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

← The Greatest Show On Earth - Flea

The Greatest Show On Earth - Flea - Comments

Factofevolution's Avatar Comment 1 by Factofevolution

Oh no! A chessmaster!

Sat, 27 Mar 2010 14:39:00 UTC | #452991

Lenny's Avatar Comment 2 by Lenny

How humble of the author to put a question mark at the end of his title!

Sat, 27 Mar 2010 14:39:00 UTC | #452992

pkruger's Avatar Comment 3 by pkruger

I know its horseshit already, and so does everyone else in here. If the creationists/ID'ers are correct, there would be scientific evidence to support that position. If Dr.Sarfati is that intent to discredit the scientific veracity of evolution, then staying as far from creationism and intelligent design as he possibly would be in his best interest. He's a logician? Come on, then he would know his entire argument would still based on the false alternative committed by creationists/ID'ers. Or maybe he does, and he knows perfectly well the choir to which he is preaching. Actually, I'd like to see people read this book, and then try to debate its points publicly. Hopefully then a few of them will see how far their arguments go, before they attempt their usual escape down the faith manhole.

Sat, 27 Mar 2010 14:46:00 UTC | #452994

Chris_The_Positivist's Avatar Comment 5 by Chris_The_Positivist

"Dr. Sarfati is known for declaring that the biblical account of origins has abundant evidential support and has withstood the test of time."

He is also known for his misunderstanding of what constitutes evidence. I don't think any biblical account for our origins has "withstood the test of time" on the basis of the evidence. I think more on the basis of certain people putting their fingers in their ears and singing "la la la la la la la la".

Sat, 27 Mar 2010 14:48:00 UTC | #452997

Tyler Durden's Avatar Comment 4 by Tyler Durden

Before publishing The Greatest Hoax on Earth?, Dr. Sarfati authored the best-selling book, Refuting Evolution, which now has over 500,000 copies in print.
In print?

The term "in print" could mean in a warehouse, in boxes, unsold.

Sat, 27 Mar 2010 14:48:00 UTC | #452996

pkruger's Avatar Comment 6 by pkruger

@lenny

Good observation about the the question mark at the end of the title. It reminds me of that bestseller "The Chariots of Gods?" that was oh-so-well scientifically supported.

Ya, right.

Sat, 27 Mar 2010 14:53:00 UTC | #452998

ccmclaugh's Avatar Comment 7 by ccmclaugh

"Dr. Sarfati authored the best-selling book, Refuting Evolution, which now has over 500,000 copies in print."

Is this spin doctoring? It states that he has printed 500,000 copies and implies that he has maybe not sold that many. Maybe there's a warehouse containing 450,000 copies.

Sat, 27 Mar 2010 14:54:00 UTC | #452999

GaryHarmon's Avatar Comment 8 by GaryHarmon

"The first to plead his case seems right, until another comes and examines him."

Interesting point to make considering the fact that, prior to Darwin, Creationism had been the "only game in town."

Still, I'd like to read this book to see if there are any valid points. Without reading it, I'm nearly 100% positive that there aren't, but that is the difference between a fundamentalist and a skeptic. Who knows? Maybe Dr. Sarfati has it all figured out and he has once and for all made a watertight case for creationism. Doubtful, but still...

Of course, the problem with that is that the only people that will know for sure are religious pundits and skeptical Atheists. Why would the pious need this book? They have faith. The only book they need is the Holy Bible.

Isn't it nice having more than one book to turn to for answers? I think it is.

Sat, 27 Mar 2010 14:55:00 UTC | #453001

epeeist's Avatar Comment 9 by epeeist

Comment #473288 by pkruger:

I know its horseshit already, and so does everyone else in here. If the creationists/ID'ers are correct, there would be scientific evidence to support that position.
Yes indeed, that is the way science works. But if you look at creationism then it is largely based on bifurcation and argument from ignorance:

1. The theory of evolution has "problems"

2. Therefore it is false

3. Therefore creationism must be true

Read the testimony of Michael Ruse in the Arizona trial and Barbara Forrest in the Kitzmiller-Dover trial for a longer exposition.

Incidentally, Australia has produced some wonderfully whacky creationists. My favourite is probably Barry Setterfield.

Sat, 27 Mar 2010 14:56:00 UTC | #453004

mordacious1's Avatar Comment 10 by mordacious1

Damn. We should have all pitched in and bought Richard a 50 gallon drum of flea powder for his birthday. So many fleas for one man.

Sat, 27 Mar 2010 15:01:00 UTC | #453006

Roger Stanyard's Avatar Comment 11 by Roger Stanyard

Sarfati is a chemist. His position on geology and eveolutionary biology is that of a not very gifted amateur.

Like all fundies, the one thing he really hates, like a dose of the clap, is other fundies. He's spent a vast amount of time trying to rubbish the old earth creationist Hugh Ross.

Sarfati works, of course, for Creation Ministries Interneational which (surprise, surprise) hates Answers in Genesis because Kentuck Kook Ken ran off with its magazine subscription ist and cost it a pile of money.

This is the very same Creation Ministries International which is claiming that dinosaurs roamed the British Isles in the 15th Century. (I'm not joking on this.)

Re Barry Setterfield - dropped out of his first degree after one year and claims to be a world class physicist who overturned everything. I've tried to debate online with his wife. She's as thick as a brick.

Even the fundies such as KKK's Answers in Genesis think Barry Setterfiedl is a nutter. The Creation Science Movement in Portsmouth, though, think the sun shines out of his bum.

Ever get the feeling that all creationists are utterly bonkers?

Sat, 27 Mar 2010 15:09:00 UTC | #453008

Ygern's Avatar Comment 12 by Ygern

Jonathan Sarfati isn't worthy of the label "flea". He's more like the fungal infection that sometimes infests fleas.

Sat, 27 Mar 2010 15:10:00 UTC | #453009

epeeist's Avatar Comment 13 by epeeist

Comment #473293 by ccmclaugh:

"Dr. Sarfati authored the best-selling book, Refuting Evolution, which now has over 500,000 copies in print."

Is this spin doctoring? It states that he has printed 500,000 copies and implies that he has maybe not sold that many. Maybe there's a warehouse containing 450,000 copies.
It would seem that if you have a cent to spare you can buy a second hand copy of his book at Amazon (where it is currently has a sales rank of around 131,000).

Sat, 27 Mar 2010 15:11:00 UTC | #453010

NewEnglandBob's Avatar Comment 14 by NewEnglandBob

No real book publisher would touch this piece of garbage so he publishes it via Creation Ministries International. Hilarious!

Sat, 27 Mar 2010 15:12:00 UTC | #453011

Nunbeliever's Avatar Comment 15 by Nunbeliever

Hahaha, talking about strawmen while advertising the infamous "Richard Dawkins stumped..." video clearly shows how OBJECTIVE this review is ;-)

One would think anyone trying to be serious would get as far away from idiots like Sanford. Oh, I forgot who we are talking about here. My mistake!

Oh well, only in America.

EDIT: and Australia, and New Zealand... ;-)

Sat, 27 Mar 2010 15:13:00 UTC | #453012

Roger Stanyard's Avatar Comment 16 by Roger Stanyard

bGaryHarmon claims


Interesting point to make considering the fact that, prior to Darwin, Creationism had been the only "only game in town.

Sat, 27 Mar 2010 15:14:00 UTC | #453014

musicdesign's Avatar Comment 18 by musicdesign

Please don't be tempted to part with hard-earned cash for a copy of this book in the name of balance and fair play. I have just read the introduction on the website and that is 7 minutes of my life wasted that I'll never see again.

It consisted of a short biography of Prof Dawkins, followed by a list of quotes from people who did not enjoy the professors books as much as I did, and a promise that the rest of the book will contain a rebuttal of 'The Greatest Show on Earth'. However, there was no sign of any rebuttal in evidence, and anyway, it seemed that Mr Sarfati was attempting a rebuttal of the wrong book. I think he really has a problem with 'The God Delusion'.

I note the question mark at the end of the title. Interesting. So you're not sure then?

I also note that 1/2 million copies are now in print. Impressive. As I myself am a musician, Mr Sarfati might like to know that I have 1/2 million CD's of my music 'in print', currently residing in my Nan's garage. Maybe not so impressive after all.

Sat, 27 Mar 2010 15:42:00 UTC | #453027

ridelo's Avatar Comment 17 by ridelo

When I go to the Amazon website for this book, why is it that I cannot search in the text like for any decent book? Fear of being exposed as humbug instantly?

Sat, 27 Mar 2010 15:42:00 UTC | #453026

beelzebub's Avatar Comment 19 by beelzebub

Ha ha ha....
Take a look at the bottom of this "review" - it's written by Creation Ministries - surprise!
The book is published by "Creation Book Publishers", perhaps because no reputable publisher would touch it with a barge-pole?
LOL! :-)

Sat, 27 Mar 2010 15:50:00 UTC | #453029

Crazycharlie's Avatar Comment 20 by Crazycharlie

These flea writers should thank Richard for inspiring them to write books. Maybe give Richard a cut of their royalties, for instance.

Oh wait... No one buys these books...The royalty check wouldn't be enough to buy a cup of coffee.

Sat, 27 Mar 2010 16:23:00 UTC | #453043

Pilot22A's Avatar Comment 21 by Pilot22A

They preach to their audience, and believe you me, many of their audience include members of the Flat Earth Society, Moon Landing skeptics, and Big Foot believers.

My guess is that none of the above belong to organizations that trust logic and facts.

Sat, 27 Mar 2010 16:35:00 UTC | #453048

MrPickwick's Avatar Comment 22 by MrPickwick

What a flea! This guy maybe a chess master (he is just 2251 elo, nothing impressive) but he believes in Noah's flood:

"The Ark was built to be tremendously stable. God told Noah to make it 300x50x30 cubits (Genesis 6:15) which is about 140x23x13.5 metres or 459x75x44 feet, so its volume was 43,500 m3 (cubic metres) or 1.54 million cubic feet. This is just right to keep the boat from capsizing and to smooth the ride..."

Sat, 27 Mar 2010 16:54:00 UTC | #453053

Bonzai's Avatar Comment 23 by Bonzai

Boby Fisher would be a better chess master and even more crazy.

Sat, 27 Mar 2010 16:56:00 UTC | #453054

Alrischa's Avatar Comment 24 by Alrischa

This stinks of Francis Collins, whom, incidentally, I've never read. I have his book though (have had it for at least a year. I can't remember. Couldn't bother to keep track; I've read better things since its purchase), and heavens forbid I make the same mistake with this book. It's still on my shelf, and can anyone save me a day of my life to tell me whether it's anything more than "this is too perfect to be natural"? I have little doubt that it is, but I'm always open to new possibilities. Like the possibility that this book would not be followed by dozens others trying to do the same thing. A snowball's chance in hell, that is. Maybe I should just screw this and send it to a reputable recycling facility. Surely it's of more use there.

Sat, 27 Mar 2010 17:01:00 UTC | #453056

Kingasaurus's Avatar Comment 25 by Kingasaurus

Dr Jonathan Sarfati, scientist, chessmaster, logician and Christian apologist...


Creationism is definitely a scientific alternative to evolution.

Yup. It sure is. They say so, so it must be.

Strange, though, how you can almost never find anyone willing to champion it who isn't a religious apologist first (and proudly so, usually).

That tells any intelligent person that the axe they have to grind is most likely responsible for their so-called "scientific" opinions.

The fact that they themselves don't seem to notice this (or don't care) is quite funny. What you then get is these nitwits sometimes claiming that ID is separate from religion - pure science, and all that - and the remainder of the time they brazenly trumpet their faith-credentials as if it helps them. Do they think we don't notice?

The fact that creationist movements don't really exist anywhere in the world outside of places where politically powerful, fundamentalist, anti-evolution religious movements exist, is a GIANT red flag to any human being with a brain who is actually interested in the truth.

Anyone can try claiming that being an A-grade fundie has nothing to do with their disbelief in evolution, but no one takes that claim seriously, and the rest of them simply stop pretending and admit their religious views buttress everything else they think.

Either way, it's bankrupt thinking.

Sat, 27 Mar 2010 17:14:00 UTC | #453060

Jos Gibbons's Avatar Comment 26 by Jos Gibbons

So I went to the bottom of this page and learned that any comment I had could not be placed on the PRWeb link (how convenient); and, having read the excerpt here without finding any EXAMPLES of what RD did wrong, I felt I had to follow the link (after which I deleted it from my web history as a matter of ritual cleansing). Did any come? No, but promises they are there did. I have nothing there to refute, but I'll say this: why would you just reply to one advocate of the opposing view? When have RD or any other defenders of anything he defends, such as evolution, science, reason or atheism, ever written a book about one person with whom they disagreed, or one book by such a person? Yet many books exist targeting RD this way, two being by the same author, Alister McGrath. This is not how you honestly find the truth; this is how you use character assassinations of one person with whom you disagree as a way of defending your own position. Sarfati will have failed to defend what he thinks even if he makes TGSOE look rubbish (unless, of course, those promised evidences for creation or against evolution (NOT the same thing, BTW) work too). These people are all promises (of things that are strictly irrelevant) but no results.

Sat, 27 Mar 2010 18:34:00 UTC | #453085

the great teapot's Avatar Comment 27 by the great teapot

While Evolution maybe the greatest hoax on earth I would also like to see his other book "Religion probably also the greatest hoax on earth"
Although to be fair religion is faith based and as such doesn't claim to be based on any evidence. So perhaps I am doing him a dis-service.
Perhaps he should have called his book "Evolution, it's just as made up as religion"

Sat, 27 Mar 2010 18:41:00 UTC | #453088

Stonyground's Avatar Comment 28 by Stonyground

As I understand the way that science works, the theory of evolution could be overthrown if someone came up with a new theory that better explained the available evidence. This is what happened when Einstein's theory of relativity replaced Newton's take on gravity. Evolution could also, theoretically, be disproved by the discovery of a new piece of evidence which refutes it.

Creationists and IDers simply don't understand that they can only refute Darwin's theory by coming up with a better one or by discovering some new facts. Any better theory would have to be a naturalistic one by definition. A scientific theory works as an explanation of something, once they inject their god into it, it ceases to explain anything.

Sat, 27 Mar 2010 18:54:00 UTC | #453091

GBile's Avatar Comment 29 by GBile

At the Creation Ministries Website I came across this:

Article:
An awesome mind
A talk with one of Christianity’s foremost defenders, Jonathan Sarfati
by Gary Bates

In this article you find this:
"Logically, Jonathan (Sarfati) realized that if the Genesis account of the entrance of sin and death into God’s perfect world was not real history, then it eradicated the very reason why Christ (the God-man) had to come to earth to save mankind from the penalty their sin justly demanded."


Here they admit that without "Genesis" Christianity is doomed. So they HAVE to attack everything that contradicts "Genesis" and they HAVE to support all the nonsense that is in there, like grass eating lions in paradise, Noah and his floating zoo etc.
Later you find this:
"But prick him and he does bleed. In fact, one of the things that genuinely upsets him is seeing Christians 'twisting' Scripture. It would be fair to say that he has more intellectual respect for an 'out and out' atheist than for someone who reinterprets God’s Word away from its intended meaning."


So the 'moderates' are not only frowned upon from the atheist side, but the Creation Ministries fundies are 'not amused' either. Interesting !

Sat, 27 Mar 2010 19:01:00 UTC | #453095

friendlypig's Avatar Comment 30 by friendlypig

Comment #473302 by Roger Stanyard on March 27, 2010 at 3:09 pm
avatarSarfati is a chemist. His position on geology and eveolutionary biology is that of a not very gifted amateur.

Sarfati works, of course, for Creation Ministries Interneational which (surprise, surprise) hates Answers in Genesis because Kentuck Kook Ken ran off with its magazine subscription ist and cost it a pile of money.

This is the very same Creation Ministries International which is claiming that dinosaurs roamed the British Isles in the 15th Century. (I'm not joking on this.


Roger,

We used to have Luddites in Huddersfield, do they count as dinosaurs?

Sat, 27 Mar 2010 19:15:00 UTC | #453101