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

← Review: The Genius of Charles Darwin

Review: The Genius of Charles Darwin - Comments

Lindenfors's Avatar Comment 1 by Lindenfors

I'm getting my copy of this TV-series straight away!

God Probably Doesn't Exist: http://godprobablydoesntexist.com/

Fri, 23 Apr 2010 14:12:00 UTC | #462114

Chris Roberts's Avatar Comment 2 by Chris Roberts

Who could ever forget Bishop Boniface Adoyo - who is not an African ape, but a human being?

Or John Mackay, the guy who thinks it bnever rained before Noah's flood because the bible doesn't have any mention of rain before then?

Then there's Wendy "show me the intermediates" Wright. Just as deluded.

I really enjoyed watching this on TV & I bought the DVD for my kids, to help introduce them to evolution and critical thinking.

Personally, I think it is the best documentary that Richard has done - even though I havn't seen the extended interviews.

Fri, 23 Apr 2010 14:17:00 UTC | #462117

Pseudoniempje's Avatar Comment 3 by Pseudoniempje

2. Comment #482876
"Or John Mackay, the guy who thinks it bnever rained before Noah's flood because the bible doesn't have any mention of rain before then?"

Still not the stupidest creationist I ever heard.
There was once this guy on a dutch television channel. When he was asked why fish were lower in the geologic record then birds, he said it was because they drowned first during Noah's flood.

Edit: Does this mean Noah had a giant aquarium on his boat as well?

Fri, 23 Apr 2010 15:25:00 UTC | #462149

epeeist's Avatar Comment 4 by epeeist

Comment #482876 by Nails:

Or John Mackay, the guy who thinks it bnever rained before Noah's flood because the bible doesn't have any mention of rain before then?
One question I raised with a creationist who was on this site some while back was whether there was a rainbow previous to Noah's flood. He reckoned not.

This would get around the problem I then pointed out to him, namely that this would imply that the laws of optics were different before the flood.

Fri, 23 Apr 2010 15:34:00 UTC | #462151

yanquetino's Avatar Comment 5 by yanquetino

Then there's Wendy "show me the intermediates" Wright. Just as deluded.

I so wish that Dawkins would have replied by simply holding up a mirror for her.

Duh-uh! ALL life forms are "intermediates."

Fri, 23 Apr 2010 15:40:00 UTC | #462153

PositiveAtheist's Avatar Comment 6 by PositiveAtheist

Nice to hear some good news after Martin Rees and Neil Tyson have been slagging him off on The Science Network. Satoshi Kanazawa has also been having a pop as well, in his blog at Psychology Today dot com.

Fri, 23 Apr 2010 16:16:00 UTC | #462161

crookedshoes's Avatar Comment 7 by crookedshoes

My advanced students take a national test on Monday May 10. After that we have one whole month of whatever I want to plan for them. We are going to watch several important DVD shows, this being one of them. We are also watching Evolution on trail: the dover Pa trial. We learn how to read blood smears and function as a hematology technician (my summer job). Anyone have any other video suggestions or lessons? I show Planet Earth and Evolution (Nova)and pieces of Growing up in the Universe.

Fri, 23 Apr 2010 16:57:00 UTC | #462173

Charisma's Avatar Comment 8 by Charisma

I just watched the interview with Wright agian, wow she really creeps me out. She seriously wanted Richard to just pull some fossils out of his pockets or something.

I'm getting a copy of this for sure!

Fri, 23 Apr 2010 17:36:00 UTC | #462180

Chris Roberts's Avatar Comment 9 by Chris Roberts

3. Comment #482909 by Pseudoniempje on April 23, 2010 at 4:25 pm

Still not the stupidest creationist I ever heard.
There was once this guy on a dutch television channel. When he was asked why fish were lower in the geologic record then birds, he said it was because they drowned first during Noah's flood.

Yeah, that is pretty stupid.

4. Comment #482911 by epeeist on April 23, 2010 at 4:34 pm

One question I raised with a creationist who was on this site some while back was whether there was a rainbow previous to Noah's flood. He reckoned not.

This would get around the problem I then pointed out to him, namely that this would imply that the laws of optics were different before the flood.

If it never rained before 'The Flood', why did god not have to explain what was happening?
There was no mention of a flood before Gen 6, so how come they know what that was?

5. Comment #482913 by yanquetino on April 23, 2010 at 4:40 pm

I so wish that Dawkins would have replied by simply holding up a mirror for her.

Duh-uh! ALL life forms are "intermediates."

She wouldn't have got it, and possibly used it as a source of amusement amongst her history-denying friends.

Fri, 23 Apr 2010 17:39:00 UTC | #462181

Charisma's Avatar Comment 10 by Charisma

I think it would have been great if Richard drove Wright to a museum, and dragged her inside to show her.

Fri, 23 Apr 2010 17:56:00 UTC | #462185

Dr. Strangegod's Avatar Comment 11 by Dr. Strangegod

crookedshoes - A little dose of Cosmos never hurt anyone, hilarious fashion and haircuts aside.

Does anyone know if this sort of thing ever ends up on Netflix?

EDIT: It does! Almost all of Richard's DVDs are there. No GOCD yet, but maybe soon? Mm?

Fri, 23 Apr 2010 18:34:00 UTC | #462204

The Plc's Avatar Comment 12 by The Plc

I really want to watch the extended Dan Dennett interview. His time on the main doc was painfully short.

Also, when is Dawkins doing his next bit of broadcasting work? He should do one about the indoctrination of children in faith schools.

Fri, 23 Apr 2010 18:58:00 UTC | #462212

keithapm's Avatar Comment 13 by keithapm

This program was, as usual from Prof. Dawkins, both informative and inspiring. Must get around to buying it. Actually I want to get ALL of his stuff on DVD. May drop some subtle hints come my birthday :P

Fri, 23 Apr 2010 19:54:00 UTC | #462226

Saganic Rites's Avatar Comment 14 by Saganic Rites

Our daughter gave birth to our first grandson a fortnight ago, and when we went to see them her first words were "Here he is Dad, evolution's little miracle"!
If pride's a sin I'm glad I'm an atheist!
Even better, her mother-in-law asked when she was going to arrange his christening!
"When God knocks on the door and asks me himself" was her beautiful reply.
Score one for reason!

Fri, 23 Apr 2010 23:41:00 UTC | #462247

SilentMike's Avatar Comment 15 by SilentMike

This made me want to see the thing again. Damn it. I really don't have time...

Sat, 24 Apr 2010 00:12:00 UTC | #462255

Jos Gibbons's Avatar Comment 16 by Jos Gibbons

Thanks to a volcano I've not been here for over a fortnight, but my return will begin in earnest by exposing the vacuousness of accommodationists' arguments herein.

[RD] is convinced that science teachers in public schools are tiptoeing too respectfully around religious beliefs that are inconsistent with scientific facts. The teachers explain that their job is to teach science, not religion — a good model for this country if we are to remain consistent with judicial rulings.
You do realise the UK has different laws from the US, right?
It is hard to know whether, when, and how children will accommodate a conflict with their family's religious views
Why bring their family in to it? Let me guess: you equate "Christian child" with "child of Christian parents". In any case, you can't call RD naive for saying teachers are tiptoeing to respect faith if you bother mentioning the difficulties of respecting faith in discussing educatinal responsibilities. Either science lessons should just teach science and not care about other issues, or they shouldn't; and, if you advocate the latter, don't call RD naive for saying others agree with you. You're the US's biggest authority on how it's done!
in a democracy public education is burdened with politics, so it is not possible to offer a general recommendation where in the educational system prior to university this challenge can be effectively introduced.
This is exactly what RD is talking about: don’t teach something because lots of people don’t want you to. Nonsense. The criteria for teaching something in science should be scientific ones, not democratic ones. How well does the evidence support it? How integral is it to understanding much of the world? Have the students learned enough scientific concepts to follow it? On all of these issues, evolution is a success par excellence.

Sat, 24 Apr 2010 07:52:00 UTC | #462354

Dave H's Avatar Comment 17 by Dave H

crookedshoes, if you want to show your students a good general science video, I recommend "The Pleasure of Finding Things Out" by Richard Feynman.

Mon, 26 Apr 2010 11:25:00 UTC | #463004

LittleFluffyClouds's Avatar Comment 18 by LittleFluffyClouds

This series was bad. Too much atheism, not enough Darwin.

Mon, 26 Apr 2010 18:38:00 UTC | #463138

Eljonno's Avatar Comment 19 by Eljonno

I know that this isn't the proper avenue for this question, I haven't had a reponse when I emailed. What happened to the forums? They haven't been active since febuary.

Mon, 26 Apr 2010 19:53:00 UTC | #463167

JohnCletus's Avatar Comment 20 by JohnCletus

I don't know where all you evolutionists heads are. I believe evolution theory is bunk. It is only a theory.

I am a creationist. In fact, I an a Recent Creationist. I believe that the universe and everything in it (including our memories of what happened yesterday, etc.) was created at 7:15 this morning. And you cannot prove me wrong!!!

P.S. I hope to God (so to speak) that the moderator of this site understands irony, if not sarcasm.

Fri, 30 Apr 2010 03:42:00 UTC | #464140

Ryosuke1208's Avatar Comment 21 by Ryosuke1208

Watched twice this program.
Ive never realised that evolution was even being questioned since i was born in a secular family and here 80% are catholics and education doesnt have problems with the teaching of evolution. But i was amazed of how many people rejected the idea and found even more ridiculous the idea that the earth is 6000 years old, it just blew my mind when i knew that that my life changed forerver towars the defense and promotion of science and reason.

Thank you Richard, you have been some of the most influential persons in my life (:

Sat, 01 May 2010 08:28:00 UTC | #464492

hanktheman's Avatar Comment 22 by hanktheman

As a non-specialist in the field of evolution, and occasionally having the chance to discuss it with other non-specialists, in particular creationists, I was wondering about the following line of thinking:

- If creationists accept limited variation, then they must also accept that there is some mechanism in place to limit evolution on a large scale. Since there appears to be no such mechanism, evolution must be not only a fact but inevitable, as all genetic material is potentially mutable.

Sat, 01 May 2010 20:33:00 UTC | #464694