The Atheists Champion.

[Theland]

https://youtu.be/z4E_bT4ecgk

As an atheist, Dawkins must be the pin up boy of unbelief.
Devote a quarter of an hour listening to his rubbish.
The man is a misled fool.

What do you think?

[vulcan42]

As an atheist I don't need anybody as my champion. Unlike theists I don't need to worship anybody, alive or imaginary.

[MallyJ]

I don't know why you keep posing these questions because you have such a closed mind...agree with you or be considered a fool. Oh dear.

[Old_Geezer]

I think Dawkins is a better scientist than he is an authority on spiritual matters. I got so irate reading his insulting book on God that I had to give up after a third of the way in. However looking at the title of your linked video, I think we can be sure it's going to be equally nonsensical.

[naomi24]

//What do you think? //

What do I think? I agree with Vulcan at 01:01 Sat. You might need to be led but that doesn't mean everyone else does too.

OG, I'm guessing you're talking about 'The God Delusion'. What did you find insulting?

[Old_Geezer]

Just about all. Have discussed here before, difficult to recall much now: but saying he wasn't having a go at believers one page and a couple of pages further on simply ridiculing them for believing, didn't sit well with me as I recall. By the point I gave up I'd not seen a reasonable argument against belief, merely Dawkins rants against those that do. No intention of putting myself through it again.

[andy-hughes]

I have no interest in what Mr Dawkins says or thinks - he is certainly not a 'pin up' boy as far as i am concerned.

I keep telling you, and you keep refusing to accept - atheists just don;t have this rampant enthusiasm for debating and wondering and preaching and looking down on, and generally getting in a tizz about things.

They really don't care.

[SparklyKid]

I think that the "misled fools" are those who believe in the fictitious sky fairy commonly referred to as god.

[andy-hughes]

SK - // I think that the "misled fools" are those who believe in the fictitious sky fairy commonly referred to as god. //

One man's misguided fool is another man's prophet, and vice versa - it all brings teatime.

[Paigntonian]

I think you should get a life.

[Quizmonster]

Compared with yourself, Theland, Dawkins is an intellectual giant, so - if I really needed a "pin-up boy", I know which of you I'd choose!

[archibaldy]

This video shows why trying to use science to prove or disprove the existence of a god will never work. Both sides will always conclude something different from the same evidence.

It also leads to the question I asked (that you ignored twice) in your other thread - if one day scientists do create natural life from base elements in lab conditions, would that prove that god doesn't exist?

[agchristie]

// Both sides will always conclude something different from the same evidence. //

Yes, as Clint said, "Opinions are like a***holes, we all have one".

[jourdain2]

Well, it will come as no surprise to you, Theland, that I agree with you - but, sadly, andy-hughes at 10.53 is right, it is pointless to argue, they really don't care.

[nailit]

//Well, it will come as no surprise to you, Theland, that I agree with you - but, sadly, andy-hughes at 10.53 is right, it is pointless to argue, they really don't care.//

Who doesn't care? Atheists?
And what don't we care about exactly?

[vascop]

I agree with everything Dawkins has written about evolution and religion. I was educated as a physicist/mathematician and knew very little about evolution until I read the wonderful books by Dawkins and others which explain the fact of evolution and show how silly it is to believe the claims of religions, which are based on ideas produced when we had almost no scientific knowledge.
I think people like Theland who deny scientific facts are a danger to
progress for present and future generations and should be challenged at every opportunity.

[Muntin]

Mr Dawkins is certainly not a fool and I don't think he is misled. I got tired of his book 'The God Delusion' [it's a bit of a rant really, he can write really well on biology] at about the point where he finds some peasant woman [ no disrespect, of course] in Cambodia and bases his knowledge of Buddhism on what she tells him. Bit like him interviewing me about say diesel locomotives and writing a whole chapter on them.

[jourdain2]

Fairly obvious, I would have thought, nailit. Atheists think that when you die - that's it. Ergo, they don't care about any arguments about survival of the soul or any religions. No point in them discussing it. I've learnt this from my younger daughter - a sadness to me.

[vascop]

Muntin, Can you please give us a reference to the page/chapter where Dawkins interviews this woman?
Using the index to the book, all I can find is the following:
On page 37 he writes "... I shall not be concerned at all with other religions such as Buddhism or Confucianism. Indeed there is something to be said for treating these not as religions at all but as ethical systems or philosophies of life."

[nailit]

//Fairly obvious, I would have thought, nailit. Atheists think that when you die - that's it. Ergo, they don't care about any arguments about survival of the soul or any religions. No point in them discussing it//

Jourdain, you could not be more wrong if you tried.
Im an atheist. I have spent my life reading/researching into all this stuff. Ive nothing to convince me otherwise...and Ive looked, researched, read, investigated, explored, scrutenized, examined and assessed the available information until im blue in the face.

Facts always seem to get in the way....

[Theland]

Sounds to me like you are wasting your life.
But, your life, your choice.