Difference between revisions of "Talk:Richard Dawkins"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(→‎Dawkins - intellectual fraud: in interview could not name the full title of On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life.)
(→‎Dawkins - intellectual fraud: in interview could not name the full title of On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life.)
Line 55: Line 55:
  
 
Wow, the full title of On the Origin of Species? That's important, since that book is pretty much all there is to evolution. There hasn't been much progress or growth for a century and a half, so it's very important that people remember the full title of that book, and not just the shortened title that everyone else uses. Dawkins' inability to remember the full title of the book is a death blow against evolutionary theory, which requires that famous atheists know the full titles of famous books on evolution in order for god to not exist. I am personally disappointed with Dawkins, who should have found a way to balance his writing work, his numerous speaking engagements, his family and the need to memorize the title of Darwin's magnum opus, but has failed to do so. I think it is shameful that a scientist can call himself a scientist without knowing the full, unabridged title of this vital book, which is the center of a large amount of current research and not simply of work of historical interest, superseded by current research. Thank you, Vox Day, for bringing this vial issue to our attention, and thank you, Conservative, for providing us with vital information, the full title of the book, in your post above. No doubt the world is a better place for you two having pointed out these obvious flaws in Richard Dawkins' memory/evolution. I can only hope that scientists can jump out of the way soon enough when the big, scary train of the Question Evolution campaign comes barreling down the tracks, headed for Truthville, and cuts right through Atheism Village and sets it all on fire and everyone dies. [[User:RachelW|RachelW]] 10:39, 18 February 2012 (EST)
 
Wow, the full title of On the Origin of Species? That's important, since that book is pretty much all there is to evolution. There hasn't been much progress or growth for a century and a half, so it's very important that people remember the full title of that book, and not just the shortened title that everyone else uses. Dawkins' inability to remember the full title of the book is a death blow against evolutionary theory, which requires that famous atheists know the full titles of famous books on evolution in order for god to not exist. I am personally disappointed with Dawkins, who should have found a way to balance his writing work, his numerous speaking engagements, his family and the need to memorize the title of Darwin's magnum opus, but has failed to do so. I think it is shameful that a scientist can call himself a scientist without knowing the full, unabridged title of this vital book, which is the center of a large amount of current research and not simply of work of historical interest, superseded by current research. Thank you, Vox Day, for bringing this vial issue to our attention, and thank you, Conservative, for providing us with vital information, the full title of the book, in your post above. No doubt the world is a better place for you two having pointed out these obvious flaws in Richard Dawkins' memory/evolution. I can only hope that scientists can jump out of the way soon enough when the big, scary train of the Question Evolution campaign comes barreling down the tracks, headed for Truthville, and cuts right through Atheism Village and sets it all on fire and everyone dies. [[User:RachelW|RachelW]] 10:39, 18 February 2012 (EST)
 +
 +
:Wouldn't this be an example of [[gotcha journalism]]? [[User:Ayzmo|Ayzmo :)]] 11:35, 18 February 2012 (EST)

Revision as of 16:35, February 18, 2012

Elevatorgate

Develop Elevatorgate article and incorporate it into the Richard Dawkins article. Mention the atheist Rebecca Watson is no longer going to recommend his books, etc. Conservative 05:34, 13 July 2011 (EDT)

http://www.salon.com/life/feature/2011/07/08/atheist_flirting

http://gawker.com/5818993/richard-dawkins-torn-limb-from-limbby-atheists

http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/david-allen-green/2011/07/richard-dawkins-chewing-gum

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2011/07/richard-dawkins-draws-feminist-wrath-over-sexual-harassment-comments/39637/

http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/not-your-average-read/2011/jul/16/sexism-atheism-Dawkins-Watson-feminists-Skepchick/

http://www.religiondispatches.org/archive/atheologies/4978/does_atheism_have_a_misogyny_problem/

http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/story/2011-09-15/atheist-sexism-women/50416454/1

I've been reading up on Elevatorgate and I'm going to start drafting an article on it. One thing though - he now has ten books out and I can't change it. --SamCoulter 09:13, 18 August 2011 (EDT)

Please be more specific about book addition. Conservative 09:23, 18 August 2011 (EDT)

There's certainly one called Evolution: The Greatest Show on Earth (or similar) that's been out for a while, and that would seem reasonably relevant to the overall tenor of this article.--CPalmer 09:36, 18 August 2011 (EDT)
CPalmer, Done. Plus, I included a book which refutes that book. Conservative 09:50, 18 August 2011 (EDT)

Consider mentioning that Wikipedia Richard Dawkins article does not mention Elevatorgate

Consider mentioning that Wikipedia Richard Dawkins article does not mention Elevatorgate even though it caused quite a bit of additional damage to his already damaged reputation [1] (see also: Atheism and cowardice, Richard Dawkins and pseudoscience, etc.).Conservative 06:03, 9 September 2011 (EDT)

False dichotomy

"Dawkins has repeatedly likened religious faith to a mental defect despite the fact that atheists are more likely to commit suicide than believers in the existence of God and the plentitude of studies associating theism with better mental and physical health."

Why "despite"? The use of this word suggests that the two assertions - religious faith being a mental defect and atheists being more likely to commit suicide than believers - are mutually exclusive. That is obviously not true. Christians may be crazy while at the same time atheists may be a bunch of suicidal pessimists. Baobab 16:55, 6 September 2011 (EDT)

I can see your jealous of the mental fitness of fervent Christians. Given the madness of atheism and Christian charitableness, no doubt Christians have built a lot of hospitals containing mental wards often frequented by suicidal atheists. Of course, the mental toughness of Christian creationists this year on the creation vs. evolution battlefield is going to make the Question evolution! campaign very successful in 2012![2] It may cause a lot of atheists to have nervous breakdowns. Onward Christian soldiers! :) Conservative 02:39, 8 January 2012 (EST)
Unfortunately, I think we have to worry more about scientists in general than atheists in the QE! campaign. It's not just the atheist scientists who have been brainwashed. Either way, let's hope for the best! RedGoliath 18:33, 8 January 2012 (GMT)
Conservative, what makes you think I am "jealous of the mental fitness of fervent Christians"? I merely signaled a logical flaw in the article text, without attacking Christians or praising atheists. By the way, is your spelling prowess ("I can see your jealous") testimony of the mental fitness of fervent Christians? Baobab 11:44, 5 February 2012 (EST)

Another book

Richard Dawkins is publishing another book. A children's book, this time, called The Magic of Reality: How We Know What's Really True. See here. I think this should be added to the list of books.--CPalmer 08:39, 10 October 2011 (EDT)

I have added it to the list myself. (For some reason I thought the page was protected, but it isn't.)--CPalmer 08:39, 12 October 2011 (EDT)

Dawkins - intellectual fraud: in interview could not name the full title of On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life.

Dawkins - intellectual fraud: in interview could not name the full title of On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. [3] Conservative 03:40, 18 February 2012 (EST)

Wow, the full title of On the Origin of Species? That's important, since that book is pretty much all there is to evolution. There hasn't been much progress or growth for a century and a half, so it's very important that people remember the full title of that book, and not just the shortened title that everyone else uses. Dawkins' inability to remember the full title of the book is a death blow against evolutionary theory, which requires that famous atheists know the full titles of famous books on evolution in order for god to not exist. I am personally disappointed with Dawkins, who should have found a way to balance his writing work, his numerous speaking engagements, his family and the need to memorize the title of Darwin's magnum opus, but has failed to do so. I think it is shameful that a scientist can call himself a scientist without knowing the full, unabridged title of this vital book, which is the center of a large amount of current research and not simply of work of historical interest, superseded by current research. Thank you, Vox Day, for bringing this vial issue to our attention, and thank you, Conservative, for providing us with vital information, the full title of the book, in your post above. No doubt the world is a better place for you two having pointed out these obvious flaws in Richard Dawkins' memory/evolution. I can only hope that scientists can jump out of the way soon enough when the big, scary train of the Question Evolution campaign comes barreling down the tracks, headed for Truthville, and cuts right through Atheism Village and sets it all on fire and everyone dies. RachelW 10:39, 18 February 2012 (EST)

Wouldn't this be an example of gotcha journalism? Ayzmo :) 11:35, 18 February 2012 (EST)
Retrieved from "https://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Richard_Dawkins&oldid=962547"