This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

← It's no wonder evangelical atheists need to shout so loud

It's no wonder evangelical atheists need to shout so loud - Comments

Lisa Bauer's Avatar Comment 1 by Lisa Bauer

The author does a fine job of summing up all the anti-atheist tropes and fallacies in one brief article. *eyeroll*

Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:02:00 UTC | #225225

Pattern Seeker's Avatar Comment 2 by Pattern Seeker

This shit again?! I really do think they enjoy hearing themselves spew the same 'ol shit. They really need to try something new.

Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:03:00 UTC | #225226

PrimeNumbers's Avatar Comment 3 by PrimeNumbers

Barry Cooper, the idiot who has not read Dawkin's books, but instead shouts at a straw man parody - perhaps he shouts so much because his argument stinks.

Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:03:00 UTC | #225227

rod-the-farmer's Avatar Comment 4 by rod-the-farmer

Of course, asking how many angels can dance on the head of a pin is truly significant. What a load of crap. I will submit a longer response directly to the newspaper.

Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:04:00 UTC | #225229

JLD Calgary's Avatar Comment 5 by JLD Calgary

I've submitted a letter to the editor regarding this naive article, I'm hoping it gets published in response. Wish me luck!

Justin

Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:05:00 UTC | #225230

SharonMcT's Avatar Comment 6 by SharonMcT

*sigh*

It almost sounds like parody.

This is what we are up against here in the bible belt of Canada. How utterly embarrassing.

Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:07:00 UTC | #225231

SomeDanGuy's Avatar Comment 10 by SomeDanGuy

Are these reviewers playing a version of 'telephone'? They seem to have written their reviews based on reviews of a review of a review. Whatever 'shouting', 'dogma', and 'weak arguments' they're talking about sure aren't contained in the original texts.

Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:11:00 UTC | #225235

Elli's Avatar Comment 9 by Elli

This is parody, surely?

Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:11:00 UTC | #225234

Vaal's Avatar Comment 8 by Vaal

Boring.

Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:11:00 UTC | #225233

clodhopper's Avatar Comment 7 by clodhopper

Total Fucktard of The Month material

Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:11:00 UTC | #225232

LBraschi's Avatar Comment 11 by LBraschi

Another moron with a PhD. Guess he won that on a lottery.

Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:12:00 UTC | #225236

Smith's Avatar Comment 12 by Smith

I can only take comfort that I don't know where Calgary is.

Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:13:00 UTC | #225237

Am I Evil?'s Avatar Comment 13 by Am I Evil?

How many more 'articles' like these are we going to get?! Change the bloody record! Same old same old...

What caused the Big Bang? Don't know. Yet. We're working on it.

What caused God? Don't ask that, it offends...

Ugh!

Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:16:00 UTC | #225239

thewhitepearl's Avatar Comment 14 by thewhitepearl

Watching a three year old pick his nose is more interesting then this.

[yawn]

Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:17:00 UTC | #225240

rod-the-farmer's Avatar Comment 17 by rod-the-farmer

Cowberry is one of the two major cities in the Canadian province of Alberta. Try looking due north of Montana, or Idaho. Here, after a bit of research, is the email for the letters to the editor.

letters@theherald.canwest.com

I WILL write about this article. A PhD in Political Science. Now there is a source I would go to for reliable info on religion.

Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:19:00 UTC | #225244

fsm1965's Avatar Comment 15 by fsm1965

yet another "angry atheist", "another belief system". Can't they see these cliches don't wash?

Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:19:00 UTC | #225242

testonepatella's Avatar Comment 16 by testonepatella

What tripe! And what, Barry Cooper, will the curious (by which, one presumes, you mean the curious theist) reply to the question "and who created the creator"?

Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:19:00 UTC | #225243

Smith's Avatar Comment 19 by Smith

It seems that this PhD doesn't know that it's exactly the silliness of questions like "Can an omnipotent God make a rock bigger than he can lift?" make the God concept look bad.

Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:20:00 UTC | #225247

Stella's Avatar Comment 18 by Stella

Ha. Ha. Ha.

ETA:

1. I think I have a hell of a lot more "wonder" than most theists I meet
2. If by "wonder" she means "child-like reverence for fairy tales" or "the desire to keep the Universe shrouded in mystery," that is a fault, not a virtue
3. Invoking Karl Marx is a total non-sequitur
4. But, to boot, she is wrong about that, too

Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:20:00 UTC | #225246

equivocal20's Avatar Comment 20 by equivocal20

"When the atheists reply, "The Big Bang," the curious have one more question: what caused the Big Bang?"

And what caused the supernatural being that caused that supernatural being? Does he not get this argument? How does anyone ever and anywhere not get this argument? Why are people so damn dumb? That is the real question.

Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:21:00 UTC | #225250

indigo.myth's Avatar Comment 22 by indigo.myth

So, Mr Cooper considers the philosophical implications of 'omnipotence' to be a 'silly question', but apparently not 'what caused the Big Bang?' Apparently the only things which are 'silly' are the things atheists question and query, but, heaven forbid we should question the foundational aspects of Christianity. Also, Cooper fails to acknowledge that such questions he dismisses as 'silly' are ones that have been the cause of much discussion by ardent theologians for thousands of years! Surely he would not criticise Aquinas's 'proofs' of Gods existence as being 'silly' and far removed from belief?

Of course, this is ignoring the fallacy Cooper makes from the off by using the expression 'atheist dogma'.

Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:22:00 UTC | #225252

JHJEFFERY's Avatar Comment 21 by JHJEFFERY

"In short, the atheists' dogmatism is as much an expression of the weakness of their position as is the dogmatism of the believers"

So . . . there are both weak? How does that work?

This is one unintelligent human, PhD or not.

Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:22:00 UTC | #225251

NewEnglandBob's Avatar Comment 23 by NewEnglandBob

The premise of this article is false and everything in it is a fallacy. Someone please spray some air freshener here since this guy stunk the place up with lies.

Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:30:00 UTC | #225256

textnotspeech's Avatar Comment 24 by textnotspeech

I'm gonna call this the "Straw Man in the Mirror" fallacy. Every attack levied against the so-called "dogmatic atheist" is merely a reflection of the weaknesses in his own argument.

Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:31:00 UTC | #225258

irate_atheist's Avatar Comment 25 by irate_atheist

7. Comment #237959 by clodhopper -

A gold plated fucktard award.

What an ignorant, cretinous, twat of a human being - redolent of David Robertson wearing a bow tie.

Every day, the list of people that get on my tits grows a bit longer.

Wondering means tolerating mysteries.
Bullshit. Wondering means trying to learn about what you don't already know. Wondering does not mean staying wilfully ignorant and claiming 'goddidit' because you're too fucking stupid or lazy to investigate it.
Every faith, the dogmatic atheists say, contains a seed of violence and torment, even (or especially) among those who see in their religion a command to love their neighbours, including neighbours as obnoxious as these atheist critics.
Witch trials. Anti-semitism. Anti-birth control. The Inquisition. The doctrine of hell. The crusades. And on. And on. And on.

Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:33:00 UTC | #225263

8teist's Avatar Comment 26 by 8teist

Another idiot for jesus..................just what we need.

Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:33:00 UTC | #225264

pedantic_semantic's Avatar Comment 27 by pedantic_semantic

Of course, asking how many angels can dance on the head of a pin is truly significant. What a load of crap. I will submit a longer response directly to the newspaper.


rod-the-farmer, I would like to read your response. Would you mind also posting your response to the newspaper in this thread?

Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:45:00 UTC | #225276

NMcC's Avatar Comment 28 by NMcC

What utter drivel from first word to last!

No doubt Cooper has included the little bit about Marx at the end to tar the atheist view with 'communism'.

Unfortunately, Cooper is just as hopeless here as he is in the first part of this tripe, and evidently knows nothing about Marx.

Firstly, as a matter of historical record, Marx was famously lacking in dogmatism in the matter of religion. That's why, when the Russian Anarchist, Michael Bakunin, tried to set up a secret society within the First International Working Men's Association, one of Marx's main criticisms of Bakunin was that he was trying to introduce "atheism as a dogma".

Secondly, far from being a dogmatist, Marx's self-declared favourite maxim was De omnibus dubitandum (doubt everything).

Thirdly, far from 'famously declaring' that 'Socialist man doesn't ask such questions' I have a strong suspicion that Marx never declared anything of the sort and that Cooper has simply made that quote up. I certainly have never heard of it before and it sounds more like some crap-merchant from the Russian Communist Party than Marx himself.

So, three statements about Marx, and all of them lies.

Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:49:00 UTC | #225279

scottishgeologist's Avatar Comment 29 by scottishgeologist

Sigh....

"Barry Cooper, PhD, is a professor of political science at the University of Calgary"

as opposed to "Dr Barry Cooper etc etc..."

This "milking the qualification for all its worth"... Big Deal!!

a PhD means f*ck all if its the postnomial predicate to total insanity. Look at Kurt Wise for instance:

a PhD in invertebrate paleaontology from Harvard. Yet this is the guy who said: "if all the evidence in the universe turns against creationism, I would be the first to admit it, but I would still be a creationist because that is what the Word of God seems to indicate"

Meaningless.

:-))
SG

Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:57:00 UTC | #225284

Szymanowski's Avatar Comment 30 by Szymanowski

Second, they know full well that their own arguments are so weak that they have to obscure this fact with a high-decibel diversion.
This is very ironic.

Christopher Hitchens / Richard Dawkins, etc: soft-spoken, polite, dense but clear prose.

Rabbi Boteach / Dinesh D'Souza / Muslim Rage Boy / (Adolf Hitler), etc: shouts, ad hominems, pithy slogans.


But it's a very good tactic - if you make the unsubstantiated accusation that a group of people are whingers - they can't write in to complain about it.

Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:58:00 UTC | #225286