Talk:Richard Dawkins/Archive 8

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Dawkins/Craig debate and petition.....might want to point out

It might also be worthwhile to point out that the response Craig reported goes a long way towards validating the claims that Dawkins puts publicity and notoriety above serious inquiry. Someone whose response to a debate invitation is that it "wouldn't look good on my resume" isn't exactly pursuing truth with all his might... --Benp 13:13, 24 May 2009 (EDT)

Rough Draft of Dawkins Biography

Per request. I tried to keep it as concise and factual as possible. Please feel free to make any revisions necessary, or let me know and I will.

Richard Dawkins was born in Nairobi, Kenya, in 1941, the son of agriculturalist Clinton John Dawkins. Dawkins spent his early childhood in Africa, returning to England with his family when he was eight.

Dawkins was raised to have religious values, and confesses that when he was young, he acknowledged the complexity of life and believed that it indicated a designer. However, during his teens, he chose to abandon this faith and embrace Darwinism instead, despite admitting that he hadn’t actually read Darwin’s works. [1], [2]

Dawkins studied zoology at Oxford University, and graduated in 1962. He remained at Oxford for his doctoral work, receiving his Ph.D in 1966. From 1967-1969, Dawkins served as Assistant Professor of Zoology at Berkeley. During this time, he was, in his own words, “heavily involved” in the unrest and liberal activism for which Berkeley is notorious. [3] He returned to Oxford in 1970, and has remained there as a lecturer since.

Despite this, Dawkins might have remained a relatively obscure professor if not for the publication of his first book, The Selfish Gene, in 1976. This book became a bestseller, and brought Dawkins a celebrity which he has worked to maintain with further books and lectures.

In 1984, Dawkins divorced his wife of 17 years, Marian Stamp; later that same year, he married Eve Barham. Dawkins also divorced Barham, though the precise circumstances of this divorce are unclear. [4] He married science fiction actress Lalla Ward in 1992; at present, the two are still married.

--Benp 15:01, 25 May 2009 (EDT)

Richard Dawkins foundation:

I was wondering if anyone had any information about the "Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science" I think if we could get any worth while information on it that we couls add to this article might be worth it in the long run.


Conversion Work

It needs to be pointed out the age distribution of those who like him converted. For example if we look at [9] you will notice that most of the testimonies published are for people under 20, some are even 9 and 8 years old. There should be a section discussing the susceptibility of young people to his ideas.

Good point. Many of them are likely to convert back as they grow older, at least if they strive to be open-minded.--Andy Schlafly 14:21, 11 October 2009 (EDT)
Something like recidivism? Although with a different context, surely. DanieleGiusto 17:16, 14 December 2009 (EST)

The Greatest Show on Earth

I have just finished reading Dawkins' latest book. Once you remove the usual authoritative evolutionist arguments, there is surprisingly (or not that surprisingly, actually) little information in there. I am quite impressed by one argument though: the comparative DNA 'evidence' described on page 153. If is my personal feeling that the results have most certainly been fabricated. In this case, a big blow could be dealt to the evolutionists by exposing the fraud. It is also possible that the results are correct, but the interpretation is wrong, or biased. Unfortunately, I am afraid I can not see, by myself, how the argument goes wrong. Could someone explain to me how to refute this particular statement from the evolutionists? Thanks in advance, --TSpencer 10:03, 11 December 2009 (EST)

Is there anyone to help me? Even a tentative explanation would be useful when debating with my in-law. So far, I have to concede the point. --TSpencer 12:57, 12 December 2009 (EST)

So you're saying that evidence contrary to your beliefs is either fake, or wrong. There's simply no other alternative? Perhaps you should look up the definition of evidence.

Can this book be added to the list of books authored by Dawkins? --EmersonWhitecp 20:27, 15 April 2010 (EDT)


Hi, should we add this article to the 'evolutionists' category? JackHT 13:21, 18 April 2010 (EDT)

Dawkins losing credibility by the day - growing perception that he is a "clown"

File:Richard Dawkins.jpg
Richard Dawkins appears to have lost a video taped debate to a rabbi and then claimed the debate never took place.[1][2] The rabbi appears to have publicly declared that he is offering the video for sale at this website. [3][4] (photo obtained from Flickr, see: Creative commons license agreement )

It appears as if both the political left and the political right are beginning to perceive the atheist and evolutionist Richard Dawkins as a "clown". The Huffington Post and the Canadian publication the National Post have both referred to Richard Dawkins as a "clown" recently. Conservapedia is considering adding material to its Richard Dawkins article in order to incorporate the public's growing perception that Dawkins is a clown. Dawkins certainly has a penchant for engaging in publicity stunts, yet in far too many cases he fails to provide the public with anything of real importance and substance.conservative 18:18, 21 April 2010 (EDT)

Conservapedia: Richard Dawkins Project

I think it might be a good idea to have interested Conservapedians do a Richard Dawkins Project similar to the Conservapedia: Anti-abortion Project. I generated a small list of topics, but I am sure if I applied myself I could come up with 50-100 more article topics (see: Conservapedia:Anti-abortion Project ). Conservapedia could become one of the premier places on the internet for information on Richard Dawkins. Everything you wanted to know about Richard Dawkins, but were afraid to ask! Of course, these articles would be much different than the web articles created by the acolytes of Richard Dawkins. By the way, I am aware of someone in the UK who has a very strong disliking to the material that Richard Dawkins puts out in the public square, so perhaps he could be our point person for spreading awareness of our anti-Dawkins material in the UK.

Conservapedia administrator TerryH, might be interested in spearheading the start of a Conservapedia Anti-Evolution Project as well for those who are interested. I am sure I could generate a list of 100-150 topics for this subject.

Here is a list of Richard Dawkins topics that I came up with so far, but again, I think I could come up with about 50-100 more if I applied myself:

Perhaps, many Caucasian, liberal, male, elitists were not greatly offended when evolutionist and atheist Richard Dawkins said in an interview: “What’s to prevent us from saying Hitler wasn’t right? I mean, that is a genuinely difficult question."[5] See above: Women's views on Richard Dawkins and Evolutionary racism and Richard Dawkins and Hispanics and Richard Dakwins and Asians and African American Views on Richard Dawkins and Richard Dawkins and Caucasian, Liberal, Male, Elitists [6][7]

conservative 06:58, 30 April 2010 (EDT)

This sounds like a good project - Dawkins and his acolytes have manipulated the media so much that their ridiculous views often go unchallenged, if we have a central resource that people can refer to in order to get the factual uncensored information they need to form their own judgement on Dawkins. RichardBurn 16:41, 30 April 2010 (EDT)

Dawkins statement Concerning Hitler

I think, what Dawkin says is right if you look at it from an neutral point of view, there are no objective moral values. Because of this, it's difficult to condemn Hitler on a genuinely rational basis. I will try to explain it. Let's say the bad thing about Hitler was that he caused the death of humans. Killing humans is an awful if you look at it as a human. Assuming there would be an intelligent being that is not human, let's say a super computer. It probably wouldn't care if Humans died. Actually, if all humans would die instantly (a big comet hits the earth or anything), noone would care, there wouls be no morals. Now try to find a set of moral values, that is based on rational thoughts (this excludes religion and culture, because they are to a large extent arbitrarily) and that forbids killing people, you will have a hard time, as Dawkin says. --GilbertF 08:21, 2 May 2010 (EDT)

Gilbert, are you a descendant of one of the Holocaust survivors? Also, given your commentary on objective morality, what are your thoughts on having the various Josef Mengele experiments being done on your mother? conservative 22:15, 3 May 2010 (EDT)

Dawkins the clown - articles collected so far

1. Dawkins has turned himself into a clown:

2. Send in the Clowns – Richard Dawkins Obliges

3. Conservapedians can consider setting a Google alert for "Dawkins" and "clown". conservative 23:27, 3 May 2010 (EDT)

addition to arrive soon, Richard Dawkins and so called "Gentle pedophiles"

File:309028813 380c3e9719.jpg
It appears as if there may be a lot of sensible women in the world who pay little attention to Richard Dawkins - despite the fact that he is a showman and publicity hound who has fans in the liberal press. Conservapedia predicts women's views of Richard Dawkins probably won't improve much given his recent commentary on so called "gentle pedophiles".[8]. See Alexa and Quantcast audience data on located : HERE and HERE (photo obtained from Flickr, see Creative commons license agreement)

Richard Dawkins and so called "Gentle pedophiles":

uploaded flickr picture to be used: conservative 00:56, 4 May 2010 (EDT)

found some excellent information concering Dawkins cowering when it comes to debating Dr. Craig - new atheists avoiding strong arguments

found some excellent information concering Dawkins cowering when it comes to debating Dr. Craig - new atheists avoiding strong arguments: Incorporate some of the info in the article conservative 15:27, 6 May 2010 (EDT)

Essay: Does Richard Dawkins have machismo?

conservative 03:50, 24 May 2010 (EDT)