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

← OMG! It's Richard Dawkins

OMG! It's Richard Dawkins - Comments

danconquer's Avatar Comment 1 by danconquer

Ha. Ha. Ha. "Dawkins does not like his public image as atheism’s rottweiler", so writes the hack from The Times.

Next time he is back inside Murdoch's media fortress in Wapping, he should take a quick stroll just a few corridors down and speak to his colleagues at The Sun. Then he could ask them why it is that, almost invariably, whenever they mention Richard Dawkins, his name is immediately prefaced with the words 'militant atheist'.

The Sun smears shit everywhere. And then The Times comes along proclaiming 'what is that awful odour?!'

Thu, 09 Jun 2011 13:05:48 UTC | #636375

Teg's Avatar Comment 2 by Teg

Bond villain. Damn, I wish I'd been there. It would have been worth the cost and the time and everything just for that.

Thu, 09 Jun 2011 13:05:58 UTC | #636377

SaganTheCat's Avatar Comment 3 by SaganTheCat

what a frighteningly mediocre journalist

Thu, 09 Jun 2011 13:07:28 UTC | #636380

Hendrix is my gOD's Avatar Comment 4 by Hendrix is my gOD

For the sort of people who don’t go to atheist conventions, there is a pleasingly symmetric way of describing the sort of people who do: it’s another religion.

So, if software developers have a convention and enthusiastically discuss common interests, that would be a religion. The problem with religious people is that they insist on telling everyone else they are religion instead of allowing people to define for themselves what they are.

Thu, 09 Jun 2011 13:26:09 UTC | #636386

Sara12's Avatar Comment 5 by Sara12

I read somewhere, I think in the preface to the 30th anniversary edition of The Selfish Gene, where Richard writes that when he does book signings, no matter what book he is promoting, people almost invariably ask him to sign that book, since it is his first. At an atheist convention it makes sense to expect that he'd sign The God Delusion a million times. If I ever get the opportunity though, I'd ask for my copy of Unweaving the Rainbow to be signed, as that is my favorite. I love the bar code analogy he uses in several chapters throughout the book. I always think Richard speaks best when speaking on the eloquence of science. Not that the anti-religion stuff isn't good too. But the simple elegance of science and the natural world comes out more eloquently and more passionately.

Thu, 09 Jun 2011 13:41:48 UTC | #636393

Marc Country's Avatar Comment 6 by Marc Country

That article is retarded, but, it is TIME magazine, so what do you expect, besides middlebrow pap for the Heartland? I hope the writer is assigned to cover Justin Bieber's next girl-school visit.

Thu, 09 Jun 2011 13:42:39 UTC | #636394

God fearing Atheist's Avatar Comment 7 by God fearing Atheist

They are here, they explain, “to have a dialogue"

From the video I saw it was a monologue.

Thu, 09 Jun 2011 13:46:03 UTC | #636395

Vorlund's Avatar Comment 8 by Vorlund

Gadzooks! this waste of good ink has not the merest hint of style. A fundamental principle of good writing is to write about something and then! One should at least have a basic understanding of what one writes. These principles are soundly violated in this dull drifting drivel.

Thu, 09 Jun 2011 13:47:01 UTC | #636396

mmurray's Avatar Comment 9 by mmurray

Comment 6 by Marc Country :

That article is retarded, but, it is TIME magazine,

No it is The Times. A once great newspaper.

Michael

Thu, 09 Jun 2011 13:55:20 UTC | #636398

Marc Country's Avatar Comment 10 by Marc Country

OMG... THE TIMES!!! Not TIME Magaizine?

WTF? It made sense, almost, before, but now... I'm baffled.

Well at least now readers of The TIMES(!) have a clear picture of the convention: it's like a religion, but actually, not. It has members who are young female bloggers and the middle aged, so therefore is made up almost exclusively of old and beardy or young and baggy men. Some questioners mentioned the "design" of the universe, but Dawkin's explained that it's just the illusion of design, so everyone is still confused, but at least nobody got angry at one another. Dawkins says he isn't "fiery", but then I caught him saying how he doesn't like religion and thinks it is ridiculous... gotcha! Imagine if someone said that about, say, hockey, or something! FIERY!!! Too provocative, innit? A call for comedic treatment of something you dislike is beyond the pale, n'est pas?

Someone should tell the reporter that, in addition to giving Dawkins his proper titles of Saint and Rock Star, you might want to mention that he's the author of several books, and a biologist, etc., too.

Thu, 09 Jun 2011 14:00:17 UTC | #636402

beebub's Avatar Comment 11 by beebub

I think it's a rather silly, juvenile piece. He's way over stating the reaction to Dawkins. Sure some asked for photos, some for autographs on their books, but it was a tiny minority. Is this the best he could come up with on a weekend convention with more than 20 speakers over three days? The audience was wide an varied and there were many more people there than 'young men in baggy T-shirts and older men with interesting facial hair' and whole range of issues discussed, none of which resembled atheism being 'another religion'. I suspect he had preconcieved notions of what he was expecting and rather than write about what actually happened, he slotted in a few bits and pieces to match what he'd already decided to write about. No mention, for example of the extraordinarliy brave Maryam Namazie. The whole thing is pretty lame.

Thu, 09 Jun 2011 14:25:27 UTC | #636407

sunbeamforjeebus's Avatar Comment 12 by sunbeamforjeebus

Unfortunately I read this over my bacon and egg this morning and all I can say,with the benefit of having read(too) many articles by Whipple, is that he is a twat!

Thu, 09 Jun 2011 15:17:26 UTC | #636428

Ignorant Amos's Avatar Comment 13 by Ignorant Amos

Abstemious, what a fantastic word, it describes exactly the opposite of what the journalist, I use that term loosely here, TOM WHIPPLE - THE TIMES, is doing in this article, right down to a tee. Like the purpose of a gathering of non believers in supernatural deities nearly (tongue placed firmly in cheek).

The fact that he begs the question...

But why have 350 dedicated atheists come from as far away as Australia to talk about, well, something they don’t believe in?

Declares him profoundly ignorant of the world around him, but even then he doesn't realise he half answered the the question himself.

While Hamza and his friends distribute leaflets in the hope of putting a human face on Islam, inside there are leaflets for “transforming atheists from bogeymen to human beings”.

Thu, 09 Jun 2011 15:35:51 UTC | #636434

Capt. Bloodeye's Avatar Comment 14 by Capt. Bloodeye

If I were attending a conference and happened to find myself in proximity to Professor Dawkins, I would not ask for an autograph, nor photograph him. However, he is for me one of the greatest living people and a personal hero of mine.

Thu, 09 Jun 2011 16:38:26 UTC | #636450

James Keen's Avatar Comment 15 by James Keen

I read the beginning of this article, and I am too embarrassed to have continued so far, as I've never been compared to a Justin Beiber fan before!

But here's the video the journalist took by accident:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHgSV4xEP0U

Dawkins was smiling!

Thu, 09 Jun 2011 17:02:02 UTC | #636459

danconquer's Avatar Comment 16 by danconquer

Hi James! I felt bad for you when I read the article. I thought "Whoever this James Keen chap is, I hope he isn't reading this". Don't worry about it though. That's how News International "journalists" behave.

It's interesting isn't it... To think that the hack from The Times bothered to lie about such a small little nugget of information, claiming that Richard was not smiling for the picture when, as the video clearly shows, he was. So arises the inevitable question: If he will lie about that, what else will he make-up?

You could write to The Times and ask for a small correction, or a space in the letters page. But you might just as well be asking for a game of Scrabble with Rupert on his yacht next sunday teatime.

"News Corporation has shaped global media by ensuring the public’s needs are met and that our offerings are of the highest caliber. Today, hundreds of millions of people around the world trust us for the best quality and choice in news, sports and entertainment. This public trust is our Company’s most valuable asset: one earned every day through our scrupulous adherence to the principles of integrity and fair dealing." Rupert Murdoch, May 2011.

Thu, 09 Jun 2011 17:22:51 UTC | #636467

Philster61's Avatar Comment 17 by Philster61

As typical its behind a paywall. I cannot imagine The Times making any money out of paywall if it prints mediocrity like this.....

Thu, 09 Jun 2011 17:48:06 UTC | #636475

James Keen's Avatar Comment 18 by James Keen

Well if Richard wants to write to the Times to complain about the incorrect smile phrase he can lol

The reporter was a nice enough guy though, he was friendly and did take the photo and video for me after all haha, but yeah, I'm sure the Justin Beiber comparison was just there to attract attention.

Richard was very friendly and was in lots of photos, but I would say it was apparent it wasn't something he enjoyed doing, not that that's surprising though!

Thu, 09 Jun 2011 17:54:34 UTC | #636477

sbooder's Avatar Comment 19 by sbooder

I do not go to atheist conventions..funny you should ask, mainly because I do not have £500 to spend on nothing.

This piece of shit article might as well have been a clip of Max Boyce from the 70s saying "I know...because I was there", really were you, you had better let people know then...ah, you have, what a shame.

Plus trying to write as Stewart Lee presents stand-up, dose not work, it reads badly and is not funny, mainly because you are not Stewart Lee.

Thu, 09 Jun 2011 18:01:15 UTC | #636479

James Keen's Avatar Comment 20 by James Keen

The cost was 100 Euros, 5 Muslims went.

Thu, 09 Jun 2011 18:03:01 UTC | #636480

sbooder's Avatar Comment 21 by sbooder

I still do not have £99 to spend on nothing!

Thu, 09 Jun 2011 18:17:20 UTC | #636486

HardNosedSkeptic's Avatar Comment 22 by HardNosedSkeptic

Randall Calvin ... Born a Catholic, then reborn a Jehovah’s Witness, he is now an atheist.

Same as me.

Thu, 09 Jun 2011 18:17:41 UTC | #636487

danconquer's Avatar Comment 23 by danconquer

Incidentally, regarding the bizarre Justine BiBeer (or whatever the hell her name is) reference which was so gratuitously shoehorned into the article for no good reason...

I recently read about a leaked memo from the Telegraph to it's churnalists, instructing them to try to insert the names of whatever celebrities happened to be "trending" on Twatter, or appearing in the top ten popular searches on various engines, in order to push their articles up the listings. So you get reports saying things like "Scientists in Mexico, a country Paris Hilton visited on holiday 8 years ago, have discovered a new species of woodlouse", typically accompanied by a 3cm square black/white image of woodlouse, and an enormous half-page colour shot of Paris Hilton.

Thu, 09 Jun 2011 18:23:03 UTC | #636490

Hellboy2's Avatar Comment 24 by Hellboy2

Richard Dawkins- rock star of the godless. Priceless!

Thu, 09 Jun 2011 18:35:17 UTC | #636494

pasadena beggar's Avatar Comment 25 by pasadena beggar

How has this journalist managed to write a seemingly innocuous piece about Prof. Dawkins, managing at the same time to make Prof. Dawkins seem unpleasant?

Thu, 09 Jun 2011 19:27:20 UTC | #636508

Zelig's Avatar Comment 26 by Zelig

This is "journalism"? Makes you proud to live in a mature democracy . . .

Thu, 09 Jun 2011 19:58:02 UTC | #636525

ConnedCatholic's Avatar Comment 27 by ConnedCatholic

Comment 14 by Capt. Bloodeye :

If I were attending a conference and happened to find myself in proximity to Professor Dawkins, I would not ask for an autograph, nor photograph him. However, he is for me one of the greatest living people and a personal hero of mine.

Agreed

Thu, 09 Jun 2011 21:21:16 UTC | #636554

debonnesnouvelles's Avatar Comment 28 by debonnesnouvelles

Comment 14 by Capt. Bloodeye :

If I were attending a conference and happened to find myself in proximity to Professor Dawkins, I would not ask for an autograph, nor photograph him. However, he is for me one of the greatest living people and a personal hero of mine.

Agreed. Although I believe that if a colourful reptile asked Richard for an autograph or to have a picture taken together, he would probably agree ;-)

Thu, 09 Jun 2011 21:46:37 UTC | #636563

Mrkimbo's Avatar Comment 29 by Mrkimbo

Strewth, what a load of adolescent, would-be-clever puffery. The man is so occupied in trying to be ironic and distainful he completely fails to convey anything whatever of substance.

Thu, 09 Jun 2011 21:55:52 UTC | #636570

Alan4discussion's Avatar Comment 30 by Alan4discussion

Comment 1 by danconquer

Ha. Ha. Ha. "Dawkins does not like his public image as atheism’s rottweiler", so writes the hack from The Times.

Comment 25 by pasadena beggar

How has this journalist managed to write a seemingly innocuous piece about Prof. Dawkins, managing at the same time to make Prof. Dawkins seem unpleasant?

The gentlemen of the press are long extinct. The common newshounds now dominate the media!

Thu, 09 Jun 2011 22:32:57 UTC | #636581