Rahvin writes:
I really wish Dawkins had been there, though. The RRS is decent, and I like them, but the fact is they aren't as verbally eloquent as Dawkins. He's just better equipped for public debate, I think.
After watching the debate, I would agree with you that Comfort and Cameron were preaching. I also think that Dawkins would have appealed to the logical crowd very effectively...as he knows how to do so.
I don't believe that any side can win a debate such as this, however. There are different world views in play. What a person believes is pretty much what a person wants to believe. Of course there is only one basic logical way to look at things, but seen through the lens of different world views, conclusions may be relative. There is no absolute answer. (At least not collectively)
™ Version 4.2
