What is Digg?407 Comments
- yukevster, on 10/12/2007, -9/+80@DogmaticAtheism
Well, you're actually quite wrong - he is aggressive in his approach, yes. Perhaps too aggressive - but what he says is backed up by years (much of his adult life; 50 years or so) of research, and makes a lot of sense.
Not intelligent? Surely you're joking.
He also makes very important statements on social problems - this one is a good case in point; kids are forced into the religion of their parents. - mrkmrk, on 10/12/2007, -27/+81"When are you nerds gona stop submitting ***** from this guy? His 15 minutes are up. He is boring and unintelligent, and the only reason he is known by anyone is because he speaks on controversial topics. He's basically like Michael Moore. Doesn't believe in what he's saying but says it anyways because morons like all of you eat it up. Move along kiddies. Time to get a life."
We'll stop when we find it necessary to stop. His 15 minutes are not up, and they never started: he will have a much longer time than 15 minutes to get his message out. He is more interesting than you, and *vastly* more intelligent than you. If you've seen his work and you truly think that he doesn't believe in what he's saying, then you're ***** retarded. Sorry, but there's no other way to say it. He's a molecular biologist, for the FSM's sake. You, sir, are the only moron here. Your irrelevant and ad hominem attacks are useless, fallacious, and just plain annoying.
Blocked. - Nydas, on 10/12/2007, -5/+54My grandparents are from the Bible Belt, and very religious. (Baptists to be exact). I feel no need to tell them I'm an atheist. Not because I'm afraid to, but because it would crush there hearts. And they have been great to me, so i would never want to do that.
Had i grown up with them though, I have no doubt in my mind that I would be at church tomorrow morning. - mrkmrk, on 10/12/2007, -11/+60"All right, as much as I have a problem with some christian "ways", I have an even bigger problem with this guy."
I look forward to your reasoning, if I find that it would be appropriate to call it that.
"First off, there are about 2 billion Christians in the world, and many churches have hundreds if not thousands of years worth of history (baggage). So I have no doubt that anyone who looks for dirt to digg up is going to have no problem finding it."
Righto.
"So he goes on and on about this cult, that quote, this doctrine, that church, this religions freak, that ESP experience, and that bible thumper. Well so what, and that proves God isn't real how again?"
The point is that he doesn't have to argue about why god isn't real. Why? For the same reason that he doesn't have to argue about how the Flying Spaghetti Monster or the Invisible Pink Unicorn (hail His name): because they're nonsensical. If someone believes in something non-sensical, they should be explaining to Dawkins why they believe what they do. They can't. You can't. At least not logically.
"In fact, if he had such compelling facts on his side - then he wouldn't need to be attacking on all these side issues, would he?"
That's the problem with religion: facts are not important. As long as you have faith, the facts don't matter. The facts are sitting in front of everybody's faces, but they're blind to them due to the veil of faith that they refuse to lift from their eyes.
"But my real problem is this. This guy is not the defender of rationality, he is not the defender of atheists under attack, he is not even a voice of reason in a world of chaos."
He is all of those things. You provide no reason why you believe he is not. You're wrong. It's that simple, really.
"So what is he then? The defender of his wallet, and the voice of his book promo."
Ah, so it was a money conspiracy all along. I should have known!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Dawkins
Read up. Shut up.
"Yes, under GW, I'm sure there are a lot of frustrated Atheists out there looking for an outlet, and I'm sure there are also a lot of argumentative Christians out there looking for a fight, well here come Dawkins to save you from yourself and collect your money."
I'm sure that Dawkins made HUGE amounts of money doing these interviews and selling his book. I'm sure that he is *filthy* ******* *rich* from doing so many interviews. Listen: he's not. He's merely expressing his beliefs. Get the ***** over it. Even if he did make money from any of these things, that, in no way, changes the validity of his conclusions.
"And he hammers on those preachers who collect money out of greed, shame on him - what a hypocrite."
I just told you why you're horribly mistaken. He doesn't capitalize on peoples' stupidity, ignorance, and faith. He's not a hypocrite, and he deserves anything but shame. - Gerbil_Juice, on 10/12/2007, -2/+49@Paul
The ground. - VeryAngryJim, on 10/12/2007, -7/+49I've lost some good friends because they claimed they couldn't be friends with an atheist. They themselves were raised in the "Jesus Camp" tradition and think evolution is total BS.
It really is pretty unfortunate to lose a friend because of something they've been trained to believe since they could talk. - yukevster, on 10/12/2007, -6/+42Just to clarrify; Richard Dawkins is a British ethologist and evolutionary biologist, author of ten books and various academic papers and popular science writer who holds the Charles Simonyi Chair for the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University.
- hannahmar, on 06/11/2009, -3/+37This holiday season my grandparents came to visit. They are life-long roman catholics, and my being an atheist almost completely ruined our relationship. I was asked to go church on Christmas morning, and simply declined. They asked 'Why, don't you believe in god anymore?" and I replied, "No, I don't". This turned into a huge debate I never wanted to be a part of, they blamed my parents and me for my 'turning away from god' (I have been baptized as well as received my communion). I found their reaction completely out of proportion but somehow I partly blamed myself. I understand what he is saying completely, it should never be my fault, I do not get mad at others for believing in god, so why should I receive criticism in return?
- Lobut, on 10/12/2007, -5/+34Are you being sarcastic?
- NiGHTSChao, on 10/12/2007, -9/+36http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=28pNxgD-ldc&eurl=
Direct. - hobgobbler, on 10/12/2007, -5/+30This poor guy is going to be killed by a zealot. I think he's right though, it's not right to push that stuff on a kid. To teach a kid about religion is one thing, but it's a lie to tell a kid that your religion is a proven fact, and that makes it wrong. And no it's not the same as santa claus.
- AnteChronos, on 10/12/2007, -2/+27@SJKat
"So you don't think flying "spaghetti monsters" or "unicorns" could exists on, say, the other side of our galaxy?"
The question is not whether or not God *could* exist. It's whether or not God *does* exist. Sure, there could be unicorns on the other side of the galaxy. But if I went around telling everyone that they should behave or the intergalactic unicorns will punish them, people would think I was crazy.
The point is that it makes logical sense to withhold belief in *anything* until sufficient proof has been presented to confirm its existence, whether it be intergalactic unicorns, the FSM, or God. - janne1, on 10/12/2007, -3/+27Quite frankly, if you need a book to tell you that you should be nice to people and treat them as you would like to be treated, you are missing something in your brain.
- signal15, on 10/12/2007, -4/+28You are correct. Which is why our children will be raised atheist and taught that god is a bunch of malarky, just like the tooth fairy, leprechauns, santa, and fairies.
- signal15, on 10/12/2007, -1/+24Richard Dawkins is getting Atheists to stand up for themselves, and he's doing a fairly good job of it. I have a ton of "religious" friends that are only religious because they are too afraid to say they don't believe in god. I did the whole church thing. Half the people there don't want to be there, but only go because their friends and family go. Many of them don't believe in god, they just believe in the belief of god because they were indoctrinated into it when they were a child.
As much as you dislike Dawkins, you must admit he does bring up some very good arguments against a supreme being. And he is quite good at getting closet atheists to stand up for what they (don't) believe in. When this country turns into a theocracy, you'll be wishing there was more people like Dawkins around making people realize that religion is just plain silly. - yukevster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+23Rather than thinking of it as Anti-religion. Try looking at it as pro-humanity, pro-children's rights. Dawkins is talking about the rights of a child not to have the religion of it's parents forced upon it. The desire to have and nurture children should never come from a desire to brain-wash more people into your own religion.
- Jaynix, on 10/12/2007, -2/+25@argoff
"And when I question whether he has the facts on his side, and then you respond by saying facts don't matter to Christians. Well dude, I have just as much justification to question his facts (and faith) as he does mine. Once again, the hypocrisy shines thru."
I don't think he has any faith for you to question.
I don't think you have any facts for him to question.
And I'm sure he would agree and encourage you, along with anyone else, to question his facts. It is science after all.. - Jaynix, on 10/12/2007, -8/+30http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qR_z85O0P2M
Direct link to 70 minute Dawkins Q&A video that includes this clip.
"Richard Dawkins reads excerpts from The God Delusion and answers questions at Randolph-Macon Woman's College in Lynchburg, Virginia on October 23, 2006. This Q&A features many questions from Jerry Falwell's Liberty "University" students." - annonimality, on 10/12/2007, -3/+25For the glory of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, this man needs to be stopped.
I am calling on all Pastafarians to censor this tool of Satan.
I wonder how arrogant Dawkins will be when Judgement day comes! - mrkmrk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+20"You can't disprove the presence of God and you can't prove the theory of evolution. How is religion "crap"?"
You can't disprove the Invisible Pink Unicorn (who lives on Pluto and ***** cocaine). Therefore, he exists, and the religion based on him is definitely not crap.
If you're going to say that evolution can't be proven, then you have to say that gravity, heliocentrism, and a host of other theories can never be proven. Evolution has never had any evidence presented to it that it disagrees with. Evolution is, for all intents and purposes, proven. It can be observed in a laboratory, too.
Get your head out of the damn sand. - janne1, on 10/12/2007, -4/+24Atheism isn't a religion. When will religious people understand this fact?
Its amazing that a Christian would feel tempted to stop loving someone because they have different beliefs. Defies much of Christianity if you ask me -- how can it be a duty?
Reward-based religions are basically flawed. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+24I always think it is funny that Christians today pick and choose what they want to believe in so their religion doesn't seem so dogmatic. And when other people do something in the name of the bible, the go and say, "oh he wasn't really a Christian." It sort of reminds me of this one religion in the middle east...
Atheism is not a religion buddy ;) - mugenkeiji, on 10/12/2007, -3/+23One would think that the duty would be to show the children facts and evidence, and allow the children to develop and ascertain a truth for themselves from those two. You, as a Christian, can do neither. You can only present the children with a Bible and a dogmatic indoctrination into the Christian lifestyle and the institutions associated therewith. Neither is fact or evidence. You cannot intellectually engage your children; you cannot prompt them to discover and learn for themselves. You can only only state that 'this is the truth, and you must take the word of this book, my word, and the word of people who share my beliefs'.
I should hope that I never do that to any children of mine. - kurtu5, on 10/12/2007, -9/+27My heart has been crushed by those in my family and circle of friends who truly think I deserve to go to hell for not believing that Jehovah isn't a middle east version of Peli or that Mary had an immaculate birth, or Allah is the one true god and Muhammad is his prophet.
- TKardinal, on 10/12/2007, -18/+35As a Christian, I disagree with Mr. Dawkins' assessment. A person has an obligation to raise one's children in the belief system they believe to be correct; to do otherwise would be irresponsible. If I believe something is the truth, what would posess me to teach my child anything else?
That said, certainly my child does have the right to choose what they will believe when they are an adult, and I, as a human being and a Christian, have a duty to love them and accept them no matter what that religion is. Quite frankly, those who abandon their "friends" or family members because of a change in religious belief are not following Jesus' commandments to love all.
While I disagree with Mr. Dawkins most vehemently, he, like everyone, has a right to believe and to speak as he wishes to. It would be a gross violation I would never wish on anyone to restrict his freedom of speech, not the least of which reason is, as we are seeing a rise in the popularity of atheism, I don't want to see MY freedom of belief and speech curtailed if atheism becomes the dominant religion in my nation or world. - Gerbil_Juice, on 10/12/2007, -2/+19I've never understood why he gets bashed simply for publicly stating his beliefs. I don't see people whining about the Pope always droning on about whatever it is Catholics even believe in.
- TKardinal, on 10/12/2007, -0/+17Beyond, I'm digging you down, not because I disagree with you, though I do, but because your screaming all caps is not only rude and pointless, but pretty counterproductive to anyone actually paying any attention to what you say. Frankly, you've made yourself look much more like an idiot than just about anyone else on this comment thread.
- Enixile, on 10/12/2007, -4/+20Try opening your mind. I like watching Richard Dawkins and other intellectuals, and hearing what they have to say. The true spam is the religious crap I get in my e-mail.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -10/+26@hobgobbler
"This poor guy is going to be killed be a zealot". Yeah, I was wondering why that hasn't happened yet. Theo Van Gogh exposed Islam and he was murdered--Dawkins has insulted ALL religions and no one's killed him yet.
Science willing, he'll be around exposing religion for what it really is for many years to come. - Poland, on 10/12/2007, -7/+22This guy is just awesome.
- askegg, on 10/12/2007, -5/+19Yes - it makes much more sense to believe in a sky-god that magically created everything.
- Gerbil_Juice, on 10/12/2007, -7/+19I hope you're warm and comfortable in your delusional mind. There is little to no evidence to support a god, yet quite a bit in favor of evolution. God doesn't exist until disproved. It just doesn't work that way.
- athlion, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12You are so dumb it hurts (not mentioning that you haven't read The Blind Watchmaker). His freaking program is just a simulation. He is generating random letters and his computer acts exactly as nature:
If the mutation is good, it "survives".
If the mutation is bad, it "dies".
In nature, if your mutation is good, you survive. If it is bad you die. I can't put it with simpler words that these, try to understand.
In his program, the "good" mutations survive and the next mutations are derived from them. Exactly as in nature, due to genetics. Your good genes survive and get passed on.
And now you say that this is invalid because what, he used a computer he programmed? Nature is what? A system containing rules. Eat-Survive, Don't Eat-Die, Run Fast-Survive, Run Slowly-Die.... He just used a MUCH simpler set of rules to demonstrate his point. How dumb must you be (or how indoctrinated in faith) to not see this?
I'm amazed! - signal15, on 10/12/2007, -4/+16Maybe that's a good thing. There's too many religious zealots making our laws and attempting to dictate their views and "morals" on the rest of us. They have well funded lobbyist groups, and a huge amount of political influence. Atheists... We have none of that. We sit around and let legislation get passed, and (mostly) sit idle while creationist nutcases fill our schools with crap.
The more attention Dawkins gets, the better. Maybe it spawn more membership to political atheist organizations that strive to keep this crap out of our government and our schools. If theists have a certain way they want to live, then they can go ahead and do it in the comfort of their own home or church, without forcing their beliefs on others. As soon as this crap starts taking a hold on our government, we've become a theocracy. And we've all seen what sort of bad ***** theocracies cause. And guess what, we are well on our way to becoming a theocracy. - Aninhumer, on 10/12/2007, -3/+15SJKat:
We can't prove that my chair exists, but I have lots of evidence (I can see it, feel it etc.), and no proof that it does not.
However there is no evidence that God exists. So why should I pay attention to the Bible?
"Will the sun rise tomorrow?" The answer is not "I hope it will", it is "Everything I know suggests it will" - Schmecky, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13SJKat: You're stretching things quite a bit there comparing a religious service with going to a bad movie. Going to a worship service with a believer isn't exactly this non-believer's notion of quality time. And, unless they're looking to get into a religious debate afterwards, I don't see that the post-service discussion is going to be very rewarding.
Since you say you're a theist, maybe you don't fully grasp how strange worship services can be to atheists. You're in a room with perhaps hundreds of people who will bow their heads and repeat, in unison, affirmations of how they see the universe working -- affirmations that atheists completely reject. There are also parts where the entire room sings songs affirming their beliefs. Or sits quietly and listens to someone talk about their beliefs.
From this atheist's perspective, it's just a way for a bunch of people to get together and feel better about their fairy tale of choice through loud repetition. Worship services disturb me both because I'm saddened to see all these people who are deluding themselves, and because I do still to some extent resent the fact that these beliefs were forced on me as a child.
I'd submit that if many atheists got together regularly and had ceremonies where they chanted "God is dead, there is no God," over and over again for an hour, there wouldn't be a lot of theists that would want to attend those meetings just to support their atheist relatives. - nitsuj, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11"This simply explains Dawkins Flawed logic.. I am amazed that you people think this man is so smart.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v20/i4/weasel.asp"
No it doesn't. It doesn't explain anything. It's almost unbelievable that the writer of this article is so dumb as to miss Dawkins point entirely.
The program is a very, very simple display of how selection is *not* random (as is claimed by many opponents of evolution theory). The matching of the letters against the target sentence is a simple survival rule. In lifeforms, natural selection provides this survival capability.
Creationists claim that evolution is completely random and this simple example shows very clearly the fallacy in that kind of thinking. Gene selection is not a slot machine. It is shaped by natural selection.
If my thirteen year old daughter can easily understand this then how come creationist boobs get it wrong? - Enixile, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11He despises the fundamentalist Christian view that teaches children that they will be damned to hell for eternity if they do not obey God. The view that believes it is right to teach symbolic literature as the truth and skew children's perception of reality. Many religions such as fundamentalist Christianity encourage people to do as they read in an ancient book rather than think for themselves what is right and wrong. Dr. Dawkins encourages people to think instead, and that's the best advice. Ever. Can't we keep the good from religion without having to believe in all of the mythology?
- toppgun, on 10/12/2007, -4/+15paul
he would go to the abyss of death... which is a whole lot more comfortable than an eternal existence. I, personally, want to leave existence when I die. carrying all the hardship, suffering, hate, emotion, etc, when I die for all eternity would be more than anyone could handle whether heaven, hell, Valhalla, hades or any other various afterlife. (but seriously, Valhalla is really bad ass. party all night and fight all day)
I believe in the atom, abyss and humanity. take your god and shove it when I am around. I dont want any of your sermons. preach to a crowd that wants to hear it. you have every right to say what you want but not to me. I disagree with it, so I respond with a flame b/c I am in the state where he talks about hating religion in the process of de-conversion. - Picard102, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12The whole seminar was on the front page a few weeks back.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14you have no valid points.
Atheism is not a religion. Suddenly the few who speak out are "militiant" and must be stopped before they take over the country is hilarious. get a better education evangelical (75% of homeschooled children are evangelical) - Lobut, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13Well, he engages into discussion at places and the religious people voluntarily attend.
- BigHungryJoe, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13Umm, no, you don't speak the whole truth.
The key difference between Atheists and religious people like yourself is that us Atheists seek to learn new truths regarding the Universe around us. Maybe we don't know everything now, but if we follow the scientific method closely we will be able to learn volumes. We seek knowledge.
You're happy to rely on the teachings of an ancient book filled with flawed logic. You're content with ignorance.
Now, I said you don't speak the whole truth because you got one thing right. Most people are as ignorant as yourself. Enjoy life in your bubble. - Gerbil_Juice, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12There is no parallel there. And besides, people act as if Dawkins protests in front of churches. The man doesn't go screaming in the streets that there is no god.
- 2ptyou, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10No, it is to help spread a voice of empowerment to a group, much like MLK did.
He is speaking to a group that has been dismissed and sidelined by a society which is sick with desire for objects and clouded with religion.
He wants them to recognize they will be raising the next generation of children, who can help cure this sickness, by recognizing the correct way to raise children is to inform them, not indoctrinate them. - signal15, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12Actually, you are likely wrong. Just like cats and dogs are domesticated by not breeding the aggressive animals, humans have been "domesticated" the same way. Societies formed when people learned how to work together and help each other, and they were more likely to reproduce than those that didn't cooperate.
Additionally, Ayn Rand proposes that we all have a concept of self-ownership. This is where we realize that our life, liberty, and personal possessions all have great value to ourselves. Because we place value on these, we also value other people's right to the same things. - signal15, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11@TK
Just because these values happen to be Judeo-Christian doesn't mean that our morals come from religion or chrisitianity. Society existed thousands of years before christianity even came about, and there is no way an effective society could be established without these concepts. Yet the Chinese and Egyptians were able to build quite advanced societies without christianity. - janne1, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10"In this sense, humans are a product of their environment. No one's brain is wired to be "good hearted and loving" by default, you horridly confused little blithering idiot."
I can only speak from experience.
Our brains are wired for empathy, or else we would be killing each other without compunction and obviously that is not advantageous in nature and evolution. Where there is empathy there is so-called "good hearted and loving". It's so obvious.
Stop blabbing mindlessly what you have been told forever and use your brain and your heart. They will both tell you that you would not want to hurt someone else because you can imagine how it would feel yourself. - nitsuj, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10"I am very, very thankful that the majority opinions states on this topic is a very small minority overall with very little impact on the world."
I think you might be surprised just how many atheists there are in the world. The tide is turning - we are beginning to stand up and be counted.
"No one can comprehend the Universe and how it was created."
While there is a long way to go, I think you might be astonished to discover the progress that science has made regarding this.
"With that in mind who the hell are you to come along and dictate that the religious belief of a higher power is not possible?"
Don't like it? Tough. Nobody is dictating anything. Other opinions are being offered. If you make incredible claims, as religion does, then you'd better be prepared to put up evidence to be taken seriously. I've said this before, but welcome to the end of religious moderaton. Your free lunch is over.
Here's your question back at you: Who are you to say that Zeus, Baal and the Flying Spaghetti Monster don't exist? How outrageous!
"But like I said in the beginning, just because a good handful of diggers come along and spew vomit doesn't mean it's the popular opinion. Your anti-God speach is very much a minority thought in the world and it won't be changing."
Because 'popular' opinion is so much better than the truth, right?
"I know I'll get buried for this but I do speak the truth."
You speak the kind of truth you want to hear to feel comfortable in your beliefs. It's not what is actually happening in the world. - trypto, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Here is the central problem: Dawkin's arguments are rational and grounded in reality. They make perfect sense to anyone who listens with an open mind. Unfortunately people are not driven solely by logic and reason. Emotion plays a large factor in people's decisions and though processes. Sometimes it is just easier to ignore reality and succumb to a delusion. It's easier to live in a fantasy world than the harsh cruelty of reality. People are emotionally weak.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 399 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is