<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Coming up on toddhdow.org</title>
	<atom:link href="http://toddhdow.org/2007/09/04/coming-up-on-toddhdoworg/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://toddhdow.org/2007/09/04/coming-up-on-toddhdoworg/</link>
	<description>Thoughts, opinions and various writings</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Aug 2010 08:09:29 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: hayesy</title>
		<link>http://toddhdow.org/2007/09/04/coming-up-on-toddhdoworg/#comment-305</link>
		<dc:creator>hayesy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Sep 2007 06:30:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://toddhdow.org/2007/09/04/coming-up-on-toddhdoworg/#comment-305</guid>
		<description>Its interesting to hear your impressions because I&#039;m in the middle (literally, the centre) of it and have basically the same response. Some of the points he raises are valid, but there is an overall prevailing use of rhetoric to replace arguments. 

I&#039;m in my last year of school, so I&#039;m fairly busy. The temptation to write a refutation (almost) page by page - or even just to point out the inconsistancies - has been immense, but I consider it unwise at this stage. Maybe later.
Alistair McGrath beat me to it though, writing The Dawkins Delusion in less than half the number of pages as the original.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Its interesting to hear your impressions because I&#8217;m in the middle (literally, the centre) of it and have basically the same response. Some of the points he raises are valid, but there is an overall prevailing use of rhetoric to replace arguments. </p>
<p>I&#8217;m in my last year of school, so I&#8217;m fairly busy. The temptation to write a refutation (almost) page by page &#8211; or even just to point out the inconsistancies &#8211; has been immense, but I consider it unwise at this stage. Maybe later.<br />
Alistair McGrath beat me to it though, writing The Dawkins Delusion in less than half the number of pages as the original.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
