At first, I thought I'd share it 'cause I found it interesting. I don't understand it well enough to argue about, but I thought the brighter-minded Hubskifolk could appreciate exposure to new(?) ideas.
Then, I thought I shouldn't share it, 'cause it's bullshit, and I don't wanna spread bullshit. Though I don't understand it well, I understand it well enough to see that the position may well be flawed.
Then, I thought I'd share it exactly because it may be flawed: to spark discussion on the matter, if there's any to be had.
- Hitchens has completely misrepresented the existence of impending knowledge of the origins of both the cosmos and the species. Neither is claimed to be addressed by science. Neither the cause of the Big Bang nor the cause of first life can be addressed by empirical science. So if he means empirical evidence of the originating source for either the universe or life, then he is making a false statement. And if he doesn’t mean that, then his implication is still false. So in fact, Hitchens has again violated the Hitchens Razor, and in fact has made false claims.
- Hitchens is still without any evidence which is pertinent to the fundamental theist arguments and evidence; he has produced no evidence, just accusations and those cherrypicked for effect.