Richard Dawkins

Interesting article

Dawkins debate over creationism

Dawkins vs. Islam

He IS Richard Dawkins!

I did not care for him as the host of “Family Feud”.

R5 Why?

I agree with Dawkins that Jesus never actually existed, but was an amalgam of various gods of the period.

His clarity of thought helped me a lot when I was deconverting from Catholicism around fifteen years ago, but the New Atheism movement has moved on and changed a lot since. We no longer need to hide behind leaders like him because we're equipped to deal with religious nonsense on our own now. You can see this effect on Reddit where the main atheism sub is kinda abandoned, as those ideas have spread so much and you can now find anti-religious sentiment as most upvoted on basically all main subreddits.

It's unfortunate that he got cancelled for questioning the recent trans developments in our society. I'll be sad when he dies and I know Muslims and Christian fundies alike will be celebrating in the streets when that happens.

When I read The God Delusion, I couldn't believe how tame it was, given all the controversy.

I absolutely love him.

I thought he was the host of that colored game show Family Feud? And he was in that TV show about homosexuals at a German resort?

As a biologist who studied molecular genetics, I would say that he is simply correct about evolution. "The Selfish Gene" was required reading. It had been published just a few years before I graduated.

Sorry to learn @ r8 that he's wading into the Trans gene pool. He's brilliant but apparently hasn't learned how to just mind his own fucking business, like some of his critics.

He really didn't get cancelled and his comments on trans/sex issues are biological and scientific and can’t be disproven which pisses TRAs off.

[quote]I agree with Dawkins that Jesus never actually existed

There’s enough historical documentation that Jesus was a real person. You don’t have to believe he was divine or performed the miracles attributed to him, but he was a real person.

Sorry, but, no, r14. There is no hstorical documentation at all. The things they say were historical are not.

I used to like and respect him but him changing lanes to pushing anti-trans crap has me disappointed

I'll chalk it up to brain worms

He didn't change lanes. No Biologist would be taken in by the ridiculous trans movement.

No shortage of locals (and that includes his peers at the college) think he's an egotistical, insufferable bag of shit. This is completely separate from what he believes or is known for. He also hates Americans with a passion and thinks they are the stupidest fuckers ever, and that includes you, no matter how much of a fan you are.

And how do you know all this R18

R17, quite the contrary. Perhaps not endorsing the political aspects, but modern biology is very clear about sex not being binary.

No it is not the contrary. biology deals with sex and there are only two sexes.

R18 I can see that

I loved him on Family Feud.

R23 is obviously not R5.

[quote]biology deals with sex and there are only two sexes.

You couldn't be more wrong about that.

That is an opinion piece idiot. An opinion piece is not science.

R16 he's not anti trans. He just correctly states that there are two sexes. No man can "become" a woman or vice versa.

Which we all know. You know this. All sane people know this.

And also like any sane person, he couldn't care less how anyone identifies. That's a personal choice we all get to make.

R25 did you actually read that article?

First, it's on op-ed.

Second, it's talks first about animal species such as worms and lizards and how they aren't limited to the same sex binary as humans. Which is very true. But that has nothing to do with human sex biology? Mammals and, specifically, primates are not worms nor lizards. Comparing them to each other sex is utterly ridiculous in this capacity.

The author does go on to say that human behaviors aren't necessarily predicted by whether a human is male or female. Men or women can be good caretakers. Men or women can like literature.

Which is about as far from a hot take as is possible. And, more importantly, proves absolutely nothing in terms of "debunking" the human sexual binary.

Humans are a sexually dimorphic species. There are two body plans that have evolved to carry/deliver gametes of wildly differing size and function. Yes, there are rounding errors in the population that prove the rule, but saying that there are two sexes is like saying “humans have two arms” or “humans are bipedal”: obviously true statements that are not rendered less true because there are the occasional people born without limbs or born with some other disability.

Richard Dawkins reading hate mail is wonderful.

R19 There are minimal degrees of separation between him and myself, I used to work with several UK individuals who were Managing Directors, etc., of companies.

He seems so mellow and soft-spoken R30 I wouldn't have guessed.

He's angry at trans because Mrs Garrison tricked him into fucking him.

He has good musical taste; Tchaikovsky, Schubert, Paul Robeson, Bach

The inevitable Charlie Rose interview

I've never paid much attention to him, save experiencing a bit of passing frustration debating Christians online, who seemed to have the expectation that I should place Dawkins on some sort of pedestal and dote on his opinions, as though he was the equivalent of 'the pope' of atheism. Their own views were generally based on the pronouncements of religious leaders they regarded as authoritative, and they couldn't understand, seeing how they looked as atheism as just another religion, why/how I didn't have any figures analogous to theirs.

I really couldn't care less about him.

I still want to fuck Dawkins. That being said, he’s insufferable. His anger towards gays for co-opting the term “gay” was bizarre. He was one step away from screaming WOKE!

This long Guardian profile of Dawkins is not recent (about a decade old), but it drips with contempt. The author could not have made her dislike for him more obvious:

In the many world hypothesis wouldn’t a universe with an anthropomorphic God exists. Also I personally believe the universe only exists with sentient life to observe it so it will always seem much older than what it truly is. And no I’m not saying that the world and Earth is the age as presented in the Bible. What I’m saying is that time is relative and revolves around the experience of time. I believe Big Big and all up to the sentient animals—time was both infinity, a second, and a thousand years. But I also think the universe is individualistic and we are each in our own universe manifesting into each others.

Even when Richard Dawkins received most of his media attention for yelling at Stephen Jay Gould, he was pompous.

He's a pompous ass

For his fans and foes on DL: he's doing a live Q&A session tomorrow (July 30).

Of course weirdo xtians hate him.

Pompous and self-righteous.

R43 He is British

It goes with the turf.