blaydcor on 07 April 2009
It's basically a concession on Dawkin's part. I mean there's that one book of his where he basically just expounds on how there's basically no way that there's a higher power, that faith is bullshit and all that. If something appears to be as true as evolution, it is; Dawkins is just pointing out that nothing can be absolutely proven, not that nothing is absolutely true.
Crusty VGchartz old timer who sporadically returns & posts. Let's debate nebulous shit and expand our perpectives. Or whatever.
