Comments on: So Who Was Behind 9/11, Dick?

By: Binyamin

Binyamin — Sat, 13 Oct 2007 18:42:33 +0000

The NYT article is Here.
( http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/09/science/09tier.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&ref=science )

It deals with the specific issue of low-fat diets.

By: Michoel

Michoel — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 18:22:46 +0000

I am reminded of Rabbi Avigdor Miller’s teaching that these things are revealed to us to learn from them to related cases. Just as his words in this area are completely agended and empty, so too are his workds on evolution. He is not a person who values truth and therefore we do not need to give weight to anything he says.

By: Ben Zoma's Apprentice

Ben Zoma's Apprentice — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 17:58:15 +0000

“Raishis Chochmah Yiras Hashem”—The sine qua non for real wisdom is the fear and awe of G-d; without this, even brilliant people see the “real power” everywhere and anywhere.

By: Nachum

Nachum — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 15:37:08 +0000

I’m pretty sure that religious Jews are not in the forefront of the pro-Israel lobby, at least not as much as Dawkins thinks. So he’s a double fool.

By: Ori Pomerantz

Ori Pomerantz — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 21:26:54 +0000

The actual article is available here. However, may I respectfully point out that it does not claim that Richard Dawkins believes any conspiracy theories about 9/11? This post attacks Dawkins on what he says and writes, which is good. The headline, however, implies without stating that he has a conspiracy theory about 9/11. Is there a reason for choosing such a headline?

Dawkins is an annoying character who wants to use his alleged superiority to control education (”I would free children from being indoctrinated with the religion of their parents or their community”) and interfere in the domestic affairs of another country (”But I think that this country is so powerful and what goes on politically here is so enormously influential, the rest of the world is entitled to have a say.”). Doesn’t he give us enough ammunition to attack him without resorting to innuendo?

By: David

David — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 20:59:19 +0000

See also Tuesday’s New York Times Science section for a fascinating article by John Tierney regarding ‘consensus’ on certain issues that were held to be true by scientists despite the fact there was no proof whatsoever.

By: David

David — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 14:16:51 +0000

Good point. From my anecdotal experience, it seems the 9/11 Truth movement is overwhelmingly populated by atheists, even if not in raw numbers, for sure from a statistical view. I’m wondering if anyone else out there has noticed this.

By: Bob Miller

Bob Miller — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 12:19:02 +0000

I don’t believe Richard Dawkins exists. There is clearly some conspiracy afoot to create this imaginary personality to confuse and demoralize Western society. Those who say they’ve seen Dawkins can’t be relied upon; they must have run into one of the paid actors the cabal sends around, or perhaps they were hallucinating or paid off.

By: Yehoshua Mandelcorn

Yehoshua Mandelcorn — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 05:49:33 +0000

Wrong, the “pesi” described by King David just needs to learn some Torah and will be become wise.
It will not be so easy to do so with a militant atheist. In fact the more they know about any G-d based religion the more they will use that knowledge to disparage G-d and religion.