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

← Richard Dawkins is an embarrassment to atheism

Richard Dawkins is an embarrassment to atheism - Comments

hitchens_jnr's Avatar Comment 1 by hitchens_jnr

I think I'll just stand aside and watch the thoroughly deserved kicking this contemptible post is going to get.

Kick away, people!!!

Tue, 24 Aug 2010 12:03:53 UTC | #504669

Hammert1me's Avatar Comment 2 by Hammert1me

Don't feed the troll people.

It's an opinion that Richard shouldn't be allowed to state his opinion, because it disagrees with another opinion.

I'll be ignoring that then.....

Tue, 24 Aug 2010 12:09:35 UTC | #504672

viralmeme's Avatar Comment 3 by viralmeme

I'm an atheist, but ..

translation: I'm one of a number of nymshifting fundamentalists whos self appointed mission is to troll `atheist' sites and disingenuously discredit the msg by claiming membership of the targeted group. I call it lying for Jesus .. :)

Tue, 24 Aug 2010 12:17:54 UTC | #504675

man with stick's Avatar Comment 4 by man with stick

He's not the Messiah, he's a very naughty boy!

I think you maybe confusing the tools of the media for grabbing viewing figures with richards position as an atheist. Anyway it was very kind of Mr Dawkins for him to allow such open criticism on his own forum, rather than say some sharia lawed ass whooping.

Tue, 24 Aug 2010 12:18:26 UTC | #504676

Jay G's Avatar Comment 5 by Jay G

I think Richard Dawkins is attempting to provoke people into thinking instead of just accepting the teachings of religion without critical thinking and analysis. Sometimes you have to hit people hard to get their attention. If what he has to say is not to your liking, then don't listen.

Tue, 24 Aug 2010 12:20:42 UTC | #504677

TW10's Avatar Comment 6 by TW10

  1. Richard is not aggressive. He just points out stupidity when it is present.
  2. When religion tramples over the rights of children, women etc. somebody needs to stand up for them.
  3. He's never claimed to speak on behalf of all atheists. Sometimes I feel he (or Hitchens etc) goes too far, but I've never been worried that people will think he speaks for me. We're different people.
  4. He's passionate about Biology and religion is making a mockery of that. His old books were very thought provoking, but as he's grown, he's realised that hundreds of millions of people are standing in the way of the progress of science. This needs to be addressed.
  5. We need an atheist in the public realm to get people thinking about these issues. I'm not sure if I ever actually seriously believed in a god, but it was him who made me actively disbelieve. Whether you like or hate him, he opens us to important ideas, which can only be a good thing.
  6. Your last paragraph ("He has more in common with the medieval people who flayed themselves and burned innocent people...") makes me think your rant is a satirical one. He's a very calm person that I could easily see as a friend.
  7. I can't be bothered to continue.

Tue, 24 Aug 2010 12:21:12 UTC | #504678

Dhamma's Avatar Comment 7 by Dhamma

I've never understood why anybody would want to troll, but it's hard to take him seriously.

Richard is not our leader, and has never been appointed as such. Neither by us, nor himself.

You don't want him to be associated with your "belief"? What belief are you talking about? And are you not more concerned about being associated with Stalin than Dawkins then?

Unfortunately people will associate atheism with its prominent figures, though I'm very happy Dawkins is one of those figures.

Tue, 24 Aug 2010 12:21:15 UTC | #504679

Dr Doctor's Avatar Comment 8 by Dr Doctor

Anyone who enters the threshold of someone's property to insult them has no right to teach anyone else about behaviour.

Thats you by the way.

Tue, 24 Aug 2010 12:26:10 UTC | #504680

smegely's Avatar Comment 9 by smegely

I like feeding trolls, they are a fascinating species, worthy of further study.

Whilst Dawkins does sometimes get a little bit cross about stuff, I think your characterisation of him is rather one sided. If you can bear to watch his interview with Wendy Wright http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YFjoEgYOgRo you might be astonished at how calm, polite and gentlemanly he is when faced with such ignorance and hostility. I'm sure I would have lost it within a few minutes.

Tue, 24 Aug 2010 12:27:09 UTC | #504682

mmurray's Avatar Comment 10 by mmurray

Take his latest Channel 4 trailer, for example – it is ridiculous to suggest that religion is the source of all evil, the only thing which “makes good people do bad things”.

Richard (praise be His name) would not say that religion is the only cause of people doing bad things. That would contradict scripture. He is perfect and cannot, by definition do this. Surely you have memorised TGD Preface Para 4 Verse 1:

In January 2006 I presented a two-part television documentary on British television (Channel Four) called Root of All Evil? From the start, I didn't like the title. Religion is not the root of all evil, for no one thing is the root of all anything.

The Channel 4 producers must be blasphemers and heretics but there is hope for you. Recant from your mistakes and open your heart to Dawkins. Otherwise you will be thrown into the outer darkness and there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

Michael

PS: How did this troll get through moderation ?

Updated: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 12:39:22 UTC | #504683

SaganTheCat's Avatar Comment 11 by SaganTheCat

Hmmm, interesting. Not an argument I’ve ever heard before. This is certainly food for thought, thank you for posting.

Within minutes of registering you've managed to put forward a devastating character assassination that the rest of us are simply not mentally equipped to resist.

I think you can chalk this up as a success. go back and tell the others in your church group "mission accomplished". I for one shall be looking for a new high-priest of atheism to worship

lot's of talk of your "hate" and "belief" in there but otherwise a very worthy attept at trolling

Tue, 24 Aug 2010 12:32:14 UTC | #504684

QuestioningAuthority's Avatar Comment 12 by QuestioningAuthority

Everyone is entitled to their own opinions. It doesn't mean you NEED to share them.

Discretion being the better part of valour, and all that.

Luckily, I know how to /ignore that which I don't agree with, for the rest who cannot, remember, Marquis of Queensberry rules.

Tue, 24 Aug 2010 12:36:52 UTC | #504685

Mark Jones's Avatar Comment 13 by Mark Jones

I was brought up in a Christian household. Baptised a Methodist and confirmed an Anglican, I ended up as head chorister at Newcastle Cathedral.

LOL; next you'll be saying Andy Carroll for England.

Tue, 24 Aug 2010 12:37:13 UTC | #504686

Cestriana's Avatar Comment 14 by Cestriana

Reading between the lines, I think we have an ego-tripper here who's trying to draw attention to himself.

He would like us all to believe that he has a radical theory worthy of exposition and serious debate.

Tue, 24 Aug 2010 12:38:27 UTC | #504687

Rosbif's Avatar Comment 15 by Rosbif

"attaches his name ubiquitously to the belief that I happen to hold"

What belief? Atheism is non-belief.

Anyway, I disagree. Richard has been increasingly more polite and restrained in the face of complete loons who think they are clever by trotting out the same already-rebuffed-BS that we, let alone Richard, have heard a thousand times. I sometimes wonder how he keeps his calm.

I also at no time recall Richard saying religion is the cause of ALL evil. Yes, it is A cause of evil and an uneccessary one, but RD has never said it is the cause of ALL.

"Is there a worse posterboy for any movement in Britain than Richard Dawkins?" :

Tony Blair

Prince Charles

Arch.Bish Williamson

The Pope

....

need more?

Tue, 24 Aug 2010 12:40:03 UTC | #504688

Ignorant Amos's Avatar Comment 16 by Ignorant Amos

Mark Wallace is entitled to his opinion. The concept that it has any bearing on reality obviously does not concern Mark one iota. Given the choice of a million pernicious Mark Wallace's, or a whiff of vapour of one Richard Dawkins, I'm on the side of reason and evidence, guess which one that is?

Given that this is may be a troll post to encourage a rise, I will refrain from commenting further on this nefarious article until convinced of it's sincerity.

Tue, 24 Aug 2010 12:42:08 UTC | #504691

thebaldgit's Avatar Comment 17 by thebaldgit

Mark Wallace is proof of the old saying that opinions are like arseholes, that we've all got one. But in this case to say that Richard is an embarrassment to atheism is total and utter garbage, if he had bothered to watch the faith school programme properly he would have seen that Richard showed the kind of restraint in the face of the sort of nonsense regarding a human right to educate children in any form of religious bigotry they like that I could never have managed without either laughing in the person's face or simply treating them with the contempt they deserve.

Tue, 24 Aug 2010 12:49:22 UTC | #504695

Tarantella's Avatar Comment 18 by Tarantella

Blockquote I'm an atheist

There are no atheists here, only people who think they are atheists.

Tue, 24 Aug 2010 12:55:12 UTC | #504699

MarkOnTheRiver's Avatar Comment 19 by MarkOnTheRiver

Sometimes, it’s almost enough to make me want to change back to believing in God – half to escape association with him, and half just to spite him.

Ok off you go, and shut the door on the way out. . . . or are you hoping for a; "No Mark, don't leave us!"

Don't hold your breath.

Tue, 24 Aug 2010 12:58:19 UTC | #504700

Jay G's Avatar Comment 20 by Jay G

Comment 10 by mmurray :

Take his latest Channel 4 trailer, for example – it is ridiculous to suggest that religion is the source of all evil, the only thing which “makes good people do bad things”.

Richard (praise be His name) would not say that religion is the only cause of people doing bad things. That would contradict scripture. He is perfect and cannot, by definition do this. Surely you have memorised TGD Preface Para 4 Verse 1:

In January 2006 I presented a two-part television documentary on British television (Channel Four) called Root of All Evil? From the start, I didn't like the title. Religion is not the root of all evil, for no one thing is the root of all anything.

The Channel 4 producers must be blasphemers and heretics but there is hope for you. Recant from your mistakes and open your heart to Dawkins. Otherwise you will be thrown into the outer darkness and there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

Michael PS: How did this troll get through moderation ?

I thought the High Office for the Protection of Purity of Atheism of the Church of Dawkins already published guidelines for handling this sort of deviant thought. We need an inquisition and an auto-da-fe so as to build up the faith of all those who are loyal followers of the Cult of Dawkins.

Tue, 24 Aug 2010 12:58:52 UTC | #504701

Mark Jones's Avatar Comment 21 by Mark Jones

MW appears to be attention seeking - he's simply regurgitating the same lies we hear from theists and faitheists all the time. A sad character.

Tue, 24 Aug 2010 13:01:37 UTC | #504702

mmurray's Avatar Comment 22 by mmurray

Comment 20 by Jay G :

I thought the High Office for the Protection of Purity of Atheism of the Church of Dawkins already published guidelines for handling this sort of deviant thought. We need an inquisition and an auto-da-fe so as to build up the faith of all those who are loyal followers of the Cult of Dawkins.

Yes indeed time to stoke the fires and heat up the pointy metal things.

Michael

Tue, 24 Aug 2010 13:01:56 UTC | #504703

Dhamma's Avatar Comment 23 by Dhamma

There are no atheists here, only people who think they are atheists.

You'd care to elaborate? I'm eager to read your highly insightful answer.

Tue, 24 Aug 2010 13:05:31 UTC | #504706

Zelig's Avatar Comment 24 by Zelig

This is beyond silly.

Tue, 24 Aug 2010 13:07:56 UTC | #504707

Cluebot's Avatar Comment 25 by Cluebot

Hmm. Maybe CrashBangWallace's mental straw-man of Richard Dawkins is fast becoming a "frothing-at-the-mouth, bigoted zealot," but I haven't noticed any corresponding change in the actual Richard Dawkins. While forthright as always in his criticisms, he remains scrupulously objective, eloquent, rational and composed - not to mention far more patient than I would be under similar circumstances.

Mr. Wallace, there are many far worse "posterboys" than Richard for atheism. The baseless, hyperbole-flinging wall of piffle at the head of this discussion qualifies you to be among them. Perhaps you have mistaken your own prejudice for reality?

Updated: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 13:18:13 UTC | #504711

God fearing Atheist's Avatar Comment 26 by God fearing Atheist

No

Tue, 24 Aug 2010 13:15:36 UTC | #504712

Richard Dawkins's Avatar Comment 27 by Richard Dawkins

Would this, or perhaps this, or this, be representative of my contrarian, hectoring, snarling, bigoted, frothing-at-the-mouth television style, or did Mark Wallace have other examples in mind? If so, I'd love to hear them.

Richard

Tue, 24 Aug 2010 13:21:06 UTC | #504713

AtheistEgbert's Avatar Comment 28 by AtheistEgbert

Obvious troll. (Although I may add that it's a nicely written piece of tripe. Perhaps mr CrashBangWallace works for the Guardian.)

Updated: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 13:33:40 UTC | #504714

bird on the wire's Avatar Comment 29 by bird on the wire

What did I miss? Can I see Richard frothing-at-the-mouth too? PLEEEEEASE

Tue, 24 Aug 2010 13:29:08 UTC | #504718

MumboJumbo's Avatar Comment 30 by MumboJumbo

Troll thinks, "yummy, yummy, more food; Ha, ha, I even got Professor Dawkins to feed me."

Tue, 24 Aug 2010 13:33:14 UTC | #504720