Just answer the question!

Well the great and mighty Richard Dawkins has spoken yet again! The world's self proclaimed master of intelligence continues to grace our planet with his wonderful random chance supremacy steeped in his deep "accidental" logic that derived from nothingness! How blessed we are to have such a humble personality come together with such vast knowledge of his own wisdom! How did he attain such heights of orderly intelligence out of all the chaos in our expansive universe? I guess he was just first in line thru natural selection to grab hold of that selfish gene. Good thing to because I would not know how stupid I was if he were not around to tell me.

Thank God for...oh dear, I just offended Richard and displayed my hallucigenetic nature exposing my incredible lack of intellect. But really, I just want to know more Richie. If you are as smart and as intelligent as you keep telling us you are and we are as stupid...as you keep telling us we are...then please, for the love of...(oops, almost did it again) please "enlighten" the masses with an answer.

In the following video, Richard had a minute and a half to answer a very simple question, no doubt from a "simple" person compared to his greatness, and was incapable of it. If one claims to be such a supreme intelligence at the very least grace us all with an intelligent response. Instead Richard displays an "attitude" of arrogance and ignorance without responding with an answer at all.

First he opens up with a self defeating contradiction:

"Well, anybody could be wrong!"

Not true Richard, because you assure everyone that only people with weak minds who have the audacity to believe in a deity are wrong! Don't believe me? Just ask yourself since there is no other superior intellect outside of you. In fact it was you who said "The refusal to believe in anything you can't see yourself is absurd". Wait a minute... Yikes! Forgot about that one. That little statement could actually put you in a place of conflict with yourself so we just won't go there.

Next up he says to the "simple" minded student, who was probably robbed in the gene pool of intellect by being the weaker of the species:

"You know what it is like to believe in a particular faith because you are not a muslim your not a Hindu. Why aren't you a Hindu? Because you happen to be brought up in America not in India. For people brought up in India you'd be a Hindu. If you were brought up in, in Denmark in the time of the Vikings you would be believing in (could not make it out) and Thor.If you were brought up in classical Greece you'd be believing in Zeus. If you were living in Central Africa you'd be believing in the great Juju up the mountain."

OK let's get serious here now. Are you freakin' kidding me? What a generalized, broad brushed statement that was. On the one hand I will give Richard some credit for the whole "you are a product of your enviorment" spiel but that is certainly not a verifiable consistent pattern in which one could draw a conclusive absolute on. There are far to many circumstances that would dictate just the opposite. This is such a narrow minded unintelligible response.

For one thing there are Christians in every region that he mentions. Many who converted (in some of the mentioned regions under threat of death) from the different "beliefs" within the differing time eras. Secondly, how does Richard the almighty supreme intelligence explain me? If I had posed the same question he would not have me pegged at all. I came from a very non-Christian/religious home. Not a single Christian on either side of my family. As far back as my great grandparents, none ever attended church on a regular or irregular basis unless it was a wedding or funeral. To this day none of them even have a bible in the home unless I personally gave them one which I doubt they read. The mindset of my enviorment growing up was liberal and my step father professed his atheism. Yet, in my stupidity as Richard would point out, I made a decision to follow Christ. regardless of my childhood surroundings, nation, or atheistic influences. Answer that one O great master of supreme intelligence.

Finally he states:

"There's no particular reason to pick on the Judeo Christian God in which by the sheerest accident you happen to have been brought up in and ask me the question "What if I'm wrong?". What if your wrong about the great juju at the bottom of the sea?"

And there you have it. He refuses to answer the question and then turns the question back on the "simple" minded student. This sounds so much like "I know you are but what am I?". Childish and redundant. What are you afraid of Richard? Answer the question if you are so sure of yourself. And to insult the young lady by referring to her upobringing as an accident. Wow! Tell us then Richard what it was like being raised in the selfish dominating gene pool that natrually selected your parents to raise such an intellect? Funny how nothing "influenced" your perceptions. You are to sharp for that aren't you?

What an asine response. In Richard's earlier years he displayed a willingness to engage in intellectual philisophical debate with respect. Today, he appears to have given into the "New Atheism" which is completely disengaged philisophically and focuses more on outright attacking people who believe in the existence of a deity. Tsk tsk, not very tolerant! I am willing to answer the question Richard. Why aren't you?

Until next time...