I’m glad my tragic review routines can amuse you 
(that means they’re good for something right? #positive thinking)
6 Likes
Totally on point there. You always gotta twist the truth to appear positive.
But I’m actually a bit shocked that that image was real - I thought you had manipulated the source code. I think I might now know what my future nightmares will be made of.
3 Likes
Entertaining in a way that Dawkins intended it? 
Because the book opens with this following lines (albeit paraphrased somewhat from memory, because I don’t have it on me at the moment): “Christians believe in a supernatural God. In this book, I will prove that such a God could not have come about by natural means.”
Well of course he didn’t - you literally just established that he’s supernatural. You’ve now completed the main argument of your entire book within two sentences, so what’s the rest of the book about?
5 Likes
It’s been a while since I read it and it was probably a translated edition. If that’s literally how the text goes than it’s an editor’s oversight.
As far as I remember he was writing that the existence of God or any other unfalsifiable claim cannot be disproven, like the Russell’s teapot. It should be up to the believers to prove it. So, perhaps what he wanted to say in the introduction is that he’ll show that believing in God has no observable benefits.
The most entertaining thing about the book is how a distinguished scientist writes a thick book roasting religions in a somewhat salty tone. But I can understand that, since from his writing I got an idea that being openly atheist is something frowned upon.
6 Likes
The arrow and the little faces are great. I’m laughing really hard right now.
2 Likes
I have the book here but couldn’t find that line. Does the “come about by natural means” here mean as in how the image of God formed naturally in peoples minds or that the existence of God came to be in a supernatural event? That said, I found the book interesting with the discourse around religion. I don’t think it was just about disproving god, there’s 10 chapters, and only 2 of them talk about proofs.
1 Like
Somewhere in the opening paragraph, if memory serves. And he was talking about “natural means” as in evolution - since evolution by nature leads from simple to complex, it couldn’t possibly start with a complex being.
Though, a biologist making attributing any kind of logical progression to evolution is already a bit spurious - evolution favours only what survives better, not what’s “more complex” or whatever. Unless… perhaps… it’s being guided by some kind of… higher being.
1 Like
Got curious and skimmed the preface and start of chapter 1, but still couldn’t find that line of thought. Oh well, better just leave it be then.
2 Likes
okay, this is the most productive thing I’ve done during my work day
26 Likes
I think I gave the like primarily for the line of text beneath the picture. There isn’t a single thing in this thread I can relate to more.
3 Likes
This one is one of my favourites 
Why does the picture only show up as an link? I think i have sacrificed all the turtles needed for it to show.
8 Likes
lol, is that GTO?
2 Likes
definately. Need a japanese anime exam paper to complete the meme.
5 Likes
Emergency post! 
@ekg
When you’re better at N4 grammar than you are N5:
35 Likes
I got better score on JLPT N3 mock exam than on the N4…
13 Likes
Wow, I’ve literally become the embodiment of a cautionary tale. I feel like I’ve turned into the forest dwelling monster that parents of small rural villages warn their kids about. (I’m almost a bit proud of myself for that. This might be my greatest achievement.)
13 Likes
yes it is GTO
1 Like
Y’know, the mnemonics that really try to make a sensual association with a word don’t always get me on that level, but this one does. This one does.
21 Likes