Poll
22%
22%
22%
33%
Has written many books and had numerous TV shows attacking religion.
If you never heard of him heres a few links to get the general idea.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wcG3yoSAdk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaKryi3605
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDqN8ymhkKI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6XXiwZ3GZk
http://richarddawkins.net/
I think that he's better off with a specific point to prove, like in most of his books. When he's allowed to just rant, he shows his own prejudices, biases, and becomes nothing less than a jerk toward large groups of people. He hopes to be a catalyst for scientific inquiry and atheist support, but he ends up simply polarizing the opposition to him.
A lot of his books and articles are much better, however. I've read 2 of them and enjoyed them both, both from a reading enjoyment standpoint and also one of scientific curiosity. I haven't read his new "The God Delusion", so I can't comment on it, but his arguments certainly aren't without merit.
Bicnarok-
I read the options presented in your poll, and I must say, that I was very disappointed. I simply cannot vote upon the options that you presented! I would say--for those interested--that Richard Dawkins is a brilliant man. So brilliant in fact, that I do not understand why (or how) he "convinced" himself of such convictions. Any one who has spent time honestly studying evolution, shares my views and knows that evolution fails to explain "the origins of life." And not just by a little bit, either. I mean, literally, science hasn't the first clue! I am forced to conclude, that he, has philosophical issues relating to his "in ability" in reaching an honest view of the evidence. I love the man to death, and I enjoy hearing his views, but he makes himself look like an idiot. I'm sorry, that is my humble opinion. See for yourself:
Originally posted by ushomefree
Bicnarok-I read the options presented in your poll, and I must say, that I was very disappointed. I simply cannot vote upon the options that you presented! I would say--for those interested--that Richard Dawkins is a brilliant man. So brilliant in fact, that I do not understand why (or how) he "convinced" himself of such convictions. Any one who has spent time honestly studying evolution, shares my views and knows that evolution fails to explain "the origins of life." And not just by a little bit, either. I mean, literally, science hasn't the first clue! I am forced to conclude, that he, has philosophical issues relating to his "in ability" in reaching an honest view of the evidence. I love the man to death, and I enjoy hearing his views, but he makes himself look like an idiot. I'm sorry, that is my humble opinion. See for yourself:
Why would you think that evolution or science would have anything to do with question of the origin of life? If you studied evolution, you would know that evolution never deals with that question.
Originally posted by ushomefree
Bicnarok-I read the options presented in your poll, and I must say, that I was very disappointed. I simply cannot vote upon the options that you presented! I would say--for those interested--that Richard Dawkins is a brilliant man. So brilliant in fact, that I do not understand why (or how) he "convinced" himself of such convictions. Any one who has spent time honestly studying evolution, shares my views and knows that evolution fails to explain "the origins of life." And not just by a little bit, either. I mean, literally, science hasn't the first clue! I am forced to conclude, that he, has philosophical issues relating to his "in ability" in reaching an honest view of the evidence. I love the man to death, and I enjoy hearing his views, but he makes himself look like an idiot. I'm sorry, that is my humble opinion. See for yourself:
Complaining about poll options? Seriously?!
Also, it's inability. One word. And calling him brilliant before chopping him down? Nice use of sarcastic undermining (another amalgamated word that you broke into two words in another thread).
Also, you realize that video is heavily edited, right? Hell, right as he's about to answer the first question they cut to a new clip.
😄
Originally posted by ushomefree
Are you kidding!! Have ever heard the term, "Spontaneous Generation!?"
Spontaneous Generation does not exist. Therefore were did life come from? This is a false question. It ignores the fact that at the subatomic level, there is no difference between life and non-life.
Originally posted by ushomefree
DigiMark007-Richard told the interviewer to stop the tape! The question was obviously whipping his ass! Amazing!
Yes, amazing...considering how everyone on the planet remembers everything they know and can recite it at will, especially about hyper-complex subjects like the highest levels of genetic evolution.
😐
...beyond that, how does that question even bolster Creationism? It doesn't, or if it does they never explain how. "Look! Dawkins can't answer this random-ass question!" isn't exactly proof of anything except that he's human. Anyway, you're either really deluded in your beliefs or you're a troll.
Originally posted by ushomefreehttp://www.skeptics.com.au/articles/dawkins.htm
DigiMark007-Richard told the interviewer to stop the tape! The question was obviously whipping his ass! Amazing!