q and a on abc, page-113

I think just about anyone could of come up with Richard Dawkins responses they were not quite difficult to do and most people have probably had this same debate many times themselves.Was there any real science there?This debate has been going on for all my life and probably after my life and that is where he has to realy prove that the "soul" does not exist.We all know ashes to ashes dust to dust and Richards response was pretty much inline with what you would expect.No mention of the "soul" because as yet they cannot prove this part does not exist or can be created.Much of the debate was just history being proofed As science searches back in time to prove about evolution they still need to search forward where the real science is there for believers or non believers alike that are still alive at the time of the findings.I wonder how he will feel if he is ever in a situation where someone tells him he has moments to live. A silent prayer anyone? I guess we may never know unless science can prove what goes through his mind at the time.It is a good debate i just didnt like the way he went about it.