jackles wrote:blags i can tell by the puppy dog approach you have to all things scientific as if you have found the answer bone to all human life and history that you must be fresh out of some cosy university.dawkins does not know how consciousness works.
Neither do you, but you seem to think you have all the answers despite no one having all the answers, which is ironic n'est pas?
Jackles if you were half as clever as you think you are you'd be able to explain all this in terms that would make you as clever as you think you are at least. But it seems you aren't able to explain this stuff in any way anyone could or would agree with, which makes me hence think you aren't half as clever as you think you are. No offence but all you seem to be doing is talking nonsense, which is fine half as clever as you are I am sure that is as clever as you may get, until of course you get somewhat more clever. We live in hope...
I'll quite happily sit in the dark looking for a light source, that is of course what science is, but what I wont do is sit in the dark and listen to other people who are in the dark wax lyrical about how they have seen the light, in lieu of light or any sort of verifiable consequence there in. As I say you are welcome to your candle, but if that candle is only a light source you believe it only enlightens you.