backing of the anti-shroud community, and then claim that his view wasn’t accepted because of the bias from the other side.
The media, if it doesn’t side with Dawkins, will report both sides as equally valid.
As of this writing there have only been 428 views and 3 comments after 3 days. The challenge is about 8 weeks old. Does Dawkins even know he has been challenged?
He probably is aware of it, but I doubt there will be any response….He’ll probably just laugh it off.
Given that Richard Dawkins declines to debate with any cleric below the rank of bishop, he probably ignores challenges from any film director/producer not in possession of a Palme d’Or award at the Cannes Film Festival.
I too would ignore any challenge from David Rolfe, not because I’m famous or vain, but because I think David Rolfe, gifted though he may be as a documentary maker, displays advanced heliorectal syndrome in his dealings with the scientific community…
I cannot imagine any genuine scientist declining an opportunity to explore such a self-evident mystery. We must remain patient. This Challenge is one of many that have been made to Dawkins. Most are intangible and involve angels and pinheads. This one is real and, ultimately, empirical.
I hope so, David; I hope so.
PS: Having seen the comment that has just gone up (mine still awaiting moderation) I am also profoundly wary of any non-scientist who begins a comment with “I cannot imagine any genuine scientist etc etc”. Does he go to his local GP and say “I cannot imagine any genuine doctor declining to discuss my self-diagnosis and failing to write the appropriate prescriptions…?” .QED re the heliorectal syndrome…
Colin, I just finished taking you off of mandatory monitoring of comments. Maybe I’ll have to put you back on. Insults in lieu of substance are not welcome here.
Maybe you are unfamiliar with an English tradition for pithy comment, Dan, which some of us are keen to preserve, indeed to promote as an antidote to PC. If you Stateside folk see no distinction between pithy comment and insult than I shall not darken your doorstep one moment longer, having several other scientific interests on the go right now apart from the Shroud.
I may be back, I may not – but regardless, WYSIWYG…
Colin, where I come from calling someone an A-hole is considered a rude comment. I think you have definately pushed the boundaries insulting many here. I amongst others could have said the same to you, but we showed some restraint (for the most part). Insulting Mr. Rolfe definately was not warranted and I would back Dan, at this point, if he blackballs you from this blog, wholeheartedly. I’m sort of getting sick of your rediculous, errogant arguments anyways, to tell you the truth.
Oh and I think Dan as been more then fare in allowing you to continue to post here. Yet you continue to act out.
Comments are closed.